When spending time with the Kogawa Fonds, my primary focus landed on what readers and editors had said about the book, Obasan. The book discusses her personal experience of the treatment of Japanese-Canadians during World War II in attempt to keep the history alive. Personally, I felt that the topic book was interesting, but her writing style did not fulfil the distinction and stature of the topic.
The success of the book suggests that her endeavour to keep the story of the unfair behaviour toward Japanese-Canadians circulating. There is no denying that this book successfully gives most readers an eye-opening look at the standard of living this people group was forced to endure. In a letter from a fan, Henry David Thoreau was quoted to explain to Kogawa that she had “built where no one had built before”. This is an unfortunate truth. Although the topic has seen some media attention, it has not received merely as much as it deserves. I, personally, had never heard of it before and I have lived in Canada my whole life. Unlike the Holocaust, where Canada is seen as a hero, this shameful event is not included in many school curriculum’s. It seems as though our nations leaders want this event forgotten. Unfortunately that leaves it to us to keep these memories alive.
Canada is a fortunate country. Blessed with resources and a stable government, but as mentioned in a letter from David Holdaway, “…fear drove otherwise rational governments to do irrational acts”. Canada not only dropped the ball by acting irrationally towards the Japanese-Canadians, but they also did not handle the situation with the honour and integrity the world is used to seeing from them as a nation. A public apology was not issued within adequate time, and the event was concealed as much as possible in the years following. History is often said to be taught to prevent mankind from making the same mistakes again, but that is not the case in this circumstance. The mishap is not receiving rightful treatment. In a letter from a publisher who chose not to print Obasan, Ted Whittaker stated, “Canada is a righteous country. This book refuses that righteousness, telling with quiet rage what Canadians can to do each other, and have done.”
Canada has a reputation as a “middle-man” country. It’s new “multicultural” status currently serves it well. Always making decisions which are not too dramatic to avoid upsetting as many people groups as possible. Radical decisions are not it’s specialty and more often than not, it is the positive actions that have been made which are taught in school and promoted in media. Ideally, I like to say that this is unfair. History should be presented as blank and white as possible. Allowing everyone equal access to the facts. The following is merely one, very patriotic, way to look at what Canada has done in the past. Personally, I like the reputation Canada has created for itself by selectively choosing which aspects of it’s history to make known. Having a good reputation in the past drives us as a nation to maintain this character in the future. I understand this can be unfair to the people who endured the hardships of the event and why they would want it to be made known, but my selfish pride takes over. This may be insensitive to say, but I understand why Canada chooses to hide this event in the shackles of the past.
Alana- I thought this post was really interesting and gave me a new perspective on the idea of why a nation selectively chooses what particular parts of its history it wants to be seen and remembered by the public. I am sure this is true for almost any country, they all have their dirty laundry that it is easier to sweep under the carpet and forget about then admit to. It makes me curious what type of nation say Canada or the US or China would be if they acknowledged the ugly parts of their past just as much as the heroic, brave parts. I agree that by creating a good reputation we are holding ourselves to that standard, which then raises the bar for how we want to be seen as a nation in the future. I believe it comes down to a balance- future generations must know about the horrific events in the past so that they are not to be repeated but we should also be allowed to share our pride as a nation with our people and remain optimistic about our future. Great post!
Alana,
I really enjoyed your post and I agree with you that Kogawa’s novel deserves more acclaim because of its powerful narrative of the unfair treatment of Japanese-Canadians during the Second World War. I too also took a look at the editorial letters addressed to Kogawa and I remember reading a certain letter from Oberon Publishing. The letter praised Kogawa’s telling of the historical event that happened in Vancouver during the war, but it also mentioned that as novel it was weak. The novel really heavily pushed for historical events and facts but in doing so, Kogawa neglected to develop the plot, characterization and story line. After reflecting on this letter I can see what the editor is trying to point out. The novel does feel more like a history book rather than the telling of a story. This is not to say that Kogawa’s work on the novel should not be praised, but perhaps not in the field of a literary work. This might be a factor as to why the book has not gotten a lot of acclaim in the literary world. Perhaps this may be a new perspective to consider?