by Giuliano d’Andrea
Qui Sumus, who are we?
What are those points of reference by which we define ourselves? It is a question as profound today as it was in ancient times. Collective identity is not static. It changes and sheds itself of much of its heritage as it travels through time despite the efforts of those who insist on its preservation. And for we who bequeath our cultural legacy to successive generations, what parts of this identity can we expect to be retained?
Some months ago I resolved to write an opinion piece on the question of identity in reaction to a surge of articles and public statements regarding what ought to be Quebec’s collective national character. In fact, it was to be the first of my contributions to this web site through which I could succinctly and precisely refute all that disturbed and irritated me about this elusive quest for a national ideology that perennially engulfs public discourse. I imagined a masterful snub, my magnum opus tearing through the vast collection of mindless diatribes, absolute idioms of Quebec political speech.
Then, I began to write and all did not seem so simple. After much thought and far more reading on the topic that I could ever hope to retain, I realized the topic of identity, by its very nature. is complicated. Society is a constantly evolving construct in which individuality is as much a myth as is the egalitarian collective. In this national identity debate, emotions play a far greater role than logic. What I find ultimately being asked is how well does one adhere, or fit into, visions of our individual standing within the community and how well accepted are we with respect to any dominant vision.
So, my plans for an essay changed as I found myself struggling even with appropriate questions that would guide me on this quest. As such, my plans changed: I will instead embark on what I hope to be a meditation of sorts on the topic of Quebec identity. I will seek to flesh out arguments as to why there is a need for a collective identity and in particular what can be behind this push for what as a society Quebec ought to be. In this meditation, I will ask myself what benefits does such a collectivist vision offer? What benefits do such visions seek to attain?
Furthermore, I will ask how much of this identity is manufactured? Is this a new phenomenon that arised with the advent of industrialization and modernism or is the crafting of a collective identity timeless?
I confess this is all an ambitious plan. As such, I will try to make successive instalments on this topic and invite your analysis as to the usefulness of this exercise.