Communiqués de presse et annonces
Discours par Peter Mansbridge à la Conférence Postes Canada 2004 (en anglais seulement)
OTTAWA, le 6 décembre 2004 — Notes for a speech delivered by
Peter Mansbridge, CBC News Chief Correspondent,
at the Canada Post Lecture Series, University of Ottawa,
December 3, 2004
**CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY**
It’s a great honour for me to be here this afternoon in such distinguished company. And it is particularly humbling to be the person you chose to speak to you as part of an important lecture series.
Hope springs eternal in my soul that my words will be so inspired, so profound, so well-received, that a hundred years from now, “The Mansbridge Lecture” will still be talked about. But I am aware that I am the second speaker in this series. Which leads me to think my place in University of Ottawa history may be an appropriate metaphor for all of Canadian history.
I will be unknown. I mean, who remembers the second person to do anything? Everyone knows John A. MacDonald was our first Prime Minister. But outside this room, who could name our second? Everyone knows the first person to score 50 goals in an NHL season. Who knows the second? The first Canadian to fly an airplane is a legend. The second is ... Well, calling him “obscure” would be kind.
So, I am prepared for the fate that awaits most Canadians who achieve a measure of success. The fate of being forgotten! For it is a fact – a sad fact – that most Canadians do not know our history. And, I don’t mean they don’t know the hard stuff. I understand most people don’t know that Stadacona became Quebec City. Or what exactly the Canadian Government bought in 1869 that was called Rupert’s Land. (All the land drained by rivers that flow into Hudson’s Bay - one third of what is now Canada.) Or, what was in the Regina Manifesto of 1933.
Perhaps we can resign ourselves to having only so-called “history buffs” know those kinds of things. But last year, the Dominion Institute did a survey involving more than a thousand people. It asked ten questions – multiple choice questions – about our post Second World War history. Only 2 people in a hundred got all ten questions right. Another six got nine answers right. 50 percent got fewer than five right.
And what were the questions? Well, one asked what D-Day was. Was it: the bombing of Pearl Harbor, the Battle of Vimy Ridge or the invasion of France? Another asked what conflict Canada was part of from 1950 to 1953. Was it: the Vietnam war, the Cuban missile crisis or the Korean war? So, these weren’t exactly questions meant for Mensa members. But most Canadians couldn’t get half of them right. Whose fault is that?
Another survey last year, by Environics Research, found that only 31 per cent of young people (18 to 29 year olds) found Canadian history interesting. Whose fault is that? Well, some of the blame lies with Canadians themselves. Some just aren’t trying hard enough to absorb what is readily available. But sometimes the average person is the hero of the story. Sometimes they do want to preserve our past. They do want to honour our accomplishments.
After the First World War, for example, it wasn’t the government of Canada that rushed out and built memorials to our war dead. It was the citizens of Canada. From far and wide. In the biggest cities, and the smallest hamlets, war memorials were built because average Canadians raised the money and saw to it that the jobs were done.
That’s why there’s such a variety of cenotaphs. They are not the products of central planning. They are expressions of local determination to remember what we had lost. And, it’s a good thing that from time to time, the people rise and do the right thing. Waiting for government can mean waiting in vain.
More than a year and a half ago, in March of 2003, Prime Minister Chrétien announced a plan to build the Canada History Centre. He said, “We must find ways for young Canadians to know what we have done, and to gain pride in the nation’s accomplishments.” Sounds good! But government priorities change. And the next budget scrapped the centre.
So where else might we turn for help in learning our history? The media of course! Do the media reflect Canadian history? Do they let Canadians know about their past? Do they make Canadians want to know what went on here in days gone by?
It used to be pretty common to dismiss Canadian history as uninteresting and use that as an excuse to ignore it. In the memorable words of Maurice Hutton in 1935, “Canadian history is as dull as ditch water.” We’ve changed our view somewhat in recent times.
On the Internet, I saw a university chat line discussing the merits of taking a Canadian history course. One person asked if Canadian history was “interesting?” Another answered, “Well, not exactly interesting, but there are parts that aren’t so boring you want to hang yourself.”
But I think that now it has become the conventional wisdom that our history is not at all dull. That it’s full of rock ‘em sock ’em action, noble deeds, fascinating individuals, remarkable achievements, and soaring examples of nation-building against all odds. I happen to believe in that conventional wisdom. Our history is full of all that. Rock ‘em sock ‘em. Noble. Fascinating. Remarkable. Soaring. All that. So, why don’t more of us know more about it? Is it the media’s fault? Well, let’s look at that.
The media encompasses a great many things. Books. Film. Magazines. Newspapers. The World Wide Web. Radio. Television. Are any of them telling the story of Canada’s history? Heaven knows there are books. If you look at the Chapters web site there are a thousand books listed under “History: Canada.” There are thin volumes that cram the whole story in from the ice age to Paul Martin. And, there are huge books that concentrate on narrow bits — the voyages of Jacques Cartier, or the building of the railway, or the King-Byng affair.
A thousand books are enough books to read one book a week for almost 20 years. Pierre Berton, Jack Granatstein, Desmond Morton, David Bercuson, David Mitchell, Peter Newman, Christina McCall, Stephen Clarkson, Charlotte Gray, and many, many more. They’ve popularized our history, made it accessible to one and all. And, they deserve our thanks. So too do the publishers and bookstore owners who put these books in circulation. If Canadians do not know their history, literature is not to blame.
The Internet has even greater resources. Key the words “Canadian history” into the Google search engine and you get almost ten million choices in under a tenth of a second.
There is a vast reservoir of knowledge open for business. Some of it is truly enlightening.
The memory project, for example, run by the Dominion Institute that I mentioned a little earlier, is aimed directly at young people and is as engaging as it is informative.
We have a magazine of Canadian history - The Beaver. Occasionally a movie has been made about Canadian history, or at least loosely based on Canadian history. We won’t count Cameron of the Royal Mounted in 1921. But there was The Grey Fox, about train robber Bill Miner, in 1982. And in 1975, there was the gentle Lies My Father Told Me that re-created an era of life in Montreal.
We have some popular songs about Canadian history; notably Gordon Lightfoot’s Canadian railway trilogy and his Ballad on the Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald. Stompin’ Tom Connors once released an album that had songs about Wop May, Wilf Carter, Don Messer, the Bluenose, and Confederation Bridge.
So yes, the media has served up a lot of Canadian history. It is irrefutable. And as I said before, Canadians have only themselves to blame if they don’t pursue it. But, there is one medium I haven’t talked about yet. And in many ways, it is the only one that counts. Television.
Even before television came to Canada in 1952, its power was recognized. In Maclean’s magazine, in 1949, Blair Fraser wrote that “with all its imperfections and imbecilities, here is a tremendous social force, its potential impact greater than radio, telephones, or movies.” How right he was.
The reality of the world we live in is that you could have two million books about Canadian history. And, you could have 50 plays, 30 movies, a hundred magazines, and newspaper sections every day. And that would be nice. But if you wanted to make a difference - if you wanted Canadians to be seized by their history - then television would have to get the message across.
If you have any doubt about that - about the power of television - I have two words for you. Buddy Ebsen. Most of you will know he was an actor. He started his career in vaudeville. He appeared on Broadway. He was in 33 movies with such stars as Audrey Hepburn, Judy Garland, Shirley Temple, Lee Marvin, Barbara Stanwyck, Patricia Neal — a very impressive list.
But when he died last year all that added up to a footnote. Every obituary I saw started by remembering him for one role – his television role as Jed Clampett, the father figure of the Beverly Hillbillies. It was the role that made him famous. What T.V. did for Buddy Ebsen, is what television could do for Canadian history. It is the only medium that really reaches everyone.
Most of you, I expect, are familiar with the “Heritage Moments” produced for television. Those one minute dramatizations of episodes in Canadian history are lampooned by comedians. But they absolutely work. I know young people who now know all about those Victoria Cross winners on Valour Road, all about Joe Shuster drawing Superman, all about Jean Drapeau's wild idea to build islands in the middle of the St. Lawrence River for Expo 67. Some kids can actually recite the scripts by heart.
The secret of those television moments of course is that you don't have to search for them. You just fall upon them as you're watching something else. Television is often the medium of least resistance. If you have nothing else to do, you sit down with the remote and see what's on. A good historical drama just might stop you. Television is the only way to really reach a mass audience. But that is difficult in this country.
Canadian television has produced good Canadian historical material: the story of Marilyn Bell; and of Pierre Trudeau; the Dieppe Raid; the Halifax Explosion. All highly regarded, and watched by large audiences. Is there enough of this? No.
We have a history television channel that runs some excellent documentaries, but also runs movies like Patton, The Untouchables, and Dances With Wolves, which have nothing to do with Canada (even though some of them were shot here). It also runs the T.V. series Jag, which as far as I can tell has nothing at all to do not only with Canada, but has nothing at all to do with history.
The great success of Canada: A People's History on the public broadcaster had many lessons. First - though it was a great success, we should put that success in some perspective. No episode had an audience as great as say an audience of CSI: Miami or E.R.
And, for a great many people in this country, the only measure of success for a television program is the number of people who watch it. It is an elementary calculation to conclude that any Canadian history broadcast will not bring in as many eyeballs as an American drama. So, if that is the only yardstick, Canadian programs are doomed. It was no easy feat to get A People’s History to air. Mark Starowicz, the executive producer, says that for two years, he couldn’t find a single Canadian company to agree to be a sponsor. He knocked on door after door: the oil companies, the airlines, the banks, the big retail chains… it was no. No. No. And no. Finally, Sun Life signed on.
Canadians loved the series. But as long as we allow the marketplace to be the sole determinant of what gets on television, you won’t see much enthusiasm for telling our story.
Another program, The Greatest Canadian, was never meant to be a scientific search for the greatest. It was an out-and-out popularity contest. We can conclude that most Canadians have not given serious thought to the question of who is the greatest. Otherwise, with all due respect, Don Cherry would not be in the top ten. Shania Twain would not be the top female. Still, the program generated lots of talk about Canadian history – which can only be a good thing. And, it did put ten lively documentary profiles in front of Canadians. And that can only be a good thing.
So, it was disheartening to see a National Post column the other day call the series a “ratings-desperate follow up to Canadian Idol.” And “a limp response to reality T.V..”
Please.
Does no one see any difference in the value of The Greatest Canadian compared to Canadian Idol? In this room, you may wonder why the media doesn’t do more to explore and celebrate our history. Perhaps it is because we eat our young.
There is something in the Canadian character that compels us to be modest. And I suppose modesty is a good thing sometimes. Winston Churchill once spoke of a "modest little man who has a good deal to be modest about.” That’s one way to look at modesty.
Another Briton, before Churchill's time, was the essayist William Hazlitt. He said modesty is the lowest of the virtues. And here's the important part of his thinking that's particularly relevant to Canadians. Hazlitt said, "He who undervalues himself is justly undervalued by others.” I think we have a massive case of undervaluing in our country. We undervalue Canadians of the past and that leads to undervaluing Canadians of the present. And that means we don't appreciate the greatness of this country.
The media can be counted on to do what it has been doing. Steady as she goes with the occasional gust of brilliance. And I hope television can fulfill its potential to drive the Canadian story into Canadian hearts and minds. But in the end, Canadians are going to have to look in the mirror for the solution.
Our history is full of heroes. It's full of valour, and courage, and enterprise, ingenuity, determination, sacrifice, hard work, genius, and integrity. And yet I can name names for the rest of this day. Names of people who contributed to Canada's growth as one of the truly remarkable countries on earth. And most of those names will be mysteries to most Canadians.
Maude Abbott. In 1889 she was determined to become a doctor and applied to McGill University's medical school. McGill said “impossible.” So, she went to Bishop's College, the only woman in the medical faculty...Eventually graduating with honours. By 1907, she was the world's leading authority on congenital heart disease.
John Bushnell and his daughter Elizabeth. Working from a small shop in Halifax in 1752, they ran Canada's first printing office, and made it possible to launch Canada's first newspaper, the Halifax Gazette.
Mary Ann Shadd. In Windsor, in 1851, she opened a school for black refugees from the United States. Then she started the Provincial Freeman, a weekly paper covering the lives of Canadian blacks. She was the first black woman to edit a weekly newspaper in North America.
Clifford Sifton, Wilfrid Laurier's Minister of the Interior. In the early twentieth century he launched an intensive campaign in Europe to bring immigrants to Canada. He was wildly successful.
And more -
Carrie Derick, the first female university professor in Canada. Emily Murphy, the first female judge in Canada, and the entire British empire. J.D. McCurdy who made the first powered flight in Canada, in the cockpit of the silver dart. Clarence Hincks. Founder of the Canadian Mental Health Association. The list is virtually endless.
And remember, I'm talking about Canadians who contributed enormously to their country — our country — and are barely remembered by a large majority of us. Canadians have to try just a little harder. The rewards await.
Who wouldn’t want to know about Joseph Howe? A newspaper man in Nova Scotia, charged with libel in 1835 because he dared to print criticism of the colonial government.
He defended himself, and in his closing summation to the jury he said he always asked himself three questions, and a journalist today, anywhere in the world, would do well to ask them. "What is right? What is just? What is for the public good?"
Who wouldn’t want to know about A.A.Heaps? A Member of Parliament from Winnipeg in 1939. As Hitler persecuted the Jews of Germany, those Jews sought refuge elsewhere, including Canada. Our prime minister, Mackenzie King, told Canadian Jewish groups and all MPs not to make a public fuss about the Jews, but instead to work behind the scenes quietly. Heaps went along with that for a while. But then he could remain silent no longer. He stood in the House of Commons and said, "Never in the history of mankind have human beings been treated so barbarously. Canada should extend the hand of brotherhood and friendship to these people. It is they who have been the first victims of fascist tyranny and oppression. Who knows who will be next?"
There are thrilling things to learn in our history. Canadians have to seek it out. They have to demand more and more from the media — especially from television. But it’s also important I think, that Canadians don’t treat history as a spectator sport. History didn’t just happen. It happened because people made it happen. Everyone has to understand that they have a role in Canadian history.
I remember when Julie Payette was picked to be an astronaut on a shuttle mission. We asked her what she'd be thinking when she was sitting in her seat in the crew cabin, wearing a space suit, ready to be launched by giant rocket boosters into space. And she said she'd be thinking of all the people who knew her dreams, and who helped her through her life. She said they would be sitting beside her in the shuttle. Well, that put it very well.
You and I will never ride a space shuttle. But we can be there in spirit with a Canadian we've encouraged. You and I will not find the cure for cancer. But we can be in the lab with a Canadian we've supported. You and I will not run an orphanage in Africa. But we can feel the satisfaction of helping another Canadian do it.
An occasion like this is important because it should remind us that history hasn’t stopped. We’re writing tomorrow’s history every day. And all of us – even those of us who consider ourselves to be the most ordinary of Canadians – can do certain things very well. And we can all contribute to the growth of our country, and the success of our country.
I began this little talk by saying that I hoped a hundred years from now, my words this afternoon might somehow be remembered. I’m not counting on it, but maybe, just maybe, the person who stands here in 2104, will be a terribly industrious historian who will have unearthed a record of these proceedings. And I hope that person reads my words, and can barely imagine what I was talking about. A country that didn’t know its past? Media outlets not filled with Canadian stories? I hope that person sees this era as the dark ages. And I hope the enlightenment starts very, very soon.
