Colonialist Ire?

We haven't exactly missed his presence, nor his pronouncements, nor the revelation that he has launched yet another discourse on society through the publication of yet another tedious, opinionated tome. I do recall not all that long ago, having read one of his earlier works, an attempt at an adventure novel, wretchedly amateurish, and miserably wrought. Obviously not representative of one whom some refer to as a leading Canadian intellectual.

We admired his spouse, Adrienne Clarkson, when she was tasked by the government to represent our British heritage, as the primary representative of the Crown in Canada, taking up the mantle of Governor-General. She functioned as such most admirably, with a truly regal bearing, and an obvious grasp of the task before her, doing her utmost to reach into every geographic nook and cranny of the country. From sea to sea to sea.

She proved herself to be a definite, unifying asset, and most Canadians felt very appreciative of her august presence, her resolve to represent her imperial duty to a one-time colony of the British Crown. Her magisterial presence, her presence of mind and intelligent addresses to Canadians never failed to impress us all. Her spouse, known then as His Excellency, riding on her coattails, somewhat less.

He appeared as morose as she was gracious. Internally furious, one might imagine, that his intellectual prowess as a self-acknowledged and internationally celebrated philosopher and arbiter of current events was so little recognized, let alone admired nor his opinion sought, in Parliament. He was an after-thought, an addendum, a virtual nonentity. He played the part well.

It's a peculiar thing that Canadians who so often espouse the values of the liberal left, themselves often display all the attributes of the entitled, an aristocracy of academic and social achievement, facetiously deigning to notice the great masses who toil, yet do not appear capable of recognizing the import of reasoning intelligence and cerebral debate.

Adrienne Clarkson, although she fit that mould herself, was most gracious in temporarily suspending herself from that accustomed style, and representing herself as a champion of the people, as an emissary from the Crown. The liberal left in Canada demonstrates its superior view of the world by mocking its neighbour to the south, the politics played out there, and their social and cultural values; or as they would have it, lack of.

John Ralston Saul, for his part, simmered in resentment, dutifully, quietly, unwilling, as a good husband should, to unsettle his wife's splendid representational duties. For the most part, but not entirely, since he saw fit to publish, while she was in office, a book severely critical of our most important trading partner, our close geographical cousin in democracy.

Now, with the publication of his latest book, his spleen has found release in a critical series of assays labelling the capital city of his country, the National Capital Commission, and the government as grovelling colonialists. Accusing the political and bureaucratic elite of the city and the country of errant ignorance, claiming for them the title of "mediocrities".

"A Fair Country: Telling Truths About Canada", has enabled Mr. Saul to tell it the way he feels it is, from his jaundiced point of view. He has that right, after all. It's a free country, and he, like anyone else, has the guaranteed freedom to state his opinion. And he most certainly does. In the process pointing out some well known facts; certainly not informing anyone of anything new in his startling revelations.

But for a proponent of the liberal-left he was somewhat incautious in claiming that Canada is really a "Metis civilization". Proud aboriginals and Metis will be particularly puzzled at that scornful designation. Half-breeds? Us? We're resigned to and inclined toward the "aboriginal" way of doing things? Tch, tch, how unoriginal, and how insulting to our first-nations populations.

Nowhere does he excuse himself for resigning himself to the role of His Excellency, while his wife represented the past of the exalted British Empire, the Canadian Monarch, an impressively imperial position that states quite clearly where our legacy stems from, where our traditional values resulted from, our politics, our justice system.

He just toughed it out, poor man, not revelling in the company of the wealthy and powerful, enjoying state dinners, fine wines and grand events his elevated position-by-a-remove entitled him to. He rails against the myths we have accepted in a celebration of our historical presence. Big deal; doesn't every country enjoy their particular myths?

He detests the bureaucracy in Ottawa, its disinterest in details, in revelations and opportunities he would have been only too pleased to supply them with. The political elite, he charges with utter disbelief, is anti-intellectual. Goodness me. They only read briefing notes, fear "to think and read".

The bureaucracy he criticizes are expected to do the bidding of their political masters, neutrally. The political elite has been democratically elected by a majority of voters who have discerned in a particular political party the reflection of their values and the hoped-for ability to produce good governance for the country as a whole.

Canadians are fully aware of the failings of human nature, and we also are quite well aware that our political elite leave much to be desired.

Why then, does someone like Mr. Saul, who claims the distinction of intellectual superiority for himself, echoed elsewhere in the hallowed halls of academe, not choose to put himself forward for political office and show everyone how it should be done, properly. To govern with full intelligence.

Mind, our current crop of party leaders can all of them claim a certain degree of intelligence. All of them have succeeded in securing university degrees. Some have had the opportunity to teach in universities.

Somewhat like Mr. Saul, come to think of it. They are all imbued with critical faculties, all claim to have the best interests of the country uppermost in mind, while they pursue the ultimate prize, to govern the country.

Surely Mr. Saul, with his great ability to view the larger picture, with his grievance against the pettiness of human nature - himself obviously not immune to unleashing his own brand of pettiness - knows that we know all of this. Why would he feel that his opinion is of such great moment, that being so?

Ah, his broad self-regard, his obvious belief that he sees what we do not. Obviously relieving himself of a whole lot of irritating resentments.