A different perspective on the Dawson College shootings
As so often happens in the aftermath of violence, many of us here and throughout the city are struggling to understand why Kimveer Gill drove to Dawson College from his parents’ home in Laval with the purpose of killing others and, ultimately, himself. Thus far, much of the discussion has centred on the role that popular culture may have played in the tragedy, and, to a lesser extent, on what family members and the larger community could have done to prevent them.
In a thought-provoking article that will be published in Saturday’s Globe and Mail, Jan Wong approaches the question from a somewhat different angle. Rather than focus on the culpability of goth music or the Internet, she looks to see what Montreal’s three most notorious mass murderers–Marc Lepine, Valery Fabrikant, and now Gill–have in common.
What she discovers is that all three were allophones: that is, immigrants, or the children of immigrants, whose first language is in many cases neither English nor French.
From the article:
What many outsiders don’t realize is how alienating the decades-long linguistic struggle has been in the once-cosmopolitan city. It hasn’t just taken a toll on long-time anglophones, it’s affected immigrants, too. To be sure, the shootings in all three cases were carried out by mentally disturbed individuals. But what is also true is that in all three cases, the perpetrator was not pure laine, the argot for a “pure” francophone.
It is a contentious hypothesis, certainly, and one which no more suffices as an explanation than any other single factor. Even so, it does provide some much-needed context for the discussion that has transpired here and elsewhere. At the very least, it might help us to understand why certain “warning signs” were overlooked (what sense does an immigrant parent make of Marilyn Manson?), and, possibly, why these individuals did not receive help before they turned to violence (how easy is it for a parent to access social and psychiatric services for their child if they don’t speak the language, or, if those services are not commonly available in the country of their origin?)
In any case, it’s worth a read.
Related posts:
Seems absurd to blame the Dawson shooting on his not being “pure laine” since Dawson is an Anglo school.
More than the fact that the shooters were allophone caught in the middle of a linguistic battle, she seems to be saying that all these shootings happened in Québec because ‘pure laine’ french quebecker are racist.
About Marc Lépine:
“He was a francophone, but in the eyes of pure laine Quebeckers, he was not one of them, and would never be. He was only half French-Canadian.”
About the three killers:
“But all of them had been marginalized, in a society that valued pure laine.”
I completely disagree, but I think it’s a serious enough accusation that if the author of the article wants to make that point, she should certainly bring up better arguments or evidence.
Not to mention, the author of the article refers to the shooter as “an immigrant” even though he was born in Canada. My definition of an immigrant is someone who, well, immigrates. To say that psycho shootings are all perpetuated by immigrants, when two of the three examples are Canadian-born killers, is nothing more than race baiting.
Then the piece goes on to mention that the shooter has light skin, as if that’s relevant.
And how about the totally superfluous comment about whether the students who kept working on their computers during the shooting were Asian?? I’m appalled a piece like this was published in a national newspaper.
I thought I had seen very bad articles about the shootings but this one has te be the worst of them all. It’s making huge assumptions but doesn’t push the analysis any further and it’s going in all directions at once. I can’t believe the newspaper allowed it to be published as such. I also can’t believe someone has managed to bring this all back to language issues again. I guess it was bound to happen…
Vila: You are bringing good points that the article doesn’t raise at all because it’s too busy blaming things on Bill 101 and the rest. It’s true that parents that come from a different country might have a hard time decoding the warning signs or understanding that their child is feeling alienated, but it’s true everywhere around the world.
Martine, you make an excellent point. The sense of isolation that many immigrants feel is not by any means unique to Montreal, and this, ultimately, is where Wong’s argument fails.
There is, all too often, a tendency among non-Quebeckers to link the social problems that exist in this province to the fact of Quebec’s difference, as though other places are not also blighted by them. Aside from cynically politicizing the issue, this approach serves to render such problems invisible when they happen elsewhere, which they most certainly do. At the worst, minorities (immigrants, aboriginals, non-whites) become a convenient ideological football, which does nothing to help us truly understand their experiences.
Having said this, Wong’s article did make me think about the issues I raised at the end of my post, which I believe are important and which resonate with my experience as a first-generation Canadian. Lisa, you’re right–it is a different thing to emigrate to a country than to be born in one, but it is also enormously different to be raised by parents who do not speak the language(s) of their adopted homeland, who do not share its cultural norms and traditions, and who cannot engage in in them to the same extent that others do. Can immigrant parents read their child’s report card, or have a meaningful conversation about it with their child’s teacher? Do they understand the social significance of a high school yearbook or the symbolic dimensions of wearing a black trenchcoat? And, if they do, do they have the skills they need to navigate the bureaucratic maze of government-sponsored social services–skills most of us take for granted–to seek out professional help for their child?
As I wrote in my post, I don’t think the fact that Gill and the others were allophones explains what happened on Wednesday, any more than what music he listened to does. However, it does provide us with a biographical detail that may shed some light on why his unspeakable rage went unnoticed. This in no way absolves Gill of responsibility for his actions, but if our goal is to prevent more like them, it is worth thinking about.
The article suggests Gill’s parents were educated in English, since he was allowed to go to school in English himself. Thus they likely could read his report card, etc.
I know first-hand how difficult it can be to arrange social services in French when you don’t speak it perfectly, but still…
So does this mean I don’t have to learn spanish?
Laurie
Louisiane’, North America
I found this article truly appalling.
A Kimveer Gill is created by his parents and his family and not society. I’m sure when the story really comes out, we’ll hear that all sorts of weird things were happening at his home. And surprise, immigrants can abuse their kids too.
Finally, in all this analysis, it’s very interesting to see the name of the doctor in charge of energency at the Montreal GEneral, Dr Tarek Razek, and his colleague from psychiatry, Dr Karine-Josee Igartua. They seem to have fared well enough despite their non pur laine names. How does Wong’s theory explain their success or hers, come to think of it?
I did not like this article..The writer should look within. To suggest a tie between his not being “pure laine” and what he did is really a stretch I think. He may have been a recluse and a shut-out but that’s often the individual’s own doing or choice. What constitutes “pure laine”? If a Franco Manitoban were involved would they be considered as not being “pure laine”? Or even someone from France who would be an immigrant?
Thank you all for such comments of this appalling article.
We should always protest when racism raises its ugly, ugly head. In this case, I do not know if Mrs. Wong is truly racist, or if she simply doesn’t know anything abou modern Québec, and above all Montréal city.
Sure, Québec is different. Who says otherwise? Sure, Bill 101 is far from perfect, but it was the best we could come with to protect the French majority in Québec. Nothing to be ashamed about. Please let’s look elsewhere.
I would suggest to Mrs. Wong to read very carefully the following article about compared murder rates in Canada:
http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/031001/d031001a.htm
Those numbers should destroy any ugly myth such as the one brought by Mrs. Wong. Writing in a major newspaper, it is her duty to get ALL her facts right.
Thanks for reading this.
Roger Gauthier
Montréal
FYI, you can comment on Wong’s article here.
To read my final thoughts on the shooting, click here.
I’ve just read through Ms. Wong’s article and I’m so filled with disgust that I can barely comment. Her theory is outright ridiculous. I’m sure that when I cool down a bit I could come up with a more biting criticism of her article, but for now I’ll just say that she should be ashamed of herself for submitting such garbage for publication.
Ms Wong’s article shows that a side effect of multiculturalism in ‘fighting’ racism in Canada is that non-WASP can now adopt WASP racist point of views.
Would there be a need for language laws in Québec if WASP racist attempt to impose English to everyone in Canada wouldn’t have prevailed for centuries?
Anastasia DeSousa.
Everyone’s busy yapping about the shooter, but never mentions the victim. Quite simply, he doesn’t deserve the fame.