|
After reading "Poem" and "The Girl Who Couldn't See Herself," explore your private and public images through the following projects.
1. Consider the following questions and write your answers in the columns:
· If I were a colour, I would be.... Others might say that I am more like ...colour.
· If I were music, I would be.... Others might say that I am more like... music.
· If I were an animal, I would be.... Others might say that I am more like... animal.
· If I were a texture, I would be.... Others might say that I am more like the texture of....
· If I were a tree, I would be.... Others might say that I am more like a ...tree.
· If I were a food, I would be.... Others might say that I am more like...food.
Use your imagination and make up more comparisons between your private self and public self.
The Private Me That Only I See |
The Public Me That Others See |
1. Create a "Me Collage" that expresses the two images of who you are-the private and public images. Use such things as:
· shapes, colours, textures
· words, favourite expressions, nicknames
· pictures of places, animals, famous people, family and friends
· small treasures or mementos
· other items that you wish to include.
2. Pair up with someone who knows you relatively well, and ask him or her to identify the private and the public you in the collage.
Select ten names from a country, culture or language group. Use a variety of resources including name books, interviews with people and the Internet to learn about the origins and meanings of the ten names. On the chart below, list the names and state the meaning(s), background (history and origin) and classification (reason for naming the child that way-religious, family name, day of year or time of day born, musical or physical reasons, nature or environment).
Global Names Chart | |||
|
Country: Culture: Language: | |||
Name |
Meaning |
Background(history and origin) |
Classification(reason for name) |
Write a generalization about your findings to explain the naming traditions of this particular culture.
Write a brief response to the following questions:
1. What three items do you own that are very important to you? ______________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
I value these items because ____________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
2. What are three of your favourite activities?
It is important for me to do these activities because ______________________________
3. What are three of your favourite foods?
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
They are my favourites because ______________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
4. What three items of clothing (including shoes) are important to you?
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
I value these clothing items because ______________________________
5. What are three items from questions 1 to 4 that you would be comfortable living without?
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
I could live without these items because ______________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
6. Reflect on your responses to questions 1, 2, 3 and 4 above, and identify which of these items the media has influenced you to use or purchase. List them.
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
People I am Said to be Like |
Similarities |
Differences |
Complete the following survey. Be as honest as possible. There are no "right" or "wrong" answers.
SA = Strongly Agree A = Agree D = Disagree SD = Strongly Disagree
SA |
A |
D |
SD | ||
1. |
It is too easy for refugees to enter Canada. |
||||
2. |
Immigrants to Canada should be allowed to keep their own ethnic cultures and traditions. |
||||
3. |
It is important that immigrants learn to speak either English or French. |
||||
4. |
Immigrants should get equal pay for equal work. |
||||
5. |
Everyone, including recent immigrants, should have freedom of speech in Canada. |
||||
6. |
Refugees take jobs away from Canadians. |
||||
7. |
Canada spends too much money on helping refugees come to Canada. |
||||
8. |
New immigrants should not be allowed to own large amounts of land in Canada. |
||||
9. |
New immigrants have much to contribute to Canadian society. |
||||
10. |
Children of new immigrants should be permitted to attend school only if they can speak English or French. |
Compare your responses to those of the entire class by compiling the class responses into a graph (e.g., bar graph, line graph).
Discuss the results with the class.
With the exception of the First Nations, everyone in Canada is either an immigrant or descended from immigrants. But how did all these people, from so many different countries, end up living here? What criteria did they have to meet in order to gain entry? The truth may explode some long-cherished myths about Canada's immigration history.
As late as 1910, those wishing to move to Canada were subjected to a ranking system based on racial origin and how well immigration experts thought they could adapt to life in this country. It wasn't until the 1960s that the Department of Immigration discarded these racial criteria and adopted a more tolerant attitude towards ethnic minorities. But in order to take a comprehensive look at Canada's immigration policy, we have to go back another 300 years.
In 1660, immigrant settlement in Canada was mainly restricted to villages scattered along the St. Lawrence River. Most inhabitants were traders, merchants and soldiers and the area was nominally controlled by the French Crown. For years, the colony languished. French authorities considered it a backwater. Some said its only claim to worthiness was the quality of the furs in the region. But this changed when France's arch-enemy, England, fixed her imperialistic eye on the New World. France knew the key to retaining the colony was to populate it.
To bolster the predominantly male population along the St. Lawrence, beginning in 1665, more than 700 French women were imported into the colony. Many were impoverished and their expenses were paid by the Crown, which led them to be known as les filles du roi, daughters of the King. This novel approach had the desired effect as the population grew.
Then, from 1665 to 1760, another 8,000 immigrants settled in Canada. Nearly all were single men and many didn't care for what they encountered. For every one that remained, two returned to Europe. Canada's early immigration policy was obviously flawed.
For more than a century, with the notable exception of les filles du roi, authorities encouraged male immigration. Single men could be transported cheaply, with many working aboard the ships to defray the price of passage. It was rationalized that, without families to encumber them, these men would travel the colony searching for work and settling where they liked. Married men, especially those with children, were considered inappropriate immigrants. It was believed they would abandon the colony rather than subject their loved ones to privation. This attitude changed in the 1750s when Britain tried to colonize Nova Scotia with loyal Protestants. It was hoped these staunch Englishmen would counterbalance the Catholic population in Quebec.
It is estimated that 2,500 Protestants came to the area between 1750 and 1780. But of the single males in this group, fully two-thirds disappeared from colonial records. They did not settle in Nova Scotia. They either slipped away to the United States or joined the army. As colonists, they were a total loss. However, among the married men, only one-third did not settle permanently. The British government was quick to realize it got much better value out of families, even though single men were cheaper to settle. This shift in thinking influenced Canadian immigration policy for nearly 50 years. As one historian put it, "families were channels for information and assistance, and an important source of support in adjusting to life in a new location." A prime example occurred around 1815, when a group of Irish immigrants settled in Upper Canada.
Once the original group was here, they began writing letters home. They extolled life in Canada as compared to the conditions they left in Ireland. As a consequence, more family members immigrated and so did friends and neighbours. This became known as chain immigration and was quickly acknowledged to be a more effective colonization tool than the random importation of single males. Canada's immigration policy was maturing.
For 200 years the primary reason for people coming to this country was the fact that they could get free land. All that changed at the beginning of the 20th century. Labour-seeking immigrants began to outnumber land-seeking settlers. This was amply demonstrated when the railroad was being constructed through the interior of British Columbia. Thousands of Chinese workers came to Canada hoping to earn wages unheard of in their homeland. They were here strictly to earn money, not to take up homesteads. They represented not only a drastic shift in the trend of immigration, but also a dramatic change in the way officials viewed those seeking access to this country.
The attitude adopted toward the Chinese was: if they wanted into Canada to work that was fine, but only male labourers would be allowed to immigrate without penalty. If they wanted their families to join them, each member would be charged a head tax. The tax was so high that hardly any of the Chinese could afford it. in 1923, to further impede the entry of families, the infamous Chinese Immigration Act was passed. It imposed such strict quotas that a decade later only five percent of all Chinese Canadians were women.
After the Second World War, the North American economy again needed an infusion of immigrant labour. Coincidentally, Canada also had an international obligation to help find homes for persons disrupted by the war. Immigration authorities combined the nation's need with its moral obligation, developing an innovative solution. Whole families without Canadian relatives would be allowed into the country if they were willing to work in the sugar beet fields of Ontario and Alberta. These immigrants came to be called "sugar beet families," but were officially defined as "relatives willing to live together and work as a family unit." The Canadian government also came up with a policy to meet its obligation to accept single displaced persons without relatives in Canada. Under what came to be the bulk labour scheme, displaced persons signed contracts that bound them as employees to specific companies for up to a year. But not all were welcome. Lumbering companies wanted only single men under 40 years of age. The mining industry would accept married men only if their families stayed in Europe until enough had been saved from wages to establish a dwelling place and pay their passage. Displaced women could enter Canada as domestics but age, marital status and health determined eligibility. They had to be young and either single or widowed. Those who did not have children were preferred. These women were also expected to be endowed with emotional stability and possessed of average intelligence. All were tested for venereal disease and pregnancy.
It was also at this time that the Canadian government began offering assisted passage to skilled workers and professionals. Only the breadwinner received passage. The rest of the family had to stay behind. Canadian church groups often took care of paperwork and raised money to transport dependents.
Today, before being granted entry into Canada, independent immigrants must present proof that they have professional training or an occupational skill. At the same time, reunification plans are supposed to pave the way for entire families to acquire political or economic sanctuary in Canada. Controversies continue to surround immigration policy regarding immigration fees, the emphasis on economic immigrants and proposals requiring immigrants to speak either French or English.
Simmons, D. "The Chosen Ones: A History of Selective Immigration." FACES: Canada's Multicultural Magazine. Fall, 1998. Regina, Saskatchewan. (Reprinted with permission of the Multicultural Council of Saskatchewan.)