It's been a bit less of an Olympic lovefest, hasn't it? Chantal Hebert reminds us of the most Canadian of our failings:
Most of the weekend's anti-Quebec rants were anonymous. That's par for the course for commentary sections on most media websites. There is no onus of accountability placed on contributors and no way to know – in the case of a political story, for instance – whether those who post these remarks are really speaking for themselves or being paid to spin tales from some murky corner of a partisan war room. Facts are seldom allowed to stand in the way of a good rant. Patently false assertions routinely make it unto media websites – leaving readers to their own devices when it comes to distinguishing reality from fiction.
Note the real new point being made - established news services are facilitating language-based bigotry. In both directions apparently. This is beyond the UK press pointing out how inept and unfortunate Van2010 has turned out to be. It's beyond Betty Fox being next to Romeo Dallaire not being enough of a tribute. It is in addition to how it turns out Canadians are crummy hosts, preferring to sit by the lone cheese tray all night rather than mingling. "Own the Podium"? "Own the Odium" more like it. Who knew we missed the day in junior kindergarten where we learned it was good to share with guests? And we seem to dislike a free press - even our own. And our heavy hand of the law doesn't even know how to party.
Wad some power the giftie gie us, to see ourselves as others see us? What is Canada going to be seen like after the games are over?
Comments
Ben (The Tiger) - February 17, 2010 11:07 AM
"But poring through Canadian media websites, anyone unfamiliar with this country would often come away with the sense that we are a collectivity of intolerant cranks."
Bah. Canada is a collectivity of _tolerant_ cranks.
And that's okay.
But what does she expect -- the country's spent the last, what... forty years, twisting itself into a pretzel trying to accommodate its francophone minority. I favour some of those accommodations, and even some of the arrangements made. But there's going to be a certain percentage who just get cheesed off by all the navel-gazing.
As for being bad hosts, or whatever -- I like Alex Bilodeau's comment:
"The Germans and others aren't here to finish second. That's the way sports is. It's competition. Own the Podium brings the best out of athletes."
More of that, please.
Alan - February 17, 2010 12:58 PM
Actually, we have spent almost 250 years accommodating since the fall of Montreal to our great benefit building on an about face on the expulsion of the Acadians. It does seem weird, however, that no one noticed that the only French seemingly being used is IOC official French and not bilingual Canadian French.
Germans and others did not keep their competitors off practice runs. A win by a bad host counts for less than a win by a good host. Nothing worse than a bad winner.
Alan - February 17, 2010 1:23 PM
More about "how we suck."
Alan - February 17, 2010 1:57 PM
"...And, if all of this isn't enough, it seems that American competitors have taken to mocking Canuck snowboarders for their Austin Powers-like apparel, claiming their hip-hugging aerodynamics breaches a gentleman's agreement to keep things nice and loose..."
Ben (The Tiger) - February 17, 2010 2:44 PM
"Nothing worse than a bad winner."
How about a bad loser?
***
As for IOC French vs. Canadian French -- it's all about aesthetics, anyway.
Disagree re the 250 vs. 40. For the first two hundred years, accommodation involved begrudgingly not crushing the French, letting them vote, etc. For the last forty, it's involved more proactive stuff. The earlier stuff was simple human decency (all too rare); the later stuff imposed more of a burden.
The Vancouver games are going great, except for the weather and the bad Zambonis...
Alan - February 17, 2010 3:10 PM
The bad loser has suffered an insult that the bad winner has not. The bad winner is far worse.
Ben (The Tiger) - February 17, 2010 3:37 PM
Except that the winner has... won.
Alan - February 17, 2010 3:58 PM
Which is not a door opener for being an arse. Losing, however, comes with a brief but socially acceptable window for being an arse.
Ben (The Tiger) - February 17, 2010 4:12 PM
If and when Canada takes the top spot among medal-winners, then I'll consider the "sore winner" thesis.
Alan - February 17, 2010 6:51 PM
There is no contest for top spot among medal winners. That's like Easter Monday, a figment of the collective imagination.
Ben (The Tiger) - February 18, 2010 10:50 AM
So help me, you've driven me to agree with Dahlia Lithwick...
Alan - February 18, 2010 1:15 PM
Canada is hardly kicking ass. Plus it is unCanadian to gloat and mock and not be nice. You can actually be very good at what you do - even defeat others - and be gracious at the same time. In fact, that is what we have done for decades and are loved for it and respect ourselves for it. "Own The Podium" has turned out to be a bit of a flop and an embarrassing one - not because of the performance of the athletes but the co-opting of their skills for political and corporate purposes, including a little wacky social engineering.
P of K - February 18, 2010 2:58 PM
C'mon Al, despite what Molsons and TDL Group want us to believe there really is no such thing anymore as "unCanadian". Canada has evolved to be the splodge nation - a nation of undiscernable shade where only breaking the Law is against the law.
And the only thing the Olympics has to do with Canada is that their are some Candian athletes competing (note that I did not say "we have Canadian athletes competing") and its Canada's turn to pay the hotel bill.