The Empty Basket: Canadian Identity Through Action

By Giovanni Zenone

A country’s national identity inherently separates them from other cultures. Most countries have cultural indicators that differentiate them from others. Canada is a unique case because we show our national identity through negative representation. Our nationhood is built on not acting like other countries, particularly our neighbours to the south. The ironic problem that arises from defining our identity in the negative is Canadians are not building a national culture to which they can relate. We are passively marking the borders of our identity, but cannot fill it with any meaningful content. Without a defined identity, Canada becomes a non-nation. However, the 2010 Olympic Games have left in their wake a change to how Canadians view themselves. We are now defining “Canadian” actively through the performance of our Olympic athletes and the characteristics that arise from them. These two views of Canadian identity have been captured by Chester Brown and Mordecai Richler in their texts Louis Riel: A Comic-strip Biography and The Apprenticeship of Duddy Kravitz. The title characters of these works embody both the passive and active representations of our national identity. These two characters are defined negatively through comparison to other characters; but, like post Olympic Canadians, eventually build their identity through the attainment of goals. The final question when thinking about this change is whether our new way of creating national identity is going to solidify a positive Canadian culture.

Prior to the Olympic Games, the popular viewpoint of our national identity was to be an “other.” Canadians thought of themselves as “not-insert country here,” rather than having features that we can claim as our own. The main nation that our culture opposes is the United States of America, mostly because of geographical proximity and partly because of an inferiority complex. The cultural and political presence to the south became a crutch on which Canadians have leaned on to identify themselves. The most apparent, and popular representation of this idea is Molson Canadian’s “I Am Canadian” campaign .



To be fully transparent, I will admit that my initial reaction to this advertisement during its initial release was genuine pride. However, after many years that feeling has dissipated and been replaced by shame. This commercial is the epitome of the passive, negatively defined Canada. All a viewer needs to do is count the number of times the word “not” is used.

The characters Duddy Kravitz and Louis Riel exemplify what “Joe Canadian” presents, Canadian identity through negative representation. Part of Duddy’s characterization is his opposition to other characters. One such example is his scholarly brother Lennie. Duddy places himself against his older brother when speaking to his Uncle Benjy. Richler sets up this exchange by showing how Benjy admires his studious nephew, taking “pride in all of Lennie’s achievements… [including] his acceptance by the McGill University Faculty of Medicine” (Richler 62). On the next page, Benjy describes Duddy as “Some kid,” to which Duddy replies “Not like Lennie?” (Richler 63). The text places these two representations beside each other to show Duddy’s use of negative representation. His question separates himself from his brother. However, there is no active definition present in his claim. Duddy does not gain any identifying features through his negative representation. Chester Brown’s depiction of Louis Riel, much like Duddy, is passively defined through what he is not. Riel’s Métis descendent places him within numerous cultural borders. His identity is stuck between French, English and Aboriginal characteristics. The Métis culture, as portrayed by Brown, is not distinguishable from the Canadians. The celebration of Riel becoming president for the provisional government (Brown 45:6) does not hint at anything that differentiates Canadian or Métis culture. Nevertheless, Riel and his people are considered and self identify as “other” which, in itself, gives them no sense of culture. Riel, Duddy and Pre-Olympic Canadians all exemplify passivity by defining “Canadian” through negative representation.

The 2010 Olympics have shown Canadians action; both literally, through the athletics of the participants, and through the achievements of our Olympic team. The Canadian athletes depict a change in how Canadians represent themselves, which is through actively building characteristics of our identity. If we rely on negative representation as the sole indicator of Canadian identity, we cannot have a strong core. The best visual example is an empty basket; the boundaries of “outside” and “inside” are clearly defined, but that contrast does not fill the basket. There needs to be an active agent to put content in the basket. Ergo, to build a strong national identity, Canadians need to actively portray defining characteristics. One such athlete who has done such a deed for Canada is Joannie Rochette. She is the bronze medal winner for Woman’s figure skating, which she attained with an amazing short program performance (CBC does not allow embedding of their content, sorry).

Rochette’s actions to win her bronze medal were graceful and skilful. However, in my mind her real achievement is persevering through the pain of losing her mother to compete on a world stage (Iorfida para.3). Even though she was experiencing a major family crisis, she exhibited poise and determination to achieve a goal. Rochette, through her actions, presents Canadians as perseverant, which is a defined characteristic that builds our national identity.

Our national literature also works to create our national identity through the actions of Duddy and Riel. Duddy’s goal throughout his narrative is to attain a certain stretch of land, to fulfil his grandfather’s mantra “A man without land is nobody” (Richler 48). The plans that Duddy initiates to pay for this property are not always noble or legal. They range from driving his father’s taxi (Richler 313) to stealing the inheritance of his one true friend, Virgil (Richler 362). Duddy’s actions may, in some cases, be despicable; but, it is his deeds that define his perseverance to achieve his goal. Riel functions in the same fashion as Duddy. Riel’s decisions, both diplomatic and militaristic, shape his life and the success of his objective to protect Métis land. His speech during the trial scene (Brown 228-229) depict his strong will to uphold what he believes is right. He argues on political grounds (Brown 228:5-6) to try and convince the jury of his innocence. Riel perseveres in his cause until his death. The actions of Rochette, Duddy and Riel present Canadians defining themselves through action. Their deeds, regardless of moral validity, exemplify perseverance; which, in turn, imbues Canadian identity with the same characteristic.

What I have argued is that the 2010 Olympics have changed the way we as Canadians perceive ourselves. Rather than defining ourselves as an “other,” Canadians, through the performances of our Olympic athletes, are now creating identity through action. However, this change presents a problem, one that I hope readers of this article will think about. Creating a stronger identity invites scrutiny. This fact is evident in the criticism of American policies in the world media. As we build our national identity there is a chance that Canadians can become overconfident about our culture. The question then must be asked, is our newfound identity going to make us stronger culturally or just arrogant? I will end my argument with a link to a CBC.ca article asking the public about their favourite Olympic moment.

Perusing some of these comments, we can see that that a new sense of identity is present. Whether that confidence will turn into arrogance is still to be seen, and is something to watch in the time to come.

Works Cited

Brown, Chester. Louis Riel: A Comic-Strip Biography. Art by Chester Brown. Montreal: Drawn & Quarterly, 2007. Print.

Iorfida, Chris. “Kim, Rochette Skate and Nation Build.” CBC.ca Olympic Coverage. CBC.ca, 28 Feb. 2010. Web. 31 Mar. 2010.

Richler, Mordecai. The Apprenticeship of Duddy Kravitz. New York: Washington Square Press, 1959. Print.

Hockey Nation

By Justine Sandhu

Many of the Vancouver 2010 Olympic Games commercials became redundant and memorized during the two weeks. Others stood out for their originality and ability to catch aspects of Canadian tradition, culture and sentiment. If we understand commercials as functioning beyond their financial means, we can then read them as cultural texts. These texts (whether you consider it a form of low or high culture) set up myths in relation to nation-building and cultural understanding. How can we understand other cultures and nations if not through the texts that are meant to represent them?

Canadian Destiny?



Nike’s Olympic campaign, “Fight Fate”, consisted of commercials running before and during the games. During the two weeks, the Sears’ building downtown screened a projection with a different image every night with player Jerome Iginla’s face next to an aggressively-rich phrase in regards to Canadians’ ability to forge their own fate. Based on this commercial and their choice of athletic representative (Jerome Iginla), Nike decided to focus, like many companies, on the Canadian hockey nation. The power of this ad in particular is its ability to inadvertently discuss various Canadian issues at the same time. First, it sets up “destiny” as a pejorative term through allowing the individuals in the ad to demonstrate and discuss how the word fails to encompass them:

“Destiny doesn’t run 5km before practice”/ “Destiny makes excuses” / “With five seconds left, Destiny panics”

By doing this, the commercial sets up a binary between Destiny and the commonality shared between all the individuals – hockey and Canadian identity. Nike is making the two terms interchangeable yet interestingly, neither ‘hockey’ or ‘Canada’ are mentioned. What we rely on to fill in the blanks are the images moving before us: the Canadian jerseys, the children playing street hockey, the athletes’ work ethic, and even the veteran athlete’s Canadian pin in remembrance of days long gone. In a sense, Chester Brown’s “Louis Riel: A comic-strip biography” relates to this commercial because it relies on images to make up the full meaning of the text. Without John A. Macdonald’s caricature-like appearance in the comic book or Brown’s homage to vaudeville characters, much of the lightness and his underlying meanings would ultimately be lost. Therefore, looking to texts that seemingly appear of low ‘intellectual’ importance are often remarkable cultural artifacts.

OED defines destiny as “[t]he power or agency by which, according to various systems of philosophy and popular belief, all events, or certain particular events, are unalterably predetermined; supernatural or divine pre-ordination; overruling or invincible necessity”. Nike attempts to define Canadian identity as a negation of this term. A country resolved in claiming its own fate through (as the commercial presents) hard work, determination, skill, commitment, and a powerful confidence; as opposed to luck or chance. In this way, Nike is claiming that Canada will claim gold not because they are meant to but rather that it is the result of hard work and commitment or in other words, living the Canadian lifestyle.

Hockey... “It’s in our hearts”



While the Olympic commercials attempt to display the cohesiveness of the Canadian nation founded on an array of differences there is also a thematic presence of ‘standing out’. In this way, this commercial attempts to assert a sense of ‘togetherness’ of the Canadian people while paradoxically focusing on ‘the individual’ renowned for his athletic ability and popularity. Tim Hortons is renowned for its commercials based on various Canadian experiences but mostly, hockey. The company has a history of supporting children’s hockey with their organization, “Tim Bits”. Sidney Crosby has become a Canadian gem of late. He is an ideal representation of the Canadian child who, through hard work and a love for hockey, grew up to become a superstar athlete. As a child, Crosby played for Tim Horton’s “Tim Bits” team and has thus become their primary spokesman. The commercial aims at earning our trust through sentimental value, by relating our experiences as Canadians with those highlighted by Crosby’s narration. Crosby says, “hockey’s our game but really it’s much more than just a game”. The commercial relates hockey as a cultural phenomenon that is a part of the Canadian heritage, childhood, daily life, but also a passionate part of our identity.

Please post comments regarding any negative or positive connotations you believe are tied to this commercial (or the Nike commercial) and if you are a part of English 357, what is the significance of passion and determination in the course novels?
Also, post any Vancouver 2010 Olympic commercials that personally stood out to you and a brief explanation why.

Works Cited

Brown, Chester. Louis Riel: A Comic-Strip Biography. Art by Chester Brown. Montreal: Drawn & Quarterly, 2007. Print

Mascot Genesis

By Trevor Zawalich

The current Vancouver 2010 Olympic mascots were designed to appear as charming variants of creatures from local Native legend. This decision, however, has resulted in only a very small portion of the overall Canadian culture being represented in the final design. Those in the position of designing a new mascot(s), would need to find a way by which to remedy this issue. While initially contemplating the necessary elements that an Olympic mascot would require, I complied a list of everything I considered Canadian. The list entailed natural elements, historical cultures, contemporary cultures, objects of Canadian pride, and Canadian characteristics derived from class texts. The end result was a list by and far too long to be incorporated into a singular icon or caricature. This was attempted in a variety of manners, but perpetually resulted in the horrible fusion of an entire culture's identity, crushed into a object no larger than a piece of paper.

The second attempt was made with the knowledge of the cause for the failure of the original creation, and the same mistakes were avoided. Instead of attempting to create a single, massive mascot encompassing all of Canada, the list was split into two halves. One side focused upon the Canadian idea of genesis, journey, and the natural wilderness. The second focuses its attention on elements of Canadian human culture, both ancient and modern. The two lists were then taken down to simple, easily recognizable objects, which became the final elements implemented into the mascot design.

The first mascot centers itself around the Canadian natural world, and the idea of a nature central genesis. Three animals found locally in British Columbia are the orca, the eagle, and bear, all three of which have become central portions of the mascot. The orca forms the body, the eagle the wings, and the bear the legs. In order to further connect the design to nature, a forest is seen growing from its back. The mascot, in its finalized form, is seen to be a spirit of life, creation, and the natural world. Focusing the design upon the natural world removed the issue of over-representation of a single culture, as the current Olympic designs have done.

The natural world plays a central role in a number of course texts, such as The Innocent Traveler. Images of nature play heavily into the discourse of the novels in situations such as when Topaz travels across the nation, intrigued at every stop by the manner in which the landscape had changed. The text further notes the manner in which Vancouver itself arose from the wilderness, a city still being born and perpetually surrounded by the wild. The natural wilderness is as much a part of the Canadian identity and its creation as human designated cultures.

The second mascot avoids nature entirely, it focuses solely upon aspects of human culture, chosen due to their recognizable appearance as being uniquely Canadian. The body of the mascot is formed by a hockey puck adorned with the uniform of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. His name is Louis. In one hand he clutches the Canadian flag, an easily recognizable symbol of the nation. Atop his head Louis is wearing a local First Nations Haida hat. The intention of the design is to bring together both elder native and the dominant contemporary Canadian cultures, each sharing a spot on the mascot, neither left out.

In relation to course texts, the mascot encompasses the idea of cohabitation of multiple cultures in a single body. This can be seen remarkably clearly by Naomi's uncle in Obasan, who is flawlessly both Japanese and Canadian. Topaz too shares this duality in common with the uncle. She is very pleased to find that Canadians and the Canadian lifestyle are very much as she would expect life to be in England, often noting that Canadian individuals seem very "English" to her; these observations suggest a very strong personal blending of the two cultures for Topaz. In opposition to this ideal are Naomi, alongside Duddy Kravitz, Louis Riel, and many others from the readings who very much struggle with this concept. They are torn between two cultures, questioning their identity, something which this mascot attempts to eloquently handle.

Works Cited

Kagawa, Joy. Obasan. Toronto: Penguin Canada, 1981.

Wilson, Ethel. The Innocent Traveler. Toronto: New Canadian Library, 1949.

With Glowing Hearts

By Dorota Szczepanska

Since the closure of the Vancouver 2010 Winter Olympic and Paralympic games, the level of fervour has noticeable died away, as Olympic memorabilia is taken down, visitors return home, and the streets of Vancouver are no longer barricaded to accommodate the sudden increase of festivities. As Vancouver reverts back to habitual existence, columnists such as Erin Anderssen, a writer for the Globe and Mail, ask: how long will the patriotic glow for Canada remain since the conclusion of the games?

Anderssen takes her inquiries to individuals such as Historica-Dominion Institute president Andrew Cohen, who believes that “[w]earing a pair of mittens, waving the flag, buying a Tim Hortons coffee and singing the national anthem are not huge acts of patriotism. They're easy” (Anderssen ¶7). In Cohen’s viewpoint, it would be more beneficial in the long run to transfer the energy and enthusiasm towards programs to “fight child obesity or to inspire young Canadians to vote” in order to build the nation (¶6)

Cohen’s approach may be shared by many other individuals, but consequently, it narrows patriotism to a box, suggesting that it must be substantial and somewhat more difficult then purchasing a coffee at Tim Horton’s in lieu of Starbucks in order to be truly patriotic. More importantly, it implies that patriotism must be based on action alone, as opposed to personal attitude. The truth is that most Canadians will never perform a “large” patriotic action, such as peacekeeping duties in Afghanistan, running in government, or saving the world Jack Bauer-style from terrorists. Furthermore, the majority will not create programs to fight childhood obesity or encourage young adults to vote in the elections, although some will participate with varying amount of enthusiasm.

Patriotism should not be solely defined as small or large, difficult or easy, but should be based on personal attitude of the individual as well. This is certainly exemplified in L.M. Montgomery’s novel Emily of New Moon, as the protagonist Emily, returns to her home at New Moon Farm after spending a vacation with her Great-Aunt Nancy at Wyther Grange:

And she was sorry to leave Wyther Grange; she had grown to love the old beautiful house, with its flavour of hidden secrets— a flavour that was wholly a trick of its architecture [. . .] She was sorry to leave the bay shore and the quaint garden and the gazing-ball and the chessy-cat and the Pink Room bed of freedom; and most of all she was sorry to leave Dean Priest. But on the other hand, it was delightful to think of going back to the New Moon and all the loved ones there— Teddy and his dear whistle, Ilse and her stimulating comradeship, Perry with his determined reaching up for higher things, Saucy Sal and the new kitten that must need proper training now, and the fairy world of the Midsummer Night’s Dream. Cousin Jimmy’s garden would be in its prime of splendour, the August apples would be ripe. Suddenly, Emily was very ready to go. She packed her little black box jubilantly and found it an excellent chance to work in neatly a certain line from a poem Dean had recently read to her which had captured her fancy.

“’Good-bye, proud world, I’m going home’,” she declaimed feelingly . . . (Montgomery 276-77).

When Emily returns to New Moon, she begins to find new appreciation for old things in the farmhouse, which she failed to notice before:

In the old kitchen the candles were lighted and their flames were dancing in the winds of the August night blowing through door and window.

“I suppose you’ll not like candles very well, Emily, after being used to lamps at Wyther Grange,” said Aunt Laura with a little sigh. It was one of the bitter, small things in Laura Murray’s life that Elizabeth’s tyranny extended to candles.

Emily looked around her thoughtfully. One candle sputtered and bobbed at her as if greeting her. One, with a long wick, glowed and smouldered like a sulky little demon. One had a tiny flame— a sly, meditative candle. One swayed with a queer fiery grace in the draught from the door. One burned with a steady upright flame like a faithful soul.

“I—don’t know—Aunt Laura,” she answered slowly. “You can be—friends—with candles. I believe I like the candles best after all.”

Aunt Elizabeth, coming in from the cook-house, heard her. Something like pleasure gleamed in her gulf-blue eyes.

“You have some sense in you,” she said (281).

What is important about Emily’s approval of candles at New Moon, rather unique in their antiquitous use for that present era, is that she is voicing her larger approval and love for her family and home. Her love for her aunts, cousin, and friends supersede concerns of luxury or comfort, and she takes on a patriotic attitude towards the farm, even for its little eccentricities, which other individuals mock.

Taking an example from Emily, Canadians may be patriotic without daily celebrations of flag-waving to affirm their love for their country, or even establishing grand, long-term national programs for the nation. Ultimately, the aspect of “true patriot love” lies in the Vancouver 2010 Olympic motto: with glowing hearts. Yes, it is trope with a dash of cheesiness, but it asserts the heart of patriotism as belonging to, well— the heart. Even if patriotism cannot be measured through visibility or action, it does not mean it fails to exist, nor is it suppressed until the next Olympics come to town— or a really great hockey game, eh?

__________________________________________________

Works Cited

Anderssen, Erin. "Canada's Incredible Golden Glow: How Long Will It Last?" Globe and Mail [Toronto] 5 Mar. 2010, National sec. Globe and Mail. CTVglobemedia Publishing Inc., 5 Mar. 2010. Web. 17 Mar. 2010.

Montgomery, L. M. Emily of New Moon. 2nd ed. Toronto: Seal, 1998. Print.

The Apprenticeship of Canada Through Quatchi, Sumi, and Miga

By Jenn Perutka

The Vancouver 2010 Olympics were a time for Canadians to showcase who we are as a nation and have the world take notice. On November 27, 2007 the mascots for the Olympic Games were revealed as three mystical creatures named Miga, Quatchi, and Sumi. Designed by Vancouver based graphic design house, Meomi, the creatures sparked the question of what is Canadian identity.

The official website of the Vancouver 2010 Olympic Games offers short bios on each mascot to let those interested become more acquainted. Miga is part killer whale and part Kermode spirit bear and is based on the legends of the First Nations of orcas that transform into bears on land. The Canadian touch? Miga is also a skilled snowboarder (Vancouver 2010).

Quatchi is a Sasquatch that is a lover of all winter sports and hopes one day to become a world-class goalie. The final mascot is Sumi who has the wings of a bird and has the legs of a bear while wearing an orca whale hat (Vancouver 2010).
The objective of these mascots were to represent diversity within Canada, however they ended up looking like Japanese Anima characters that many have compared to Pokemon.

It seems as if the creation of the mascots as creatures rather than people was made as not to offend or unintentionally discriminate any sort of culture. Mordechai Richler has described Canadians as apathetic to culture. Seeing as we do not have a definition of a Canadian, Meomi Designs decided to make their own sort of culture parallel to ours embodying Canadian interests such as snowboarding and hockey. Richler’s outcast character Duddy Kravitz, and his experience living in a Jewish area of Montreal, may be related to the mascots that were chosen to represent Canada through their struggle of identity. Canada is still going through it’s “apprenticeship” as it continues to grow and struggle for a definition. However, seeing as our nation is much younger compared to other countries an identity is harder to come by. We have been made up of a variety of cultures since becoming a nation in 1867 and had no prior identity to base ourselves on other than the First Nations. Being such a young nation, Canada has become an outsider just as Duddy Kravitz was an outsider within his community for being Jewish. He was the punchline to jokes and set apart from others for being an ethnicity he could not help. Duddy was a victim of stereotyping with jokes such as “Do you know how the Jews make an ‘S’?...draw two strokes through it” to resemble the money sign (Richler 10-11). The Olympic mascots are also a victim of stereotyping to some extent with their love of snow sports, however Meomi Designs made a more conscious decision to avoid explicit stereotypes through the characters.

The mascots ultimately represent our uncertainty of identity. By simply viewing these mascots we would have no clue as to what they are or what they represent. Though they slightly represent the First Nations myths that include these animals, they are not an accurate image of Canadians today. Viewers are not able to tell that what these mascots are or what they represent unless they are explained to them, just as Canadians must make it explicit that they are in fact from Canada when travelling or meeting new people so as not to be confused with Americans. Mordechai Richler noted this struggle for Canadian identity through Duddy Kravitz and his quest to own land in order to become a man. At a young age Duddy is labeled an outcast and does not receive the same treatment when pursuing ownership of land. Canada must work through it’s apprenticeship as a nation. We already have the land, so what else do we need?

Works Cited
Richler, Mordecai. The Apprenticeship of Duddy Kravitz. Washington Square Press: New York, 1959.

"Meet the Vancouver 2010 Mascots!" 2010. Vancouver 2010. 29 March 2010. <"http://www.vancouver2010.com/mascot/en/meet.php"> .

Canadians Celebrate Mediocrity!

by Veronika Petrovski



Can we as Canadians truly be defined as “blah” or “very ordinary” and how is this applicable in relation to the Olympics? During the Vancouver 2010 Olympics, we as Canadians certainly displayed great enthusiasm by supporting our athletes and as a nation had something in common to celebrate. The 2010 Olympic Games have provided Canadians with a chance to showcase our pride to the world and it certainly cannot be considered dull by any means. After all, we won 14 gold medals and that in itself deserves acknowledgment and pride. Nonetheless, there are certain other events that took place during the Olympic period that deserve a more critical and closer look. Even before the Olympic Games began, an unsafe track design led to the death of Georgian luger, Nodar Kumaritashvili, after his high speed collision with one of the poles outside of the track. If we, as Canadians, want to show the world that we are ready and equipped to host such an important and massive event like the Olympics how is it that we have allowed the possibility of such mistakes to result in fatalities? How does this incident reflect on who we are as Canadians? Do we take everything lightly and forget about these events soon after, without reflecting back on how we could have executed certain things differently? Why was this incident blamed on an inexperienced driver, while precautions were not applied, which resulted in further injuries of other athletes? These questions, at least as a Canadian, arise in my mind.

Mordecai Richler as a Canadian writer, in his book The Apprenticeship of Duddy Kravitz, constructs a Canadian experience through a Jewish community living in Montreal. He chose to create flawed Jewish characters that are part of an alienated minority group. In an interview, Richler discusses that the Jewish identity relates to the-identity crisis of Canada. Canada as a country is the minority within North America just like the Jews are a minority in Montreal and ultimately the minority of the world (lecture, Feb.). How can we define our Canadian identity? Can we now merely be defined by our flaws and nothing more? During the time of the Olympics we have certainly shown nothing better than average. Instead of representing to the world a flawless performance we have allowed too many mistakes to occur. I personally cannot get over the death of this athlete at a time when these events should have only brought the best of memories for the entire Canadian nation. Do we as Canadians take these actions too lightly and dismiss important information that may have led to preventative measures? I believe that this lack of action caused the death of Nodar Kumaritashvili on that fatal February day. It has been discovered that despite the known dangers of the sledding track, Canadians Olympic staff that were in charge of safety dismissed additional precautions and measures that should have been in place to avoid injuries. Even after the death of this young athlete, the same track was kept open which resulted in further serious injuries to other individuals. What I question is, if room for improvement was in fact needed why was it dismissed not only prior to the death but after injuries continued to occur to other athletes. I personally think that as a Canadian it is a shame and an embarrassment for the entire Canadian nation that this fatal accident, which could have been prevented (with installments of some sort of a shield or guard) had in fact occurred.

Another example of carelessness during the games was in the opening ceremony when the fourth pillar malfunctioned and did not fully rise. It would seem that after spending 6.1 billion (Briarpatch magazine) dollars on Olympic events everything would have been thought of or considered to avoid such mistakes. From how things were executed it would seem that insufficient testing lead to unfortunate outcomes such as the ones mentioned above. Canadians were not only ill-equipped but made too many errors that jeopardized lives. And yes, in the closing ceremony we decided to poke fun at the initial mistake but that does not cover the fact that we messed up.

During the Olympics we had a chance to show the world how great we can be but instead we have presented our flawed side. Despite awing the crowds around the world with our ceremonies we have showed our carelessness for safety and preparation. Drawing from these mistakes we in fact can be defined as stereotypical Canadians, and deserve the name a “bunch of ordinary folks”. For some mostly young Canadians the Olympics served as a chance to continually party, with the presence of alcohol of course, for the entire duration of the games. We did show off our pride but through the masquerade of drunken loud, white and red dressed folks walking down the streets. After picking up the tab for our Vancouver party, we may still stand proud of our mediocrity or we may improve from our mistakes.

Works Cited

Richler, Mordecai. The Apprenticeship of Duddy Kravitz. New York: Washington Square Press, 1959. Print.

“Boosters’ millions: Better ways than the Olympics to spend $6.1 billion” Briarpatch Articles. Vancouver 2010. 5 January 2010. <”http://briarpatchmagazine.com/boosters-millions/>.