Page 247 - Marcello Potocco, Nacionalni imaginariji, literarni imaginariji, Dissertationes 20
P. 247
Summary
regard to Canadian space/nature. However, it is equally impossible to ig-
nore fierce criticism of their work. Frye’s treatment of hostile nature as a
basic constituent of the Canadian founding myth should be understood
in the framework of Frye’s general theory, which shows Canadian so-
called thematic criticism in a wider perspective. Frye obviously does not
want to define a single, fixed identity, while in his works the response to
hostile nature is already understood as a (socially and individually) con-
structed response. The chapter focuses on the political and social mech-
anisms that played a significant role in constructing a typical Canadi-
an response to space. The Canadian response is thus primarily under-
stood as a set of conventions determined by the opposition between the
encountered land and the horizon of expectations by at least two signifi-
cant Canadian groups, the so-called royalists and the so-called loyalists,
the latter escaping from the USA and identifying their experience with
the experience of the Israelite exodus.
The analytical description of the Canadian founding myth is also
treated in a specific relation to the political and social phenomena of
Canadian multiculturalism. Potocco addresses the multicultural dilem-
mas that may be summarized in contradicting notions of assimilation,
integration and ethnic diversity. The author stresses the impossibility of
unreserved ethnic diversity as a consequence of the still present hierar-
chical relations between ethnic groups. In the Canadian case, this im-
possibility is complicated by the political question of Quebec, but the
main problem, as can be seen in Charles Taylor’s Politics of Recogni-
tion, is recognising the value of the Other. Instead ofGadamer’s con-
cepts of merging of horizons, which are taken up by Taylor, a Bakhtini-
an notion of dialogue is more acceptable. The interlocutors’ dialogic ut-
terances serve as basic points of discursive cohesion, but it is not possible
to enter the dialogic sociality without renouncing one’s own superiority
over the Other. While such a sociality presupposes some degree of cul-
tural and ethnic conflict, Taylor’s notions of diversity and the merging
of horizons may, on the contrary, prevent a proper dialogic sociality and
preserve hidden hierarchical relations between the interlocutors. Diver-
sity may thus avoid ethnic assimilation, but it does not escape hegemon-
ic relations in a given society. This is particularly true of Canada despite
its official politics of multiculturalism, as many studies point to the hid-
den socio-economical discrimination of certain ethnic groups precisely
due to the overemphasised idea of cultural diversity. Potocco also tack-
les the problem of multiculturalism in terms of the Canadian founding
myth, claiming that multiculturalism in its relation to the “self ” may
regard to Canadian space/nature. However, it is equally impossible to ig-
nore fierce criticism of their work. Frye’s treatment of hostile nature as a
basic constituent of the Canadian founding myth should be understood
in the framework of Frye’s general theory, which shows Canadian so-
called thematic criticism in a wider perspective. Frye obviously does not
want to define a single, fixed identity, while in his works the response to
hostile nature is already understood as a (socially and individually) con-
structed response. The chapter focuses on the political and social mech-
anisms that played a significant role in constructing a typical Canadi-
an response to space. The Canadian response is thus primarily under-
stood as a set of conventions determined by the opposition between the
encountered land and the horizon of expectations by at least two signifi-
cant Canadian groups, the so-called royalists and the so-called loyalists,
the latter escaping from the USA and identifying their experience with
the experience of the Israelite exodus.
The analytical description of the Canadian founding myth is also
treated in a specific relation to the political and social phenomena of
Canadian multiculturalism. Potocco addresses the multicultural dilem-
mas that may be summarized in contradicting notions of assimilation,
integration and ethnic diversity. The author stresses the impossibility of
unreserved ethnic diversity as a consequence of the still present hierar-
chical relations between ethnic groups. In the Canadian case, this im-
possibility is complicated by the political question of Quebec, but the
main problem, as can be seen in Charles Taylor’s Politics of Recogni-
tion, is recognising the value of the Other. Instead ofGadamer’s con-
cepts of merging of horizons, which are taken up by Taylor, a Bakhtini-
an notion of dialogue is more acceptable. The interlocutors’ dialogic ut-
terances serve as basic points of discursive cohesion, but it is not possible
to enter the dialogic sociality without renouncing one’s own superiority
over the Other. While such a sociality presupposes some degree of cul-
tural and ethnic conflict, Taylor’s notions of diversity and the merging
of horizons may, on the contrary, prevent a proper dialogic sociality and
preserve hidden hierarchical relations between the interlocutors. Diver-
sity may thus avoid ethnic assimilation, but it does not escape hegemon-
ic relations in a given society. This is particularly true of Canada despite
its official politics of multiculturalism, as many studies point to the hid-
den socio-economical discrimination of certain ethnic groups precisely
due to the overemphasised idea of cultural diversity. Potocco also tack-
les the problem of multiculturalism in terms of the Canadian founding
myth, claiming that multiculturalism in its relation to the “self ” may
