<\/p>\n
The\u00a0Canadian Literary Canon has come to be a somewhat diverse and fairly inclusive entity, but unfortunately there are still many silenced voices, cultures, and areas of literature that must be included. \u00a0Our group, \u2018Us vs. Them\u2019, has focused our research on the us vs. them dichotomy, and how it is still perpetuated and reinforced throughout Canadian literature; furthering this through dialoguing with other classmates in order to develop some potential ideas in combating the marginalization we have created throughout Canada. \u00a0Much of the literature we reviewed, and completed our annotated bibliographies on, consistently outlined the failures of multiculturalism and inclusion within Canadian society. \u00a0With the aid of our classmates, we have come up with several ideas to combat against this marginalization such as encouraging all languages, both in speech and literature; ensuring community programs are at work to rebuild and include all cultures in Canada; further support literature publication of First Nation\u2019s people; as well as encourage the idea of mutual identification across cultural borders. \u00a0Through our research, it has become clear that although it may seem like an arduous process, the inclusion of all cultures in the Canadian Literary Canon is a mandatory step in moving our country forward. Our discussion centers primarily on:<\/p>\n
Through our research looking into the dichotomy of Us versus Them in contemporary Canadian literature, our team was able to find a number of diverse authors, stories, and articles outlining the current notion of Canadian identity represented in this particular media today.<\/p>\n
One author that two members of our team independently researched is an example of a man who comes from a mixed background, and offers his unique personal identity to his characters, providing voices for both sides of the cultural intersection. Joseph Boyden made the top of the bestsellers list in 2014, winning both the 2013 Governor General\u2019s Award and the 2014 Canada Reads competition for his novel The Orenda<\/i>. His first novel, Three Day Road<\/i>, provided a look into the effects of war on a Cree man in 1919, and the traditional methods of an Oji-Cree medicine woman; a perspective that looked into the struggle of the First Nations population to live in two different worlds at once after the colonization of North America. Although Boyden has attracted some controversy over his work, the dialogue that it has sparked has only brought attention to the struggling voices of minority authors in Canadian literature.<\/p>\n
While one of our cited articles dove into the representation of the \u201cOther\u201d, such as the Inuit, in children\u2019s literature as a good indication of how society views these minorities as a whole, the majority of our research looked into the idea of multiculturalism in Canada. An anthology of essays regarding the multicultural mosaic, collected by Laura Moss, asked the question of where exactly is present-day Canadian literature situated in regards to culture, identity, and the dichotomous \u201cus versus them\u201d? Her collection did not find a definite answer, but rather provided arguments that Canada was both on its way to bridging this gap, and that the country needed to take major steps forward to remedy its literary bias.<\/p>\n
In one of the works we researched, the question was raised in an article by Douglas Todd as to whether Canada had a culture at all, or whether it was a blank slate. What tends to be forgotten in understanding Canadian identity and culture is that the existence of multiple cultures was present far before the Europeans arrived; it did not start as a blank slate. But by disregarding the culture that existed beforehand, the European influence of cultural identity is allowed to dominate.<\/p>\n
Both authors Fazeela Jiwa and Charles Asher Small agree on this account. Small makes use of the Social Identity Theory when regarding multiculturalism in Canada, labelling Canada\u2019s policy as one that reflects the dominant identity as the expense of others. Jiwa looks at how this dominating European sense of identity has led to literature by non-white\/non-dominant authors to be essentialized as \u201cethnic writing\u201d, which in fact undermines the differences between various ethnic communities.<\/p>\n
In an article written just prior to the 40th anniversary of the Multiculturalism Policy of 1971 a term is introduced which may begin to help in stemming the differences in the \u201cus versus them\u201d dichotomy. The idea of \u201cmutual identification\u201d allows for a far more inclusive and homogeneous sense of identity, allows individuals to connect to their traditions, while still feeling fully Canadian.<\/p>\n
What we have learned from our research is that the Canadian identity, as represented in contemporary literature, while having made some progress, is still very one sided in favour of a Anglo-European construction of culture. In our dialogue between our own team and members of teams who commented on our page, adding further insight to the conversation, we were able to come up with a few methods in which we can move towards to bridging the gap between \u201cUs\u201d and \u201cThem\u201d.<\/p>\n
We encountered some very enlightening dialogue discussing our topic. Comments spanned a variety of directions including the errors of multiculturalism, the treatment of the history of Canada, the importance of acceptance and understanding towards other groups, and what the existence of in and out groups means for the nation as a whole.<\/p>\n
Much of our dialogue touched upon an idea that Qihui Huang stated quite accurately, that there is a \u201ctendency\u2026 to notice differences before we notice similarities\u201d. This is due to a lack of understanding. A few ways to combat this deficiency were discussed within our dialogue such as:<\/p>\n
– \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Change the way that different cultures, such as Aboriginal ones, are taught<\/p>\n
– \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0Instead of having them, as Florence stated, \u201cstuck in the past\u201d, we need to make sure that they are taught as \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 something that still exists and is relevant today<\/p>\n
– \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Increase education for foreign students concerning Canadian history and cultural identity<\/p>\n
– \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Provide accurate representations of various cultures in Canadian literature, especially children\u2019s books<\/p>\n
– \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Christie Smith suggested we promote an environment of \u201cacceptance and interest as opposed to distrust, \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 dislike, and disinterest\u201d<\/p>\n
The current environment of Canadian literature is saturated by the failure of multiculturalism. This topic in particular was discussed at length within our annotated bibliography sources as well as the comment section. This so called failure can, according to our discussions, be blamed on the fact that multiculturalism does not address conflicts or differences between cultures. Instead it takes the same route as many have with discussing Canadian literature, distancing itself from the negative or difficult portions instead of dealing with them. Ignoring issues currently facing Canada\u2019s cultural landscape appears easier than working to solve them, much in the way that forgetting about the dark periods of Canada\u2019s history, particularly in regards to how Aboriginals were treated, is easier than admitting and dealing with them.<\/p>\n
The fate of Aboriginals in Canada was discussed at multiple points in our conversations. Lauren Hjalmarson mentioned the fact that the \u201cmarginalization of First Nations\u2019 voices in Canada\u201d exists both today as well as in the past. Several ways to combat this marginalization were mentioned, including:<\/p>\n
– \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Encouraging the continuation of Indigenous languages, in both speech and Canadian literature<\/p>\n
– \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Programs to get other communities and cultures more involved with First Nations ones in order to help rebuild them<\/p>\n
– \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Support Aboriginal groups and their publishing of literature<\/p>\n
– \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Encourage the use of \u2018hybrid identities\u2019 so that individuals can identify as a part of more than one culture<\/p>\n
When it comes to cultures Canada is a very diverse nation, and it is in no way a homogenous community. We are united in many ways, such as the land that we share, and yet allow ourselves to be separated into smaller and smaller groups. Our acceptance of \u2018in groups\u2019 and \u2018out groups\u2019 has only continued this process and caused differences to be emphasized while commonalities are ignored.<\/p>\n
What much of our conversation boiled down to is this: Canada is a land of many cultures, many of which need to be better represented in the landscape of our literature. In order to do this we as a nation need to accept and respect other cultures as well as understand that it is okay to belong to more than one.<\/p>\n
So, where are we now and where do we go from here? Although we agree that Canadian literature and society has made some small strides in exemplifying its diverse cultural and ethnic background, it is evident that there is still a long road to tread. As mentioned within our analysis of the dialogue on our annotated bibliography, there remains a central authority, or a privileged narrative, within Canadian literature that manifests itself as the Us, effectively resigning all other narratives to the periphery, or the Them. We have, with the use of our research, challenged the notion of Canada as a cultural mosaic. While there have been efforts to promote the narratives of ethnic communities, what we have found is that the inclusion of ethnic voices in Canadian literature has, unfortunately, resulted in these communities as being resigned to a static conception of their respective ethnic and cultural communities. Fazeela Jiwa mentions, as we have mentioned, how this literature has been coined “ethnic literature” and is often generalized to represent and entire group of people; thus erasing the richness and diversity in each individuals personal experiences. One of the greatest barriers Canadian literature faces is accurate representation. We often find stereotypical depictions of the many cultural and ethnic groups represented in Canadian literature, and perhaps it is necessary to unsettle the normative in order to combat this. One such strategy for intervention may, thus, require non-dominant voices to transgress the acceptable boundaries within literature that effectively “westernize” their stories and result in much of the meaning and integrity of these stories to be diminished.<\/p>\n
Representation is certainly an excellent place to begin, but it must go beyond being simply a novelty or a requirement if we wish to see the Us versus Them dichotomy in Canadian literature disassembled. Beyond this politics of representation, we have also explored the necessity of accountability in Canadian literature. As one of our group members (Charlotte) suggested in her response to a comment, Canadian literature has been framed within a specific conception that favours specific narratives, and has resulted in the erasure of vital history. The idea of Canadian literature as “survival” literature, for example, lends itself to the idea that Canada’s barren lands were cultivated and brought to life by the hands of colonizers and ignores the lives of those who occupied these lands before the arrival of the Europeans, as well as the stories of those who largely built Canada after colonization. While attempts to share these stories have certainly been made, they do not form the national narrative that permeates mainstream Canadian literature. Indeed, there is a wave of change that is threatening to dismantle and decolonize Canadian literature, as Ali commented, with works such as the dialogic narratives of Thomas King, or as Jiwa’s article states, the ethnic narratives that are attempting to bring to the fore more accurate representations of the variances within and across ethnic communities. As mentioned in our discussion of the annotated bibliography comments, it is necessary for reforms to be made within spheres such as the education system by including these non-dominant narratives, and widening the span of literature included within the Canadian curriculum. Another such strategy would be to promote the resistance literature narratives that undermine the normative and stereotypical. We hope that these excellent strategies continue to inform the landscape of Canadian literature and can be brought into the mainstream through the use of platforms such as the Canada Reads competition and, in doing so, we hope to see a\u00a0 more accurate representation of these varied and complex identities.<\/p>\n
Our research has brought a number of questions for future research to the fore. Perhaps one of the most pressing and daunting would explore the ways in which we can achieve greater and more accurate representation of minority groups in Canadian literature. How can we foster a safe, inviting and inclusive literary environment that does not privilege one voice over another? Moss’ collection of essays, mentioned in our bibliography, faced one glaring issue: the absence of Indigenous voices. The editor suggested that this was due to a lack of these writers wanting to be included or represented within the anthology. Might this be an indication of the fear of being misrepresented? What are some platforms that we, as a society, can put forth to combat this issue of narrow and biased representation? Resistance literature such as that mentioned by Jiwa and King are powerful tools, but how can we bring these narratives into the mainstream so that we might effectively re-imagine “Us” and “Them” and find our footing on common ground?<\/p>\n
Works Cited List<\/p>\n
Boyden, Joseph. The Orenda. Toronto: Penguin Group, 2013.<\/p>\n
Boyden, Joseph.\u00a0Three Day Road<\/em>. Penguin Canada, 2006.<\/p>\n Duncan, Ali. “Annotated Bibliography.”\u00a0ENGL 470A CONFERENCE WEBSITE<\/em>. 10 Apr. 2014. Web. 16 Apr. 2015.<\/p>\n Hjalmarson, Lauren. “Annotated Bibliography.”\u00a0ENGL 470A CONFERENCE WEBSITE<\/em>. 6 Apr. 2014. Web. 16 Apr. 2015.<\/p>\n Hodgson, Charlotte. “Annotated Bibliography.”\u00a0ENGL 470A CONFERENCE WEBSITE<\/em>. 9 Apr. 2014. Web. 16 Apr. 2015.<\/p>\n Huang, Qihui. “Annotated Bibliography.”\u00a0ENGL 470A CONFERENCE WEBSITE<\/em>. 8 Apr. 2014. Web. 16 Apr. 2015.<\/p>\n Moss, Laura, ed.\u00a0Is Canada postcolonial?: unsettling Canadian literature<\/em>. \u00a0Wilfrid Laurier Univ. Press, 2003.<\/p>\n Ng, Florence. “Annotated Bibliography.”\u00a0ENGL 470A CONFERENCE WEBSITE<\/em>. 10 Apr. 2014. Web. 16 Apr. 2015.<\/p>\n Jiwa, Fazeela. \u201cExpect Expectations: Reading \u201cEthnic\u201d Literature Through a Multicultural Lens.\u201d Plenitude: Your Queer Arts and Literature Magazine. 1 Feb. 2013. Web. 15 Apr. 2015.<\/p>\n Small, Charles Asher. Social Theory \u2013 A Historical Analysis of Canadian Socio-Cultural Policies. Netherlands: Eleven International Publishing, 2013.<\/p>\n Smith, Christie. “Annotated Bibliography.”\u00a0ENGL 470A CONFERENCE WEBSITE<\/em>. 10 Apr. 2014. Web. 16 Apr. 2015.<\/p>\n Todd, Douglas. \u201cIs Canada a Blank Slate, With No Culture?\u201d\u00a0Vancouver Sun<\/em>\u00a0<\/em>14 March 2015. Print.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The\u00a0Canadian Literary Canon has come to be a somewhat diverse and fairly inclusive entity, but unfortunately there are still many silenced voices, cultures, and areas of literature that must be included. \u00a0Our group, \u2018Us vs. Them\u2019, has focused our research on the us vs. them dichotomy, and how it is still perpetuated and reinforced […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":13672,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-18","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/engl470aconference\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/18","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/engl470aconference\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/engl470aconference\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/engl470aconference\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/13672"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/engl470aconference\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=18"}],"version-history":[{"count":9,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/engl470aconference\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/18\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":85,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/engl470aconference\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/18\/revisions\/85"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/engl470aconference\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=18"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}