Note: Transcripts may contain errors. If you wish to re-use all, or part of, a transcript, please contact CBC for permission. Please check the corresponding audio before quoting in print. Copyright © CBC 2020

The AIH Transcript for February 24, 2020

Hosts: Carol Off and Chris Howden

Prologue

CAROL OFF: Hello. I'm Carol Off.

CHRIS HOWDEN: Good evening. I'm Chris Howden. This is As It Happens.

[Music: Theme]

CH: Tonight...

CO: The jury has spoken. Harvey Weinstein is convicted on two counts in a New York courtroom. Our guest is among the former film producers many accusers. She says today feels like the start of something new.

CH: The ruling is a milestone for the MeToo movement and the story is far from over. An L.A. Times reporter who was in the courtroom today says he's now looking to his own town where Weinstein faces still more charges.

CO: A devastating blow. L'Arche international uncovers evidence of sexual abuse by its founder, Jean Vanier, a man celebrated around the world as a champion for people with developmental disabilities. We speak to the person who kick-started that investigation.

CH: She's a hidden figure no more. The late Katherine Johnson's work helped NASA get to the moon. We'll talk to the writer who helped her get the recognition she deserved in life.

CO: Tourist trap. For the past year and a half, people have been traveling from miles to see a literal hole in the wall in Derbyshire, England. Or so they claim in online reviews, which it turns out may be full of holes themselves.

CH: And hard core. George Hood didn't just set a new world record for planking -- the former Marine did it at 62 years old, proving he's still more than fit for duty. As It Happens. The Monday Edition. Radio that's all for breaking records, but thinks this one sounds abdomenable.

[Music: Theme]

Part 1: Harvey Weinstein guilty verdict is a 'monumental win' for women, says accuser

Weinstein verdict

Guest: Katherine Kendall

CH: Harvey Weinstein is guilty. As you've probably heard on the news, a jury in New York found the former movie producer guilty today of sexually assaulting two women. He was convicted of committing a criminal sex act against Miriam Haley in 2006. And a third degree rape against Jessica Mann in 2013. He was acquitted of the most serious charge, predatory sexual assault. Here is what New York District Attorney Cyrus Vance Junior said after the verdict.

SOUNDCLIP

CYRUS VANCE JR.: Rape is rape -- whether the survivor reports within an hour, within a year or perhaps never. It's rape -- despite the complicated dynamics of power and consent after an assault. It's rape -- even if there is, there is no physical evidence, and even if it happened a long time ago. This is the new landscape for survivors of sexual assault in America I believe. And this is a new day.

CH: New York District Attorney Cyrus Vance Junior. Mr. Weinstein, who was taken into custody in a medical facility, will appeal, according to one of his lawyers. The conviction comes after dozens of women came forward with accusations against Mr. Weinstein dating back decades. Katherine Kendall is one of those women. We reached her in Los Angeles.

CO: Katherine, first of all, how did it feel to hear that Harvey Weinstein was declared guilty?

KATHERINE KENDALL: Well, it's incredible. It's it feels like a monumental win for victims and for the women that I know and I've met that have been on this journey, it's a really big day. I am emotional talking about it even now. I was trained for a not guilty because everyone told me that's the way it usually goes. And it's very hard to prosecute and prove rape. And there was a lot of victim blaming going on during that trial. I was there. I saw it. And I was really concerned. There were moments I thought it's not going to go our way. You know, and I was preparing to feel defeated. And how I would handle that.

CO: And you just heard the DA Cyrus Vance Junior, he not only describes all that, but he says it's a new landscape in America. And this is a new day for people who are making these charges. Does that seem to be true to you?

KK: That is my hope. And that is what all this has been for. That's what I'm fighting for. And I think it is. I do think it is. I think it is a new day. I think that people have to be considering all of these things in a different way than they ever have before. And I am really hopeful that more people will come forward with their claims, you know, and their truth. That the sort of shroud of shame starts to lift and people won't be so afraid that they won't be heard.

CO: We did hear, though, that one of the accusers in this New York trial, Annabella Sciorra -- you described the difficulty of the testimonies and the cross-examination, her's was quite extraordinary. And yet the decision was to find Mr. Weinstein not guilty on the charge of predatory sexual assault, which was that one of the charge that she was included in those charges as a victim. What did that mean to you?

KK: You know, it's shocking. I mean, I was there. I watched her and listened to her testimony and I thought she was incredible. And I don't know how you could be in that room and listen to her and not believe her. I think it has to do with the statute of limitations. And that still really needs to be changed and looked at. I don't think it has to do with not believing her testimony. You know, we really were worried about the fact that the predatory account -- he wouldn't be guilty of that. We were concerned. But we all know in our hearts that he is a predator who is you know -- he has a pattern over 30 years. And, you know, it's difficult. I hope she doesn't feel like she failed in any way or let anyone down because she was magnificent. And I actually think that her testimony helped as a whole -- the whole -- very much.

CO: And when I ask you, because we spoke you with you as the trial began in January and you talked about the other two women, Miriam Haley and Jessica Mann. And you were saying to us that you felt so grateful to them for taking on the burden of going to court. When you look at what they went through, how difficult do you think this trial has been for them?

KK: I think that both of those women are incredible like heroes. You know, I think that both of them knew that this was complicated. They weren't lying to themselves about that. They knew that going in. But they were both really sure that they had been at the hands of a predator. And there was no question in their mind. And they were just going forward telling the truth. And I think that they were prepared, which is incredible, because they were walking into the world looking at their lives and taking apart their lives in a way that seemed to only do with victims of sexual assault.

CO: Can you imagine what it would've been like -- because you were one of about 80 women who have accused Harvey Weinstein of sexual misconduct -- did you put yourself in their shoes and imagine what that would be like to be one of those women in this trial?

KK: I absolutely did. And I don't know if -- I mean I can't honestly tell you that I would have had the courage. There is nothing easy about it. Just because I had an experience, you know, of harassment or assault with Harvey doesn't mean that I would be willing to take a stand because of what it's like to take a stand...it's petrifying. I mean, it's designed to break you down. And I think that that can be its own new trauma. So I can't -- I mean, I would like to think that I would, but I can just say that the women who did...I don't know. I mean, it takes an enormous amount of endurance. And it was a real gift. It was real. They were, you know, very generous with their souls, really, to do that for so many people.

CO: If you could speak to them -- to Miriam Haley or Jessica Mann -- right now, what would you say?

KK: I would say that you have changed the world. That the risk you took was worth it. That I have been here with you the whole way and I will always be here with you. That you are absolute heroines.

CO: Do you think it has changed the world? Because the whole MeToo movement began with Mr. Weinstein and those who came forward to make their accusations? Do you think that the entertainment industry has learned anything -- has changed at all?

KK: I think it has to have changed. We came forward about one of the maybe the most powerful producer in Hollywood. I mean he will be in jail. There is no doubt about it. And yeah, this is someone who never saw a consequence. So I think that if we can see that there are consequences for him, that women everywhere are going to start to feel safer and that everyone will start to take all of this more seriously. It's here to stay.

CO: Katherine we will leave it there. And I really appreciate speaking with you. Thank you.

KK: Yeah. Thank you.

CO: Take care.

KK: Thanks.

CH: Katherine Kendall is an actor and one of the women who have accused Harvey Weinstein of sexual misconduct. She was in Los Angeles. And you can find more on that story on our website: cbc.ca/aih.

Weinstein: what's next

Guest: James Queally

CH: Here is Gloria Allred, the lawyer for Miriam Haley and some of the other women who've made allegations against Mr. Weinstein.

SOUNDCLIP

GLORIA ALLRED: Harvey Weinstein. This justice has been a long time coming, but it's finally here. And it's not the end because L.A. is still going to proceed.

CH: Ms. Allred is referring to charges Mr. Weinstein is facing in Los Angeles, where he's accused of raping one woman and sexually assaulting another woman in 2013. James Queally is covering the Weinstein court cases for the Los Angeles Times. We reached him today in New York.

CO: James, these charges in Los Angeles were laid on the day Mr. Weinstein's trial in New York opened. So what exactly is he accused of doing in the Los Angeles case?

JAMES QUEALLY: Sure. He's been accused of four different counts of sexual assault. Those allegations stem from accusations made by two women related to events in 2013 in west Los Angeles and Beverly Hills. One woman is an Italian model who has accused him of rape. The other woman was actually one of the "prior bad acts" witnesses who testified in New York. Her name is Lauren Young. She said Mr. Weinstein lured her up to a room from a dinner --- another person was there. She became trapped in the bathroom with him. She accused him of groping her and ultimately pleasuring himself in front of her obviously against her will.

CO: How is similar or dissimilar are the charges in L.A. to those in New York?

JQ: A little different because at least to the best of my knowledge, the women making the accusations in Los Angeles did not have these longer, more elaborate relationships with Mr. Weinstein that some of the women in New York did. They weren't actresses who had performed in pictures or otherwise, you know, like Mimi Haleyi worked on a show that his company had a hand in. I don't believe they stayed in touch with him that often after the fact. These cases contain these sort of myths or stereotypes around sexual assault victims. But the defense tried to employ in New York that's probably the main difference.

CO: And yes -- that was one that was considered to be one of the stumbling blocks for the case, was that the women had continued these relationships. And so this is not going to affect the Los Angeles trial.

JQ: At least as far as we know, so far, the inverse of that argument I've heard -- probably one of the biggest problems in the L.A. case will be that Lauren Young did testify in the New York case that will now give defense attorneys out on the West Coast you know, a very long time to scour over her story, look for weaknesses, to prod at inconsistencies. It's really going to give them a lot of material to work with for their cross-examination having heard her entire story in court already.

CO: We know that Mr. Weinstein is now scheduled to be sentenced in New York on March the 11th, and he faces prison time between 5 and 25 years, possibly. One of his lawyers said after the verdict they plan to appeal. Does all of that affect the timing of the Los Angeles case?

JQ: To the best of our knowledge right now, the whole thing is going to happen in L.A. ahead of the sentencing. The appeal could conceivably delay it, but that'll guess will depend on the grounds and when that's heard. He has not even appeared in L.A. yet. He hasn't even entered a basic not guilty plea. So there is a chance that that first appearance may happen just to get the ball rolling sometime this year. But even that's just speculating. Really, nothing is going to be known. And the L.A. DA's office has not made any public comments about the case since announcing the charges and probably won't until after the sentencing is complete in New York.

CO: The women in the L.A. case -- at what point do they go to the police about Mr. Weinstein?

JQ: The genesis of those two charges are a little murky right now. My newspaper had interviewed one of the women who has not given her name yet, but she's an Italian model. Her case was presented by the LAPD to the district attorney's office in February of 2018. I believe she had spoken to the LAPD in late 2017. Ms. Young's case was actually routed through the Manhattan DA's office to Los Angeles prosecutors. So it's a little unclear when exactly she came forward. Her case didn't come to possession of L.A. authorities until last year, though.

CO: So why do you think it took so long for the district attorney in L.A. to lay these charges?

JQ: I asked her about this before, she has basically said the case was filed when it was ready to be filed. She has mentioned, you know, the other woman I keep referencing, not Lauren Young, testified in New York -- the Italian model. You know, she lives out of the country. It took a while for them to find witnesses to corroborate certain parts of her story. They may have -- and this would just be a guess -- but they may have wanted to bring as many charges as they could at the same time, instead of adding victims piecemeal. Because they did investigate eight total allegations of sexual assault against Mr. Weinstein in Southern California, three of them were outside of the statute of limitations. Most of them were too old to prosecute. There are three that are some actively being investigated, though, so it is possible that they could file additional charges. But again, how they will act, given what happened today in New York is very unclear.

CO: What effect does the testimonies and the evidence presented in New York -- what effect might that have in the L.A. case, both for prosecution and for the defense?

JQ: Well, as we said, you know, Lauren Young is one of the primary accusers in the charges filed in L.A. -- so her testimony, we don't really know how credible it was to the jury's verdict here, but she did, you know, at least to get to kind of have a trial run of speaking in public. You know, these situations are terrifying for some people. We saw, you know, some of the witnesses in this case break down on the stand. You know, Ms. Young kind of got to do that in a courtroom setting once before she will have to do it again in Los Angeles. We also got some idea of how his defense might work. It was largely the idea that these situations were consensual. He wasn't denying they took place. He may have a different legal team in California. So we don't again, can't really draw through line between those two -- Donna Routunno you know, the Chicago-based attorney representative in New York is not currently listed as his lead counsel in L.A. There is a different one by the name of Blair Berk. So she could have a completely different strategy.

CO: Just finally, how is Harvey Weinstein being regarded right now in L.A. -- in movie circles? I mean, this trial is now going to be at the center of his world? What's the reaction? What's the sense in L.A. and in Hollywood about Mr. Weinstein right now?

JQ: I mean, I live in a courthouse, not on Hollywood Boulevard, so I'm not really in those circles. But generally speaking, he's largely been excommunicated from that world. And I don't know if the trial, you know -- even if he had been acquitted, I don't think he would have suddenly been welcomed back into the movie land with open arms or anything like that.

CO: James, we'll leave it there. We'll be watching this trial. Thank you so much.

JQ: Thank you.

CH: James Queally covers crime and courts for the Los Angeles Times. He was in New York.

[Music]

Planking record

Guest: George Hood

CH: You rest your own body weight on your forearms and your feet. Squeeze your glutes. Put your heels together and sure, your whole body, including your neck, is parallel to the floor and hold it. That's how to do a plank. And most of us can probably hold one for a about the length of time it took for me to give that explanation of a plank, and reach the end of this sentence. George Hood is not like most of us. Nine days ago, he planked for 8 hours-15 minutes-15 seconds. And in doing so, he set a new Guinness World Record for the second time. We reached Mr. Hood in Naperville, Illinois.

CO: George, big congratulations.

GEORGE HOOD: Thank you so much for reaching out to me, I appreciate that.

CO: How are you feeling of you were completely recovered from being in a plank position for more than eight hours?

GH: Now, I'm not completely recovered. I never telegraph weakness. But the recovery has been progressive. But discomfort was deep tissue. So the body heals from the inside out.

CO: [Chuckles] You would be totally justified and just going to be a couch potato for the next month after this -- you know, you don't have to do anything.

GH: I wouldn't say a month. You can give me three days.

CO: Doing this for, what, 8 hours-15 minutes-15 seconds. Was there a point during this, being in plank position for that length of time, that you thought, I can't do this anymore?

GH: Funny you ask. Yes. Every long plank I do in training and obviously the main events, has its at least one moment when that demon creeps into your head, jumps on your back and starts to tell you...create self-doubt and so forth. And that for this particular event that happened at about hour six, I remember looking at the coach and said, where is hour six? Can you give me hour six? And I wasn't there yet. And when I make that time call and I'm not where I think I should be, that can be devastating. So that's why everybody gets in close, take a lot of group photos just to kind of distract myself and then I break through that wall. But hour six going at hour seven was really critical. And I cranked the music up because loud music chases away the demons. They don't like loud music. But it wasn't always pleasant.

CO: Okay you had a party but you stayed in plank position. But how often do you take a break -- when you're going for a Guinness record for being in plank for this many hours, do you have to be in a plank position for the entire eight hours, or do you have any breaks?

GH: No, there's no breaks.

CO: You're just in a plank position for eight hours and fifteen minutes.

GH: Yes. Yeah.

CO: Okay. You know, most people listening to this are really really happy when they can do a plank for 30 seconds.

GH: That's a starting point. Every tree has to be planted. And once that tree is planted, those roots grow and people become stronger, just like a tree.

CO: Okay. How did you get strong enough to do this? What was your training?

GH: Training -- for this last ordeal, my training began probably nearly almost 18 months ago after the June 2018 event. I'll just give it to you in a nutshell. My training is about 7 hours to get done what I have to do. That included about four to five hours plank time each day in no more than three sets. At least 700 pushups a day. 2000 crunches. About 500 leg squats. Bar squats -- holding onto the bar. About 500 band curls with the weighted band for the arms and shoulders. And my squat -- about 500 toe squats a day. And legless. The Hood fitness package will come out in a few months. It's been in demand and I am going to put it all down on video now and people can do it as they wish.

CO: Okay, so your 700 hundred pushups a day is about six 695 more than most people. Your 2000 sit-ups -- have got to be more than...I don't know, 1990 than most people. You think people are going to see the George Hood method of how to get to be this strong and they could actually do what you've done?

GH: Absolutely. And why not? Everybody is capable of this. I've proven that proof of concept countless times with people who never thought they could even set a world record for that matter. Truly anybody can do what they want if they put their mind to it and commit.

CO: Okay. But just for anyone who's thinking, okay, that's fine for a young fellow like that to do it. But just tell them how old you are?

GH: I'm 62! 62! But understand, please -- as I tell my peers, 62 is just a number. There are no excuses anymore.

CO: You think others could actually do what you've done?

GH: Absolutely.

CO: What would motivate them?

GH: I don't know. That's a personal journey that people and a commitment that people has to make. I use the plank pose on my platform to think and study myself. And it's my way of dealing with demons that confront me on a daily basis. You know, relationships to financial to am I going to look next year, future plans, how well my sons are doing. It can be very therapeutic. And before you know it, the time clicks by. It does.

CO: What's your next goal? What are you going do now?

GH: I'm going to move into the pushup genre. And I'm working on pushups now. And you pick whatever time you want -- hour or two hours. I'm going to pursue something like that and take a look at that record. And that may happen sooner, rather later because of all the plank training I've done.

CO: What's the record on that?

GH: Most push ups in an hour is about 2800 right now set by a guy I believe in New Zealand. Good guy. Good good candidate for that kind of event. I'm looking forward to training for that.

CO: And you're going to push him off his record.

GH: I'll surpass whatever his mark is [laughs].

CO: George, again, congratulations and good luck.

GH: Hey, I really appreciate the call and all the best of those in Canada.

CO: Oh and just one thing we should point out that I think that the plank position, Guinness World Record by a woman is a woman from Canada. Did you know that?

GH: It is. Yes, I know her. Dana's a good friend of mine. I worked with her for years -- preparing her for what she ended up doing here last spring -- here in Naperville, Illinois. So a huge congrats to her. She did very well. Posted that 4-hours and 19-minutes and 55-seconds. So she's Canada's sweetheart no doubt.

CO: You bet. Okay. Thanks George.

GH: You bet. Thank you. Bye bye.

CH: 62 year old George Hood set a new Guinness World Record for longest time in the abdominal plank position. We reached him in Naperville, Illinois. And you can find more on our webpage and see videos and photos of Mr. Hood: cbc.ca/aih.

[Music]

NatWest Hole

CH: The Louvre is a pretty nice museum. But if you're looking for a real artistic masterwork, let me recommend a visit to the town of Illston in Derbyshire, England. Yes, it's about seven and a half hours drive away from Paris, but it's worth the trip to see the NatWest Hole. For the last year and a half people have been posting euphoric reviews of the NatWest Hole, which is a circular hole in the brick wall outside a NatWest bank machine in Ilkeston. It was built into the wall so you could see if anyone was waiting on the other side to rob you. Functional -- yet according to these reviews, fascinating and phenomenal. People wrote "one of a kind architectural masterpiece that draws visitors from near and far." "An adventure not to be missed." And "It is said that people often faint upon first sight of this magnificent structure, unable to deal with the unrivaled attack on the senses that the Hole in the Wall delivers." And those are just three of the many TripAdvisor posts lauding this haunting hole. Of course, there are Philistines like the person who gave it one star -- writing: "What is going on here? A round hole in a wall, which is part of the NatWest branch next to a cash machine. Whatever next." And TripAdvisor itself, which has suspended further reviews, saying they do not describe a firsthand experience. Which suggests, unlikely as it is, that TripAdvisor thinks people are just kidding about the power of this wall hole. Well, that just can't be true. Even in photos, it's simply breathtaking. So make the trip to Ilkeston and get ready because you've got your hole life ahead of you.

[Music]

Part 2: Jean Vanier abuse

Jean Vanier abuse

Guest: Stephan Posner

CH: Jean Vanier dedicated his life to championing the rights of the most vulnerable. Which is why new revelations about the Catholic philosopher have come as such a blow to those who admired him. The Globe and Mail has reported details from an independent investigation into Mr. Vanier -- uncovering sexually abusive relationships he had with at least six women over the span of 35 years. Mr. Vanier died in 2019. In the 1960s, he founded L'Arche, which grew into a global group of communities that supports people with intellectual disabilities. None of the victims are intellectually disabled. The women who were assistants and nuns describe how Mr. Vanier manipulated and even coerced them sexually. Stephan Posner is the director of L'Arche International. We reached him in Paris, France.

CO: Mr. Posner, as you know, to so many people Jean Vanier was a living saint -- and so how are you reconciling that side of the man with what we've learned in this investigation?

STEPHAN POSNER: Well, we're not. That's because, you know, there's a gap between the man we actually knew and what we are putting into light today. And this gap is what creates that shock and the fact that, you know, there's a big hurt. And obviously it's a blow for our members and for myself.

CO: Just for those who might not know of the legacy of Jean Vanier -- he had a revolutionary alternative to how the intellectually disabled were being treated. What did he do that was that changed everything?

SP: Well, I would say that, you know, basically the idea is quite simple. He took two people out of the psychiatrist hospital in 1964, and he said one thing -- he said, these people are my friends. And that was th beginning of the adventure, beginning of L'Arche. And so our communities are not only a place of care, but a place of friendship.

CO: And yet, at the same time, it's been found that on the, quote, balance of probabilities, Jean Vanier had at least six relationships with women at L'Arche some of them abusive, all of them coercive and non-consensual. And that happened over a stretch of more than 30 years. How is it that we're just hearing about it now?

SP: So I just want to give an important point. It's adult women -- nondisabled. In 2016, we received a first testimony of a woman who questioned the behavior of Jean towards her. And at that time, obviously, we presented that testimony to Jean which he explained to us that this relationship was consenting. But in March 2019, so just a few months before Jean died, we received a second testimony very similar to the previous one. And quite immediately we decided to launch that inquiry. We passed it onto an external body to do this type of investigation.

CO: Really? Nobody knew that this was going on? The women --they were associated with L'Arche, they were in positions of where he had -- not just the authority over -- but he was considered to be one of the most extraordinary people in their whole field. Did no one know that these women were suffering, as they have now said in this report?

SP: That's a question that raise very naturally. And obviously, the question is, is there a member of L'Arche or any leader of L'Arche that actually knew, understood, and covered up? And today, to our knowledge, we've got no indication that we can point out someone that actually knew and understood and covered up. But, you know, we've said and said again that the public communication that we're doing today is not the end of our work.

CO: We know that that Jean Vanier -- these women have said that they told him that they found it very painful what he was doing, the approach he was making at them. Can you just give us some examples, because they've quoted him as the kinds of ways he would justify his approach to them. Tell us a bit about what you learned.

SP: So that's one of the most, you know, strange part of the story is that each of these women who've got no knowledge of their stories, they don't know each other, report similar facts. And this sexual behavior was always with some kind of very unusual mystical or spiritual explanation that were there to justify them.

CO: I'll give one example of one nun who did not want these sexual advances from Mr. Vanier. And she says when I expressed my astonishment, he said that that I could manifest my love to Jesus with him -- Jesus and myself. He said this they are not two, but one. It is Jesus who loves you through me. You know this man. You know what he represents. How did you feel about learning that?

SP: Obviously, we were astonished. But what is extraordinary that it seems that for some people it had made sense. The inquiry described the fact and the process and these women taken on a psychological hold [speaks in French] -- we say in French. And that's a very, you know, insidious way of taking power off someone, which makes it so difficult for the people which are caught in that to actually, you know, realize what's going on and then put out a complaint. And that's why we actually have paid tribute to these women, because we actually understand and realize the courage for them to come out and share this piece of their personal story -- courage and also suffering.

CO: How are you communicating this to the members of your communities, the intellectually disabled, who have benefited so much from L'Arche -- how are you explaining to them what's going on?

SP: So, you know, that's obviously one of our major concern. You know, since weeks and now I would say a few months, we have shared the information with some of our leaders throughout the federation for them to be ready to support their members. We also pay attention to the way we could share the information with people with disability. And we had, you know, set up tools and easy reading to make it more accessible. And obviously, people are shocked and you know, angry and disappointed.

CO: You know, yourself what Jean Vanier meant to people. I interviewed him before he died. And the reaction to that interview was overwhelming. How moved people are by what he had to say, how he could make sense of things and guide people. What happens now to that image?

SP: So, you know, I'm in L'Arche since 35 years. And when I came in L'Arche -- I met a man called Jean Claude. And Jean Claude is a man with disability. And he became my friend. Jean Claude was my friend yesterday. He's my friend today. I can't see any reason why he couldn't be my friend tomorrow. And I think that is a feeling which is shared by many of us today.

CO: And have your views of Jean Vanier changed completely? Do you still see him as the same man that you knew?

SP: Of course not. And that keeps me awake at night because it is very difficult to understand. In fact, I can't understand how this can be in the same man. And that's why I'm saying there's a time for emotion. And I will try -- there will be a time to try and to have more understanding of that.

CO: Mr. Posner, we will leave it there. I appreciate you speaking with us. Thank you.

SP: Thank you very much.

CH: Stephan Posner is the director of L'Arche International. We reached him in Paris, France.

[Music]

Sophia Sidarous

CH: Today, police moved in on one of the major gatherings of protesters that have been blocking rail service for weeks. Near Belleville, Ontario, police made a number of arrests on the rail line where Mohawks of Tyendinaga have been camped in solidarity with anti-pipeline protests in northern BC. But now the blockades have moved to the roads and streets. The disruptions included the closure of a major highway north west of Montreal and a rolling blockade that briefly blocked traffic south of the city. In Ottawa, protesters blocked Wellington Street near Parliament Hill. The CBC's Hannah Thibedeau spoke with one of those protesters, Sophia Sidarous. Here's part of that interview.

SOUNDCLIP

SOPHIA SIDAROUS: Yes. So we're indigenous youth and allies for Wet'suwet'en. We are peaceful land and water protectors and we stand in solidarity with Wet'suwet'en and as well as other protectors across Turtle Island right now.

HANNAH THIBEDEAU: And why did you decide to come to downtown Ottawa to shut down the streets, essentially, and get attention?

SOPHIA SIDAROUS: I mean, this isn't really for attention. This is just to send a clear message to our government saying that we see what is happening. We are aware of the arrests being made. And this is just a continuation of the violence that Indigenous peoples are facing and also that, you know, basic human rights right now are being violated just for being on their own territories.

HANNAH THIBEDEAU: And what do you want Canadians and the Justin Trudeau Liberal government to understand right now?

SOPHIA SIDAROUS: Well, we're peaceful and we're unarmed. I think that's the biggest message we can send right now, is that this is a peaceful movement and that further violence doesn't look like arresting people on their own territories. So that's not a peaceful resolution to us. And we're not going to stop until our basic human rights are being respected and fulfilled. You know, our right to govern ourselves, our self-determination as Indigenous peoples, we have, you know, sovereignty that the federal government needs to respect us for. And, you know, basic human rights that are being violated on the ground right now. I can't speak for Tyendinaga. I can't speak for Wet'suwet'en and Unist'ot'en. If you go there, you would see all the violence that is enacted on them just for being peaceful and being on their own territories.

HANNAH THIBEDEAU: What would it take for these protests, the blockades to stop in your mind?

SOPHIA SIDAROUS: You need to respect fundamental, basic human rights and uphold the constitution and the rule of law that this Canadian government has said so over and over again. The rule of law also applies to them in respect to Indigenous sovereignty.

CH: That was the CBC is Hannah Thibedeau speaking with Sophia Sidarous who was taking part in a protest that blocked traffic near Parliament Hill in Ottawa today.

[Music]

Katherine Johnson obit

Guest: Margot Lee Shetterly

CH: Throughout her career, she was doubted and discriminated against because of her race and gender. But Katherine Johnson rose above and helped NASA do the same. Katherine Johnson, a mathematician at NASA, died today. She was 101. Ms. Johnson was part of NASA's "Computer Pool" -- a group of mathematicians whose data powered the agency's first successful space missions. The group largely relied on the calculations of its black women members. And Ms. Johnson quickly proved she was remarkably astute and remarkably accurate. One of her most significant achievements was helping make it possible for US astronaut John Glenn to orbit the Earth in 1962. After she retired, she became an advocate for mathematics education. In 2011, she told WHRO Public Media why it was important for girls to get into math.

SOUNDCLIP

KATHERINE JOHNSON: I think the difference is in the desire to learn. Girls -- I've found myself very inquisitive. I wanted to know what was going on and why about whatever was the subject at the time. It was important to me to learn why. Girls -- some of them are reluctant to ask questions. They feel that they're just being curious. But if you want to know, you ask a question. There's no such thing as a dumb question. It's dumb if you don't ask...if you don't ask it. But girls are capable of doing everything men are capable of doing. Sometimes they have more imagination than men.

CH: That was Katherine Johnson back in 2011. For decades, Ms. Johnson's work was largely ignored. Margot Lee Shetterly wanted to change that. In 2016, Ms. Shetterly wrote about Ms. Johnson in her book "Hidden Figures" -- which was also the name of the Oscar-nominated film. We reached Margot Lee Shetterly in Charlottesville, Virginia.

CO: Margot you just heard a clip of Katherine Johnson speaking about the importance of girls getting into math and being curious. What's it like for you to hear her voice again?

MARGOT LEE SHETTERLY: I'm. I listen to her voice so many times over the course of doing the interviews with her both live and then re-listening over and over again. And I learned so much from her. And that particular clip was very typical of Katherine. I think it gives the real insight into what made her so successful. One is that obviously she was an incredibly gifted mathematician, very smart, very talented. But she was also somebody whose curiosity knew no bounds. And as she was just mentioning in that clip, if she wanted to know something, she asked the question. She wasn't shy about it. She wasn't embarrassed about it. She didn't feel badly about not knowing something beforehand. But she did feel badly if she did not find the answer.

CO: How did you come to meet her? How did you come to know her?

MARGOT LEE SHETTERLY: I came to know her because I grew up in Hampton, Virginia, where NASA Langley, that's the NASA Langley Research Center where she worked was in my hometown. My father actually worked at NASA. He's now retired. But he was an atmospheric research scientist and worked there at NASA, and knew Katherine, knew Mary Jackson. So that's the way I came to know her. But it wasn't until I started doing the research on the book that I knew her legacy, her work.

CO: And when you were doing that research, when you were hearing about what it was like for her to be at NASA in the 40s, 50s, what did you make of that? I mean, it was just extraordinary first of all, that women were able to break in there -- but a black woman to be able to find herself in there. What did she tell you about what was like to work at NASA at that time?

MARGOT LEE SHETTERLY: Right. Well, I think what's interesting is, is that in a way, women broke in back in the 30s. You know, we tend to think of women as not being good at math. This is the old stereotype, that simply is not true as evidenced empirically by the work that these women did. Of course, you know, the painful reality is that even as they were doing that work, they were segregated into a separate coloured office, as it was called back then. They had coloured bathrooms. And not just at NASA, but in every aspect of their lives in the state of Virginia, which was a state that practiced legalized racial segregation.

CO: Because Katherine Johnson -- she begins her career in the age of Jim Crow, and yet is so smart, so good at what she does. I think that in your book and in the film "Hidden Figures" -- really the most kind of graphic moment is her looking for a bathroom that a woman of colour could go to while she had this urgent work she needed to do as a mathematician.

MARGOT LEE SHETTERLY: Yeah. And I just want to just comment something right there. You know whenever a nonfiction book is adapted for film, there are things that are changed in the film from the book. One of the things that was changed is that this incident of having to go run all the way back across campus to find a coloured bathroom that happened to Mary Jackson. Katherine Johnson, it happened that in the building that she was working in there was not a coloured bathroom -- simply because there were not very many "coloured employees." And so she went to the white bathroom, which is to say the only bathroom and dared anyone to say anything to her about it.

CO: What did she have to do to get a seat at the space agency's scientific briefings, which is another breakthrough that she had?

MARGOT LEE SHETTERLY: She had to ask and ask and ask and ask again. To essentially insist that she be included in the meetings. But Katherine as evidenced by, you know, the quote that you played in the very beginning was curious. She wanted to know and if she had a question, she would not stop asking until she got an answer. In this particular case, her question was, why is it not possible for me or other women, for that matter, to attend the briefing? And eventually they gave up because they didn't have a satisfactory answer to that question.

CO: Katherine Johnson was obviously a trailblazer, broke down barriers for others. Did she see herself in that light?

MARGOT LEE SHETTERLY: It's interesting when you asked her that very question, "Did you see yourself as a trailblazer or did you know that you were making history?" She had a sense of herself working in a team with other people and doing something that was ground-breaking. But when you start to ask her -- "How did you feel being a woman, being an African-American in a mostly white workplace?" Her point is, well, I was just doing my job. I loved my job. I went to work every single day. So even as the discrimination and these structures were present, when you talk to her about her experience, that is not what she talks about. It's really about the work that she did. The pride in that work. The people that she worked with. And then looking back, you know, a little bit of what that meant for people that came behind her.

CO: She saw the film -- the Oscar-nominated film based on your book "Hidden Figures." And saw herself as depicted by that movie -- how did she feel about that? How did she feel about being recognized that way?

MARGOT LEE SHETTERLY: I think that she appreciated the work of the film and also of the credit that was given to the other women, that it wasn't just about her. That it was about Mary Jackson and also about Dorothy Vaughan. So I think there was a little bit of what's all the big fuss about it. But I think she probably also appreciated the fact that the movie shined a light not just on her accomplishments, but on those of many many other people.

CO: Margot, thank you for writing the book about these remarkable women and for telling us about Katherine Johnson.

MARGOT LEE SHETTERLY: Carol thank you so much. It has been a pleasure being on the show.

CH: Margot Lee Shetterly wrote "Hidden Figures: The American Dream and The Untold Story of the Black Women Who Helped Win the Space Race." Katherine Johnson, a pioneering mathematician at NASA, died today. She was 101.

[Music]

Sol Mamakwa

CH: The words to "God Save the Queen" echoed inside the Ontario legislature today, marking the start of a new tradition introduced by Premier Doug Ford. The government mandated that MPPs sing God Save the Queen, in addition to the Canadian National Anthem once a month before Question Period. And a lot of members raised their voices in song. But some politicians raised theirs to expressed disappointment, including Sol Mamakwa. He's the NDP member for the northern riding of Kiweetinoong.

SOUNDCLIP

SOL MAMAKWA: Today, for the first time since I became an MPP for Kiweetinoong, the British national anthem "God Save the Queen" was sung here in the chamber. For me, the singing of God Save the Queen is a celebration of Ontario's colonial past. As settlers of this province, there are people in this House that may want to sing the anthem that celebrates violence, oppression and discrimination carried out by the British Empire. But for me, as a First Nations person, I will not celebrate colonialism. Colonialism and racism remain the foundation that the buildings and the institutions of this province and country were built up. Because of this the truth and reconciliation demands improved relations between the federal and the provincial governments of Canada and Indigenous nations. I see the revival of God Save the Queen in this House as a step backwards, a shift from modern reconciliation to a past that celebrated the colonialism, that sought the destruction of cultures, languages and communities. For me, singing God Save the Queen is a celebration of a hurtful and violent colonial past. I cannot be part of it.

CH: That's Ontario NDP member Sol Mamakwa speaking today at Queen's Park. He and other Indigenous MPPs are not pleased with a procedural change at the legislature mandating that God Save the Queen will be sung once a month. According to the legislative library, Canada's royal anthem has never been routinely sung at the Ontario legislature.

[Music]

Megan Millward

CH: Any other year, the biggest problem Megan Millward and her husband would have faced was keeping their two kids entertained on the flights to and from China. This year, their biggest problem was much bigger than that. On Friday, Ms. Millward, her husband Lie Zhang and their kids returned to Montreal after being quarantined at a Canadian Forces base in Trenton, Ontario for 14 days, which came after a flight out of Hubei Province, courtesy of the Canadian government. Which followed a period of isolation in a small town outside Wuhan, China, where they'd traveled to visit Mr. Zhang's family in late January. This morning, Megan Millward told CBC Montreal's Daybreak how her family is settling in at home.

SOUNDCLIP

MEGAN MILLWARD: It feels lovely and this is probably going to sound strange, but like it's only been two days. But it now seems like the whole experience is long ago and far away. It's just a regular Monday morning.

MIKE FINNERTY: I suppose I should ask, how's your health?

MEGAN MILLWARD: Very good. Thanks. Yeah, we are all symptom free and healthy.

MIKE FINNERTY: What did the kids say about it?

MEGAN MILLWARD: They really enjoyed all the activities that we had. And then the Red Cross staff there was giving them teddy bears and coloring books. So for themselves, they were fine. But they sort of absorbed our stress a bit. Like we weren't as patient maybe as we usually would be with them just because we were trying to manage our own stress. So they noticed that a bit. But overall fine. There were other kids there for them to play with. There was a playground that they had access to. So I think for the most part fine.

MIKE FINNERTY: What was the first thing they did when they got back home?

MEGAN MILLWARD: Checked out the fridge. Which friends of ours had secretly stocked for us. So they snacked on food that they'd been missing.

MIKE FINNERTY: That is pretty sweet. And once they got past the fridge...

MEGAN MILLWARD: They remembered their Halloween candy, and asked for that. And then it was back to the bedroom to check on all the stuffed animals.

CH: That was Megan Millward speaking with Daybreak host Mike Finnerty. Ms. Millward and her family are back home in Montreal after being quarantined at a CFB base in Trenton, Ontario, for two weeks.

[Music]

Part 3: Teck pipeline cancelled

Teck pipeline cancelled

Guest: Duane Bratt

CH: The federal government was expected to make a decision about the project by the end of this month. Now it doesn't have to. As you've probably heard, Vancouver-based Teck Resources Ltd. is withdrawing its application for the Frontier Oil Sands Mine in Alberta. In a letter, the CEO pointed to issues around climate policy and resource development in Canada. Alberta Premier Jason Kenney reacted to the news during a press conference today. Here's some of what he had to say.

SOUNDCLIP

JASON KENNEY: There is absolutely no doubt that this decision was taken in large part because of regulatory uncertainty and endless delays created by the national government, as well as the general atmosphere of lawlessness that we have seen take hold parts of our country and much of our economic infrastructure in the past three weeks. This should have been a straightforward and automatic approval after it went through nine years of exhaustive environmental review, according to the world's most rigorous standards and profound period of Indigenous consultation with affected Aboriginal communities. And what came from all of that was a validation of the frontier project as being the kind of project which should be the path forward for responsible energy production. And I can tell you, friends, I've been on the phone with major investors with whom we have been working to invest in Canada over the past several months. I've been on the phone with major investors in the past several days who have canceled, frozen and suspended major projected investments in our economy because of the massive uncertainty created by the appearance of anarchy in parts of this country.

CH: That was Alberta Premier Jason Kenney speaking earlier today. Duane Bratt is a political science professor at Mount Royal University. We reached him in Calgary.

CO: Professor Bratt why do you think that Teck has pulled the plug on Frontier Oil Sands project?

DUANE BRATT: I think ultimately it was uneconomical. You have to remember that there's about 20 oil sands projects which have been approved, that construction hasn't begun on because of the cost and the low price of oil.

CO: Okay. So what do you make of this letter that has been issued by Teck, which does not mention that anywhere. There's a lot about the politics and the differences of opinion, what do you make of the letter?

DB: I think that's what happens when you have a letter that's written by more than one person. I have no doubt that it spent over a day being drafted by executives, lawyers, PR people. And you're right, they focus a lot on climate change. They focus on trying to come up with something that supports energy development and reconciles that with climate. They're very careful not to criticize by name either the federal or provincial governments, but there's nothing in here about the economic viability of the project.

CO: But a lot of the language is directly out of the Liberal playbook, isn't it? I mean the letter says there is an urgent need to reduce global carbon emissions and support action on climate change. Climate smart resources to support the world's transition to a low carbon future is essential, and we support strong action to enable that transition to low carbon future. And that they support carbon pricing and other climate policies such as caps and oil sands. That's all out of the Liberal playbook, isn't it?

DB: Absolutely. And that requires interpretation because they don't name names in here. But when they talk about investors looking for a responsible climate policy. You also have the Kenney government that has been very critical of companies that have talked about the importance of a climate policy. Whether that is Shell, whether that is HSBC, whether that is Moody's. So my reading of the Teck letter is it's more of a criticism of the provincial government than it is a federal government. And unfortunately, they don't mention what I think is the real reason, which is about the state of the economy and the price of oil.

CO: Why then not wait to just let this play out? And as you point out, this project would probably end up languishing on the shelf along with many others that don't have a price that they need in order to proceed. Why not just let that play out?

DB: And that is what the expectation was, which is why when this letter came out last night people were so shocked. I think the provincial government in particular was absolutely blindsided by this. I think they were prepared for the federal government to say no. I think they were prepared for the federal government to say yes with conditions. But they were not prepared for Teck to just say we're going to pull out. And I think one of the reasons that Teck pulled out was to make sure it had its message about climate and energy policy being reconcilable in the letter, as opposed to going through this process -- a realization that even if they got the approval with conditions, that it still wasn't going to be constructed. Now they can sit back and wait. They can focus on other mining projects and they can always resubmit at a later date.

CO: Okay. But they're taking advantage of this, to put out a statement to make to say something about the current state of policy, then why not say who you're blaming for? They've sort of thrown this cat in with the pigeons not knowing what they want to get out of it.

DB: Yeah. Which is why political leaders of different stripes are interpreting it in different ways. You saw Andrew Scheer today coming out and saying this is all on Trudeau and it's because of the blockades -- even though there's nothing about that in the letter and even in subsequent interview. You had the Kenney government coming out with a statement, you know, blaming the Trudeau government. You had the Notley and the provincial opposition NDP coming out and blaming the UCP for repealing its carbon tax. So by not stating clearly what the real rationale was, it's allowing a lot of finger-pointing to occur. And the Trudeau government can't really respond. If they had said no or if they had said yes with conditions, they would have been blasted, but then they could have defended the decision that they made -- in this case without a decision all they're doing is taking fire without being able to respond back.

CO: Would it be fair for politicians to say to Don Lindsay, the CEO of a Teck, that this has not been particularly helpful?

DB: That would've been nice for them, except by it not being helpful they can spin it into any direction that they want.

CO: Can you just give us a sense as to why this mine was not -- why this project was not viable?

DB: It wasn't viable simply because they would have had to put so much money into constructing it. And the price of oil wasn't high enough.

CO: The Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis said in January that Teck's applications showed a reckless disregard for the facts regarding oil prices in Canada, and that indicated that they needed a price -- an oil price projection -- of more than 95 U.S. per barrel. Is that anywhere on the horizon, that kind of money?

DB: I mean, we haven't seen that since 2013, and that was pre-Shell revolution in the United States. I cannot imagine $95 U.S. oil coming back anytime soon.

CO: So this project is dead?

DB: This project is dead. And I think even if they had waited and it was approved by the Trudeau government, it would have been dead anyway. But it has taken on a symbolism much greater than the actual value of the project. I'm a close Alberta politics watcher. I couldn't have told you about the frontier mine last fall. And now all of a sudden it is an existential question about Alberta's place in Canada. The Alberta environment minister, a couple of weeks ago, Jason Nixon, had a press conference where he said if the Trudeau government doesn't approve it, they're rejecting Alberta in Canada. That's how big the stakes have gotten over this. And I think Teck pulling out may actually, despite all the discussion we're having today, might help to simmer this down, as opposed to the Trudeau government having to make a very tough choice on a project that most likely would never been built in the first place.

CO: Professor Bratt it is good to talk to you. Thank you.

DB: Okay. You're welcome Carol.

CH: That was Mount Royal University political science professor Duane Bratt. We reached him in Calgary, Alberta's government did get some good news today. In a win for the province, the Court of Appeal of Alberta found the federal government's carbon tax unconstitutional. The court said the policy interferes with Alberta's own jurisdiction over managing its natural resources. Federal Environment Minister Jonathan Wilkinson talked about the ruling this afternoon.

SOUNDCLIP

JONATHAN WILKINSON: First of all, two courts have upheld the federal position with respect to the constitutionality of this. This was a step in the process today. We look forward to the Supreme Court opining on the issue of jurisdiction. But I would simply tell you that a price on pollution is the most efficient way to reduce emissions. I do find it odd that Conservative politicians who profess to be believers in the market are opposed to a market mechanism and somehow are more interested in regulating reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. So I would say we need to work together, but we need to do it in thoughtful ways, in ways that are efficient, that are affordable for Canadians. And one of those ways is the price on pollution.

CH: That was Federal Environment Minister Jonathan Wilkinson speaking this afternoon after a ruling by the Court of Appeal of Alberta.

[Music]

Vanessa Bryant

CH: It was a celebration of life inside the house that Kobe built. Some 20,000 guests filled the Staples Center today to pay tribute to Kobe and Gianna Bryant at a public memorial in Los Angeles. It's been nearly a month since the legendary NBA player and his 13 year old daughter were killed in a helicopter crash along with seven other people. The Bryants were laid to rest in a private ceremony on February 7th. For the first time today, Vanessa Bryant spoke publicly about the loss of her husband of 19 years and their daughter, Gianna. In her eulogy, she called Kobe "the MVP of girl dads" and spoke about the moments he'll no longer be around to share with his family.

SOUNDCLIP

VANESSA BRYANT: He isn't going to be here to drop Bianka and Capri off at pre-K or kindergarten. He isn't going to be here to tell me to "get a grip V" when we have to leave the kindergarten classroom. Or show up to our daughter's doctor's visits. For my own moral support. He isn't going to be able to walk our girls down the aisle or spin me around on the dance floor while singing "P.Y.T" to me. But I want my daughters to know and remember the amazing person, husband, and father he was. The kind of man that wanted to teach the future generations to be better and keep them from making his own mistakes. He always liked working and doing projects to improve kids lives. He taught us all valuable lessons about life and sports through his NBA career, his books, his show "Detail" and his Punies podcast series. And we're so thankful he left those lessons and stories behind for us. He was thoughtful and wrote the best love letters and cards. And Gigi had his wonderful ability to express her feelings into paper and make you feel her love through her words. She was thoughtful like him. They were so easy to love. Everyone naturally gravitated towards them. They were funny, happy, silly. And they loved life. They were so full of joy and adventure. God knew they couldn't be on this earth without each other. [Chokes up] He had to bring them home to have them together. Babe you take care of our Gigi. I got Noni, Bibi and Coco. We're still the best team. We love and miss you Boo-boo and Gigi. You both rest in peace and have fun in heaven until we meet again one day.

CH: That was Vanessa Bryant speaking at a celebration of life earlier today for her husband, Kobe Bryant, and her daughter Gianna. The two were killed on January 26th when the helicopter they were traveling in to a basketball game crashed into a hillside near Calabasas, California. Seven other people were killed in the crash, including the pilot. Shortly before the memorial service, Vanessa Bryant filed a wrongful death lawsuit against the helicopter operator, alleging the company flew the helicopter in unsafe weather conditions.

[Music]

Michael “Mad Mike” Hughes

CH: For Michael "Mad Mike" Hughes, no stunt was daring enough. The California daredevil drove stretch limos off sky-high ramps and strapped himself to manned rockets. He once told a reporter, "Sometimes I feel like the cartoon character Wile E. Coyote, but it's the price I pay for a life that's not boring." This weekend, Mr. Hughes was killed during the launch of a homemade rocket. He was 64 years old. Recently, he'd been attempting to launch himself into space to prove his theory that the earth was flat. But five years ago, As It Happens spoke to him when he was attempting a less dubious but still outrageous stunt: soaring across the St. Lawrence River using his own steam powered rocket. It's a stunt he never did achieve. But before the attempt, he spoke with Carol in January of 2015.

SOUNDCLIP

MICHAEL HUGHES: In today's world, you've got do something really out there to gain the notoriety and the worldwide media attention, because people see things in the movies or TV and they think it's real -- when it's actually computer generated images.

CO: Why do you want notoriety?

MICHAEL HUGHES: Well, hope is it springboards some of the other things in my life. You know? We're trying to develop a car and a motorcycle that runs on steam again. And I think I've got an idea how to run an electric car on air. It takes money to do all this stuff.

CO: All right. So you built use of a rocket?

MICHAEL HUGHES: Yes. It's a small fuselages that I spit into. And a tank of it is out of a 1950 airplane -- solid stainless steel. I've adapted everything. I've built the wings. And I just made it happen. I actually jumped over quarter-mile in the Arizona desert. And it's the farthest anybody's ever jumped. And what I think is the most extreme stunt ever completed. You know, something else that people have got to realize when you do something like this, it takes a lifetime of experience and knowledge to do something like this. Plus, you've got to have the balls to do it, which very few people in the world -- I doubt there are less than five people in the world that would jump in a rocket that day and pull the lever to make it go.

CO: You do think you have it in you to get in this rocket again and go over the St. Lawrence River, right?

MICHAEL HUGHES: Yes.

CO: So you're planning to leave from Canada and land in the United States and without passing customs, I presume?

MICHAEL HUGHES: This is kind of like a cruise ship. You take a cruise ship to another country and get out. As long as you leave on the same ship and go back to your same ported destination, you're fine.

CO: And you don't have too much duty free with you.

MICHAEL HUGHES: That's right. I'm not carrying anything with me.

CH: That was Michael Hughes, also known as "Mad Mike" speaking to Carol in 2015. The stunt man died this weekend after another homemade rocket attempt went wrong. He was 64 years old.

[Music]

Mystery painting

Guest: Caroline Shields

CH: Starting tomorrow, the Art Gallery of Ontario will have a new 18th century painting on display. And in many ways it's like a lot of the other portraits from that time period: a woman in a fancy blue gown smiles out from the canvas. But in one essential way, it's different. The subject is a woman of colour -- which was exceptionally rare in the 1700s. The AGO knows very little about the provenance of the painting. It doesn't even know the artist's full name. But that didn't stop the gallery from acquiring it -- paying a little over 90,000 Canadian for the piece at a recent Sotheby's auction. Caroline Shields is the associate curator and head of European art at the Art Gallery of Ontario. We reached her in Toronto.

CO: Caroline, why would the Art Gallery of Ontario buy a painting that you know almost nothing about?

CAROLINE SHIELDS: We are so thrilled to have this painting because of the stories that it enables us to tell. This painting is of a beautiful woman who is in a blue silk dress with really detailed lace. And a lot of those details like her lace and the pearls show us the skill of the artist. And as a woman of colour who is presented with a tremendous amount of individuality and dignity, she allows us to tell a broader, richer story of the history of Europe.

CO: Okay. Just to stop you there -- the question, though, do you know who the artist is? You don't know who the artist is. You don't know who the painting is of. What do you know about this work?

CS: So it is a complicated work. And indeed, we don't know who the artist is or who the subject is. But there's so many clues that we have. We know her costume and we know, for example, there's a really rich potential in the study of the materials, the canvas that is on, the pigments that it was made with, the history of conservation treatment. And so there's really rich clues that we are thrilled to be able to dive into. And all of that allows us the opportunity to lead that research, to ask these hard questions and tell more complex stories about the past.

CO: Okay. But you have some clues as to who. Let's start with who might have painted it. And so what have you, at this point, been able to surmise about the artist?

CS: Yeah. So there's a signature on the painting. It's signed "J. Schql" -- and the rest is obscured and we can't read it. So we have those initials in the first five letters of the artist's last name. And so that's one point of departure that we can use. And then also really specific symbols, for example, the orange blossom that she's presenting. It means something. It was very much purposefully intended to tell us something about this woman, but we just don't know what yet. And also, her costume, her jewelry and her dress are so specific. We're really hopeful that historians of fashion can help us narrow down what those details might mean. And so there's a few different starting points that we are excited to explore.

CO: Far more interesting is, I guess, who is this beautiful woman. This is a portrait of a lady holding an orange blossom, as you point out, wearing very expensive clothing. She's a black woman in the 1700s in Europe. What does that tell you right away about how unusual this is?

CS: It's extremely rare to have a painting like this for it to survive to the present day. And so, yeah, we're thrilled to figure out more -- to have the opportunity to learn more about her. So it's possible that she could be from either the Atlantic or the Pacific world. If she's in the Atlantic worlds that places her at the height of the transatlantic slave trade and opens up so many possible interpretations of her place within that sphere. For example, we see her, as you say, in this incredibly luxurious dress and costume. She's also placed outside. And the individuality and sort of confidence that she portrays also suggests that perhaps she's a free woman in this world. But it's also possible that her ancestors or even one of her parents would have been enslaved. So there's a lot of possibilities that we have a lot to learn about.

CO: Right. But can you really presume that because she is wearing fine clothing and she is in this painting, that she is a free woman and it's possible that she may have been enslaved in another way?

CS: Yes, it's absolutely possible that she was an enslaved person. And even so, this allows us to tell that story, to tell that history. Really history is so complicated. And the stories that we tell about the past should also be complicated. So whatever the story is, we want to learn what it is and share it with our audiences.

CO: This is going into your European galleries. Do you have anything like this? Are there any other works of art that depict people of colour from this era, from slavery? Do you have anything like this on view right now?

CS: We have two other paintings that include figures of colour. Both of them, however, are in positions of servitude. Their attendance figures. One is from the Renaissance. One is from the 1800s. And so what's really special about this new acquisition is that this figure has such individuality and confidence and really can kind of meet our gaze and stare right back into our eyes.

CO: So you're saying that the other paintings you have are -- when you say they're in positions of servitude, you mean they're slaves?

CS: Likely. We don't know specifically, and sometimes these are invented scenes. One of them is a biblical scene, for example. The other is a mythological scene. So their role has to do with the specific narratives of those paintings.

CO: And where can people see this painting?

CS: All three of these are hanging in the European galleries at different European galleries. So those are the suite of galleries that wrap around the central courtyard.

CO: So this painting is now on display at the Art Gallery of Ontario?

CS: Yes. Our new acquisition is now on view.

CO: We will leave it there. Caroline thank you.

CS: Thank you so much.

CH: Caroline Shields is the curator of European art at the Art Gallery of Ontario. We reached her in Toronto.

[Music]

Jeremy Bentham’s Head

CH: As they enter their student centre, the student body at University College London will now be greeted by an actual body. It's the preserved and tastefully clothed remains of 18th and 19th century philosopher Jeremy Bentham. His last wishes were for his body to be wheeled out at parties or other special occasions. And his new location is much more conducive to socializing than his old digs down a corridor. Mr. Bentham's head, though, is another story. It's stored elsewhere. But sometimes rears itself for special exhibitions. There was one such occasion back in October of 2017. From our archives, here's Carol speaking to curator Subhadra Das about the famous head.

SOUNDCLIP

SD: There are two aspects to the removal. The first is the physical removal of the head from his body when he died. Bentham had made a special request that his head be preserved in the style of the Māoris, the native New Zealanders, but his friend Dr. Southwood Smith, who was tasked with creating the auto-icon, wasn't necessarily as practiced with that as he probably would have liked to have been. And so the result was ahead that Southwood Smith said it was not suitable for display, which is why he had a wax model commissioned, and that's the one that is on display with the auto-icon, which is the skeleton in Bentham's own clothes. The second removal is when it was taken off display, and we're not exactly sure when that happened, but we think it was sometime in the 1990s. And that was because the head had been kidnapped by UCL’s rival university, King's College in London. And so because of the added security risk to the head, we think that was the reason why it was taken off display at that time.

CO: I'm looking at a photo which is Jeremy Bentham looking normal, but this is a wax head that he's got, but this is his real body and this photo isn't it?

SD: That's correct. Yes, in a box in the South Cloisters of the UCL building is the auto-icon of the philosopher Jeremy Bentham, that is his own skeleton, dressed in his own clothes, but with a model head.

CO: And this grotesque head is at his feet, and that's the one that you're going to put back?

SD: That's correct. So we're not putting it on display in that box, as you see it there. It's on display in a special exhibition, which is called What Does It Mean to Be Human: Curating Heads that UCL.

CO: Now, since the head was recovered after it was kidnapped by the students, where has it been all these decades?

SD: Well, I could tell you, but then I would have to kill you. So, rest assured that it is in a secure and museum-standard, conservation-grade secure place.

CH: From our archives, that was curator Subhadra Das speaking to Carol about the preserved head and body of philosopher Jeremy Bentham. His clothed body has a new home. It's now prominently displayed in the Student Center of University College London.

Provide Transcript Feedback

CBC would like to acknowledge the support of the Broadcasting Accessibility Fund.

February 24, 2020 Episode Transcript

Social Sharing

More from this episode