100 Songs By 100 Bands (Part 2)

Well, the last couple of months have been absolute insanity due to work, home, and other life events. Blows my mind that I wrote my first post all the way back in February and I haven’t come back. In case you missed it, I outlined the rules of this exercise in Part 1 and listed some honourable mentions. I’m not going to do a definitive ranking of these songs since I’m interested in that level of hair splitting, but I will organize them in groups of 10 in alphabetical order (100-91, 90-81, etc.). Here we go!:

Songs 100-91:

Alannis Morrisette – Hand In My Pocket

The Band – The Night They Drove Old Dixie Down

  • I wasn’t very familiar with The Band until recently. Determined to learn more about this group and Canadian rock legend Robbie Robertson I came upon this song and was struck by it immediately. Most popular music use love as its central theme, whether it’s longing for a person, loss of a lover, being uncertain, etc. You don’t often get a compelling historical narrative as a central theme. This song is about a poor working person living in The South at the end of the American Civil War, and feeling the effects and confusion of losing war that they didn’t ask for in the first place. There have been some other 21st century interpretations of this song that I have yet to read, so I’ll hold off on engaging in that conversation for now.

Cypress Hill – When The Ship Goes Down

Fat Boy Slim – Right Here, Right Now

The Hives – Hate To Say I Told You So

Justin Bieber – Love Yourself

  • I’m not a Bieber fan per se but I must admit that as he has grown up, his music has too. Starting to appreciate the Bieb a little more these days. That being said, he was totally not needed for Luis Fonsi’s Despacito, I don’t need another gringo trying to sing in Spanish in my life.

Pearl Jam – Given To Fly

The Police – Every Breath You Take

Rage Against The Machine – Bulls On Parade

Third Eye Blind – How’s It Going To Be?

Songs 90-81:

Beck – The New Pollution

Blink-182 – What’s My Age Again

Bob Dylan – The Man In Me

  • Thank you “The Big Lebowski!”

Creedance Clearwater Revival – Up Around The Bend

David Bowie – Heroes

Haim – 3AM

Lauryn Hill – Doo Wop (That Thing)

  • One of the underrated and somewhat forgotten R&B singers.

The Mamas and the Papas – California Dreamin’

Michael Jackson – The Way You Make Me Feel

  • The catchiest of MJ’s catalogue in my opinion

Our Lady Peace – Naveed

  • A callback to my childhood. I’m not a big OLP fan these days. Somehow I’ve grown out of much of the music of my childhood but this song–and album of the same name–seems to have stood the test of time. The first CD I ever bought was OLP’s second album, “Clumsy.”

Songs 80-61 coming next.

100 Songs By 100 Bands (Part 1)

My last two blog posts were a little grim and treated some heavy topics, so I thought I would write something a bit lighter. Those of you who know me, know that I am a music snob, though I keep my opinions to myself these days. I am always revisiting and revising my list of favourite songs. It’s interesting how time, experience, and maturity can change our tastes. However, I thought I would switch up the exercise a little bit and choose my favourite song by 100 different performers and force myself to only choose one song by a performer to put on this list. Not every band on this list is a favourite of mine, some of these bands just have one song I really love. A few of these songs would not appear on my 100 favourite songs list, but since I can’t list 5 or 6 songs by Radiohead, Pink Floyd, or The Beatles, some of these songs have to make the cut. This list is definitely influenced by recency bias. Some of the selections are on here because I love the band and I had to have one song of theirs on this list, other selections are here because I simply like the song. This exercise is completely arbitrary and I make no apologies.

Why am I doing this? I don’t know! Sometimes exercises like these can tell me something about me. Maybe this a way for you to get to know me better in a way that I haven’t verbalized. I think music tastes can tell you a lot about someone such as how nostalgic they are, the demographics with which they identify, their worldviews, where they’re from, maybe even their inner feelings. I also think building lists and ranking things are fun whether they’re music lists, sports lists, travel lists, etc. I guess it speaks to the human compulsion to categorize and create hierarchies that help us make sense of the chaos in which we live. For some songs, I’ll provide some personal anecdotes on why a song means something to me.

To prevent cheating and to ensure diversity in my selections, I made a list of ground rules:

  1. No covers, the band or performer has to be the original performer of the song (apologies to Jeff Buckley and Hallelujah, the toughest song to omit from this list)
  2. If a solo artist was in a performing group that had a similar sound, I had to choose the solo artist or the group, I could not have both. For example, I have to choose between Lauryn Hill and The Fugees, or Richard Ashcroft and The Verve. This doesn’t apply to guest performers.
  3. Super groups are allowed since they tend to depart from the sound of their original groups
  4. Bands that change names over time are considered the same band (Joy Division = New Order, RIP Ian Curtis)

I initially listed 135 songs and I pared it down to 100. Below are the 35 songs that just missed the cut in alphabetical order:

  • 2Pac – California Love
  • A-Ha – Take On Me
    • Still one of the coolest music videos of all-time. It holds up thirty-five-odd years later.
  • Arctic Monkeys – You Look Good On The Dancefloor
  • The Barenaked Ladies – Brian Wilson
  • Brand New – The Quiet Things That No One Ever Knows
  • The Chemical Brothers – Block Rockin’ Beats
  • Collective Soul – Heavy
    • NHL 2001, anyone?
  • Craig David – 7 Days
  • Daft Punk – Instant Crush
  • Dire Straits – Walk Of Life
  • Dr. Dre – Still Dre
  • Duran Duran – Hungry Like The Wolf
  • Filter – Welcome To The Fold
  • Franz Ferdinand – Do You Wanna
  • Hole – Malibu
  • I Mother Earth – One More Astronaut
  • Jay-Z – Empire State of Mind
  • Jimmy Eat World – On A Sunday
  • KRS One – Step Into A World
  • Marcy Playground – Sex & Candy
    • This was Marcy Playground’s only hit. Apparently they weren’t crazy about the song since it was something their lead singer just wrote goofing around. Their producer heard it and encouraged them to include it on their album. Crazy how hits come about sometimes.
  • Marilyn Manson – The Beautiful People
  • Matchbox 20 – 3am
  • MGMT – Time To Pretend
  • My Chemical Romance – I’m Not OK
  • Nirvana – Lithium
  • Procol Harum – Whiter Shade of Pale
  • Prodigy – Breathe
  • Shakira – La Tortura
  • Sneaker Pimps – 6 Underground
  • Stevie Wonder – Superstition
  • Stone Temple Pilots – Sour Girl
  • The Music – The People
    • If you need to get pumped up for an event or activity, I strongly suggest this song. I’ve started my workday listening to this song many times..
  • Wheatus – Teenage Dirtbag
  • Yellowcard – Ocean Avenue
  • Outkast – Hey Ya!

My next few posts will cover my top 100 songs by 100 bands. I’ll cover 20 songs in each post.

Revisiting My Personal Narratives Regarding Indigenous People

A couple of months ago I participated in a moderated discussion to talk about racism. I served as one of the panelists and discussed my experience with Indigenous racism as a white person. I thought I would put those words into writing and share them here.

I am typing this from my home in Petawawa, Ontario which is the traditional territory of the Algonquin, Huron-Wendat, and Anishinabewaki Peoples. I am a settler on this territory as my parents immigrated from the United Kingdom in 1970.

About Me

I was raised in Newmarket, Ontario about 45 minutes north of Toronto. While growing up, Newmarket was a predominantly white community, although it is much more racially diverse now. There were only a handful of black and Asian students in my high school of 2000 students and I only knew a few First Nations individuals throughout my childhood.

My Relationship with Indigenous Peoples until 2017

I didn’t know many Indigenous Peoples throughout my childhood and most of my early adult life. The public school curriculum in Ontario barely acknowledged Indigenous People aside from the following topics:

  • First European contact with Samuel du Champlain and Jacques Cartier
  • The Huron and Iroquois and their relationships with the French and British
  • War of 1812
  • Métis and Red River Rebellion

I obtained three university degrees, two of which were in History and I failed to learn about Indigenous History in any significant way. It’s not the school system’s fault entirely; I had a lot of choice in the courses I took. But I think it says something about our education system as a whole (elementary, secondary, and post-secondary) and that I could get through all of that without learning about:

My Problematic Personal Narrative up to 2017

A “narrative” is a story that we construct around a social issue or person. As we get older, we tend to adopt and hold on to these narratives more tightly. We construct narratives based on the knowledge that we have. We also pass on our narratives to our children and loved ones. These were the main points of my personal narrative prior to 2017:

  • First Nations have access to cheap gas on reserve
  • They tend to commit more crimes
  • They like to drink alcohol
  • Some bands have casinos on reserve
  • They have a hard time taking advantage of handouts that they are given such as tax breaks, Indigenous scholarships, and post-secondary opportunities)
  • Racist policies disabled their ability to get ahead but these policies are a relic of the past

I realize that my narrative is terribly misinformed and lacks essential knowledge to understand First Nation struggles in Canada. What bothers me about this narrative is not that I was ignorant, it’s that I didn’t care. I didn’t care to learn more about why First Nations people were going to jail in large numbers, I didn’t care to learn about why alcoholism is so rampant across on- and off-reserve communities, and I didn’t care that people of my race had such an uneducated and misguided contempt toward First Nation issues. Although I was never vocal about my thoughts on Indigenous people, my silence and unwillingness to learn conspired against them.

My Relationship since 2017

So what changed for me? What woke me up? In January 2017 I started a job at Indigenous Services Canada (ISC) which I accepted for all of the typical reasons a worker accepts a job offer: Good money, matched my skillset and experience. However, I quickly realized I had a massive knowledge deficit due to my own ignorance of the past. Thankfully, an olive branch was extended to me and I got to go on a trip to help with treaty pay events in the remote communities of Kashechewan, Attawapiskat, and Moose Factory which are located on the shores of James Bay in northern Ontario. When arrived in these places, I was particularly struck by how desolate and neglected these places were. They are characterized by dirt roads, poor infrastructure, and isolation. It’s impossible to drive to any of these communities as there are no roads connecting them to other communities. You can only get to them by plane.

Attawapiskat is infamous for its ongoing suicide crisis. From September 2015 to April 2016 there were 101 people that attempted suicide ranging from ages 11 to 71. As I looked into people’s faces I saw the scars drug addiction, abuse, and self-harm.

Kashechewan is infamous for the threat of flooding each spring. The saddest part of this isn’t that it floods. My ISC colleagues from Thunder Bay remarked that many of the residents hope for flooding because that would mean the government would fly them out of the reserve and send them to a community like Timmins or Cochrane, put them up in a hotel, and give them a per diem until the flooding subsides. For me, I cannot imagine a situation where I would celebrate that my home is being flooded. That’s how bad home life is for the residents of Kashechewan.

Revisiting my Personal Narrative

Upon returning from my trip, it caused me to revisit my personal narrative as it was obvious that there were gaping holes in it and it was problematic. Since then, I have taken it upon myself to learn about more about Indigenous history especially since the Confederation of Canada. These are the things that I didn’t know:

  • First Nations people signed treaties with Canada that promised them a parcel of land and certain economic and health benefits in exchange for unfettered access to the rest of the land
    • Theses benefits are not handouts. They were purchased.
  • Canada had no intention of keeping the treaties and created bureaucratic and legislative traps to remove individuals from treaty, Indian Status, or steal even more land
  • Women who married non-status men lost status
    • Some of these men were stripped of status earlier in life
  • Children of non-status men lost status
  • Non-status women who married status men gained Indian status
  • If reserve land was not in use, the government had the right to sell it, and they did
  • Canada banned cultural ceremonies and forcibly removed objects used for these ceremonies and gave them away
  • Canada forced children up to age 16 to attend residential school hundreds of miles away from their homes for the primary purpose of stripping them of their culture and language and to be assimilated in to white Canadian society
    • Despite scathing reports regarding the health conditions of these schools, the Government believed that the goal of cultural assimilation trumped the health and well-being of the students. In other words, it would be better that a few children die in the attempt to assimilate the rest than to close the schools for a time and improve health conditions. 2800 children died.
    • The last residential school to close was in 1996.
  • Provincial child services agents forced themselves into homes and took children away from their homes and placed them up for adoption without any type of legitimate due process or cultural understanding.
    • Many children were stripped from loving homes
    • No attempt was made to adopt these children into other Indigenous homes
    • Some children were adopted by families abroad
  • Indigenous people were banned from establishments that served alcohol
    • A discriminatory policy that banned Indigenous veterans from legions which is problematic when there are no mental health supports for returning veterans. At least other veterans could support each other as they adjusted to civilian life as they coped with newly acquired mental health issues.

Why Didn’t First Nations Individuals Fight Back?

Status Indians had no political or legal recourse to right the wrongs inflicted upon them. They lost status if they:

  • Hired a lawyer;
  • Became a lawyer;
  • Attended university;
  • Became a doctor; or,
  • Registered to vote.

Why Didn’t Status Indians Enfranchise (give up Indian Status)?

  • They wanted the government to hold up their end of the treaty
  • They didn’t want to leave reserve or their families
  • They didn’t want to surrender their identities

What Does All of This Mean?

The culmination of all of these issues described above had resulted in intense trauma for those that experienced these hardships. In the absence of mental health services, survivors of these hardships self-medicate by way of physical abuse, self-harm, alcohol addiction, and drug addiction.

This trauma has been passed down to children and further generations (intergenerational trauma). Children growing up in these households don’t perform well in school, have a hard time obtaining employment, and deal with the trauma they same way their parents did, thus the cycle continues. All of the challenges that Indigenous people face today can be traced back directly to racist and discriminatory policies perpetuated by the Federal Government of Canada. Indigenous people are still suffering today.

Conclusion: What Can You Do?

  1. Review and be critical of your personal narrative
    • Check for absolutes such as phrases that start with “All of these people do…” and “No people from this group…”
    • Check the source from which your narrative comes. Is it true? How do you know? Have you learned that from a reliable source?
  2. Educate yourself
  3. If you are in a position of power, see if there is anything you can do within your sphere of influence
    • Educators can insert more Indigenous-themed lessons
    • Donate to an Indigenous charity
    • Employers can bring Indigenous applicants in for a job interview
    • Employers can review their job descriptions to see if there are systemic biases that might prevent an Indigenous person from qualifying for an interview

All of us are in a position of power to create equality and tolerance for all people.

Monuments as Safe Spaces

There has been so much going on over the last 9 months that I have found it overwhelming. Kobe Bryant and Chadwick Boseman’s deaths, Donald Trump’s continued foray into alt-right politics, Black Lives Matter protests including the destruction of monuments, police brutality, all in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. 2020 is going to be one of those historic landmark years for better or for worse. I’ve found this year so challenging to wrap my head around that I have been paralyzed from my ability to write here, but I have a lot of thoughts. Today, I am going to let some of those thoughts leak out of brain starting with some thoughts about monuments as being inclusive and safe spaces. Let’s see what comes out.

Black Lives Matter protests have spurred much illegal destruction of monuments of controversial figures in the United States. This has spurred conversations in Canada regarding our monuments, most notably that of John A. MacDonald, Canada’s first Prime Minister, the pride of Kingston, Ontario, and the father of Canada’s Indigenous Residential School System. On June 22, CBC’s All in a Day radio program had a discussion regarding MacDonald’s statue in Kingston’s town square as well as the Faculty of Law which is named after MacDonald at Queen’s University. Two Indigenous women gave opinions and expressed how MacDonald’s commemoration in these spaces makes them feel unsafe and unwelcome and how something needs to be changed whether it’s a removal of the statue or some sort of modification to additional context. More recently, Mi’kmaq Elder and residential school survivor Marie Knockwood of Abegweit First Nation in Prince Edward Island is campaigning to have MacDonald’s statue removed from Charlottetown’s downtown area by educating people in the streets.

Many people scoff at the idea of the removal MacDonald’s monuments across Canada arguing that he’s the father of confederation and without him there wouldn’t be a Canada, or that we’d be erasing history, or that we should not judge him by a modern lens (i.e. all white people were racists in the late-nineteenth century therefore we can’t judge him for being a racist), or that the act of giving into the demands of minorities is somehow a reverse-racist act toward white people (yeah, I don’t get that one either).

The issue with this debate is that of narrative. For historical figures, multiple narratives surround them coming from different segments of the population. Some of these narratives are positive, and some are negative. Here are some narratives surrounding MacDonald:

  • He is the father of the confederation of Canada and founded a country without going to war with Britain
  • He initiated the construction of a transnational railroad that connects the provinces from east to west
  • He successfully fostered a partnership with the province of Québec despite linguistic, religious, and cultural differences bringing English and French Canada together into one country
  • He founded a federal police service, the Northwest Mounted Police (now known as the Royal Canadian Mounted Police), designed to oppress and subjugate Indigenous People
  • He founded the Indian Residential School System designed to rid children of their Indigenous culture and language through physical, mental, and emotional abuse which has perpetuated intergenerational trauma that Indigenous people still feel today
  • He signed treaties with First Nations of Canada to obtain land in exchange for certain benefits
  • He passed The Indian Act designed to disqualify First Nation individuals from receiving treaty benefits and which over time would eliminate any individual being able to claim legal recognition as an Indian
  • He charged a head tax on Chinese people to enter the country even though he needed them to build his railroad. Chinese workers were often given the most dangerous roles and many died. Once the railroad was completed and he didn’t need the Chinese workers anymore, he increased the head tax to curb Chinese immigration to Canada

I just thought of these off the top of my head (forgive me for not wanting to do a ton of research for this post). While I might be missing some nuance and details here and there, all of these narratives are true, more or less. What’s interesting about us as a public is that we pick and choose the narratives we want to embrace and dismiss the ones that contradict the persona we’re trying build around a historical figure. In other words, we have a tendency to construct myths around real people and try to sell these myths as the whole truth. The white population of Canada has generally embraced the first three narratives on my list. The perspectives of other segments of the population such as Indigenous people are largely ignored by the majority and they seem to be systemically excluded from the various curricula in Canadian education. This was demonstrated to me by how I went through 13 years (1989-2003) of public education in Canada without learning about Indian Residential Schools. Residential schools were also ignored in my Canadian History survey courses at the University of Ottawa (2007-2008).

My point in saying all of this is that historical figures are complicated and we cannot ignore true and verified narratives that don’t support the myth that we have embraced about a historic figure. We have to embrace and acknowledge all of it. The anti-Indigenous policies and legislation that MacDonald implemented are not false. They’re not debatable. His racism was rather overt. And while anti-Indigenous racism may have been the norm in Canada among whites, I find it bizarre that MacDonald would throw money at churches to open these schools with no federal oversight. I find it challenging that children had to attend schools hundreds of miles away from home when I am sure there were suitable sites much closer to, if not on reserve. Why did the schools have to be boarding schools and children have to sleep there? Why couldn’t parents have regular access to their children? This does not feel like your typical run-of-the-mill racism of that time period. This feels more like a powerful man deciding that certain human lives were not as valuable as his due to their culture, skin colour, and language but decided their lives could increase in value if their morals and values became more aligned with his. As a result 2,800 children died because of this overtly racist attitude and thousands more suffered physical, emotional, and mental pain which has been passed down generation to generation. Noting the intergenerational problems that MacDonald founded, if we added the subsequent suicides and homicides that have resulted due to his legacy, I’m wouldn’t be surprised if that death toll rose higher than 10,000 people.

Knowing this, we need to be OK with marginalized people speaking up every once and while and saying, “I’m not OK with this person, and I don’t think he should be honoured in this way.” We also should not be surprised if they get angry when the majority ignores their legitimate concerns. I am not suggesting that MacDonald not be honoured at all, but I am suggesting that we reassess how we honour him because certainly there is far more to his story that we fail to acknowledge. However, I should say that I am opposed to the illegal destruction or removal of statues. If the mob destroys the statue, it sort of eliminates the opportunity to have a meaningful dialogue about the person since it just escalates the conflict. That being said, keeping the monument without having a meaningful dialogue is equally destructive.

Now, pro-MacDonald monument people will argue that we will erase history if we remove the MacDonald statues. I personally disagree and would argue that the opposite is true. If we remove a monument due to a reassessment of one’s track record, it means that we have learned something new and found a better way to commemorate a person’s legacy and have given voice to more narratives and to more segments of the population. In fact the larger narrative is enriched, truer, and more thoughtful.

Open letter to the BYU Administration: Campus Safety for All

Dear President Worthen,

I am a heterosexual, white Male and alumnus of BYU. Over the last 3 years or so I have been doing some significant soul searching and reflecting upon how I could make the environment around me more safe and inclusive for anyone that is different from me, whether it is differences in race, sexual orientation, religion, sex, etc. This exercise in self-reflection has been difficult as it has caused me to confront overt and covert acts of racism, sexism, homophobia and other problematic behaviours for which I am personally responsible. I have done my best to make changes in the way I speak, the way I act, and to redefine my beliefs and values

I was struck by Déborah Aléxis’s article published in the Salt Lake Tribune regarding the overt and systemic racism prevalent at BYU. As I reflected upon my experience (2009-2011), I cannot say that I was surprised. I had neighbours in BYU-approved housing that hung Confederate flags on the wall and in the window. I had a Bishop that once referred to a young man in our ward as a “colored boy.” I had a professor who once suggested that the reason black members were banned from the priesthood because white members of the church weren’t ready yet. I’ve had a classmate tell me that the Holocaust was God’s revenge on Jews for crucifying the Savior.

In my opinion, BYU needs to confront its racist past as well as the racist past of the Church. The Church has always taught that while the Gospel is perfect, the Church members are not, so why not look to the past and where members, including general authorities, have made missteps and let’s discuss those mistakes.

It’s known that while BYU has always admitted black students, there was a period of time before the priesthood ban was lifted in which the University sent letters to newly admitted black students warning them that the campus may not be so welcoming to them for reasons such as: they may not get dates as they wouldn’t be eligible for a temple marriage, or that the surrounding community may not accept them. It’s not a stretch to say that BYU, The Church, and Utah County have a difficult relationship with racism and took steps to enable that racism rather than quash it.

I would like to make the following recommendations based on my lived experience at BYU and on BYU-approved housing:

  1. Explicitly state that racist language and acts are an Honor Code violation, including the display of Confederate flags on campus or in BYU-approved housing.
  2. Ban the use of the “n-word” by non-black students and faculty. It’s not their word, nor is it their privilege to use it.
  3. Provide racial and cultural sensitivity training for faculty, priesthood, and organization leaders. Train these leaders to act against racism in their classes and church meetings.
  4. Create greater stronger means to redress racial administrative issues at BYU.
  5. Review the namesakes of the buildings at BYU and rename any buildings who are named after individuals who supported slave ownership or white spiritual superiority. Consider renaming these buildings after faithful black pioneering Latter-day Saints such as Jane Manning James, Elijah Abel, or Helvécio Martins.
  6. While I understand that we don’t completely know why Blacks were banned from the Priesthood, the Religion Department needs to be explicit in dispelling myths that we are certain are not true regarding the priesthood ban, such as:
  • The spirits of black people were less faithful in keeping the first estate in the premortal life
  • That blacks are the seed of Cain
  • That blacks not having the Priesthood was an act of mercy on God’s part
  • That whites weren’t ready to have black priesthood leaders

On the topic of inclusion and safety of all people, I would also like to see the University formally recognize BYU’s Gay-Straight Alliance and give them a space for discourse and club activities on campus. LGBTQ2+ individuals seriously struggle at BYU and are at a major risk of mental illness and suicide. It would go a long way if BYU could give them a small corner on campus so that they can have a forum and support each other while navigating life at BYU. If an Apostle of the Lord says there is a place for LGBTQ2+ people in the Kingdom, certainly there is a place for them on campus.

As such, an additional recommendation I would make is to remove chastity violations as grounds for expulsion including unchaste behaviours between homosexual students. Expulsion should be reserved for academic and criminal violations only.

Until measures such as the ones I have suggested are implemented at BYU, the University will continue to struggle with issues of inclusion and safety and the student body will wallow in ignorance toward people that aren’t like them. BYU will fail to become a strong, diverse institution. Additionally, I’m not sure how long freedom of religion rights guaranteed by the US Constitution will hold up in a court of law when racial discrimination and discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation are being perpetrated on campus every day.

I love BYU, and the 2 years I spent there were a life-changing time and put me on a path for further academic and career success. It pains me that not every student who graduates has had that same experience.

Thank you for reading my letter and seriously considering my opinions and recommendations.

Best regards,
Joel Sherlock (Class of 2011)

Libraries and Free Speech: Megan Murphy and Toronto Public Library

Last week, Toronto Public Library allowed a radical feminist author Megan Murphy to give a talk at the Palmerston Branch of TPL. This has sparked a debate about hate speech, safe spaces, freedom of speech, and the public library’s role in those debates. Murphy maintains controversial–if not offensive–views and opinions regarding trans individuals, such as that women’s rights are undermined by trans rights.

Prior to confirming the booking of the space, TPL reviewed Murphy’s work and determined that her booking should be approved since it did not violate the terms and conditions of TPL’s room booking policy which was scrupulously updated by third-party lawyers in 2017. Vickery Bowles, City Librarian of Toronto said that she would not reconsider the change.

Now, I’m a left-leaning conservative (leaning very left these days) but I don’t agree with Megan Murphy’s views. I think her views are outlandish, ill-thought, and seemingly unsupported by any science. That being said, I’m no expert on feminism or trans rights. If someone wants to push back at me, that’s cool, I’m happy to receive correction.

That being said, just because Megan Murphy is wrong, does not mean she isn’t allowed a voice. I am fearful of the concept of illegitimatizing speech and I believe that we often mistake “wrong speech”, “unpopular speech”, or “offensive speech” as hate speech.

Hate speech should be censored. Hate speech isn’t legitimate speech. However, there doesn’t seem to be a consensus or much legal precedent in Canada as to what constitutes hate speech. My understanding of hate speech is that it must explicitly incite violence toward a group or explicitly illegally discriminate against a group based on race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, etc. From what I’ve read of and about Murphy, she doesn’t use her voice for that purpose no matter how hurtful and misguided her words can be. Again, I don’t agree with her.

The problem with illegitimatizing speech that isn’t explicitly hate speech is that it removes our ability to talk about it and create a dialogue. This has been a problem on university campuses as they have wrestled with this issue, most notably at Wilfrid Laurier University in 2017 when Teaching Assistant Lindsay Shepherd showed a TVO video clip featuring controversial University of Toronto professor Jordan Peterson (aka. The Stupid Man’s Smart Guy).

What I would rather do is allow people like Peterson and Murphy say what they want to say and let the academic process take its course. Let their peers and opponents shred them apart and put their ludicrous claims to rest. Heck, we gave Holocaust deniers a voice and we ripped them to shreds and hardly anyone takes them seriously. Now, there is a small segment of the world that still denies the Holocaust but the group is so small that it’s inconsequential. My fear is that if we silence people like Peterson and Murphy and deny them a platform, we risk galvanizing their cause and inadvertently drawing more attention to it. Like in Beauty and the Beast. Beast banned Belle from entering the west wing of the castle. What was the first thing she did? She went to the west wing of the castle. This keeps happening over and over again including attempts to ban books and films. It just makes people want to engage with them more.

Many people such as the trans community, authors, and Toronto mayor John Tory are disappointed that TPL allowed the Murphy event to go on. Many people in the community believe that Murphy’s talk compromises TPL’s ability to claim that they are a safe and inclusive space.

I don’t know that this is true. As long as TPL vets their speakers and ensures that hate speech isn’t perpetuated, I don’t see why TPL can’t be a safe and inclusive space.

It seems to me that libraries are at a crossroads and that their values are being tested by individuals whose views generally go against the values that the library promotes. However, if libraries want to continue to be radical and disruptive–as they often try to be–I think they need to follow the lead of Vickery Bowles and stand by their policies and allow all types of legitimate speech to book spaces to have a dialogue. What’s interesting is that there seems to have been a paradigm shift in what constitutes “disruptive” and “radical.” Since the Second World War, these labels seemed to be the left’s territory. It now seems that right-wing thought has taken these labels back. I don’t particularly like it, but this will be the true test: Can the library apply its values evenly and fairly to both left- and right-wing voices?

Open Letter: Save the University of Manitoba’s Master of Archival Studies Program

*A call to action was issued on the arcan Listserv the other day to comment on dramatic changes to the Master of Archival Studies program at the University of Manitoba. Below is the letter I wrote in response. If you would like to make your own comments, click here to see the Call to Action.*

​Dear University of Winnipeg and Manitoba History Departments,

When I was investigating graduate programs in archival studies, the University of Manitoba’s Master of Archival Studies program was described to me as the “gold standard” for such education.  I fear that proposed changes to the program will threaten its ability to produce competent archives professionals in the future and will damage the prestige of its program whose quality is comparable to those of the University of Toronto and the University of British Columbia.

Specialized archival educators are essential in teaching the complex principles of archival science.  The expertise of the historian is fundamentally distinct from that of the archivist.  While historians are experts in utilizing the archives, the archivist is expert at organizing and operating the archives.  It is an insult to the archival profession to assume that a historian can jump right in and teach courses in a field in which they have no background, no publications, or any professional practice. While practicing professional archivists such as myself can provide valuable lessons to students in class, they occasionally lack the ability to see the “big picture” of the profession (e.g. where the profession came from, where it’s going, the issues, biases etc.). Only a tenured professor who can take the time to study these topics can speak with authority on these issues. Practitioners find themselves pigeon-holed due to their experiences and the type of archives they run.  If the UManitoba wants to continue its tradition of archives education excellence, reducing its tenured faculty is not the answer.

In a world is that demands universities to modernize and be practical in its teaching, removing the opportunity to work is counterproductive.  While I did not attend the University of Manitoba, one of the highlights of my graduate school experience was in obtaining in-field experience under the tutelage of archival practitioners.  Thanks to my internship, I not only had an excellent experience, it also led to my first job after graduation, effectively launching my career in government archives and information management.  High employment rates after graduation can only help the reputation of your program.    

As an employee at Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada, one of the stumbling blocks for many indigenous communities is a lack of knowing their past.  I encounter people on a daily basis that simply want to know where they came from, and needing to access this information via the Federal Government because the information is not available in their communities.  While there are countless problems in indigenous communities, this does not need to be one of them.  It would be wonderful if we could enable indigenous people to keep their own histories and bulid their own archives so that they are not at the mercy of a third party to access their history. In addition, the archival community lacks diversity and if the UManitoba can attract First Nation and Métis students to its program and train them, it will give a new segments of the population a voice in building Canada’s historical narrative.       

Thank you for considering my opinions and ideas.  Should you wish to discuss any of this with me further, please contact me at joel.sherlock@aandc-aadnc.gc.ca.

Best regards,

Joel Sherlock, MLIS, MA

Bobcaygeon: Or How I Learned the Song Was Named After It

It’s amazing how death causes one to reflect upon the things that matter most. The things we take for granted, once stolen, become the things that you suddenly can’t live without.  I’m sad to say that The Tragically Hip are one of those things for me. It took me a long time to realize how big an impact The Hip had on without me realizing. First, a couple of apologies:

  1. This blog post is gonna get personal and dig into some feelings and personal experiences. But then again, this post wouldn’t be worth writing without personal insight, so, sorry, not sorry.
  2. Lest I be accused of being a “poser,” or bandwagon jumping, I’m not a Tragically Hip fan. I’m not going to pretend to be one. This is a reflective piece on moments when they meant something to me and how I took them for granted. Something I regret, since I only now recognize the genius in their music.

I wanted to share a few isolated experiences that made me appreciate The Hip and rock music in general:

Finding National Pride Through Song

When I was a student living in the United States, I had this fun but pig-headed roommate. I can’t remember exactly how the conversation started, but we got on the subject of Canadian bands. I started telling him about The Hip and put a song on for him, I think it was “Bobcaygeon.” My roomie hated it from the moment Gord Downie sang, blurting that he had an awful voice. I think my Canadian pride kicked in and I started defending the greatness of the song. He just wouldn’t have any of it. My thought was, “I guess he doesn’t get it since he’s not Canadian!” This was one of my key moments when I saw that Canadians and Americans were different and found national pride that I didn’t know I had.

Late Night Listening

When I was growing up I used to go to sleep with the radio on quietly. Following the example of my older brothers, I listened to 102.1 The Edge in Toronto. The Edge tended to play more throwback songs in the late night, so it was in these moments when I became acquainted with songs like “Grace, Too,” and “Fifty Mission Cap.” I don’t have recollection of my parents singing me to sleep (though they probably did) but Gord Downie sang to me every night and I never even realized or appreciated it.

Singing Me Geography

For me, whar separates good bands from great ones are the ability to rock out with distorted guitars, loud drums, and shredding solos while being equally good at capturing tenderness and reflecting on sweet moments through ballads. My favourite song by The Hip is “Bobcaygeon”, one of those tender ballads. When I started to enjoy the song as a teenager, I didn’t care to know what a “Bobcaygeon.” When I was 18 I was on a trip to Peterborough with some friends and we got lost on some back roads and found ourselves passing through Bobcaygeon, Ontario. It finally clicked that the song I listened to was named after a place. There’s Gordie teaching me Geography and me, the stubborn student, not listening until years later.

The Lesson

I’m not prepared to say that The Hip are the greatest Canadian band of all time. It’s a worthless discussion as musical enjoyment is extremely subjective and personal music tastes change dramatically over time. I dislike most of the music I enjoyed as a teenager. Besides, how can we legitimately rate one’s artistic expression and compare it to someone else’s? The beauty of any musical piece lies in the listening ear. 

What I am prepared to say is that The Hip always seemed to “be there” whether I appreciated them or not. They didn’t stop making music when I wasn’t listening. Like a good parent, they stood by, kept doing their thing, and waited for me to come around. The sad thing is that it took Gord Downie’s impending death for me to sit down and reflect on the greatness of this band. It’s funny that while I didn’t appreciate The Hip when they were big, I’m certainly going to miss them when they’re gone. I’ve learned that I ought to cherish good bands while they’re at their best rather than realize how great they were in hindsight.

I’m going to miss you Gord. Thanks for the memories.

The Olympics Just Aren’t That Important

I just read a recent report that the Australian Olympic Team will not be staying in their Rio Olympic Village accommodations due to electrical and plumbing issues, and an apparent robbery. Another point on the “What’s wrong with Rio” list along with water cleanliness issues, Zika virus, and human rights infringements. Due to these issues and other pending career decisions, many notable athletes have chosen not to participate in the Rio games. Among these include basketball star LeBron James, golfers Jason Day and Vijay Singh, and cyclist Tejay van Garderen.
Athlete participation isn’t the only concern of the International Olympic Committee. There’s an ever-increasing movement in the developed world that opposes hosting the Olympic games due to tax increases, increased traffic congestion, and likelihood that the Games will put the city in punishing debt –especially with the Games adding new events requiring elaborate facilities (e.g. golf). The prestige of hosting the games no longer outweighs the burden of the taxpayer. The Toronto City Council recently voted to not pursue a bid for the 2024 Summer Games, a city that nearly won the bids for the 1996 and 2008 games finishing 3rd and 2nd respectively.  This puts ever more pressure on the developing world to carry the burden of hosting which comes with an entire new set of baggage. Quick Google searches for the Beijing, Sochi, and Rio games reveal the struggles that developing countries have in hosting. Not to mention the struggles that Greece is facing since hosting in 2004.

How do we solve these problems. Despite my trashing of the Olympics here, let it be known that I freaking love the Olympics, and I want it to continue in a sustainable way.

There are two issues at play here: the first is that the Olympics is failing to draw the best athletes in all its events to its games. The second is that the games are too expensive to host and the expectations of the host are too high which leads to shady business deals and shoddy facilities. The easiest way to cut the Games down to size is to eliminate certain events. It’s a tough pill to swallow.

The usual event selection process criteria involve IOC recognition, presence of an international federation of the sport, value added to the Games, and the internationality of the event (i.e. is the sport played around the world). Despite these criteria, the Olympics fail to draw the top athletes from each sport, especially from the lucrative sports such as basketball, tennis, and golf. I think IOC ought to create another selection criterion: how an Olympic gold medal stacks up against a sport’s top championship.

I was recently listening to a show on TSN 1050 with decorated Canadian Olympic kayaker Adam van Koeverden. He explained that despite all of the challenges that Rio 2016 is facing, there was no question as to whether he would be competing. An Olympic gold medal represents the pinnacle achievement in his sport. If he chose not to go, that’s 4 years of training down the drain as well as sponsorships that allow him to eat. He can’t afford to miss an Olympics. He will be there Zika or not. This is especially salient since we have just learned that athletes are advised not to put their heads under water (good luck to the triathletes, kayakers,and sailors).

Assessing some other olympic sports, there isn’t the same “play or perish” mentality tied to participating in the Olympics. I think it’s because those athletes have income sources that are not tied to Olympic participation, and because the championships in their respective sports are more prestigious than an Olympic gold medal, such as:

– Men’s Basketball (NBA Championship)

– Men’s and Women’s Tennis (Wimbledon)

– Men’s cycling  (Tour de France)

– Men’s Golf (The Master’s and British Open Championship)

– Women’s Golf (The US Open)

– Men’s Football (The World Cup, Euro Cup, Copa America, European Champion’s League, Copa Libertadores)

– Women’s football (FIFA Women’s World Cup)

– Baseball (The World Series) *Men’s baseball and Women’s softball were just reinstated for the 2020 Tokyo Games.

These are just sports I thought of off the top of my head. There might be more. My point is why put pressure on athletes to compete in competitions that they don’t want to be in? The IOC does not have a corner on sport prestige and achievement and shouldn’t pretend that it does. To LeBron James, an Olympic medal just isn’t that important. To Usain Bolt, it is incredibly important.

The IOC needs to be honest with itself and accept the fact that not every top athlete is going to go through hell and high water to compete at the Olympic Games. Rio 2016 proves this. Therefore, give the Olympics to the athletes that want it most, and cut the events that the sports’ athletes don’t care about. This is one way that the Olympics can keep its events competitive, worthwhile, and frankly, watchable. This will also mean fewer athletes to house, and fewer playing facilities to build, and better TV coverage for the sports that matter to the athletes.

Final thought: Is an Olympic gold medal really valid when 5 of the top 10 athletes in the sport are choosing not to compete? Absolutely not.

 

 

 

Understanding the Meaning and Impact of Expo ’67: A Lesson in Context

Introduction

Back in June I made a post regarding Expo 67 and its importance to Canadians. Since I published that post, I learned significantly more about the Expo, and believe a follow-up post is in order. Back in August, I made a presentation to Library and Archives Canada staff regarding the Expo at LAC’s Summer Student Symposium. Being quite pleased with my presentation, I decided the text of the presentation would make a good blog post, so here we go.

Back in May 2014 I was assigned to undertake a block review project for the Expo 67 Fonds.  Though I was excited to start the project, I was nervous since I knew little about Expo 67. As I started the project, and in doing some preliminary reading, I had prematurely come to the conclusion that the Expo was just one big, long fair that was held from April to October 1967.

However, there were a few things I found in the records that challenged my initial conclusion. First, why did stars of film and television like Ed Sullivan and Bing Crosby, royalty like Queen Elizabeth II and Princess Grace Kelly of Monaco, and high powered politicians like Hailie Selassie, Charles de Gaulle, and the Kennedy Family converge in Montreal for what was seemingly just a big carnival?

Second, why did Pierre Dupuy, Commissioner General of the Expo, receive so many letters simply thanking him for putting on such a successful event? Some of those letters were from people of high standing such as international ambassadors and business people who out of good manners, sent him a thank you and congratulations; however, a good number of these letters were from low-level employees of the Expo, and ordinary visitors from all over the world.

Even letters of complaint were accompanied by grand compliments and tokens of appreciation for the Expo. In an odd case, one young woman employed as a nurse by the Expo even thought that Dupuy could help resolve her relationship problems with a young Expo doctor. I obviously needed to do more reading to gain a better sense of the context around the Expo.

See Phillippe de Gaspé Beaubien’s interview with Bob Evans promoting the Expo. Beaubien was Expo’s Director of Operations and unofficial “Mayor of Expo.”

A Rising Country

I discovered that Canadians prior to 1967 had a somewhat subdued national self-esteem and patriotism. Canada was still among one of the youngest countries in the world, struggling to find its identity and global niche to separate itself from being only a member of the British Commonwealth. Not to mention the United States’ constant shadow cast over Canada with the Vietnam War- and Cold War-related news stories. Expo created an opportunity for Canada to take a step and stand out, and it seized the opportunity.

The success of Expo marked the beginning of a new era of national pride and image for Canadians, and much of the British press agreed. The Lancashire Evening Post called Expo “the greatest man-made show on earth.” The London Observer commented, “Expo 67 isn’t just a world fair, it has a glitter, sex appeal, and it’s given impact and meaning to a word that had neither: Canadian.”

The American press also celebrated Expo and acknowledged Canada’s achievement. Time magazine called the Expo, “The most successful world’s fair in history.”  Life Magazine gushed, “In all ways, Expo, which cost $1 billion, turns out to be the biggest show ever.” However, Canada was not the only sociopolitical entity coming of age during the Expo.

See a video of Expo’s Opening Ceremonies

Lester B. Pearson’s Welcome Speech

Québec’s Coming-out Party

The success of Expo 67 also seemed to be a climax in Québec’s Quiet Revolution. (Slide 6) 1967 did not only mark the 100th birthday of Canada, but the 325th anniversary of the City of Montreal. This was not just Canada’s coming out party, but also aroused a sense of Francophone pride and values in Québec, as it caused the Québecois to reevaluate their situation in Canada and the World. Louise Arbour, who became a Canadian Supreme Court Justice and UN High Commissioner for Human Rights stated, “[Expo 67] gave French Canadians the sense that they existed in the eyes of the world.” French-Canadian film producer Monique Simard observed, “[Expo 67] was a very strong catalyzer, especially for Francophones who had a ‘shy’ relationship to the world. Suddenly they felt they were a part of the world.”

Generational Gaps and Conflicting Narratives

Researchers from the University of British Columbia noticed a dichotomy between Anglophones and Francophones in their interpretation and remembrance of the significance of Expo 67. Forty years after the Expo, these researchers conducted a survey with people who attended the Expo from both Québec and British Columbia. The Anglophones surveyed regarded the Expo as Canada’s centennial birthday with a few mentioning French-English tensions in Canada, whereas Francophones saw it as a triumph for Quebec, with no mention of the national centennial whatsoever. In sum, there are two competing narratives elucidating the importance of the Expo to two different segments of the national population.

In comparing casual conversations with the older generation that remember Expo, and with students my age, I have come to notice a generational gap in understanding the importance of Expo. My generation has grown up in a Canada with intense national pride with global importance, and one that has achieved much acclaim in international diplomacy, global athletic competitions, and by way of the achievements of actors, actresses, musicians, and other artists; and thus, has not constructed a narrative around the importance of Expo. Thus far, Expo has not received the recognition it is due from my generation, and with more and more aging baby boomers, Expo risks being forgotten altogether.

My generation fails to see that Expo was a major step in realizing this international recognition, and a launching point for this national pride that we now enjoy. I never knew of the Canada that was described prior to 1967; and this historical narrative seems to be disappearing from the curricula of history courses at all levels of education. My hope is that the opening of the Expo 67 fonds—in conjunction with Expo’s 50th anniversary, Canada’s 150th anniversary, and Montreal’s 375th anniversary—will re-open the discussion of the long-term impact of the Expo, both on the French and English sides of the country, and breathe new life into this fading branch of our national story.

Further Reading

Anderson, David and Viviane Gosselin. “Private and public memories of Expo 67: A Case Study of Recollections of Montreal’s World’s Fair, 40 Years After the Event. museum and society 6 (March 2008): 1-21. http://blogs.ubc.ca/ewayne/files/2010/02/AndersonGosselin2008.pdf

Fulford, Robert. This Was Expo. Toronto, ON: McClelland and Stewart, 1968.

Kenneally, Rhona Richman and Johanne Sloan. Expo 67: Not Just a Souvenir. Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press, 2010

Lownsborough, John. The Best Place to Be: Expo 67 and its Time. Toronto, ON: Allen Lane, 2012.