Talk:Culture of Canada

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project member page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.

Contents 1 Suggest merge from Canadian identity 2 Culture, Regional Cultures, and Freedom from Culture 3 Confusing industry with culture 4 Biased/incomplete lead 5 Canadian Idol

I just bet that this was written by a canadian. It starts with a self-deprecating joke. I'm also going to say urban; but, hipness runs from sea to sea to sea cause of the CBC ;-}. Good article so far but I am immediately thinking of the millions of Ukrainians and others brought to the country under Clifford Sifton's direction. This article needs to be several pages long Two 16

Even if it's only dealing with artistic culture (which is how the author is interpreting it) then it needs to be about five times the size. Let's put the Ukranians in a separate article (Dhoukabours?). Even so, will somebody who knows something about it please, please, write and article on the Canadian Stage. I know its good, I know its out there, but I know nowhere near enough to write on it. Especially what's going on outside Ontario. DJ Clayworth 20:45, 11 Aug 2003 (UTC)

strike avril from the list of famous artists, please. I do not think she is famous, just you wait. Give her one more year and then she will be gone.

• I'd like to see a verification of this change; also, a reference to the original Ralston Saul source would be helpful to add. --bleh fu talk fu 15:57, Jan 22, 2005 (UTC)

One matter of contention in the effort to study Canadian culture rests in the fact of Canada's bilingualism; there is little reason to question the distinct identity of the English- and French-speaking peoples of Canada. However, John Ralston Saul conjectures that Gabrielle Roy is better known in anglophone (???) Canada than in France, and more French-Canadians than anglophones know of Margaret Laurence and Atom Egoyan.

hey hey hey

[edit] Suggest merge from Canadian identity

These two articles seem to be about the same thing. The title of this one seems to be the most accurate. It seems, to me at least, a lot in the Canadian identity article is by nature POV--reading more like one person's essay (or a collective's essay) on "What it is to be Canadian." where quite a few values-based assumptions have entered into it as a sort of "weasel word" kind of bias (see the "Multiculturalism" section for instance). Maybe merging here will weed that out and we can have an encyclopedic article on Canadian culture.--Ben 01:00, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

• Culture and history are connected, but I like the format as is, where Canadian identity is separate from Canadian culture. Culture gives someone an identity, so examinimg culture on the Canadian culture page with a link to Canadian identity seems like the way to go.

I tend to agree that they should be separate articles, however, the Canadian identity article is in need of cleanup. I've added a tag to that effect and begun working on improving the "Canadian identity" article. Sunray 21:49, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Culture, Regional Cultures, and Freedom from Culture

The article currently reads like Bumpf from the culture/heritage ministry about what we're supposed to be, plus the obligatory list of artists. Discussions of regional cultural differences and distinctivenesses are noticeably absent. Have we been so fully homogenized that any mention of the cultures that have been submerged into Greater Toronto's don't even deserve historical mention?Skookum1 19:08, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

This may be useful: Wikipedia:Canada collaboration. Mindmatrix 20:34, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Confusing industry with culture

It's not clear to me why the X-Files, Stargate SG-1, Battlestar Galactica, and The Outer Limits are mentioned in this article. Those are notable products of Canadian business and industry, not Canadian culture. --Ds13 17:47, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Equally confusing is why 80% of the article is geared towards TV and movie actors and comedians that have "made it" in the US. If we need to struggle to write an article beyond the trivial, it's probably non-existent. Actors do not represent a Canadian culture but rather an ability to entertain. Most listed are more about American culture than Canadian culture. By the way, the entertainment industry is not the only indication of a people's culture (I hope!!). Where is literature, art, music, social values, religion, political values, etc.? Where is Emily Carr, Arthur Erickson, Trembley, Suzuki, Group of Seven, the Friendly Giant, Chez Helene? Finally, this article is mostly about English Canada- where's French Canada? THere is much more to Canadian Culture (or Cultures) than what we can offer across the border. 207.6.233.239 19:31, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Biased/incomplete lead

The initial paragraphs of this article show several glaring points of error, omission, and bias, specifically:

• ignoring British influence (!)
• overstating "Celtic" influence (might be big in the Maritimes, but the Orangemen kept Irish influences out of Toronto until recently)
• identifying major cultural factors as "points of contention"
• ignoring geography and climate influences, and urban/wilderness contrast
• not mentioning anti-Americanism as a driving force in some cultural areas
• not mentioning pacifism/anti-imperialism
• political influences (government policy)

It seems like the article is responding to an unstated assumption that there's no such thing as Canadian culture. That is a peculiar (and non-neutral) POV. The opening paragraphs require a massive rewrite to be more complete, accurate, relevant, and impartial. The introduction should be an executive summary of the rest of the article. (This is not a request for someone else to do work, this is a request for comments before I start hacking away at bad prose.)Avt tor 20:04, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I'll be back with more about your points, but just in quick-passing the second one struck me as very offbase: the Orangemen were inherently Celtic; Protestant Celt, that is; it was Catholics they were keeping out; Anglo-Irish were the founders of the organization, plus Scots Presbyterians and CoE (or, I think, in Scotland, CoS). Out here in BC the UEL/Orange thing was less pronounced until maybe the 20th Century, but the heavy Celtic flavour of the early province was dominantly Scots, including the Anglo-Irish Protestants (among the elites, that is), a smattering of American-Irish Catholics (left over from the gold rush), and a large contingent of Welsh and Cornish...and I'm not speaking of only the gold rush and pre-railway period, but of the post-railway: until the Great War, it was often observed that Vancouver, in sight and sound, bore a striking resemblance to Glasgow, as Scots were so numerous (the city has had iron-grillwork of the same kind favoured in Scotland, until it was all melted down for bullets for the war). And since then the presence of both labour and elite elements from Scotland and Wales is notable, as well as further waves of Anglo-Irish and Catholic Irish as well...there's also an argument to be made that Metis culture is more than a bit Celtic in ethnic origin as well as in culture.Skookum1 23:24, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Culture is not racial or genetic, it is learned behavior, and in the Centre of the Universe, which of course influenced the rest of Canada, the Loyal Orange Order that ran the town for two centuries explicitly promoted a British version of Canada. I attended Toronto's first St. Patrick's Day parade in the early '80s. Point is that while Celtic immigrants very strongly influenced certain regions of Canada, these influences were almost all regional and not national. Truly my intent is not to be exclusive; I was merely questioning comment about highlighting one source of influence and ignoring several other comparable ones; you can't discuss the Prairies without talking about Ukrainians and you can't talk about BC or Toronto without mentioning the Chinese, if one gets down to regional influences. I'm not sure the lead requires a lot of detail about regional subcultures. The reason the lead requires a rewrite is not so much the specifics as the overall apologetic tone of the introductory section.

You also can't discuss BC without also discussing the British - the multiple flavours of British, and the different layers (fur trade colonial, railway, ex-American, colonial, remittance/gentry, labourite and more - all different historical eras/types); or for that matter the Scandinavians and Germans (likewise the Prairies). BC's history is all too typically presented as having more to do with the Chinese legacy, or the anti-Chinese legacy, but there's a lot more to it than that. It's not reflected in contemporary curriculum, particularly post-secondary curriculum, except in a negative light. But the special nature of the British flavour of British Columbia is unique within Canada, and still a defining element; and the Chinese presence from colonial times onwards is an expression of the British imperial links, likewise the early Australian presence and others such as the South Asians, Kenyans and so on; the Chinese presence in Toronto does not have the same roots, nor as much influence on the common culture of that city as it has had in BC (even in the smallest towns!). As already alluded to re the Prairies, the Ukrainians are only the most visible element; the Scandinavians and Germans (other than Mennonites and Hutterites) wilfully assimlated; not as British, but as Canadians. You may want to read my posts on a recent forum at http://thetyee.ca, a political webzine from BC: http://thetyee.ca/Views/2006/11/28/Quebec/ (use "Find on this page" under Edit, if your on a PC, and search for my username). Focussing on only two ethnic groups in western Canada (note the small-w, as there is no one "Western Canada" just as there is no single "English Canada") does a disservice to all the other ethnic groups, "white" or "coloured", whose mark can be seen and felt in the societies of the Prairie Provinces, and (separately) of BC and of the remaining territories. The Prairies aren't only about the Ukrainians; BC isn't only about the Chinese; in addition to the Germans and Scandinavians there's also other "invisible minorities", variously the Dutch, Yugoslavs, Poles, Finns, Hungarians and especially Italians (unlke Toronto, as with the Chinese, BC's Italian population is historic rather than recent in origin). There are also important Hawaiian and West Indian legacies here, as well as freed-black (including the first governor's mother...); much more submerged but still part of the milieu. The nature of cultures in the westenr provinces is about the emergence of a collective, but diverse, English-speaking society very different from that of Upper Canada or the Maritime/Atlantic, despite in-migrants from those areas being numerous, particularly in recent decades). Skookum1 01:15, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

And in BC there's the important cultural/social distinctions between the Lower Mainland, the Island and the Interior; with certain towns and the regions having important ethnic components - Hungarians in Prince Rupert, Doukhobbours in the West Kootenay, expat Americans throughout (with the new wave of draft-dodgers focussed in the West Kootenay, and in Vancouver), Italians in Revelstoke and Trail, Germans in the Okanagan and South Cariboo, South Asians throughout, and more (the Chinese in the 19th Century, and up to the '20s and '30s, were present in large numbers throughout the Interior, with some towns dominantly Chinese until - like so many BC boomtowns - they were abandoned). I'm not meaning this in terms of ethnicity or race, but in terms of the influence these various identities had on the life and mentality (the culture) of the towns/regions they helped form. The much more pervasive culture and population of the First Nations is also more strongly felt in BC than in Ontario or Quebec or elsewhere, with many important towns having distinct First Nations flavours (I won't start a list as it's very long); and the manufactured identity (government/tourism culture) of the place focusses on that a great deal, and nearly all of us who have grown up here identify with the imagery of totem poles as being part of where we're from. Traditions from different peoples mingled along with their families, a common identity developed that wasn't British or white or anything else; it included everyone; there is no Chinese vs everyone dichotomy, not until lately anyway.Skookum1 01:14, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Re the Irish vs Celtic thing, Orange culture is an outgrowth - perhaps a contrary one - of Celtic realities; it is inherently Celtic. It's true that the Loyal Orange advance(d) British culture; but their sense of "British" includes Protestant and CoE English, and the "British" throne is seen (by them, perhaps) as also including the former realms of Ireland ("former" because the other three ancient kingdoms of Ireland are a republic now). And, as already described, the Celtic (read Scottish) influence in Western Canada is inescapable, in any period (Gaelic was as often heard in the goldfields as Canadian-style English, and also in Vancouver pre-Great War; it's also mentioned as having contributed words to local varieties of the Chinook Jargon, BC's early lingua franca, but none are recorded in the lexicons, which focus on the Columbia River version of "lalang"). As with the Metis there's also a notable Celtic strain in Quebec, not just because of the emigre Catholic Irish there and Quebeckers' own taste in Celtic-style dance music, but because of the Breton foundation of Quebec society, so clearly heard in its accent, which resembles Brettonais a great deal, and for good reason).Skookum1 01:04, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Seems like you have enough material to create a subordinate article about multicultural or immigrant influences on Canadian culture. I think you're basically agreeing with my point that many different immigrant communities influenced the culture of various regions, so it would be odd to single one out. British and French influences are overall more relevant historically, because the colonial powers could use government institutions to distribute their cultural models. Avt tor 15:41, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

I will prepare a draft before replacing this section. I'll post a link here to a user page, for comments, for a few days before I paste it over the existing text. Avt tor 00:17, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

My draft replacement for the lead of this article is at User:Avt_tor/draft/Culture_of_Canada. It includes references. This is not intended to delete or replace the sections of the existing article; I only intend to replace the lead. Comments welcome. It is a major rewrite and I would prefer not to waste time with a bunch of reverts. Avt tor 17:58, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Canadian Idol

Why is there a picture of Canadian Idol suggesting American Influence. This program is British and surely shows the neo-colonial influence that the brits still maintain! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.134.187.50 (talk • contribs) 16:26, February 8, 2007 (UTC).

Even though the American show was based on a British show, the Canadian one was based on the American one. If we can find a good image that doesn't have the British connection, we'll replace it. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 22:46, 8 February 2007 (UTC)