Canada's Panamerica Identity

[lio45]

Originally Posted by rousseau

I'm sure there's lots of hunting in northern Ontario, just like in rural Quebec, but the point is that hunting is widespread throughout the U.S.

I wouldn't go as far as to say that. I lived in the central valley of CA for six straight months and now that you mention it, hunting was inexistent over there. I do not recall having the slightest contact with the world of hunting while over there.

Do you see this in Ontario? No. Are you saying that when hunting season starts in Quebec you see thousands and thousands of pickup trucks driven by hunters jamming the highways going north? Really?

I suspect you don't see that anywhere else, because MI is a rare case of an entity delivering hunting permits to its residents (state level) that has a populated part with few forested areas and an unpopulated part full of pristine woods and game, so of course on the one main road (I-75) connecting the two there will be a considerable stream of residents moving from the populated part to the "hunting paradise" part at the beginning of hunting season.

But yes during hunting season in rural Quebec you'll certainly see hunters and pickup trucks carrying dead deers. I am sure it's the same in (the right parts of) Ontario (namely, Northern Ontario).

The main difference though is the trucks gun racks. You won't see that here.

I'm not talking one or two, or an anecdote about your grandfather, I'm talking about something that is unmistakably a major part of the culture that is impossible to avoid. If this is really what it's like in Quebec, then wow, I had no idea. But somehow I suspect we're talking about vastly different degrees of scale.

Rural forested Quebec? I would definitely say it's a major part of the culture.

You won't see it as a tourist in walled Old Quebec or in downtown Montreal, obviously.

But again, I am pretty sure it's also a major part of the culture in Northern Ontario. (Can anyone confirm or infirm that?)

[lio45]

Originally Posted by rousseau

I can tell a French person from a Quebecker right away

I sure hope so! The accents are absolutely incredibly different.

[Procrastinational]

Originally Posted by rousseau

This is not true, though. We've been through this on this forum before. Go to baitcar.com for the standard working class BC accent. BCers are closer to baitcar.com than they are to Seattle.

Sorry, but you're in denial if you think you sound more like Tom Hanks in Sleepless in Seattle than baitcar.com.

Tom Hanks didn't exactly nail the Seattle accent in that movie. You can pretty tell he's from California (the accent there is quite distinct from the PNW).

The accents aren't identical, obviously, but the southern Ontario accent isn't really any more similar. Honestly, the closest thing to an Ontario accent in the States is probably around Minnesota, or maybe Alaska.
While she makes me cringe, Sarah Palin could pretty easily pass as eastern Canadian, accent-wise, whereas she'd stand out in BC as not being from here.

Working class accents are always quite exaggerated. Most people in around Vancouver don't sound all that much like baitcar.com.

And again, there is a pretty large disconnect between younger generations and older groups in Vancouver in terms of accent. On the news, a good example is any sort of RCMP interview with an officer over 30. That's the accent you'll typically find amongst older generations, whereas the ones under 25 and especially under 20 are starting to sound less and less like that. My guess is that it's due to all the exposure from American media, as well as heavy immigration.

A good example of the younger accent would be Andrew Chang from CBC Vancouver.
While distinct from accents in places like Seattle, it's also distinct from Eastern Canada.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

Yes. No doubt the life of a fisherman in a small village in Maine is more similar in many ways to the life of a fisherman is a small town in Hokkaido than the life of an accountant in central Boston.

Obviously, and that's because physical characteristics (the coast, climate, mountains, deserts, etc.) also shape culture.

We have an example with hunting. I am convinced that the % of Manhattanites who hunt every year is a lot lower than the % of Northern Ontarians who do. When you live right in the middle of the woods, hunting is more likely to be part of your culture. Not rocket science.

[rousseau]

Originally Posted by lio45

...a considerable stream of residents moving from the populated part to the "hunting paradise" part...

That's what I'm getting at. In Ontario we don't have a considerable stream of hunters moving from the populated part to the hunting part. There are virtually no hunters in the populated regions.

Sounds like you don't have that in the populated regions of Quebec, either.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by rousseau

Consider this: is there another internet forum out there populated mainly by Americans living directly to the south of you where you can comfortably talk about Canadian issues and concerns the way you can here? Is Signalhillhiker talking about the issues he raises here on an Irish online forum?

Yes and no.

For example I recall on this very forum that VANRIDERFAN and some other Canadian (don't remember who though) were discussing cattle farming in pretty deep detail.

VANRIDERFAN and SignalHillHiker can discuss Stephen Harper together on this forum but they can't discuss cattle farming like professionals.

But VANRIDERFAN could discuss cattle farming with an American who showed up on this forum who happened, like him, to grow up on a cattle farm, but south of the 49th.

VANRIDERFAN couldn't discuss Stephen Harper with the aforementioned American.

So, some things are common, others aren't.

I would honestly say that the things that can be truly fully discussed on a pan-Canadian forum are few and far between. Federal politics... that's about it.

Skylines, Pictures of your city, etc. you could easily have Americans showing up in there and it wouldn't change anything. Heck, we already have some Copenhagen and Shanghai in there.

[MonkeyRonin]

Originally Posted by Procrastinational

Honestly, the closest thing to an Ontario accent in the States is probably around Minnesota, or maybe Alaska.
While she makes me cringe, Sarah Palin could pretty easily pass as eastern Canadian, accent-wise

Yeah, no. Not even close. Have you ever actually heard an eastern Canadian accent?

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by lio45

Obviously, and that's because physical characteristics (the coast, climate, mountains, deserts, etc.) also shape culture.

We have an example with hunting. I am convinced that the % of Manhattanites who hunt every year is a lot lower than the % of Northern Ontarians who do. When you live right in the middle of the woods, hunting is more likely to be part of your culture. Not rocket science.

Yes but when looking at the effect of borders, one has to set aside the geographical, climatic, age, and socio-economic influences and compare "like for like" looking specifically at the effect of borders. Not much different than isolating variables in a scientific experiment. Otherwise you'll run into trouble no matter how many differences exist between regions.

[Procrastinational]

Originally Posted by lio45

Yes and no.

For example I recall on this very forum that VANRIDERFAN and some other Canadian (don't remember who though) were discussing cattle farming in pretty deep detail.

VANRIDERFAN and SignalHillHiker can discuss Stephen Harper together on this forum but they can't discuss cattle farming like professionals.

But VANRIDERFAN could discuss cattle farming with an American who showed up on this forum who happened, like him, to grow up on a cattle farm, but south of the 49th.

VANRIDERFAN couldn't discuss Stephen Harper with the aforementioned American.

So, some things are common, others aren't.

I would honestly say that the things that can be truly fully discussed on a pan-Canadian forum are few and far between. Federal politics... that's about it.

Skylines, Pictures of your city, etc. you could easily have Americans showing up in there and it wouldn't change anything. Heck, we already have some Copenhagen and Shanghai in there.

And that's why I don't think it's unreasonable to say for example that people in Vancouver have more in common with people in Seattle than in Toronto.

I could talk comfortably about skiing with someone from Seattle, whereas someone from Toronto may have only experienced Blue Mountain, which barely passes as a hill.
You'd be more likely to have success talking to someone from Seattle about coffee as well. They are just elements that are common to the PNW, and probably more prominent in every day life than Canadian politics.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by rousseau

That's what I'm getting at. In Ontario we don't have a considerable stream of hunters moving from the populated part to the hunting part. There are virtually no hunters in the populated regions.

Sounds like you don't have that in the populated regions of Quebec, either.

Well, there certainly isn't one main channel between one and the other in Quebec that would be comparable to the 75, that's for sure. But you do still have plenty of hunters in rural southern Quebec where (unlike rural southern Ontario) forest is never very far away. I would have no problem believing that hunting is a lot more popular in southern Quebec than in southern Ontario. Culturally, forest and game have always been a big part of this place.

Going with a few anecdotal examples, FWIW, one of my friends who lives on the Mtl south shore and works in an office in downtown Montreal goes to the Gaspé to hunt every fall. My cousin who is an engineer in downtown Montreal generally comes back to the Townships to hunt. Many likely go to the Laurentians too. I suppose it depends on where they're from originally. Someone who's from central Montreal born and raised is unlikely to have ever taken to hunting, obviously.

But urbanites in the US are IMO also unlikely to be hunters.

Again, coming back to another point I made (that there are other divides that might be as important as the Canada-US one), I would say that about hunting the correlation is more with urban vs rural than it is with Canadian vs American.

[Procrastinational]

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

Yeah, no. Not even close. Have you ever actually heard an eastern Canadian accent?

I have. Parts of my dad's side of the family, and some of his good friends are from out east.

Obviously my example was a very exaggerated, but the working class BC accent (baitcar.com) was brought up, so I was just comparing the eastern Canadian accent to a heavily exaggerated working class accent I've heard out there that shares some elements with a Minnesota accent...

The way she says roomy and today in this sounds similar to me to a very thick Ontarian accent.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzN_nqXZPj8

(Don't know how to imbed the video without an error occurring)

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

I think when we're talking about physical components (both built form and natural landscape), Canadian regions tend to look more similar to nearby US regions than to distant Canadian regions. But in terms of connectivity and cultural/philosophical affinity, the opposite. This is one case in which looks are deceiving despite the impression they may give.

I find that there is a tendency to focus on superficial similarities when people talk about cultural affinity or when Canadians and Americans are compared in general. The appearance of buildings is interesting but I'm not convinced it's more important than, say, the way the health care or education systems work where you live. Those things are cultural too.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

Yes but when looking at the effect of borders, one has to set aside the geographical, climatic, age, and socio-economic influences and compare "like for like" looking specifically at the effect of borders. Not much different than isolating variables in a scientific experiment. Otherwise you'll run into trouble no matter how many differences exist between regions.

Completely disagree, the point of this discussion isn't to only isolate the variables that are different, but rather to look at the whole picture.

If someone says that people in Vancouver have more in common with people with Seattle than with people in Iqualuit, it's totally meaningless to say "but if we narrow it down to only the things that are strictly Canadian, like knowing who Stephen Harper is, being able to say which color a bill of ten is, and knowing which animal is on the two dollar coin, then we find that the Vancouverite actually has more in common culturally with the Iqualummiuq than with the Seattleite".

It completely defeats the purpose of the comparison. If people say "the few things that are shared by all Canadians aren't that numerous compared to all the things that some Canadians and some Americans share", you can't counter that with "but if we only look at the things proper to Canadians, then we find that they're common to them".


(Yes, I had to look the demonym up for Iqualuit...)

[lio45]

Originally Posted by someone123

The appearance of buildings is interesting but I'm not convinced it's more important than, say, the way the health care or education systems work where you live. Those things are cultural too.

Sure. When we were talking about physical landscape I'd say it was more about climate and resources than about architecture. If people go out on sea to fish, or grow corn, or raise cattle, or work on an oil crew, or chop trees, or work in a CBD cubicle, that's cultural too.

If your rainy climate makes coffee the drink of choice of the place, it's cultural too.

If you get a ton of snow every year, the culture probably takes it into account. Ski, hockey, hating to have to shovel the driveway, etc. Kids here who wanted to share their winter snowball fights stories would relate more with other kids in, say, northern Vermont, than kids in Victoria BC.

If the place is full of forest and game, the culture probably takes it into account as well, and hunting is likely going to be a cultural trait there.

I see your point but surely you can see mine too.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by lio45

I sure hope so! The accents are absolutely incredibly different.

I might be able to distinguish a Quebec accent from an Acadian accent, but I doubt I could do any better than that.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

I might be able to distinguish a Quebec accent from an Acadian accent, but I doubt I could do any better than that.

That's already impressive, congratulations

[niwell]

Originally Posted by someone123

I find that there is a tendency to focus on superficial similarities when people talk about cultural affinity or when Canadians and Americans are compared in general. The appearance of buildings is interesting but I'm not convinced it's more important than, say, the way the health care or education systems work where you live. Those things are cultural too.

Health care and education is a huge cultural difference we can see on this very forum. Whenever the topic of movement back to the inner-city comes up, Americans always bring up education - and rightly so. That isn't a thing here. Huge difference IMO.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by niwell

Health care and education is a huge cultural difference we can see on this very forum. Whenever the topic of movement back to the inner-city comes up, Americans always bring up education - and rightly so. That isn't a thing here. Huge difference IMO.

Yep.

The link between property values and good school districts south of the border is something that was very foreign (to me at least).

If you want to bring up another pretty big cultural difference, to me, there's religion.

Although maybe now that our dear leader occasionally says "God bless Canada", that line is blurring.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by lio45

Completely disagree, the point of this discussion isn't to only isolate the variables that are different, but rather to look at the whole picture.

If someone says that people in Vancouver have more in common with people with Seattle than with people in Iqualuit, it's totally meaningless to say "but if we narrow it down to only the things that are strictly Canadian, like knowing who Stephen Harper is, being able to say which color a bill of ten is, and knowing which animal is on the two dollar coin, then we find that the Vancouverite actually has more in common culturally with the Iqualummiuq than with the Seattleite".

It completely defeats the purpose of the comparison. If people say "the few things that are shared by all Canadians aren't that numerous compared to all the things that some Canadians and some Americans share", you can't counter that with "but if we only look at the things proper to Canadians, then we find that they're common to them".


(Yes, I had to look the demonym up for Iqualuit...)

It doesn't defeat the purpose of the comparison, it is the comparison. If we're asking if people are more similar to neighbouring US regions than to more distant Canadian regions, this is what you have to actually compare that rather than comparing other things. Like comparing the experience of a middle income 40 something school teacher in a small town in BC to a working class 40 something car mechanic in a small town in Ontario versus one in Idaho. You wouldn't compare the experience of two very similar people across the border are more similar than two dis-similar people across the country because that's mostly comparing other aspects of their lives.

[lio45]

On the other hand, do you really think that health care is something that makes a big cultural impact?

I mean, if you para-dropped an alien in Vancouver, Seattle, Halifax, Boston, with his given assignment being to observe the "culture" for a while and report his observations, you really think he'd manage to identify health care as a major culture-shaping characteristic shared by the Vancouver-Halifax and Seattle-Boston duos and unshared between the two groups?