To Expo 67 in Montreal 1967 was the year of Canada's 100th birthday and of all the events and celebrations that were to take place during that euphoric year of Canadian nationalism, the world's fair in Canada's largest city, Montreal, was to be the most spectacular. It opened on April 27th, 1967 and was located two large islands on the St Lawrence River in the heart of Montreal. By the time the fair came to an end, over 50 million visitors had experienced the amazing presentation of technology, culture and a view of the future. After the Soviet Union had won the rights to hold the fair, the Russians backed out of their commitment in 1961, due to financial constraints, and Montreal stepped up. The Ile Ste Helene was chosen as the site a second island, the Ile Notre-Dame was created from dredging the river and building up he island. Expo 67 was designated an exhibition of the First Category by the Bureau International des Expositions which required that it would have to ask participants to cover the entire range of human activities. The architecture and technology were impressive and spectacular and almost all visitors were duly impressed.

Some of the highlight pavilions were the gigantic U.S. geodesic dome, the inverted pyramid Canadian pavilion and the large Soviet structure. The five themes of the exhibition were Man the Creator Expo 67 - The Canadian Encyclopedia Festivals Expo 67 Expo 67, the "Universal and International Exhibition," was the highlight of Canada's Centennial celebrations in 1967. Senator Mark Drouin of Québec first developed the idea of a world exhibition in Montréal to serve as a focal point for Canada's celebrations of its 100th birthday. Expo 67, the "Universal and International Exhibition," was the highlight of Canada's Centennial celebrations in 1967. Senator Mark Drouin of Québec first developed the idea of a world exhibition in Montréal to serve as a focal point for Canada's celebrations of its 100th birthday. Senator Drouin and Senator Sarto Fournier, former mayor of Montréal, first presented the idea to the Bureau International des Expositions in Paris, but that body initially decided that the 1967 world exhibition should be held in Moscow.

In late 1962, however, the USSR cancelled its plans and Montréal's mayor, Jean Drapeau , made a fresh presentation to the BIE and the exhibition was awarded to Canada. That Expo 67 was sanctioned by the BIE virtually assured participation by a majority of the countries of the world. What is more, the BIE designated it as an exhibition of the "first category," the first to be held in North America. The most important aspect of this "first category" classification is that the exposition must cover the full range of activities of contemporary man. Choice of the theme and the site of the exhibition Implementing legislation passed by the House of Commons in late 1962 established a crown company, the Canadian Corporation for the 1967 World Exhibition, to build and run the exposition. The exhibition was to be a three-way partnership, with 50 p. cent participation by the federal government, 37.5 per cent by the Québec government and 12.5 p. cent by the city of Montréal.

With time pressing, the three governments called a conference of educators, literary figures, and intellectuals at Montebello, Québec, to choose a central theme and evolve a philosophy for the exhibition. "Man and His World," the theme chosen at the Montebello conference, derived from the title of a book by the French author, poet and aviator Antoine de Saint-Exupery, Terre des Hommes. On schedule in late 1963, the master plan was completed and submitted to Parliament. By late 1966 the corporation listed approximately $320 million as capital-incurred costs of Expo 67, and $138 million as anticipated revenue, yielding an expected deficit of $82 million. The choice of a site for the exhibition presented many difficulties, not the least of which was the shortage of time. Many proposals were studied, but it was finally decided Ile Ste-Hélène, a park in the centre of the St Lawrence linked to Montréal by the Jacques Cartier Bridge, would be expanded by land reclamation techniques using silt and rock dredged from the bottom of the river.

In addition, a new island, Ile Notre-Dame, would be created adjoining Ile Ste-Hélène and alongside the St Lawrence Seaway . River bottom sources of landfill proved insufficient and for months parades of dump trucks bringing landfill moved to the site on a 24-hour-a-day basis, and the cost of building the site rose from the original estimate of $10 million to $40 million. Despite all the problems, the site was formally turned over to the exhibition corporation on 1 July 1964. As finally developed, it was divided into four main areas. The entrance at Cité du Havre was formerly known as Mackay Pier, a part of the port of Montréal. From the Cité du Havre, the new Concordia Bridge across the St Lawrence led to the first exhibition area on the western section of Ile Ste-Hélène. The third area was the Ile Notre-Dame. The fourth, La Ronde, at the eastern end of Ile Ste-Hélène, contained most of the amusement activities. Buildings and Exhibitions The theme program was divided into five main groups: Man the Creator, Man the Explorer, Man the Producer, Man the Provider, and Man and the Community.

These, in turn, were divided into subgroups. To implement the theme, the exhibition corporation invested almost $40 million in theme buildings strategically located around the site to serve as "points of polarization" for the theme groups. Illustrating Man the Creator was an exhibit of approximately 160 paintings borrowed from museums and individuals worldwide. Also part of this subtheme were exhibitions of sculpture, photography and industrial design. The social sciences and humanities were grouped under Man and the Community. Pavilions The nations that agreed to participate in Expo 67 either built their own pavilions or combined with other nations in regional pavilions. Among them, the Soviet Union spent approximately $15 million; Czechoslovakia, $10 million; and the United States, more than $9 million. The approaches taken by some of the world's greatest architects in designing the pavilions were varied and frequently breathtaking.

Arthur Erickson 's pyramidal Man in His Community was built from hexagonal frames of Douglas fir; the German pavilion, a 15-storey, multi-peaked tent of plastic, indicated how concept and materials might radically alter the design of buildings such as auditoriums; and Buckminster Fuller's geodesic dome for the US became the prototype for a new trend in construction. The interiors of the pavilions also varied greatly. Some presented prosaic displays of consumer goods and machinery while others imaginatively depicted their history and cultural traditions. Montréal architect Moshe Safdie 's revolutionary Habitat '67 was a graphic demonstration that by industrializing the building process, there are better and cheaper ways to house people. Expo also witnessed the development of new approaches to viewing film . The multiscreen technique was omnipresent, transforming everyday sights and sounds into more vital images. Expo 67 also encouraged participation by private industry and by special groups. In the latter category, seven Christian churches combined to present a Christian pavilion; others included the United Nations Association, the European Economic Community, the House of Judaism, sponsored by the Canadian Jewish community , and the Youth Pavilion.

Under BIE rules, each country taking part in the exhibition may send performing artists as a part of its participation. The World Arts Festival was thus able to include on its schedule such internationally known groups as La Scala Opera Company from Milan, Sir Laurence Olivier's National Theatre from Great Britain, the New York Philharmonic, the Amsterdam Concertgebouw, and classical theatre from Greece. Expo 67 and the Montréal International Film Festival combined to present a festival of more than 30 feature films during August. Sports events included an international soccer tournament, a lacrosse tournament and a European-American track meet. Spectacles such as a western rodeo and the first North American appearance of the Gendarmerie française rounded out the festivities at this, the crowning event of Canada's birthday celebration. Impacts There were some 120 governments present at Expo in 60 pavilions, and thousands of private exhibitors and sponsors participated in 53 private pavilions and through various facilities on the site. The exhibition site was planned to accommodate 26 million individual visits over a 183-day period.

In fact, there were over 50 million paid admissions recorded from April 28 to October 27, not counting over 5 million admissions by performers, the press, official visitors and employees. Expo 67 cost Canada, Québec and Montréal $283 million to put together and to run. Independent economic studies indicated that the return to federal, provincial and municipal taxpayers was almost double that amount. For example, the increase in tourist revenues in 1967 directly related to Expo was calculated at $480 million. The Quirky Buildings of Montreal: Remnants of Expo 67 | Untapped Cities The Quirky Buildings of Montreal: Remnants of Expo 67 Share Expo 67 full view circa 1967 The Sixties and Seventies were an interesting period of time for Montreal . In the race to become a modern metropolis, the city’s skyline became a massive jumble of cranes and concrete. Back then, an ambitious man named Jean Drapeau was mayor of the city.

Today, he is often designated as a visionary, as it was under his 29-year rule that many of the city’s biggest projects happened, such as 1967 World Fair (best known as Expo 67) and the 1976 Summer Olympics . Via these two events, Montreal attracted the world’s attention and became the city that it is today, a booming cultural metropolis. The modernization process was aggressive and many neighborhoods and historic buildings were destroyed in order to make place for the new infrastructures that were required to host both happenings. This engendered much protesting at the time and ongoing criticism in the following decades, regarding costs and what to do with the buildings once the events were over. However, today the tumult has calmed a bit and these buildings are usually seen as quirky and retro. Along the way, they have become integral parts of Montreal’s eclectic panorama. In this first installment of a series about the quirky buildings of Montreal, we will talk about 3 buildings that were created for Expo 67 and how they are being used today. Expo 67 was held from April to October 1967.

It is estimated that 50 million people made the trip to Île Sainte-Hélène and Île Notre-Dame to visit the Fair, which hosted the pavilions of 62 nations. Each of these countries had their own designated area and many of them hired prominent architects to create elaborate, audacious buildings for them. Most of these installations have disappeared over the years but a few have remained standing. Here are the most remarkable ones that are still in use: Quirky building #1 The Biosphere today. The Biosphere (United States pavilion, Ile Sainte-Hélène) The United States pavilion is one of the most distinctive installations built on the grounds of Expo 67. Its shape, in the form of a geodesic dome, is directly related to the signature style of its creator, noted inventor and futurist Richard Buckminster Fuller . Inside, an exhibit showcased hundreds of objects recounting a typical vision of American culture (like spaceships, baseball bats, Raggedy Ann dolls and Andy Warhol paintings). Once the Expo was over, the building served various purposes such as hosting private events or being used as a bird sanctuary.

In 1976 however, a massive fire destroyed the external (translucent acrylic) skin. Regardless of this, the structure remained intact and in 1990, an environmental museum was installed inside. Recently, it was announced that the museum would be closing in late 2013. So far it is not known what will become of the Biosphere. Close-up of the geodesic dome. Quirky building #2 Casino de Montréal, circa 1967 The France Pavilion today. Casino (France Pavilion and Quebec Pavilion, Ile Notre-Dame) France’s pavilion was one of the largest buildings at the Expo 67. The massive 9 story construction was designed by architects Jean Faugeron and André Blouin. When the gates of the Fair closed, it was turned into the Palais De la Civilization, a historical and sociological museum. In 1993, the Montreal Casino took up the space and has been there ever since. A few years later, Quebec’s pavilion (seen at the right hand side of the last picture) was also annexed into the leisure complex. Quirky building #3 Habitat 67 – Cité du Havre today.

The outside premises of Habitat 67 today. Habitat 67 (Cité du Havre): Aside from the country pavilions, Expo 67 also had theme pavilions like: Man the creator, Man the producer or Man the explorer. Habitat 67 was one of these. Designed by eminent architect Moshe Safdie , Habitat was supposed to represent the housing complex of the future. During the Expo, visitors could explore a prototype apartment and witness firsthand the architect’s idea of affordable, modern urban living. Safdie, then a young Mcgill University student, initially hoped to expand the residential complex throughout the surrounding area and even wanted to include boutiques, restaurants and a school but was forced to review his plans due to a lack of funds. The full structure that was finally constructed consists of 354 individual, identical concrete blocks that are assembled to form 3 interconnected pyramids, 12 floors and 146 independent units (each made up of 1 to 5 blocks). Windows are oriented on three sides and each unit has a sizable outdoor terrace. After the Expo, most of the apartments were put up for rent and upkeep of the building was partly neglected.

However, starting in the 80s, Habitat 67 became prime real-estate in Montreal. In 2009 the building was classified as a historic monument by the Quebec government. This means that the outer shell, the public spaces and two units (1011 & 1012) are protected by law. The inner area is no longer accessible to visitors but it is possible to walk around the outdoor premises, as long as you stay respectful. Today, as we walk through the subway doors, setting foot on Ile Sainte-Hélène, we are constantly reminded of the Expo and how much of an impact it has had on the city of Montreal. In fact, most of this island, as well as Ile Notre-Dame, were created for the 1967 World Fair. The grounds have since been turned into a large park and now hold the name of Parc Jean-Drapeau , after the former mayor. For more pictures taken during the Fair, check out this video which also features the official anthem of Expo 67: This is the first part in a series about The Quirky Buildings of Montreal . Get in touch with the author @ModStoryteller and read her blog .

Expo 67 – The McGill Daily Uncovering the legacy of Montreal’s International Exposition January 29, 2011 Share On the morning of April, 1967, Expo 67 officially opened to the public. Over 500,000 enthralled visitors – Montrealers and tourists from across Canada and all over the world – lined up to be first to see the gleaming site of the 1967 International and Universal Exposition. The site of Expo was not quite like anything seen before: located on two large artificial islands in the Saint Lawrence, the site was car-free, vibrant, and never without a handful of cultural attractions to experience. The opening of Expo saw the concurrent launch of the metro and other state-of-the-art transportation networks, alongside the installation of 113 pavilions. As is customary with most large international events, however, the government went to great lengths to change the way outsiders saw the city.

The tactic of masking social problems with dazzling sights and an idealistic naiveté was in no way unique to Montreal – we saw this not ten years later with the Montreal Olympics in 1976, and more recently at the Vancouver Olympics and the Commonwealth Games in India. Today it seems that Expo’s legacy lies in the crumbling remnants of the Turcot exchange, Montreal’s metro system, and a dim memory of great hopes for a new and thriving city. Clearly both Expo’s innovators and visitors held the highest of hopes for this young and thriving city, but its legacy hasn’t been much more than an emotional one. An Age of Modernism The sixties were a truly unique era, the spirit of which Expo 67 reflects: tradition had been engulfed by modernism and replaced with a deeply-rooted belief in the brilliance of the future. Prime Minister John Diefenbaker proudly declared that Expo 67 “will be an unusually great event in Canadian history.” During the six months that Expo was open, it seemed that Montreal had endless potential. “The modern movement was essentially about rational building, and buildings that would have no reference to other styles of architecture.

[Modernist buildings have] no decoration,” said Pieter Sijpkes, associate professor at McGill’s School of Architecture. “The construction itself is the architecture.” The Quebec pavilion embodied this with its concrete floors, steel façade, and exterior glass walls – which doubled as an illuminated display case at night. As described by its designers, the pavilion was meant to “make [Montreal’s] presence felt” as a growing and cutting-edge metropolis. Place Bonaventure, built in the years leading up to Expo, was a practical application of modernist architecture in downtown Montreal. It housed – as it still does – a hotel, exhibition, and office space, comprising the largest building ever built upon its completion in 1967. “It has no front façade, it has no back façade, it has no main floor,” Sijpkes told me. “It’s just a lump of building, like a beehive.” Innovation: Man the Creator A group of Canadian thinkers were given the task of coming up with the theme of the Expo in 1963.

After mulling over possible concepts for three days, the group selected “Man and his World,” a theme based on Antoine de Saint-Exupéry’s 1939 novel, Terre des Hommes. The theme was meant to encapsulate the world’s progress in industry, science, and culture. Indeed, new technology seemed to confirm that humanity had achieved an unprecedented control of its surroundings. The advent of data storage meant that a new type of building had to be developed to house these massive computers. McGill School of Architecture Professor Emeritus Derek Drummond spoke with me about his experience in designing the operations control centre on the Expo site: “It wasn’t much, but the whole building was designed to be able to have all the computers.” He explained how the floor had to be built up with special materials in order to have the connections run underneath, which was, like the computers themselves, an entirely new feature. “It would be a joke now. We’re all used to having computers this size,” he laughed, pointing to his laptop, “but they were huge!” Other Expo buildings, including the wooden-framed pavilion, “Man in the Community,” hinted at the new problems connected to population growth and increasing urbanization.

But the overall focus overwhelmingly remained on obstacles that humanity had overcome. The American pavilion – a geodesic sphere known today as Montreal’s Biosphere – housed a three-man command module that had been launched into space only a year earlier. After spending a few minutes on the ground floor in the theatre, visitors could ride up the longest escalator ever built at the time. “It was spectacular!” Drummond said. Though on the one hand the pavilion was an ostentatious celebration of American technological ingenuity – the structure itself was built with a bright acrylic skin that automatically responded to changes in sunlight – on the other, its decorative pop art, giant posters of Hollywood starlets, and collection of Raggedy Ann dolls promoted a more wholesome vision of the American Dream. The Soviet Union naturally attempted to upstage their American competitors. Their massive pavilion featured great glass walls, an upswept roof and an enormous bust of Lenin – but most agreed that they fell short. “The U.S. pavilion, without question, won this battle,” said Sijpkes. Despite all the pomp and circumstance, most of the Expo’s buildings – and perhaps even most of its concepts – did not last.

“The day Expo finished, the whole concept died with it,” Drummond lamented. “[The American pavilion] was innovative, but not something that was transferable really.” In terms of other innovations, Drummond stated quite assuredly, “virtually everything had been tried before.” Habitat 67 Habitat 67, a ten-storey apartment complex on the Marc Drouin Quay on the Saint Lawrence, may be the only standing legacy of Expo 67 currently used as a residential space. When I saw Habitat on my first visit to Old Montreal last year, I was beyond confused. I felt as if I was in a dream, staring across the channel at what appeared to be enormous concrete Lego pieces stacked unevenly on top of each other. Hoping to find an efficient and innovative way to house a large number of families as an alternative to the standard apartment complex, Moshe Safdie designed Habitat 67 for his thesis project at McGill’s School of Architecture. With the striking reality of poverty in and around the city, the building was meant to be a creative solution to affordable urban housing, incorporating Safdie’s community ideals.

The visionary architect designed external walkways – essentially pedestrian streets – to provide direct access to each of the 158 units of residence. “It was certainly an interesting idea that one house would have a terrace on top of the unit below,” said Sijpkes, but he did not hesitate to mention its structural problems. “The site here…was very cold and windswept, so [the design] was very inappropriate for Canada… because it exposed as much light as [possible].” Since the Expo, Habitat has had to go undergo annual maintenance because its concrete surface is completely exposed to Montreal’s harsh winter conditions. Although designed to house 1,000 units, shops, and even a school to create a real sense of community dynamics, this objective has proven far too expensive. Now, Habitat is owned by its tenants, who together bought it from the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation in 1985.

Despite all this, however, Sipjkes told me that “as an experiment, and as an attention grabber, [Habitat] really was a big success.” Transportation: The underground network, metro, and the Turcot Interchange The Metro was built quickly to open in time for Expo 67 and survived well beyond the other transportation networks built for the event. There were many transportation options for visitors, including the Expo-Express, a rapid transit system; a monorail that allowed visitors to see the pavilions from above; the cable cars at La Ronde (the on-site amusement park); the vaporetto, which navigated across the canal; and even a hovercraft. None of these innovations, ever spread to the mainland after Expo closed. The Turcot Interchange and the Bonaventure and Decarie Expressways all opened on time for the Expo as well. The Turcot, at a cost of $24.5 million, officially opened in 1966, despite opposition in the neighbouring community of St. Henri. Although designed to facilitate Montreal’s growth, the aging and crumbling interchange has not been able to withstand the city’s harsh winters, partly due to poor construction.

Today, with talk of reconstructing the Turcot, the controversy surrounding the interchange has again reared its head. Quebec’s Ministry of Transport intends to reconstruct and expand the Turcot starting this year – an endeavour that would encompass the demolition of a loft building with roughly 100 housing units. Meanwhile, those in the community who aren’t facing expropriation are seriously concerned about being exposed to increased levels of pollution. (The neighbourhood has already been found to suffer from unusually high levels of respiratory disease.) While Expo 67 may have left us with a few effective transportation networks, we have still not been able to overcome traffic problems in and around the city. “Simply stated, [there are] way too many cars,” Drummond said. “The experience of being on the site was absolutely marvelous [because] it was car free. It was a pedestrian world.” Simply looking at the influx of pedestrians crowded on the small sidewalks of Ste. Catherine’s, it is clear that the stress-free, car-free environment of the Expo site in no way recreated itself on the mainland. The man who made it happen Mayor Jean Drapeau is often seen as one of the most influential figures in Montreal at this time.

First elected as Montreal’s mayor in 1954, Drapeau lost in 1957, but spent only three years out of office before being re-elected in 1960. He initiated, and successfully accomplished, his ambitious pursuit of bringing Expo to Montreal. While sharing with me his personal experience with Drapeau, Drummond told me that “the design and the building [of the operations control centre] had little to do with the mayor because he was a man with grandiose ideas and he was not an engineer, [nor was he] an architect.” Drapeau’s one particularly grandiose idea – to have the site of Expo on an artificial island in the river – was one that required a lot of technical expertise. When I spoke with Dmitri Roussopoulos – publisher, writer, editor, and representative of the Student Union for Peace Action in 1967 – he did not hold such high regard for mayor Drapeau. He explained how Drapeau tended to skirt important issues, such as public housing, city planning, and pollution control. “Montreal had a lot of visible poverty [so] there were neighbourhoods that were really slummy,” Roussopoulos said.

“When the Drapeau government undertook to do Expo, they went to great lengths to cover up these types [of problems].” In different areas of the city, the government installed fences to hide things they felt should remain unseen. Some people were simply removed from the city for the duration of Expo. (The same thing was done in Vancouver last year, when the government relocated thousands of homeless from the Downtown-Eastside, Canada’s poorest region, after failing to increase social housing.) Recalling his experience as a prominent member of the youth community, Roussopoulos explained how Expo was isolated from the city – from the real world – in more than one way. “Expo was supposed to be a big bubble, in which everyone was closing their ears and their mouths to anything that was of a critical nature.” What we see here is a great discrepancy between the harsh realities and the idealistic dream world envisioned by Expo’s creators. Montreal, particularly in the southeast and southwest, faced immense poverty and deteriorating housing conditions. Drapeau’s “beautification process,” as Roussopolous called it, concealed these problems temporarily, but others surfaced nonetheless.

The city’s bylaw against demonstrations, for instance, did not stop an anti-Vietnam War rally from taking place at the opening of Expo. As a member of the anti-war movement, and an organizer of that very protest, Roussopolous concluded, “It’s all very well to have a universal exposition, but we have to remember at the other end of the planet…people were dying and fighting.” In a similar fashion, Montreal was quick to eject the gay community from downtown in order to “clean up” the city. Drapeau had many of the gay establishments closed down, in both the downtown area between Peel and Atwater, and The Main (or Red Light district), at St. Laurent and Ste. Catherine’s. The slow revival of the gay community in what we now call the Village can essentially be traced back to these police raids on downtown gay bars in the lead up to Expo. Perhaps the most exciting moment in the modern history of Montreal, Expo 67 remains just that: a fleeting event that did not survive after its concluding firework display on October 29, 1967.

The city did try to keep the spirit of Expo alive, making the site a permanent exhibition, but it was not successful enough to remain open past 1981. Sijpkes compared the remaining exhibition to a table where the dinner had already finished. “It never had the same number of people, [and there was never] the same budget to maintain [it]…so it started to look ratty.” The American pavilion, after Expo, was given to the city of Montreal by President Lyndon Johnson. In 1976, however, the American pavilion caught on fire, burning the transparent acrylic bubble. After going through a structural appraisal, the city banned access to the site, which lay deserted in Parc Jean-Drapeau for over ten years. The site was purchased by Environment Canada in 1990 and converted into an environmnetal museum now called the Biosphere. The French pavilion was also left abandoned for well over a decade, until it was inaugurated as the Casino de Montreal in 1993.

If the Turcot in any way reflects present-day Montreal, it seems that the close of the Expo, and the debt accumulated by Expo 67 and the 1976 Olympics, has placed a serious burden on the city. “The trouble is, after Expo 67, there was a drop in the economy here in the city. You know the party was held, and the hangover was long,” Drummond said. » History Lesson: Expo 67 History Lesson: Expo 67 1 Comment On April 28 2012, the city of Montreal celebrated the 45th anniversary of a landmark event that forever changed its history. This monumental event not only placed the city on a global centre stage, but was also the catalyst for Montreal’s development into one of the most cosmopolitan and distinct cities in the world. This one occasion not only defines the way Montrealers view their urban landscape today, but also, the way it represents their hometown and its environs. Almost instantly, the designs and undertakings that came forth in the 1960s brought incredible fame and misfortune to the city of Montreal, which we continue to analyze. So what was this mysterious event?

It was none other than the dynamic World’s Fair Exhibition celebrating Canada’s centennial, known as Expo 67. Continued after these awesome archive photos. Yes, we had a monorail. Famous Expo 67 Hostesses Ontario Exhibit Expo 67 Polymer Pavilion Expo 67 On the morning of April 28th, the highly anticipated 1967 International and Universal Exposition kicked off to a tremendous start. Expo 67 was attended by 62 nations, over 7000 members of the media, fifty-three heads of state, and broadcasted to an audience of over 700 million people worldwide. If that weren’t enough, Queen Elizabeth II, Lyndon Johnson, Jacqueline and Robert F. Kennedy, and Charles de Gaulle were some of the many notable figures in attendance, while musicians Thelonious Monk, Grateful Dead and Jefferson Airplane performed live sets to massive crowds. In the moments leading to the start of the show, a then-record crowd of approximately 320,000 people cheered and counted down the final seconds. Official figures later noted that over a million visitors attended the fair in the first three days alone.

Expo 67 would eventually rake in over 50 million visitors, the third highest attendance record for the World’s Fair in the 20th century. However, Expo 67 did not materialize easily. The project was hardly supported in Canada, and took great effort by mayor Jean Drapeau – the name later designated to the public park on Île Sainte-Hélène – in his campaign to win the vote, overcoming numerous challenges and seemingly impossible obstacles. Soon after, lobbyists, constructionists and thousands of others slaved away for over four years, working tirelessly to complete what some consider one of Canada’s finest cultural accomplishments. When construction began in August 1963, the Expo Corporation had less than four years to complete the entire project. The first move was to enlarge and create the artificial islands of Île Sainte-Hélène and Île Notre-Dame using 25 million tons of fill from excavations of Montreal’s metro system, which was also extended to accommodate public transit across the downtown core. (April 28 1980 also marks the expansion of the Orange Line from Lucien L’Allier to Place Saint-Henri stations).

Expo 67 featured 90 pavilions, including the extremely popular Soviet pavilion and the iconic Habitat 67 modular housing complex. Since then, structures such as the Montreal Biosphère and Montreal Casino were renovated from former pavilions, while Habitat 67 was converted into affordable co-operative housing. The once adored Montreal Expos were given their team name as a tribute to the exhibition, and the Montreal Formula 1 Grand Prix takes place annually on a track built on the outskirts of Île Sainte-Hélène. The amusement park La Ronde, now a member of Six Flags, continues to enjoy favourable reviews by hosting annual international firework competitions and adding several attractions in recent years. Montreal Biosphere Montreal Biosphere Despite all the praise received for Expo 67, a few hangovers continue to plague the city. At the time, De Gaulle’s “Vive Montréal… Vive le Québec… Vive le Québec libre!” speech rippled through Canadian politics, serving as an ambitious slogan for Quebec separatists and FLQ militants. Today, the most obvious example is the Turcot Interchange – completed in time for the exhibition – now causing more than its fair share of headaches for drivers and residents in Montreal.

While maintaining good condition, roads such as the Decarie Expressway are outdated and cannot accommodate to the increasing amount of motorists on the island. Finally, due to insufficient funds in the years after Expo 67, the extension of the metro system was abandoned and has since struggled to achieve high levels of service. The list goes on and on… Today, very few of the original structures from Expo 67 remain behind, despite the $439 million spent in construction alone. In the years following 1967, the buildings continued to deteriorate or were demolished to create space for the 1976 Summer Olympics. Most were not built to last, and therefore, by 1981, the remaining exhibits were finally closed for good. Of those that remained behind, the pavilions, buildings, and statues that were once idolized by the global community now stand in ruin. The former South Korean pavilion serves as the bus station – which is currently under construction, indefinitely. The remnants of other sites continue to decay under the wrath of Mother Nature and provide vivid reminders of a bygone era. However, the legacy left behind stands as a vivid reminder of one of Montreal’s greatest historical triumphs.

Korean Pavilion Expo 67 Korean Pavilion 2012 Expo 67 Korean Pavillion 2012 – Photo by: John Trivinsonno There is no doubt that Expo 67 is an unbelievable chapter in Montreal’s story. Historian Pierre Burton argued that in many ways, Expo helped bridge the gap between Canada’s French and English speaking communities, creating solidarity through cooperation between both parties and the overall spirit of the exhibition. And while the prominent features of Expo 67 help preserve a particular moment in time, they should instead be remembered as the elements that forever defined the history of Montreal. Whether that is for better or worse, is totally up to you. L’Homme de Calder – Recognize this from Piknik Elektronik? Expo 67 - Architecture Expo 67 - Architecture There have been two approaches to designing world's fair architecture. One was to dictate the overall architectural style of the buildings like that of the 1893 World Columbian Exposition. The other was to allow pavilion architects free reign in their creative design.

Expo 67 officials decided to allow free reign in architectural style as long as participant's pavilions fit in with the overall loose theme "Man and his World." By the time Expo 67 was conceived, city architecture had become quite conservative and filled our cities with economical, predictable tall boxy buildings. It was exactly the unexciting style that the business society welcomed, but the effect was boring and it deprived cities a sense of identity. This same design philosophy proved expensive in large apartment buildings and public housing projects. Worse they robbed the individual or family, who lived there, a sense of identity they had when they lived in individual homes with gardens, porches and yards. Architects of social consciousness were thinking of solutions to cover more space with less material and for less money in ways that didn't rob the individual of his identity. At the same time these architects wanted to make a creative statement. So when participating countries held architectural competitions for their country's pavilions, some unusual architecture evolved. Perhaps the most innovative concept to be used at Expo was "space- frame" architecture.

In an effort to "Do more with Less" architects covered large spaces cheaply and flexibly, by distributing the building's weight over a wide area, and by using complex techniques involving aluminum, plastic and other materials. The pavilions that used that technique were the United States pavilion, the Netherlands pavilion, the West German pavilion and the two big theme complexes, Man the Producer and Man the Explorer. NETHERLANDS PAVILION The Netherlands pavilion was an engineering triumph, a space frame structure consisting of 33 miles (57,000 pieces , each three feet long) of aluminum tubing. They didn't weld or rivet the pieces together, rather it was put together like a Gilbert Erector set, with wrenches. The exhibition room was suspended inside. The technique had its advantages in that if the building needed to expand, the builders could just add more pieces. It was a very flexible approach to building design and gave the structure a feeling of lightness. The Dutch designed a "space-frame" building out of 57,000 pieces of aluminum tubing. GERMANY PAVILION Frei Otto's elegant space frame tent was used to cover the German pavilion's exhibit area.

While it took the architect several years to develop his system, it only took six weeks to build. His system used a roof of steel mesh suspended from eight slender steel masts of varied height, situated at irregularly intervals and supported by steel cables anchored outside the structure, covered an area the size of a city block. The roof's steel mesh net, hung from the guy wires, was then covered by a translucent plastic skin. The tent itself and all of its components were fabricated in Germany. The German Pavilion was covered with a modernistic tent. The structure adequately dealt with the twin problems of aesthetics and economics. At the least it was a fanciful way of escaping from the tyranny of the box, but it also produced a unique and beautiful interior space. The space below was lit through the transparent plastic and through odd-shaped windows in the roof. As to cost, the building wasn't cheap to build since it was a one of a kind project. But it had potential for its steel and plastic roof weighed only 150 tons; one third to one fifth the weight of normal roofing materials. The tent concept had the ability to adapt to irregular topography of any site.

The concept was used again with a much larger tent to enclose the swimming stadium at Munich's 1972 Summer Olympics. UNITED STATES PAVILION The United States pavilion's designers choose a Buckminster Fuller dome, two hundred feet high (20 stories) and 250 feet in diameter. As in all of Fuller's domes both little and big, they used three- dimensional units, a triangle on the outside, hexagonal on the inside, and curved to fit a given arc, as its structural basis. By connecting them together in the shape of a dome, it distributed the structure's weight over the whole surface. To avoid his usual half-dome that produced a squat look, the pavilion's designers built a beautifully proportioned, three-quarter sphere that fit the site ideally. The United States Pavilion was a Buckminster Fuller dome. It was the most complicated of his domes. It used an elaborate system of retractable shading screens to control the heat within. A computer adjusted the screens in accordance with the sun's rays. Its exterior covering was exquisitely tinted, and surprisingly it was lovely to look at.

MAN THE EXPLORER & MAN THE PRODUCER The architects (the firm of Affleck, Desbarets, Dimakopoulos, Lebensold and Sise) of the theme complexes were faced with the need to produce, quickly, some large buildings with large areas of open spaces. They decided to make them out of a type of small building blocks, much in the way the Dutch constructed their pavilion out of short metal tubes. The Canadian architects choose the truncated tetrahedron shape,- a four-sided triangular figure with the corners cut off, then flattened so that it looked like a prism. Thousands of these blocks would "nest" with other blocks, large and small, and be built up quickly into theme pavilions. Several of the Theme pavilions used "space-frame" architecture to create large inexpensive display spaces. The designs and models looked graceful, but the steel fabricators complained that there weren't enough welders in Canada to make the truncated tetrahedrons the architects would need. As a result, the units were bolted together and the pieces heavily braced. The final result was at all graceful, but was heavy and oppressive - miles and miles of thick rusted metal.

OTHER NOTEWORTHY PAVILION ARCHITECTURE Both the Japanese and Man the Community pavilions used static forms composed of alternating crossing beams. The difference in their shapes was in the positioning of those basic structural elements. In the Japanese Pavilion, vertical stacking created a series of interconnecting cubes, but it closely resembled a concrete but graceful log cabin. On the other hand, the profile of Man in the Community resembled a Chaldean ziggurat. The wooden beams were placed so that the formed wooden polygons that rose in decreasing size from foot to summit. Man the Community Pavilion The Soviet Unions' Pavilion, by using great walls of glass and aluminum topped by a ski-jump roof, was a departure from its traditional monolithic architectural style. The escalator that lead up into the pavilion prepared the visitor for the surprise of the wide-angled V beams that supported its upswept roof, and carried him into a symmetrically organized display area dominated by a huge bust of Lenin. Inside was a show of technology and the progress of the country's space program. Britain's was a ponderous castle-like pavilion, whose walls, while made of a kind of cardboard, looked like stone.

The jagged top of its 200 foot tall cone-like tower topped by a Pop Art version of the Union Jack, represented incomplete construction. It symbolized Britain's unfinished contribution to the world. Fortunately the exhibits inside were very uplifting as the British made an attempt to charm the visitor. The French Pavilion, on the other hand, modeled itself on the fine art of sculpture. While it was tastefully executed, architectural critics perceived its fins as merely tacked on. In the great well of the building, the floors full of exhibits were arranged around an open space. Its arrangement of interior stairways and balconies, which gave it an airy feel, was often overshadowed their attempt to overwhelm the visitor with technical displays Austria's pavilion used the space-frame concept to a certain degree. It used triangular building units to construct large habitable cells. The result was a striking exterior architectural form, geometrical in style, that worked well as interior exhibit space. HABITAT 67 Habitat 67, an experiment in apartment living, became the permanent symbol of Expo 67 after it closed. It was Canadian architect Moshe Safdie's experiment to make a fundamentally better and cheaper housing for the masses.

He attempted to make a revolution in the way homes were built - by the industrialization of the building process; essentially factory mass production. He felt that it was more efficient to make buildings in factories and deliver them prefabricated to the site. Safdie was dissatisfied with both suburbia, which destroyed open space surrounding cities and cut off people's enjoyment of the amenities of city life, and with the high-rise apartment block, which concentrated people on less land. Apartments generally were too small for growing families, and lacked both privacy and outdoor space. He was convinced the later were inadequate as family housing. He planned Habitat with the goal to find a way to put a great many people on a small space, yet provide them with at least some of the pleasures of a private home. He wanted to build a city in the sky, a 3- D city and his city would contain 1000 housing units, with shops and even a school. What he proposed was an experiment, not just in housing, but in community life. But between 1964 and 1966 when construction started, it was downsized to only 158 dwelling units, without shops and a school.

What started out as a plan for a small city, instead became a hugely expensive apartment building. Worse, while it was on Expo 67 grounds, when Expo 67 closed, it would be some distance from the rest of Montreal's business and housing neighborhoods. Habitat's 158 living units resembled a Taos Indian pueblo. As Habitat was designed, it resembled a curious concrete mountain of dwelling places, strikingly modern, yet reminiscent of a Taos Indian pueblo village, or an Italian hill town. Its units were built on the ground, then hoisted by crane into place five, six or more stories above the ground. A factory was built beside the Habitat site. It contained four large molds in which the standardized units were made. To make each of them, a reinforcing steel cage was placed inside the mold, then concrete was poured around the cage. After the concrete cured, the unit was moved to an assembly line where a wooden sub-floor was installed with electrical and mechanical services below it. Windows and insulation were then inserted; afterwards prefabricated bathrooms and kitchen modules. Finally the unit was moved to its position in the building. There were 354 of these units in all.

But it was the way they were put together than produced the variety of forms that made Habitat, both inside and outside, so unusual. The units were arranged to provide fifteen different types of "houses". These varied from one-bedroom houses (600 sq. feet) to four-bedroom houses (1,700 sq. feet). Each had a private open garden space, 37 x 17 feet. Each man's roof was another man's garden. The arrangement of the units provided privacy and the variation in house layouts provides a sense of uniqueness. While factory production techniques should have cut overall costs, building 158 apartments isn't really productive in factory work since there is often a steep learning curve. Also since the individual units would bear the weight load of the units above, the units on the bottom where actually thicker and stronger. In the end Habitat 67 cost $22,195,920, or about $140,000 per living unit. Effectively that was the same cost as building six-eight ordinary town houses. Luckily one could rationalize that it was only a prototype, and if scaled up, it might be much cheaper to construct.

While the visiting public was impressed, they didn't embrace the concept. At a distance the complex looked like an exciting piece of Cubist sculpture, at close up it's flat concrete-gray exterior looked boring and as if nobody lived there. Inside the complex Safdie's plastic covered pedestrian streets, connecting the apartments with the elevators and parking lots, were poorly sheltered from Montreal's cold window weather. Perhaps if it had been built near one of Montreal's exciting neighborhoods, the public might have been more willing to accept it, but then few of Expo's fifty million visitors would have seen the innovative housing site. Copyright © Jeffrey Stanton 1997 Expo '67 - Dixon Slide Collection ‘Expo ‘67’ as it was named, presented a platform from which “nations could display their aspirations, characteristics and achievements”. In clear parallel to the architectural direction of the time, Expo was conceived as a showcase of diversity and innovation. The site chosen for Expo ’67 was an innovation in itself. Twenty-three million tonnes of fill gathered from excavations for the city’s underground transit system were used to enlarge the existing island of Ste-Helene and create an entirely new island, Ile Notre Dame.

Isolated by water, the Expo site became a micro city, utilizing the actual city of Montreal as its backdrop. ____________ I. Kalin, Expo ’67: Survey of Building Materials, Systems and Techniques, (Ottawa: The Queens Printer, 1969), v. -- excepts from: The First Nations Garden Pavilion & The French Pavilion: Substance over Spectacle Welcome to Expo '67: A Photographic Journey! This website is a compilation of digitized images capturing the buildings and surrounding area of the Expo '67 site. The original photographs (slides) were taken by Meredith Dixon at the 1967 World Exhibition that took place in Montreal, Quebec on April 28th through October 29th. The collection of 470 slides were given to the McGill School of Architecture at the behest of its Professor Pieter Sijpkes, and are here accessible in its digitized format at the kind suggestion of the School's Professor Annmarie Adams.

The website features descriptions for each image as follows: Title Photographer's Notes References The website also includes an interactive map which allows users to explore the Expo Islands, a search feature enabling users to browse the collection by subject or keyword, essays and a bibliography of selected resources. Copyright is held by the McGill University Library. These digitized images are intended for study, teaching and personal use only. Permission to reproduce must be obtained from the library. ... SPECIAL THANKS We are proud to make available through this website the contents of the Expo '67 Photograph Collection taken by the late Meredith F. Dixon. We are also pleased to provide supplementary maps, descriptions and essays detailing the historic event that was Expo '67. The project was jointly conceived by Annmarie Adams and Marilyn Berger. The collection was digitized and organized by Troye Carrington, an undergraduate student in School of Architecture. Troye's talents were used most effectively in developing and designing the website and in researching the information on each Expo 67 Pavilion. She also prepared descriptions of all archival material. The final website is a joint production by the McGill University Digital Collections Program and the Blackader Lauterman Library of Architecture and Art.

Recognition is given to Elizabeth Thomson and Eli Brown of the Digital Collections Program (DCP), McGill University for their exceptional cooperation and support of this project, under the leadership of Anastassia Khouri. We take this opportunity to express our profound gratitude to the Canadian Library Association's Young Canada Works in Heritage Institutions program for their financial support of Expo '67: A Photographic Journey. Thanks also go to the Office of the Trenholme Director of Libraries, McGill University for additional funding. Finally, we wish to express our thanks to Pamela, Mike, and John Dixon for donating their family's collection to McGill University School of Architecture. Without their generosity this collection would not be publicly accessible. Special thanks to John Dixon for his "About the Photographer". It is our hope that the exceptional contribution of Meredith Dixon to the documentation of Expo '67 will remain alive through the use of this image collection. Marilyn Berger Blackader Lauterman Library of Architecture and Art Expo '67 | Historica Canada HERITAGE MINUTES#PARTOF OUR HERITAGE Expo '67 #PARTOFOURHERITAGE Share Montréal's Expo literally rises from the depths of the St. Lawrence River to give Canada a dazzling one hundredth birthday party.

There was much to celebrate in the year of Canada's Centennial, but its crowning achievement was Expo 67, one of the greatest birthday parties in history. One of the most successful international exhibitions of the 20th Century, Expo 67 gave Montréal the opportunity to show itself as an international city and proved once and for all that Canada had come of age. But the story of Expo 67 must begin with the fact that it almost didn't happen at all. The Canadian government's application to the International Exhibitions Bureau in Paris for the right to hold a "first-category" exhibition, as this was called, was rejected in favour of the U.S.S.R, which was marking the 50th anniversary of the Communist regime. However, when the staggering costs forced Moscow to withdraw their bid, Canada re-applied and was selected. The controversy and friction about the fair then began in earnest. Montréal mayor, Jean Drapeau, came up with the idea of enlarging Ile Ste Hélène, an island park in the St. Laurence, and adding another island to become the fair site. His plan was met with skepticism and derision by almost everyone.

But Drapeau and his engineers persevered, and began the momentous task of filling the river with 25 million tons of earth to create a magnificent and unique locale. The choice of the islands in the St. Lawrence River for the location also carried historical significance for Canada. As an important trade route, and the access point for early immigrants, the St. Lawrence symbolizes the link between Canada and the world. But the real meaning of Expo 67 came from the theme itself, a clear representation of the optimism of the time. "Man and his World" was the official title, and the fair guides explained it in this way: "It will tell the story of man's exploration of the physical world, his drive to discover, understand and produce; of how he assimilates, organizes and uses his knowledge to improve his lot and how, as a social being, he has sought and still seeks to live in peace and harmony with his fellow man." Expo 67 was a huge success. It changed the world's view of Canada, and more importantly, it changed our view of ourselves. Expo brought us together for the first time in mutual pride and appreciation for our talents and accomplishments.

Heritage Minute Cast Whether it be small or big contributions to this Expo 67 web site, the following people shared their equal enthusiasm in making this project possible with my sincere thanks: The Canadian Alpine Journal for the photographs and "Centennial Peak" report Christopher Barany for the photo of the Trinidad, Tobago and Grenada pavilion Terri Meyer Boak, B.E.S. B. Arch. M.Arch, Associate Professor School of Architecture University of Waterloo, for the Habitat indoor/outdoor photographs Klaus Boerger for the photograph of the Centennial Range Fips Broda for photographs of the Centennial Range Bill Cotter of WorldsFairPhotos.com for sharing his excellent collection of Expo 67 photographs Louis J. Depelteau for the post-era photographs of the Jamaican pavilion Bill Dutfield for his excellent collection of photographs Dave Garvin, technical specialist for all the audio files located on this website. Also for finding two articles (with images) about the food at Expo 67 and for the 3-D maps D.C.

Hillier of FOS Productions for the additional Expo 67 photographs Yves Jasmin, Director of Publicity, Marketing and Promotions for Expo 67 who shared his fond memories about the fair. George C. Konder for the excellent write-up on "A Place To Stand" Claude Latour for the following audio files: Interview with Lester B. Pearson and Expo 67 Commissioner General Pierre Dupuy; La Ronde; The Last Train to Expo 67; On s'en souviendra; and Echos of Man and His World. Also for the photographs of the Automotive Stadium (Autostade) Robert Lavigne for usage of his Expo 67 photographs Genevieve Lauziere for usage of the Louis Chavignier's sculpture "Vaisseau Lunaire" Patrick Leclerc for providing the rare recording of Ben McPeek's instrumental cover version of "Canada" Allan Macmillan, principal founding partner for Nimbus 9 records for his comments on composer Ben McPeek Helmut Microys for photographs of the Centennial Range Tom Mitchell, University Archivist, S.J. McKee Archives & John E.

Robbins Library, Brandon University, Manitoba, for his photography of Victor Tolgesy's "Explorer" sculpture Stéphanie Mondor of the Centre d'histoire de Montréal for the drawing of the International Trade Centre -- Expo-Club Diane Morin for usage of the 40th Anniversary Celebrations hostesses photograph Gary Muth for the exclusive photographs of Nimbus 9 records headquarters Brian Pollock for the post-Expo image of the Mario Armengol sculptures Stan Rosenbaum for photographs and his excellent write-up on the Centennial Range Susan Schuppli, Professor at University of Western Ontario, for Yves Jasmin interview questions Bruno Paul Stenson, MA, for texts, Expo pavilion floor plans and additional images John Stockl for the post-era photographs on Expo 67 Stéphanie Stockl for the lovely photograph of Yves Jasmin Jason Stockl of Montréal for the excellent write-up and audio files on Michèle Richard Mary Ann Sullivan, Professor at Bluffton University, Ohio, for the post-Expo images of the Barbara Hepworth sculpture Eric Watson for the post-era images of the Cuban, Yugoslavian and U.S.S.R.

pavilions Hans Weber for the photograph of the Centennial Range Clayton Yee for the post-era photographs of the Calder's Man sculpture and the United States Pavilion

Question: In which city did Expo 67 take place
Answer: Montreal