This is an archival story that predates current editorial management.
This archival content was written, edited, and published prior to LAist's acquisition by its current owner, Southern California Public Radio ("SCPR"). Content, such as language choice and subject matter, in archival articles therefore may not align with SCPR's current editorial standards. To learn more about those standards and why we make this distinction, please click here.
But the Valley is not Los Angeles
Academically speaking, the above title (a quote from one of our commenters) is correct and it only took 15 comments to get there! Not every part of the valley is within city limits (haha, Wiki left out West Toluca Lake!) of the City of Los Angeles (as pointed out: there is Bizarrebank, Glendale, City of San Fernando, the occasional unincorporated Los Angeles County, etc).
Should New York City be our example? If you live in Manhattan, you say you live in New York. If you live in one of the other Burroughs, say Queens, you say you live in Queens, but you are legally in the City of New York City. No wonder New Yorkers rag on us. It isn’t our award winning public transportation system; it’s that we can’t get this fucking right!
Will this linguistic debate ever be solved? Is it vernacular, colloquial, or both? Is “The Valley” only understood in context of a conversation?
What say you? Go ahead, take a stab, and make your official declaration of the proper use of “The Valley.” The best comment wins and City Hall will declare it (uh…sure).
One rule: Leave Camelot out of it.