On Thursday February 7 Professor Wanda Thomas Bernard delivered this lunchtime lecture to the Lifelong Learners program at Acadia University.
Bernard’s lecture builds on her work with Judith Fingard on Black Nova Scotian domestic workers in the mid-twentieth century. In this lecture Bernard discusses the hardships these women faced and the complex worlds in which they lived. Interested readers should see their joint essay “Black Women at Work: Race, Family and Community in Greater Halifax” in Judith Fingard and Janet Vey Guildford’s Mothers of the Municipality: Women, Work and Social Policy in post-1945 Halifax. Continue reading →
Idle no more protesters marching along Government Street in Victoria on December 21, 2012
Recently, there have been some good cases for the utility of history as a discipline in explaining #IdleNoMore. Here I want to add to, and shift, the terms of this discussion by urging historians who study Canada, and the societies that preceded it, and who presume a connection between scholarship and social change, become active allies of #IdleNoMore.
Historians study change over time. A lot of the time the historical record seems to offer up a compelling but deeply depressing litany of horror and trauma: plagues, slavery, dispossession, war, relentless and deadening structures of patriarchy that stunted and ruined lives. Sometimes it seems to go on and on without much respite. But history also shows us that things change, sometimes in ways that we might never anticipate. For those of us committed to social change, history can provide remarkable evidence that however seemingly intransigent and unmoveable, political and economic structures can also give way, shift, and alter, sometimes when they seem perhaps least likely too. Continue reading →
My focus here is on one tool for maintaining a language of masculine empowerment and feminine and racist oppression: the joke. Uh-oh! Here we go! Another “man-hating,” “over-reacting” “feminazi” who “can’t take a joke.” On the contrary, I love a good joke. But I believe that good jokes should be funny to everyone in the room, not just a historically privileged group. I think good jokes should not make anyone feel demeaned, afraid, hurt or like lesser of a human being. This is not just a personal opinion; many human rights’ codes clearly define jokes about historically oppressed groups as harassment. Continue reading →
Last Saturday night in Ottawa, a young musician took the stage at the National Arts Centre and sang about a dream he had had. The dream was interesting because all his favourite historical figures – from Friedrich Nietzsche and Jean-Jacques Rousseau to Bob Dylan and Woody Guthrie – had shown up for a party at his house. The Party Song is a terrific example of how history has an active presence in our lives and how pop culture can be a great disseminator of historical references.
In this episode of the History Slam I talk with singer/songwriter Del Barber about the use of history in his songs as well as how history has influenced his career. Apart The Party Song, we chat about personal histories and how the past plays a role in our daily lives. Given my affinity for the Prairies from my days in Regina and Del’s Winnipeg roots, we also talk about the changing face of the West.
It has often been said that you shouldn’t meet the people of whom you are a fan, because inevitably you will be disappointed. Some of the greatest tales I’ve ever heard have been horror stories about meeting a celebrity who turned out to be less than affable. Fortunately, my experience with Del Barber was the exact opposite of that. Apart from the fact that his show was great, he’s a great guy – generous with his time, gracious in his attitude, and sincere with his answers. It was an interview that I really enjoyed, and hopefully you will too.
Sean Graham is a doctoral candidate at the University of Ottawa where he is currently working on a project that examines the early years of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. He has previously studied at Nipissing University, the University of the West Indies, and the University of Regina and like any red-blooded Canadian his ultimate dream is to be a curling champion while living on a diet of beer and poutine.
“Reconciliation” is a word that has gained great currency of late. It has been frequently used in discussions surrounding the Idle No More movement during the winter of 2012-13. But the term has a longer history in discussions in Canada concerning Native-newcomer relations. Notably, Chief Justice Antonio Lamer in the Supreme Court of Canada’s rulings in both the Van der Peet and Delgamuukw cases in 1996-97 made the point that the purpose of Section 35 of the constitution adopted in 1982 was “the reconciliation of the pre-existence of aboriginal societies with the sovereignty of the Crown.” That conception of the place of reconciliation in Canadian life is also relevant to the topic of residential schools and their legacy. Read More
Editors Note: In addition to our group blog, ActiveHistory.ca strives to provide timely, well-written and thoroughly researched papers on a variety of history-related topics. This is an area of our website that we would like to develop further. If you have a paper that you think resonates well with our mandate please consider submitting a paper to us. Expanded conference papers or short essays that introduce an upcoming book project are great starting points for the type of paper we publish. With a current readership of about 10,000 people per month we can assure that you will find an interested audience through our site.
For more information visit our Papers Section or contact papers@activehistory.ca. All of our papers are peer reviewed to ensure that they are accurate and up-to-date.
By Jim Clifford
Is Stephen Harper, as Terry Glavin argues, right to “not trust the history establishment“? Posts on this website and elsewhere do suggest that a broad spectrum of Canadian historians disagree with Harper’s use of history. Does this vocal minority represent the establishment? If not, who makes up the establishment? The Canadian Historical Association’s executive members? Leading historians at the large graduate programs?
Glavin’s column pivots from mentioning the concerns of Tom Mulcair and Scott Simms with the Conservative’s efforts to re-brand Canadian history to rehashing Jack Granatstein’s critique against “faddish social histories” from the 1990s (a fad that appears to have outlasted three to four generations of popular culture fads). Glavin, an author who has written a number of books about indigenous history, laments:
If it’s “a proud national story rooted in the great deeds of our ancestors” you’re after, the very last place to go looking for it would be the history faculty of a Canadian university.
To bolster his argument, Glavin interviewed Christopher Dummitt (the author of a great history blog, Everyday History), who began his career as a historian of masculinity, to confirm the Conservatives are
“right not to trust us… The historical profession has become kind of an activist organization. The result is we have lost authority, as a discipline, and we can’t talk about history writ large.”
In his Histoire du Canada (1846), François Garneau promulgated the myth that slavery never existed in New France. He congratulated King Louis XIV and the French colonial clergy for having saved Canada from this “grand and terrible plague.” Following suit, Canadians have accepted this claim despite the historical evidence of at least 4,000 slaves in New France alone, two-thirds of whom were Aboriginal. In 2013, these misconceptions about the history of slavery in Canada continue, and today Aboriginals make up the largest proportion of human trafficking victims in Canada.
Slavery is routinely dismissed as an historical artifact, and there is the tendency to downplay or disregard the historical dimensions of current complex and enduring problems. Confronting the longstanding mythology surrounding slavery in Canada has proved critical to policy efforts to combat this pernicious practice.
This February 23rd dozens of NGOs, law enforcement, students, community members, survivors, researchers, and more will be coming together in Toronto to learn, network, and share about how we can work together to end slavery. Continue reading →
The 2013 History Matters lecture series kicked off on January 31st, when migration historian William Jenkins (York University) gave a talk to a crowded room at the Parliament branch of the Toronto Public Library. His presentation examined immigration patterns and political allegiances of Toronto’s Irish between 1870 and World War I, and how struggles at home and abroad had an impact on the Catholic and Protestant Irish communities in the city.
The next talk in the 2013 History Matters series takes place at the Dufferin/St. Clair Branch of the Toronto Public Library on February 28th from 6:30-8pm. Award-winning migration, labour, and gender historian Dr. Franca Iacovetta (University of Toronto) will explore the International Institute Movement’s use of public spectacle and pageantry to promote cultural pluralism in a pre-multicultural Toronto. Click here for more information on this and other talks in the series.
Consul General Anton K. Smith speaking at War of 1812 commemorative event with Minister Peter McKay. Source: “CG Anton K Smith” by US Mission Canada
“Canada’s history is worth emphasizing,” according to a recent pathetically inoffensive editorial headline in the Globe and Mail. Such an argument is so bland and broad as to be almost entirely pointless. What drove the editorial team at the Globe to boldly stick its neck out with such a feeble statement? The temerity of the Leader of the Official Opposition, Thomas Mulcair, and his critique of the federal government for its use of historical commemorative events as “political branding” and a form of “jingoism.” “If it is an act of “jingoism” to commemorate such events, or to mark the bicentennial of the War of 1812,” according to the Globe, “then let’s have more of it. These are critical opportunities to educate Canadians about their history and thereby enhance their identity.” In short, more Canadian history means more better!
How can one criticize a government for devoting resources to raise awareness of Canadian history? As James Carville might say, “It’s the emphasis, stupid.” What history is worth emphasizing and how should it be emphasized? Whose stories do we tell and how do we tell them? These questions actually matter. To historians and public history professionals these questions are obvious and basic. By implication, the Globe and its sympathetic readers, argue that any effort to place emphasis on any aspect of the past is a good thing. It is simply a “wise recognition of the need to celebrate Canadian identity.” The argument is either ignorantly oblivious to the significance and political weight of public commemoration or it is dishonest. Either way, it is embarrassing to see in print. Continue reading →
In 1487, Godfrey O’Donnell killed a Breifre O’Rourke with what was most likely a primitive cast iron hand cannon. Detailed in the Annals of the Four Masters, the text differs on the wording regarding what to call the new weapon. What was less uncertain was that the new weapon could only be trusted in the hands of those loyal to the English state and kept out of the hands of the local Gaels. 355 years later in a debate about what to do about the gun in Ireland in the House of Commons caused one man to remark that ‘ take from honest men the means of defence, and will not deprive the turbulent and the lawless of the means of aggression.’ (ARMS (IRELAND) BILL. House of Commons Deb 29 May 1843 vol. 69 cc996-1063) On January 30 of this year, the Irish Labour whip Ms Hayden stated that ‘it is shocking to think there are criminals – drug dealers and other forms of low -life – who walk around in this country and seem to have no difficulty whatsoever accessing firearms.’
Firearms have always caused consternation when they fall into the hands of those deemed unworthy of their use. Whether a killing field in 1487 or remarks made to reporters in 2013 the debate about the gun has a certain timelessness. Unlike some other commentators this brief piece is not going to on the intent of the founding fathers of the American Revolution, or the nuances of meaning by the framers of the Bill of Rights. Rather, it is to put firearms in a different context. It is about what the gun represents. What is has always represented.
Recently, the recurrent debate on gun ownership has been galvanizing two very different narratives of what the legacy of the right to bear arms is to be and what it might become. Taking a look at a different world entirely may provide an alternative starting point to an often muddled discussion. I will cover a major theme of my own work, and how it might be applied to the current debates taking place in small towns and urban conglomerations throughout America in churches, cafes, bars and boardrooms. Continue reading →
On Thursday February 7 Professor Wanda Thomas Bernard delivered this lunchtime lecture to the Lifelong Learners program at Acadia University.
