Emily M. Keeler on the literature of overwork PAGE 13

$6.50 Vol. 25, No. 7 October 2017

Margaret MacMillan & Randall Hansen History Wars Memory, politics, and dark chapters in our past

PLUS Amira Elghawaby The jihad economy

Graham Fraser The mytho- constitutional Quebec universe

ALSO IN THIS ISSUE: + Dennis Duffy on a sociology of CanLit + Anne Kingston on doctors, patients, and cash Publications Mail Agreement #40032362 Return undeliverable Canadian addresses to + Donna Bailey Nurse on the vision of David Chariandy LRC, Circulation Dept. PO Box 8, Station K + Stephen Smith on P.K. Subban and hockey-dad memoirs Toronto, ON M4P 2G1 Literary Review of Canada First Canadian Place 100 King Street West, Suite 2575 P.O. Box 35 Toronto, ON M5X 1A9 email: [email protected] reviewcanada.ca T: 416-861-8227 7PM

/P


r

0DUPCFS
 Charitable number: 848431490RR0001 To donate, visit reviewcanada.ca/support

EDITOR IN CHIEF Sarmishta Subramanian [email protected] 3 Rites of Passage 15 Luminaire MANAGING EDITOR A letter from the editor A poem Michael Stevens Sarmishta Subramanian Julia Florek Turcan ASSISTANT EDITOR 4 History’s Ghosts 18 Institutionalized Bardia Sinaee Margaret MacMillan in conversation with A sociology of CanLit ASSOCIATE EDITOR Beth Haddon Randall Hansen Dennis Duffy POETRY EDITOR 6 In Shanghai 22 Lives of a Brother Moira MacDougall A poem Love, hope, and death in Scarberia COPY EDITOR Melanie Pierluigi Donna Bailey Nurse Patricia Treble CONTRIBUTING EDITORS 8 Undeclaring a language war 24 The Money Trap Mohamed Huque, Andy Lamey, Molly A Montreal academic confronts the ‘mytho- Big Pharma’s bid to woo doctors, patient groups, Peacock, Robin Roger, Judy Stofman constitutional Quebec universe’ journalists, and the rest of us ONLINE EDITORS Graham Fraser Anne Kingston Jack Mitchell, Donald Rickerd, C.M. PROOFREADER 10 Praise God—but First, the Market 28 Bigger Than the Team Tyler Willis Why some jihadist groups rise to power A dad’s-eye view of the NHL’s most polarizing RESEARCH Amira Elghawaby fgure Rob Tilley Stephen Smith 11 Who Says April is the Cruelest? DESIGN A poem 32 Letters James Harbeck, for the last time Amanda Merpaw Antony Anderson, Jodi Butts, Christopher ADVERTISING/SALES Dummitt Michael Wile 13 Trompe Le Toil [email protected] Identity capitalism and the modern conundrum DIRECTOR, OPERATIONS of overwork Michael Booth Emily M. Keeler ADMINISTRATOR Christian Sharpe PUBLISHER Mark Lovewell [email protected] BOARD OF DIRECTORS George Bass, Q.C., Don McCutchan, Trina McQueen, O.C., Jack Mintz, C.M., Jaime Watt ADVISORY COUNCIL Michael Adams, Alan Broadbent, C.M., Chris Ellis, Carol Hansell, Donald Macdonald, P.C., C.C., Grant Reuber, O.C., Don Rickerd, C.M., Rana Sarkar, Mark Sarner, Bernard Schif, Reed Scowen Poems in this issue are inspired by Sue Goyette’s poem “You Know This”: POETRY SUBMISSIONS For guidelines, please see reviewcanada.ca. Tis is how it begins, this part of winter. Its hands, clawed LRC design concept by Jackie Young/INK and chapped, undo the safety net over your ears. Once that’s gone Founded in  by P.A. Dutil you hear things you shouldn’t. Whispers. Te LRC is published 10 times a year by the Literary Review of Canada Charitable Organization.

ANNUAL SUBSCRIPTION RATES Individuals in Canada $56/year plus GST/HST. (Libraries and institutions in Canada $68/year plus Cover art and pictures throughout the issue, unless otherwise indicated, by Ally Jaye Reeves. GST/HST.) Outside Canada, please pay $86/year for Ally Jaye Reeves is a Toronto based illustrator and a graduate of Sheridan College’s illustration program. She enjoys individuals, or $98 for libraries and institutions. reading children’s books, petting golden retrievers and thinking about adopting a house plant. SUBSCRIPTIONS AND CIRCULATION Literary Review of Canada P.O. Box 8, Station K, Toronto ON M4P 2G1 [email protected] 
r
SFWJFXDBOBEBDB From time to time, the LRC may allow carefully selected organizations to send mail to subscribers, ofering products or services that may be of interest. ©2017 Te Literary Review of Canada. All rights, If you do not wish to receive such correspondence, please contact our Subscriber Service department at [email protected], including translation into other languages, are reserved or call 416-932-5081, or mail P.O. Box 8, Station K, Toronto ON M4P 2G1. by the publisher in Canada, the United States, Great Britain and all other countries participating in the Universal Copyright Convention, the International We acknowledge the fnancial Funding Acknowledgements We acknowledge the assistance Copyright Convention and the Pan-American Copyright support of the Government of the OMDC Magazine Fund, Convention. Nothing in this publication may be repro- duced without the written permission of the publisher. of Canada through the an initiative of Ontario Media ISSN 1188-7494 Canada Periodical Fund of Development Corporation. the Department of Canadian Te Literary Review of Canada is indexed in the Canadian Literary Periodicals Index and the Canadian Heritage. Index and is distributed by Disticor and Magazines Canada.

an Ontario government agency un organisme du gouvernement de l’Ontario

October 2017 reviewcanada.ca Undeclaring a language war A Montreal academic confronts the ‘mytho-constitutional Quebec universe’ GRAHAM FRASER

by little and day by day, new real- Charte canadienne et droits ities.” linguistiques: Pour en fnir avec There were flags and trum- les mythes pets on April 17, 1982 all right— Frédéric Bérard but not in Quebec. Te day the Les Presses de l’Université de Constitution was signed by the Montréal Queen in Ottawa, René Lévesque 386 pages, soft cover led a protest march in the rain ISBN 9782760637443 in Montreal. Quebec’s fags were lowered to half-mast. Te agree- ment on the Constitution without his is the year of Quebec was dubbed the Night of Canadian anniversar- the Long Knives; Raoul Hunter, Ties. But in the furry of an otherwise mild-mannered car- events surrounding Canada’s toonist for Le Soleil, drew Quebec 150th, Montreal’s 375th, the 40th as a woman being serially raped anniversary of the Charte de la by the premiers from the rest of langue française (Charter of the Canada; Lucien Bouchard almost French Language) in Quebec, won the 1995 referendum by reviv- and all the symbolic gestures of ing a story of betrayal, mockery reconciliation with Indigenous and humiliation. peoples, there has been relatively Te nationalist trope of betrayal little mention—certainly in English—that 2017 is the headline of an analysis piece was “Quebec’s and oppression has also been refected in journalis- also the 35th anniversary of the patriation of the renaissance in the blind spot of the federation’s tic and academic writing—not simply about the way Constitution and the introduction of the Charter 150th.” In the same edition, Daniel Turp, a law in which the Constitution was patriated, but also in of Rights and Freedoms. Te only discussion has professor and former Bloc MP, wrote about “La analyses of the way in which the Supreme Court been provoked by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s solitude constitutionnelle du Québec,” in which he has interpreted the Charter. Lévesque biographer spontaneous dismissal of Quebec Premier Philippe argued that the Charter, in promoting bilingual- Pierre Godin described Article 23 of the Charter, Couillard’s proposal to discuss Quebec’s role in ism and multiculturalism, was committing Canada which deals with minority language educational Confederation. And the consensus in English to the construction of a new national history that rights, as “the last attempt to anglicize Quebec.” Canada appeared to be relief that that other refused to recognize its own plurinational char- Law professor Eugénie Brouillet argued that the unmentionable “C” word would not return to pub- acter. Turp argued that Quebec needed to draft its Charter has “led to an erosion of the [Quebec] legis- lic debate. own constitution in order to refect how Quebecers lative competence in linguistic terms.” In a glowing editorial on the eve of Canada Day, see Canada. Legal scholar Henri Brun maintained that the the Globe and Mail recounted all the potential In Quebec, the approach to the constitution has Charter consisted of “perfectly symmetrical norms, wrong turns Canada could have taken over the past always been diferent. As Daniel Johnson Sr. told which completely ignores that Quebec is the only century and a half; it wrote that steps had been Peter C. Newman in the mid-1960s, when he was place in America where a French-speaking major- taken and a change of course made in the 1960s still leader of the opposition in Quebec, “When we, ity exists and that this majority at the same time and 1970s to correct the wrongs committed against with our Latin culture dream of a new constitution only represents a tiny linguistic minority on this Canada’s francophones outside Quebec to deprive for Canada, we see a monument of logic and clarity continent.” And academic and conservative colum- them of language and education rights. “Today, it with great principles from which fow the supreme nist Mathieu Bock-Côté claimed that “the regime is Indigenous Canadians who are owed apology, laws of the country. We conjure up the wonderful of 1982 is fundamentally hostile to the very idea of acknowledgment and redress,” the editorialist wrote. day when, in the name of a sovereign people, with Quebec nationalism (and even the Quebec nation) Language rights? Been there, done that—time a fapping of fags, the proclamation of the new to the extent that it claimed to domesticate it. It has to move on. constitution and the scrapping of the old one will led, for example, to the programmed destruction of However, Le Devoir’s editorial on July 1 spoke be announced.” Bill 101 (Quebec’s language law).” of Canada as “an unachieved compromise”—and “All this is very marvellous from our point of view,” Johnson continued, “But this isn’t the way hen I saw the title of Frédéric Bérard’s book, Graham Fraser is a senior fellow at the Graduate constitutions are made and unmade in British WI thought it would be another contribu- School of Public and International Afairs at the countries. Tey don’t proceed with trumpet calls tion to this narrative of defeat and victimization. University of Ottawa. As a reporter, he covered but on the basis of precedents. Theoretically, On the contrary. In the book Charte canadienne et the language debates in Quebec in the 1970s, the they don’t abolish anything at all. Tey carefully droits linguistiques, based on his doctoral thesis—it constitutional debates in the 1980s, the Quebec preserve all the facade, all the rites, and even the translates to “Canadian Charter and language referendum in 1995 and the Quebec reference to the whole vocabulary of the former state of afairs, rights”—Bérard summarizes and quotes from those Supreme Court in the1998. He was commissioner of and behind this facade, under the intangible veil who have established this approach, but turns the ofcial languages from 2006 to 2016. of these rites and vocabulary they introduce little narrative on its head.

8 reviewcanada.ca Literary Review of Canada Citing authors and academics such as Michel signifcant decisions in the area of language rights, Quebec City to accept the idea of restricting access Seymour, Frédéric Bastien, Turp, Brun, Brouillet, Justice Michel Bastarache specifcally reversed the to English school only to the children who had one and Bock-Côté, Bérard finds four themes in 1986 decision in R. v. Beaulac. “Language rights parent educated in English in Quebec. attacks on the Charter: that it signifcantly reduces must in all cases be interpreted purposively, in So while Article 23 did, as the Charter’s crit- Quebec’s ability to protect the French fact; that it a manner consistent with the preservation and ics claim, take away the power of the National constitutes a frontal attack on Quebec’s language development of official language communities Assembly to decide who could go to English school policies; that it favours, or could be used to favour, in Canada,” Bastarache wrote. “To the extent that in Quebec, it did so by adopting an approach that the interests of the English-speaking minority Société des Acadiens stands for a restrictive inter- achieved the goal that Lévesque wanted: opening in Quebec over francophone minorities outside pretation of language rights, it is to be rejected.” Quebec’s English-language schools to the children Quebec; and that the Supreme Court, principally He then made it clear that the principle of of parents educated elsewhere in Canada. Bédard consisting of anglophones from outside Quebec, ofcial bilingualism was not accommodation, but describes in detail what the Supreme Court has has undermined Quebec’s Charter of the French equality. Te state should not respond as though done for French-speaking minorities outside Language and has applied, or could apply, lin- there were “one primary ofcial language and a Quebec—and is withering about the reaction in guistic principles in a uniform manner across duty to accommodate with regard to the use of the Quebec. “What Quebec author has recognized the country, thus undermining Quebec’s unique other ofcial language. Te governing principle is the immense progress of francophone rights since character. that of the equality of both ofcial languages.” the Charter? None,” he writes. Te facts, he points He sets out to verify these claims—but instead Bastarache has played a huge role in the con- out, demonstrate that all of the gloomy predictions challenges or debunks them all. Te result is a struction of the jurisprudence of language rights. about the anglicizing efect of the Charter have book-length description of how the Supreme Court Before joining the Supreme Court he was counsel been wrong. “Te rights of francophones in the over 35 years has acknowledged Quebec’s dis- in a case that led to the court’s decision that the country, over the course of the last thirty years, have tinctiveness, recognized the validity of protecting minority education rights in the Charter meant not quite simply exploded.” the French language in Quebec, linked individual simply the right to have access to minority language But this has been ignored. Bédard argues that language rights to community vitality, and acted schools, but the right of the minority community to the French-speaking minorities outside Quebec to ensure that French-language minority schools control those schools. have been a “disagreeable reality” for Quebec enjoy substantive equality with English-language On the court he clarifed the obligation of prov- nationalists, and “an implicit enemy.” As a result, majority schools. It is a remarkable story: Over that incial governments to provide schools within a the Quebec government has often intervened in period, the Supreme Court has developed a sophis- reasonable distance of French-speaking parents, court against French-speaking minorities, feeling ticated jurisprudence of language rights that has regardless of school district boundaries. And he was that any gain they made could be used against the been nuanced but clear. a member of the court that unanimously concluded French-speaking majority in Quebec. On the con- In the 1985 reference Re Manitoba Language that respect for minorities was one of the unwritten trary, he argues, the English-speaking minority has Rights, Bérard notes the court described in sweep- principles underlying the Constitution. Now retired gained no beneft from the Charter. ing terms the vital place of language rights in soci- from the court, Bastarache continues to be active As he proceeds, chapter by chapter, his indig- ety: “Te importance of language rights is grounded on minority language cases. nation increases as he criticizes what he calls the in the essential role that language plays in human Bérard approaches this narrative of language “mytho-constitutional Quebec universe” and the existence, development and dignity. It is through rights jurisprudence with a specifc goal: challen- “quasi-hegemony of Quebec nationalist orthodoxy” language that we are able to form concepts; to ging the conventional wisdom in Quebec. It is gen- which leaves “little room for dissidents.” structure and order the world around us. Language erally taken for granted that the Charter of Rights “Te dominant Quebec doctrine has thus come, bridges the gap between isolation and community, and Freedoms has been detrimental to the protec- consciously or unconsciously, to ignore reality,” allowing humans to delineate the rights and duties tion of the French language in Quebec, insensitive he writes. “One can obviously explain the frustra- they hold in respect of one another, and thus to live to Quebec’s distinctiveness and biased in favour tion for those who hold this doctrine that anything in society.” of the English-speaking majority in Canada and which approaches Trudeauism can provoke, par- However, in 1986, in cases that originated in minority in Quebec. Bérard’s verdict: wrong on all ticularly after the patriation of 1982. Tat being New Brunswick, Quebec, and Manitoba, the court counts. said, this frustration cannot justify the creation of issued three decisions that appeared to back away His frst target is the argument that the Charter an imaginary politico-constitutional construction, from this sweeping view. Memorably, as Bérard punched holes in the language law, Bill 101, which particularly on the part of intellectuals who, while outlines in the book, the court ruled in one of them, established French as the only ofcial language of having legitimate convictions, have nevertheless a Société des Acadiens, that where there was a right to the courts and the National Assembly in Quebec. duty of critical refection.” Ow! use an ofcial language in court, there was no right Sorry, that legislation was declared ultra vires He goes on to observe that the principles of to be understood. Language rights, Judge Beetz in 1979 and 1981 in the two Blaikie cases. Bérard asymmetry, substantive equality and the need to wrote for the majority, “give the speaker or the points out that the overturning of the sweeping repair the damage done in the past, all defned writer the constitutionally protected power to speak aspects of Bill 101 had nothing to do with the by the Supreme Court, have been recognized—by or to write in the ofcial language of his choice. And Charter. Te Supreme Court found that erasing French-language academics and analysts outside there is no language guarantee, either under s. 133 the use of English in the National Assembly and Quebec including Michel Bastarache, Michel of the Constitution Act, 1867 or s.19 of the Charter… the courts in Quebec was unconstitutional on Doucet of the Université de Moncton, and Pierre that the speaker will be heard or understood, or that the basis of the language provisions in the British Foucher of the University of Ottawa. Yet all of that he has the right to be heard or understood in the North America Act of 1867—before the Charter was has been completely ignored by what Bérard calls language of his choice.” enacted. “the Quebec doctrine.” Te reason, according to the majority, was that His next target is the argument that Article 23 So far, the book has yet to provoke reaction in “Language rights…remain nonetheless founded on of the Charter, which defnes who gets access to the Quebec press. Te academics and nationalist political compromise.” As a result, the court con- minority language schools and gives the right to commentators that Bérard has criticized so vigor- cluded, they should not be considered legal rights. minority language education to the child of at least ously have not taken to the pages of Le Devoir or Chief Justice Brian Dickson disagreed. “Tis one parent educated in that language in Canada, is La Presse to mount a counterattack. Tis is perhaps right,” he wrote, “includes not only the right to a tool to anglicize Quebec. understandable: it is hard to see what the basis for make oral and written submissions in the language Te Supreme Court’s clarifcations of that right, an efective response could be. chosen by the individual but also, to make this right Bérard points out, have led to the doors to English But, as the departure of Chief Justice Beverley meaningful, the right to be understood by the judge school in Quebec opening a mere crack, certainly McLachlin approaches and the time comes to or judges hearing the case, whether directly or not enough to anglicize Quebec. name her successor and fll the vacant seat on the through other means.” And Justice Bertha Wilson Interestingly, what Berard fails to mention is that court, it is extremely useful to have a book-length was blunt in dissent. “Judges who sit on a case must the so-called “Canada clause”—as opposed to the analysis of the work of the Supreme Court in the be able to understand the proceedings, the evi- “Quebec clause” in the original version of Quebec’s feld of language jurisprudence. In addition to pro- dence and the arguments regardless of whether the language law, Bill 101—was then-premier René viding a refreshingly critical response to the nation- case was being heard in English or in French. Tis, Lévesque’s preference. He ofered reciprocity to alist narrative in Quebec, Bérard has delivered an indeed, is a requirement of due process.” his fellow premiers at a premiers’ conference in St. efective anniversary tribute to the work of the court Dickson’s and Wilson’s views eventually pre- Andrews, N.B., in 1977—but no one was prepared in describing in detail this uniquely Canadian ver- vailed, even if it took 13 years. In one of the most to discuss it with him. Discouraged, he returned to sion of language rights.

October 2017 reviewcanada.ca 9