Said Al-Badri's Reading Note # 2: Rudin, R. (2002). From the nation to the citizen: Quebec historical writing and the shaping of identity

Summary:

            Rudin (2002) explains how the concept of citizenship has been discussed in the Quebec context. He argues that this term is merely used by those connected with a specific political preference, namely sovereignty with the nation-state. Rudin (2002) notes that Gerard Bouchard is one of many historians who shows sovereignty preference in his discussion of citizenship in the Quebec context. As Bouchard examined the relationship between people's vision of their past and their attaining of a common identity, he hoped that one day "all Quebecers feel like full-fledged citizens, regardless of their ethnic origins or constitutional preferences" (Rudin, 2002, p. 95). Bouchard emphasized that historians are capable of building an identity "by giving people a sense of where they have been so that they might be able to imagine where they are headed" (Rudin, 2002, p. 96). However, Bouchard pointed that as historians consider themselves professionals undertaking a scientific act, they are caught in the dilemma of being committed to their objective view of the past and their own preferences concerning the future of their society (Rudin, 2002). In order to give an example of what Bouchard calls "false representations" (Rudin, 2002, p. 96), he criticized Abbe Lionel Groulx for depicting Quebec as a rural society when it was in the process of urbanizing. However, Rudin (2002) indicates that Quebec was more rural than the Canadian norm when Groulx started his career. He also states that both Bouchard and Groulx faced the dilemma of trying to stick to the facts while being affected by the world in which they lived. Additionally, Rudin (2002) notes that both Bouchard and Groulx looked at Quebec society from different perspectives. While Bouchard portrayed this society as an ethnic form of nationalism, Groulx depicted it as the image of the citizen in a sovereign state (Rudin, 2002).

            Bouchard argues that the historians who preceded him are preoccupied with the idea of difference. Thus, French Canada was shown as if "it were radically different from their English-Canadian and American neighbours" (Rudin, 2002, pp. 97-98). Moreover, Rudin (2002) points that a group of "amateurs", such as Francois Xavier Garneau, presented the Quebec past in a way that strengthened people's determination to survive "by explaining to them what made French Canada unique" (Rudin, 2002, p. 98). Both Garneau and Groulx agreed that fellow citizens have to remain loyal to their roots, however they had a disagreement about where to place Catholicism in French-Canadian society (Rudin, 2002). In addition, Rudin (2002) explains how Groulx's view of Quebec history evolved over time. Although Groulx continued to emphasize the notion of difference and his hopes for the future of his people, he eventually devoted his attention to material concerns (Rudin, 2002). Groulx's successors, such as Guy Fregault, Michel Brunet and Maurice Seguin, followed his footsteps as they persisted in defining people on the basis of their ethnic origin. However, these new historians differ from Groulx in that they tried to understand the causes of French-Canadian economic inferiority (Rudin, 2002). Furthermore, a series of historians from the university of Laval, namely Marcel Trudel, Jean Hamelin and Fernand Ouellet, agreed with Groulx's successors that French Canadians had traditionally maintained little power. However, they claimed that this was due to these French speakers' poor business practices and lavish spending which can be considered one of the negative consequences of Catholicism (Rudin, 2002).

            Rudin (2002) notes that the Quiet Revolution, which took place in the 1060s, brought about considerable changes in Quebec society. By way of example, the Quebec state took control of education and hydro-electricity. As French-speaking Quebecers achieved a period of prosperity and received an excellent education, they regarded themselves as successful members of the majority group within Quebec and refused to be considered members of a weak Canadian minority (Rudin, 2002). Another product of the Quiet Revolution is the term 'Quebecois' which, as Jacques Parizeau argued, refers to the French-speaking Quebecers only (Rudin, 2002). Although Parizeau's belief about the concept of 'Quebecois' demonstrates his ethnic understanding of nationalism, the Quebec governments, from the 1960s to 1097s, endeavored to contain both Native people and English-speaking Quebecers (Rudin, 2002). Unlike earlier historians, Paul-Andre Linteau, Jean-Claude Robert and Rene Durocher looked at Quebec as an urban society and questioned the influence of Catholicism which blocked "the entrepreneurial instincts of Quebecers" (Rudin, 2002, p. 104). Jocelyn Letourneau stated that "the French Canadian, 'conquered, humiliated and demoralized,' was replaced in the historical record by the Quebecois, 'successful, entrepreneurial and ambitious'" (Rudin, 2002, p. 104). Additionally, Linteau, Robert and Durocher emphasized that "[t]he Quebec that we are studying here is defined in territorial, rather than ethnic, terms" (Rudin, 2002, p. 104). Thus, they used the term 'Quebecois' to refer to all residents of Quebec.

            The modernist approach to Quebec history, which demonstrates a civic understanding of nationalism into the past, received serious criticisms. Jocelyn Letourneau argued that there was "no real connection between the [modernist] interpretation and the persistent representations of the past in the collective memory" (Rudin, 2002, p. 104). Dumont also criticized the Quiet Revolution for leaving the French-speakers with little knowledge about their own history (Rudin, 2002). In conclusion, Rudin (2002) argues throughout this chapter that people tend to manipulate history in order to promote certain notions of citizenship.

Assessment, critique and questions:

            I personally found Rudin's (2002) chapter titled 'from the nation to the citizen: Quebec historical writing and the shaping of identity' very informative as it explains how historians use history to support different versions of citizenship. Rudin (2002) discusses how historians focus upon different paradigms, namely the paradigm of difference, normalcy and the citizen, when examining history. Although I have a very limited knowledge of Quebec's past, Rudin's (2002) writing follow chronological sequence which enables me to trace the development of Quebec's history. On the other hand, as I don't speak French, I found difficulty understanding some French words used in the text such as citoyen, decouverte, and survivance. Moreover, although Rudin (2002) explains the life of French-Canadian speakers in Quebec very well, he does not provide enough information about how English-Canadian speakers live in Quebec. Additionally, Rudin (2002) merely cites French historians in this chapter, thus he excludes English historians' points of view about the Quebec history. Reading Rudin's (2002) chapter, the following questions came to my mind:

1.      Do we write history in a way that supports a certain version of citizenship?

2.      Is it possible to write about history without any bias?

3.      How can historians be objective when viewing history?

4.      Does history affect politics and change people's future life?

5.      Should history be open to multiple interpretations?

Reference:

Rudin, R. (2002). From the nation to the citizen: Quebec historical writing and the shaping of identity. In R. Adamoski, D. Chunn & R. Menzies (Eds.), Contesting Canadian citizenship: Historical readings (pp.95-111). Toronto: Broadview Press.