Misty Hollow Carving
This BLOG is sponsored by “Misty Hollow Carving”. You are welcome to visit Misty Hollow and see all of my carvings.
My Web Site is a like a Gallery – please drop in for a stroll through.
To help me promote my Web Site please copy this URL address and email to someone today http://www.murraylincoln.com/
* * * * * * * *
Today’s Blog Post
Naema Ahmed, the niqab-wearing woman – and the French Language – Part Two
After putting out my reflections on the macabre niqab incident that is growing in Quebec now I touched a sore point with some.
“Anonymous” left a comment on my posting yesterday, of which I published and it appears in whole at the bottom of the posting – but only indicated as “1 Comment”. It is very good to get the feed back and I republish it in today’s post with comments of my own.
Dear Anonymous,
Thank you for your note about yesterday’s posting about the niqab and Naema Ahmed’s situation. I have included it at the end of these notes.
Yesterday’s posting was not aimed at the French Language Laws of Quebec. The comment was off the cuff as it appeared in the post. But it is a true expression of many in the non-Anglophone community.
Yesterday’s post was about the rights of Naema to wear here niqab and act the way that she chooses to.
Anonymous, I respect your posting and accept your point of view – noting that it is your point of view. And your point of view likely has been deeply affected by some historical influence and or present position that you are involved with.
My posting and seemingly off the cuff comment about Quebec and the French Language requirements by people living there are also a point of view. And this point of view is also formed/influenced based upon historical and present position that I am involved with. Let me explain.
I am an Anglophone admittedly. Being born and raised in Saskatchewan with its primary Anglophone, Francophone, Ukrainophone, Germanophone, Chinophone, Aboriginophone, and almost every other Phone going we survived our Multi-Ethnic, Multi Language base. Everyone in Saskatchewan lived with everyone else fairly easily.
We were a very new Province that had stolen the land from our Native/Aboriginal Brothers in more recent years than did Quebec. Our “settlers” only arrived about 150 years ago to take control of the land. Whereas Quebec did that comfortably way back about 400+ years ago when you look at the historical records.
It was simple way back when the two provinces started. When new people came and began to control the countryside saying that they owned it now, the Aboriginal simply tried hard to understand and then learned the language of the new people. The French and English kind of forced a new societal norms on everyone. So yes we all know about societal norms and the frightful need to use the present societal norm.
It was difficult for the Aboriginal Brother of mine to survive – but they did. Their language is almost in tact despite after what the French or English did to them. And please note here that the French were doing it first – (an off the cuff and a deliberate sideline comment like any good politician uses).
Personally being raised in Saskatchewan I didn’t need the French Language at all. Gravelbourg, Sask. was the one major pod of Francophone and there was no need to go there. It was not somewhere that you would take a vacation in!
My parents encouraged me to take French through my schooling. Graduating from High School I was able to read and write French at about an 80% level – at least that was the mark that I achieved.
After the Post secondary years of study and through a unique series of events I went to live in Quebec, Trois Rivieres to be exact. That year was 1966. I moved to Quebec to live and work as an Anglophone Computer Technician. My task was to restore the French Speaking Office and build it up. Odd job for a stupid Anglophone!!
I was there when the FLQ was marking their territory. I “met” Monsieur Charles De Gaulle – at least he was about four feet from me when he waved at me. That was July 24, 1967. Later that afternoon he uttered his “Vive le Québec! (Long live Quebec!) then added, Vive le Québec libre! (Long live Free Québec!)” in Montreal.
Wikipedia states…
“In July 1967, de Gaulle visited Canada, which was celebrating its centennial with a world's fair, Expo 67. On 24 July, speaking to a large crowd from a balcony at Montreal's city hall, de Gaulle shouted Vive le Québec! (Long live Quebec!) then added, Vive le Québec libre! (Long live Free Québec!). The Canadian media harshly criticised the statement, and the Prime Minister of Canada, Lester B. Pearson stated that "Canadians do not need to be liberated." De Gaulle left Canada two days later without proceeding to Ottawa as scheduled. He never returned to Canada. The speech caused outrage in most of Canada; it led to a serious diplomatic rift between the two countries. However, the event was seen as a watershed moment by the Quebec sovereignty movement.”
If it was all about Language I could see it make sense. But it isn’t and it is way deeper than people let on in their expression.
In your posting you asked/stated… quote
“If you are so certain that French is "forced" on anglophones in Quebec, then ask yourself - honestly - whether you would rather be an anglophone in Quebec or a francophone in Ontario. I think the answer is obvious.”
I did that and did survive very well. My French was terrible and they all laughed a lot at me. But in 1967 it was fun to be there. It was stimulating and it was plain and simply a delight.
In only one business place, in Shawinigan, Quebec, was I treated with complete disgust and told to leave the premise and not come back until I could speak French. The man’s business machine was broke down. He did his job on me in front of a group of people that all laughed when he said it. I was reduced to the idiot level he wanted me to feel.
The next day Emmanuel Dimek went back to the business place with me to look at the machine. At least that was what I thought was happening. The business owner greeted him and ignored me. Emmanuel asked the man if he spoke German. The answer was “non”. Emmanuel asked if he spoke, Italian, Greek, etc… and the answer was always “non”.
Emmanuel spoke 12 languages and came from Malta.
Emmanuel’s final comment just before we walked out leaving the machine still broke down was, “Until you can speak these languages we will not be fixing your machine… Good day sir!”
It was a priceless moment. I had tried hard that previous day to speak my broken French and was treated like an idiot. This day was a pure delight.
In the more recent years my Francophone Friends and Anglophone Friends in Quebec have lived through some tough times with signage, and language laws that insist on societal changes.
I can say that I am surrounded by English Canada. And many in this English Canada cannot stand the societal impressions they are left with now from Quebec. I can say that 99% of the Anglophones that I speak with think I am absolutely nuts to go back to Quebec for my visits. They simply state that THEY WOULD NEVER GO THERE!
Now I do face one huge obstacle in May, 2010. I have to travel to Quebec and conduct a Wedding for a close friend that is a Francophone – who is marrying an Anglophone that speaks French as well. Her family is totally French speaking – so she will fetch me a translator from her many brothers and sisters.
They asked me how my French was. “Not good” was my answer. After having lived and studied Chinese in Hong Kong, and worked in that language, French no longer comes out very well… only Chinese. So they will give me someone to help.
Soooo… I may be off base in your mind as I offer off the cuff, mild critique of Quebec… in your mind. But I have this relationship with these folks that goes way back… way, way back. I love them… but cannot understand their leadership and the nonsense that goes on.
Thanks for the comments “Anonymous”. Have a great day!
~ Murray Lincoln ~
Anglophone
http://www.murraylincoln.com/
BTW – I speak FOUR Languages English, Cantonese, Spanish and French – poorly and people still laugh at me - mixing these with some Thai, some Mandarin, some Vietnamese. I am Canadian!
Anonymous wrote..
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Niqabs forever! Naema Ahmed, the niqab-wearing wo...":
I don't want to defend the government's decision on the niqab, because I don't agree with it.
But I think you're way off base criticizing Quebec's efforts to protect the French language.
You write:
"[T]he French Language and the way that it is forced on to the residents of Quebec is far more Domineering than some group of people forcing their women to dress a certain way."
That is simply not true.
First, you should note that there is no legal requirement to speak French to live in Quebec. It is a societal value, and the government tries to encourage it in ways that have been, with only a couple of - in my view - relatively minor exceptions in the past, respectful of human rights.
Second, the view that people should speak French does not mean that they should not also speak other languages. What it means is that French should be the common language used between individuals belonging to different language groups, and when addressing society as a whole. The government does not seek to assimilate anglophones, but rather to encourage allophones, through non-coercive means, to use French rather than English in their public interactions when these are in an official language.
English plays that role in the rest of Canada, and because of its strong position, that happens naturally without government intervention. In Quebec, English used to play that role, and it still does to a large extent. This is an injustice, considering that 80% of the population is francophone and only 10% anglophone, and that it is the result of the historically superior socioeconomic status of anglophones.
Third, the government services provided in English to Quebec anglophones are far superior to those provided in French in any other province except New Brunswick. Only in Quebec does a minority language community have such an extensive array of education, health, legal and social services in their language, all provided by taxpayers of whom 80% are francophone.
Fourth, you can live in English in Montreal in a way that you cannot live in French anywhere else. It is far easier for a unilingual anglophone in Montreal to find employment than it is for a unilingual francophone in, say, Ottawa, despite the fact that the sizes of the minority communities are similar.
Fifth, and perhaps most importantly, the historical advantages enjoyed by the English language in Quebec force francophones to be bilingual for many jobs. This is a situation that no other majority language community in Canada has to endure.
To illustrate the last point, 44% of francophones in the Montreal CMA use English at work regularly, although only 12 % of the population is anglophone. In comparison, in the Sudbury CMA, where 27% of the population is francophone, only 9% of anglophones regularly use French at work. (2006 Census) It is sometimes said that this has to do with the predominant position of English in North America, but everyday experience tells us that this state of affairs has much more to do with interactions among Montrealers themselves than those with outsiders.
If you are so certain that French is "forced" on anglophones in Quebec, then ask yourself - honestly - whether you would rather be an anglophone in Quebec or a francophone in Ontario. I think the answer is obvious.
~ Murray Lincoln ~
http://www.murraylincoln.com/
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
Sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_de_Gaulle
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Hello Murray,
Thanks for your reply. I take your point that your posting was on a different topic, however I did take issue with your comment on language.
I'm an anglophone, but I also speak French, and always try very hard to be fair to both sides in the language debate. When I hear opinions that are unfair from either side, I sometimes get angry, because I think they can be detrimental to our communities' ability to live together. And the kind of idea your comment expressed, even though it was an incidental one, falls into that category, because it grossly distorts the reality of language policies in Quebec. When those opinions are aired, they may add to the prejudice against francophone Quebecers that undoubtedly already exists in English Canada, and therefore require a response.
While I don't agree with all language policies in Quebec, I think that on the whole they are fair to minorities. I myself teach in an English-language college, and know that most francophones in Western Canada would be lucky to have access to these kinds of facilities.
So it would be more constructive for anglophones in the West to think about what they can do in their own back yard. I don't mean that nobody should be allowed to criticize Quebec. What I mean is that that criticism should be based on an accurate understanding of the facts, and a willingness to hold themselves to the same standards they would hold Quebec to. Account also needs to be taken of the fact that French is a minority language in Canada as a whole, and for that reason some steps may need to be taken to protect it which would not be necessary for English.
I'm sorry that you had the experience you had in Shawinigan. The people you encountered seem to have been very rude. I think that in a situation in which two communities are in conflict - and this was the case in 1967 even more than now - deep resentments can be created, and these can sometimes come out in inappropriate ways.
I think that these resentments - and the kind of incidents you described - have diminished a good deal precisely because Canada has made progress towards equality for English and French since 1967. The more progress is made in that regard, the better English and French Canadians will get along. That is a responsibility not only for Quebec, but also for the rest of Canada to take seriously.
Cheers,
Joel
Good comments Joel.
I see after these years of being exposed to many cultures that there are great differences. I can see also that some wish to encounter the differences and move forward... others are protective wishing to maintain their own.
I have discovered that Celebration of something goes much further than Regulation. My Chinese friends have never lost their langauge or culture - they Celebrate.
Of my French friends,the many that I connect with,they also Celebrate and have lost nothing.
It appears that the ones that have made the Regulations are insecure trying to legislate their culture and societal norms into the forefront. That will never work.
Every student I ever encountered (including myself) knew instintively that rules needed to be challenged - and would be broken where possible. That is a norm - right or wrong.
Have a great day.
Murray
Hello Murray,
Thanks for your reply.
I understand your preference for promoting a language through "celebration" rather than "regulation".
When it comes to limiting the means of expression of individuals, as was the case when Quebec sought to make commercial signs unilingually French, I do not support that. However, that is no longer the case and was only a small part of Quebec's overall language regime.
However, regulation of language matters is inevitable, whether you are in Quebec or any other province, or any part of the world for that matter. These regulations tend to be objected to in Canada only when they conflict with people's views of what languages actually *ought* to be used in this or that part of Canada.
Let me ask you, for example, what you think of the regulations that require nutritional information to be provided on food packaging. If you agree with that requirement, then surely you must agree that a company would not, in Canada, be allowed to provide that information only in a language that few here understand, such as Swahili. Therefore, we have regulations requiring that the information be provided in English and French. What is wrong with regulation in this case?
Regulations like this are everywhere, and are perfectly legitimate, and even necessary. In many cases, only English is protected in this way by some provinces. (For example, some provinces require that court proceedings be conducted in English.)
A similar regulation in Quebec might be that instructions for appliances need to be provided at least in French, in addition to any other languages chosen by the manufacturer. Or that nurses must be able to speak French well enough to serve those patients who wish to receive hospital services in French. (Would a nurse who spoke no English be qualified to practice in Alberta?)
Most of the regulations in Quebec that some people object to are regulations that can be justified for these kinds of reasons.
They do not necessarily reflect a will to impose one's culture on others, but are a necessary part of making society function well.
Quebec does sometimes adopt stronger protections for French than are necessary for English elsewhere, and you rightly note that this is motivated by insecurity about the position of the French language in Canada. But it is not enough to say that francophones are insecure if their insecurity is in fact justified, and it can be argued that it is.
You also say that using legislation to promote a language will never work.
Ontario and Manitoba earlier in our history used the law to promote English to the detriment of French, for example when they banned French-language education. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manitoba_Schools_Question and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_17 ) The situation was not righted in Manitoba until 1985. In the intervening period, francophones went from being almost half the poulation in Manitoba to just 4%, and they are hanging on for survival.
I think these examples demonstrate that legislation does have a huge impact on language groups. Of course, I am not advocating that laws be used in this way to eliminate the very English minority to which I belong. But I think it is undeniable that language laws - everywhere in the country - can have an effect on the vitality of language groups.
My basic point is that there are regulations on language everywhere, and that fact is unavoidable. Often, laws conferring special status on English in the rest of Canada are invisible to many anglophones, because they generally agree with the premise that English should be the normal, everyday language there. When they criticize language laws in Quebec, it is in many cases based, ultimately, on a view that it is illegitimate to favour French as the normal, everyday language in Quebec. And this is a double standard.
Cheers,
Joel
Post a Comment