Canadian Military History

Volume 19 Issue 3 Article 3

2010

The Canadian War and the Military Identity of an Unmilitary People

Norman Hillmer

Follow this and additional works at: https://scholars.wlu.ca/cmh

Part of the Military History Commons

Recommended Citation Norman Hillmer "The and the Military Identity of an Unmilitary People." Canadian Military History 19, 3 (2010)

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Scholars Commons @ Laurier. It has been accepted for inclusion in Canadian Military History by an authorized editor of Scholars Commons @ Laurier. For more information, please contact [email protected]. : The Canadian War Museum and the Military Identity of an Unmilitary People The Canadian War Museum and the Military Identity of an Unmilitary People

Norman Hillmer

he Canadian War Museum was having invented , and its country’s first national history Abstract: Late in the twentieth politicians for decades after tried to T century, intent on a new vision and museum, but also one of the most repeat his success. There was hardly new building for their museum, neglected of federal institutions. Its Canadian War Museum planners a peacekeeping mission in the second usual fate was pedestrian quarters, crafted an interpretative scenario half of the twentieth century that did meagre financial resources, and a that emphasized the military as a not have Canadian participation.4 miniscule staff. , after all, national symbol and the importance Peacekeeping might constitute a of war and conflict in the shaping of styled itself as the very opposite very small part of the defence budget, Canada and . A striking of a warrior society. Governments architectural design followed, and a but it bulked very large in the public promoted an official brand of renewed war museum opened in May and official mind. Peacekeeping nationalism that obliterated the 2005. A flood of visitors came, and became indelibly Canadian as national internal divisions and dilemmas that they have continued to come. Public interests, ideals, and expectations prominence has brought applause Canada’s wars exposed.1 Their project combined, accumulated, and took and controversy as a buried military succeeded, and not simply with identity is refolded into the nationalist firm hold. With peacekeeping came Canadians. One visitor to , narratives of Canada. the conviction that other countries a museum scholar from California, waged war, and that a superbly, was astonished by the very idea of a an understanding of themselves that supremely moral Canada cleaned Canadian War Museum. The image made it easy to overlook the pivotal up their messes. The world needed of Canada that rushed to her mind role of warfare in the definition Canada, the belief went, just as was that of the cartoon Mountie of their country. Modern Canada Canada needed the world.5 Dudley Do-Right, not of a country began to see itself, and ostentatiously The peacekeepers of the United with a long pedigree of military describe itself, as cosmopolitan, Nations were given the Nobel service and distinction.2 progressive, tolerant, generous – and Prize in 1988, an award that Yet a magnificent new Canadian peaceful. The military personnel who Canadians promptly appropriated War Museum building rose up in caught the national imagination were to themselves. Two years later the the national capital during the first Canada’s peacekeepers, who became decided to years of the twenty-first century. the leading international practitioners erect a peacekeeping monument The renaissance of the war museum of the craft. The country’s foreign to reflect “a dramatic shift in the was the result of an extraordinary minister, L. B. Pearson, won the 1957 role and purpose of the Canadian alchemy of events and impulses that Nobel Peace Prize for the diplomacy Armed Forces” and to represent “a challenges the notion of Canadians that had solved the Suez Crisis fundamental Canadian value: no as an unmilitary people. (and “saved the world,” in the missionary zeal to impose our way Military conflict and military words of the Nobel Committee) of life on others but an acceptance endeavour are woven into the with the expedient of a Middle East of the responsibility to assist them national fibre,3 but post-Second peacekeeping force. Although it in determining their own futures World War Canadians constructed wasn’t true, Pearson got credit for by ensuring a non-violent climate

Published© Canadian by Scholars Military Commons History @, Laurier,Volume 2010 19, Number 3, Summer 2010, pp.19-26. 19 1

Hillmer - CWM.indd 19 9/27/2010 11:25:49 AM Canadian Military History, Vol. 19 [2010], Iss. 3, Art. 3

in which to do so.” So read the commercial played repeatedly before it fights still. An outspoken general, guideline for the competition to and on 11 November; it featured a Chief of the Defence Staff Rick choose the monument’s sculptor.6 contemporary young man’s telephone Hillier, championed the war effort, The monument was unveiled in call home from a Second World War downgraded peacekeeping, and 1992, very near the National Gallery battlefield in France thanking his forged a populist link between the and the Canadian War Museum and grandfather for his military service. military and the people. Politicians, pointing directly at . In May 2000 Canada’s Unknown who had already begun to respond to At the same time, however, Soldier was brought from France the increasing calls for more defence a Canadian military identity that and interred at the National War spending, incorporated military stood apart from peacekeeping Memorial in the centre of Ottawa, in themes and support for the Canadian was beginning to reassert itself. front of 20,000 observers and millions Forces into their rhetoric. Canadian The celebrations of the fiftieth more on television. governments under Paul Martin and anniversaries of the last years of After years of neglect, veterans Stephen Harper, the first a Liberal the Second World War brought its and veterans’ issues were being and the other a Conservative, agreed diminishing numbers of veterans integrated into ideas of what it that a robust military engagement

to the fore. They and their lobby meant to be Canadian. A Veterans with the world was indispensable Museum (CWM) 20020045-1904 Canadian War groups in turn took a notable role Memorial Highway sprung up on to Canada’s national security and in promoting their causes and the road leading away from Ottawa international standing. The public defending themselves against towards the United States, and a seemed to take the same view.9 revisionist history that questioned parade of other memorials, coins, The war museum had meanwhile their actions and sometimes their stamps, advertisements, and tributes stumbled into the 1990s.10 Its building integrity.7 Remembrance Day on 11 marched into the cultural content of had a prominent address at 330 November, the date that the First Canadian identity. The vets became Sussex Street, beside the Royal World War had ended, attracted “imbedded in a powerful narrative of Canadian Mint and not far from more attention and more participants sacrifice, honour and nationhood.”8 the residences of the prime minister and spectators. Late in the 1990s When the ended, the and governor general. However, a popular Bell Canada television Canadian Forces found themselves the structure, the former national challenged to justify archives, was unsuited to the needs their existence on of a museum. The inadequacies, in the one hand and the words of war museum historian y e t b u s i e r t h a n Cameron Pulsifer, who had to live ever on the other with them, were manifold, ranging hand. Peace support from “awkward and cramped exhibit o p p o r t u n i t i e s space, environmental conditions a b o u n d e d , a n d which were hazardous to artifacts, O t t a w a s e l d o m the lack of a freight elevator, floor refused international loading capacities that could not requests, but the support heavy artifacts, and lack trend as the last of space for educational and other d e c a d e o f t h e public activities.”11 Moreover, the century dwindled war museum was dwarfed by a new away was toward next door neighbour, the Moshe enforcement and Safdie designed National Gallery

Canadian Forces Joint Imagery Centre ISC00-400-25 Canadian Forces combat operations of Canada, which spilled onto the of the type Canada museum’s property. Next to the c a r r i e d o u t i n gallery’s imposing modern glass t h e B a l k a n s . I n structure, the Canadian War Museum 2002, the country looked more ancient and threadbare w e n t t o w a r i n than ever. Afghanistan, where

The repatriation of Canada’s unknown soldier in May 2000 capped a decade of growing interest in Canada’s military identity.

https://scholars.wlu.ca/cmh/vol19/iss3/320 2

Hillmer - CWM.indd 20 9/27/2010 11:25:49 AM : The Canadian War Museum and the Military Identity of an Unmilitary People Canadian War Museum (CWM) 20020045-1904 Canadian War

The original Canadian War Museum on (here photographed in 1967) enjoyed a prominent location in Ottawa (note the Parliament Buildings in the background) but the building itself was unsuitable for a national museum.

The 1991 report of a Task Force on for the design of an extension to 330 the day after the end of the Second Military History Museum Collections Sussex that would make use of the World War in Europe, that they in Canada damned the museum as space in front of the building, which would spearhead a major fundraising an “embarrassment” and a “national was set well back from the street. effort. “Passing the Torch,” the disgrace.”12 The report concluded Further government help for campaign was called, to convey the that contemporary museum design the war museum was not in the responsibility of Canadians to carry and technology had far outpaced the immediate offing. Spendthrift forth the work of earlier generations. Canadian War Museum’s practices, Canadian governments, over Passing the Torch set out to while the research function, on which decades, had run up a mountain assist the museum with its plans to an historical museum depended, was of debt and deficits that were no modernize 330 Sussex. In its initial completely inadequate. Well covered longer sustainable. Budget cuts phase, as revealed in internal war in the media, the report demanded were expected for every federal museum documentation, the drive better resources for the museum institution, and they were ruthlessly to raise money looked to “critical and suggested that it would be implemented by a Liberal government national and ethnic groups as an better off as an independent agency, elected in the fall of 1993. Officials at important source of funding that will separate from its parent institution, the Museum of Civilization and the prove crucial to the ultimate success the Canadian Museum of Civilization war museum began to cast around of the campaign.”13 Prime targets Corporation (CMCC). The CMCC for ways to attract financial support were wealthy Jewish and Dutch responded to the criticisms with and sponsorships. The Friends of the veterans, with the eventual goal of $1.7 million for the war museum’s Canadian War Museum, a volunteer raising $2 million from each group. exhibits. A contract was then awarded group of museum supporters, A Netherlands Memorial Theatre to the architect A. J. Diamond announced in 1995, fifty years to was contemplated, to highlight

Published by Scholars Commons @ Laurier, 2010 21 3

Hillmer - CWM.indd 21 9/27/2010 11:25:50 AM Canadian Military History, Vol. 19 [2010], Iss. 3, Art. 3

Canada’s role in the liberation of Canadians took up the cause. One of past.”16 The museum was moving Holland in 1944-1945. So too was them was the historian Irving Abella, away from its moorings and on a gallery concentrated on Jewish an expert on Canada and the Jews of to dangerous ground. It would be Canadian war heroes. Since contacts Europe in the 1930s and 1940s. vulnerable to every spasm in the with Jewish Canadians revealed their It is easier to chart the upward body politic and every imaginable interest in integrating a remembrance trajectory of Gallery charge of ethnic bias. of the Holocaust into the refurbished than to explain quite how and why Holocaust Gallery committees war museum, that became part of the the project acquired a dominant and opinions, expert and not, planning as well. place in museum thinking. The proliferated. Critics emerged, Recognizing the opportunity fundraising potential loomed notably history professor Robert to graft these proposals onto their large, without doubt, the more so Bothwell, a member of the Museum dreams of transforming the Canadian because a survey of visitors to the of Civilization Corporation Board War Museum into a major facility, museum had demonstrated interest of Trustees, and his University of the director and CEO of the Museum in the Holocaust. The appeal and Toronto colleague, Michael Marrus, of Civilization, George MacDonald, success of the Holocaust Museum in an authority on the Holocaust. and senior war museum officials Washington also invited imitation; They counselled caution, citing the picked up on the possibilities. In Suthren was energized by a visit there inadequate research capacity of the mid-1995 MacDonald approached the in March 1996. At that stage the plan museum, and the sheer scope and Bronfman Foundation, the Montreal- was still to feature the war service complexity of the Holocaust itself. based philanthropic organization, to of Jewish Canadians in what was The presentation of the Holocaust ask that it help underwrite a Jewish then being called the “Holocaust and catastrophe, Marrus pointed out in gallery. He was aware, however, Jewish War Veterans Gallery.” That a memorandum of April 1997, “is a of the pitfalls of raising issues of idea was jettisoned by year’s end, particularly formidable challenge. It cultural and religious sensitivity. however, the reasoning being that a is all the more difficult because debate The gallery would not pivot around gallery given over to one identifiable on many issues continues, because the Holocaust. Charles Bronfman, grouping would fuel the expectations some areas remain contentious, and the foundation’s key figure, agreed of other groups. There would be no because responsible people differ with MacDonald. Bronfman was stopping the demands for further considerably in their emphases reportedly “more interested in galleries. A war museum document and interpretations. As often with celebrating Jewish achievement concluded that “a collection of little historical subjects, while historians than in reviewing past historical such galleries would destroy the debate, the more public search injustices.”14 integrity of our current and planned for meaning sometimes fluctuates These views did not carry the day exhibits and galleries.”15 strongly. Different communities and for long. Over 1996 and into 1997, the The war museum was right different generations draw different scheme to honour Jewish Canadians to refuse to cut up its mandate lessons and significance from the transmogrified into a vision of a and share it with outside interests. Holocaust.”17 gallery that had the Holocaust as its Yet it was wrong to think that a MacDonald took these only subject. When planning began, Holocaust Gallery would be free of arguments very seriously, as was the Holocaust Gallery was expected to external constraints. Suthren and his his responsibility. He drew away cover 2,000 square feet. That number allies, moreover, hatched the idea from Suthren, his subordinate in the ballooned to 2,500 and then 4,000 of using the Holocaust “as a means chain of command. When Suthren square feet, and finally was projected of addressing intolerance, prejudice demanded a vote of confidence from to come in at 6,000 square feet, which and the dehumanizing of other ethnic MacDonald, it was not forthcoming. would have made it the largest groups which lie behind not only past The two men parted company, gallery in the war museum by a factor wars but current issues such as ‘ethnic Suthren’s tenure at the war museum of four. George MacDonald declared cleansing’ in Yugoslavia, Rwandan ending in early October 1997. the creation of a Holocaust Gallery atrocities, and many other problems Suthren had not survived, but a major corporate priority of the which Canadian peacekeepers are the Holocaust Gallery did. The A. Museum of Civilization Corporation. called on to address.” The swing J. Diamond architectural plan was Victor Suthren, the director of the war in emphasis was in line, Suthren made public in mid-November 1997. museum, embraced the concept and maintained, “with the museum’s At a cost of $12 million, Diamond pushed it forward. Charles Bronfman increasing focus on the origins of proposed three substantial additions and his foundation were nowhere to human conflict in general as opposed to 330 Sussex, including a glass dome be seen, but other prominent Jewish to a mere chronicling of the military that would cover the courtyard in

https://scholars.wlu.ca/cmh/vol19/iss3/322 4

Hillmer - CWM.indd 22 9/27/2010 11:25:50 AM : The Canadian War Museum and the Military Identity of an Unmilitary People

front of the building, extending it out The Holocaust Gallery was a travesty. from the Suthren era, when elaborate to the street. The revolutionized war Clarkson and MacDonald were re-enactments of historical events museum would have much enhanced scarcely allowed to speak. Utterly passed for scholarly substance. exhibit space, a Memorial Chamber, defeated, they announced that the Danson recruited J. L. Granatstein, a theatre, and room to display some gallery would have to go.18 the country’s best known historian, of the war art collection that was the The salvation of the war museum as the museum’s director and chief museum’s hidden treasure. None had come disguised as a crisis. The executive officer for a two year term.20 of these welcome changes caught Holocaust Gallery debacle brought The Granatstein goal was much interest. What did was a 6,000 the parlous condition of the museum excellence, energetically delivered, square foot gallery exclusively set to national attention and cleared the and he shook the antiquated museum aside to describe and remember the way for the dynamic leadership and to its roots. He extracted more money Holocaust. ideas that resulted in an innovative to add to the tiny museum budget, The formal announcement that new building with a clear if complex oversaw the correction of hundreds the Holocaust would be a prominent message about the Canadian military of errors in exhibits, set up a Centre aspect of a revamped museum identity. of Military History and a publishing mobilized Canada’s veterans, who The government had already program, restored relations with were quick to point out that they moved to still the commotion, and Canada’s military and had not been consulted about the give direction to the war museum, the Canadian Forces, and squeezed decision and had felt marginalized after Suthren’s departure. The more autonomy from the Museum by war museum management over previous autumn, minister of of Civilization. Most important of all, many years. They set out to defeat Canadian heritage Sheila Copps, and as a condition of his employment, the idea, arguing that the Holocaust whose responsibilities included Granatstein hired three established was a horrible part of history, but not the national museums, named military historians: Roger Sarty, Dean part of Canada’s history, and more to the Museum of Oliver, and Serge Durflinger.21 particularly not part of Canada’s Civilization’s Board of Trustees The museum’s research team, military history. Their story had and to a war museum advisory now led by Sarty and Oliver, been hijacked by someone else’s committee, which he would head and developed a uniform vision for the story. At the helm of the opposition which would give a voice to veterans future, which they housed in the campaign was Clifford Chadderton, and scholars alike.19 Danson was a interpretative scenario, an evolving the savvy president of the National well-connected politician from the document that was tested across the Council of Veterans Associations, party in power, a former minister country and before various publics. a longtime Ottawa lobbyist who of national defence, and a Jewish It was driven by the story line of knew his way around the media. veteran who had been wounded in Canada’s military experiences, and George MacDonald fought back as the Second World War. He could the belief that the country’s history best he could, but he was no match speak to both sides of the Holocaust had been formed by them. Everything for Chadderton and other veterans’ debate, and he had the political clout in the museum from the organization groups, whose publicity machines to manoeuvre his powerful friends chart through collections policy and ensured widespread coverage of the into action. exhibit development flowed from vets’ point of view. Danson wanted the Holocaust the interpretative scenario, tracking Politicians, sniffing publicity, remembered, but not in the war Granatstein’s straightforward view involved themselves. A parliamentary museum. The modest A. J. Diamond that the war museum must “be committee, the Senate Subcommittee extension to the war museum ought research-based, chronological, and on Veterans Affairs, summoned to be reserved completely for the historically accurate,” or it was MacDonald and the chair of the museum’s own collection, most of nothing. Intellectual integrity had Board of Trustees of the Museum of which was in precarious storage to be at the gut of any reputable Civilization Corporation, Adrienne at , an old streetcar museum.22 Clarkson, to hearings on the barn visited from time to time by Within a month of Granatstein’s Holocaust Gallery issue in early flooding. The Danson committee arrival at the war museum to take 1998. They, and Clarkson especially, concluded, in fact, that the Diamond up his duties in July of 1998, the encountered fierce antagonism from plan did not go nearly far enough. plan for the Diamond expansion of committee members, and from the The war museum needed a fresh 330 Sussex was on hold. Danson, veterans and other opponents of the start in a new building, and in the with his extensive contacts, had gallery who populated the hearings. meantime, it needed the intellectual been at work. He managed to secure The committee’s mind was made up. respectability that had been missing an ample parcel of property near

Published by Scholars Commons @ Laurier, 2010 23 5

Hillmer - CWM.indd 23 9/27/2010 11:25:51 AM Canadian Military History, Vol. 19 [2010], Iss. 3, Art. 3 CWM CWM_cp23

Left & right: The new Canadian War Museum located on the opened in May 2005.

the National Aviation Museum on the contamination was removed.25 bound the theme of regeneration into the , a gift from the Briefly an architecture student before his museum design, and manipulated Department of National Defence, he became a lawyer, Chrétien took the building on a gentle rise towards which was closing the Rockcliffe a special interest and pride in the the of the Parliament Canadian Forces Base.23 Granatstein creation of a grand building that Buildings, in a silent salute to “the promoted the cause of a Rockcliffe he believed, as the New York Times symbolic home of all Canadians.”27 museum across the country. He later reported, would celebrate the M o r i y a m a a n d R a n k i n secured a Donner Foundation grant national capital as a place that stood exploited the natural contours of to put some of the war museum’s for something more than and beyond Canadian geography and historical 13,000 art works on tour, reasoning politics.26 development. The museum seemed, that “the collection was its trump The architects chosen for the deliberately, to be more landscape card with those who might not war museum project, on the basis of than architecture. Staying low and think battles or tanks or medals their response to the interpretative hugging the ground, it resembled a mattered.”24 Funding commitments scenario document, were Raymond traveller hunkered down to brave a were sought, painstakingly. Passing Moriyama and Alexander Rankin, stiff prairie wind. It reached out from the Torch pledged $15 million, and backed by large teams from their to the hills of Quebec on the the government committed $58 respective firms. The museum’s western side of the LeBreton site, and million in March 2000. A new war research group assembled historical to the east toward central Ottawa museum, unimaginable just months images that captured the storyline and Parliament, the vertical wedge before, was in view. in visual terms for the architects’ of Regeneration Hall mimicking an There was one last twist in the use, while Moriyama and Rankin Arctic whale, or the Rocky Mountains, renewal of the Canadian War Museum. crossed the country, coming to poetic or Canada itself as it moved on a Danson and Granatstein were elated conclusions about Canada’s character steady upward climb from colony by the 35 acre Rockcliffe plot, which and diversity. As a young boy, to country. Canada and its people, had plenty of space for outdoor Moriyama and his family had been Rankin was convinced, were “quiet, displays, ceremonies, parking, and among the thousands of Canadian modest, and strong,” just as their picnicking. The project was well Japanese who were removed from museum would be.28 advanced when Prime Minister their homes and relocated to camps The museum’s architecture Jean Chrétien intervened to change during the Second World War; got at war through the use of tilted the site to the more central location Rankin was from Northern Ireland, a planes and rough hewn materials, of LeBreton Flats, a short distance land torn apart by sectarian violence. creating an impression of trauma from the National War Memorial Both were convinced that modern and disequilibrium. On the exterior and the Parliament Buildings. The Canada was very different from Moriyama created the effect of war LeBreton area had been rejected what they had known. Moriyama visited on the land. On the inside early on in the planning because recalled that in his consultations he sought the intensity of an urban CWM NCWM_28 the ground was full of pollutants, with Canadians he found history’s landscape scarred by battle: “Walls the legacy of heavy industrial use wounds in abundance, “and yet all the emerge sharp and unrefined from decades before. The prime minister speakers shared a wish for a brighter the floors at jagged angles. Concrete had the problem solved forthwith; future of inclusion and hope.” He is left raw and exposed. Joints of

https://scholars.wlu.ca/cmh/vol19/iss3/324 6

Hillmer - CWM.indd 24 9/27/2010 11:25:51 AM : The Canadian War Museum and the Military Identity of an Unmilitary People

forms are rough.” The contractors muted, and to little effect, in part offensive, but the offending panel for the building were instructed to because no one could dispute that and the graphic photos remained.33 achieve “a controlled imperfection.”29 the terrible event had taken place. It Again the veterans mounted a Novelist Alan Cumyn’s first visit had been photographed. It was real withering attack, and again the Senate to the museum revealed an almost and shameful. It was part of Canada’s Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs omnipresent “grey, unadorned past. The regiment involved had implicated itself, with similar impacts concrete angled back as if to deflect been disbanded. The president of and similar results. Prominent in the the shock of explosions, and cut only the powerful veterans interest group, veterans’ charge was Paul Manson, a with narrow slit windows.” He felt the , was Cold War pilot, former Chief of the “off-balance and uncomfortable, prepared to let the matter pass.31 Defence Staff, and the person who had in keeping with the jarring and A more serious attack on the led Passing the Torch’s fundraising fractured nature of war.”30 war museum’s integrity came when for the new museum. The veterans Veterans liked almost all of what veterans, although not all veterans, and their interest groups insisted they saw in the striking new museum, condemned the interpretation of the that the bombing had been crucial in but not everything, and they had been Second World War allied bombing bringing Hitler to his knees, and that conditioned to believe that what they of Germany, in which some 20,000 the war museum was accusing the air did not like was not acceptable. The Canadian airmen participated veterans of immorality at best and Holocaust Gallery experience had and half of that number died. The criminality at worst. War museum raised expectations that they would controversy centred on a concluding officials testified at the committee have a permanent role in deciding panel containing two stark assertions: hearings, saying that they were how the future museum would look that the value and morality of strategic making no value judgements about and what it would include and omit, bombing remained bitterly contested, the airmen; they pointed out that a belief that was reinforced by the and that the bomber offensive had the exhibit as a whole demonstrated museum’s mandate to be a place been largely ineffective until late in Canadian heroism and sacrifice, of remembrance as well as a war the war.32 Accompanying the words and contextualized the bombing museum. were photographs of the destructive campaign in a manner sympathetic to When the museum opened, impact of the bombing on German the allied side. Professional historians the veterans were immediately cities and civilians. The war museum weighed in on the debate, but they unhappy about artistic renderings had consulted with the veterans as were of differing views.34 of a photograph that showed a the Second World War gallery was The senators were not. The Canadian soldier holding a baton to being developed. Changes were museum was “technically and the throat of a Somali teenager, who made, including information about professionally correct in its stand,” subsequently died of his wounds. the extent to which enemy resources the subcommittee reported, but the Their complaints, however, were were tied down by the bomber vets had been insulted and should CWM NCWM_28

Published by Scholars Commons @ Laurier, 2010 25 7

Hillmer - CWM.indd 25 9/27/2010 11:25:52 AM Canadian Military History, Vol. 19 [2010], Iss. 3, Art. 3

be given their due. The panel ought building’s architects did not shy 9. See Michael Valpy, “Invisible No More,” 35 Globe and Mail (Toronto), 21 November to be revisited and revised. The away from the horrors of war, but 2009. Board of Trustees of the Museum they shared the commonplace conceit 10. The account in the paragraphs that follow of Civilization Corporation agreed of Canadians that they have fought leans heavily on interviews conducted by the author in the autumn of 2009 to do so, and the director of the war wars and sacrificed lives for the right with Robert Bothwell, J. L. Granatstein, museum, Joe Guerts, was forced reasons, not for gain or glory. The Alexander Rankin, and Roger Sarty, and out in the bargain. The panel was museum’s unflinching portrayals on Canadian War Museum documents, particularly Cameron Pulsifer’s helpful reworked by senior representatives of conflict, suffering, and death are unpublished study, “The Roots of a of the CMCC and the war museum, lashed to lofty messages of peace, Museum Crisis: Exploring the Origins and discussed with the veterans hope, and rebirth. A military people of a Proposed Holocaust Gallery at the Canadian War Museum.” and David Bashow, an historian perhaps, but if so, a people with a 11. Pulsifer, p.2. favourable to the vets’ interpretation. particular way of war. 12. Quoted in ibid., 3. See also Sarty, pp.124-5. It was history by committee. The 13. Quoted in Pulsifer, p.9. 14. Quoted in ibid., pp.11-12. new text was three times as long as 15. Quoted in ibid., p.19. the discarded panel and many times Notes 16. Quoted in ibid., p.20. less direct. Glossed over were salient 17. Quoted in ibid., p.24. 18. I was a consultant to facts, notably that the bombing The original version of this paper was delivered at the time, and experienced these events campaign in which the Canadians at the Weatherhead Center for International first hand. Affairs, Harvard University, 9 November 19. Barney Danson, with Curtis Fahey, Not were involved (with no share in 2009. I am indebted for advice and assistance Bad for a Sergeant: The Memoirs of Barney decision making) was explicitly to Stephen Azzi, Andrew Burtch, Alan Cumyn, Danson (Toronto: Dundurn, 2002), p.273. designed to destroy Germany’s Malcolm Ferguson, Philippe Lagassé, Mark 20. Ibid., pp.273-4. 36 Phillips, Ruth Phillips, and Susan B. Whitney. 21. J.L. Granatstein, “At Play in the Fields cities and kill civilians. Shades of the Museologists: Two Years at the of the Smithsonian Institution’s 1. Roger Sarty, “The Nationalization of Canadian War Museum,” Ross Ellis capitulation in 1995, the critics of Military History: Scholarship, Politics, Memorial Lecture in Military and and the Canadian War Museum,” in Strategic Studies, University of Calgary, the decision shouted, when protests Norman Hillmer and Adam Chapnick, 19 January 2001, pp.8-9. erupted and a director’s head had eds., of the Mind: The Making 22. Ibid., p.6; Roger Sarty, “The Canadian rolled over an exhibit featuring and Unmaking of Canadian Nationalisms War Museum and National History,” The in the Twentieth Century (Montreal and Shannon Lectures in History, Carleton the Enola Gay, the airplane that Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University University, 3 October 2003. had dropped an atomic bomb on Press, 2007), pp.110-33. 23. Danson, p.275. Japan forty years before.37 The war 2. Lara Bickell, “Canadian War Museum,” 24. Granatstein, p.9. The Public Historian 24, 1 (Winter 2002), p.72. 25. Danson, pp.276-7. museum, however, could draw on 3. J.L. Granatstein and Norman Hillmer, 26. Clifford Krauss, “New Canadian Museum a great deal of media, academic, “Introduction,” in their Battle Lines: Has a Battlefield Focus,”New York Times, Eyewitness Accounts from Canada’s Military 27 April 2005. and public support – and on its own History (Toronto: Thomas Allen, 2004). 27. , In Search of a Soul: expert staff. It had not withdrawn 4. Norman Hillmer, “Peacekeeping: The Designing and Realizing the New Canadian the exhibit as the Smithsonian had, Inevitability of Canada’s Role,” in Michael War Museum ( and Toronto: A. Hennessy and B. J. C. McKercher, eds., Douglas & McIntyre, 2006), pp.22-4, 48-9, the photographs accompanying the War in the Twentieth Century: Reflections at 63. panel were not altered or abandoned, Century’s End (Westport, Connecticut and 28. Rankin interview, 27 October 2009. and the museum insisted on historical London: Praeger, 2003), pp.145-65. 29. Moriyama, p.69. 5. J. L. Granatstein, “Peacekeeping: 30. Alan Cumyn, “Behind the Front Lines,” accuracy in the rewriting of the Did Canada Make a Difference? And Globe and Mail (Toronto), 4 May 2005. Bomber Command panel. What Difference Did Canada Make 31. Dean, p.3. The Canadian War Museum to Peacekeeping,” in John English 32. For the text, see Robert Bothwell, Randall and Norman Hillmer, eds., Making A Hansen, and Margaret MacMillan, was a witness to, participant in, and Difference? Canada’s Foreign Policy in a “Controversy, Commemoration, and beneficiary of a significant shift in Changing World Order (Toronto: Lester, Capitulation: The Canadian War Museum the country’s socio-political culture. 1992), pp.222-36; Norman Hillmer, and Bomber Command,” Queen’s “When Peacekeeping Became Canadian,” Quarterly 115, 2 (Fall 2008), p.368. The engagement and prominence of a presentation to “50+ Years – Canada 33. See Dean, p.4. the vets were part of the story, but and Peacekeeping: History, Evolution 34. Ibid., pp.3-7; Bothwell, Hansen, and only part. In the short time since and Perceptions,” University of Ottawa, MacMillan, pp.368-70. 13 May 2006. 35. Bothwell, Hansen, and MacMillan, p.370. the opening of the museum in 2005, 6. N a tional Capital Commission, 36. Ibid., pp.384-7. The altered text is on p.384. well over two million visitors have Peacekeeping Monument: Competition 37. Ibid., p.375. Guideline (Ottawa: Government of come to a hall of history and memory Canada, 1990), pp.1-2. that emphasizes the military as a 7. Sarty, pp.126-7. 8. David Dean, “Museums as Contact Zones: national symbol, and the importance Norman Hillmer is professor of history The Canadian War Museum and Bomber and international affairs at Carleton of war and conflict in the making Command,” Museum and Society 7, 1 University. of Canada and Canadians. The (March 2009), p.10.

https://scholars.wlu.ca/cmh/vol19/iss3/326 8

Hillmer - CWM.indd 26 9/27/2010 11:25:52 AM : The Canadian War Museum and the Military Identity of an Unmilitary People

From the Editor-in-Chief the continued value of heavy designed to last (with maintenance … continued from page 2 armour expressed so vehemently and periodic upgrades) for about in the recent past are answered by a a generation. Thus Christopher an important disjunction between chilling account of a light armoured and Tim’s speculation that Gross’ the veterans of the French Canadian vehicle’s instant destruction, with film will, with the limited funding 22nd Battalion who celebrated heavy casualties to the crew, by available in Canada’s cultural sector, their comradeship in arms in a an improvised explosive device. It likely have to stand for a generation sacred cause, and the increasingly brought to mind a talk by General or more seems exactly correct from predominant nationaliste view that Hillier in 2004 when he explained that the financial perspective. the war was a British one of no in the Afghan environment, one really interest to true Canadians. When needed the protection and precision Roger Sarty Geoff presented his results at the punch of a tank to “reach out and August 2010 military history colloquy at Laurier touch someone” – and not least to do last spring, members of the audience so with minimum losses both to our encouraged him to produce the article personnel and noncombatants. published here, and the anonymous This issue has two special peer reviewers have been equally features, both cinematic. Tim Cook positive. of the Canadian War Museum has Regular contributor Laura cavassed ten colleagues for their ten Brandon of the Canadian War favourite war films. As interesting Museum examines printmaking as the diversity of the movies chosen and other reproduction of works is the commentary by each of the in the war art programs of the two historians. Wittingly or not, these world wars. In the First World War, are auto-biographical. Films, as the art program was organized by much as books (and music) evoke Lord Beaverbrook as something powerful memories on the part like a private enterprise, and the of the viewer about when she or reproductions were sold on a he first saw the work. Here is a commercial basis to raise funds. By snapshot of the markedly different contrast, the government sponsored life experiences and perspectives that the Second World War program, and have brought some of this country’s the wide distribution of reproductions leading teachers, writers and museum reveals some of the reasons for official professionals to military history. support, including the value of the Tim collaborated with Christopher art for propaganda posters. Perhaps Schultz of the University of Western more important was a conviction Ontario to produce the second that art should be encouraged for feature, an analysis of the historical the benefit of Canadian society and content of Paul Gross’ important culture, an idea that in part can film Passchendaele. Christopher, who be traced to government funding has worked in film studies as well as Dear sir, of art projects in the United States history, and Tim, who has worked rlene Doucette has been diligent during the Depression as part of the on many exhibits in several media Ain her article “From Belgium to Roosevelt administration’s “New aimed at broad audiences, are both Broadway” (Canadian Military History, Deal” for economic recovery. well qualified to comment on the Spring, 2010) in tracing the connection Sean Maloney, another regular, compromises with scholarship so between the Watson and Massey families presents a first-person account of often essential in a cultural product and the chain of events that may led a Canadian-Afghan operation in with a hefty price tag. It is worth the button, reportedly taken at Ypres, August 2008 built around Canada’s noting that the $20 million budget for being bequeathed to the Canadian War capable armoured forces. These have Passchendaele was roughly equal to the Museum. proved invaluable in the broken, whole budget for exhibit planning, It is unfortunate that she did not constricted, heavily overgrown design and construction, including devote as much attention to the button terrain that features in key parts artifact conservation and preparation, itself, which is actually not a German of Kandahar province. In the early for the new Canadian War Museum button. A little research into heraldic part of this piece the doubts about building. The exhibits were continued on page 80…

Published by Scholars Commons @ Laurier, 2010 27 9

Hillmer - CWM.indd 27 9/27/2010 11:25:52 AM