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 Current Transcript for June 2, 2020

Host: Matt Galloway

STORIES FROM THIS EPISODE

Prologue

[Music: theme]

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE: Today, I have strongly recommended to every governor to deploy the National Guard in sufficient numbers that we dominate the streets.

MATT GALLOWAY: It was not the unifying speech in a time of crisis that some had hoped for. After the U.S. president called violent protests an act of domestic terror, police fired tear gas into a crowd of peaceful demonstrators so he could pose in front of a church with a Bible. Meanwhile, the anger over police killings of black people continued, cities imposed curfews, and those who'd been protesting on the streets wonder if this is truly a time of change. In a moment, how veterans of the struggle for black rights see this moment. Also this morning, remember the pandemic? Yes, that is also happening. How will you remember it? Museum curators are currently collecting artifacts to depict this moment for future generations. How will they capture yesterday's awkward Zoom call or your corona cut? We'll find out. Plus.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE: A few years ago, the only road into the territory was closed. Supermarket shelves began to go bare within 48 hours. That was my wakeup call.

MG: At a time when shopping for groceries has become a stressful exercise, why one family in Dawson City decided to go a year only eating local food. Goodbye coffee, tea and salt. We begin though in this moment of protest and ask whether the fire this time is any different than the last? Good morning. I'm Matt Galloway. This is The Current.

[Music: theme]

Back To Top »

Protests just as important as voting to counter anti-black racism, says historian

Guests: Carol Anderson, Frank Chapman, Charlene Carruthers

MG: "If going forward, we can channel our justifiable anger into peaceful, sustained and effective action then this moment can be a real turning point in our nation's long journey to live up to our highest ideals. Let's get to work." Words by former U.S. President Barack Obama this weekend, a stark contrast to Donald Trump's words from the Rose Garden last night.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE: I am dispatching thousands and thousands of heavily armed soldiers, military personnel, to stop the rioting, looting, vandalism, assaults. I want the organizers of this terror to be on notice that you will face severe criminal penalties and lengthy sentences in jail.

MG: These are historic times, and yet it feels like we've been here before. Selma, 1965, Los Angeles, 1992, Ferguson 2014. Baton Rouge, 2016. Killings, protests, promises of change, calls to reform policing and then more killings. Little change. For a look at where America goes from here, I'm joined by three guests. Carol Anderson is a professor of African-American studies at Emory University and the author of several books, including White Rage: The Unspoken Truth of Our Racial Divide. She's in Atlanta, Georgia. Frank Chapman was wrongfully convicted for murder and armed robbery in 1961 and spent 14 years in jail. He's been an activist for justice reforms ever since. He's the author of The Damned Don't Cry: Pages from the Life of a Black Prisoner and Organizer. He's in Chicago. And Charlene Carruthers is the author of Unapologetic: A Black, Queer and Feminist Mandate for a Radical Movement. Good morning to you all.

FRANK CHAPMAN: Good morning.

CAROL ANDERSON: Good morning.

CHARLENE CARRUTHERS: Good morning.

MG: Carol Anderson, there was another night of unrest and anger across the United States, and this came, as I mentioned, in the wake of the president's comments, calling for governors to be more aggressive and use the military to put down the unrest in cities across the United States. What did you make of what the United States president said, Carol?

CAROL ANDERSON: It's just vintage Trump. It's relying upon violence. It's relying upon threats. And it is aimed at black people. It is aimed at at brown people. It is aimed at people that he doesn't even regard as people. If we understand that Trump is an authoritarian in progress, then we will view him as such. And that is why the mobilisation of the people is so important to stop this descent into the hell that he's trying to bring us into.

MG: Frank Chapman, what did you make of what the president said yesterday?

FRANK CHAPMAN: Well he said nothing that surprised me. He's everything that the speaker before me just said he is. I think it was a significant turn in the history of our country.

MG: How so?

FRANK CHAPMAN: Well, you know, it reminded me of the slave holders rebellion back in 1861. You know, they realized that they could no longer expand slavery within the union, so they withdrew from the union. And then the union fought to get them back in. What Trump has done here, he's a little outside the Constitution. The things that he's talking about doing are actually illegal. And he is made an authoritarian turn where he's saying that he's going to take the military of the United States government and turn it against the people in the country. That's almost like civil war.

MG: Charlene Carruthers, what do you want to hear from your president right now?

CHARLENE CARRUTHERS: Oh, the president that we have in the White House at this time is actually unable and not fit for leadership. So the only thing I want to hear from Donald Trump in this moment is that he's going effectively going to resign today. And I say that, I say that knowing that he's called for violence since even before he was elected as president of the United States. And he continues to call for violence. And he is not at all capable of leading people during this moment of uprising and rebellion nor has he, he's also shown himself to be incapable to lead during the time of a pandemic where black people are disproportionately dying as a result of complications from COVID-19 across the country. So, frankly, I'd rather not hear anything from him in this moment, besides, I'm effectively resigning today.

MG: People are looking for leadership, Carol. You're in Atlanta, Atlanta, a city deeply connected to the civil rights movement in the '60s and, of course, the work of Dr. King. What do you think King would have made of the moment that we're in right now?

CAROL ANDERSON: He would make of it the same that he did when he was in Birmingham jail. He would make of it the same that he did when he was dealing with the uprisings in Birmingham itself. When Bull Connor is siccing the dogs on children and peaceful protesters and blasting them with fire hoses. Is that there comes a time when silence is betrayal. That there comes a time when you must stand up, when you must confront the evil that is trying to destroy you. And that is what you see happening across the United States. The fact that you have a regime that is trying to label this as outside agitators, trying to label this as domestic terrorism, is no different than what King faced when they labelled him a terrorist.

MG: Frank, you've been in this struggle for, I'm not aging you here, but you've been in this struggle for a while, a long time. What's different this time compared to the fights that you've been in in years past?

FRANK CHAPMAN: Well, in my over 50 years of environment in the struggle, this is the first time I have seen the rebellion in the United States this extensive and this deep being lived by black people. All 50 states, the rebellion is in all 50 states, and I think we've reached a point where we're not going back. I think we've reached a point where some radical transformations are going to take place in this country as a result of this rebellion. I don't think we were there in '68 when we had 118 cities to go up in flames as a result of the assassination of Dr. King. I think we're there now.

MG: Charlene, are you there now? Because people have said similar things in the wake of Ferguson, in the wake of the death of Trayvon Martin or Eric Garner. What's different this time?

CHARLENE CARRUTHERS: Well, I think every single time, as Frank has talked about, there is a history of rebellion uprising in this country, and each moment builds on the last. And frankly, if we believe that radical transformation is possible, be it in 2014 in Ferguson, be it now in 2020 across the country, that's all right with me. And in this particular moment, what we are seeing is a convergence of state agencies, including enabled by our president, but also local mayors — many of them who call themselves progressive — converging and saying, let's bring in the National Guard, let's institute curfews. Let's even in Chicago, Mayor Lori Lightfoot suspended the Chicago Public Schools meal programme for families.

FRANK CHAPMAN: Yes she did.

CHARLENE CARRUTHERS: All of these things, you know, while the police have plenty of money to deploy tear gas, to deploy pepper spray, to deploy combat gear against everyday people, but they don't have enough money for our schools, health care and jobs. And so many of us across the country in the movement for black lives are calling for the defunding of police and investments in our communities.

MG: There's a narrative that change will not come on the streets, that it will come at the ballot box. Terrence Floyd, the brother of George Floyd, addressed a crowd at a memorial for his brother yesterday. Have a listen to what Terrence Floyd said.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE: Let's stop thinking that our voice don't matter and vote. Not just vote for the president. Vote for the preliminaries, vote for everybody. Educate yourself. Don't wait for somebody else to tell you who's who. Educate yourself and know who you're voting for.

MG: I could hear you all in the background as I was getting into that clip. I'll start with you, Carol. Is voting the answer to making change in this moment?

CAROL ANDERSON: I think what we need to do is not have a false binary, whether it's either protest or vote. It's both. You need the protest to make it really clear what the possibilities of change are. You need to activate that vote despite all of the suppression that these states are putting down on black people to block them from the ballot box.

MG: And you've written about that extensively,.

CAROL ANDERSON: Extensively. In order to ensure that you have the real kind of policymakers in there that can provide the funding necessary for our communities, that can have the kinds of policies where we can eventually be able to breathe. If we don't vote, the protests don't get us there. If we just vote without having the kind of of activism that makes it clear what the imagined possibilities are, then we're just replicating the same old, same old.

MG: Frank, I could hear you in the background as well. Is the vote the answer here? It's an election year and people may see change in November. They may not see change in November. Is that the real way to create change in this moment?

FRANK CHAPMAN: Well it's one of the ways and in some cases, it's not the most essential way. Like right now I think that people need to stay in the streets. We need to keep protesting, we need organizing to systemic change. And we also need to use the ballot box. You know, it's not a this or that. We need to use all these, black people in the history of our movement have used every means available to them to bring about change. Bring about change by all means necessary. So voting is just one of the means. The means that I think is the most effective and most of the time is when people in the streets protesting and demanding change, organize mass movement. Bring about more change in this country than anything else.

MG: Charlene Carruthers, what do you see as the opportunity in November? Is there one there?

CHARLENE CARRUTHERS: Well, I think as both Frank and Carol just shared, we need multiple tactics every single time in order to drive for a transformative change. And many, the sad reality is that many people who are thinking about, or could show up to, the ballot box in November still have an incomplete reason to show up — and are, frankly, just not inspired, and many people are actually dismayed by many of our options. At the same time, I'm going to make the tough choice to still vote in November because I always vote. I've been voting since I was 18-years-old, and I'm 34 today.

MG: You say it's a tough choice. What do you mean?

CHARLENE CARRUTHERS: It's a tough choice because the Democratic nominee has a history of actually being complicit in the oppression of black people, be it from the 1994 crime bill or the various policies that he supported. And I'm speaking of Joe Biden in particular. And I can't ignore that and everyday people don't ignore that either. But many black people are making the choice to support Joe Biden, not because we believe in Joe Biden, but because we recognize that Donald Trump can not continue to be in the White House. And so it's a difficult choice and it also means that we'll have to continue to hold Joe Biden's feet to the fire and hold him accountable should he be elected as president of the United States. And so it's necessary, I believe, to get Donald Trump out of the White House, the how we do it and ensuring that we just don't hand it to Joe Biden really matters.

MG: Carol Anderson, is it about also who Joe Biden picks as a running mate? There's great pressure on him to pick a black woman as a running mate. But as Charlene has said, the people's history also will influence how people feel no matter who that person is on the ticket.

CAROL ANDERSON: The V.P. is absolutely important, but I think one of the things that we also must understand that it's down ballot that is absolutely essential in this election. So even if you're not enthralled by the Democratic nominee, which many folks aren't, then it is absolutely essential to think about who's running for senator. How about your city council? How about your mayors? How about your governors? Because they are all having an impact on the way that we live our lives. And so when you heard we've got to educate ourselves on who is running, that's what this is about. It is about the entire ticket from top all the way down to dog catcher.

MG: In the meantime, there is concern in some quarters about what's happening on the streets right now and how people, what the best way is to to be out on the streets protesting. Have a listen to this. This is Trevor Noah. He's the host of The Daily Show.

SOUNDCLIP

TREVOR NOAH: When you are a have and when you are a have not, you see the world in very different ways. And a lot of the time, people say to the have nots, this is not the right way to handle things. When Colin Kaepernick kneels, they say this is not the right way to protest. When Martin Luther King had children in Birmingham, Alabama, people said to having children as your protest is not the right way to do things. You might have experienced even more anger watching those people loot that Target. Try to imagine how it must feel for black Americans when they watch themselves being looted every single day.

MG: Carol Anderson, we keep hearing from politicians, other leaders as well, saying that they support peaceful protest.

CAROL ANDERSON: No they don't.

MG: Not the people who are out rioting or looting. You say they don't.

CAROL ANDERSON: And I go with where Trevor Noah went. I mean, you saw the way that Colin Kaepernick basically got blackballed out of the NFL for just taking a knee, protesting the killing of black people by police. And so it's not the silent protest, the quiet protest. It is the fact that there is a protest that is, in fact, what is causing all of this angst.

MG: But is smashing up the window of the Nike store and grabbing shoes, what did that accomplish?

CAROL ANDERSON: And so you're asking yourself then so I ask myself, we are so concerned about the Nike store, but we didn't show that kind of concern when we kept saying there was something wrong with policing. So if we're going to handle the root causes, then we're not going to be dealing with the Nike store. It is our inability as a society to grapple and deal with and dismantle the root causes that then have us playing this shell game with looting.

MG: Frank Chapman, what gives you in this moment optimism that this will lead to change? That the steps that have been taken in years past will actually amount to something this time around?

FRANK CHAPMAN: Well, I believe that it's always the people who are the vehicle of change. That's been my experience as an individual human being and that's been my experience in understanding of history. This time around, I think we're witnessing and it started with the Black Lives Matter movement some years ago, I think we're witnessing an uprising of the youth like we haven't seen in this country in a long time. And that they are really setting the stage for some very dramatic and radical social change in this country. And I'm so glad that they are, because this is exactly what we need. I want to just speak to something else about the looting and all of that stuff. You know, I get sick of this. The United States has no more ground to stand on. You know, we live in a country that was based on looting. You know, we live in a republic that was founded on genocide and slavery, you know? So, you know, all this false narrative about people looting and whatnot, when you oppress people the way that we have been oppressed, when you deprive them of their very lives, then you have no moral authority to tell them about how to rebel.

MG: Charlene Carruthers, just in the last minute or so that we have, where's your optimism coming from that this will be a moment of change?

CHARLENE CARRUTHERS: Well, my grounding in this moment is deeply connected to what Frank and Carol have both just shared. There's a legacy of radical black resistance and the black radical tradition is one that when black folks fight for their, when we fight for our humanity, for our liberation, we're actually fighting for the collective liberation of all people. And so I am inspired and I'm confident that where we go from here will be different from where we are right now. We will never go back to where we were before. As Octavia Butler tells us, you know, the only thing that is constant is change. And God is change. And what we must do in this moment is actually determine what that change looks like. And it absolutely begins with defunding the bloated budgets of police departments across this country and really investing in our schools, our health care, jobs, housing and our environment, if we're going to get serious about our collective liberation.

MG: It's great to speak with you all this morning. Thank you for your time.

CAROL ANDERSON: Thank you.

CHARLENE CARRUTHERS: Thank you.

FRANK CHAPMAN: Thank you.

MG: Carol Anderson is a professor of African-American studies at Emory University, author of several books, including White Rage: The Unspoken Truth of Our Racial Divide. Charlene Carruthers is the author of Unapologetic: A Black, Queer and Feminist Mandate for Radical Movement. And Frank Chapman, field organizer with the Chicago Alliance Against Racist Activity and Political Repression. He was in Chicago. The CBC News is coming up next. And then, after a weekend of protests in Canada and schools and businesses starting to reopen, social distancing is beginning to ease as the pandemic continues. A conversation with the Global and Mail's health reporter, Andre Picard. He's here for an update on COVID-19. Where are we at when it comes to that great reopening and should we be concerned about a return of COVID-19? More on that to come. I'm Matt Galloway. This is The Current on CBC Radio One. We're back in six minutes. Stay with us.

[Music: theme]

Back To Top »

Racism is a serious public health issue too, says Andre Picard

Guests: Andre Picard

MG: Good morning. I'm Matt Galloway. You're listening to The Current.

[Music: theme]

MG: Still to come, when this pandemic is all but a distant memory, how will we preserve these times? And why would we want to do that in the first place? Hear how museums are curating COVID exhibits for future generations. But before we can look back, we need to get first through this pandemic.

[Music: theme]

MG: We were just talking about the protests in the United States and here in Canada. Those huge crowds gathering in cities across North America have some people, including the governor of New York, wondering what that might mean for the spread of COVID-19. Andre Picard is back with us to discuss this and much more. Andre is the Globe Mail's health columnist. Andre Picard, good morning.

ANDRE PICARD: Good morning.

MG: How concerned should we be about the risk of new coronavirus outbreaks from these protests?

ANDRE PICARD: Well, I think that large gatherings are concerning. We know that the fact that they're outdoors and not indoors is good because we know the spread of more difficult outside. The protesters are largely masked. They're being responsible. So that's all good. And I think the other element is that we have to take into account is that, you know, COVID-19 is not the only public health issue in the world. Racism is very much a public health issue, one that we should take seriously. So it's not you can't just say to these protesters, go home, forget about this, because there's a pandemic that's serious, if not more serious issue than COVID-19.

MG: When you say that racism is a public health issue, what do you mean by that?

ANDRE PICARD: Well, we know that it has impacts on health, on your socio economic impact, your health. We know a black male in the US has a life expectancy of five to 10 years less than an equivalent white male. We know that there are thousands of black men are shot every year. They are discriminated against economically, etc. So there are real health impacts. And I think we have to ask ourselves, as we look at these protests, we have to ask ourselves, why haven't we tackled this with the same urgency and determination as we have another virus, COVID-19.

MG: Does that also speak to the reluctance that some jurisdictions have in collecting race based data around covered 19? We know in the United States and in other jurisdictions that it's not the great equalizer, as somebody said at the very beginning, that certain communities are being hit disproportionately black communities, brown communities in the states. And we believe that that might be the same case here, but there's been a reluctance to collect that sort of race based data.

ANDRE PICARD: Yeah and Canada has had this reluctance for a long time, and it's one we have to get over. One thing the US does much better than us is collect race based data, in part because they're obsessed about race for good and bad reasons. But I think in Canada, we've sort of had this view that all were all great. You know, we we don't see a colour sort of thing and that's not how public health should work. We have to single out people who are suffering more in one way to do that is to collect economic data, race based data. There's no question that some communities are being harder hit by this racialized people, poor people and we need the data to back that up so that we can work to prevent it.

MG: Let's talk a little bit about where we're at in this pandemic. In British Columbia, some kids headed back to class yesterday on a voluntary basis. What are you watching for? This has been called a bit of an experiment to perhaps, you know, a sense as to what we might see in the fall.

ANDRE PICARD: Yeah, so I think if it's treated like that or treated as an experiment, it's not a bad thing. If we can learn from it. So what B.C. is doing, it's not a free for all. It's not everybody going back to class. It's voluntary. Most kids, young kids are going back for half days. Older kids are going back one day a week. So I think we can learn, if we do some testing, who went to school, who didn't, what are the differences? I think it can really help us understand how to open up schools more broadly in the fall. So what B.C. is doing is what we call a temporal distancing as opposed to physical distancing. So spreading kids out in the classrooms over time and that's going to be something that's probably going to become the norm for at least the next school year. So if it's studied and not just done willy nilly, I think it's probably a good thing.

MG: Some schools in Quebec have been open now for a couple of weeks. What's going on there when it comes to new infections? Have there been many?

ANDRE PICARD: Well, we've seen, we saw a report last week of 41 infections. Now, you can look at that two ways because there are thousands of kids back and go, hey, that's not too bad, 40. Now, the concerning thing, I think it's about half and half students, only about 20 students, 20 teachers. So teachers are being disproportionately affected. And that was the concern, I think, of of the unions, teachers unions, that teachers would be at risk. Now, what's wrong with the Quebec data like much Canadian data, there's not much detail. We don't know, is it older teachers who are at risk? We don't know exactly how it's spreading. So there's some internal information there, but not enough to be particularly useful.

MG: But it leads to the concerns that teachers and day-care staff have had. I mean, should they have the option to return to work if they don't feel safe? And how as a society do we figure that out if schools and day-care are so important in getting you know, society back open again?

ANDRE PICARD: Well I think these are big questions that we'll be asking about every workplace. There's no question that we we can't stop infections altogether. We know there are gonna be infections. So what we have to do is try and minimise the harm, the spread of those infections. And we have to catch them quickly. So teachers, are they being guinea pigs, in a sense? Yes, they are, but and should they have the right to refuse to work. I think some people with certain health conditions, probably, yes. But some of us are going to have to have a higher risk in life depending on our jobs. And let's not forget many people, healthcare workers, janitors, food services workers, they've been putting themselves at risk for for many months already and we have to recognize that all of us are going to do that to a certain extent.

MG: CBC News broke the story yesterday about what's happening in Ontario, where a couple of hospitals apparently were not telling public health officials about somewhere around 700 positive COVID-19 tests. There was some sort of mix up and confusion as to who was supposed to report that. In the ongoing fight for Ontario to flatten the curve, what does that story tell you?

ANDRE PICARD: Well, just a couple of things. You know that Ontario, sadly, that whole testing debacle has often been like almost like an Abbott and Costello routine. And this is just another example of it. You know William Ostler did testing and sent the test to Sinai to be done and each of them thought the other was going to notify Public Health, so it just speaks to this widespread disorganisation. No one's in charge. We're hearing this over and over again. No one's really in charge in Ontario and this is just a sad example. And the consequence has been that, you know, for up to six weeks, some people have just not been contacted. So it's again, it's another failure of contact tracing, which is in Ontario, really fundamental problem.

MG: And yet the province is in the midst of this reopening phase one underway. The phase two has been delayed. And there's now talk that perhaps there could be some areas of the province which would open before other areas of the province. But is it legitimate to worry whether the reopening without that tracing and testing in place could lead to a resurgence in cases? Because the number of cases is kind of hovering around 400 every day?

ANDRE PICARD: Yeah, and it's not going down steadily. It's going up and down. It's a bit like a roller coaster. And that really tells us again that we don't have adequate data, that it's we're not getting information in a timely fashion. I think, you know, I think well, especially Toronto, not Ontario, but Toronto. I think Greater Toronto has to be really concerned about what's going to happen with the reopening is a we don't have a handle on where cases are occurring and why and how widespread they are. So I think it's real fundamental issue there in the GTA.

MG: What does that story of a doctor returning from a different province, coming back and suddenly not reporting, but also being responsible for a number of potential cases? What does that tell you? Just about how, in some ways it feels as though we have taken our foot off the gas pedal when it comes to this pandemic in some jurisdictions. But that story seems to remind a lot of people just how virulent this disease is and how quickly the virus can spread.

ANDRE PICARD: Yeah, I think it is a reminder, you know, it happened in New Brunswick, which is a province with barely had any cases, was bragging about how well it was doing. And it's just a reminder, just takes one case, just take one ember and there can be a fire again, right? There can be a whole bunch of cases. So I think this is what we're going to live with for the foreseeable future. This risk that one person being irresponsible or in the case of this doctor, I would say unethical, can be really problematic. And I think, again, the research is showing us that the real thing we have to be concerned about is so-called super spreaders. So I was just reading this morning, 80 percent of new infections are linked to 20 percent of people that are the super spreaders. So it just takes one or two of those in the community and boom, the numbers blow up again.

MG: Great reminder. We'll talk again. Andre, thank you as always.

ANDRE PICARD: Thank you.

MG: Andre Picard, the Global and Mail's health columnist, a regular part of our ongoing COVID-19 coverage here at The Current.

Back To Top »

Museum curators are beginning to decide how we’ll remember COVID-19

Guests: Julia Petrov, Jan Seidler Ramirez

MG: This is The Current on CBC Radio One. My name is Matt Galloway. A first graders homework, a beaded mask, quarantine recipes. Just some of the items that museum curators are gathering, items that they hope will help future generations understand what it was like to live through this moment. Julia Petrov is the curator of Daily Life and Leisure for the Royal Alberta Museum in Edmonton. Julia, good morning.

JULIA PETROV: Good morning.

MG: Tell me about some of the things that you're getting so far COVID-19 artifacts. What have you brought in?

JULIA PETROV: We have generally tended to focus on things that companies and volunteers are producing to help people cope with the pandemic. So things like hand sanitizer made by craft breweries and distilleries, things like handmade fabric masks or 3D printed face shields, things like that.

MG: What do you do with them? You get them in and what happens?

JULIA PETROV: Well, they join our collection. We have a fair amount of material from from previous pandemics as well as social movements in general. And hopefully when this becomes history, rather than being news, we'll be able to put them on display or share with them, with other people in other ways. So through doing tours or through social media posts, etc.

MG: These are items that I think a lot of people might just find in this time, would find to be part of their daily life. Hand sanitizer, the masks that we have, the face shields that we might be wearing if we work on the front lines or in a grocery store or what have you. What is historically valuable about them?

JULIA PETROV: Well, they have really come out of nowhere. These craft breweries and distilleries were making liquor and beer up until March, and then suddenly the demand for that dropped to where they found themselves being able to contribute to public life in a different way. Similarly, with fabric facemasks. It was not that common to see people wearing masks in public, at least in Alberta. And similarly with sneeze guards. You would see them maybe at a buffet or at the deli section of your grocery store, but certainly not where your cashier is. And so it shows the dramatic change in our public life that has happened over the last few months. So it's important for us to be able to document that.

MG: There are the artifacts, but obviously, as you've hinted at the stories connected to the artifacts are even as or perhaps even more important. How do you connect to the artifacts, to the stories and preserve those stories so that they would make some sense to future generations and they wouldn't just see, as you say, a sneeze guard and wonder why it had some sort of historical value?

JULIA PETROV: Yeah, absolutely. And it's a really important part of our job to be able to talk to the donors to understand why they produce these things or why they use these things, how they felt about that. Similarly, we're trying to archives of the objects and include some of the newspaper articles, for example, that explain the wider context so that later on, 100 years from now, when a curator is going through the research files, that material is easily available to them.

MG: How do you get a hold of these things? I mean, they're around us, but you're asking people to donate them or you had people donate them. How do you get a hold of them?

JULIA PETROV: In the early days, we were literally scavenging things ourselves. My colleague, the curator of military and government history, was driving by a playground one day and noticed that some of the caution tape that was guarding it off had blown away. So he got out of his car and he field collected that. So we live in these communities as well and and we're just hyper aware of the sorts of things that that are particularly telling about the pandemic.

MG: Could you tell us the story of one of the artifacts that was donated to you?

JULIA PETROV: Yeah. So we have gotten some promotional items, for example. But we've also gotten handmade objects. So we just received a donation offer of a handmade fabric mask. And the donor embroidered the fabric mask with the phrase "speak mostly to me," which obviously is a reference to the prime minister's quite awkward phrase when he was encouraging the Canadian public to wear masks to protect each other from from the virus droplets. And we just thought that was, you know, very telling about the kind of meme status that that phrase has reached. And, you know, it's obviously not just an Ontario thing. It's obviously an Alberta thing now as well. So it's humorous, but it also shows how much the media played a role in shaping our understanding of the pandemic.

MG: This is part of a larger practise called urgent collection. What does that mean?

JULIA PETROV: Yeah. Urgent collection or rapid response collection basically seeks to get things as they're being used. So generally in museums, we scavenge what's left over. So people are maybe renovating or maybe they're cleaning up in estate state after someone has died. And so we generally get things after they've been used, so after they have immediate importance in people's lives. And so rapid response collecting seeks to reverse that a little bit and seek out objects that are part of of an event that is still unfolding. And also, these things tend to be disposable by their nature. So they might be things like protest signs after a public upswell of interest or indignation about a thing that would otherwise be discarded at the end of the event. So if we make sure that we're there and we're collecting these objects, then they don't disappear to history.

MG: This is a process that has happened elsewhere in the wake of seismic events. Jan Seidler Ramirez is the chief curator with The National September 11 Memorial & Museum in New York. She has advised curators around the world on urgent collecting and she's been listening in. Jan, good morning to you.

JAN SEIDLER RAMIREZ: Good morning.

MG: How do you go about documenting history as it's unfolding around you?

JAN SEIDLER RAMIREZ: Well, I think, you know, one thing is to immediately come to some kind of decision about is it at a acute event or is it as in the case of the pandemic, a more longitudinal one? Because mostly we've advised communities that have experienced, you know, sudden of horrific mass casualty event or often there's a crime scene that's cordoned off. You're not getting into the crime scene. And so you're beginning to collect at the circumference around it, sort of a public expression first and then you're moving toward the event. You know what caused ot? The perpetrators, the evidence, you know, of that particular action. So I think, you know, it's been really interesting for me to look at the both the differences and the commonalities between how we moved after 9/11 and how museums and archives are moving today. I mean, there is a general sense, I would think most of us in North America would agree that it was sort of mid-March that things started to get exceptionally strange. And then there was the very sort of acute time period of, you know, whether it's March 12th, March 13th, March 14th, you know, this kind of cascade of events was of closure and so forth that and quarantine that happened.

MG: Do you see, obviously, they're very different, but do you see parallels in terms of how you go about documenting, for example, 9/11 and this moment that we're still in right now?

JAN SEIDLER RAMIREZ: I absolutely do. And in part of it is the you know, the shift overall in how museums collect from, you know, what they used to do. Let's say, you know, in the 19th century or early 20th century, which was really about exceptionalism, you know, the the leaders, the top down, you know that the unusual event. And now we're much more focussed on the collective spirit and expression and, you know, societal. We're in it together as being the essence of public history. And so the public today has a huge role. You know, in controlling the spread of this virus and being good sports, that they have the privilege of working at home and schooling their kids at home of doing so. No one says it's a social preference, but it it's a necessity. And also the ways people dig down and try to do good in the world and, you know, express their gratitude from a distance and show their appreciation for those that are on the front. That's very, very similar to what we saw in the aftermath of 9/11.

MG: How do you document that, Julia? I mean, whether it's, you know, 7 or 7:30 or whatever time it is when people, for example, go at under their balconies or in my street, they're on their front porches, clanging pots and pans and playing kazoos and things like that. How do you capture that, which is such an important point in the midst of this pandemic?

JULIA PETROV: It's difficult for a museum, particularly with us, where we have the archival function devolved to a separate institution. So generally we would either work with them to collect recordings or alternatively we might collect, you know, the kazoo or the pot and pan or whatever people are actually making noise with and then try and interpret that through audio visual means in a display.

MG: What does it mean, Jan, to have a physical space to allow people to remember this event in the future, because unlike 9/11, there might not be a specific spot that people can visit to remember those who lost their lives, but this is still something that's affecting us in a very physical way, in a really tangible and palpable way. So how important is it to have some sort of physical space where people can go and remember that?

JAN SEIDLER RAMIREZ: Well, I do think I mean, you're absolutely right in the case of 9/11 or in the case of, you know, some of these huge rupture events in society where there is that authentic spot where it happened. We can harness that emotional power and people, you know, are it's a magnet. People are drawn to it in part to bear witness to something they may not themselves have witnessed. I think here, you know, it's very fascinating because it is a global phenomenon and it's happening, you know, whether it's in a city like New York or Edmonton or it's, you know, in a tiny village somewhere up on the Alaska peninsula, everyone is aware of this. It's, you know, the pandemic is differently affecting these these communities. And I do think people need to come together to have a communal moment of mourning and reflection and the opportunity to see other people there, you know, having their similar mourning moment and moment of thinking back to, you know, all of the changes that exploded in our lives because of COVID-19. So in that regard, I think museums and historical societies, wherever they might be, do have an opportunity through doing special exhibitions or setting aside space in their core history exhibition to provide that kind of experience.

MG: Is your sense, Jan and I'll ask you this as well, Julia, but is your sense, Jan, that people we're all in the midst of this right now. Do we understand that we're living history right now, that this is a moment that is something special that will, you know, create some sort of time stamp on us for years down the road?

JAN SEIDLER RAMIREZ: I absolutely think people are very aware of this. And I think actually 9/11 is is one of the primers for it. And I think, you know, obviously children and people that are too young to have any lived memory of what it was like to experience the 2001 terror attacks and all the repercussions that followed from them, but many people are now harnessing that memory to, you know, create an awareness and comparison between the two events. And, you know, I would say that, you know, some day probablywe will look back on March of 2020 and say that is when you know the era of 9/11 as a predominant collective memory ended and yielded to a new era, which is the, you know, the pandemic awareness.

MG: Julia, what do you think? I mean people are already starting to speculate on what life after this is going to look like and maybe they've already, you know, developed a fatigue about the time that we're in right now. Do you think we understand that we're in a moment?

JULIA PETROV: Yeah, I think people certainly understand that it's an exceptional time whether or not people think and indeed whether it will turn out that life will, quote unquote, go back to normal or whether there will be a new normal remains to be seen. But certainly there's an awareness and I know that schools and also various historic societies across Canada and probably across the world are encouraging people to create these time capsules or diaries, their experience recorded in one way, shape or form to be able to look back on it and say, OK, let's not take this for granted. It was different at one point.

MG: This is fascinating. You live in a moment and perhaps you don't think that that moment will have resonance down the line, but this certainly will. Thank you both for joining us.

JAN SEIDLER RAMIREZ: Thank you.

JULIA PETROV: Thank you.

MG: Bye bye. Julia Petrov is the curator of Daily Life and Leisure for the Royal Albert Museum in Edmonton. And Jan Seidler Ramirez is the chief curator with The National September 11 Memorial & Museum in New York City. Just wondering what you'd put into such an exhibit in the time that we're in? How would you capture this moment? Is there one item that you would put to help? Remember the time that we're in right now in the future. You could let us know through the website cbc.ca//thecurrent or click on the Contact link. Coming up in our next half hour, which is in about 90 seconds, one family's adventure of eating local for a year in Yukon. I'm Matt Galloway. You're listening to The Current on CBC Radio One. Stay with us.

[Music]

Back To Top »

This Yukon woman wanted to live off local food for a year. That meant getting her teenagers on board

Guests: Suzanne Crocker and family

MG: Hi, I'm Matt Galloway. You're listening to The Current.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE: I live in the Yukon. A few years ago, the only road into the territory was closed by a landslide. Supermarket shelves began to go bare within 48 hours. That was my wakeup call.

MG: That's the voice of Suzanne Crocker and the opening of a very personal documentary about her attempts to live for an entire year only on food that could be grown and produced in and around Dawson City, Yukon. This film is about her journey with her family. It's called, First We Eat. It's screening as part of Hot Docs, which is, of course, taking place online this year. Suzanne Crocker joins me now from her home in Dawson City. Suzanne, good morning.

SUZANNE CROCKER: Good morning, Matt.

MG: Why would you want to do this?

SUZANNE CROCKER: Well, it was my wakeup call to realize that 97 percent of our food gets trucked in to Dawson City, into the Yukon, for that matter, from really far away.

MG: And so you could think about this, you could think, you know what, we're going to address this by eating a little bit more local food, a lot more local food. Why would you think that you would eat local food for an entire year?

SUZANNE CROCKER: Well, you know, it was done in the past of course. Indigenous people in the north ate entirely locally for thousands of years and even way back 100 years ago, apparently Dawson used to be able to produce about 90 percent of its own food. So I thought, you know, if it can be done before, surely it can be done again. Well, I shouldn't say, surely, maybe it can be done again. You know, we're a bigger population now, we're not nomadic and we're pretty stuck in our comfort zone with food. So instead of researching it, I thought the best way to do it would be just to actually try it.

MG: And for a year, that was the the game plan for the entire time?

SUZANNE CROCKER: Well, if you can make it through a year from one, you know, one food cycle to the next, then you could continue doing it. I mean, there's no point just trying it during the time of plenty in the summer. You've got to find out if you can produce, harvest, store, hunt and gather, fish enough food for your family for an entire year in order to survive. So it was important to do it for a full year. And here our growing season is incredibly short.

MG: Did you have a sense, given how short that was, did you have a sense even before you started, what kind of things you could eat that came from closer to home?

SUZANNE CROCKER: I had a sense for sure, but I didn't have a sense of how much we would need. I really had no idea how much food a family of five with three teenagers who eat a lot would would go through in a year. So that was a bit anxiety provoking. Just to think, OK, can I actually physically gather enough?

MG: I mean, it sounds obvious in some ways, but what are some of the things that you weren't going to be able to eat or drink for that year?

SUZANNE CROCKER: Well, no caffeine for one. No alcohol, of course. And then there's those kitchen staples, like oil and vinegar or baking powder. The usual spices, yeast, those kinds of things. They were they were totally gone. There was a question as to whether we would have any green at all. We actually had zero green for the first three months. So that was a huge adjustment. And then, of course, you know, there's those luxury items like chocolate, avocados, bananas and all that, all that grabbing go food, which was especially a big deal for the for the kids. No peanut butter, no bagels.

MG: There is a scene just before you start where you're sitting and you're having what would be your last cup of tea and you talk about the emotional connection that we have to food. All of us have the food, but you have to food as well. What was it like looking at the last dregs of tea in that cup, knowing that you wouldn't have any for another year?

SUZANNE CROCKER: I actually broke out in tears, which sounds crazy, but I, it was my comfort drink and not only that, I think it was something that got me through the day. So the idea of of no comfort drink and no caffeine really struck home on the last sip and yea felt like a really long time at that point.

MG: You could have done this just on your own, but you do this with your family, your husband Gerard and your kids Tess, Kate and Sam who are listening in. They were between the ages of 12 and 17 when you made the film. They're with us now as well. Good morning to you all.

FAMILY: Good morning.

MG: Gerard, what did you think of this idea when Suzanne first suggested it?

GERARD: Well, you know, Suzanne has a reputation for coming up with interesting ideas. She's not really a comfort seeker, I would say, and she certainly wears pants in this family. And when she comes up with an idea, she's very stubborn and persistent. And we've certainly found that again this time around. We've been through this sort of austerity before, when we lived in the bush for a year, it was certainly her idea then. And again, we've learnt just to follow suit really when it comes to her.

MG: Is that how it works, Suzanne? This wasn't a suggestion, this was more of a direction?

SUZANNE CROCKER: Well, I like to say they were conscripted, but I wish it was that easy that they just sort of said, OK, your idea will follow. But they actually put up some resistance for quite a while. And it wasn't really until I somehow convinced Gerard not to bring any grocery store food into the house for a year, that I knew that we could do it because the kids weren't really want to go out and grocery shop on their own. So that was a big turning point for me.

MG: Sam, what did you make of the idea when you first heard about it?

SAM: I was very unenthused proposal, to be honest. You know, I was a teenager and growing and I had a big appetite. I was worried that there just wouldn't be enough food or there wouldn't be enough snack food to grab on the go and things like that. So, yeah, I was, I had a lot of trepidation going into it and I think I'm one of the main antagonists, at least early on in the movie, because of the because of my skepticism.

MG: Creates good tension for for a film. Kate, what about you? Did you initially buy into this or not so much?

KATE: Not at all. I like to think that I thought of all the reasons why we shouldn't do it while mom was thinking of all the reasons why we should do it. And most of the reasons I thought that we shouldn't do it actually became complex later on. So I'm honestly pretty proud of myself for keeping up with those. But yeah, it was not until we were told that dad was on board, so therefore no grocery store food was coming into the house, that we were kind of like, OK, I guess this is actually going to be a thing. And I guess you kind of have to just go with it a little bit.

MG: Tess, did you feel like you just had to go with it or were you on side at all in this?

TESS: I did feel like it wasn't much of a choice. I didn't think I was going to do it for the whole year and I definitely thought, well, I won't bring any grocery food into the house for the first couple of months, but I'm definitely going to eat non-local food elsewhere, which I did. And I thought I'd only make it maximum to Christmas, but at that point, I don't think there is any way that I could stop mom from going to the end.

MG: Suzanne, how did these and you walk through this in the film, how did your early experiments in local cooking turn out?

SUZANNE CROCKER: Poorly. I was not a cook to begin with. So so I was went into this experiment as a total blank page. So, yeah, really, really poorly, Matt. And the other thing that happened at the beginning was I was so busy gathering and storing and preserving food that there really wasn't a heck of a lot of time for learning how to cook or any creative cooking. So that was that was also a challenge. And then, of course, you have to make everything from scratch. Even the ingredients that go into things. So you need butter. Well, you have to have thought of that in advance because you actually have to make your own butter first.

MG: And there's no salt.

SUZANNE CROCKER: And there's no salt. So food tasted quite bland at the beginning, but what was amazing was how my taste buds transformed in pretty short order. I would say after six to eight weeks, I could start to just taste the flavours in food and I really didn't miss salt anymore.

MG: Kate, what do you remember about the first things that your mom was cooking locally?

KATE: Oh, man, it was a little disappointing, but it was I think at first when it was summertime and there was still fresh vegetables to just grab and go, it was a little bit easier. But, yeah, I think we were missing the spices quite a bit in the first few months.

MG: You talk, Suzanne, about how in the film, that eating was the lowest part of the priority list in many ways. How hard was this and how much work just to to get food out on the table when the convenient things that we're used to having around us aren't there? And that's not even those basic elements, it's just some of the food that we take for granted.

SUZANNE CROCKER: It was time consuming for sure. It was you know, it was a full time job in itself. And then, of course, filming the whole thing was a second full time job. So I'm not sure how I managed, two full time jobs in at the same time, but I did. And without caffeine. But after you get into a groove, it gets easier. So, you know, you just get into this pattern where once a week you make the butter and once a week you make the yogurt and then it all kind of becomes easier. So I know people at the beginning often asked me, how on earth could you do this if you had an outside of the house separate job? And I would have thought it would be impossible, but by the end of it, it's very possible.

MG: What was the biggest challenge for you, Gerard?

GERARD: Well, I mean, initially it was the withdrawal of things. The withdrawal of caffeine and the withdrawal symptoms of caffeine withdrawal and certainly the snack food as well, the green eyes. I seriously missed the opportunity just to grab bread or cereal and and it quickly I found that the first couple of months I was snacking on carrots incessantly and I lost a lot of weight. And I think I lost 30 pounds in my first two months. So I was feeling weak and incapable really of keeping up with my metabolism and the demands of my body. And also, though we were busy as a family. It wasn't just Suzanne who was picking and putting away. We were all involved in the process of processing food and helping chop and freeze vegetables and so on. And food as a nutrient was really put on the back burner for a little while in preference for food to be stored.

MG: Suzanne talked about moose meat, and you have a huge responsibility on your shoulders as you go out and you hunt and there were concerns that you wouldn't be able to get a moose that year. What was it like kind of carrying that responsibility?

GERARD: Well, I've always hunted for moose ever since I've been here for 30 odd years. But this year was different because really this year it was something that I had to find and I was hunting alone for most of this time. So, yeah, I felt it was quite a weighty responsibility. Normally it would be a recreational thing where, you know, if you didn't get a moose, then it wasn't the end of the world. But I did certainly feel the weight of it this time, I must say.

MG: Was there a point, Sam, in which you wanted, not just your mom, because you're all in this together, but you wanted the family to pull the chute and say enough is enough?

SAM: Yeah, I would say that I was pretty much on that train of thought through the entire first half. I was, it was very hard to win me over on this one. It took you, I'd say, the better part of the project before I finally accepted my fate.

MG: What was that moment, when you accept your fate, what was the turning point?

SAM: I think it came down to honestly, the fact that I got used to the lifestyle and the food.

MG: What were you eating? What did you enjoy the most that you were eating locally?

SAM: Well, I enjoyed the fact that we had, you know, solid meals three times a day. So, you know, eggs and meat and potatoes and all of that stuff that kind of keeps you going and fills you up. So I enjoyed that part of it a lot, I think. And I think that's probably what mostly won me over.

MG: Kate, what was the best stuff that you were eating over the course of this year that was local?

KATE: Oh, I would say the something that I learned to appreciate through this year of eating local is how much better local vegetables are than store bought vegetables. So, yeah, it was like our candy. It was like our treat to eat locally grown carrot or any other type of vegetable. And also, of course, local meat and knowing where your meat is coming from was also something that was really nice.

MG: Suzanne, one of the things about having the luxury of going to a grocery store is that you have almost limitless variety and that can change depending on where you happen to be in the country. But you still have more variety than what's right in your backyard. How much variety was there in what you and the family were gathering and preparing?

SUZANNE CROCKER: I was surprised by the variety in the end. There's an old saying that in the summer you eat above the ground and in the winter you eat below the ground. And I found that really to be true. This whole idea of eating seasonally in the summer, I really craved the greens, the broccoli, and in the winter I didn't crave those at all. I was really going for the root vegetables and the wonderful potato that that really kept us kept us going. But, you know, there actually is a huge variety in spices and flavours using birch syrup, for example, as our main sweetener is just full of of flavour. And so we would have birch syrup, toughie, birch syrup, ice cream, a custard. And then there's a tremendous amount of berries that either grow wild or can be cultivated here, saskatoons and hascaps and cranberries and they're also really full of of flavour. So it is, you know, a meat fish, egg based diet for sure. And I would say my family, I think, did get sick of eggs and potato cakes every morning.

MG: Family, is that correct?

KATE: Yeah.

SAM: Yeah.

TESS: Pretty much, yeah.

GERARD: To this day in fact, I think.

MG: There are certain things perhaps, I don't know, are there things that you will not have eaten because of that year that you had too much of?

SAM: The one thing I would say is sugar beets, that absolutely is a thing that I don't think I'll be able to stomach ever again. We were so overloaded with it because it was one of two of the sweeteners that we had and birch syrup was low in quantity. And so almost everything sweet tasted very richly of sugar beet. Yeah, I think that one is something I will never probably eat again, to be honest.

MG: Tess, how did this change how you think about food?

TESS: I mean, I especially I think went with mom to go see the various farmers and to go foraging and things like that, because I was the one that she could drag out. And I think it made me appreciate all the work that goes into getting food like the foraging and the processing and raising animals and growing food. And it's more than just picking it off the shelf. I can see the whole process.

MG: Where does this leave you now, Suzanne? Are you continuing to eat a lot of local food now and now that the year is done?

SUZANNE CROCKER: Yeah, definitely. And I do need to acknowledge this community of Dawson City that played a big part in feeding us as a family. You know, we have amazing family, small family, sustainable farmers here. We are on the traditional territory of trying to quit quittin and traditional knowledge that the elders passed on to me and to the youth of our community and to everybody is is so fundamental to moving forward and being sustainable. And I just have to say, it was a really humbling experience to actually know where every ingredient on my plate comes from. And not only, you know, just know where geographically, but actually know the hand that helped raise or grow it or gather it and the land that produced it. And. It was a really transformative experience for me. So I continue to eat 95 percent local to my community. I still stock her house with a year's worth of food every fall. The family, you know, no drug goes back to the grocery store. I cringe every time, but the grocery store food does come in. So I'd say my family is about 75 percent local now, but it's yeah, it's definitely changed the way I eat and what I appreciate about food and all that goes into creating it.

MG: We're in this moment now where for the first time, many of us are going to the grocery store and we can't buy some of the things that we are able to buy six months ago. And I think that humbling element is something that a lot of us are feeling right now. What do you think the people down south who are in this pandemic moment and experiencing that for the first time, what can they take away from what your family experience is?

SUZANNE CROCKER: Yeah, I think, you know, it's in a crisis time that we realise that it's really what's in our own local area that is vitally important to getting us through. And that if we depend on on infrastructure that comes from far away, that that's actually fragile. So what I would hope people can take away from this experience is, I guess, a new appreciation for what's local understanding that one of our greatest resources is our community knowledge holders, you know, our farmers or indigenous communities, people who know how to forage and just having a new appreciation for where our food comes from and kind of noticing those labels when you do get to go to the grocery store and notice how far it's travelled and maybe if there is the option, pick something closer to home. I also think that what the experience taught me and probably what the pandemic is teaching a lot of us is that we are very adaptable. You know, it's okay if you can't have an avocado, you around will. We'll do just fine. There's other other wonderful benefits to what is in season or what we can get right now. So I think remembering to rely on our are our neighbours and things that are closer to home and recognising how adaptable we are is a good way to help get through tough times.

MG: Gerard, when you went to the grocery store, what was the first thing you wanted to get?

GERARD: Oh, I think we were back into the bread and the cereals quite quickly. Quick energy foods and and of course, I went right back onto the coffee and the caffeine again, needless to say. And still resume that to this day, of course.

MG: Sam, what about for you? What was the first thing that you wanted to eat when it was done?

SAM: I think first thing I had a craving for was a good burger or something greasy, like poutine, fries, that kind of thing. So I think I went to one of the restaurants here in town right away and got myself a big cheeseburger.

MG: Kate, was there something you were craving?

KATE: Well, you know, it was odd for me because I started craving things that before I didn't even like like avocados, for example. I'd never been a fan of avocados and then after a year of eating local, all I wanted was to eat an avocado. It was quite strange.

MG: What about for you, Tess?

TESS: Yeah, I think it was bread, cereal, crackers, snack food and also maybe fruit, oranges.

MG: Suzanne, do you know what your next interesting idea is going to be for the family?

SUZANNE CROCKER: If I do, I'm keeping it top secret.

MG: I was going to say they're listening with great anticipation, wondering what they're in for next.

SUZANNE CROCKER: Yeah, that's right. But, you know, I do have to say, in contrast to my family, when I tried, you know, bread and bagels again after that year of eating local, I found it incredibly bland compared to that 100 percent rye, sourdough bread that I was used to eating. So I haven't really gone back to greens and I'm still off caffeine. Although the one thing that has come back in to my life is my secret drawer of chocolate, which my family doesn't know about until now.

MG: There's nothing wrong with that. Secrets are good to keep. It's a fun film and really revealing as well. Congratulations, all of you, for making it through the year and thanks for talking to us.

SUZANNE CROCKER: Thank you Matt.

FAMILY: Thank you.

MG: Suzanne Crocker is the director of First We Eat. It features her husband, Gerard, and her kids, Sam, Kate and Tess. They join me from Dawson City, Yukon. The film is screening online this week as part of the Hot Docs Film Festival.

Back To Top »

Remembering Silver Donald Cameron

Guests: Linden MacIntyre

MG: This is The Current on CBC Radio One. I'm Matt Galloway. He was known for his storytelling and journalism, for his environmental work and for his love of Cape Breton. Silver Donald Cameron has died after a recent diagnosis of lung cancer. He was 82. He lived in a small community in Cape Breton, Nova Scotia. Throughout his time there, he was deeply involved in writing about his community. He had actually just finished a new book about a murder that took place in Cape Breton in 2013. Linden MacIntyre is an author, former CBC journalist and a longtime colleague of Silver Donald Cameron. His memories of him go way back.

LINDEN MACINTYRE: I first encountered Silver Donald Cameron 50 years ago actually. I was a newspaper reporter in Cape Breton. He arrived as a sort of a highfalutin magazine type writer who would sort of wander into stories that I covered, and he would do them with a lot of flair and he would do them with a particular point of view. And so I kind of like had neither flair nor particular point of view. And I kind of resented this academic type wandering in and becoming a reporter, but he won't be around for long, I thought. Elite, hippy, wouldn't be here any longer than one winter. And especially he decided he was going to live in this very small community not far from where I lived and an Acadian community. And I said one winter will see the back of him. And he kind of confounded me and everybody else. And he not only moved into the community, he became a very large part of the community. He continued to be a writer with very broad interests in the wider world. He travelled. He came. He went. He came. But Cape Breton became his home. A little place called Descos. He wrote books from there and he became ingrained. I mean, we talk about people being embedded in small communities. He became ingrained in the community. He was you know, he was a volunteer fireman. He was a participant in the community activities of every kind. Wakes, weddings, social events, political events. He just became a very strong part of the heartbeat of a very small place. I think he leaves a legacy of engaged journalism. He used to be ahead of the curve of that, that there is a way to bring your views and your subjectivity to large public issues. I think that's the legacy that he will be most remembered for. And this this latest book is is a perfect example. Blood in the Water. It will be out this summer. I've read the manuscript. We've talked about it as recently as three weeks ago. And I don't think he intended it this way, but he has left behind a profound statement about what he represents and what he represented and what he will continue to represent. So this guy who showed up here as a kind of what I thought was a, you know, a dilettante 50 years ago, he, you know, we talk about artists who sort of turn life into art and art into life, who walk the walk, silver Donald did all of that. And he didn't just walk the walk, he kind of ran it. He ran 50 years. He was still running strong for what he believed in. And he turned it into a lifetime of service to a whole lot of people who otherwise would not have been served in the way he did it.

MG: The journalist and author, Linden MacIntyre. Longtime colleague of Silver Donald Cameron. Silver Donald Cameron died this week at the age of 82. His latest book, finished shortly before his death, is called Blood in the Water: A True Story of Revenge in the Maritimes and it will be out in August.

Back To Top »

Closing with Tom Power

Guests: Tom Power

MG: That's it for The Current for today. Coming up next on your CBC Radio One, it's Q. Tom Power is here. Good morning, Tom.

TOM POWER: Matt, I gotta tell you two things. One is that it was so lovely to hear Linden there talk about Silver Donald.

MG: Sure was.

TOM POWER: You know and it's just so lovely to hear Linden on the radio again, isn't it? I feel like I'm not the only person on the radio this morning who's gonna say the word 'art' like that. It's not just me.

MG: Well done.

TOM POWER: How are you doing? You all right?

MG: Everything's all right. Thanks. People will notice social media will be quiet today.

TOM POWER: Yeah. We're gonna talk a little bit about the blackout, Blackout Tuesday, the suspending of social media accounts by brands in particular in the music industry. But we're gonna talk about whether that's overshadowing some more important information and whether it might be too little, too late or if it's a good first step?

MG: All of that to come in just a moment on Q. Thank you, Tom.

TOM POWER: See ya, Matt.

MG: Tom Power. Q, coming up right after the CBC News. That's it for The Current. I'm Matt Galloway. Thanks for listening and we'll talk to you tomorrow.

[Music: theme]

Back To Top »

Provide Transcript Feedback

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

June 2, 2020 episode transcript

More Stories Like This