To
mark our country's 150th birthday I will be writing a trio of posts. I want to
look at Canada's past, present, and future. It, of course, won't be definitive
in any way, but figured it would be a valuable way to talk about our sesquicentennial.
Before I go on to the topic I would like to take a moment to point out that
this week marks the seventh anniversary of this blog. What a strange idea that
is.
I've
written about Canada's history before. I've written on specific topics and on
the general notion. This post will fall firmly in the latter category.
The
150th anniversary of Canada has stirred significant controversy. The first is
setting Canada's birthday and age at 150. Critics argue that setting the date
there inherently cuts the narrative of people before 1867 off. Our country does
not exist in a vacuum so there is an inherent time before Canada that led to
Canada. You can tell our story 1867 forward but I think many Canadians don't see
it that way. Quebecois, First Nations, Inuit, and Acadians and on want to see
their deep history reflected in this national narrative.
This
fundamentally reveals the truth that any historian can tell you: Canada doesn't
have history, it has histories. This isn't just about identity politics. We can
examine history through a social lens, an economic lens, a regional/local lens,
a cultural lens, and on and on. If you look at a generic history of Canada you will
find an exceptional amount of attention on personalities which loses
marginalized voices. The story of Canada as we traditionally tell it doesn't give
insight into life in Saskatchewan in 1890s, or the impact on the collapse of
the fur trade on workers and our economy, or any other number of voices that
aren't 'central' to understanding how we got to where we are.
Canadians
are tragically ignorant of their history. I have seen this as a teacher and in
my interactions with normal Canadians who have no idea what I'm talking about
when I have mentioned fundamental parts of our history. Obviously I likely set
an unreasonably high bar, but the critical failure surely doesn't inspire
confidence.
Canada's
histories are certainly things to be celebrated, learned from, criticized and
enjoyed. One of the problems our ignorance causes is that blind celebration
seems ignorant. Canadians can be tremendously proud of their history. Likewise
we don't need to feel damaged every time a figure or moment in history is
problematized by critical commentary. This feedback enriches the project.
Take
for example the connection of this country with the national railway. I think
the 'traditional' telling of that story is quite boring. It's about how great
men and visionaries stitched together the country with a ribbon of steel. Now
that story is incomplete without discussing Chinese labourers, the corruption
and graft on the railways, the state of the West at the time, and the dramas
all those entail.
Richard
Gwyn wrote a fascinating biography of Sir John A. Macdonald, which I reviewed on this blog.
The human portrait of one of our great leaders does not diminish the man, but
elevate him. Being critical of our national heroes does not mean we are tearing
them down.
As
we mark our 150th birthday, and the centuries that preceded it, I would
strongly urge Canadians to take some time to reflect upon their history. Visit
a museum, read a book, watch a documentary, or talk to someone about our shared
history.
No comments:
Post a Comment