The Death of General Wolfe by Benjamin West. Oil on canvas, 1770.
The CBC shocks us all.
Canada's national broadcaster will mark the 250th anniversary of the Battle of the Plains of Abraham with a documentary on the decisive British-French conflict, months after threats from hardline separatists forced the cancellation of a planned re-enactment in Quebec City.The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, like a broken clock. To our American readers, let me put this in perspective. Imagine if a bunch Southerners demanded that a re-enactment of the Battle of Gettysburg be cancelled, because the battle recalled painful memories of defeat, and you begin to understand the absurdity of the protests of Quebecois nationalists. One can take two perspectives about landmark events like Gettysburg and the Plains of Abraham. It's big history that deserves to be remembered, regardless of the respective merits of each side. The other approach is honouring the values the respective sides were fighting to uphold. On both counts Gettysburg and Quebec were major events whose outcomes changed their respective nations for the better. While there is no moral comparison between New France and the Confederacy, slavery was a peripheral issue in Canada though it did exist, 1759 was ultimately a lucky break for les Canadiens.
The one-hour documentary, set to air during prime time next Thursday, is already ruffling the feathers of those who opposed the real-life re-enactment
The New France of the mid-eighteenth century was much like old France, quasi-feudal and dominated by a Catholic Church far enough away from grasping the need for the separation of church and state. While the Enlightenment was in full swing in the salons and coffee shops of Paris, its values and attitudes had yet to trickle down to the average Frenchmen in the fields. Only a tiny landed elite along the St. Lawrence would have begun to come to grips with the implications of figures like Voltaire and Diderot. For the generation of Quebec nationalists who emerged after the Quiet Revolution, 1759 was both humiliation and lost opportunity. Had French colonial rule lasted Quebec might have become a modern independent liberal nation, just as Canada and the United States had.
The narrative implies that English speaking Canada helped prop up Quebec's ancien regime. Having about one quarter of the population of Canada stuck in the seventeenth century, for the first hundred years after Confederation, was a significant encumbrance. Something polite opinion has steadily ignored for decades. Quebec was strategically vital to the existence of Canada, yet its basic values were more statist and collectivist than those of the ROC ("Rest of Canada"). For all the celebration of the coureur des bois, the state and clergy preferred les habitant to stay on the farm. The province's educational system famously churned out priests and lawyers, just as schools in English speaking North America were beginning to turn out business graduates and engineers.
The hope that Quebec might have modernized sooner had it remained within France's orbit, omits the bloody history of the metropole after 1789. Five republics, two Empires, three major military defeats and a near coup as late as 1962, modern France modernized slowly and often by force. The France of the 1950s might have been nominally more secular that contemporary Quebec, yet it suffered from many of the same structural setbacks. What Quebec had enjoyed was two centuries of peace, security and relatively more freedom than his French counterpart. The Battle of Quebec was the inception of Canada. For the Quebecois it was the moment they came into the orbit of a liberal and modern government. That alone should be enough to commemorate.
This is the oil on canvass that hangs above my fireplace mantle, much to the displeasure of my better half. The immense original sits in the National Art Gallery in Ottawa.
ReplyDelete"Imagine if a bunch Southerners demanded that a re-enactment of the Battle of Gettysburg be cancelled, because the battle recalled painful memories of defeat, and you begin to understand the absurdity of the protests of Quebecois nationalists."
ReplyDeleteDown here it is much more likely to be Northerners barring Southerners from celebrating or even recognizing their heritage. Imagine if, for instance, Quebecois succeeded in banning the Union Jack or St George's Cross or other such reminders of Canada's British heritage from the flags of Canada's provinces. Southerners suffer an analogous indignity when forced to remove the Confederate flag from their own state flags.
I write this, by the way, as a native New Englander.
"Imagine if, for instance, Quebecois succeeded in banning the Union Jack or St George's Cross or other such reminders of Canada's British heritage from the flags of Canada's provinces."
ReplyDeleteThey did actually. It's part of ther reason we junked the Red Ensign and replaced it with our current flag.
Beaverbrook,
ReplyDeleteHow can anyone object to that painting???!!!
"They did actually. It's part of ther reason we junked the Red Ensign and replaced it with our current flag."
ReplyDeleteTo which flag do you refer? The flags of Canada's provinces are still, in large part, festooned with British symbolism, no?
The former national flag that was replaced in 1965. Only three provinces (BC, Ontario and Manitoba) still have union jacks. New Brunswick and PEI have royal symbols (Lion). Nova Scotia has a sort of St Andrew's cross with a lion. Alberta has what looks to be a cross of St. George. Saskatchewan also has a lion.
ReplyDeletePrecisely. That's what I was talking about - if those provinces were forced to strip from their provincial flags the union jacks, Lions and crosses of St Andrew and so forth.
ReplyDeleteThe point is, Mr Toddard, that to please the Quebecois, in attempt to bring Canadians 'together', Mr Pearson, against firm opposition, changed the flag of Canada from the venerable Red Ensign that was perfectly fine and I still think is much more beautiful than our current one..
ReplyDeleteThe ironic part is that, just as the illustrious Mr Conn Smythe predicted, it has not brought us together, it just illustrated, once again, to the Quebecois, like Mr King's actions over conscription or Mr Laurier's over the navy, that the Liberal Party was willing to bend over backwards to satisfy them. Because of this, the Quebecois, in general, now have it in their minds that they are something special and the rest of Canada needs to give in to their every desire.
This, in my opinion, must stop as it will not bring Canadians together in the least.
"Beaverbrook, How can anyone object to that painting???!!!"
ReplyDeleteFor some mysterious reason, bloody battle scenes, death, guts and glory do not appeal to members of the opposite sex. Strange, that.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSir, wives tend to be like that - it is the same this side of the water. However, my better half seems to be easily reconciled with battle scenes as soon as horses are involved!
ReplyDeleteAs for the Benjamin West painting - I certainly shall not object to it, either. I have always liked what you might loosely call drum and trumpet pictures of the "service above self" variety. I'd say most lads have enjoyed them in their youth and many continue for the rest of their lives...
At about 12 years of age I read about Wolfe and Montcalm for the first time - in a tattered old German history book where a version of West's painting was printed. This probably helped to trigger my interest in British and Commonwealth history which continues to date.
"The Death of Major Pierson at St. Helier" (or the artistic representation thereof) seems to be even more dramatic than the Wolfe painting, although, colours unfurled and all, but the significance of 1759 cannot and should not be doubted.
The Death of Major Pierson at St. Helier
ReplyDeleteA very fine picture too Stauffenberg.