Chapter 19 | Tomke Lask

(continued)

Language, or the language option, is an excellent element linked to the building up of Canadian identity, at least as far as Francophone Canadians are concerned. Objectively speaking, Anglophone Canadians find it more difficult to have a sense of their own identity, as neighbours of the Americans, because language is not an element that is as distinguishable as in the case of Francophones. Anglophones, therefore, have to put forward other cultural tools to maintain a cultural frontier with the USA and, in a world of globalized material culture, the domain of an intangible heritage such as lifestyle is more difficult to master. Francophone Canadians do not take mastering into consideration, as they are too caught up with their concern of seeing their cultural specificity recognized in a Canadian context. But is it possible to equate identity only with the use of a given language? Is that not a way of putting oneself into a dead end trap logically? In the past, language as an essential cultural element has been used to justify war. I know what I am talking about having been born in Germany. I could have studied, first at school, and later at university, the history of national socialist Germany. The emotions raised by the evocation of a common culture based on the use of the same language open doors to all types of political radicalism and closes windows to a larger perspective on culture. Of course, there is no such movement in Francophone Canada. I just want to warn about a possible emotional overemphasis, of relying on language as the entire cultural strength of a population.

In the City of Québec, I witnessed different scenes which displeased me because of their implicit violence. One day, in a tiny souvenir shop, I overheard a conversation between the owner of the shop and two French tourists. The shopkeeper said with a nice Québécois accent that the worst plague facing Québec was Chinese tourists coming from Canada [sic!]. “What the English were not able to do, the Chinese are going to succeed at!” That is to eradicate the French language from Québec. “Since the younger generation does not love our language any more, after my generation, French will not find any defenders here. We are going to disappear!” This discourse was not only shocking because of its racism toward the Chinese (who bring money to Québec through business and tourism), but also because the French couple seemed in full agreement. The important matter here is to see the weight the French language is given. What did this man mean when he complained about the lack of love of the younger generation for the French language? Is it the fact that they gladly learn the English language? Is the mastering of another language a sign of loss of identity? Is the rest of Québec culture meaningless? And what an expression of resentment toward the English people of Canada, that is to say the fellow-citizens of that man! How could that attitude contribute to the handing down of the culture of a small society such as Québec? Was it not rather a declaration of surrender against a tradition? He who says tradition does not necessarily say no to change, as seems to be the case here with the younger generations (Fernand Harvey).

These generations were at the core of concerns in more than one paper at this colloquium. Serge Proulx’s analysis of the use of new technologies as a threat to the primary identity of young Québécois was of particular interest to me. The danger he described in his presentation was the possible loss, or at least reduction, of their linguistic ability by the frequent use of cyberspace — using English for chatting within virtual groups. The “hard core” of Québec identity was under pressure and was in danger of disappearing, or of changing in a radical way.

In that pessimistic context, characterized by the fear of change, one should perhaps relativize the impact of virtual impacts on the building up of a regional or a national identity. Until further notice, reality and daily physical contact are more important for the building up of an individual’s identity than any talk through new technologies. Put differently, it is important to ask questions, especially about the influence of the Internet on the building up of identity. If this influence becomes more efficient than those of daily life, one has to question what those responsible for the education of the youth are doing. Of course, school is seen more and more as the only source of education, but is it correct to exempt parents from this task, which has traditionally been theirs? If children and teenagers can devote so much time to the computer (and it is not a question here of the number of hours they sit in front of the television receiver), it is important to ask ourselves why. Where are the parents who can suggest other leisure time activities? The tumbling down of competence in French, especially in written French, is the result of the lack of a habit of reading on the part of children, whose parents didn’t make them interested in that activity. Those who do not read cannot write well.

On the other hand, why is the use of the Internet in English looked on with such disfavour? Mastering of the English language is an essential tool in our world and French speaking children who know how to communicate in English on the Net should be congratulated by their parents. They are ready to face life in a time of globalization, because the world is larger than Québec and larger than all the countries of the Francophonie. The hard European reality has already shown French speaking Belgians⁴ — as well as all the citizens of the European Union — that being European means mastering English as a second language.

Chapter 19, continued >

________________

4. Belgium is a country where linguistic problems are inversely proportional to its size. Put differently, in a very small territory, there is a Babel of three official languages. The Francophone Wallony has become, after a century of economic and linguistic hegemony, the poor sister of the Flemish. They are still suffering from an inferiority complex because their language has received only recently, after long quarrels, the recognition it deserved in Belgium. The Flemish now take their revenge; Francophone Belgians should speak their language correctly if they wish to work in Flanders. On the other hand, the European market requires multilingual persons. English is the strict minimum today, even for a secretary. I shall not speak here of the German minority, the third official language in Belgium…

home | about grubstreet books | return to this book's table of contents
e-mail: | |

web site: