I've been listening over the course of the last few days to the 2007 Massey Lecture The City of Words this week and every time I listen to the podcast I get something out of it.
I've been thinking lately about the fact lately about the inability of some people to put themselves in someone else's shoes. The inability to empathize or recognize "the other". This is something that has recently crystallized for me, in understanding the way some people see the word. Some people have difficulty imagining the plight of the other, the see everyone else as a poor reflection of themselves and fail to understand how or why others think differently. In political language this kind of rhetoric is disguised by the language of "rationality". I have recognize that there are certain things about myself and experiences that I have had that allow me to better understand and empathize with the other.
First, I am a visible minority. As someone who has one white parent however this puts you in a somewhat awkward position, particularly in a country that for many reasons refuses to engage in conversations about race. This fact in some ways put you automatically in a position of being forced to recognize that there is a sense in which you will always be on the 'outside'. This is simple something that white Canadians, particularly those of the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, etc generations often have trouble understanding. I would imagine that this would be even more true in parts of Canada where there are few visible minorities. I think that being a visible minority in Canada (which I believe is a Canadian invention, It is defined as "persons, other than Aboriginal people, who are non-Caucasian in race or non-white in colour." See here.
The other experience I have had that also leads me in the same direction is the fact that I as in the French immersion program. I've heard annecdotaly that many of the participants in the program come from immigrant families, more than you would expect given their numbers anyways. One of the things that it teaches me, and I've seen whenever I've seen people struggle to learn a new language is how "things can be different" in language, how language structures thought. No one who has really learned another language well can pretend that language is just a vessel for ideas. It affects what we can communicate and in what way.
The example given by Alberto Manguel in the 2007 Massey lecture is a good one. He explains how Don Quixote opens with a line that would be literally (roughly ) translated as "In a certain place of La Mancha whose name I don't want to remember..." this construction is required because of the construction of the language,whereas Melville in Mobdy dick uses the same literary device saying "Call me Ishmael". In Spanish this is an impossibility because Melville can embrace all of humanity in those three words, whereas in Spanish you have to define your relationship to your reader. Listen to the lecture for a much much better description, I tried to simplify it here, but used the basic point from the comments in his lecture.
I owe my participation in the French immersion program to my father's strong belief in this country and how important understanding French was. I inherited from him a love of Canada. I think is something that those who simply are Canadian because they were born here, often fail to recognize. Immigrants choose Canada, and this choice has an impact on their perception of the country. Some make this choice without information, or with little thought, but many who choose this country do so because of what it stands for, what opportunities exist, because of what the country "is". I was often amazed at how deep my fathers attachment to this country became. One of my earliest memories and I'm sure one of his best moments was the day of my father's citizenship ceremony. He was surely among the proudest Canadians I have ever met, and it is in large measure because he chose this country.