Institut für Anglistik und

Amerikanistik Fakultät für Kulturwissenschaften

RReepprreesseennttaattiioonnss ooff CCoonnfflliicctt iinn CCoonntteemmppoorraarryy CCaannaaddiiaann DDrraammaa

aanndd iittss SSiiggnniiffiiccaannccee ffoorr CCaannaaddiiaann IIddeennttiittiieess

Bachelor paper for:

“Advanced Topics in Culture Studies: A Few Acres of Snow – Canadian Identities”

SE 551.265

Course instructor: Mag. René Schallegger

SS 2010

KKaatthhaarriinnaa FFeerrcchheerr

Matr.Nr.: 0561161 10 February 2011

katharina.fercher@edu.uni-klu.ac.at

I hereby declare that all material in this assignment is my own work except where there is clear acknowledgement or reference to the work of others. I understand the nature of plagiarism. I have read and I agree to the English department's statement on Plagiarism and Academic Integrity on the University website at http://www.uniklu.ac.at/iaa . ________________________________ _________________________________ date signature

This paper is dedicated to my mother. Without her support I probably wouldn’t have managed to see my studies through to the end. Thank you so much for everything, Mama. I wish you could have read this yourself. Special thanks also to Tata, Thomas, Silvia and Valentina, my family and friends who always believed in me – often more than I did.

........................................................................................................................ ii ........................................................................................................iii ........................................................................................................................ 1

...................................................................................................................................... 2 ............................................................................... 2 ...................................................................... 2 ................................................................................. 4 .............................................................................................. 6 ....................................................................................... 6 ..................................................................................... 6 .................................................................................................. 9

.................................................................................................................................... 9 ........................................................................ 9 .................................................................................................. 9

4.1.1 The Rez Sisters.................................................................................................... 10 4.1.2 Someday.............................................................................................................. 11

.......................................................................... 14 4.2.1 Mom, Dad, I’m Living With A White Girl ......................................................... 14 4.2.2 Riot ...................................................................................................................... 16 4.2.3 Fronteras Americanas.......................................................................................... 17

........................................................................................................ 19 4.3.1 Harlem Duet ........................................................................................................ 19 4.3.2 Lion in the Streets ............................................................................................... 21

.................................................................................... 22 4.4.1 Martin Yesterday................................................................................................. 23

................................................................ 24 ..................................................................................... 24 .................................................................................................. 25 ........................................................................................................................ 27 ..................................................................................................................... 28

When I decided to take the course “A Few Acres Of Snow – Canadian Identities”

in the summer term of 2010 as the topic course for my bachelor thesis, I did not yet

know much about the country and its identity issues – save its location north of the

United States and it obviously having enough identity issues to make a course about it.

During the course and the research for this paper, however, this piece of information

turned out to be a quite significant aspect in how Canada and Canadians are mainly

perceived by the rest of the world and also by themselves. Most of the time it appears

that Canada as a nation has ‘happened’ to come to existence rather than having been

founded with intention and future dreams and goals by its forefathers. It also seems that

Canadian people value their (cultural) differences more highly than the one nationality

they have in common. And what is more that only until recently the umbrella terms

Canadian Art or Canadian Literature more than often strangely evoked impressions of

offense rather than praise. Since these notions differ so strongly to what I have

encountered so far in culture and literature studies I chose to investigate the connections

between contemporary Canadian Literature, Canadian psyches and thus also their

identities more closely.

The title of this paper Travelling Postmodern Canadian Drama is supposed to

represent the identity formation processes a person or a nation goes through. These

processes can be compared to a journey somebody takes: First, the one to take the

journey must have the will to break out of everyday routine and determine a destination.

Then, he or she has to find out what they own and what they need to equip themselves

with for the journey (departure). Once on the road they need to find the right way(s),

ask for directions and at the same time look out for themselves (journey). Occasionally,

they stop for food and accommodation or to learn about new places and people before

moving on (layovers). Eventually, they get to their desired destination – either to find

what they were looking for or to find out that things are rather different than initially

expected (arrival). In any case, they have become aware of themselves and their

surroundings, and have enriched themselves with much experience. This metaphor of

the journey has become the red threat in my paper’s structure.

I chose to examine and interpret eight contemporary plays by acclaimed English

speaking Canadian playwrights from very different social and cultural backgrounds. My

main focus will be on conflicts – conflicts that arise between and within the characters

in the plays and conflicts that lead to the development of situations and characters. As a

next step I analyze how these conflicts can be related to ongoings in Canadian society in

the present and the past. In the first part of this paper I will elaborate on essential points

made by Margaret Atwood in her work on Canadian Literature, some critical events

from Canada’s historical background, as well as Mienert’s arguments on identity

formation. By using the thus gained information as basic tools in the second part of the

paper, I will examine the following plays: The Rez Sisters (1988) by Tomson Highway,

Someday (1993) by Drew Hayden Taylor, Mom, Dad, I’m Living With A White Girl

(1995) by Marty Chan, Riot (1995) by Andrew Moodie, Fronteras Americanas (1993)

by Guillermo Verdecchia, Harlem Duet (1997) by Djanet Sears, Lion In The Streets

(1992) by Judith Thompson and Martin Yesterday (1998) by Brad Fraser. I categorized

these plays according to cultural and social backgrounds of the authors and their main

themes. My aim here is to validate my claim that through the conscious and/or

unconscious representation of Canada’s complex and often disadvantageous situation in

and through drama (and the arts in general), Canadian society has made a great cultural

and psychological development over the past decades –probably even greater than many

other countries or societies ever could.

The most important cornerstone of Canadian Literature is probably Margaret

Atwood’s book Survival. During the 1960s and 1970s Canada seemed to be at a

significant cultural turning point and Atwood was the first writer who ‘dared’ to coin

the term ‘Canadian Literature’ and define common elements in ‘Canadian Literature’.

Her statements put a mirror in front of Canadian artists and society (including herself)

and have consequently influenced Canada’s literary production until today; thus they

remain not only valid but also fundamental to the Canadian perception of themselves.

The most prominent theme in Canadian Literature clearly is survival. According to

Atwood the versatile concept of survival (bare survival in nature, cultural survival

during the English colonization, surviving the economic integration into US markets)

has gradually become an internalized issue of Canadians. Therefore, it can be explained

why most characters in Canadian Literature are concerned with either ‘surviving’ or

‘failing to survive’ – be it literally or psychologically. As survival and failure seem to

be omnipresent themes, Atwood identifies five Victim Positions – or ways of dealing

with these themes: denial, fatalism, rebellion, acceptance and mysticism (Atwood,

1972: 46ff). At least one of these themes is reflected in every literary piece (later also in

film) by Canadian authors but evidently also in ‘real life’.

Whereas earlier works (until the 1960s) tended to evolve around the positions of

denial and fatalism, the positions of rebellion acceptance and mysticism have become

more crucial in Contemporary Canadian literature (from the 1970s onwards) and in

Canadian Drama in particular. Where people were concerned with literally and

figuratively building walls, creating frontiers and ‘celebrating’ Canada’s “garrison

mentality” before, they now seem to be passionately tearing down these walls and

frontiers by crossing any borders (Frye, 1971: 225). In the past few decades, drama has

largely moved away from mainstream literature and theater, having considerable effects

on literary and cultural recipients both on a national and international level.

What has probably changed most significantly is that Canadian drama no longer is

only a mere reflection of but has now an impact on society. Additionally, it serves as a

voice for certain communities within the Canadian society that have been silent before –

such as First Nations, Hyphenated communities and LGBT (Lesbian Gay Bisexual and

Transgender) communities. Playwrights as well as their characters seem to revisit and

acknowledge their past and – most importantly – move on. An achievement that

Atwood defined as Victim Position Four, i.e. as being a “creative non-victim” who

accepts things the way they are and makes the best out of them (Atwood, 1972: 49).

This achievement provides a lot of freedom, and Canadians in such a position are

having much pleasure experimenting with this newly gained freedom. As already

mentioned, Contemporary Canadian Drama has a preoccupation with crossing borders:

on the one hand, its plots have become multi-ethnic, political and generally very critical

towards society by playing with stereotypes or presenting marginalized characters who

find themselves in contradictory or irresolvable situations (a fact that still exhibits

Canada’s core theme of failure). Furthermore, characters and plots often become self-

referential and aware of themselves and their situation. On the other hand, the director

gets attributed a vital role when putting a play on stage. The plain text is open for

artistic interpretation – a chance for directors to seize and to creatively employ

techniques like lighting, stage design, voice and silence in order to emphasize the

message of a text in a particular way. Plots and performances are also often pushed to

the extremes, for example through provocative elements, such as violence, sexuality or

through absurd or ironic elements. Moreover, the roles of the directors, playwrights and

actors have become interchangeable. The audience often gets attributed a significant

role as well, for example by being addressed directly or given the chance to get involved

with the plot and direct the further course of the play. Everything seems possible and

everything is free to change.

There are no longer rules to obey or borders to halt at. In other words: it is no

longer possible to put the different styles of Canadian drama into boxes. They all share

common features, and yet they are all different. The riddance of all forms, the

acceptance of the subjective and the individual, and the importance of difference and

interpretation are features that make Canadian drama utterly postmodern. Drama today

questions the ‘normal’ and confronts Canadian society with all its aspects, regardless of

how dark, hidden or “fucked up” that aspect may be (Fraser, 1998: 18). Thus, Canadian

drama plays a vital role in reflecting, defining and shaping Canadian culture and

identity. As Guillermo Verdecchia effectively points out at the end of his piece

Fronteras Americanas: “I am building a house on the border.” (Verdecchia, 1997: 78).

The concepts of survival and failure have been identified as common themes in

Canadian Literature. Additionally, as mentioned above, these themes are rooted in

actual events and experiences Canadians have made over time when settling the

country. Only later have these initially external factors become internalized and

manifested themselves in the Canadian culture and psyche. Therefore, it seems

appropriate to take a look at a few important aspects of Canadian history which have

influenced the formation of the two concepts of survival and failure. I chose three

particular situations that were crucial for Canada as a nation and a people and illustrate

its development most vividly.

What determined Canada’s biography most vitally occured right at the beginning

of European settlement: Whereas immigrants went to what later would become the

United States to stay there, to create a new home and gain freedom and opportunity,

colonies in later Canada were thought as outposts for fur trade with the First Nations,

fishing and as temporary habitats used before moving on in order to find a passage to

the Orient (Ferguson, 2005: 47ff). For quite some time (until about the 17th and 18th

century) the Canadian colonies were not places people chose voluntarily to spend the

rest of their lives but rather places that served certain purposes. Additionally,

settlements in the north also were not all too popular as the climate there generally

tended to be cooler and harsher than in their southern counterparts. What is more, the

first settlers of the Canadian regions – whether they stayed there temporarily or

permanently – turned out to be overwhelmed by the nature they faced: expressed in the

writings of the early settlers, they seem to meet the abundance and might of nature with

admiration and awe, only to suggest soon afterwards that their surrounding nature be

“dead and unanswering or actively hostile” and in any case something to be “distrusted”

(Atwood, 1972: 59). Therefore, the image of someone dying by or barely surviving the

malevolence of nature has become quite common in Canadian Literature.

Another particular topic that has been influencing the Canadians’ sense of nation

and culture ever since is the situation of its francophone province Québec. After the

British had defeated the French in the battle on the Plains of Abraham, they took over

the region of New France (what would later be narrowed down to the province of

Québec) and caused the so-called “Big Bang of Canadian history” (Ferguson, 2005:

117). Since that time Canada has been experiencing major and minor tensions between

their English and French speaking citizens, or in other words: between English Canada

and Québec. Although the country as a whole is considered bilingual, Québec has

always emphasized on its being a “distinct society” (Ferguson, 2005: 396). However,

the situation grew more and more critical when rumors about a potential separation

spread and culminated at two referenda, in 1980 and 1995, where a “sovereignty

association” was only narrowly averted (Ferguson, 2005: 376, 408). The threat of such a

severe incision in the country has thus constantly been circling in its people’s heads and

finds expression in the work of several authors and artists (Fraser, 1997: 31).

Last but not least, an essential point that adds to Canada’s complex national and

cultural condition is its dependance on its southern neighbor, the United States. At

several instances in time, the Canadian government has tried to shift its economic ties

from the U.S. to other trade partners (Ferguson, 2005: 373) in order to become more

independent. This did not turn out to be much of a success as the United States were big

and strong enough to exert economic and political pressure on Canada. In addition, and

as most of Canada’s prosperity was and still is attributed to its agreements with the

United States, such as the NAFTA. Up until today the Canadian economy is integrated

in the United States’ economy to a very large extent. As Robert Thompson puts it: “The

Americans are our best friends – whether we like it or not.” illustrating how vulnerable

not only Canada’s economy but also the country’s existence itself is (Ferguson, 2005:

413).

Going through Canadian history and literature, its particular and complex situation

becomes evident. Feelings of uncertainty, powerlessness and of being helplessly trapped

in their environment (e.g. nature, Québec, the U.S.) have accompanied Canada at all

times. What is more, as soon as attempts are made to improve disadvantageous

situations and fight ‘higher powers’, Canadians were usually taught by experience that

even if they tried, they would fail nonetheless. Therefore, the concept of failure has

developed and fastened in the Canadian psyche and culture over time and finds

expression in the country’s arts. Unlike the archetypical storyline of the U.S. American

hero that courageously masters any task and is rewarded and celebrated in the end, the

typical Canadian story does not even sport a hero but usually portrays characters who

are trapped by higher powers it is no point in fighting against, who fail to escape or

master a task if they survive at all in the end.

If the emergence of diffuse identities is a phenomenon of postmodern Western

societies, then Canadian society is probably the one taking it to the extreme. On the one

hand, we Westerners have lived in rather peaceful and economically secure times since

World War II, and have multiple options available for our lives. What Maslow

designates as our basic needs are therefore covered. On the other hand though, the result

of not having to worry about major changes on our countries and thus our lives leads us

to the next steps of the pyramid where we get the privilege and the challenge at the

same time to consciously develop our identities, rather than being ‘forced’ into one.

Canada has been struggling to find out ‘where’ and ‘who’ it is for quite a while already

(Atwood, 1972: 24f). When we take a look at the situation of Canadian ethnic

minorities, it is even more complicated and complex still.

It is probably most important to bear in mind that the concept of identity is not

something static or rigid but should be seen as a dynamic process, a constant

development of experiences and attitudes that lasts throughout one entire life (of a

person as well as a society or culture). Usually, the process of identity formation

distinguishes three major steps: detachment (from old positions), exploration (diffuse

identity stage) and self placement/commitment (Mienert, 2008: 76ff). In other words, in

order to develop one’s identity – or rather one’s identities, as there may be different

ones in the different spheres of life – present beliefs or opinions are questioned, new or

different perspectives are tried out (i.e. assumed and reflected by oneself and others),

then adopted or rejected, and finally responsibility is taken for the newly acquired

quality, integrity established and individual values are created. For several reasons,

however, this process may be obstructed and can last longer – as it is the case in

Canadian society.

Canada has been busy exploring its identities since Margaret Atwood first

mentioned its preoccupation with “internal obstacles” and the threat of it in the early

1970s (Atwood, 1972: 42). Canada is a country that hardly has any common history and

experience it can build upon. The reason for this being that the Canadian people consist

of a mixture of various different cultures, ethnicities and beliefs – save its being a

“collective victim” as Canadians all share the stage of ‘detachment’ by having left their

home country in the first place and now they need to cope with cultural and spiritual

survival in the stage of ‘identity exploration’ (Atwood, 2004: 43). This collective

experience is also the reason for the immense struggle in Canada’s ‘identity quest’. New

attitudes cannot be sufficiently tried out as there are not many Canadians with clear-cut

positions others could run up against and be reflected by. Moreover, a society that

ostensibly offers freedom and self-fulfillment (i.e. everything is possible) is even more

resistant to any change as it may jeopardize exactly these qualities (i.e. when everything

is possible, nothing is possible) (Mienert, 2008: 136). This assumption would also

account for Canada’s “obsession with surviving” on the one hand, and its “will not to

survive” and internal “choice” for failure on the other (Atwood, 2004: 44). What makes

Canadians’ exploration for identity last can thus be summarized as a struggle between

integrity (or “Who am I?”) and desperation (to survive) (or “Where is here?”) (Erikson,

1981 in Mienert, 2008: 109; Atwood, 2004: 24f).

As it has become clear now, the processes for identity formation pose quite a

challenge for Canadian society in general. All the more challenging it is for Canadian

ethnic minorities, as their cultural backgrounds differ more profoundly from those of the

majority population with European background. Pieces of drama written by artists of

minority groups provide insight into their feelings about their country and their tackling

of identity questions. Most prominent in Canadian drama is the concept of transgression

or crossing borders as well as the negotiation between old traditions and norms and new

ways of living and potential opportunities, which can be interpreted as a Canadian way

of exploring their identities (Glaap, 2005:15). In the First Nation play The Rez Sisters,

for example, Tomson Highway’s character Emily Dictionary vividly represents all these

concepts: She has a masculine appearance, is bisexual, went to another country and

returned, and gets pregnant without having a steady partner. She consciously violates

unwritten societal rules, acknowledges and combines all the different facets of her

personality in order to create something new. On the formal level Highway also breaks

several conventions of drama by not adhering to the three unities (time, space and

action) and portraying taboo themes, but, like Emily on the content level, he presents a

multitude of aspects (or fragments) and thus recreates drama by deconstructing it

(Highway, 1988: 97ff). Another example for the negotiation between old and new

concepts of living is represented in Marty Chan’s Mom, Dad, I’m Living With A White

Girl, when Mark shows his parents appreciation for what they have done for him

instead of blindly rebelling and still breaks up his relationship to Sally instead of

‘fleeing’ with her)in order to find his own way in this country and his life, and

eventually ‘daring’ to declare that “[the] young tree has deep roots,” (Chan, 2007: 84f).

Like Highway Chan also violates dramatic norms by shifting between two levels of

narration, provokingly including B-movie features, and merrily playing with Asian

stereotypes. Andrew Moodie’s Riot takes ethnic difference one step further by

suggesting through his representation of six profoundly differing – but nonetheless

complex – Black-Canadian characters that so-called ethnic minority societies are just as

torn and fragmented as Canadian society as a whole. In other words, he suggests that

there are only differences when we make them. Furthermore, Moodie also attributes a

lot of space for interpretation to the performers of his play and thus creates an

opportunity for every actor to bring in his individuality and for every play to become

something unique, which is again a riddance of old conventions.

There have been many instances where Canada became notoriously known as the

‘Empire of Nice’. Tying all strings of the previous sections together it can be said that

being ‘nice’ and tolerant (to Québecois separatists, for example) instead of

demonstrating an imperturbable attitude and will is likely a result of Canada’s diffuse

identities. Unless a nation like Canada has come to terms with its internal conditions,

(cultural) differences among its people for example, and has thus been able to establish

essential (cultural) values, it will most certainly always have problems with its

representation to and interaction with other countries. The separatist movement in

Québec – taking this representative example again, though many others could serve here

just as well – shows that a common national identity has not sufficiently been

established. On the other hand, Canadians gradually start to notice the predicament and

call people’s attention, by provoking, for instance, like Will Ferguson when he says that

through their ‘niceness’ “Canadians have pushed tolerance to the point of self-

destruction.” (Ferguson, 1997: 201).

When dealing with First Nations contexts (be it literary, cultural or political) one

always has to bear in mind the eventful and complex history First Nations people have.

Not only have they been living in Canada’s regions, and developing and fostering their

various cultures long before the Europeans arrived but also did they experience severe

incisions in their lives and customs during colonial times. Gradual expropriation of First

Nations territories, several policies of assimilation as well as structures of inequality

that have partly even endured until today have left remaining First Nations communities

traumatized and seriously uprooted. Through drama Aboriginal artists have found a new

means to pursue one of their remaining but profoundly anchored traditions of story-

telling in contemporary Canada. This way, also their concerns and critique have found

expression.

4.1.1 Tomson Highway’s The Rez Sisters (1988)

Although highly comic and entertaining, Tomson Highway’s play The Rez Sisters

is also very self-critical. On the one hand, he portrays his seven female characters in the

fictional Wasaychigan reserve as chatty, candid and full of life. They seem to love and

hate each other at the same time. And when they get together to travel to Toronto

looking forward to the biggest Bingo game they know of, loyalty and strong ties

amongst the women are revealed. On a symbolic level however, Highway creates the

theme of failed motherhood, as all of the women have experienced some kind of

trauma: mentally challenged Zhaboonigan has been sexually assaulted and injured with

a screwdriver (Highway, 1988: 47f); Philomena has given up her child for adoption

(81); Veronique is sterile and therefore adopted Zhaboonigan (26); Annie dreams of a

perfect relationship but is really still in love with Marie-Adele’s husband (77ff) and

hardly ever gets to see her daughter who lives in Toronto (12f); Pelajia’s sons and

husband have also left for Toronto and Espanola in hope for better education and work

which leaves her “all broken-hearted” (1988: 7); Marie-Adele suffers from abdominal

cancer. It seems that the women are trapped in a narrow-minded community, with few

options but heavy burdens in their lives. In addition to the theme of misfortunate

motherhood and family relations and especially the symbolic meaning of Marie-Adele’s

cancer creates the image of a failed (First Nation) community in a dying culture.

There is one woman, however, who transforms this image in the end. As

mentioned in section 3.1, Emily is the only character in the play who tries out different

lifestyles and takes advantage of her situation and experiences – or in Margaret

Atwood’s words she “pull[s] up her socks and quit[s] whining” (1972: 9). She is well

aware that she cannot change the people around her who treat her badly or the situations

she finds herself in. However, she knows that if she learns from her experiences and

stands up for herself (Highway, 1988: 53), she will always be able to make the best out

of her life. Emily thus develops a new identity out of all the identity fragments she grew

up and spent her life with. Unlike Pelajia, who only laments how badly she wanted to

move away from the reserve (2ff), Emily takes responsibility for herself by having

moved to San Francisco – if only to find out that the reserve is her only real home. Not

surprisingly, Emily is ‘rewarded’ by Highway with having a baby (110) and symbolizes

thus, that there is hope and future for people – even of a seemingly vanishing,

disadvantaged culture – who take their lives in their own hands.

The negotiation of conflicts Highway portrays through Emily’s character at the

individual level can also be observed at the group level. The women spend most of their

time gossiping, quarreling, daydreaming and/or lamenting. What appear to be ‘low-

quality’ activities at first glance are stories that keep the women’s communication alive

and their everyday lives exciting. In other words, gossip stories, day dreams etc. are

actually an important part of oral culture. The activities change when all the women

assemble for a common goal, getting to the Bingo game in Toronto. They decide to use

their individual talents and abilities in order to raise enough money to finance the

journey. For the first time, all of the women have a certain task and a role to fulfill. Like

Emily before, they show initiative and step out of their hopeless routines, become aware

of what they want and who they are and accomplish their projects successfully. For their

journey to Toronto, they leave behind what Margaret Atwood defined as Victim

Position Two (fatalism) and move on to Victim Position Three (rebellion) and Position

Four (acceptance) (1972: 46ff). In other words, they are no longer at a higher power’s

mercy, rather they become actively and creatively involved in their lives, they take on

responsibility for themselves.

4.1.2 Drew Hayden Taylor’s Someday (1993)

Where The Rez Sisters tackled the issues of First Nations identities and their

current situation in general, Drew Hayden Taylor’s play Someday deals more

specifically with the subsequent traumata of Canadian residential schools. For over two

hundred years countless Aboriginal children were taken away from their families,

languages and cultures and put in boarding schools in order to “better assimilate them

into white society – under guidance of a proper Christian education” (Ferguson, 2005:

415). The impact of colonialism in Canada had already caused severe incisions in First

Nations cultures, the consequences of the residential schools’ actions, however, resulted

in what could be termed a form of genocide. Apologies, “healing” funds and

reconciliatory projects are certainly steps in the right direction but can never make First

Nations regain what has been lost and removed over several generations (2005: 414ff).

In Someday Taylor illustrates authentically how complex and momentous a child’s

forceful removal can be, the decades of longing, hope and uncertainty, and how difficult

the moments of reunion are.

In the play there is one major conflict all characters have to deal with: the

encounter of two cultures among one ethnic group. This conflict unfolds in two

different ways. One is Janice’ perspective who after thirty-five years returns ‘home’ to

the family she has been taken away from when she was only a baby. According to her

accounts she seems to have been fully integrated in a wealthy white family and the

white society. She has apparently enjoyed all the privileges and grown up equally, save

for her distinct looks. Her only predicament has been that she has not been able to find

her position when people have asked her about the “native perspective” (Taylor, 1993:

55) on political issues like the Meech Lake Accord (Ferguson, 2005: 396f). Obviously,

her Aboriginal identity does play a significant role in her life and she has to eventually

deal with the subject. Although she has had contact information about her original

family for some time, it is the fact that her biological mother and sister win the lottery

which triggers her to finally meet them. Moreover, while growing up and studying,

Janice has constantly had the feeling of having to outreach her fellows in order to prove

her equality. Apparently, there have always been latent notions of First Nations people

being inferior to white people that she has obviously also internalized because she is

“tired of the “poor Indian” mentality” (1993: 72). On the other hand, Janice has started

to fight against these notions and prove ‘her’ society wrong. She negotiates her identity

conflicts in the way that Atwood explains as Victim Position Three, rebellion. Atwood

points out that in the position of rebellion there is a danger of becoming “locked into

your anger and fail to change your situation” (Atwood, 1972: 48). In Someday Janice

declares “I’ve been angry for 35 years. This might stop the anger.” (Taylor, 1993: 71).

However, she fails to relate back to her roots and her original identity and thus leaves.

The other way in which the main conflict of the play unfolds is the perspective of

Anne and Barb Wabung, Janice’ biological mother and sister. Although Anne’s

deceased husband Frank has told her after their daughter’s removal to “let sleeping dogs

lie”, she has been searching and worrying about Janice ever since (13). On the one hand,

the incident has left the family with a heavy burden: Anne has never stopped hoping for

a reunion, Frank has repressed the happenings and Barb has always had the feeling to

live “in her shadow for 23 years” (11). On the other hand, Janice’ ‘return’ inflicts more

than ambiguous feelings and unfulfilled expectations on both sides. Barb rightly

observes that, although they are biologically and in a certain way also culturally

connected, their long lost daughter/sister is also “a 35-year-old woman with a set of

parents and a full history” (1993: 23). In other words, as Janice has been culturally and

socially uprooted from her original family for such a long time, she will always be an

outsider. At the end of the play, when Janice turns to leave asserting her commitments

to her foster family, Barb’s boyfriend Rodney argues that “[i]t’s not supposed to end

this way” (79). This ending disillusions the reader and the audience, making them aware

that there are stories – especially contemporary First Nations stories – that resist closure

and happy endings. In the end, Taylor still leaves the reader a glimpse of hope when

Rodney asks Janice when she might return and she answers “Oh, someday, I suppose.”

(80).

In The Rez Sisters and Someday the authors deal with a profound concern within

First Nations communities: the threat of cultural extinction. Both plays illustrate the

assimilation of white culture, such as the Christmas preparations at the Wabung’s

house. White customs seem to be part of their everyday lives. However, there are also

notions of cultural survival expressed in the plays. Both stories take place in reserves

which are isolated or remote from ‘white’ towns or neighborhoods. Moreover, First

Nations traditions and languages play only a minor role in the plots and the characters

express an almost desperate need for the practice of their own culture. Eventually, on

the meta-level The Rez Sisters and Someday conclude realistically that their original

cultures and lifestyles cannot be regained in a way they used to be. Instead,

communities are called upon by contemporary First Nations Drama to connect their

original cultures with the present, white culture.

Like First Nations artists other Canadian ethnic minority artists also deal with the

subject of cultural identity through drama. Canada is internationally known for its

multicultural society, however, until people of foreign cultures became legally and

socially accepted, they went through a series of discrimination and assimilation. Today,

so-called ‘hyphenated’ communities, such as Asian-Canadian, African-Canadian and

Hispano-Canadian artists have found a means to express cultural and identity issues as

well as criticism in Contemporary Canadian Drama.

Chinese immigrants in Canada have been experiencing particularly difficult

situations ever since they were first arriving during the gold rush on the Fraser River

and the construction of the Canadian Pacific Railway (CPR) in the 19th century

(Ferguson, 2005: 212, 259). Legally, a special head tax was imposed on Chinese settlers

and the Immigration Act of 1923 was passed in order to prevent more Chinese from

immigrating (332). Socially, the Chinese community was confronted with racism as

well as cultural uprooting. Even today, while first generation immigrants try to keep

their cultural background and traditions alive, (over-)protect them, the second

generations, who have been born in Canada, often find themselves torn between two

worldviews.

4.2.1 Marty Chan’s Mom, Dad, I’m Living With A White Girl (1995)

Playwright Marty Chan grew up as a second generation Chinese-Canadian himself

and expresses his feelings on the situation in a creative and provoking way. In his play

Mom, Dad, I’m Living With A White Girl Chan breaks up all conventional structures on

and between the diegetic, extradiegetic and hypodiegetic level, rather than letting the

play get caught up in irresolvable conflicts within and among the characters. Facts and

fiction of the story blur by employing the hypodiegetic B-movie level, thus violating the

tradition not to blend theater and film as well as the three unities of time, space and

action. On this additional level to the general plot Chan uses extremely exaggerated

stereotypes to make the audience laugh only to later “make them feel like accomplices

to propagating the stereotypes” (Glaap, 1998 in Glaap, 2005: 8). Additionally, the B-

movie level is in a certain way a relief for all the characters as they finally get to express

– under the ‘guise’ of the stereotypes and clichés – their true feelings. At one point,

Chan even links the plot to the extradiegetic level when a stage assistant (the Drummer)

gets involved in the play, which leaves the reader and the audience pleasantly stunned .

Apparently, where the characters in the plot set up cultural borders, Chan tears

structural borders down in the play itself. As in the previously discussed First Nations

plays, humor plays an essential role in the play. Also other Canadian playwrights see

the importance of humor in contemporary plays because “[i]f you are going to tell

people the truth, you better make them laugh” (Canadian Theatre Encyclopedia, 2009).

In the storyline(s) Chan portrays three viewpoints of immigration: first generations

immigrants Li Fen and Kim Gee, their son Mark, who has already been born and grown

up in Canada, and Mark’s white Canadian girlfriend Sally. Li Fen and Kim, on the one

hand, have been living in Canada for over two decades but have not been able to

integrate into white society. To the contrary, while Kim has established himself as an

acupuncturist, his wife Li Fen seems to have never gotten far away from their place

(Chan, 1995: 69f). In addition, Kim wants Mark to take over his business and ignores

the fact that Mark prefers to be a car mechanic. Also Li Fen ignores her sons desire to

be with Sally and even threatens her to leave him alone, which is the only time Li Fen

leaves the house. Li Fen illustrates this dichotomous worldview on the B-movie level

when she as ‘Yellow Claw’ tells Kim that “[t]wo worlds cannot coincide. We must

conquer or submit.” (1995: 3). Only in the end it turns out that they themselves have left

China for Canada against the will of their parents but once settled have clung to the

acupuncture clinic and subsequently to their son Mark out of fear and uncertainty in the

new country (82).

Sally, on the other hand, pretends to be an open-minded person but eventually is

just as prejudiced as Mark’s parents are. At the beginning she is utterly interested in

Mark’s family and culture but becomes rather frustrated when she notices that her

interest and open-mindedness is not much appreciated by either Mark or his parents.

When the ‘Canadian side’ (Sally) and the ‘Chinese side’ (Li Fen and Kim) practically

start a fight over Mark, either side’s condition being to leave the other for good, and

make him decide. However, Mark discovers that Sally is in love with the ‘exotic’ about

him rather than with him as a person and vice versa, that Sally is to some extent also his

“way out of here” (80). Furthermore, he discovers that he is not responsible for any

person’s life but his own. His father still struggles in Atwood’s Victim Position Two by

telling Mark to “accept [his] destiny” but is confronted by Mark’s declaring to “accept

[his] choices” (80), who has moved out of the victim role, detached himself from old

positions and moved on. In other words, Mark has successfully established something

like a “third space” for himself in Canada, a ‘hyphenated’ space that accumulates his

cultural roots, his experiences in Canadian society and his own identities amongst them.

In spite of everything, Mark is given a quite advantageous opportunity as he is

confronted with both of his identities as persons: Sally represents his Canadian identity,

Li Fen and Kim represent his Chinese identity. As he has had the chance to try out both

‘identities’, he is now able to find out who he is and where he stands.

4.2.2 Andrew Moodie’s Riot (1996)

African-Canadian actor and playwright Andrew Moodie takes a quite different

approach towards drama. Being an actor himself he explicitly mentions in the

Playwright’s Notes and Player’s Manifesto of Riot the importance of authenticity and

the individual cast’s freedom to develop the play. Moodie has therefore produced a text

which will differ with every performance and has to be regarded as an on-stage process

rather than a finalized play. With Riot Moodie furthermore intends to encourage

political theater “through which the lines between artist and audience are blurred.” He

also states, “I do not want to create a static piece of theatre that is observed, I want to

start a dialogue […]” (Canadian Theatre Encyclopedia, 2009). Through this approach he

established the possibility for actors and audience to interpret according to their current

state of mind.

In terms of conflict and identity the central character in Riot is Wendle, an

African-Canadian student. In his past he has experienced numerous instances of racism

and therefore feels highly antagonized by Alex, another African-Canadian student who

has grown up in a rich family among white people. Wendle tries to convince him that

white society only pretends to mean well but after all, black people “have to stick

together”, like Jews who seem to “swim” and “sink” together (Moodie, 1996: 46). He is

not aware of his underlying reverse racism until Kirk – who Wendle has been protecting

in spite of his frequent rogueries – turns out to be in possession of a gun and Wendle’s

discrimination is then also aimed at him. Although Henry points to his words about

‘swimming together’ it stays uncertain whether Wendle actually becomes disillusioned

or not and remains with his anger in the position of fatalism until the end of the play.

Through Wendle’s character Moodie criticizes the general understanding of

collective identity. When Wendle talks about ‘having to stick together’ the question

arises ‘who’ exactly has to stick together: Riot’s characters, who are of African and

Jamaican descent, resemble another more or less in skin color but differ vastly in their

social backgrounds, sexual as well as political orientation. On the meta-level, the

characters as a group constitute a microcosm of individual and (overlapping) collective

identities, whose image could as well be shifted to other ‘minority’ communities, or

even to the super-level of the Canadian society as a whole. On the other hand, Moodie’s

connection with the Yonge Street riot in Toronto and Effie’s analysis of it (“Circular

reaction”, “Characteristics of social unrest”, “Characteristics of the Acting Crowd”) (50,

60) prove that groups or communities can be formed quickly, the center of identification

not necessarily (only) depending on skin color but on any appealing cause (YouTube,

2007).

4.2.3 Guillermo Verdecchia’s Fronteras Americanas (1993)

Whereas in Riot collective identity is portrayed on the diegetic level actor and

playwright Guillermo Verdecchia uses the extradiegetic level to communicate the

concept. In his one-man play Fronteras Americanas Verdecchia addresses his audience

in an unabashed way by asking whether and how they belong together. What seems to

be absurd at first, he reveals as the foundations of a potential collective identity: the

people in the audience are strangers to each other, however, they “must be lost too or

else [they] wouldn’t have ended up here, tonight” and thus have in fact something they

all share (Verdecchia, 1993: 20). At the end of the first act, he addresses the audience

once more and identifies theater as a means of “creat[ing] a common bond among you, a

common reference point” for those (Canadians) who have not yet been able to find the

collective identity they belong to (52f). In other words, Verdecchia sees the fact of

swinging between two or more identities (the border) as the foundation for a new one.

Verdecchia’s preoccupation with the “border” is the central theme of his

autobiographical play Fronteras Americanas. The two characters Verdecchia and

Wideload, who are both performed by Guillermo Verdecchia himself, portray an

Argentinean-Canadian man with diffuse identity in search for his ‘true’ home and the

stereotype of a Latin-American man who paradoxically provokes and does away with

clichés of the ‘Latino’, respectively. From a psychological perspective Verdecchia as

the author and actor of the play represents the inner conflict of the two worlds – and

thus two cultural identities – that inhabit him. On the one hand, there is Verdecchia who

after a long time finally leaves for his ‘home’ country but is afraid of crossing the

border between the familiar, the safe and what might expect him beyond. On the other

hand, there is Wideload, the stereotypical Latino macho, who serves as an

overcompensation for Verdecchia’s ‘Latino’ identity but who is also the one who makes

him as well as the audience and the reader aware of the cultural “filter” everyone needs

“to look at de [sic] world through” (34). Furthermore, when making fun of the ‘white’

stereotype, the “Saxon”, Wideload crosses the border from his other cultural identity

Verdecchia, provides the audience and reader with the Latin-American perspective and

makes them accomplices in reinforcing the clichés by laughing. He therefore

demonstrates that the ‘cultural filter’ everybody is equipped with is only conditioned

and can be shifted – which again is only possible if one has more than one cultural

background and identity.

Verdecchia’s message in the play about being a ‘hyphenated’ individual is not to

make a definite decision for either of the two worlds but constantly negotiate between

the two and all the subsequent conflicts. He underlines this message by quoting Octavio

Paz on one slide, “I am not at the crossroads: to choose is to go wrong” (74). Moreover,

by claiming to “never give a ferret avocado”, he asserts that very often it is just not

possible to bring two cultures, two worlds together (55). Therefore, Verdecchia realizes

during the constant ‘border crossings’ and inner conflicts throughout the play that he

“just wanted to go home – but I’m already there – aren’t I?” and thus, the only solution

for him is to create a ‘third space’ and learn “to live the border” (78). And ‘living the

border’ means also to confirm as well as challenge the clichés and stereotypes of either

side.

In reference to Atwood and Mienert, the characters of Mom, Dad, I’m Living With

A White Girl Riot and Fronteras Americanas no longer let psychological borders direct

their life. They exit the concepts of being a victim altogether and move on to Victim

Position Four (Atwood, 1972: 49). They furthermore look at and try out all of their

‘given’ identities and find integrity with being an individual that encompasses not all

identities entirely but certain fragments of them. Eventually, hyphenated communities

artists use drama as a means to communicate their development to others and therefore

inflict reflection of society but also yield identity formation and negotiation processes in

society (Mienert, 2008: 73ff).

The term Feminist Drama here refers to a postmodern conception of feminism and

drama. Rather than regarding writers, such as Djanet Sears and Judith Thompson, as

second-wave feminists, who worked for legal and social equality of women,

contemporary or ‘third-wave’ feminist playwrights have abandoned a dichotomous

perception of sex and gender. Instead, contemporary Feminist Drama discusses and

reflects more ambivalent concepts of gender and sexual identities. Additionally, today’s

feminist view of society is a very psychological one. Gender roles are regarded as useful

but simplified categories, and thus, there is a need to look into people’s cultural

upbringing and individual emotional lives in order to account for ‘real’ equality or

inequality in today’s society. The postmodern connotation of the term ‘feminism’ is

therefore misleading but is generally used nonetheless as it has its foundations in the

original conception of feminism.

4.3.1 Djanet Sears’ Harlem Duet (1997)

Djanet Sears’ Harlem Duet could be categorized among ‘Hyphenated

Communities Drama’ as well as ‘Feminist Drama’ as both African-American and

feminist concepts are strongly interwoven in the play. I will be looking at the

representations of conflicts and identities from the feminist perspective of the play as I

personally find them more prominent. As in most contemporary Canadian plays

however, the different concepts I am analyzing can never be kept apart entirely because

this would lead to distorted interpretations. Therefore, the categorization of Harlem

Duet (the same applies for the other plays) should be regarded as fluid and a structural

necessity rather than a fixed ‘box’ that cannot be interchanged.

In Harlem Duet Djanet Sears revisits Shakespeare’s Othello from a “black and

female” perspective (Sears, 1997: 15). Rather than contradicting Shakespeare’s original,

it seems that only through Sears’ contemporary reaction to the original play it is now

possible to complete the story around Othello. The story centers on Billie, the girlfriend

Othello had before getting together with (Desde-) Mona. Harlem Duet repeats the

romance between Billie and Othello three times, and thus in three different versions.

Each time Othello leaves Billie for the white Mona and every time Billie is on the verge

of killing Othello. In the first two versions, the scorned woman has not been able to

learn and develop and thus commits the murder. The cycle has continued until the

present, although Billie finds herself again on the verge. She poisons a special

handkerchief Othello’s has given to her and which has been handed down in his family

over several generations. Billie uses all her intelligence to produce a poison intended to

kill Othello and his future wife but almost injures herself in the process. Although it is

not revealed in the end whether she succeeds or not, Billie’s intentions clearly represent

Sears’ criticism leveled at women of African descent who have often not yet been able

to accept their ‘new’ North American identity and find themselves for the most part still

in the process of identifying with their African identity. Negotiating between the two

identities (as in Verdecchia’s case in Fronteras Americanas) seems to be

incomprehensible for Billie. For her, this means jeopardizing everything that African-

Americans have achieved and fought for. What is more, it is also the reason why

Othello leaves her and when he tries to explain that he realizes that his “culture is not

[his] mother’s culture – the culture of my ancestors. [His] culture is Wordsworth, Shaw,

Leave it to Beaver, Dirty Harry. […] I mean, what does Africa have to do with me.”

(73). Othello has obviously interrupted the cycle, has moved on but also away from

his ’former’ identity and thus away from Billie who still deals with her “black” side

(56).

Sears’ criticism is therefore leveled as much at African-American people in

general as at African-American women and men in terms of gender. Billie’s situation

and actions show, on the one hand, what African-American women have achieved (i.e.

education, job opportunities) and how open-minded and progressive they have become.

On the other hand, it shows that there is still much reverse racism within African-

American society which needs to be overcome. Billie’s character and thus African-

American women have now the means (through education, for example) to make use of

what they have gained. Othello antagonizes and hurts Billie by comparing her (African-

American women) to Mona (white women) (70). This way, Billie’s womanhood has

been offended and her jealousy has been provoked. However, she is too emotionally

involved and dependent on Othello which restricts her from taking advantage of and

developing from the situation. Othello, for his part, pretends to have overcome racial

categorizations. However, he keeps slipping back and exhibits his own emotional

dependence on Mona and white society respectively when admitting that “[w]hen I’m

with her I feel like…a man.” (63).

4.3.2 Judith Thompson’s Lion in the Streets (1992)

The criticism on continuing cycles and failed responsibility is also found in Judith

Thompson’s Lion in the Streets. Thompson’s play is also deeply psychological, highly

critical of society and symbolical. Although there is no continuous plotline – as the play

consists of various fragmented scenes and characters – coherence of the fragments can

be found on the meta-level of the play. Insight into the characters’ psychology and

meaning of Thompson’s symbols are embedded on the play’s diegetic level.

Similarly as in the previously discussed plays, Thompson’s Lion deals with a

microcosm of fragmented individuals and ailing relationships that vividly resemble the

biotope of contemporary society – only condensed and taken to the extreme. When Sue,

for example, tries to reach out for her unfaithful husband Bill and convince him to come

back home to her and their children, she causes an absurd and comic situation, which is

nonetheless deeply human as it reflects the profound need to connect to others and to

prevent loneliness but at the same time indirectly admits emotional dependance. In

order to override her insecurity she assumes a gender role (the ‘attractive wife’) which

according to her belief enables her to connect to her partner and to maintain the

relationship.

In another scene of Lion sex seems to be a means to exert power and subversively

compensate for unfulfilled needs. Edward draws his fiancée Sherry into some kind of

‘rape-game’ (it is not clear whether it is only game between them or an actual event he

repeatedly reminds Sherry of) in order to ‘keep her in check’ (56ff). Ed does not seem

to be a very stable character and self-confident about his masculinity. He uses Sherry to

demonstrate his ‘masculine power’ by using her weaknesses, “this feminist shit”,

against her which she in turn lets happen as she ‘needs’ him to fulfill her dream of a

perfect marriage (59). The characters are not able to reflect upon themselves, their needs

and their lives und thus remain victims (Victim Position Two) not only of their partners

but rather of themselves.

During the course of the play Isobel is the only consistent character and ‘leads’

from one scene to another in search of the ‘lion’. Regarded from a meta-perspective, it

seems that Lion proceeds backwards: The sadistic play of the children in the first scene

represent the rather negative prospects for the neighborhood’s future – the

neighborhood representing society in general. During the play, there is always one

character that builds a link between on scene and the next by appearing in both. Thus,

this particular character represents the connection among individuals and the impact of

one individual on another. It is also this kind of ‘domino effect’ that leads Isobel to the

lion, i.e. to the ‘beginning’, the ‘core’ of all evil where all threads come together.

Eventually, Isobel forgives Ben (the lion and her murderer) and concludes the play by

saying, “I take my life. […] I want you all to have your life.” (75). Thus, Isobel is the

first woman to face herself, her ‘fate’ and takes responsibility for herself. Not becoming

aware and responsible for oneself is therefore Thompsons main point of critique in the

play.

In both, Harlem Duet and Lion In The Streets, gender roles and particularly the

roles of women in contemporary society are harshly criticized. Sears and Thompson

make clear that after having emancipated themselves and struggled for equal rights,

women have missed to take advantage of their newly gained situation and have not

developed further. Men, on the other hand, are criticized in the same way, as they have

missed to react to women’s emancipation and look into their own gender roles and

emotional lives. From the postmodern feminist perspective both men and women are

treated equally as they are portrayed and criticized relentlessly.

The LGBT (Lesbian Gay Bisexual and Transgender) communities have become

more self-confident about themselves and their identities and thus increasingly

recognized by the ‘mainstream’ community, especially via Canadian Theater.

Subsequently, also definitions of gender and sexuality have been argued about and

revised accordingly. In transgender research, for example, Shane Whalley posited the

concept of several independent but interacting continua (sex, sexual orientation, gender

identity, gender expression) which constitute a person’s gender and sexual identity or

identities (Elmendorf, 2010). Therefore, it becomes clear that gender and sexual

identities – just as any other identities – can no longer be regarded as labeled boxes. In

Contemporary Canadian Drama playwright Brad Fraser has taken up this question and

challenges predefined views.

4.4.1 Brad Fraser’s Martin Yesterday (1998)

The concept of a play’s characters representing a microcosm has already come up

in the previous plays – Brad Fraser, however, develops the concept further. As he

mentions in the introduction to Martin Yesterday, he “hoped making the show ultra-

specific would make it ultra-universal” (Fraser, 1998: 4). Representing the ‘gay ghetto’

as a microcosm of the straight community reveals its complex power relations and

subsequent conflicts which Fraser also portrays on several other levels in the play.

Whereas the gay community versus straight community relation is the most obvious

one, there are several other relations: Christian versus Jewish (Matt-Rachel), English-

Canadian versus French-Canadian (Matt and Rachel versus Yves), male dominated

profession versus woman in that profession (Rachel working as a comic artist), elder

versus younger people, professionals versus trainee (Matt and Rachel versus Yves) etc.

In each instance conflicts are constantly present – their tackling leads either to the

ghettoisation or integration of the less powerful group, person or community.

Eventually, it is Rachel who becomes aware of ongoing conflicts (role of gay people in

the Holocaust; her role as a woman in a male dominated profession), learns from them

and is thus able to move on in her job as well as with her personal development.

Rachel’s development is also brilliantly illustrated by Fraser’s comic strip of Fridge

Magnet Girl.

Just like Thompson centers the story of Lion around the connections between

individuals, so does Fraser in Martin Yesterday and focuses on people’s connection to

one another and the role of responsibility. On the one hand, Fraser’s characters Matt and

Martin seem to be intelligent but to a certain extent emotionally dependent men; Matt

takes Prozac in order to become more self-confident because he evidently does not trust

himself and Martin creates an odd situation for himself by living with his more or less

ex-boyfriends although at the same time dating Matt. More than Matt, he does not seem

to be able to confront with his own personality and experiences (i.e. ‘connect’ to

himself first in order to be able to connect to others), become aware of himself and his

actions and thus break the cycle of relationships in which he assumes the caring ‘father-

role’ and lets his boyfriends repeatedly use him in this role. On the other hand, both

men use sex as a means for connecting to on another, which is simultaneously a means

that challenges their responsibility with regard to the threat of a possible HIV infection:

out of frustration Matt has a one-night-stand with an anonymous guy he “[rides]

bareback” (96f); out of revenge Martin purposely rapes Rex in his sleep and risks

infecting him with HIV. As Fraser states in his introduction, his plays are “about people

living with AIDS” (4) and therefore cannot abdicate from their responsibility – one way

or the other.

Martin Yesterday is highly critical not only of the gay community but of society

and their development. Like other postmodern playwrights Fraser seeks to raise

awareness of unconsciously learned and perpetual patterns of emotional and sexual

dependence in contemporary Canadian society and calls for responsibility in a

provocative and yet creative way. The technique of dove-tailing expresses the

connection between people and every action or attitude brings about another: although

every person is an individual, they are yet all connected. Furthermore, the play is also

very critical of the author himself. As Martin Yesterday encompasses many

autobiographical elements, Fraser is understandably emotionally involved in its

production (1). Therefore, it is not only an entertaining and critical play, completed and

ready to be put on stage but also a personal developmental process for Fraser himself

which can be adjusted or rewritten (10). On a meta-level, Brad Fraser’s play illustrates a

Canadian artist’s way of dealing with his identity and his society’s reflection of it (13).

As has become evident through the previously discussed plays there have been

extensive shifts from conventional to postmodern theater. No longer are dramatic plays

intended to simply tell a story and adhere to traditional conventions like the three

unities. Playwrights, actors and directors are no longer different positions, they can be

interchanged. The concept of the three unities and other conventions apply if the

playwright/director/actors wish to but mostly they are strongly violated. As the

Women’s Liberation movement has first manifested in the 1960s and 1970s that ‘the

personal is political’, so it has in Canadian drama (Knowles, 2005: 120). Characters and

plotlines are represented as fragmented and discontinuous (Glaap, 2005: 42). Moreover,

are they rather improvised and workshopped than adopted from the playwright’s writing

(13, 16f). Realism and surrealism, facts and fiction often blur to a large extent. New

media and other elements are embedded in the performance. Different cultures and

(ethnic) minorities and marginalized communities have found a voice through theater

(Knowles, 2005: 128). Generally speaking, it is no longer possible to categorize today’s

drama. Canadian drama has moved on to Victim Position Four: exit the Victor/Victim

game in Canadian Literature, make use of creativity and theater as a means for

expression, and provide a mirror to reflect and a platform for society to develop

(Atwood, 1972: 49). Thus, in postmodern Canadian drama the common theme of

inevitable failure has become one of visible conflict which can be expressed and dealt

with.

As nature has always been a prominent theme in Canadian Literature I would like

to use two natural metaphors in order to illustrate Canadian identities and the role of

their communities and their arts for my final interpretations. To begin with, a country’s

geography or mapping, its people and its common history can be regarded as roots of a

growing tree. Just like roots are the foundation for the trunk, branches and leaves of the

tree, so are mapping, people and common history the prerequisites for the development

of the country’s culture and thus a collective and national identity. Finally, as the tree’s

fruit reflect its sort and its health, the country’s arts reflect its culture and current state

of mind. According to this metaphor, what Canadian artists express in (contemporary)

drama serves as a mirror of what currently occupies Canadian society and therefore

explains the connection between Canadian drama and Canadian identities.

To use a second metaphor, Canada’s national or collective identity can be

compared with a living organism. Rather than being a rigid construct that encompasses

specific symbols, cultural practices and similar states of mind of its individuals, the

‘identity organism’ is full of dynamic (sub-) processes, prone to change and constantly

busy with satisfying the needs of its individuals it consists of. It therefore makes sense

to see Canadian minority communities as sub-units of this greater organism to whose

wellbeing and development they contribute. Additionally, like cells and organs in an

organism, the communities also experience conflicts and have to negotiate between their

individual interests and interests of society and the nation which are hierarchically

higher. In such a complex system conflicts can deteriorate and some members may

choose to pursue their own interests and work against the system. The organism, on the

other hand, may cope without a few members. However, every system has its limits and

violation thereof can become fatal for the organism (Dethlefsen, 2000: 336ff). In more

concrete terms, every country can cope with communities that are distinct to a certain

extent. Though, as soon as too many citizens can not sufficiently identify anymore with

the country they live in (in the case of the French Canadian or other marginalized

communities), the existence of the country (English Canada) may be threatened as well.

The crucial point for the development of a common national identity is the arts. By

knowing their origins and fostering their culture (cultural practices and the arts)

Canadians are gradually working towards that common identity. Through the previously

discussed plays is has become evident that individuals and communities in Canada have

become able to shift, assume and reflect upon different social perspectives and have

thus created a basis for communication and understanding, on the one hand, and the

possibility to influence social/cultural/national processes, on the other hand (Mienert,

2008: 114). Through drama, it seems that Canadians become increasingly aware of

where and who they are – as well as what makes them unique (themes and practices in

drama, for instance). In Canadian drama artists begin to creatively reject the role of

being in a perpetual Victor/Victim game and use their energy to rewrite their ‘history’.

They create a “third space” according to Homi Bhaba’s terms and make everyone

involved as well as Canadian society in general aware. Evidently, one of Canada’s ways

to develop and share something like a common national identity lies in the arts

(Rutherford, 1990: 211).

An extensive journey through postmodern Canadian drama and Canadian

identities has come to an end. My thesis statement, that Canadian society has created an

opportunity to cultural and psychological development, has been validated. Margaret

Atwood’s and Malte Mienert’s assertions have backed up my arguments and three

historical spotlights and the interpretations of conflicts in eight contemporary Canadian

plays have confirmed my assumption that Canadians have developed – or rather they

are still in the process of developing – individually and collectively. More specifically,

the plays discussed above express that although Canadians generally seem to emphasize

on their differences more than on their similarities, similarities (and thus a common

national identity) do in fact exist.

Currently, my thesis statement is valid. This does not mean, however, that the

development could not stagnate or change at any point in time. Although being symbols

of a common identity, the concepts of survival, failure and distinctness but also self-

awareness are symbols that are often frowned upon – mostly by Canadians themselves.

However, as I see it, the requested processes of Canada’s people’s self-determination

and identity formation have begun (particularly in drama) (Menzies, 2009: 302). And

incidentally, I have gone through an important development process, too, while writing

this paper. For me, this is one more verification that there is no experience – no matter

how long or short, intense or superficial, fun or ‘fucked up’ – which one cannot take

advantage of and learn.

Atwood, Margaret. 1972. Survival: A Thematic Guide to Canadian Literature. Toronto: McClelland & Stewart.

Canadian Theatre Encyclopedia. 2009. “Moodie, Andrew” http://www.canadiantheatre.com/dict.pl?term=Moodie%2C%20Andrew (accessed 28 January 2011)

Canadian Theatre Encyclopedia. 2009. “Sherman, Jason” http://www.canadiantheatre.com/dict.pl?term=Sherman%2C%20Jason (accessed 27 January 2011)

Chan, Marty. 1995. Mum, Dad, I'm living With A White Girl. Toronto: Playwrights Canada Press.

Dethlefsen, Thorwald & Dahlke, Ruediger. 2000. [1989] Krankheit als Weg: Deutung und Be-Deutung der Krankheitsbilder. München: Goldmann.

Dickinson, Peter. 2002. "Duets, Duologues, and Black Diasporic Theatre: Djanet Sears, William Shakespeare, and Others." Modern Drama. 45.2, 188-208.

Elmendorf, Dana and Veri, Jennifer. 2010. “Handout: It Begins With Us: Therapists’ Reactions To Transgender Clients” http://www.counseling.org/handouts/2010/442.pdf (accessed 6 September 2010)

Glaap, Albert-Reiner & Heinze, M. 2005. Contemporary Canadian Plays: Overviews and Close Encounters. Trier: WVT.

Ferguson, Will. 2005. Canadian History For Dummies. Mississauga: John Wiley & Sons Canada, Ltd (2nd ed.).

Ferguson, Will. 2007. [1997] Why I Hate Canadians. Vancouver, Toronto and Berkeley: Douglas & McIntyre.

Fraser, Brad. 1998. Martin Yesterday. Edmonton: NeWest Publishers Ltd.

Frye, Northrop. 1971. The Bush Garden: Essays On The Canadian Imagination. Toronto: Anansi.

Highway, Tomson. 1988. The Rez Sisters. Calgary: Fifth House.

Knowles, Ric. 2005. [2004] “Drama” In: Kröller, Eva-Maria (ed.). The Cambridge Conpanion To Canadian Literature. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 115-134.

Menzies, Charles R. 2009. “First Nations, Inequality, and the Legacy of Colonialism.“ In: Grabb, Edward and Neil Guppy (eds.). Social Inequality In Canada: Patterns, Problems, and Policies. Toronto: Pearson, 295-304.

Mienert, Malte. 2008. Total Diffus: Erwachsenwerden in der jugendlichen Gesellschaft. Wiesbaden: Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften

Moodie, Andrew. 1996. Riot. Winnipeg: Scirocco Drama.

Rutherford, Jonathan. 1990. “The Third Space. Interview with Homi Bhabha.” In: Ders (ed.): Identity: Community, Culture, Difference. London: Lawrence and Wishart, 207-221.

Sears, Djanet. 1997. Harlem Duet. Toronto: Scirocco Drama

Taylor, Drew Hayden. 1993. Someday. Altona: Fifth House.

Thompson, Judith. 1992. Lion In The Streets. Toronto: Playwrights Canada Press.

Verdecchia, Guillermo. 1993. Fronteras Americanas. Vancouver: Talonbooks.

YouTube. 2007. 1992 “Yonge Street Riot.” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9WZtRw9II2s (accessed 28 January 2011)