Une ancienne de l’Université d’Ottawa partage son expérience personnelle de l’Holocauste

Il y a soixante-dix ans, Truda Rosenberg, alors âgée de 19 ans, entreprend sa première année universitaire à Lwòw, sa ville natale de Pologne. Elle est fiancée à un homme qu’elle a rencontré au cours de son emploi à temps partiel.

Au mois de juin 1941, les nazis arrivent. À partir de ce moment, la jeune femme commence à lutter simplement pour survivre.

Aujourd’hui, Dr Rosenberg est une psychologue réputée et une figure de proue au sein de la communauté juive. Le 28 février, cette ancienne de l’Université d’Ottawa célébrera la traduction de ses mémoires sur la période de la guerre, qui viennent tout juste de paraître en français.

Dans son livre intitulé Sans masque, Dr Rosenberg décrit les horreurs qu’elle a vécues pendant l’Holocauste et les moyens qu’elle a pris pour survivre. Elle a notamment utilisé une série de fausses identités pour cacher ses origines juives, ce qui n’a pas empêché les nazis de la mettre à bord d’un train en direction de Belzec, camp de la mort où 500 000 Juifs ont été massacrés. Truda Rosenberg a aussi été emprisonnée dans un camp de travail et vendue comme esclave à un officier allemand. Tous les membres de sa famille immédiate ont péri. C’est la « profonde conviction selon laquelle tout le monde a le droit et le devoir de veiller à la survie de son esprit, de son corps et de son âme » qui lui a permis de surmonter toutes ces épreuves.

Même si pour la plupart d’entre nous, ses expériences semblent impossibles à comprendre, Dr Rosenberg rappelle qu’elle ne fut qu’une victime parmi tant d’autres Juifs ayant souffert les pires outrances aux mains des nazis. Elle écrit : « à aucun moment, ni dans le passé, ni maintenant, je n’ai qualifié mes expériences d’uniques. Leur existence est un fait et je les présente ici comme le témoignage d’un témoin direct, une version de ce que beaucoup d’entre nous ont connu sur une base quotidienne. »

Dr Rosenberg livre un précieux témoignage sur l’adversité et la cruauté humaine que des millions de Juifs ont endurées pendant la Deuxième Guerre mondiale. Son histoire dépeint la résistance de l’esprit humain ainsi que notre capacité de nous adapter aux pires circonstances. Son récit de la guerre pousse le lecteur à réfléchir aux gestes de bonté et de cruauté commis des deux côtés et à faire face à notre humanité intrinsèque.

« La guerre oblige tout le monde à faire des compromis moraux, affirme Truda Rosenberg. Vous n’avez pas toujours le temps de soupeser les conséquences et souvent, vous devez agir pour ne pas mourir. Ce n’est que plus tard, si vous survivez, que vous avez l’occasion de réfléchir à vos gestes et, bien sûr, vous traînez un sentiment de culpabilité vis-à-vis des personnes que vous avez dû abandonner. La tristesse qui nous envahit lorsque nous songeons à ceux qui n’ont pas survécu est compensée seulement par les grandes réalisations accomplies, souvent en leur nom, par les survivants. »

Sans masque a été traduit de l’anglais original par Christine Klein-Lataud et publié par les Presses de l’Université d’Ottawa.

Le lancement de Sans masque aura lieu le lundi 28 février 2011 au pavillon Desmarais, salle 12102. Pour obtenir plus d’information, ou pour faire une réservation, visitez le site : http://www.sciencessociales.uottawa.ca/rsvp/fra/

Interview with Reingard Nischik, winner of 2010 Margaret Atwood Society 'Best Book' Award

On the publication of Reingard M. Nischik's latest book Engendering Genre: The Works of Margaret Atwood, Hildegard Nagler conducted an interview with the scholar. The interview was first published in German. With the kind consent of the journalist, the interview is here published for the first time in an English translation. Translation by Christina Duck Kannenberg and Emily Petermann. Since the time of the interview, the book has been honoured with the 2010 Best Book Award by the Margaret Atwood Society.

To find out more on Engendering Genre  visit the following link: http://www.press.uottawa.ca/book/engendering-genre

===

Professor Reingard M. Nischik is considered a renowned, internationally leading specialist on Margaret Atwood. The Professor of North American Studies at the University of Constance in Germany already dealt with the world-famous Canadian author in her literary theoretically oriented post-doctoral thesis of 1991, and she has now published her second monograph (after editing two article collections) on Atwood.

HN: Professor Nischik, what fascinates you about Margaret Atwood?

RN: Her impressive intellectuality and imaginative power, her immense writing talent, her strong visionary power, her unbelievable productivity and diversity, her wide-reaching knowledge as well as her humour and her ready wit; furthermore, that she is also engaged beyond writing in diverse political and humanitarian projects, often in the public eye but also behind the scenes. As I can say from my own experience during personal meetings over the years, Margaret Atwood has remained a kind, accessible, and sensitive person despite her great success and the international hype surrounding her.

HN: How would you characterize the writer in five sentences?

RN: Atwood has been the leading Canadian writer for the past four decades. She is perhaps the most diversely talented contemporary writer overall (including male writers). Her literary œuvre, which is difficult to match in its literary quality, its genre variety, and its breadth, is supplemented by her numerous personal appearances (book tours, interviews, speeches, and television appearances), with which Atwood has, since the 1960s, not only definitively put Canada on the international literary map, but which have moreover made her, with her political and social consciousness, one of the most important chroniclers and critics of contemporary western culture. Her international impact is not only due to her literary skill, but is also supported by her media-friendly, charismatic personality, which captivates thousands of listeners at readings in, say, London or New York. Atwood has also always gotten involved on behalf of those who are socially and politically weaker, whether it be – especially in earlier decades – women, politically persecuted authors, or her own country, especially in relation to the politically and economically overly powerful neighbour, the United States.

HN: Do you still remember the day on which you heard of or read Margaret Atwood for the first time?

RN: I can still remember my reaction as a young doctoral student when I read my first Atwood text. It was her second novel, Surfacing (1972). This novel fascinated me immediately in relation to its thematic complexity and force of expression, as well as with regard to its grandiose language style (which here is idiosyncratically based on the protagonist’s characteristics). Atwood has been my favourite writer since I first read her work at the end of the 1970s, and I have never lost sight of her work.

HN: What was your first contact with the successful author like?

RN: In the situation itself I thought the first contact was actually relatively “normal,” as it was very task-oriented. In hindsight, this was one of the so-called mythical moments of my life. For five years I was the chair person of the English-Canadian Literature and Language Section of the Association for Canadian Studies in German-Speaking Countries. In this role back then I tried to convince Atwood to be the keynote speaker at the Association's annual conference in Grainau in the Bavarian Alps. This was in the pre-e-mail era and when a fax machine was still something unusual. We initially corresponded with each other by letter, which, however, led to week-long delays. At the time, Atwood was in the Provence [in France] writing for several months, and the travel agency there could not locate Grainau, the village at the base of the Zugspitz mountain (which today, by the way, has a legendary reputation in international Canadian studies). One afternoon while I was working at home, my telephone rang: “Hi, this is Margaret Atwood.”

We then talked for about 20 minutes and clicked right away. At the conference in Grainau in 1992 she presented a then still unpublished short story, which she had previously asked me to translate into German (“The Little Red Hen Tells All” from Good Bones) – with overwhelming success. I had never experienced such an electrified audience and people still address me about this event today. Atwood and I then spent the two conference days and evenings together – our long acquaintance is thus based on this first personal contact, which then through occasional written correspondence and various personal meetings in Germany, Canada, and the USA has been maintained to this day.

HN: You speak of Margaret Atwood's “unusual productivity.” You yourself have already published four books about the writer. Are there parallels between you?

RN: Atwood is unique. But I'll take up your question playfully. Of my to date twenty-six books there are in fact four dedicated to Margaret Atwood, though in very different ways. One parallel that could be named, then, is the passion for writing about fascinating topics. As Atwood herself once commented on text-creating productivity, including her own: “What drives them to it? Why this boundless outflowing of words? Is writing … − being speech in visual form − … simply a manifestation of being human?”

HN: You were even awarded with the Best Book Award of the Margaret Atwood Society. Is there any room for further development?

RN: Oh yes. For example: this prize is given out for each publication year, thus one can win more than once. I would be glad if my latest monograph (Engendering Genre: The Works of Margaret Atwood, Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press, 2009) could capture this prize once again. But in 2009 alone five books were published on Atwood internationally. Far more important to me would be for Atwood to finally be awarded the Nobel prize. She was several times close to it. I would be very happy about it, because I am deeply convinced that she has unequivocally earned this prominent award (much more than some previous winners, by the way). I see my own work in research and teaching and also in organizational matters in connection with Atwood as my very small contribution which is also meant to serve this higher goal.

HN: Your main interest is with the innovative way in which gender and genre connect and cross-pollinate each other in Atwood's oeuvre. Why?

RN: In my articles and books I have already dealt with diverse aspects of Atwood's multifaceted oeuvre. I tackled the connection between genre and gender questions because I noticed over the years that they are especially significant in Atwood's work as well as being theoretically and analytically challenging, and because this aspect had not yet been specifically examined by scholars. At the same time, I also covered several of the numerous genres treated by Atwood for the first time in a detailed and thorough way, such as Atwood's work and experience with film and film adaptations, her impressive collection of essays, or her funny and at the same time profound comics.

HN: Are there genres that Margaret Atwood has not yet dealt with?

RN: Even in the wider literary context regarding the main genres, nothing comes to mind at the spur of the moment – which again confirms the wide-ranging creativity of this writer. Atwood has, though, more prominent and less prominent genres: she is primarily a poet and fiction writer (novel, short story) and can, for example, not really be called a dramatist – her recently published first drama is a dramatization of one of her own narratives, which itself is difficult to categorize generically (The Penelopiad, 2005).

HN: Which is your favourite of Margaret Atwood's works and why?

RN: That is a very difficult question for me. I am especially fascinated by several of her poems and prose poems, some of her short stories, and several of her novels. But again I don't want to be a spoilsport, so I will now choose her historical novel Alias Grace (1996). I would argue that only a literary genius could write such a text.

The way Canadian history and aspects of general historiography mesh here with Atwoodian narrative art cannot be surpassed. As a scholar interested in narratology, it fascinates me how the reader is shown – seemingly in passing, while under a spell by the plot – how we use narration to construct our world and to some extent that of others as well. The title character Grace Marks is able to save her freedom, if not her life, through her highly intelligent storytelling. In this novel Atwood arrestingly demonstrates the power of words and of imagination. Aside from everything else, this novel is also an overwhelming love story – although it remains unspoken between the characters (and as usual for Atwood, without a happy ending). I can imagine that this novel will one day be required reading for, amongst others, prospective psychoanalysts.

HN: Let’s assume that Margaret Atwood would ask you for a subject for her next book. What would you answer her?

RN: Atwood does not even talk about the projects that she is currently working on, so this question about earlier stages is of course totally unrealistic. But your question is also provocative. Now, after Atwood has dealt with globally essential questions about the course of the world in her dystopias, I would find it interesting to see how she would grapple with topics of less cosmic dimensions, for example the microcosm of the university. This idea is, however, so far-fetched in relation to Atwood's constellation of interests that it would never come about. It is probably better that way, as such a text would certainly be a biting satire. On the other hand, Atwood has an unusual talent for expressing criticism in such a rhetorically attractive way that one does not get offended but rather one can often even be amused about it. She has, for example, an ambivalent, partially very negative image of the USA – but American readers still love her. Even more interesting from my perspective would be a North American or continental American novel, which would deal with, among other things, the current relationship between Canada and the USA. After Atwood's “(inter)national” phase up to the end of the 1980s, in which this relationship was often part of the Canadian search for identity, and her “postnational” phase starting at the beginning of the 1990s, it would be interesting to see how she would depict this exciting but also tense relationship between the neighbours USA and Canada today. But Atwood will go for other topics – she surprises us with each book anew.

HN: Margaret Atwood has been repeatedly considered a candidate for the Nobel Prize. Do you believe that she will receive this award one day? And do you believe that the Nobel Prize would be personally important to Margaret Atwood?

RN: The awarding of prizes is not always justly done, nor is it always unjust. I have believed since the end of the 1970s that one day Atwood will win this prize. In 109 years of the existence of the Nobel Prize (since 1901), not one Canadian writer has received this highest of literary prizes, which in the meantime is really a literary scandal. Even more scandalous is the fact that until now only 11% of all Nobel Prizes in literature have been given to female writers (among 106 Nobel Prize winners there have only been 12 women), although writing is definitely an area in which women are in no way inferior to men (except in prize-winning). In this alone one can see that the awarding of the Nobel Prize is not impartial. I greatly wish that literary quality will prevail and Margaret Atwood will one day win the Nobel Prize: for Canadian literature as a whole, which has also long deserved the recognition of the Nobel Prize committee, but moreover for her own literary achievements, which are Nobel-worthy. I believe that Margaret herself sees this prize with mixed feelings, as even now the hype surrounding her has become ever more difficult to control, and as is well known, one also needs peace and quiet to write. She once said to me: “I do not write to get prizes. One should not write to get prizes.” Perhaps the Nobel Prize would be still more important for a further academic-institutional recognition of Canadian literature as a whole (especially outside of Canada) than for Atwood herself – as she unquestionably already occupies a position at the literary zenith.

Interview with Author Timothy Leduc

Q: You write that research on climate change should “accept indigenous knowledge as a … source that complements science.” What do you mean by this?

The individual who most influenced my sense of Inuit understandings was Jaypeetee Arnakak. In one of our early conversations, he asked me why I and other Western climate researchers rarely ask Inuit questions about the role of wisdom in an environmental response. He saw this as part of a general tendency in Western research that tends to focus on Indigenous ecological knowledge while marginalizing cultural and spiritual understandings. Indigenous knowledge becomes an object or resource to be used rather than a complementary set of understandings that can broaden our sense of climate change.

Q: You suggest that politicians’ tendency to ‘economize’ the effects of climate change is problematic. Why is that?

It is not that economizing in itself is wrong, but that it is often defined primarily in relation to sustaining unending economic growth. On top of that, this view holds too much un-balanced power. As soon as any scientific research, cultural understanding or religious worldview conflicts with it, these perspectives become marginalized from the corridors of power. This economizing tendency is a pervasive cultural and religious belief that fuels climate change. It is what underlies the continued denial of climate change research and political statements like this one by Prime Minister Harper on the Alberta tar sands: “Digging the bitumen out of the ground, squeezing out the oil and converting it in into synthetic crude is… an enterprise of epic proportions, akin to the building of the pyramids or China’s Great Wall. Only bigger.”

Q: What do you think are some of the most important stories on climate change not being covered by the media?

I sit down in front of the TV and hear a story about climate change, and then another about the tar sands. Despite being intertwined, they are rarely discussed together. The BP oil spill is another example of this disconnect. While there were questions of ecological degradation, it was rarely discussed in relation to the need to shift from fossil fuels in a context of climate change. Whether it is the BP oil spill or tar sands, the dominant media stories focus on how to continue extracting all the resources we can while limiting the harm to the environment. These story-lines reflect the economizing cultural tendency discussed above, and I do not think the disconnection of climate and oil in the popular consciousness is sustainable.

Q: How would you rate the environmental policies of the current Canadian government?

Our government and Prime Minister Harper are, I believe, caricatures of a culture that is in denial of our situation and refuses to change. They seem rational and secular, but are in fact religious fundamentalists who hold sacred and unquestionable an oil-based approach to economic growth. That said, the Conservatives have won two minority governments and despite their questionable environmental positions are still performing well enough in the national polls to maintain power. Canadians are very much a part of the uncertain future that is being imposed on not only the north, but also our children and grandchildren. Climate change is a cultural problem that the Conservative government symbolizes in extreme form, as did American President G. W. Bush and his Republican administration.

Q: How do you envision Canada moving forward to tackle climate change?

Obviously a change in government would be one step forward, but I do not believe that in itself will solve our problem. The issue goes far beyond political parties, for it is grounded in cultural beliefs like never-ending economic growth and the power of technology to solve any crisis. These issues pervade most aspects of all our lives. It is for this reason that I agree with the late John Livingston’s statement that “there can be no technical answer to a moral problem.” There are no band-aid solutions to the climatic situation we find ourselves in.

To find out more about Leduc's new book Climate, Culture, Change visit: http://www.press.uottawa.ca/book/climate-culture-change

To read the interview in full, visit climateculturechange.wordpress.com

Je l’ai entendu à la radio : le Dictionnaire des écrits de l’Ontario français

À vrai dire, l’émission Grands Lacs Café est le rendez-vous radiophonique de la fin de semaine pour les Franco-Ontariens. Il n’y a pas longtemps, Gaetan Gervais et Jean-Pierre Pichette on fait la visite avec animateur Éric Robitaille.

L’excellente entrevue avec les codirecteurs de la nouvelle parution Dictionnaire des écrits de l’Ontario français a été diffusée le 4 décembre à la Première Chaîne de Radio-Canada.

Voici un extrait : 

« C’est le moment de vous en parler de ce Dictionnaire des écrits de l’Ontario français 1613-1993. L’aboutissement d’une entreprise qui a été lancé en 1992 – ça fait 30 ans qu’on travaille là-dessus et enfin le projet se concrétise, se matérialise. Ça tombe bien aussi parce que le livre est publié l’année du 400e anniversaire de la présence francophone en Ontario avec les premiers voyages d’Étienne Brulé et Samuel de Champlain dans la baie Georgienne. 

L’ouvrage - je l’ai reçu en primeur, il est beau, il est impressionnant, c’est une brique, il est magnifique, c’est une travaille colossale, minutieux. J'ai eu la chance de parler cette semaine avec quelques-uns des principaux artisans du dictionnaire, dont les deux codirecteurs du projet l’historien Gaetan Gervais et puis l’ethnologue Jean-Pierre Pichette … »

Pour écouter l’entrevue, cliquez le lien suivant :

Dictionnaire des écrits de l'Ontario français
Sujet: Reportage sur une oeuvre colossale et essentielle pour les francophones d'ici

Entrevue avec Denyse Côté, codirectrice de l'ouvrage « Famille et fragmentation »

Cette semaine, une entrevue intéressante au sujet de la garde partagée sera diffusée dans le cadre de l'émission « C'est ça la vie » à l'antenne de Radio-Canada. L’invitée est professeure Denyse Côté, codirectrice de l'ouvrage intitulé « Famille et fragmentation » qui a été codirigé avec Marie-Blanche Tahon.

L'entrevue sera diffusée à l'antenne de Radio-Canada, le 17 novembre entre 14 h et 15 h.

Black Holes of Risk: author W.Leiss featured in Research Perspectives

UOP author William Leiss was recently featured in the magazine Research Perspectives. The issue, which focussed on risk, was the perfect place to showcase one of our newest titles: The Doom Loop in the Financial Sector: And Other Black Holes of Risk

The book, which hit shelves last week, tells an important story about uncontrolled risk, set against the backdrop of the global financial crisis.

Leiss is a nationally recognized risk management expert and an Associate-Director at the McLaughlin Center for Population Health Risk Assessment. He's a Fellow and former President of the Royal Society of Canada, and an Officer in the Order of Canada. Overall, he has written or edited over 15 books, including Risk and Responsibility and my favourite: Mad Cows and Mother’s Milk, both of which were published by McGill Queen's University Press. 

Open publication - Free publishing - More risk

Sofia's Side of the Story

Right now the press is gearing up for the release of “My Life,” which should be printed and bound in the next week or so. We’ve set a date for the launch, and we’re working on the invitations, the guest list, and doing all the grunt work it takes to pull off an event for over a hundred people. Never having published anything of this magnitude before, I think we’re all feeling the pressure a little bit, but so far everything has been going well (knock on wood!)

We were fortunate enough to be featured in an article in the Ottawa Citizen Sunday, announcing the publication of My Life and giving a bit of an introduction to Sofia.

It was nice to see the volume treated as such an accessible text, because that has been one of my challenges in publicizing it. At 1200 pages, it’s a little daunting, and it’s certainly important to stress the academic significance of this treasure trove of information on Tolstoy, but it’s also important to note that it is very easy and interesting to read!

Read the article

UOP Author Takes Mexico by Storm

University of Ottawa Press author Michael Small was in Mexico this week, and was invited to speak about his recent book: The Forgotten Peace: Mediation at Niagara Falls, 1914. Despite the rain, around 70 people attended the talk. Attendees included Mexican diplomats, academics, and 18 university students who traveled all the way from Guadalajara to El Atrio. Thanks to everyone who made the effort to come out, the event was a smash!

We even got some press coverage in two daily papers in Mexico!

For those of you who want to practice your Spanish, take a look:

Open publication - Free publishing - More books

Interview with Reingard Nischik, author of Engendering Genre in Canadian Literature online

Below you will find a link to an interview in Canadian Literature online by Sarah Banting with UOP author Reingard Nischik.

Nischik is Chair of North American Literature at the University of Konstanz, Germany. Professor Nischik is among the pioneers of Canadian literature studies in Europe -- her first article on CanLit was published in 1981. Professor Nischik is the author of several books, including Engendering Genre: The Works of Margaret Atwood, which will be published by the University of Ottawa Press in early 2010. To discover the works Margaret Atwood and why Professor Nischik choose her work as the topic for her new book, click here.

For further information on Engendering Genre: The Works of Margaret Atwood by Reingard M. Nischik, check out the UOP’s website.

Revolution or Renaissance - Part Two

Upper Case welcomes back D. Paul Schafer, author of Revolution or Renaissance: Making the Transition from an Economic Age to a Cultural Age. This time we asked him, to tell us a little bit more about the cultural age he imagines – what is it, how is it different from an economic age, and when will it get here?

In my view, a cultural age would be an age in which people, the natural environment, and other species are valued more highly than products, profits, material and monetary wealth, and the marketplace. The focus would be on seeing the world and the large majority of things in the world in holistic rather than specialized terms - thereby putting a great deal more emphasis on ‘contexts’ as opposed to ‘contents’ - as well as making it possible for people in all parts of the world to live creative, constructive and fulfilling lives without straining the globe’s fragile eco-systems and finite resources to the breaking point. This would be realized by taking maximum advantage of culture’s capacity for holism, caring, sharing, conservation, and co-operation, as well as drawing fully on the three principal concepts of culture as the arts, humanities, and heritage, a complex whole or total way of life, and the organizational forms and structures of different species.

Making the transition from an economic age to a cultural age is imperative in my view because we need to reduce the demands we are making on the natural environment and conserve the world’s scarce resources at every opportunity, as well as achieve a much more effective balance between the quantitative and qualitative dimensions of development. I believe the natural environment will steadily deteriorate, climate change will intensify, and the world will become a more chaotic and dangerous place if this does not occur, especially as resources are used up, the world’s population is increased, and the carrying capacity of the earth is approached.

The major change that would result in the world from a cultural age would be a transformational shift from activities that are high in material inputs and outputs - especially industrial, commercial, technological and transportation activities - to activities that are low in material inputs and outputs, such as the arts, humanities, and many heritage and spiritual activities. This would be accompanied by new meanings and measures of wealth, as well as a great deal more environmental sustainability and ecological harmony.

In order to make the world a better place, I believe it is necessary to fully understand the age we are living in at present. I have attempted to do this by calling the present age an economic age - rather than a technological, information, computer, scientific, materialistic, or individualistic age as most authors do - as well as showing that this age is based on a very specific worldview, value system, model of development, ideology, and set of strengths and shortcomings. This is necessary to comprehend the nature, extent, and complexity of the challenge we face at present, as well as to determine what is required in specific theoretical and practical terms to respond effectively to this challenge.

I do not believe it will be possible to make the world a better place for all the diverse peoples, countries, and species of the world - as well as address such devastating problems as climate change, environmental exhaustion, and the need to reduce income inequalities throughout the world - without making a fundamental change in the existing worldview, value system, model of development, ideology, and way of life. To me, this is a cultural matter more than any other type of matter, since it requires a fundamental change in culture and cultures in general and cultural values, attitudes, and beliefs in particular.

This is why I have called the future age a cultural age. I feel we need to understand that culture and cultures have a powerful role to play in making the world a better place for all, and hope that Revolution or Renaissance serves a useful purpose in this regard by helping people and institutions in all parts of the world who are engaged in this process.

Revolution or Renaissance: Making the Transition from an Economic Age to a Cultural Age

Upper Case asked author D. Paul Schafer, to tell us how his career has led him to the ideas he put forth in his 2008 book Revolution or Renaissance: Making the Transition from an Economic Age to a Cultural Age. Here is what he told us:

I was originally trained as an economist specializing in international development and the history of economic thought. After studying and teaching economics for a number of years in the late nineteen fifties and early nineteen sixties, I became convinced that we have been living in an economic age ever since the publication of Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations in 1776. This age is predicated on the belief that economics and economies in general - and the production, distribution, and consumption of material and monetary wealth in particular - should be made the centrepiece of society and principal preoccupation of municipal, regional, national and international development because this is the most effective way of dealing with people’s economic and non-economic needs.

In 1965, I decided to leave economics because I was forced to the conclusion that the economic age is not capable of coming to grips with the two most fundamental and urgent problems confronting humanity, namely the huge disparities that exist in income and wealth throughout the world and the steady deterioration of the natural environment. This is because the economic age is far more concerned with the production and consumption of wealth than the distribution of wealth, and tends to treat the natural environment as ‘a given’ rather than the most essential and valuable resource of all.

Not knowing where to turn after I left economics, I decided to search for a job in the cultural field because I had grown up in a very cultural environment and my parents had a great appreciation for the arts and humanities. I was eventually hired by the Ontario Arts Council, and stayed there until 1970 when I was asked to go to York University to direct what is arguably the first comprehensive program for training arts administrators in the world. This was followed by a long period of self-employment as a cultural advisor, during which time I participated in many studies, wrote numerous reports, and undertook several missions for UNESCO to different parts of the world.

In 1983, I was hired by the University of Toronto to teach two courses in arts administration and policy, as well as to coordinate two new co-operative programs in arts administration and international development that were being developed at the university at that time. While I was there, I undertook an intensive study of culture as a concept and reality, largely to broaden and deepen my knowledge and understanding of culture, cultures, and cultural development. This led to the establishment of the World Culture Project in 1989 to research and write about culture and cultures in general and Canadian culture in particular (see the World Culture Project website at: www3.sympatico.ca/dpaulschafer).

I discovered through my various studies that there is a vast theoretical and practical literature on culture that is being virtually ignored throughout the world as a result of the preoccupation with economics and economies. Much of this literature has been written by anthropologists, sociologists, ecologists, and biologists, and contains valuable insights and ideas about the nature of the world and prospects for the future.

In an attempt to summarize my findings on the subject of culture, I wrote Culture-Beacon of the Future which was published in 1998 by Adamantine Press in England and Praeger/Greenwood in the United States in their 21^st. Century Studies series. This publication ends with the conviction that we must pass out of the present economic age and into a future cultural age if environmental sustainability, global harmony, economic viability, and human well-being are to be achieved. This line of argument was picked up in earnest in Revolution or Renaissance: Making the Transition from an Economic Age to a Cultural Age. It was written between 1999 and 2003, and published first in Chinese by the Social Sciences Academic Press in Beijing in 2006. This was followed by the English version that was published by the University of Ottawa Press in its Governance Series in 2008.

Check Upper Case again soon for more from D. Paul Schafer.