The conference presentation we dialogued with is The Maple Leaf Igloos: Exploring Interventions

1. Introduction

Our focus is on Canadian stories and how little minority stories are represented in a nation we are so proud to call multicultural. We’ve taken inspiration from Lily Cho’s article, “Archives of Diasporic Citizenship”, on how literature and theatre can release the tension between the many diasporic cultures. Research on this topic has noted the likes of: Carmen Aguirre, a Chilean-Canadian playwright, who seeks more diversity in theatre, Lawrence Hill, an African-Canadian author who challenges Canada’s past with historical fiction on its dark role in slavery, Jen Sookfong Lee, a Chinese-Canadian author who exposes the prejudice of publishers and advocates for more diversity in literature, and Eleanor Ty, a Philippine-Canadian professor who examines the role of diasporic storytelling in formulating the truth of our world. These examples provide a path for us to ask questions about storytelling, literature and theatre and use what we learn to further our understanding of inclusivity in the arts. Our research hopes to challenge the system that is currently in place here in Canada and shed light on how the discourse of diasporic citizenship can help develop Canada’s literary voice.

2. Central Questions

• How can we create more opportunities for diasporic writers in the Arts?

• How can we fix the disconnect the literary community experiences?

• Can we truly deterritorialize literature

• How can we gather and elevate all viewpoints of diasporic, Indigenous, and others to give everyone a voice that truly represent literature in Canada in 2019 and beyond?

 

3. Dialogue Quotations and Commentary

How can we create more opportunities for diasporic writers in the Arts?

For the first question, the dialogue was greatly enhanced by Sean’s background in theatre. He had some insight into some of the dilemmas we were pondering, but also admitted he didn’t have all the answers.

Katrina liked the entry about Carmen Aguirre, who talked about creating your own opportunities:

“I personally was very interested about your entries about theatre and the creation of a new genre where representation can exist, as I had also chosen to explore the idea of minorities in theatre.
This section of your bibliography, “For newcomers of any ethnicity who aspire to careers in theatre, Aguirre adds that the only way forward is to create one’s own opportunities. If you don’t want to write your own plays, then find plays by diverse writers that interest you and produce them yourself” is especially powerful.” 

Alexis provided a link that further illustrated one way to create more opportunities for diasporic creators in Canadian Arts: 

“I recommend another source entitled “Prince Hamlet PuSh(es) Shakespeare’s tragedy into fresh territory by Mark Robins: https://www.vancouverpresents.com/arts/prince-hamlet-pushes-shakespeares-tragedy-into-fresh-territory/. This source further reviews the Shakespearean play from your hyperlink. The article emphasizes how having actors from different backgrounds play iconic and well-known characters brings entirely new understanding to the text–a concept which I believe goes hand-in-hand with Voyageur’s goal to highlight diasporic authors to consequent a more global outlook.”

Sean, being familiar with Canadian productions, agreed that turning the classics on their heads with diverse casting is a step in the right direction, but emphasized that new, original works are still needed—and the funding needs to increase—especially for Indigenous playwrights and playwrights of colour:

“Theatre productions are certainly heading toward inclusivity, but the problem remains that the majority of well known Canadian productions being written cater to mostly white actors. I think adapting old theatre to become more inclusive isn’t a bad thing, but I do believe more new original work needs to be written that reflects Canadian stories that are inclusive. I believe part of the reason for this is that white play-writes are uncomfortable writing outside their race. They don’t want to offend anyone with ignorance, and in doing so simply just propagate the problem unknowingly. It’s a problem I don’t necessarily have a solution for, other than to encourage play-writes to do research, and petition the Canada Council of the Arts, for new funding for play-writes of colour. It is frustrating when the National Arts Council won’t even fund established Indigenous theatre programs.” 

Charlotte asked an interesting question, about how to include, in a genuine way, the works of minority Canadians —not as a token way to be inclusive, but to actually reinvent the canon:

“As Margaret Jetalina identified, her success did not come from invitations to festivals, publishing offers, or agency; she had to go and create opportunities for herself. I was wondering if you could speak to the idea of self-reliance in diasporic writing and communities within Canada. Why is it that these groups must still fight to be embraced? How can we meaningfully promote the works of minority Canadians as “canon” in our literary culture?” 

Sean sums up the reason why there isn’t more diversity in the Canadian Arts, and like many things, it comes down to the decision-makers at the higher levels trying to stay safe by making money (which also ties into the lack of funding):

“I know specifically in theatre, it is difficult for anyone to get new work produced. It is a challenge because a significant amount of capital needs to be produced through ticket sales to make venues want to produce theatre. This is partly why traditional venues produce mainly established work from England or America. These are shows that have proved they will make money on his production. They’re safe.” 

How can we fix the disconnect the literary community experiences?

For the second question, Cassie points out the interconnections between the teams’ research, and asks a great question that wonders how we can create better links to bring together the cultures, the geography, and the literature in Canada in the form of publishing:

“…geography and culture are very closely linked (the following TEDx gives a bit of insight into the connection between landscapes and culture: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5onjyWsWa78). How do you think that the disconnect between the various cultures established in Canada and their originating geographic places would impact the diversity in Canadian publishing?” 

Andrea responds with another insistence to find common ground, and uses the metaphor from the video that struck her as a potent image, thinking of the Canadian landscape as filled with layers of stories, all of which are important:

“I think the disconnect between various cultures in Canada and their originating geographic places impact the diversity in Canadian publishing in interesting ways… we all have to seek out and attempt to find connections and common ground that we might not at first understand—and write about it! In a sense, we are all adding layers to the landscape that will become Canada’s autobiography.”

Anna was surprised to learn from one of our sources how even the diasporic writers feel limited in their ability to tell stories other than their experience being multicultural person in Canada:

“Thinking about writing in the context of what Thien said, it can be quite a controversial subject. Literature itself is a medium that should allow the exploration of issues that may be avoided on everyday platforms, or concerns that were overlooked by society. Theoretically, writers have the freedom of creation and the power of enabling difficult conversations through their work. From the shadows, those with silenced voices should hope to address the subject matter of their passion through storytelling. Ironically, however, many are horribly limited by the literary community itself.”

Can we truly deterritorialize literature?

For the third question, Katrina brings up the ongoing discourse that is currently impacting the Canadian literary community, and although in Lily Cho’s article, she seems to make a case for deterritorialization, it also leaves some lingering concerns:

“…deterritorialization [is defined] as being “movement by which one leaves a territory,” which it also “constitutes and extends” the territory. I love the duality and existence in two spheres that such a definition brings! In your opinion, when is it okay for people that do not belong to a certain diasporic community to write on said community? Are there boundaries that must be considered?”

Tony tackles that question with sharp insight about honesty: he believes that we must be mindful when writing, but to avoid the topic altogether would result in a disservice to the diasporic community:

“We don’t want to misrepresent the communities we talk about, and that requires us to interact with such other communities and learn, which can only be a good thing. Writers must make sure not to write through rose-tinted glasses either, as it can turn it into cultural fetishization, but again, this is a form of dishonesty. Finally, we do think it is important to encourage writers to explore other cultures since a Canadian narrative without representation of minorities, in itself, can be dishonest.”

Cassie recognizes that the deterritorialization involves borders, something that her group is researching, and makes a connection which extends a suggestion of how to tackle the limitations that borders and geography impose:

“Does your future for Canadian literature require moving beyond the borders of written work in order to confront some of the limits that minority figures face in getting their work showcased?… Our group is particularly interested in borders and definitions, and I think that while we’ve looked at things like hypertextuality and paratextuality as a structural way to move beyond traditional definitions, changing the modalities we consider to be literary could also be one way of confronting the barriers that exist within our current understanding of Canadian literature.”

 

How can we gather and elevate all viewpoints of diasporic, Indigenous, and others to give everyone a voice that truly represents literature in Canada in 2019 and beyond?

And finally, concerning the fourth, question, Alexis finds some flaws in the word “diaspora” and makes to ensure that the Indigenized view is recognized in our research: 

“According to Google, diaspora refers to immigration and “the dispersion of any people from their original homeland.” … Obviously, Indigenous peoples are native to the land that we call Canada.
Canada does not own Indigenous people. It is very important that we do not call Indigenous peoples “Canada’s Indigenous peoples” with the possessive pronoun. This is because Indigenous peoples have been here since time immemorial, and Canada is a geopolitical boundary which settler-colonizers have imposed on the land. But in finding common ground, there is indeed this contradiction of diasporic citizenship. The insistence of difference which acknowledges how we must not assimilate Indigenous peoples into Canadian society and thereby destroy culture/traditions/forms of government as Canadians historically have. We must acknowledge and respect the unique identity of different Indigenous tribes –because they are not homogenous, without “other”-ing Indigenous peoples because ‘Us versus Them’ narratives are harmful.”

Maxwell counters with the acknowledgement of the importance of Indigenous voices being elevated,  but reiterates that our research attempts to focus more on those authors who are challenging citizenship demands, not seeking to displace other voices, but to instead endeavouring to add layers to the landscape:

“[we] are aware that exists many authors and artists that are from the diaspora in the global context. There are people from Ireland, France, Nigeria, China, India, Japan and they all contribute to a wealth of literary works that create the framework of intervening with the discourse of citizenship. Canada is lucky to be home to authors and poets such as Fred Wah, a Chinese Canadian poet and Laurence Hill, an African-Canadian author who have not assimilated their work but rather challenge the citizenship demands as an immigrant or child of an immigrant. It is interesting that you used Indigenous perspectives in your interpretation but I believe Lily Cho is commenting on the “immigrant as a diasporatic citizen” and their role in literature.”

To come full circle with our intervention, Cianne makes an astute observation about the necessity of the use of new media and challenging the gatekeepers, and brings forward the point that all the groups we have explored in our dialogues have new avenues of expression that will help Canadian literature move forward:

“New media has allowed previously marginalized communities platforms to express their stories. This, in turn, can lead to more people interacting with viewpoints outside of their own culture. Sites such as Medium (https://medium.com/) allow anyone to publish personal essays, cultural commentary (including commenting on their own culture), and short stories that were previously only published in newspapers and magazines. It’s my hope that a new generation of gatekeepers is currently interacting with, thinking about, and learning from the literature that isn’t their own, and that these interactions foster a more open-minded approach to Canadian literature in the future. As I said, this isn’t a complete or ideal solution, but I think that’s one piece of the puzzle as we all work to make Canadian literature more inclusive and representative of Canadian reality.”

 

4. Conclusion

Canadian Literature is still in its infancy. As we struggle to figure out who we are as a nation, where we come from and where we are going; We need to make sure we are careful about how our musings come to light. Canada has a predominately Caucasian population base, whose traditions have been distilled from European histories. We are now finding the way we represent our history on stage and in literature is damaging to our non-caucasian population. The exclusive content continuing to be produced reinforces a cultural barrier within our own nation. It stunts our cultural growth and our capacity for creating new and original work. It is important that we foster more opportunities for Indigenous, immigrant, female and other minority stories to meet mainstream publication and production. Funding, grants, scholarships and programs for reconciliation will become vital if we wish to grow beyond our English and French cultural values in pursuit of something unabashedly our own. We need to share OUR stories without propagating cultural division.  Research, inclusion, dialogue and looking critically at who we are now should take focus over reproducing historical and classical work.

5.  Future Research

As we researched and discussed, the prevalent question asked was how we can connect our diasporic cultures and promote diversity. We thought it might be an interesting endeavour to continue our research by examining what others are doing to promote diversity in arts. This way, we may be able to learn from their successes, as well as their failures, to perhaps figure out what sorts of programs are actually effective.

To get it started, organizations like We Need Diverse Books are attempting to change the publishing industry to allow for more diverse representation in children’s literature. They recognize the onus of diverse literature isn’t only on the artists themselves, but the publishers. To add, Jean Ho of NPR points out that problems also lies within marketing and publicity.

Vancouver’s own Pacific Theatre has Diversity Initiatives that seek out artists of colour for their plays, on and behind the stage. Considering they are a Christian organization, it could be an interesting study to see how that could affect the role of diversity in their initiative. An essay published on HowlRound Theatre Commons aptly titled, “You Want a Diverse Theatre? Prove it.” suggests many strategies on furthering diversity within theatre production.

 

 

Works Cited

Cho, Lily. “Archives of Diasporic Citizenship.” Canadian Literature, vol. 204, pp. 142–143., canlit.ca/article/archives-of-diasporic-citizenship/.

Duff, Christine. “Where Literature Fills the Gaps: The Book of Negroes as a Canadian Work of Rememory.” Studies in Canadian Literature / Études en littérature canadienne [Online], 36.2 (2011). Accessed 29 Mar. 2019.

Ho, Jean. “Diversity In Book Publishing Isn’t Just About Writers — Marketing Matters, Too.” National Public Radio, 9 Aug. 2016, npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2016/08/09/483875698/diversity-in-book-publishing-isnt-just-about-writers-marketing-matters-too.

Ingersoll, Karena Fiorenza, and Deena Selenow. “You Want a Diverse Theatre? Prove It.” HowlRound Theatre Commons, 18 Aug. 2015, howlround.com/you-want-diverse-theatre-prove-it.

Jetalina, Margaret. “Playwright Making Her Own Way In Canadian Theatre.” Canadian Immigrant, 4 Mar. 2013, canadianimmigrant.ca/living/playwright-making-her-own-way-in-canadian-theatre.

Lee, Jen Sookfong. “Open Letters and Closed Doors: How the Steven Galloway Open Letter Dumpster Fire Forced Me to Acknowledge the Racism and Entitlement at the Heart of CanLit.” Humber Literary Review, n.d, humberliteraryreview.com/jen-sookfong-lee-essay-open-letters-and-closed-doors/.

Pacific Theatre. “Diversity Initiatives.” Pacific Theatre, pacifictheatre.org/about/diversity-initiatives.

Ty, Eleanor. “Representing ‘Other’ Diasporas in Recent Global Canadian Fiction.” College Literature, vol. 38, no. 4, 2011, pp. 98–114. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/41302890.

We Need Diverse Books. “About WNDB.” WNDB, 18 Mar. 2019, diversebooks.org/about-wndb.