Canadian eh?
Looking forward to an upcoming fishing trip got me thinking about what it means to be Canadian, and what makes us so unique. There are of course many of those people, including several of my friends, who feel it is the multicultural aspects of Canada that make us what we are and what make this country great. I don't entirely disagree and living in Ottawa, having the opportunity to experience or at least get a small perspective of these other worlds, is a great opportunity and leads to better understanding in the world or at least we can hope it does. But to me Canada will always be the outdoors, the spirit of the land and the sense of space and freedom. A little corny? perhaps. Conservative...maybe, but the point is that, that is what 90% of our country is. Not sprawling cities and huge buildings, or people crammed into houses like sardines. Canada is know for its great outdoors and its love of outdoor activities. Our tourism industry thrives on it, and people from all over the world come here to experience what we are lucky enough to have access to every day. Weather it's playing hockey on a frozen lake, floating gently in a canoe or simply walking in a field (cue cheesy happy music and sunshine) this is what makes Canada, Canada. Our land, and the people who inhabit the small cities and areas away from the modernization and fast pace of today's world. I grew up in a small town like this, and perhaps this is nostalgia talking, but that is what makes up most of our country and so in my opinion is what makes it great.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
Have fun fishing and drink a few beers for me...
'Multiculturalism' and 'the outdoors' are not mutually exclusive. I strongly agree that part of the definition of Canada would include 'the outdoors'. But, even more fundamental aspects of being Canadian include acceptance, equality and human rights. A likely derivative of this equation is that every Canadian comprises an equal part of the country's identity and culture, even if they're not a white, fair-weather Christian or some other archetypical image of a Canadian.
I think you have missed Brodie's point. If you consider the history of Canada, multiculturalism has only manifested in the past 35 years. The "Canadian identity" described in this context, it is the traditional history of shared culture between the English and French. Outside of major urban centres, this is still principally the case.
In fact, I find your argument ignorant and hypocritical in its very nature. To suggest the experience Brodie describes as unCanadian infers the longer you remain, the less you may have a culture. Multiculturalism allows everyone to express themselves through their own culture. Brodie understands Canada by expressing himself through the small-town, white-man experience.
So Yaseen, claiming Brodie's experience is focusing on the periphery of societal norms. At the heart of the culture remains the thing that gives Brodie a warm-and-fuzzy. I think as Canadians we should respect his choice to fully engross himself in his "Canadian experience."
In fact it's your response that's ignorant - Ignorant to my post! Pfff. Read my words, don't jump to your misconceptions about what you think I would say!
I took issue not with the 'experience', but rather at a few comments made about it. Indeed I have spent my fair share of time enjoying 'small town' life, and 'the outdoors'. If you read my post, you'll see the second sentence addresses this. I completely agree that part of the landscape of the Canadian identity & culture is filled by 'the outdoors'.
So, you say multiculturalism is a fact of only the last 30-40 years. Yes, officially…
Firstly, I completely disagree that Canada traditionally = French + English. In fact, those two peoples and languages have been at odds for much of their existence in this land. For a long time, most of the federal service and parliament was English only. Since the 'silent revolution', this has obviously changed. Anyway, let's breeze through the history of Canada since you insist on breaking it down to this level. Traditionally, Canada=First Nations. Then, the French settlers. The British followed. The Polish, Germans, Irish, Ukrainians and other Europeans weren’t long after. South-east Asian immigrants also played a pivotal role in establishing the young dominion. Also, immigrants from Africa and those who moved North. As we roll further into the 20th century, we see Italians, Portuguese, and others came too. The list goes on and on and throughout our country's fairly short history, we've had immigration from every continent and most all countries.
Is there a commonality to all this? Not that they were all white, or all spoke English, or all arrived before a certain date! The thread that ties us together as a people is actually our diversity. Canada was built and continues to be built by an influx of people from different backgrounds with a wide range of perspectives and ideas – that’s our strength, truely. And that’s what multiculturalism is all about. Ignoring this IS ‘un-Canadian’. But, that’s your mistake – not our dear Brodie’s! The issue then is how to define a Canadian culture. The best solution: Our culture is a culture of cultures. Our culture is open to all culture and in fact is a composite of all cultures. I think it’s a very positive message and actually the most powerful idea Canada can deliver to the world. Understanding, acceptance and inclusiveness.
Anyway, that’s not really what my post was about. It was about the Venn diagram of multiculturalism and ‘the outdoors’. So, my issue was with these ‘other worlds’ that Brodie described. Am I, born and lived my whole live in this country as an equal Canadian to you, considered part of these ‘other worlds’. From the bottom of my heart, I sincerely don’t believe that. And if you do, then you’re the one from another world.
Let’s celebrate Canada Day together as equals of this great, diverse country with its storied history and tradition, and bright future.
*sigh*
Again, you miss the point, good sir; but alas, I will debate on your terms...
There is a binding culture within this group. The nationalities you describe melted together to form the new culture of Canada. This did not happen at any single point but gradually through events and a shared environment(wars, government, railroad, symbols, Olympics the list goes on...)
First Nations - yes, they were there but struggled to maintain their own culture from the attempts to assimilate.
South-east Asians - yes, they helped develop the country but through the exploitation of the newly formed Canadian culture.
Africans that moved north - yes, but they were still socially seen as inferior.
Globalisation has allowed cultures to more easily subsist in a foreign land as is true in Canada's case and I agree that multiculturalism has been upheld in recent years. (Although, another issue here is how Canada systematically usurps the wealth of the world in its immigration policy). BUT to suggest there is no Canadian culture apart from a patchwork from the world is blind to its history and looks through a lens that desperately clings to the fanatical dream of a Canadian history of multiculturalism.
Bah. Sorry, I don't have time for this tonight. How about I just get us a book on multiculturalism.
Sure. I'll read it.
You guys need to get a TV! Seriously ! How much time have you spent on these comments? It seems as though you've put more thought and facts in these comments then Brodie has in all of his blog postings combined! OHH SHIT!
Post a Comment