The figures I provided in my last post were misleading. I put the post aside.
In the sombre days of imperialism and colonialism, Prime Minister John A. Macdonald created “uniform” schools where English was the language of instruction. He minoritized French-speaking Canadians. As immigrants arrived in Canada, their children had to attend English-language schools. Children could not be educated in French outside Quebec. He made Quebec their only home.
Québécois would like to retain their language. They have done so since Nouvelle-France fell to Britain. But the obligatory francization of businesses is unacceptable. Quebec is trying to assimilate its anglophone population and drive it away from Quebec. No company should be asked to obtain a Certificate of Francization. Quebec is a province of Canada, and Canada is officially bilingual. Moreover, anglophones have the right to bilingual services in such areas as the Eastern Townships.
John A. Macdonald created uniform schools, and l’Office de la langue française is creating a uniform province.
The figures (list of colleges) I am providing show that Quebec is home to both anglophones and francophones. I would hate to think that we cannot live together happily. Many Anglophones live in Montreal. They have their literature, songwriters, artists, and institutions. McGill University is a monument to the world of learning.
Doctors at the Montreal Neurological Institute work miracles. Imagine Quebec has the Montreal Neurological Institute, but Quebecers cannot find a doctor. That situation is infamy. So much of our tax dollars is spent on doctors, but medicine is deficient in Quebec.
I am forwarding links leading to a discussion of a novel entitled Trente arpents(Thirty Acres). Ringuet’s Trente arpents was published in 1938, at the very end of the period of French-Canadian literary history labelled “régionaliste.” (See Philippe Panneton, Wikipedia). Unlike earlier régionaliste literature, Trente arpents is characterized by its realism. A farmer, prosperous in his youth, “gives himself” (his land) to one of his sons. Everything goes wrong. This novel reflects the difficulties habitants faced when they had to divide the ancestral thirty acres among sons. It is also an excellent depiction of an habitant’s family
One presumes Euchariste Moisan, an habitant, owns his thirty acres. When the Seigneurial system was abolished, in 1854, “habitants” who could purchase the thirty acres they had farmed since the beginning of the 17th century. Those who couldn’t buy had to pay a rente for the rest of their life, as though they still had a seigneur. As noted in an earlier post, the rente was a form of debt bondage which ended in 1935, when Alexandre Taschereau was Premier of Quebec. Whenever the priest arrived at their door, these “habitants” no longer wanted to pay thite (la dîme). Trente arpents was published in 1938. At that time, the United States and the world were nearing the end of the Great Depression and migration was less frequent. It should be noted that the exodus started at the time of the Rebellions of 1837-1838. It endured. Trente arpents was discussed in two parts.
Forthcoming: John Neilson on Canadiens, and the potatoe famine
Alexis de Tocqueville’s inverviewed John Neilson, a bilingual polititian in Lower Canada. I have translated this interview. In 1831, John Neilson, Scottish, praised Canadiens and looked upon French-speaking and English-speaking Canadians as compatible. The interview took place six years before the Rebellions of 1837-1838. The French had friends. Among them were the Irish who had fled their country because of the potatoe famine. When they arrived in Quebec, they were very sick, which caused a cholera epidemic. Canadiens had survived various blows and survived again. In fact, Canadiens bonded with the Irish, many of whom went to work in factories but were never promoted. So, we know why the music of Ireland and Scotland exerted a great deal of influence on Québécois music. We also know why my grandfather, on my father’s side, had an Irish mother.
Confederation
To a very large extent, Quebec entered Confederation because Confederation pleased Quebec’s bourgeoisie, French and English, as well as the Clergy. The Clergy feared dissention. My source is Denis Monière‘s Développement des idéologies au Québec[1] and the sources he quotes. For a very long time, the bourgeoisie, including Quebec’s bourgeoisie and the Château Clique, attempted to minoritize and assimilate French-speaking Canadians. The Clergy sided with the British. The Clergy was in favour of confederation. Moreover, several Englishmen and United Empire Loyalists, who were given the Eastern Townships, les Cantons de l’Est, now l’Estrie, wished to absorb French-speaking Canadiens. The Townships were home to Abenaki Amerindians. I have Amerindian ancestry.
French-Canadian literature is a subject I taught for several years. In 2001, I gave a lecture on La Patrie littéraire at the University of Stuttgart. As you know, I had huge workloads, so many subject-matters. A mission impossible is the only accurate description of the tasks expected of me when I taught at McMaster University. Yet I was elected to the presidency of the Canadian Association of University and College Teachers of French, l’Apfucc and to the Fédération des Études humaines, and to its Executive. But let us call these years an epiphany.
Music video of “A la claire fontaine” (By the clear fountain/spring) performed by Vancouver choir musica intima, arrangement by Stephen Smith. My own urban re-interpretation of the traditional French folk song.
Director/producer: Nigel Hunt. DOP: Terry Zazulak, Editor: Brian Nemett. Actors: Jerry Prager, Sigrid Johnson. Funding: Bravo!FACT. Video copyright: Garrison Creek Productons, 2000.
Allégorie de l’automne par Suzor-Coté (paperblog.fr)
I am revisiting my last post: Chronicling Covid-19 (14): The Mask (15 May 2020). It is not entirely clear and it did not address a serious matter: anxiety among English-speaking Montrealers. The relevant video is at the foot of this post.
I will write first that I did not vote for monsieur Legault, the leader of Coalition Avenir Québec, EN CAQ FR, a party Premier Legault founded.
As we have seen, there are very real problems in Quebec. For instance, the pandemic has brought to the fore the lack of safety in long-term care facilities. This problem exists elsewhere. There has just been a flare-up in Hamilton, Ontario, at the Rosslyn Retirement Residence.
In Quebec, however, 4 out of 5 victims of Covid-19 lived in long-term care facilities, CHSLDs, located in Montreal. The first two persons taken to the Montreal Jewish General Hospital were not diagnosed with Covid-19, but everything soon changed. Further arrivals to the Emergency Room (ER) were infected with Covid-19.
Other victims were the poor living in Montreal North (Montréal-Nord).
Frontline Workers
syndicates
sense of duty
Moreover, at the very beginning of his statement, monsieur Legault asked health-workers who were infected, but had recovered, to return to their duties. This I should have noted. The pandemic revealed considerable reluctance on the part of Quebec doctors to be frontline workers. Their syndicate, these are powerful in Quebec, negotiated fees that could total approximately $2,500.00 per day, which is a large amount of money. Too many lack empathy, a requirement in the case of health workers.
Monsieur Legault is taking the responsibility for his province’s lack of preparedness and will correct problems, such as unsafe long-term care facilities, to the extent that this problem can be corrected. Quebec quickly ran out personal protective equipment, as did other provinces. But there can be no doubt that he had difficulty recruiting health-care workers. Fortunately, as you know, monsieur Legault was able to call on the Canadian Armed Forces. Moreover, there were volunteers. A group of immigrants wanted to help in exchange for being granted citizenship. Would that I could find that video! This is question I must explore further. As well, there were volunteers who cooked free meals that were distributed to various houses and to the frontline workers. Charitable donations should cover the cost of these meals.
The demiurgic figure Urizenprays before the world he has forged by William Blake. (Wikipedia)
Rights and Freedoms
Bill 21
secularization versus protection
anxiety among anglophones
bilingualism
I should also comment on the worries concerning rights and freedoms, expressed by the lady, a journalist who asked a question, or questions, following Premier Legault’s statement. She may have been referring to Quebec’s unthinkable Bill 21 (MacLean’s).
There are other problems in Quebec, some of which the response to the pandemic have exposed. However, after he was elected Premier of Quebec, François Legault and members of his government passed Bill 21, which promotes absolute laïcité, secularization. Monsieur Legault’s predecessor, Dr Philippe Couillard, had attempted to forbid the wearing of clothes that impeded identification of a person. He wanted to protect Quebec citizens, but the matter of rights and freedoms was raised.
If one clicks on burqa, one can see that it is a garment that covers the face and which could also be used to conceal a weapon. Monsieur Couillard was the Premier of Quebec (Premier Ministre) at a time, not so distant, when terrorist attacks were frequent. Protection, not secularization, was Premier Couillard’s goal. However, monsieur Legault and his government introduced Bill 21, An Act respecting the laicity of the State, which was assented on 16 June 2019. Bill 21 affects Civil Servants and it could be considered as an infringement on “rights and freedoms” in Quebec. Muslim women wear veils.
Finally, in a survey conducted recently by Léger Marketing, it was determined that English-speaking Quebecers (68%) feared Covid-19 more than French-speaking citizens of Montreal and Quebec as a province (47%). At first, I could not understand the lady’s question. Canadians were lifting the lockdown when the coronavirus was still active. Consequently, Premier Legault urged the citizens of Quebec to wear a facemask as a protective measure. Who wants to breathe in the virus? In short, the facemask has nothing to do with Quebec’s secularization and Bill 22. But the notion came to the lady’s mind that monsieur Legault’s request could restrict personal rights and freedoms. It didn’t. As I noted, it was a safety measure.
But Christopher Skeete, the parliamentary assistant on relations with English-speaking Quebecers, stated that an “agreement” had been reached and that 800,000 English versions of the government’s COVID-19 self-care guide were sent out. I have my copies. As quoted above, Christopher Skeete, Quebec government’s point man on anglophone affairs “does not see the purpose of dividing the province by language when it comes to gauging the population’s fear of contracting COVID-19.”
In the days of Covid-19, a Premier of Quebec addresses both the province’s French-speaking citizens and its English-speaking citizens. Monsieur Legault, Quebec’s top doctor, Horacio Arruda, and Danielle McCann, Quebec’s Minister of Health, addressed the press in both French and English, as did monsieur Legault.
So far politics has played no role in the pandemic, and there were no significant Anglo-French skirmishes. Monsieur Legault may have expressed impatience, but he has managed the pandemic very well, in both English and French and has followed the same guidelines as other Premiers.
Conclusion
The pandemic in Quebec has made several issues surface, including bilingualism. It would be my opinion, however, that the worst issue monsieur Legault faced was his nearly futile call for frontline workers and helpers. The Quebec government was dealing with a humanitarian disaster. By the way, some schools have reopened. There is a school next to my building, I could hear the children during recreation.
The latest numbers of confirmed and presumptive COVID-19 cases in Canada as of 5:34 p.m. on May 17, 2020:
There are 77,001 confirmed and presumptive cases in Canada.
Total: 77,001 (11 presumptive, 76,990 confirmed including 5,782 deaths, 38,552 resolved)
(19 May 2002: 78,072 cases, 5,842 deaths, 39,228 resolved)
This report by The Canadian Press was first published May 17, 2020.
I think the time has come to delight English-speaking Quebecers and everyone else with Le Temps des cerises, (The Days of Cherries, Wikipedia). Our colleague Manuel Cerdá (A mi manera) wrote a post about it: Le Temps des cerises.
William Lyon Mackenzie’s house on Bond Street in downtown Toronto.
Canada’s National Holiday
On Wednesday, July 1st, Canadians celebrated their National Holiday. As for the citizens of Quebec, they celebrated their National Holiday on 24 June which is Saint-Jean-BaptisteDay,the former Saint-Jean. The date on which Saint-Jean-Baptiste is celebrated is on or near the summer solstice or Midsummer Day, the longest day of the year. This year, the summer solstice occurred on the 22 June.
Midsummer Dance by Anders Zorn, 1897 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
As for Canada Day, it is celebrated on the anniversary of Confederation, the day Canada became a Dominion of Great Britain: 1st July 1867. I have written posts telling the story of Confederation and have listed them at the foot of this post.
Although the people of Quebec do not celebrate Canada day, the province of Quebec was one of the four initial signatories of the British North America Act. Quebec’s Premier was George-Étienne Cartier, named after George III, hence the English spelling of George, i.e. no final ‘s’. The other three provinces to join Confederation on 1st July 1867 were Ontario, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.
The Discrepancy: Quebec and Ottawa
As you know, a large number of Québécois are nationalists and many advocate the separation, to a lesser or greater extent, of the Province of Quebec from the remainder of Canada. This explains why Quebec, one of the first four signatories of the British North America Act, does not observe Canada Day.
It could be argued that the province of Quebec was Lower Canada risen from its ashes, land apportioned by Britain itself, under the terms of the Constitutional Act of 1791, to the descendants of the citizens of New France defeated by British forces on 13 September 1759 at the Battle of the Plains of Abraham.* The battle had claimed the life of both its commanding officers: Louis-Joseph de Montcalm, aged 47, and General James Wolfe, aged 32, but it had lasted a mere fifteen minutes.
*The Battle of the Plains of Abraham is thus called, i.e. Abraham, because it was fought on land belonging to Abraham Martin.
The Greater Loss to Quebecers
1759, the Battle of the Plains of Abraham
1840, the union of Upper and Lower Canada
Of the two, first, the loss of Lower Canada’s motherland, ceded to Britain in 1763, and, second, the Act of Union of 1841 which followed the Rebellions of 1837-1838, the greater loss may well be the loss of Lower Canada. One cannot know the fate awaiting Nouvelle-France had France won the SevenYears’ War (1856-1763), called the French and Indian War in North America. Under the terms of the Treaty of Paris, signed in 1763, France chose to keep its sugar-rich Caribbean colonies, as well as the islands of Saint-Pierreet Miquelon, off the coast of Newfoundland.
However, Quebec had been granted a period of grace after the Treaty of Paris, signed in 1763. The citizens of the former New France knew they had become a colony of Britain, but they had yet to feel the full impact of their condition as British but ‘conquered’ subjects.
A Reprieve
the Treaty of Paris
the Quebec Act of 1774
the Constitutional Act of 1791
betrayal
There had been a reprieve. First, France negotiated the cession of Nouvelle-France. Britain would not deprive its new subjects of their language, their religion, their property and their seigneuries. It didn’t. Second, by virtue of the Quebec Act of 1774,the citizens of the former New France had become full-fledged citizens of a British Canada. Third, less than two decades after the Quebec Act of 1774, 17 years to be precise, the Constitutional Act of 1791 had divided the vast province of Quebec into Upper and Lower Canada.
Whatever its purpose, the Constitutional Act of 1791 created Lower Canada and, in the eyes of Canadiens, Lower Canada was their country, or terroir, which they were now losing. Therefore, if one takes into account the loss of Lower Canada and the determination to assimilate Canadiens, the Act of Union of 1841 was betrayal on the part of Britain, not Upper Canada.
The Rebellions of 1837 and 1838 occurred in both Canadas: Upper and Lower Canada. These could be perceived as twin rebellions orchestrated by Louis-Joseph Papineau (7 Oct 1786 – 25 Sept 1871), in Lower Canada, and William Lyon Mackenzie (12 March 1795 [Scotland]-28 August 1864 [Toronto]), in Upper Canada.
However, Papineau and William Lyon Mackenzie were not fighting against one another. Both Papineau and Mackenzie were “patriots” and allies. Their common motivation was to be granted a responsible government and, consequently, greater democracy.
Nevertheless, it cannot be denied that the citizens of Upper Canada were English-speaking Canadians living on British soil. As for the citizens of Lower Canada, they were a conquered people, former French subjects, living on British soil and realizing that they had been conquered. Not all of Lower Canada’s rebels were Canadiens. One was Dr Wolfred Nelson (10 July 1791 – 17 June 1863), a patriote and a future Mayor of Montreal.[1]
The majority however were descendants of the citizens of a defeated Nouvelle-France. In short, the rebels of Upper Canada differed from the rebels of Lower Canada. The patriots and the patriotes were not on an equal footing, so it is somewhat difficult to speak of the rebellions as twin rebellions. They weren’t, at least not entirely and not according to a reality of the mind.
The Rebellions in Lower Canada
different intensity
repressive measures, harsher
There were two rebellions in Lower Canada. The first took place in 1837 and the second, in 1838. The rebellions in Lower Canada were more intensive than their equivalent in Upper Canada.[2] Six battles had been waged in Lower Canada. Repressive measures were therefore much harsher:
“[b]etween the two uprisings [in Lower Canada], 99 captured militants were condemned to death but only 12 went to the gallows, while 58 were transported to the penal colony of Australia. In total the six battles of both campaigns left 325 dead, 27 of them soldiers and the rest rebels. Thirteen men were executed (one by the rebels), one was murdered, one committed suicide, and two prisoners were shot.” (Peter Buckner, “Rebellion in Lower Canada,” The CanadianEncyclopedia.)
Most importantly, as we will see below, Lord Durham had recommended the assimilation of Canadiens, which was devastating to the people of Lower Canada. In Upper Canada, three men were hanged and William Lyon Mackenzie fled to the United States. He lived in New York until he was pardoned in 1849. Louis-Joseph Papineau also fled to the United States and then sailed to France. As for Dr Wolfred Nelson, he was unable to flee and was exiled to Bermuda. It was a brief period of exile.
Dispossession
Act of Union of 1840-1841
Lower Canada, the homeland of French-speaking subjects
Clearly, for the former citizens of Lower Canada, the Act of Union of 1840-1841 was dispossession. During the years that preceded the Rebellions, it had occurred to Louis-Joseph Papineau, the leader of the Parti canadien, that Lower Canada should seek independence from Britain. Although Nouvelle-France had been ceded to Britain, by virtue of the Constitutional Act of 1791, Lower Canada belonged to Britain’s French-speaking subjects. Britain could not help itself to the vaults of both Upper and Lower Canada, its North American colony.
Lord Durham(Courtesy The Canadian Encyclopedia)
Lord Durham’s Report
an ethnic conflict
a United Province of Canada
the assimilation of French-speaking Canadians
a responsible government
Tocqueville: a nation
It should be pointed out that in the ReportJohn Lambton, 1stEarl of Durham submitted after he investigated the rebellions in the two Canadas, he concluded that the Rebellions were an ethnic conflict, which is not altogether true nor altogether false. The rebellions were a quest for responsible government which Lord Durham himself proposed in his Report. The motivation was the same inboth Canadas: responsible government.
However, in his Report, Lord Durham proposed not only the Union of both Canadas, but also recommended the assimilation of French-speaking Canadians whom he viewed as a people possessing “neither a history nor a literature.” Never were French-speaking Canadians so offended! The Act of Union of 1841created a United Province of Canada.
Moreover, when the United Province of Canada was created, the land apportioned English-speaking and French-speaking Canadians made French-speaking Canadians a minority. It should also be noted that the United Province of Canada was not granted a responsible government, which had been the reason why the two Canadas rebelled and one of Lord Durham’s recommendations.
The time had come for both Canadas, now united, to be mostly self-governed. During a trip to Lower Canada, Alexis de Tocqueville noticed and noted that the French in Lower Canada had become what I would call a nation, but a conquered nation that had yet to enter the Industrial Age and whose people had not acquired the skills they required to leave their farms, or thirty acres, trente arpents, the acreage provided to the settlers of Nouvelle-France.
Alexis de Tocqueville in Lower Canada
a nation, but a nation conquered
In 1831, Alexis de Tocqueville (29 July 1805 – 16 April 1859) and Gustave de Beaumont (16 February 1802 – 30 March 1866) took a little time off from their duties in the United States, to visit the inhabitants of France’s former colony, believing they had become British, or assimilated, which was not the case. Their language, religion, land and seigneuries had not been taken away from French-speaking Canadians. They were a nation, albeit a conquered nation.
Canadiens wanted news of “la vieille France,” old France, but there was no “vieille France,” not after the French Revolution. What was left of vieille France, Tocqueville and Beaumont found in Lower Canada. According to Tocqueville, the villain in the loss of New France was Louis XV of France. Louis XV had abandoned France’s colony in North America.
It is astonishing that, in 1831, a few years before the Rebellions and during a brief visit to Lower Canada, Tocqueville should express the opinion that the “greatest and most irreversible misfortune that can befall a people is to be conquered:”
Je n’ai jamais été plus convaincu qu’en sortant [de ce tribunal] que le plus grand et le plus irrémédiable malheur pour un peuple c’est d’être conquis.
(See RELATED ARTICLES, below.)
The above is significant. In the wake of the Acte d’Union,Antoine Gérin-Lajoiewrote his plaintive “Un Canadien errant,” dated 1842. Moreover, as mentioned above, French-speaking Canadians had begun creating a “literary homeland,” (la Patrie littéraire) the name given to the period of French-Canadian literature during which French-speaking Canadians set about proving Lord Durham wrong, which they did successfully.
Baldwin and Lafontaine (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Robert Baldwyn and Louis-Hippolyte Lafontaine
Robert Baldwin and Louis-Hippolyte Lafontaine
‘Assimilation’ cancelled (1842)
the responsible government achieved (1846)
Matters would also be redressed ‘politically,’ so to speak. In 1842, shortly after the Act of Union was passed (1840-1841) Louis-Hippolyte LaFontaine (4 October 1807 – 26 February 1864) was elected Joint Prime Minister of the United Province of Canada, a position he shared with RobertBaldwin whose jurisdiction was the western portion of the United Province of Canada. Lord Durham’s proposed assimilation of Britain’s French-speaking subjects was never implemented. Finally, although it would not happen immediately, the Baldwin-LaFontaine team would achieve the objective pursued by the rebels of 1837 and 1838, responsible government, which meant greater democracy.
LaFontaine resigned one year after his appointment as Prime Minister because Britain was not delivering on responsible government. However, in 1848, James Bruce, the 8th Earl of Elgin, who had been named governor general of the United Province of Canada in 1846, asked Lafontaine (also spelled LaFontaine) to form a responsible government.
“LaFontaine thus became the first prime minister of Canada in the modern sense of the term. During this second administration, he demonstrated the achievement of responsible government by the passage of the Rebellion Losses Bill, despite fierce opposition and violent demonstrations. His ministry also passed an Amnesty Actto forgive the 1837-38 rebels, secularized King’s College into the University of Toronto, incorporated many French Canadian colleges, established Université Laval, adopted important railway legislation and reformed municipal and judicial institutions.” (Jacques Monet, S. J., “Sir Louis-Hippolyte Lafontaine,” The Canadian Encyclopedia.)
Confederation
So a mere twenty-six (26) years after passage of the Act of Union, Quebec, under the leadership of George-Étienne Cartier, entered Confederation. Sir George-Étienne Cartier asked that Quebec retain its recently-acquired Code civil and that primary education remain compulsory. These requests were granted.
Confederation had the immense benefit of returning to Canadiens their former Lower Canada. They regained a territory or patrimoine (a homeland), however mythical. And they have bestowed on their patrimoine its National Day, la Saint-Jean-Baptiste.
At the last meeting of the Liberal Party of Quebec, Premier Dr Philippe Couillard, stated that Quebec was a patrimoine to Québécois and Canada, their country.
My kindest regards to all of you and apologies for being away from my computer and late in every way. Yesterday was Independence Day. Belated wishes to my American readers. Next, I will write about an award.♥
Investigating Canada’s status as a bilingual and bicultural nation was a difficult endeavour. It may have caused the death of André Laurendeau who served as co-chair of the Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism with Davidson Dunton. Davidson Dunton was not the problem. Laurendeau and Dunton were a compatible team.
André Laurendeau died in 1968, at the age of 56, before the Official Languages Act of 1969 was passed. From 1963 until his death, his role “brought him considerable criticism from his nationalist colleagues. The stress caused by this criticism was blamed for Laurendeau’s relatively early death by historian Charles Godin.” (See AndréLaurendeau, Wikipedia.)
These years were very stressful for certain French-speaking Canadians. At the time, my father was the leader of British Columbia’s French-speaking community. He fell ill.
1. On the one hand, he had to deal with individuals who could not understand why their language was not an official language. They lived in communities where the population consisted of immigrants or the children of immigrants who were more numerous than French-speaking citizens in their community. There may not have been French-speaking Canadians in their community. These people would say that Britain “won the battle.” This could explain why Pierre Trudeau was motivated to adopt multiculturalism as a policy.
2. On the other hand, my father had to face members of a French-speaking community many of whom wanted their French-language schools to be Catholic schools. For them, language and faith could not be dissociated. This question is central to the history of bilingualism in Canada, i.e. bilingualism outside Quebec. In Quebec, French schools were Catholic schools until the Quiet Revolution. English-language schools were Protestant schools.
Yet, had the French language schools or Catholicism been threatened, it is unlikely that the Province of Quebec (Canada East), led by Sir George-Étienne Cartier,PC, would have entered Confederation. The other three provinces, Canada West, future Ontario, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, that entered confederation in 1867 did not oppose Sir George-Étienne Cartier’s condition that Canada East retain its language and its religion, nor did London, the senior authority in the matter. It is as though the Quebec Act of 1774 had left a permanent imprint. However, when I was a student, Catholic schools outside Quebec were private schools.
When it entered Confederation, Quebec (Canada East) also kept its Code civil. In fact, if approved, Confederation would be an advantage for Quebec because it would rescind the Act of Union of 1841 that united Upper Canada (up the Saint-Lawrence River) and Lower Canada (down the Saint-Lawrence River).
“Maîtres chez nous”
“Maîtres chez nous” (masters in our own home)
the Language Laws
Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day riot (1968)
the Parent Commission (education in Quebec)
During the not-so-quiet Quiet Revolution in Quebec, Quebecers were rebuilding their society and reorganizing their education system. The Parent Commission, named after its Président, Mgr Alphonse-Marie Parent, was established on 21 April 1961. Its mission, restructuring the education system in Quebec, and the passage of language laws in the 1970s, Quebec are separate issues. The video clips shown below are very revealing. It is stated quite clearly that education would be free. If students now go on strike, encourage civil disobedience, intimidate classmates and want to unionize, we can trace that behaviour back to earlier events.
But the “maîtres chez nous” ideology was soon expressed by the Front de libération du Québec. We have already discussed the October Crisis of 1970 and the bombs. It was quite ugly. I have a good friend who saw separatist leader Pierre Bourgault ask thugs to start or join a riot during the 1968 Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day parade in Montreal. My friend was standing a few feet away. Pierre Trudeau, the main guest, was sitting on a platform of honour but he refused to be led away by his bodyguard. Ironically, Pierre Bourgault is credited for creating Quebec’s National Day.
24 June 1968 Saint-Jean-Baptiste Riot
Multiculturalism: a “descriptive ” term
Yet official multiculturalism did happen. As we will see, it was enacted by Prime Minister Brian Mulroney in 1988. However, Canada’s two official languages are English and French. No other language is an official language. In fact, official multiculturalism has been viewed as formal recognition on the part of Canada’s Federal Government that the people of Canada originate from approximately 200 countries (See Multiculturalism in Canada, Wikipedia). As such, it is mostly “descriptive.”
At this point in history, the majority of Canadians are no longer of French and British origin. Prime Minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau announced in the early 1970s that Canada would adopt a multicultural policy. Multiculturalism was recognized in Section 27 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (1982). But, interestingly, New Zealand born and educated Peter Hogg, CCQCFRSC, Canada’s foremost authority on Canadian constitutional law,
“observed that this section did not actually contain a right; namely, it did not say that Canadians have a right to multiculturalism. The section was instead meant to guide the interpretation of the Charter to respect Canada’s multiculturalism. Hogg also remarked that it was difficult to see how this could have a large impact on the reading of the Charter, and thus section 27 could be more of a rhetorical flourish than an operative provision.’” (section 27 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Wikipedia.)
Section 27 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is administered by the Department of Canadian Heritage. Multiculturalism was enacted by Prime Minister Brian Mulroney and received royal assent on 21 July 1988. (See Multiculturalism, Wikipedia.) Quebec has not adopted multiculturalism. Its policy is interculturalism and it is an “operative provision.”
I rather like Martha Nussbaum definition of interculturalism. She states that it involves “the recognition of common human needs across cultures and of dissonance and critical dialogue within cultures,” (Cultivating Humanity). We may differ in certain ways, but we are nevertheless all the same. Common affinities link humans to other humans. It is also very difficult not to rush to help another human being in distress. The manner in which we all became Charlie is an expression of commonality among human beings. Look at the Nepal tragedy. Kind souls have travelled long distances to help victims.
It would be my opinion that multiculturalism is a very short distance away from interculturalism. One cannot simply stand next to another human being. Canadian multiculturalism has been compared to a mosaic. At first sight, it may be. But Quebec does not want a mosaic. It wants an intercultural French-speaking society.
Conclusion
In short, I doubt very much that bilingualism and biculturalism were the goals pursued by Quebec’s Révolution tranquille “nationalists.” That was happening mostly outside Quebec and may not have been perceived as protection of the French language by Quebecers. Their objective was to protect their own language, an objective akin to the goals of the Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism.
Consequently, in the 1960s and 1970s, Québécois were not good candidates for biculturalism or multiculturalism, a federal project. They wanted to be “maîtres chez eux,” masters in their own home. But the declining birthrate that began in the 1960s motivated Québécois to integrate immigrants, who had to learn Quebec’s official language, French, which was interculturalism.
However, failure to learn English is not an option in this world. It could be that Québécois are too afraid of losing their language. Yet knowing English and other languages can improve one’s self-image and definitely benefits the human mind, not to mention, ironically, knowledge of one’s mother tongue.
Besides, in 1969, while Québécois were restructuring their education system, Canada did pass its Official Languages Act, reaffirmed by the 1988 Official Languages Act, which protects the French language and cannot possibly harm Quebec.
Yesterday, I wrote a blog on the subject of Bill 14, now under discussion in the Quebec Legislature,[i] but did not post it. I needed to “sleep on it” and did. If enacted, Bill 14 would make Quebec communities where the percentage of English-speaking citizens falls below 50% into French-speaking communities, but it is more complex. It would also put limits on the number of French-speaking Québécois who attend Quebec’s Cégep (grades 12 and 13). After obtaining their DEC Diplôme d’études collégiales) or DCS (Diploma of College Studies), students may enter graduate programs, such as Law and Medicine.
A will to remain within Canadian Confederation
When Jacques Parizeau, a former premier of Quebec, lost the last referendum on sovereignty, held in 1995, he commented that the Parti Québécois had lost because of “money and the ethnic vote.” This cannot be altogether true. Among the c. 51% of the population who voted against sovereignty, there were many French-speaking voters. There are French-speaking Quebecers who wish to retain a close partnership with Ottawa. In fact, this percentage has grown significantly since Madame Marois has become the Premier of Quebec. She leads a minority government and has effected cutbacks and disappointed students. I can state, therefore, that there is, among Québécois, a will to remain within Confederation, a closer bond than that which unites the United States.
French-Canadians Studying English
An excellent indication of this will is the large number of French-speaking Québécois who enrol in English-language Cégeps as well as institutions such as Bishop’s University, in the Eastern Townships, where I reside, with the purpose of learning English. English-speaking Quebecers are willing to accept compromises and, among French-speaking Québécois, many wish to learn English. Because of the operations I have undergone in the last five months or so (cataracts and bunions), I know that it is entirely possible in Sherbrooke, Quebec, to receive medical attention in Canada’s two official languages. For instance I was provided with information on the removal of cataracts in a bilingual booklet. As well, when my second bunion was removed, there were Anglophones waiting for surgery and they were addressed in fluent English and in a friendly, caring manner by French-Canadian doctors and the hospital’s staff.
Bilingualism
Bilingualism is not an evil. On the contrary. It is as a student at the University of Victoria, in British Columbia, and Marianopolis College, in Westmount (Montreal), that I studied French systematically. These were English-language institutions. As a result, I know that in English one “makes a decision” and that in French one takes a decision (prendre une décision). In other words, although French is my mother tongue, I perfected my knowledge of both French and English taking courses intended for English-speaking students. I studied French as a second-language. Later, after finishing my PhD, I taught applied linguistics, or what is involved in the teaching and learning of second or third languages (second-language didactics), at McMaster University, in Ontario. I love studying languages.
Opposing Bill 14
Now that Bill 14 is being discussed, I wish I could provide the Legislature with my personal testimonial. I can do so in fluent and correct French. Consequently, I am opposed to a Bill that would further limit access to the study of English to French-speaking Quebecers. One has to be realistic. If Québécois do not learn languages other than French, English in particular, they will be facing obstacles that have nothing to do with their being part of the Canadian Confederation. They are citizens of the world.
I am also opposed to Bill 14 because it takes away from English-speaking Quebecers the rights I enjoyed in mostly English-language provinces of Canada. The majority of French-speaking Canadians live in Quebec, but there are a great many French-speaking Canadians living outside Quebec. They have their schools or they may enter a French-immersion program. Canadian Parents for French remains a strong lobby and several members of this association look upon French-immersion schools as the better public schools or private schools within the public system.
Sir George-Étienne Cartier
The French-Canadian Legacy
French-speaking Canadians outside Quebec can listen to French-language radio and watch French-language television networks from coast to coast and they are respected by English-speaking Canadians who have been flocking to French-immersion schools from the moment Pierre Elliott Trudeau and his Liberal Party implemented official bilingualism. It is no longer possible for me to speak French at a restaurant table in Toronto or Vancouver expecting that no one will understand what I am saying.
In other words, the battle has been fought and won. I have mentioned Pierre Elliott Trudeau‘s government, but he had predecessors who paved the way for a bilingual Canada. Among these leaders are Sir Louis-Hippolyte Lafontaine, KCMG (October 4, 1807 – February 26, 1864), Sir George-Étienne Cartier, 1st Baronet, PC (September 6, 1814 – May 20, 1873), a father of Confederation, and Sir Wilfrid Laurier, GCMG, PC, KC, (20 November 1841 – 17 February 1919). It’s time to cease and desist. If not, more English-speaking Quebecers will leave their province as well as French-speaking Québécois many of whom had moved to Quebec from France, Belgium, and other war-torn countries. A large number left in the 1970s. They had fled strife.
Strife is what Lord Durham, John George Lambton, 1st Earl of Durham, GCB, PC (12 April 1792 – 28 July 1840), observed and noted in the report he submitted after investigating the mostly misunderstood Rebellions of 1837-1838 (entry from the Canadian Encyclopedia). Lord Durham commented that French-speaking Canadians were “without history and without literature” and recommended that they be assimilated, but this recommendation was never put into effect. Sir Louis-Hippolyte Lafontaine, a French-Canadian, was Prime Minister from September 26, 1842 – November 27, 1843. His term began a year after the Act of Union (1841), also recommended by Lord Durham, was proclaimed. Responsible government became the more important objective, as would extending Canada from the Atlantic Ocean to the Pacific Ocean.
The Rebellions of 1837-1838
Québécois who study the history of Canada should be taught that the Rebellions of 1837-1838 occurred in both Canadas (see Upper Canada Rebellion, Wikipedia). There were patriots in Toronto and rebels were hanged in the current Ontario (Toronto and London). Recently, I met a lady who told me she did not know about the Upper Canada Rebellion and was sorry she had not been taught Canadian history in a more accurate manner.
Conclusion
It would be my opinion that souverainistes are now “fighting windmills” (Don Quixote, Miguel de Cervantes). They are also harming all French-speaking Canadians living outside Quebec. Above all, consider the benefits of living harmoniously and in prosperity.
Featured artist
My featured artist is Claude Lorrain, the byname of Claude Gellée (born 1600, Champagne, France—died Nov. 23, 1682, Rome [Italy]), whose landscapes may have been an inspiration to Whistler in that they are lyrical and an earlier expression of a degree of tonalism.[ii]
Peter Matthews (1789 – April 12, 1838; by hanging [Toronto])
Samuel Lount (September 24, 1791 – April 12, 1838; by hanging [Toronto])
Joshua Gwillen Doan (1811 – February 6, 1839; by hanging [London, Ontario])
REFERENCES
CTV News (François Legault)
CBC News (Coalition Avenir Québec, François Legault)
CBC News (Dawson College, Cégep, priority to Anglophone students)
The Montreal Gazette Loss of identity)
Quebec’s main political parties and their leaders (le chef) are:
I updated the blog I posted on 25 January 2013: More Thoughts on Quebec. My comments were incomplete. For me, Quebec separatism is a very sensitive subject. Several members of my family, the Quebec branch, are supporters of Madame Marois’ Parti Québécois. However, my family also has a west coast branch. They are not sympathizers of any indépendantiste (separatist) movement.
However, there was a disorderly students’ strike between March and September 2012 and my comments now reflect greater disapproval of the strike. But I do not understand why Quebec did not sign the Patriated Constitution, 1982. I love my country, but it is a house divided (Abraham Lincoln).
Bilingualism
When I was a child living in Quebec, Friday was market-day, but we sometimes shopped on rue Wellington, before going to the market. Most of the shops on rue Wellington did not belong to French-speaking Canadians and they have disappeared: an exodus. The architecture, however, is a remnant of a prosperous past.
In the past, as I walked down Sherbrooke Streets with my mother, I kept seeing the word Real Estate everywhere. Réal is a French name. So I ended up telling my mother that Monsieur Réal Estate (Es-ta-te), was probably the richest man in town. He owned so many shops! Mother told me the truth.
The Differences
We had English-speaking friends and we visited with them. I was a keen observer of interiors from a very young age. I therefore noticed that the difference between French-speaking and English-speaking Canadian citizens had to do with houses. Our English-speaking friends had a fireplace and a bay window in their living-room. How brilliant! All we had was a big stove and no hot water. I therefore decided that when I grew up, I would own an English house.
Hendrickje Sleeping, by Rembrandt
Houses
I did grow older and, by then, we lived on the west coast. We therefore had an English house, a house with a fireplace and a bay window. Victoria was a marvellous place at the time. Our house was near the sea and my mother had enrolled me in a private school for girls: St Ann’s Academy. It was located within walking distance of the house and it had an extraordinary garden, tennis courts, everything. But my father decided to move to Vancouver and they settled so far from the University of British Columbia (UBC) that I chose to complete my B.A. at the University of Victoria. I do not have a Master’s Degree. UBC suggested I enter the PhD programme.
Toronto
I left Victoria to get a graduate degree. I married and, four years after leaving Victoria, I moved to Toronto, where my husband had found employment. For two years, we lived on the lower floor of a lovely little house in an area of town I had chosen. A year later, I started teaching and it was soon possible for us to buy a house, an English house. I loved our little house.
How Micheline lost her Blue House
But my favourite English house was the Blue House, my Nova Scotia house. It was a cottage-like, two-storey house and it had 22 windows. Although it did not have a bay window, it had the essential fireplace. In fact, it was perfect and located across the street from the campus.
The New Course
A long time ago, I caught a flu and never recovered fully. I can teach three courses, which is a normal workload. But at that stage in my career, I could not be asked to teach courses in unrelated areas. My goal was to finish writing my book on Molière. I was entering a sabbatical leave that would have allowed me to finish my book, but I was told to prepare a course on animals in literature, a course I would have to teach in English. Would that I could have refused. But it was not possible. I was afraid the Chair of my Department would get angry. He once got angry to the point of making me collapse. I fainted.
When I returned to work, I realized I also had to update a language-lab component. I finished upgrading it in November. During the Christmas break, I made sure every lecture of my course on animals in literature was prepared. In February, I started to feel overwhelming fatigue. I saw my doctors who told me I could not finish my teaching assignment. I was given a note and presented it. But despite a doctor’s note, I was not allowed to leave the classroom. My students no longer had a teacher, so I dragged myself to work and completed my 2001-2002 teaching assignment while applying for permanent disability benefits.
—ooo—
In the eyes of my case manager at the Insurance Company, my having completed the academic year was proof positive that I was an imaginary invalid. She had me see a doctor who requested, in writing, that I be told not to leave my home or make serious decisions as I would be able to return to work after an indefinite leave. He diagnosed Depression, not ME, myalgic encephalomyelitis. He thought I would recover. He asked my case manager to tell me not to leave my home in Antigonish or make serious decisions.
I had applied for permanent disability benefits, not an “indefinite” leave. Therefore, when my case manager told me was that my application for disability benefits had been approved, I thought I was free to leave. Not that I wanted to, but it had been suggested to me. My mother was in a hospital and my father had moved to my brother’s house. That The companies Independent Medical Examiner (IME) was right. Under normal circumstances and despite an illness, I could work.
My benefits were terminated, but when I tried to return to work, the Vice-President did not want me to continue teaching. A friend told me they would hurt me, if I returned. I ended up accepting a concealed retirement arrangement. I regained my tenure when my benefits were reactivated, but they would not let me re-enter the classroom.
So, I no longer live in an English house. In short, my story takes one from house to house and, now, infinity…
Self-portrait with a Cap, by Rembrandt van Rijn Openmouthed Aux yeux hagards
All of Rembrandt’s paintings are featured at Rembrandt.OrgThe Complete Works. “Hendrickje Sleeping” is a drawing and the “Self-portrait,” an etching.
Rembrandt van Rijn (1606-1669)
The most prominent Dutch painter and etcher of the Dutch Golden Age,
the seventeenth century
The music is by L. van Beethoven (baptized 17 December 1770 – 26 March 1827)
It’s one of the 32 sonatas for piano.