Nationalism is believed to be a set of characteristics that define a nation. For example, according to national discourse, a nation is a group of people who share common traits, history, territory, and homogeneity. It also defines who is included in a nation, who belongs, and who can be considered ‘Canadian’. One of the problems with this concept is that there are many people in Canada who do not believe that these characteristics apply to them; therefore they question whether or not they can be considered Canadian. For example, an immigrant who has recently become a Canadian citizen is technically ‘Canadian’, but does not necessarily fit into the characteristics of nationalism. This raises the question of ‘what is Canadian’ because there are also members of the Canadian population who have lived in Canada their entire lives but also feel they do not fit into these characteristics, i.e. Aboriginals.
A few Canadians from the CRB foundation saw an opportunity to create a discourse in the form of media; videos that would portray epic moments in Canadian history that would show on Canadian television stations during commercial breaks. In her article entitled The Other Heritage Minutes: Satirical Reactions to Canadian Nationalism, Katarzyna Rukszto describes this project, called ‘Heritage moments’, which was intended to enhance Canadianism through the transformative power of mass media. “The minutes attempt to reproduce the dominant discourse of Canadian identity, focusing on a multiculturalist idea of national unity out of difference.” (Rukszto, 2005)
Discourse in this sense is a set of practises that allow for certain ways to talk, conduct, values, rituals, and ways to write about a topic. National discourse, then, is a way to produce ideas about a nation, like Canada.
I believe that these Heritage moments are extremely selective in what is shown and do not display an accurate history of Canada. However, I also believe that the content of these videos for what is shown is important to Canadian history and does teach viewers about their nation in a way that textbooks cannot. For example, I learned things I did not know about Canada by watching some of the videos shown in class, and therefore I do respect the motives of the creators of the moments. The fact of the matter is that these clips do include important moments in history but limit themselves to those that only focus on the positive moments in history, and fail to include many of the facts of how Canadian came to be. For instance, If someone knew nothing about Canadian history and watched all of these videos in order to grasp the basic idea of the story, they would not be aware of the colonization, slavery, and how many people were killed for Canada to become what it is today.
An example of one of the Heritage moments that does show a prominent moment in history but shows it in a way that is distorted and inaccurate is the meeting between Jacques Cartier and the Iroquoians that resulted in the naming of Canada. In this video there is group of French settlers led by Jacques Cartier and a group of aboriginals, when they meet it is peaceful greeting, Jacques Cartier and his men are speaking English and the Iroquoians are speaking a different language. Knowing the many stories of colonisation I find it hard to believe that this meeting was this peaceful and smooth, but the way it is displayed in the Heritage moment suggests that it was, which can give people the wrong idea of exactly what the aboriginals endured during the European finding of Canada. This adds to the national discourse that makes people think and feel national pride about Canada based on these stories.
In Rukszto’s article, she talks about the parodies that have been released as a result of the distorted reality displayed in the Heritage moments. A comedy show that has taken these moments and inverted the discourse to mean something else is This Hour has 22 Minutes. This show gives a critical perspective on nationalism because, as the creator of the show, Mary Walsh asserts, the discourse resulting from the Heritage moments masks the Canadian past and present. (Rukszto, 2005) It is for this very reason that This Hour has 22 Minutes feels that it is important to direct attention to what is being left out and how that can affect nationalism. (Ibid, 2005) The show uses comedy, sarcasm and irony to compare what is being shown in the Heritage minutes to what is being left out and how that can affect nationalist discourse. “The parodies call into question whose interests are supported by the nationalist agenda, and which voices are heard in the nationalist imaginary.” (Ibid, 2005)
I think that since laughter makes Canadians interact with each other, media displaying moments of Canadian heritage that are more relevant and entertaining at the same time creates the right kind of discourse that teaches Canadians about their history and what is means to be part of a nation. This is why I feel that, while the parodies may not be appropriate to be displayed during commercials on Canadian stations, they should be more well known, because it is the discourse created by these parodies that are accurate in teaching Canadians about their history and giving them an opportunity to think about who the Heritage moments are intended for.
When many Canadians think of nationalism, for them what comes to mind is Canada's game- hockey. Whether it brings people together or represents national untiy and sportsmanship, it is up to Canadians if they agree that hockey is a symbol of naitonalism.
Citizenship as a symbol of Canadian nationalism.
Works Cited
1. Katarzyna Rukszto. (2005). The Other Heritage Minutes: Satirical Reactions to
Canadian Nationalism. Topia: Canadian Journal of Cultural Studies, 14, 73-91.
No comments:
Post a Comment