Québec

Montréal comic, Samir Khullar AKA "Sugar Sammy", www.themovienetwork.ca

Notes from north of 49ºN

“Sugar Sammy” is an Indo-Canadian comic with a cultural studies degree from McGill who wants to portray the visible minority experience in Québec. While getting some acclaim in the anglophone realm and even had had a HBO special, the multilingual Sammy {who speaks Hindi, Punjabi, English, and French}, was up for an Olivier award for Québec humour.

A few weeks ago, I blogged about a Wind Mobile ad airing here in Canada that uses cultural stereotypes of south Asians as a part of its humour.  In that post, I brought up the Apu “problem”, where a Simpson’s character also uses cultural stereotypes to get laughs and to shill for 7-11 with a promotional tie-in in 2007. In this stand-up clip, Sammy goes after Apu and how it’s voiced by a non-South Asian {Hank Azaria} and how media portrayals of South Asians tend towards the weird {go to 3:05}::

While using race as fodder for comedy is nothing new, there’s arguably more room for alternative cultural narratives, particularly with the proliferation of social media. Sammy’s experience of being Indian in a francophone region of a predominantly anglophone country is a story of confluences of culture, politics, and power. In Québec, Bill 101/Loi 101 is the law of the land, where the primary language of instruction in the province is French, as part of attempts to make French language the norm in the province.

Mr. Khullar delivers his routines in flawless French, the result of being streamed into French school along with all the immigrant children in his multicultural neighbourhood of Côte-des-Neiges in Montréal. At the time, the lack of choice wasn’t a big hit in the Khullar household.

But today, the thirtysomething comic acknowledges it’s given him his chance at succeeding on home turf.

‘I’m a child of Bill 101,” he says. “I’m happy I went to French school, because my French wouldn’t have been this good. The more languages I speak, the more people I reach.'”

Sammy’s jokes hit themes where many anglophones would fear to tread—at least in front of an audience at a comedy show. He touches on the cultural stereotypes of the Québécois, but he can do so in perfect French::

video [French]:: “Les Québécois” skit, nominee for Olivier Award

While it may seem like a double-standard that Sammy can poke fun of cultural stereotypes of the Québécois and it seems offsides that the dominant culture poke fun of the South Asian stereotypes, one could say it’s a matter of the dynamics of cultural power and which group has it. Arguably, Sammy gets away with his comedic critiques with respect to Québec audiences because {1} he’s not anglo—i.e., he’s not a member of the dominant anglophone Canadian culture that many in Québec see as hegemonic and {2} he speaks perfect French.

Sammy didn’t win the Olivier award, but you’d be hard-pressed to know that if you just followed the anglophone press. I had to dig deep and use my rudimentary French to find the winners on the Radio-Canada {French CBC} site.

When it comes to comedy in Canada, I think it’s safe to say there’s one safe target no matter who you are. Americans. Of course, this a topic for another blog.

Song:: Malajube-‘St. Fortunat’

Twitterversion:: [blog] Multilingual Indo-Canadian comic Sugar Sammy negotiates cult. boundaries in post-Bill/Loi 101 Quebec #ThickCulture @Prof_K

Downtown Montréal signage, en français, August 2006 after American Sociology Association Annual Meetings. Kenneth M. Kambara

Notes from North of 49ºN

A recent Globe and Mail article by John Ibbitson states that Québec has immigration policies that hinder diversity and that the province lacks cultural integration. He starts by comparing Ottawa in Ontario and Gatineau, just across the river in Québec. The former has 19% of the population being a visible minority, while the latter has 6%.

Québec is allowed to set it own immigration policy. I knew this to be the case in 1992, as when I filled out my paperwork to visit at McGill, I had to have documents for Canada and Québec. The policies for immigration favours French speakers and those willing to integrate into Québec society. This tends to work against potential immigrants from China and India who are much more likely to have English-speaking skills or intentions to obtain them. Compounding the matter is that the province doesn’t have the resources to help immigrants integrate into Québec society, along with cultural clashes, such as a niqab-wearing woman getting kicked out of a government-funded CÉGEP French language class.

Ibbitson also makes the curious allegation that francophone sending regions tend to be impoverished areas which aren’t the most “vibrant regions,” when compared to China and India. He goes on to argue that the lack of immigration will cause cities in Québec to start dying. This is an elitist argument couched in pragmatics.

What Ibbitson fails to recognize is the context in which Québec immigration policy takes place. Québec contains a distinct culture, but within a predominantly anglophone nation. Historically, the Québec experience is one that exists within and at times resists the dominant cultural order of anglophone Canada. The immigration policies are meant to preserve the cultural order in Québec in light of this, but it puts immigrants in a bind. Immigrating to Québec means living in a region with a distinct culture that’s a minority within the nation of Canada. That’s a double-whammy or perhaps better termed, double-jeopardy. This “disincentivizes” immigration to Québec, reflecting the difficult terrain where culture, region, and nation intersect.

Within this era of globalization, can Québec realistically preserve its culture through its various policies? I’m not sure I have the answer to this, but I feel that Québec needs to figure this issue out on its own, for better or worse, despite my federalist tendencies. While there may be delicious irony in pointing out that Québec, which has brought upon bilingualism to Canada, appears to be closed to multiculturalism; the more interesting issue is how to foster better economic integration. Montréal is becoming increasingly diverse, with the immigrant population projected to go from 21% in 2006 to 31% in 2030, although these percentages are below the percentages of other major Canadian cities. The main problem is one of jobs. Despite immigrants oftentimes having better qualifications than native Quebeckers, they lack the networking with the francophone majority and subsequently face much higher unemployment rates.

I don’t see much point in encouraging more immigration to Québec if policy doesn’t address the issues of jobs and opportunities. Programmes that foster more economic integration of immigrants could be viewed as undermining the preservation of Québec culture, so there’s the rub.

Nevertheless, I think Ibbitson has it backwards. Rather than attracting a “better class of immigrant” from “vibrant” areas of the world, I think Québec should work on creating vibrant regions {most likely Montréal and certain areas of the Eastern Townships/Les cantons de l’est that are close to universities and open to diversity} that attract the flows of globalization, in terms of people, finance, technology, etc.

Twitterversion:: Globe&Mail’s Ibbitson says Quebec must fix its lack of diversity, but bigger issue is econ. integration for immigrants. http://url.ie/5cpv @Prof_K

Song:: Les Trois Accords-“Loin d’ici”

Notes from north of 49ºN

José’s post from late November, Exploding Empires, got me thinking about Canada’s postcolonial experience.  While the remnants of the British empire linger with political structures {including the viceregal Governor General} and the Queen on the money, before 1663 most of Canada was a part of New France.  If the Battle of the Plains of Abraham and the siege of Québec City went differently, it would have been interesting to see the trajectory of Canada, if New France stayed under French control or if there was a long protracted war with Britain.  That’s neither here nor there, but the reality is that Canada does have the legacy of being a part of the British empire, while arguably subjugating the First Nations and francophone Québec, which I’ll come back to later.

So, in 1867, Canada became a Dominion in the British Commonwealth with its own Prime Minister, Sir John A. MacDonald {who is on the $10 bill}. This was a trend with its “white settler” colonies. In 1931, The Statute of Westminster made the Canadian Parliament independent of British control and Canada ceased being a colony.  Nevertheless, there were and are ties to Britain. In fact, during WWII, many of the archives for Canada were destroyed in the Battle of Britain, which were housed in London, England, not Ottawa.

The relationship between Canada and Britain has shaped Canada’s character.  The obvious way to characterize the relationship is one of parent and child, but how to characterize it further? Canada as the abused Cinderella? Benign neglect? For decades, the British sought to assert imperial authority and reduce the influence of popular control of the government, which was viewed as a precursor to the American revolution [1]. Once British control began to wane, the rapid industrialization of the United States resulted in a dominant cultural and economic power at Canada’s doorstep.  Many argue that Canada traded one hegemon for another. Many Canadian writers, including Margaret Atwood, saw this pattern and sought to “decolonize” Canada, but what exactly does that entail?  What does a decolonized Canada look like? Is a strong national identity required?

The simmering legacy of the ghost of an old colonialism, i.e., New France, along with First Nations and immigrant communities, serve to further complicate matters by generating tensions from within.   Québec, a province with about 23.9% of the population where 40% of its residents support some form of sovereignty for Québec.  Urbanist Jane Jacobs around 1979-80 even went as far to say::

“Montréal cannot afford to behave like other Canadian regional cities without doing great damage to the economic well-being of the Québécois. It must instead become a creative economic centre in its own right… Yet there is probably no chance of this happening if Québec remains a province.” [2]

Despite hundreds of years passing since the Battle of the Plains of Abraham, there is definitely a strong francophone cultural identity in Québec and a resurgence of separatist politics enabled by the Quiet Revolution/Révolution Tranquille of the 1960s.

Add to the mix, globalization and the resultant Appaduraian flows of financial capital, human migration, media, ideologies [3, 4], and brands [5].

I feel all of these four factors::

  1. Historical trajectory of British colonialism
  2. Proximity to US cultural {media} and economic forces
  3. The subjugation of francophone culture under a trajectory of British colonialism
  4. Current state of globalization with flows of people, media, capital, ideologies and brands

serve to strongly decentre the very concept of Canada and Canadian identity, i.e., Canada as an “imagined community” in the Benedict Anderson sense [6]. Extending Anderson’s ideas about print capitalism being critical in defining the concept of nation, I would argue that Canadian identity is being undermined because of the dominance of US media, particularly film, television, and Internet content. I’ve argued for increased funding of the CBC and I feel it can and should play a role in defining nation.  This post isn’t meant to be an accusation or to sound an alarm, but open up a dialogue about the future trajectory of Canada.

If Canadian identity is indeed decentred, doesn’t this imply a fuzziness in people’s meaning systems regarding Canada and does this fuzziness lead to less resistance of hegemonic forces?  Does any of this even matter?  Aren’t these just market forces in action?  Antonio Gramsci says hegemony requires acquiescence [7], but as global consumers, aren’t we all willing to submit to hegemony if it strikes our fancy?  Sweet, glorious hegemony. Hasn’t China proven that global consumers are willing to purchase in ways that are detrimental to their own economies?

I think national identity matters, as does resistance to hegemonic forces.  Identity matters, as a shared sense of communitas and comradeship should guide policy and everyday actions. Citizens should derive meaning from the institution and social construction of nation. Resistance to hegemony matters, as this allows for culture to remain dynamic by allowing its redefinition, rather than continually self-replicating in the same fashion in the style created by the powers that be, i.e., the corporation and the state.

My next blog post will extend these ideas to Canadian politics.

Twitterversion:: Thoughts about “postcolonial” Canada given its relationships with Britain, USA, & Quebec. Interplay b/t media & identity. http://url.ie/4q9t @Prof_K

Song:: Weakerthans-“One Great City”

References

[1] Smith, Simon (1998). British Imperialism 1750-1970. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 052159930X.

[2] Philpot, R. (2006) “She Stayed Creative Until the End: The Rich Life of Jane Jacobs” counterpunch.org, retrieved 21 January 2010, from http://www.counterpunch.org/philpot04262006.html

[3] Appadurai, A. (1996) Modernity at Large. Cambridge, MA: University of Minnesota Press.

[4] Appadurai, A. (1990) “Disjuncture and Difference in the Global Cultural Economy” Retrieved 21 January 2010,  http://www.intcul.tohoku.ac.jp/~holden/MediatedSociety/Readings/2003_04/Appadurai.html

[5] Sherry, J.F. (1998) ‘The Soul of the Company Store: Nike Town Chicago and the Emplaced Brandscape’, in J.F. Sherry (ed.) ServiceScapes: The Concept of Place in Contemporary Markets, pp. 305–36. Chicago: NTC Business Books.

[6] Anderson, Benedict (1983) Imagined Communities. Verso. http://books.google.com/books?id=4mmoZFtCpuoC&dq=benedict+anderson+imagined+communities&printsec=frontcover&source=bn&hl=en&ei=cZ9YS–eFcLO8QaZq-jKAw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5&ved=0CCgQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=&f=false

[7] Gramsci, A. (1971) Selections from the Prison Notebooks, Lawrence and Wishart.

"Non" Québec Sovereignty Referendum Celebration, 20 May 1980 - Tom Haythornthwaite
Québec Sovereignty Referendum, 20 May 1980 - Tom Haythornthwaite

Notes from north of 49ºN

In California, identity politics is a way of life.  Ask Pete Wilson, ex-Governor of California on how Latino politics can derail a career, as detailed in a LA Times magazine article from 2004.  The same article highlights Republican concerns with shifting demographics::

“Many Republicans view the mushrooming Latino voter rolls in the same way a person looks at a growing mole: One hopes it’s benign but fears for the worst.”

Unlike in California where immigration is resulting in dramatic demographic shifts, here in Canada, a hot-button issue is Québec separatism that stems from centuries-old disputes.  The province of Québec has a distinct francophone culture when compared to the rest of predominantly anglophone Canada and this cultural divide naturally affects politics at both the provincial and federal levels.

Currently, at the federal level, Canada {with a variation of the Westminster parliamentary system} has a minority government {plurality of parliamentary seats} with Conservative Stephen Harper as Prime Minister.  Minority governments tend to be unstable.  Indicative of this, the Conservatives had a scare last December when Stephen Harper angered the other parties, bringing the country to the brink of Constitutional crisis.  Recent polls in Canada showed that about half of the voters wanted a more stable majority government, where one party has a majority of the seats.  Moreover, recent polls indicated that support for the Conservatives is dwindling, likely leading to a situation where the Conservatives and Liberals have close to the same number of seats, further deadlocking Parliament.  An article a week and a half ago by the Montréal Gazette brought up a controversial argument::

“Quebecers more than others have it in their power to break this log-jam, by taking a more active hand in national governance instead of ‘parking’ their votes with an increasingly irrelevant Bloc Québécois. Had Quebecers voted for national parties in the same proportion as other Canadians in the last election, we would have a majority government. The instability of minority times makes the government of Canada weaker, which serves the sovereignists’ interests but not the public interest.”

This assumes that Québec voters are more interested in federal governance than Québec interests.  In Québec, the Bloc Québécois {BQ} is a political party associated with sovereignty for the province.  Its raison d’être is promoting the identity politics of francophone Québec at the federal level.  While I’ve noticed the BQ numbers slipping since the 2008 election on the ThreeHundredEight blog, the Gazette’s line of reasoning is unlikely to lure enough Québec voters to the Conservative or Liberal camps.  According to an EKOS poll, the federal vote intention in the in Québec shows a plurality of support for the Bloc::
Federal Vote Intention-July 2009
Federal Vote Intention-July 2009 EKOS

The 2008 federal results in Québec saw BQ making a strong showing with 49 ridings {seats} of 75 in Québec and 308 in Canada. The map below shows Bloc in light blue, Conservatives (PC) in dark blue, Liberals (LP) in Red, and New Democrats (NDP) in orange. The Bloc is strong throughout the province, while the Conservatives have support in a few rural areas, and the Liberals and NDP have appeal in or near the cities of Montréal and Ottawa.

Federal 2008 Election Results by Ridings in Québec
Federal 2008 Election Results by Ridings in Québec
The relative popularity of the Bloc introduces a challenge at the federal level, one of identity politics.  Last month, Liberal Party of Canada {LPC} leader Michael Ignatieff showed how hard it is to manage perceptions in Québec as the leader of a Canada-wide party. While promising restoring funding to the arts and appointment of Québecers to cabinet posts, he also said he has no plans to give Québec any special powers, if elected as Prime Minister. This opened the Liberals open to criticism in the province by rival parties.
“It’s the same good old Liberal Party of Canada that wants to put Québec in its place.”
–Pierre Paquette, Bloc MP Joliette

“It shows that he’s not only been out of Canada for 35 years, he’s never known anything about Québec except what he learned at Upper Canada College and, frankly, I’m not afraid of him a bit.”
–Thomas Mulcair, NDP MP Outremont
The nuances of the issue of sovereignty and its manifestations is far too complex to go into here, so suffice it to say that concerns of Québec as a distinct society are far from settled. According to Andrew Cohen’s The Unfinished Canadian, Québecers are more likely to be ambivalent towards the idea of a federal Canada, which isn’t that surprising. Stephen Harper has done precious little to appeal to Québec, while Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff, in my opinion, doesn’t help things with statements like::

“The best possible Canada is a Canada where Québecers are in power…The Bloc Québécois is not a solution for a better Québec and Canada.”–Michael Ignatieff, 3 June 2009 at a Montréal fundraiser

While Ignatieff may have had his reasons, the Bloc represents a set of meanings to many Québecers and I fail to see the upside of antagonizing the Bloc. The tories went after the Bloc earlier in the summer, accusing the party on being soft on pedophiles because they didn’t support tougher legislation on minimum sentencing for child trafficking. The ads haven’t affected polls and the Conservatices are still falling behind. Having appeal in Québec requires subtlety. As stated above, Harper hasn’t done much to appeal to Quebecers, but Conservative writer Bob Plamondon in a Macleans article gets at the heart of the matter. Harper needs to understand culture in order to build social capital::

“I don’t think it was so much that those specific policies were abhorred by Quebecers…because in the scheme of government activities, they are relatively minor issues. But they spoke to larger issues—does Stephen Harper understand Quebec and can he be trusted? I think Quebecers drew the conclusion that he’s disconnected from them. They couldn’t identify among Harper’s team a particularly strong lieutenant who had near-veto power over what went on in Ottawa with respect to those matters that are of particular concern to Quebecers.”

I don’t see that happening, but I can see him using fiscal controls on Ottawa as an appeal to Québec and fiscal conservatives in other provinces.
While the Bloc’s fortunes have waxed and waned over the years, the party is currently in an era of resurgence.  The Bloc’s clout with almost 16% of Parliament representing a culturally distinct region is a good case study for California legislative politics, if we assume Latino political identity strengthening.  Latino population does not equate to a homogeneous population with similar political interests, as there is diversity within.  The question remains: Can there be a strong Latino political identity that spans regions and demographic categories?
Web 2.0 & Politics
In the francophone Québec blogosphere, the following catchy Bloc video went somewhat viral in 2004 in the pre-YouTube era, as part of the “un parti propre au Québec/a party proper to Québec” campaign.

Videos like this show how parties can energize voters and generate buzz for a campaign.  Given how 41% of younger voters under 25 support the Bloc {see above table on federal vote intention in Québec} and how Bloc support skews younger, I expect to see more Bloc use of Web 2.0 in the future, i.e., more use of YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, and possibly MySpace.
What about Web 2.0 and Latino voters in the US?  Pew Internet research does show that in the US,  Hispanics tend to be younger and online less than other ethnicities.  Nevertheless, Hispanics 18-29 are online the most for the ethnicity at over 60%, although this percentage is lower than black or white counterparts.  Latino cell phone owners are more likely than their white counterparts to send/receive text messages, at 49% vs. 31%, respectively.  Given that Latinos trend younger and the younger Latinos are online the most, I expect to see greater usage of social media targeting them, using online and SMS {texting} media.  Brandweek is citing 65% use of social media by Latinos, particularly with MySpace and MySpace Latino.  The challenge will be politically engaging Latinos in a way that’s relevant to them.
While many of the following issues may be unpopular due to their divisive nature, is this the globalized political reality we’re in?
  1. How will globalization shape California identity politics?
  2. Will culture serve as a political rallying point?
  3. Strengthening of identity politics caucus/coalition powerbase{s}
  4. Use of cultural distinction socially & politically
  5. Strategies of mainstream politicians/parties to negotiate with or combat a caucus/coalition
  6. Use of Web 2.0 & SMS technologies & social media to politically engage electorate in a culturally-relevant fashion
Twitterversion:: As California grapples with identity politics, what can be learned from #Canada, #Québec, & Bloc Québécois? http://url.ie/24zz #ThickCulture @Prof_K

Song:: Tricot Machine -L’Ours {Montréal, QC}