The Great Canadian Tourism Thread!

[lio45]

Originally Posted by wg_flamip

Are Aruba, Martinique and the Turks and Caicos not culturally Caribbean then?

The various European powers have always had a much bigger presence in Caribbean cultures, so the contrast nowadays between a Continental European territory and an independent Caribbean one is much less stark than the contrast between a Continental European territory and a North American Anglo territory.

Was Newfoundland more culturally North American in 1950 than it was in 1948?

If you pay attention to SignalHillHiker posts and start to notice the significant differences between areas between one side of Empire Ave and the other (their ring road at the time), you might want to answer yes.

And again, this contrast is very mitigated by the fact that Newfoundland has always had a very strong "British Isles' Spawn" flavor, just like most of North America.

[wg_flamip]

Originally Posted by lio45

If you pay attention to SignalHillHiker posts and start to notice the significant differences between areas between one side of Empire Ave and the other (their ring road at the time), you might want to answer yes.

And again, this contrast is very mitigated by the fact that Newfoundland has always had a very strong "British Isles' Spawn" flavor, just like most of North America.

That may be true of St. John's (though I would argue that St. John's, by virtue of being in North America, has always been culturally North American), but is it true of Hopedale or Davis Inlet/Natuashish?

I'm not talking about Anglo North American culture here, I'm talking about culture that happens in North America and that is unique to this continent - whether in Havana, Savannah or Nuuk. To compare, Addis Ababa and Orania share little with each other culturally, but they are both equally of Africa in my mind - both cultural products of African history/histories and of social and political dynamics unique to that continent (though not each uniformly present across that continent).

[esquire]

Originally Posted by lio45

I'm certain it has nothing to do with indigenous people, and everything to do with being part of Denmark.

St-Pierre et Miquelon and Greenland are both firmly non-North American because Denmark and France are both firmly non-North American. Simple as that.

Huh? So you're telling us that Canada was non-North American at one time when it was under direct British rule?

[eemy]

Originally Posted by wg_flamip

Greenland is the only state or territory in North America where an indigenous group comprises a (quite large) majority of the population - that may isolate it culturally from much of the continent, but it is firmly North American nonetheless.

And the incredible irony here is that Greenland is also the one place in North America where European settlers arrived before the current indigenous population.

Speaking from my experience working thereon and off over the course of two years, Greenland has a lot in common culturally with other parts of the Arctic and there have been efforts to strengthen the ties with other Arctic territories; however, there is little in common with the dominant North American milieu.

English is commonly spoken as a third language, but is by no means close to universal, particularly amongst Greenlandic people.

Although it is physically closer to North America, trade and transportation is oriented toward Denmark to the extent that it is almost always easier, with rare exceptions, to travel through Denmark to reach Greenland from Canada or the US.

Culturally, they are mostly influenced by Denmark - Danish businesses, television, products, etc. I'd judge that the average Greenlandic person had about as much awareness of Canada and the US as your average Dane. Step into an apartment, and the plugs are Danish, the way they make their beds, their windows and appliances and bathrooms are indistinguishable from ones in Copenhagen.

They are far more likely to have spent time in Denmark or other parts of Europe for travel or education. In fact, the number of Greenlandic people I meet who had traveled to Canada or the US was very slim, while almost all regularly travelled to Europe. The only exceptions, in my case, were for the Arctic Winter Games and for the PDAC in Toronto.

They are, without a doubt, only North American by virtue of geography.

[SignalHillHiker]

St-Pierre et Miquelon are a little closer to North American than that. Linguistically and culturally, they're definitely European - Basque on the surface, and French beneath. Their lifestyle is completely French - from three-hour lunch breaks, to pride in Republican ideals. The electrical outlets and most of the vehicles are French. The fashion is provincial but still not exactly as one would find it in adjacent rural Newfoundland. Father's Day is one of the biggest holidays of the year. There are almost as many WWII memorials as buildings. It is a struggle to find soft drinks, and North American cuisine is a novelty, only as common as Chinese food in a typical Canadian town of similar size.

Terre Neuve et St-Pierre et Miquelon by R C, on Flickr

But, there are a lot - a lot - of traits shared with North Americans. While the vast majority of their media is French, the few international ones they do have are from Montreal and St. John's. Hockey is tremendously popular. Travel to Europe is almost exclusively through Newfoundland and on to one of the big Canadian airports or Boston. The songs performed at karaoke bars are almost always classic English ones. Although the official currency is the Euro, the only places that won't accept the Canadian dollar do so for political reasons.

Terre Neuve et St-Pierre et Miquelon by R C, on Flickr

*****

As for us, we were only as European as anywhere else of similar age in North America - just in different ways. Linguistically, we're probably still among the closest to Europe among anglophones. Virtually everything distinct about Newfoundland English is simply how it's said in either Waterford or Bristol. And until the late 1940s we had all the trappings of Europe - from driving on the left, to Armistice Day, to whatever else. And given our climate we share the foggy, indoor, artistic culture one would find in Ireland and Great Britain. But we're also very North American - a blend of Irish and English that couldn't have happened to the same degree back in the old country, not even in a place like Liverpool.

We got held up a little bit in the identity department because people were so passionately proud of being Britain's first colony. That formed the foundation (and majority) of our sense of self until WWI. Even when it was a Parliament, for example, we still called it the Colonial Building. It was as important to how we viewed ourselves as general friendliness and colourful houses seem to be today. So that kept people thinking of themselves as Europeans, as Britons, for a long time.

It was dominant enough that, despite being bitterly divided between English Protestants and Irish Catholics, neither was less likely than the other to be monarchist. Britain's first colony was it.

[Stryker]

Originally Posted by wg_flamip

Greenland is the only state or territory in North America where an indigenous group comprises a (quite large) majority of the population - that may isolate it culturally from much of the continent, but it is firmly North American nonetheless.

Inuit as a group actually span from east asia to greenland so that reasoning only goes so far, it's questionable if they were even the first to greenland.

Not to say the inuit are not an amazing culture.

I'd put them on the list along with the norse, and polynesians as some of the worlds greatest explorers.

However to the original point, this is one of few great discoveries to happen within Canada.

[Stryker]

Originally Posted by jeremy_haak

And the incredible irony here is that Greenland is also the one place in North America where European settlers arrived before the current indigenous population.

Speaking from my experience working thereon and off over the course of two years, Greenland has a lot in common culturally with other parts of the Arctic and there have been efforts to strengthen the ties with other Arctic territories; however, there is little in common with the dominant North American milieu.

English is commonly spoken as a third language, but is by no means close to universal, particularly amongst Greenlandic people.

Although it is physically closer to North America, trade and transportation is oriented toward Denmark to the extent that it is almost always easier, with rare exceptions, to travel through Denmark to reach Greenland from Canada or the US.

Culturally, they are mostly influenced by Denmark - Danish businesses, television, products, etc. I'd judge that the average Greenlandic person had about as much awareness of Canada and the US as your average Dane. Step into an apartment, and the plugs are Danish, the way they make their beds, their windows and appliances and bathrooms are indistinguishable from ones in Copenhagen.

They are far more likely to have spent time in Denmark or other parts of Europe for travel or education. In fact, the number of Greenlandic people I meet who had traveled to Canada or the US was very slim, while almost all regularly travelled to Europe. The only exceptions, in my case, were for the Arctic Winter Games and for the PDAC in Toronto.

They are, without a doubt, only North American by virtue of geography.

Thanks for what should be common sense. Honestly I think a large part of the problem is that many here simply do not appreciate the geography of canada's north atlantic.



Ignoring all the cultural conversation just mathematically there is such a difference from traveling to greenland from iceland, than from iceland to newfoundland.

It's like comparing getting into orbit with getting onto the moon.

As a westerner I like to think we instinctively celebrate exploration of all kinds, and in this situation I think it's clear that the norse are some of Canada's greatest history of exploration.

[Stryker]

Originally Posted by SignalHillHiker

As for us, we were only as European as anywhere else of similar age in North America - just in different ways. Linguistically, we're probably still among the closest to Europe among anglophones. Virtually everything distinct about Newfoundland English is simply how it's said in either Waterford or Bristol. And until the late 1940s we had all the trappings of Europe - from driving on the left, to Armistice Day, to whatever else. And given our climate we share the foggy, indoor, artistic culture one would find in Ireland and Great Britain. But we're also very North American - a blend of Irish and English that couldn't have happened to the same degree back in the old country, not even in a place like Liverpool.

I think the part that most people don't get is that newfoundland was settled by a rather homogeneous population, onto land that lacked very few immigrants or native groups. This is a huge contrast to much of north america that typically had split cultural influences.

I think the best comparison is to medieval scotland. Which was once an even mix of celtic, and anglo saxon(english influences).

In other words it makes almost as much sense to say that the irish are newfies, than to see newfies are irish.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by wg_flamip

Greenland is the only state or territory in North America where an indigenous group comprises a (quite large) majority of the population - that may isolate it culturally from much of the continent, but it is firmly North American nonetheless.

I believe Nunavut, which is about 85% Inuit, would also qualify.

Nunavut is also immeasurably more North American than Greenland is.

[SignalHillHiker]

Originally Posted by Stryker

I think the part that most people don't get is that newfoundland was settled by a rather homogeneous population, onto land that lacked very few immigrants or native groups. This is a huge contrast to much of north america that typically had split cultural influences.

I think the best comparison is to medieval scotland. Which was once an even mix of celtic, and anglo saxon(english influences).

In other words it makes almost as much sense to say that the irish are newfies, than to see newfies are irish.

I think what's unique about our settlement is that almost everyone alive in the province, even today, can trace their heritage back to two cities. There are almost certainly more recent immigrants here than there are people whose families were not from Waterford or Bristol and their surrounding countryside. Most other places in North America were a blend of countless places.

If Canada established a new city up north and followed its past settlement pattern, it'd have waves of settlers, English and French, and everything else, from all across the federation. If it settled a new city following Newfoundland's pattern, half the population of Halifax and St. John's would be relocated there and that'd be it. It creates a completely different experience and result.

[Stryker]

Originally Posted by SignalHillHiker

I think what's unique about our settlement is that almost everyone alive in the province, even today, can trace their heritage back to two cities. There are almost certainly more recent immigrants here than there are people whose families were not from Waterford or Bristol and their surrounding countryside. Most other places in North America were a blend of countless places.

If Canada established a new city up north and followed its past settlement pattern, it'd have waves of settlers, English and French, and everything else, from all across the federation. If it settled a new city following Newfoundland's pattern, half the population of Halifax and St. John's would be relocated there and that'd be it. It creates a completely different experience and result.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=72wSVRHz1s4 random search ironic what comes up VIKINGS!!!

EDIT: Norse culture and shit was once one of my autistic obsessions, I have to work to keep it under raps as folks might think I is crazy.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I believe Nunavut, which is about 85% Inuit, would also qualify.

Nunavut is also immeasurably more North American than Greenland is.

I think the takeaway is that while Greenland is physiographically part of North America, ethnoculturally (and psychologically) it is most definitely European.

It should be remembered that the western half of Iceland is on the North American plate, and it also could be argued as being in North America (although nobody would seriously state that Iceland is not European).

Sometimes continental boundaries make no sense........

[Stryker]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Sometimes continental boundaries make no sense........

Almost all the time lol in this context one has to ask is newfoundland even north america.

For more than a few reasons it's possible to argue the island is just part of the north atlantic.

You'd have to wonder if we were still an independent colony would this even be debatable.

Keep in mind there's a rather consistent argument that the Caribbean is not north america.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

I think the takeaway is that while Greenland is physiographically part of North America, ethnoculturally (and psychologically) it is most definitely European.



.......

Greenland is more of a hybrid between aboriginal culture and European culture.

As such it's quite interesting as there are very few places like that.

[Stryker]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Greenland is more of a hybrid between aboriginal culture and European culture.

As such it's quite interesting as there are very few places like that.

Keep in mind inuit are not traditional aboriginal they are somewhat of a distinct culture.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I believe Nunavut, which is about 85% Inuit, would also qualify.

Nunavut is also immeasurably more North American than Greenland is.

Having visited both 1) several Western European countries and 2) some of the towns within reservations in NM, AZ and OK (most native-heavy spots I've personally experienced, but I'm sure select areas of northern SK, etc. would work fine too for my point), and based on jeremy haak's description of his trips to Greenland, I am certain it would feel much more like #1 than #2.

Same for SPM, I've never been there, but having a French dad and French relatives and having been to France several times, based on SignalHillHiker's descriptions and pictures of St-Pierre, it would most definitely feel much more like "familiar France" to me than "familiar North America".

Sure, there will be a few oddities here and there that will drive home the point you're not in the most stereotypical of French towns (as for example the planet's one and only Peugeot 307 with a Boston Bruins sticker on it in existence), but they'll be really minor in the complete experience.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by lio45

Sure, there will be a few oddities here and there that will drive home the point you're not in the most stereotypical of French towns (as for example the planet's one and only Peugeot 307 with a Boston Bruins sticker on it in existence), but they'll be really minor in the complete experience.

Every times he posts that I always think it's probably some guy from SPM who went to MIT, or maybe it's actually an American guy from Mass. who married an SPM girl.

I see cars with outlier stickers all the time here in Gatineau. Just because I see a car with an HC-Gottéron (from Geneva) sticker it doesn't mean that Quebec is becoming Helvetized.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Stryker

Keep in mind inuit are not traditional aboriginal they are somewhat of a distinct culture.

What is traditional aboriginal anyway?

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Every times he posts that I always think it's probably some guy from SPM who went to MIT, or maybe it's actually an American guy from Mass. who married an SPM girl.

I see cars with outlier stickers all the time here in Gatineau. Just because I see a car with an HC-Gottéron (from Geneva) sticker it doesn't mean that Quebec is becoming Helvetized.

I take from SHH's SPM insight that it's less of an outlier than that. SPM's media/TV connections, flight connections, etc. are apparently slightly more Boston-oriented (and slightly less Canada-oriented) than one would think at first sight.

[Stryker]

Originally Posted by Acajack

What is traditional aboriginal anyway?

Generally confined to a somewhat defined geographic area is one that I think counts for a lot. ****Pre european introduction****

Technologically wise a large portion of canadian natives didn't have what one would call advanced technology.

The inuit were the first to be able to truly colonize the arctic.