So, as usual I have way too many books on my to-read list and I've decided to throw a few out there and let my readers (all 4 of you I'm sure) to choose my next read for me. Please post your choice via a comment. I'll read the one with the most votes and then write a general review when I'm finished. Also, when I get it and see how dense it is I'll post choices for a timeline for me to finish it that everyone can vote on as well.
Indecisive much? I think yes.
1. Breaking the spell : religion as a natural phenomenon
Daniel C. Dennett.2006.
2.National dreams : myth, memory, and Canadian history
Daniel Francis.1997.
3.The ascent of money : a financial history of the world
Niall Ferguson.2008.
4.The Aryan Jesus : Christian theologians and the Bible in Nazi Germany
Susannah Heschel.2008.
5.Private history in public : exhibition and the settings of everyday life
Tammy S. Gordon. 2010.
6.Boys in the pits : child labour in coal mines
Robert McIntosh. 2000.
7.Kiss the kids for dad, don't forget to write : the wartime letters of George Timmins, 1916-18.
edited by Y.A. Bennett. 2009.
8.Canadas of the mind : the making and unmaking of Canadian nationalisms in the twentieth century. edited by Norman Hillmer and Adam Chapnick.2007
9. The Lord for the body : religion, medicine, and Protestant faith healing in Canada, 1880-1930. James Opp. 2005.
10. Books on fire : the destruction of libraries throughout history / Lucien X. Polastron ; translated by Jon E. Graham.2007.
Cheers,
Random Uni Student
Sunday, June 13, 2010
Friday, June 11, 2010
Tommy Douglas Docs...
Hi everyone,
Just a quick post. Here are a couple documentaries on Tommy Douglas that I enjoy. Both docs contain some great speech clips.
Tommy Douglas: Keep of the Flame - National Film Board of Canada 1986
http://www.nfb.ca/film/tommy_douglas_keeper_of_the_flame/
The Premiers: Tommy Douglas -CPAC 2009?
Steps: (because for some reason the link wasn't working)
www.cpac.ca
Select Program (drop down menu)
The Premiers
Tommy Douglas
CBC Archives: Tommy Douglas and the NDP - 1935-2001
http://archives.cbc.ca/politics/parties_leaders/topics/851/
Sometimes being idealistic can be a good thing...
Cheers,
a random uni student
Just a quick post. Here are a couple documentaries on Tommy Douglas that I enjoy. Both docs contain some great speech clips.
Tommy Douglas: Keep of the Flame - National Film Board of Canada 1986
http://www.nfb.ca/film/tommy_douglas_keeper_of_the_flame/
The Premiers: Tommy Douglas -CPAC 2009?
Steps: (because for some reason the link wasn't working)
www.cpac.ca
Select Program (drop down menu)
The Premiers
Tommy Douglas
CBC Archives: Tommy Douglas and the NDP - 1935-2001
http://archives.cbc.ca/politics/parties_leaders/topics/851/
Sometimes being idealistic can be a good thing...
Cheers,
a random uni student
Thursday, June 10, 2010
History Flickr?
Hi Everyone,
A very cool site, once again an amazing find from historian Christopher Moore's Blog...
http://www.historypin.com./
This site seeks to gather historic photographs and super-imposes them upon modern photographs of the same locations at which the original picture was taken.
As an example of my atrocious Frenglish...this site is TRES COOL!
Christopher Moore;s blog -http://christophermoorehistory.blogspot.com/
Random Uni Student
A very cool site, once again an amazing find from historian Christopher Moore's Blog...
http://www.historypin.com./
This site seeks to gather historic photographs and super-imposes them upon modern photographs of the same locations at which the original picture was taken.
As an example of my atrocious Frenglish...this site is TRES COOL!
Christopher Moore;s blog -http://christophermoorehistory.blogspot.com/
Random Uni Student
Friday, June 4, 2010
Remembering the chair...
Hi everyone,
I saw today that June 2nd was the anniversary of the coronation of Queen Elizabeth II. It reminded me of an awful blog post that I wrote in 2007 on my first blog and I thought I'd re-post it for the heck of it...my sincerest apologies. Below is also a link to a video of the 1953 coronation ceremony...CBC archives has come through for me again!
"Now children gather round and hear a faithful tale resound, for from the lips of a historian flow, the wonder that only history can bestow. Haha, I’m a geek, ok here’s my, I’m sure long anticipated, blog on the British Coronation Chair, otherwise known as King Edward’s Chair. This is a subject that has fascinated me for quite some time and my admiration goes out to the protectors of the chair over the centuries for so carefully preserving not only a piece of British history but a piece of history that has had such an impact on Europe and the World as a whole; for upon the chair almost every English, then later British monarch have been crowned since 1308. For 700 years the royals of England have been crowned upon its seat.
The chair is made of oaken wood and originally did not have the four lions at its feet. They were added in the early 16th century (1500’s) by the Tutor dynasty and the four gold lions presently at the bottom of the chair where put in place of the originals in 1727. The space above the four lions was the former permanent home of the Stone of Scone. I will come back to speaking about the stone later on. Originally, the stone was completely enclosed by a decorated wooden panel, but over the years the panel was worn away thereby exposing the stone when it is set in place beneath the seat.
As mentioned, every monarch in England since Edward I in 1308 has been crowned upon the chair at a coronation ceremony, but there are a few exceptions. The 12 year old Edward V was proclaimed king in 1483 but his throne was quickly usurped by Richard III and Edward was placed in the Tower of London; and never seen again. He therefore was never officially coronated. That makes me want to study the War of the Roses more…it’s so hard to keep all these monarchs straight!!! There was one other monarch who was king but was never crowned; this being Edward VIII who abdicated in 1936. Both instances there were proclamations of kingship but never coronations. There are two other interesting facts that I feel would fit quite nicely in this section. The first is that in 1689 when a joint monarchy of William III (William of Orange, a Dutch royal) and Mary II was created. At the coronation ceremony a second chair was made for the Queen. Thus, in 700 years there were really only three monarchs of England who were not crowned upon King Edwards Chair. There is one more interesting bit of information, in 1653 Oliver Cromwell was proclaimed Lord Protector and the sat in King Edwards Chair for the ceremony. It should be noted though that Cromwell was not proclaimed a monarch, he did not want to be a king and was surprised even when Parliament wanted to give him power, and therefore the ceremony was not held in Wesminter Abbey, but in Westminster Hall. The ceremony had always been held in Wesminster Abbey to, I assume originally, go along with the idea of the divine right of Kings.
As a quick note Cromwell was head of the military and jointly ruled England with a Council of State and Parliament.
The Stone of Scone is surrounded by many legends. First it is said to be the stone that Jacob rested his head against "And Jacob rose up early in the morning, and took the stone that he had put for his pillows, and set it up for a pillar, and poured oil upon the top of it" (Genesis chapter 28, verse 18). O, I’m just going to paste straight from the site here to tell you the legends behind the stone, “Legends abound concerning the Stone of Scone and tradition identifies it with the one upon which Jacob rested his head at Bethel - "And Jacob rose up early in the morning, and took the stone that he had put for his pillows, and set it up for a pillar, and poured oil upon the top of it" (Genesis chapter 28, verse 18). The legend then says that Jacob's sons carried it to Egypt and from thence it passed to Spain with King Gathelus, son of Cecrops, the builder of Athens. About 700 BC it was said to be in Ireland, whither it was carried by the Spanish King's son Simon Brech, on his invasion of the island. There it was placed upon the sacred Hill of Tara, and called "Lia-Fail", the "fatal" stone, or "stone of destiny", for when the Irish kings were seated on it at coronations the Stone groaned aloud if the claimant was of royal race but remained silent if he was a pretender. Fergus Mor MacEirc (died 50l?), the founder of the Scottish monarchy, and one of the Blood Royal of Ireland, received it in Scotland, and Kenneth MacAlpin (d.860) finally deposited it in the monastery of Scone in Perthshire (846).” (http://www.westminster-abbey.org/tour/coronation_chair/index.html).
Now, here’s the really interesting part of the story. The original purpose of the chair was to enclose the Stone of Scone, and the stone being under the seat of the British Monarch was a symbol that England was “over” Scotland and its throne. You see, up until 1292 every Scottish king had been crowned upon the stone (and before the Scots, Irish monarchs had been crowned upon it). So, British monarchs, when crowned upon the King Edwards Chair were essentially proclaiming England’s power of Scotland and Ireland.
There is an ironic twist to this story though. Upon the stone is carved:
Ni fallat fatum, Scoti, quocunque locatum
Invenient lapidem, regnare tenentur ibidem
[If Fates go right, where'er this stone is found
The Scots shall monarchs of that realm be crowned]
Basically it says that whatever kingdom the Stone is found in that a Scot will be the ruler of that kingdom. This came true in 1603 with the crowning of James VI of Scotland (James I of England). So, the original purpose of the Stone was to show English rule over Scotland and then a Scot takes the British throne and once again puts a Scot ruler over Scotland…AND England. Isn’t that a kick in the pants?????
Oh, and for the record the Stone weighs 336 pounds and is composed of sandstone. Also, I tried to think of something funny/qwirky/clever to type here but failing to do so I will continue onto the next section.
There have been a few instances when the chair has been removed from Westminster Abbey. In WW2 the chair was moved and the Stone was placed in a vault. This was for their protection from the German bombing raids. On the last point I am not 100% sure, I just remember reading it. Please correct me if you know it to be false or would like to add information to it. In 1887 the chair didn’t actually left the Abbey but it was used for something other than a coronation. Queen Victoria used it for her Golden Jubilee services. As mentioned before the chair was moved to West Minster Hall where Oliver Cromwell was declared Lord Protector.
In 1950 the Stone was actually stolen from the chair by four Scottish nationalists and brought back to Scotland. It was retrieved again after negotiations with the nationalists and was promptly put into the vault that it was placed in during WW2 and wasn’t returned to the chair until 1952, in time for the coronation of Elizabeth II in 1953.
There is speculation that the current Stone is not the original. Some say the Scots hid the real stone and replaced it with another in anticipation of the invasion of Edward I circa. 1296. Also, there is speculation that the nationalists in 1950 didn’t give back the stone they stole, but replaced it with another one. The truth may never be known. Sometimes there is great wonder and tension when thinking about historical mysteries of such nature. Regardless, the current stone represents England’s rule over Scotland.
In 1996 the then Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, John Major, had the Stone returned to Scotland where it resides today in Edinburgh Castle. The Stone though was returned on the condition that it is restored to the chair when a coronation occurs in England.
Well, that’s my blog about the Coronation Chair of Britain and the Stone of Scone. I have no idea why it interests me so much. Maybe because it’s a representation of so many things, patriotism, deceit, power, honour, cruelty, pride (both good and bad), all of these things have characterized English monarchs over the centuries. These monarchs of England jointly have had perhaps the most influence on the world than the monarchs of any other nation throughout history, and for 700 years they have been crowned upon one chair, over one stone. The nation has changed much in 700 years but the Chair has remained.
Here is a link to a video clip of Queen Elizabeth II being crowned in 1953 at her coronation ceremony. There are several spots in the clip that show her on the Chair:
http://archives.cbc.ca/on_this_day/06/02/
Ok, that’s it. Frig….I love history.
-a history student"
Cheers,
Random Uni Student
I saw today that June 2nd was the anniversary of the coronation of Queen Elizabeth II. It reminded me of an awful blog post that I wrote in 2007 on my first blog and I thought I'd re-post it for the heck of it...my sincerest apologies. Below is also a link to a video of the 1953 coronation ceremony...CBC archives has come through for me again!
"Now children gather round and hear a faithful tale resound, for from the lips of a historian flow, the wonder that only history can bestow. Haha, I’m a geek, ok here’s my, I’m sure long anticipated, blog on the British Coronation Chair, otherwise known as King Edward’s Chair. This is a subject that has fascinated me for quite some time and my admiration goes out to the protectors of the chair over the centuries for so carefully preserving not only a piece of British history but a piece of history that has had such an impact on Europe and the World as a whole; for upon the chair almost every English, then later British monarch have been crowned since 1308. For 700 years the royals of England have been crowned upon its seat.
The chair is made of oaken wood and originally did not have the four lions at its feet. They were added in the early 16th century (1500’s) by the Tutor dynasty and the four gold lions presently at the bottom of the chair where put in place of the originals in 1727. The space above the four lions was the former permanent home of the Stone of Scone. I will come back to speaking about the stone later on. Originally, the stone was completely enclosed by a decorated wooden panel, but over the years the panel was worn away thereby exposing the stone when it is set in place beneath the seat.
As mentioned, every monarch in England since Edward I in 1308 has been crowned upon the chair at a coronation ceremony, but there are a few exceptions. The 12 year old Edward V was proclaimed king in 1483 but his throne was quickly usurped by Richard III and Edward was placed in the Tower of London; and never seen again. He therefore was never officially coronated. That makes me want to study the War of the Roses more…it’s so hard to keep all these monarchs straight!!! There was one other monarch who was king but was never crowned; this being Edward VIII who abdicated in 1936. Both instances there were proclamations of kingship but never coronations. There are two other interesting facts that I feel would fit quite nicely in this section. The first is that in 1689 when a joint monarchy of William III (William of Orange, a Dutch royal) and Mary II was created. At the coronation ceremony a second chair was made for the Queen. Thus, in 700 years there were really only three monarchs of England who were not crowned upon King Edwards Chair. There is one more interesting bit of information, in 1653 Oliver Cromwell was proclaimed Lord Protector and the sat in King Edwards Chair for the ceremony. It should be noted though that Cromwell was not proclaimed a monarch, he did not want to be a king and was surprised even when Parliament wanted to give him power, and therefore the ceremony was not held in Wesminter Abbey, but in Westminster Hall. The ceremony had always been held in Wesminster Abbey to, I assume originally, go along with the idea of the divine right of Kings.
As a quick note Cromwell was head of the military and jointly ruled England with a Council of State and Parliament.
The Stone of Scone is surrounded by many legends. First it is said to be the stone that Jacob rested his head against "And Jacob rose up early in the morning, and took the stone that he had put for his pillows, and set it up for a pillar, and poured oil upon the top of it" (Genesis chapter 28, verse 18). O, I’m just going to paste straight from the site here to tell you the legends behind the stone, “Legends abound concerning the Stone of Scone and tradition identifies it with the one upon which Jacob rested his head at Bethel - "And Jacob rose up early in the morning, and took the stone that he had put for his pillows, and set it up for a pillar, and poured oil upon the top of it" (Genesis chapter 28, verse 18). The legend then says that Jacob's sons carried it to Egypt and from thence it passed to Spain with King Gathelus, son of Cecrops, the builder of Athens. About 700 BC it was said to be in Ireland, whither it was carried by the Spanish King's son Simon Brech, on his invasion of the island. There it was placed upon the sacred Hill of Tara, and called "Lia-Fail", the "fatal" stone, or "stone of destiny", for when the Irish kings were seated on it at coronations the Stone groaned aloud if the claimant was of royal race but remained silent if he was a pretender. Fergus Mor MacEirc (died 50l?), the founder of the Scottish monarchy, and one of the Blood Royal of Ireland, received it in Scotland, and Kenneth MacAlpin (d.860) finally deposited it in the monastery of Scone in Perthshire (846).” (http://www.westminster-abbey.org/tour/coronation_chair/index.html).
Now, here’s the really interesting part of the story. The original purpose of the chair was to enclose the Stone of Scone, and the stone being under the seat of the British Monarch was a symbol that England was “over” Scotland and its throne. You see, up until 1292 every Scottish king had been crowned upon the stone (and before the Scots, Irish monarchs had been crowned upon it). So, British monarchs, when crowned upon the King Edwards Chair were essentially proclaiming England’s power of Scotland and Ireland.
There is an ironic twist to this story though. Upon the stone is carved:
Ni fallat fatum, Scoti, quocunque locatum
Invenient lapidem, regnare tenentur ibidem
[If Fates go right, where'er this stone is found
The Scots shall monarchs of that realm be crowned]
Basically it says that whatever kingdom the Stone is found in that a Scot will be the ruler of that kingdom. This came true in 1603 with the crowning of James VI of Scotland (James I of England). So, the original purpose of the Stone was to show English rule over Scotland and then a Scot takes the British throne and once again puts a Scot ruler over Scotland…AND England. Isn’t that a kick in the pants?????
Oh, and for the record the Stone weighs 336 pounds and is composed of sandstone. Also, I tried to think of something funny/qwirky/clever to type here but failing to do so I will continue onto the next section.
There have been a few instances when the chair has been removed from Westminster Abbey. In WW2 the chair was moved and the Stone was placed in a vault. This was for their protection from the German bombing raids. On the last point I am not 100% sure, I just remember reading it. Please correct me if you know it to be false or would like to add information to it. In 1887 the chair didn’t actually left the Abbey but it was used for something other than a coronation. Queen Victoria used it for her Golden Jubilee services. As mentioned before the chair was moved to West Minster Hall where Oliver Cromwell was declared Lord Protector.
In 1950 the Stone was actually stolen from the chair by four Scottish nationalists and brought back to Scotland. It was retrieved again after negotiations with the nationalists and was promptly put into the vault that it was placed in during WW2 and wasn’t returned to the chair until 1952, in time for the coronation of Elizabeth II in 1953.
There is speculation that the current Stone is not the original. Some say the Scots hid the real stone and replaced it with another in anticipation of the invasion of Edward I circa. 1296. Also, there is speculation that the nationalists in 1950 didn’t give back the stone they stole, but replaced it with another one. The truth may never be known. Sometimes there is great wonder and tension when thinking about historical mysteries of such nature. Regardless, the current stone represents England’s rule over Scotland.
In 1996 the then Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, John Major, had the Stone returned to Scotland where it resides today in Edinburgh Castle. The Stone though was returned on the condition that it is restored to the chair when a coronation occurs in England.
Well, that’s my blog about the Coronation Chair of Britain and the Stone of Scone. I have no idea why it interests me so much. Maybe because it’s a representation of so many things, patriotism, deceit, power, honour, cruelty, pride (both good and bad), all of these things have characterized English monarchs over the centuries. These monarchs of England jointly have had perhaps the most influence on the world than the monarchs of any other nation throughout history, and for 700 years they have been crowned upon one chair, over one stone. The nation has changed much in 700 years but the Chair has remained.
Here is a link to a video clip of Queen Elizabeth II being crowned in 1953 at her coronation ceremony. There are several spots in the clip that show her on the Chair:
http://archives.cbc.ca/on_this_day/06/02/
Ok, that’s it. Frig….I love history.
-a history student"
Cheers,
Random Uni Student
Wednesday, June 2, 2010
The Stubborn Ounces of History
A thought...though by no means a new one...
no turning point in history occurs or significant historical personality makes their impact in a vacuum. Indeed, each is necessarily supported by many intentional and unintentional acts of other people; people who seem insignificant in the shadow of the event or the historical actor.
This is, of course, a very general and simple idea, but nonetheless warrants expression. In a moment of clarity while enjoying the sunshine on my campus this thought occurred to me while I was reading. In Tom Warner's book "Never Going Back: A History of Queer Activism in Canada" he writes about the evolution of gay and lesbian/feminist (closely linked during the gay liberation movement of the 1970's-1980's)in that a good number of small liberation organizations and publications were started and failed within a few years or less. These initiatives were constantly failing and yet more would be formed, fail, and more would be formed after those. Finally, in the late 1970's and onward gay liberation groups generally gained a more permanent status as circumstances changed. They would go on to have serious legislative, legal and social impacts upon Canada and Canadians. But, these impacts would not have occurred if it were not for what I'm going to label as stubborn ounces. These early groups and publications, now largely forgotten, paved the way for the stability of gay and lesbian political and social activist groups and publications that we see today. Each one added more weight to a movement which eventually would tip the scales of Canadian society. No matter how many failures the groups and publications continued to be formed...again...again...and again.
The gay and lesbian liberation movement is just one example of many that fits this historical pattern. It could easily be applied to any movement or occurrence, past or present. But perhaps I could nuance this common sense thought with a quotation from the late Tommy Douglas, former leader of the Saskatchewan and federal CCF/NDP parties between the 1940's and the 1960's...
"You say the little efforts that I make will do no good; they never will prevail to tip the hovering scale where justice hangs in balance. I don't think I ever thought they would, but I am prejudiced beyond debate in favour of my right to choose which side shall feel the stubborn ounces of my weight"
The acts of many INDIVIDUALS and SMALL groups working towards a goal are the "stubborn ounces" which far outweigh the importance of the significant events or historical actors as it is these stubborn ounces that provide the weight and thus the the power to create the inertia that is inherently present in the evolution of every epoc of human society.
Every vote counts, every e-mail, every petition signature, every Fscebook status, every link passed along etc. etc. are the stubborn ounces which tip the scale of justice and social evolution.
And here's some union and civil rights songs to complement. Also a video of the farewell speech of Tommy Douglas upon his resignation as leader of the NDP in 1971...I find it inspiring :)I do wish the NDP would its roots again as a movement rather than a party, but this may impossible, and is of course terribly idealistic.
Solidarity Forever:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYiKdJoSsb8
We Shall Overcome:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhnPVP23rzo&feature=related
Douglas steps down:
http://archives.cbc.ca/politics/parties_leaders/topics/851/
Cheers,
Random Uni Student
no turning point in history occurs or significant historical personality makes their impact in a vacuum. Indeed, each is necessarily supported by many intentional and unintentional acts of other people; people who seem insignificant in the shadow of the event or the historical actor.
This is, of course, a very general and simple idea, but nonetheless warrants expression. In a moment of clarity while enjoying the sunshine on my campus this thought occurred to me while I was reading. In Tom Warner's book "Never Going Back: A History of Queer Activism in Canada" he writes about the evolution of gay and lesbian/feminist (closely linked during the gay liberation movement of the 1970's-1980's)in that a good number of small liberation organizations and publications were started and failed within a few years or less. These initiatives were constantly failing and yet more would be formed, fail, and more would be formed after those. Finally, in the late 1970's and onward gay liberation groups generally gained a more permanent status as circumstances changed. They would go on to have serious legislative, legal and social impacts upon Canada and Canadians. But, these impacts would not have occurred if it were not for what I'm going to label as stubborn ounces. These early groups and publications, now largely forgotten, paved the way for the stability of gay and lesbian political and social activist groups and publications that we see today. Each one added more weight to a movement which eventually would tip the scales of Canadian society. No matter how many failures the groups and publications continued to be formed...again...again...and again.
The gay and lesbian liberation movement is just one example of many that fits this historical pattern. It could easily be applied to any movement or occurrence, past or present. But perhaps I could nuance this common sense thought with a quotation from the late Tommy Douglas, former leader of the Saskatchewan and federal CCF/NDP parties between the 1940's and the 1960's...
"You say the little efforts that I make will do no good; they never will prevail to tip the hovering scale where justice hangs in balance. I don't think I ever thought they would, but I am prejudiced beyond debate in favour of my right to choose which side shall feel the stubborn ounces of my weight"
The acts of many INDIVIDUALS and SMALL groups working towards a goal are the "stubborn ounces" which far outweigh the importance of the significant events or historical actors as it is these stubborn ounces that provide the weight and thus the the power to create the inertia that is inherently present in the evolution of every epoc of human society.
Every vote counts, every e-mail, every petition signature, every Fscebook status, every link passed along etc. etc. are the stubborn ounces which tip the scale of justice and social evolution.
And here's some union and civil rights songs to complement. Also a video of the farewell speech of Tommy Douglas upon his resignation as leader of the NDP in 1971...I find it inspiring :)I do wish the NDP would its roots again as a movement rather than a party, but this may impossible, and is of course terribly idealistic.
Solidarity Forever:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYiKdJoSsb8
We Shall Overcome:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhnPVP23rzo&feature=related
Douglas steps down:
http://archives.cbc.ca/politics/parties_leaders/topics/851/
Cheers,
Random Uni Student
Saturday, May 1, 2010
First Gay Rally
This is a news clip of the first gay liberation movement rally in Canada. There are several other interesting clips grouped with it in the "Gay and Lesbian Emergence: Out in Canada" section of the CBC online archives. For context see my previous blog on history as a human right. The rally took place in the same movement that gave birth to The Body Politic. A few short weeks after this rally a gay liberation group (Gays of Ottawa) was formed in the capital.
Enjoy a brief glimpse into Canada's gay liberation history:)
http://archives.cbc.ca/politics/rights_freedoms/clips/3227/
If you're interested in more context check out this link from the Canadian Lesbian and Gay Archives...
http://www.clga.ca/Material/Records/docs/wedemand.htm
Random Uni Student
Enjoy a brief glimpse into Canada's gay liberation history:)
http://archives.cbc.ca/politics/rights_freedoms/clips/3227/
If you're interested in more context check out this link from the Canadian Lesbian and Gay Archives...
http://www.clga.ca/Material/Records/docs/wedemand.htm
Random Uni Student
Thursday, April 22, 2010
The human right to history
While reading for an essay I came across an anthology of articles from an early Canadian gay liberation movement called The Body Politic. This was one of the very first gay liberation publications in Canada, being first published in 1971. In sum, the last gay liberation wave began in Canada in the late 1960's, moreso in the early 1970's. This movement advocated for a positive public visibility of gays and lesbians and pushed for their legislative/political, social, occupational, and legal rights.
In the introduction one section stuck out at me. It's a quotation, which to me, gives a shining example of the modern western human's need, and thus their right, to have a legitimate history. Anthropology and the study of nationalism tell us that humans naturally form into groups. These groups form identities, and each individual within that group conforms, in some aspects, to that group identity. This identity, as personal though bound to a group, is the right, the right to personally belong to the group to which ones feels most suited, or to more than one groups that ones feels suited. This can only be done if such a group has some sort of historical foundation, for a group cannot define itself in the present, or its vision for the future with an historical background by which to relatively compare its present and future against.
Gerald Hannon here explains his reasoning for contributing to The Body Politic over a number of years:
"I got hooked, I guess, on empowerment, the transformation of The Helpless Queer with no history and an unlikely future into Someone, into a group of Someones, who uncovered a history, who found heroes, who grabbed today and shook it till tomorrow fell out of its pocket and there was a place in it for us."
This individual in being part of the gay liberation visible gay identity helped to pull back the layers of society to reveal a distinctly queer history ("who uncovered a history") and how that history aided in its present identity ("grabbed today") and helped to focus upon its future ("shook it till tomorrow fell out and...there was a place in it for us").
Peronsal history, group history....social history...is a human right...deny it to no one.
It was once denied to Women, Canadian Japanese (only examples of many) as it was denied to Homosexuals. It has been denied in gender, race, and sexuality. Though it is not the start, NOW is the day to uncover the histories of those to who it is denied.
Maybe ask yourself, who are we denying today?
Random Uni Student
Ps. It can be a worthwhile thing for a group to understand its history, only to be ashamed of it and use that shame to redirect their role in the future to be as positive of one that's possible within their present perspectives.
pps. The quotation can be found in Flaunting it!: A Decade of Gay Journalism from The Body Politic.
In the introduction one section stuck out at me. It's a quotation, which to me, gives a shining example of the modern western human's need, and thus their right, to have a legitimate history. Anthropology and the study of nationalism tell us that humans naturally form into groups. These groups form identities, and each individual within that group conforms, in some aspects, to that group identity. This identity, as personal though bound to a group, is the right, the right to personally belong to the group to which ones feels most suited, or to more than one groups that ones feels suited. This can only be done if such a group has some sort of historical foundation, for a group cannot define itself in the present, or its vision for the future with an historical background by which to relatively compare its present and future against.
Gerald Hannon here explains his reasoning for contributing to The Body Politic over a number of years:
"I got hooked, I guess, on empowerment, the transformation of The Helpless Queer with no history and an unlikely future into Someone, into a group of Someones, who uncovered a history, who found heroes, who grabbed today and shook it till tomorrow fell out of its pocket and there was a place in it for us."
This individual in being part of the gay liberation visible gay identity helped to pull back the layers of society to reveal a distinctly queer history ("who uncovered a history") and how that history aided in its present identity ("grabbed today") and helped to focus upon its future ("shook it till tomorrow fell out and...there was a place in it for us").
Peronsal history, group history....social history...is a human right...deny it to no one.
It was once denied to Women, Canadian Japanese (only examples of many) as it was denied to Homosexuals. It has been denied in gender, race, and sexuality. Though it is not the start, NOW is the day to uncover the histories of those to who it is denied.
Maybe ask yourself, who are we denying today?
Random Uni Student
Ps. It can be a worthwhile thing for a group to understand its history, only to be ashamed of it and use that shame to redirect their role in the future to be as positive of one that's possible within their present perspectives.
pps. The quotation can be found in Flaunting it!: A Decade of Gay Journalism from The Body Politic.
Thursday, December 31, 2009
"Democracy Canadian-style: How do you like it so far?"
This is an article from the Globe and Mail about the then upcoming prorogation of Parliament. Such prorogation at the whim of Stephen Harper and the Conservative Party has occured and once again his and his parties contempt for Canadian parliamentary convention and democracy is painstakingly evident. I fear a Conservative majority government and I this is a mistake on their part, the Liberals force an election, and at least reduce the Cons to a smaller minority. I really hope this move bites the Cons and Stephen Harper square in the ass.
Random Uni Student
Democracy Canadian-style: How do you like it so far? - Globe and Mail by Lawrence Martin
Link:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/democracy-canadian-style-how-do-you-like-it-so-far/article1403148/
Published on Wednesday, Dec. 16, 2009 6:15PM EST Last updated on Thursday, Dec. 24, 2009 2:23AM EST by Lawrence Martin
When you think about it, the way to make governing easy is to dispense as much as is possible with the demands of democracy. The d-word is a drag. It gets in the way of the exercise of power. Ways need be found to circumvent it.
There are a variety of such ways. One is to limit the voice of the bureaucracy, the public service, making it more submissive and partisan. Ditto the foreign service. As well, you want to dispense with agency or commission heads who don't follow your thinking. If some agencies get particularly meddlesome, such as Elections Canada, take them to court.
There's an old-fashioned idea, once a Reform Party thing, that regular people – those grassroots folks – should have a sniff of the action. As nice as it sounds, don't go there. You need to amass unparalleled executive power so everything is top down and put through the filter of politics. For your own caucus, you enforce such tight discipline that no one dare cast an independent vote. You issue your members a secret handbook on how to disrupt parliamentary committees. For Question Period, you instruct your members to answer most queries with a putdown of the previous government's record.
A key facet of a downgrading democracy campaign has got to be cutting off access to information – so much so that you leave the Information Commissioner appalled, especially with the stonewalling at the Privy Council Office. Some sensitive documents are going to get out no matter how hard you try. So the strategy is to use national security as a cover to black out all potentially incriminating paragraphs. You may also wish to eliminate a huge government information registry (the Co-ordination of Access to Information Requests System) because the fewer the tracks, the better. You may also wish to prevent the publishing of departmental studies, especially ones that don't reflect well on your law-and-order proclivities.
It is said that a hallmark of democracy is the toleration of dissent. Best leave that one in the church pew. Exceptional measures need be used to crush the opposition. Stuff such as taking the unprecedented step of launching personal attack ads between election campaigns. Or trying to push through a measure that would effectively cut off financing to the opposition.
A heavy dose of demagoguery also can go a long way. Play on simple prejudices by accusing opponents of not supporting the troops or of being anti-Israel. If nothing's working, if the going gets really tough, don't hesitate to bring out the heavy timber. Just after Parliament has reopened, have it shut down.
If your campaign is waged effectively, you will enfeeble the checks and balances in the system and give the d-word a good clubbing, emerging very much in control.
That's effectively what's happened in Ottawa over the past four years. The Prime Minister is now in such command that he can get away with pretty much anything. And he is lauded for his conquests.
A test case of his powers is the re-emergence of the Afghan detainee controversy. The government is knee-deep in allegations of a cover-up, of obstruction of justice, of treating Parliament, as this newspaper said in an editorial, with contempt. The censoring of documents on the basis of national security – which also happened in the income trust controversy – is being met with great skepticism. The way the Military Police Complaints Commission has been blocked from probing the affair is unseemly. The treatment of diplomat Richard Colvin has spawned a letter of reproach from no fewer than 71 former ambassadors. William Johnson, a biographer of Stephen Harper, says flatly that “the government has subverted Canadian democracy.”
If true, it likely won't matter. The key is that once you've established such a pronounced degree of control over the levers of power, you're in position to strong-arm your way past anything. And so the government has halted hearings on the detainee file by boycotting them. And so the government is threatening to prorogue Parliament again so it doesn't have to face more detainee music.
It's more evidence from a stockpile of how the system's been brought to heel. It's democracy Canadian-style.
Random Uni Student
Democracy Canadian-style: How do you like it so far? - Globe and Mail by Lawrence Martin
Link:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/democracy-canadian-style-how-do-you-like-it-so-far/article1403148/
Published on Wednesday, Dec. 16, 2009 6:15PM EST Last updated on Thursday, Dec. 24, 2009 2:23AM EST by Lawrence Martin
When you think about it, the way to make governing easy is to dispense as much as is possible with the demands of democracy. The d-word is a drag. It gets in the way of the exercise of power. Ways need be found to circumvent it.
There are a variety of such ways. One is to limit the voice of the bureaucracy, the public service, making it more submissive and partisan. Ditto the foreign service. As well, you want to dispense with agency or commission heads who don't follow your thinking. If some agencies get particularly meddlesome, such as Elections Canada, take them to court.
There's an old-fashioned idea, once a Reform Party thing, that regular people – those grassroots folks – should have a sniff of the action. As nice as it sounds, don't go there. You need to amass unparalleled executive power so everything is top down and put through the filter of politics. For your own caucus, you enforce such tight discipline that no one dare cast an independent vote. You issue your members a secret handbook on how to disrupt parliamentary committees. For Question Period, you instruct your members to answer most queries with a putdown of the previous government's record.
A key facet of a downgrading democracy campaign has got to be cutting off access to information – so much so that you leave the Information Commissioner appalled, especially with the stonewalling at the Privy Council Office. Some sensitive documents are going to get out no matter how hard you try. So the strategy is to use national security as a cover to black out all potentially incriminating paragraphs. You may also wish to eliminate a huge government information registry (the Co-ordination of Access to Information Requests System) because the fewer the tracks, the better. You may also wish to prevent the publishing of departmental studies, especially ones that don't reflect well on your law-and-order proclivities.
It is said that a hallmark of democracy is the toleration of dissent. Best leave that one in the church pew. Exceptional measures need be used to crush the opposition. Stuff such as taking the unprecedented step of launching personal attack ads between election campaigns. Or trying to push through a measure that would effectively cut off financing to the opposition.
A heavy dose of demagoguery also can go a long way. Play on simple prejudices by accusing opponents of not supporting the troops or of being anti-Israel. If nothing's working, if the going gets really tough, don't hesitate to bring out the heavy timber. Just after Parliament has reopened, have it shut down.
If your campaign is waged effectively, you will enfeeble the checks and balances in the system and give the d-word a good clubbing, emerging very much in control.
That's effectively what's happened in Ottawa over the past four years. The Prime Minister is now in such command that he can get away with pretty much anything. And he is lauded for his conquests.
A test case of his powers is the re-emergence of the Afghan detainee controversy. The government is knee-deep in allegations of a cover-up, of obstruction of justice, of treating Parliament, as this newspaper said in an editorial, with contempt. The censoring of documents on the basis of national security – which also happened in the income trust controversy – is being met with great skepticism. The way the Military Police Complaints Commission has been blocked from probing the affair is unseemly. The treatment of diplomat Richard Colvin has spawned a letter of reproach from no fewer than 71 former ambassadors. William Johnson, a biographer of Stephen Harper, says flatly that “the government has subverted Canadian democracy.”
If true, it likely won't matter. The key is that once you've established such a pronounced degree of control over the levers of power, you're in position to strong-arm your way past anything. And so the government has halted hearings on the detainee file by boycotting them. And so the government is threatening to prorogue Parliament again so it doesn't have to face more detainee music.
It's more evidence from a stockpile of how the system's been brought to heel. It's democracy Canadian-style.
Wednesday, December 23, 2009
Blinded
Hi everyone, I'm trying to read through Paradise Lost over the holiday break from classes and I forgot how much I love reading it. One passage that strikes me everything time I read it I thought was worth sharing. Paradise Lost is an epic (really friggen long) poem written in the later half of the 17th century by John Milton. By 1652 Milton was completely blind when he wrote the poem (or rather recited it) and in one passage in particular he laments the loss of his eyesight. The passage tears at my heart when I try to emphasize with Milton and comprehend what it must be like to no longer be able to witness sunshine or know the changing of the seasons by have no vision of them, or to never again see the face of any person. However, I am at least solaced by the fact that Milton, at least according to the poem, didn't dwell in depression but found strength in his faith, as seen in the last 4 lines.
Paradise Lost - Book 3, lines 21-55
(Milton here is talking to the Holy Spirit - his 'muse" for the poem)
thee I revisit safe,
And feel thy sovran vital Lamp; but thou
Revisit'st not these eyes, that rowle in vain
To find thy piercing ray, and find no dawn;
So thick a drop serene hath quencht thir Orbs, [ 25 ]
Or dim suffusion veild. Yet not the more
Cease I to wander where the Muses haunt
Cleer Spring, or shadie Grove, or Sunnie Hill,
Smit with the love of sacred Song; but chief
Thee Sion and the flowrie Brooks beneath [ 30 ]
That wash thy hallowd feet, and warbling flow,
Nightly I visit: nor somtimes forget
Those other two equal'd with me in Fate,
So were I equal'd with them in renown,
Blind Thamyris and blind Mæonides, [ 35 ]
And Tiresias and Phineus Prophets old.
Then feed on thoughts, that voluntarie move
Harmonious numbers; as the wakeful Bird
Sings darkling, and in shadiest Covert hid
Tunes her nocturnal Note. Thus with the Year [ 40 ]
Seasons return, but not to me returns
Day, or the sweet approach of Ev'n or Morn,
Or sight of vernal bloom, or Summers Rose,
Or flocks, or heards, or human face divine;
But cloud in stead, and ever-during dark [ 45 ]
Surrounds me, from the chearful wayes of men
Cut off, and for the Book of knowledg fair
Presented with a Universal blanc
Of Nature's works to mee expung'd and ras'd,
And wisdome at one entrance quite shut out. [ 50 ]
So much the rather thou Celestial light
Shine inward, and the mind through all her powers
Irradiate, there plant eyes, all mist from thence
Purge and disperse, that I may see and tell
Of things invisible to mortal sight. [ 55 ]
Paradise Lost - Book 3, lines 21-55
(Milton here is talking to the Holy Spirit - his 'muse" for the poem)
thee I revisit safe,
And feel thy sovran vital Lamp; but thou
Revisit'st not these eyes, that rowle in vain
To find thy piercing ray, and find no dawn;
So thick a drop serene hath quencht thir Orbs, [ 25 ]
Or dim suffusion veild. Yet not the more
Cease I to wander where the Muses haunt
Cleer Spring, or shadie Grove, or Sunnie Hill,
Smit with the love of sacred Song; but chief
Thee Sion and the flowrie Brooks beneath [ 30 ]
That wash thy hallowd feet, and warbling flow,
Nightly I visit: nor somtimes forget
Those other two equal'd with me in Fate,
So were I equal'd with them in renown,
Blind Thamyris and blind Mæonides, [ 35 ]
And Tiresias and Phineus Prophets old.
Then feed on thoughts, that voluntarie move
Harmonious numbers; as the wakeful Bird
Sings darkling, and in shadiest Covert hid
Tunes her nocturnal Note. Thus with the Year [ 40 ]
Seasons return, but not to me returns
Day, or the sweet approach of Ev'n or Morn,
Or sight of vernal bloom, or Summers Rose,
Or flocks, or heards, or human face divine;
But cloud in stead, and ever-during dark [ 45 ]
Surrounds me, from the chearful wayes of men
Cut off, and for the Book of knowledg fair
Presented with a Universal blanc
Of Nature's works to mee expung'd and ras'd,
And wisdome at one entrance quite shut out. [ 50 ]
So much the rather thou Celestial light
Shine inward, and the mind through all her powers
Irradiate, there plant eyes, all mist from thence
Purge and disperse, that I may see and tell
Of things invisible to mortal sight. [ 55 ]
Thursday, December 10, 2009
Following the trends...
Just a quick note, I'm sitting in the library studying the trends of historical theory and thought and a thought came into my mind that has come and gone before. The farther I go on in university the more I see my thinking as following trends already laid out. This doesn't concern me, I don't see it as a bad thing and I still feel myself to be an individual, but it's both comforting, interesting, and disconcerting at the same time to realize that you are intimately linked to the trends in the atmosphere and community you live in...without you even realizing it. The more I read the more I realize, for example, that my historical thinking is deeply based in the inclusiveness and diversity that is present in post-modern historical thought....and I didn't even realize it was happening! I count it as a good thing that I feel that all fields of history are relevant in some respect and that all fields (both historical and non) are important to the study of history; an inter-disciplinary approach to history is necessary. This is why I love social history (very much a product of post-modernist thought) because it seeks to include EVERYONE AND EVERY GROUP so that nobody's history will ever be forgotten. Take a look at your own life, what trends and ways of thinking in your lifetime are you intimately affected by....maybe without realizing it?
Bye for now,
Random Uni Student
Bye for now,
Random Uni Student
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
