In class, an interesting discussion sparked about whether or not Canada is multicultural. At the beginning of her presentation, Amanda defined multiculturalism as follows (well, this is what I have in my notes, I apologize if it’s incorrect): Multiculturalism –An individual’s “culture” must be maintained, it is not inherent but must be actively practiced; multiculturalism is not a project of the nation state.
In the end, it seemed that the general consensus was that multiculturalism itself did not exist or could not exist.
I found this discussion to be really interesting, and again the rationale for Canada’s non-multiculturalism partly rested on the capitalization of difference. As discussed, the food court is not a true example of multiculturalism because each restaurant is at once being exploited based on its difference/exotic appeal, but is also watered down in order to meet Western standards.
True enough, but our discussion left me wondering just how much of our debate was dictated by a single word, a single definition, that of course of multiculturalism. Author Janet Wolff revealed how the words we use shape communication and our understanding of history. In the language of modernity, words themselves are powerful, but often very restrictive.
Of course, if we stick to the definitions of multiculturalism, maybe Canada isn’t multicultural at all, but this problem lies more so with the choice of words than with Canada’s failed efforts. By sticking to the definition of multiculturalism, we are asking that an ideal of multiculturalism be met, and just as with definitions of democracy, freedom and the public sphere, these ideals are impossible to meet.
But this doesn’t mean that we should dismiss Canada as non-multicultural, instead I would call for a redefinition of the term. Or better yet, we need to stop being so loyal to definitions and start looking outside the pages of the dictionary.
Is Canada multicultural? I know that Toronto is. Simply riding the streetcar across the city, you will encounter a number of different areas and subsequently different cultures. The streetcar is often filled with different accents and languages. Toronto has a number of different cultural events, such as Caribana and Taste of the Danforth. While the argument may again return to “capitalizing/exploiting difference”, perhaps for now this is one of the main ways to show appreciation for another culture. And maybe, what multiculturalism means, is that another culture is able to really celebrate and brand their culture without judgment. Where’s the harm in that?
I completely agree with you. I find it hard to pin point certain events, restaurants or organizations and say "this is the face of a multicultural Canada'. I have tried and find most examples fail or fall prey to judgement. Instead I think multiculturalism is a work in progress and agree that we can do more to improve the life of diasporas and even ourselves by trying to stop defining terms and simply work to better the life conditions of all. Idealistic, I know, but in the end the definitions seep away and people and customs remain.
ReplyDeleteI thought it was very interesting how at the end you discussed the various festivals that take place in Toronto. While these particular festivals take place in Toronto, similar festivals take place all across Canada. As Sophie mentioned above, it is difficult to put a "face" on Canadian multiculturalism, but perhaps such festivals are one way of understanding our diversity.
ReplyDeleteThanks for your comments girls, yes I chose to focus on Toronto because I can't speak for Canada as a whole. As we discussed in class, every province and city is different, so it's hard to, as Amanda said, to put a "face" on Canadian multiculturalism. Having travelled Canada, I did feel a sense of shared identity (though not so much in northern Quebec...), but I can't say the same for multiculturalism.
ReplyDeleteI think like every culture is not only inherently hybrid but is also constantly changing. To say "individual's culture should be maintained" itself is problematic, because while trying to maintain a diaspora's culture, it is changing at the same time. As is said by many scholars, diaspora stands between two points that are constantly changing as well.
ReplyDeleteI think underlining that definition, there is a fear of homogenization. So there has to be a project to actively maintain each culture to avoid homogenization. But as we see in reality, heterogenization happens everywhere for different reasons. The fear is correct but should not be overemphasized to rigidize the definition.
Maybe we can understand multiculturalism literally as multiple cultures mix together?