Talk:Culture of Quebec

Origin

I really did not want to write this page but since nobody was going at it I thought I might start it off and hope that others would come to add, modify and delete at will in the goal of making it better. There was also the fact that I wanted it to be more than just a list of Quebec artists. The next additions on my list are notes on the role of the intellectual elites, the dichotomy of Paris and New York (The USA you say? What's that? Oh yes, the country around NYNY, I think.) as cultural "capitals", and many other things such as the peculiarities of a cultural life in English in the province of Quebec.

---

Capri and Amayah was here :/ 2023

Representation of Culture

Your opinion text shows a good understanding of Quebec's particular culture and is more than welcomed and appreciated. However, all other Culture of xxxx pages have a kind of structure meant to introduce a region's cultural aspects from a more neutral and scientific point of view. Although admittedly boring, this is the goal of this encyclopedia. I invite you (as well as all others) to contribute to present Quebec's culture to the best of our knowledge. This culture, as many other small ones, is often misunderstood, scorned, ridiculed, ignored, stigmatized etc. I believe that there is more than enough intelligence in the Anglophone world to do the job and have the page Culture of Quebec be at least as good as fr:Culture québécoise or Culture of the United States over time. ;-) -- Mathieugp

It was not an opinion text but an analysis, culled from the comments made by several local cultural critics. I have started distributing this to the relevant sections in the hierarchy.

I didn't mean to be insulting. I apologize if I was. Your analysis is interesting, and I personnally like it being a Quebecois, but it could be interpreted as being rather subjective. All I was trying to say is that, in my opinion, this page should gather all facts about Quebec's culture (all of Quebec, the main Francophone culture + the other ones) and leave the intrepretation of these to the readers. Do you agree? -- Mathieugp

No! Just a list is not enough. You need both the facts and some form of context. Without both items and an explanation readers or other editors have no real substabce and room for interpretation or editing work. For instance, what is cultural about just giving a list of universities in Montreal? This list could just as well be in articles on Quebec education or Quebec business. You need both the list and an explanation of the linkup with Quebec culture.

---

CMR

I removed the College Militaire Royal (CMR) because it was closed several years ago. Everything was centralized in the Royal Military College in Kingston Ontario. Note also that the CMR was in Saint-Jean-sur-le-Richelieu, a nice little town not too far from Montreal but far enough to be beyond the annexation dreams of even the most ambitious "greater Montreal" proponents. Several traditional, century old, regiments of the Canadian armed forces have their home in Montreal, but I am not sure if they really belong in a culture article.

Thanks for clearing it up, I wasn't sure why I couldn't find any info on it! :) I don't think there is a big need for a military component to this page. fvincent 20:18, Dec 8, 2003 (UTC)

---

Questions

Francophone or francophone

A few questions. Should francophone be capitalized (Francophone?) When it says North American broadcasts do you mean CBC or do you mean ABC, NBC, CBS and don't want to admit it? And Radio-Canada is a TV station? Just out of curiosity how do you translate New York into French? Rmhermen 15:06, Dec 6, 2003 (UTC)

(1)When you write Francophone(s) or Anglophone(s) as nouns, it takes a capital letter I believe. I hope I am right. If I am not, then correct me.

It can be used in either way, but we can use a capital so long as it is used consistently. fvincent 20:18, Dec 8, 2003 (UTC)

(2)Radio-Canada is indeed a TV and Radio station. For some reasons, bureaucrats never bothered changing it to Tele-Canada or something like that. (3)The major North American broadcasts are of course American, not Canadian. I believe it would be wize to make the distinction between the two just to make sure we do not offend British Canadians. ;-) (4)In French, New York City would be la ville de New York. In French, we only capitalize the first letter in a title. Other than that, we capitalize names, but not months and weekdays. There are minor differences here and there. -- Mathieugp 17:15, 6 Dec 2003 (UTC)

In English, most people that refer to New York, the city, put a capital C on New York City.fvincent 20:18, Dec 8, 2003 (UTC)

Two points. First of all, Radio-Canada did change it's name to Société Radio Canada (SRC), the equivalent of the CBC acronym I guess. Radio-Canada is still used as a name however because I think it is an important part of our culture. Many people still remember when Radio-Canada became the first TV channel, and then the first colour TV channel, in Quebec. But that's unimportant. Most people in Quebec would refer to New York City plainly as "New York". However, the full and correct translation is "La ville de New York". Hope that clears up. Lg1223 22:23, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Metropolis

Thanks but now another question. Does metropolis mean something different in Canadian English. The sentence is "the metropolis of Quebec is Montreal" which is bizarre to me because I read it as "the city of Quebec is Montreal" Should it say capital, cultural center, something else? Rmhermen 23:30, Dec 6, 2003 (UTC)

I just looked at the Quebec Television article. Is Radio-Canada just the French language CBC. Or is it a different station. And is it different than the French language CBC that is broadcast in Ontario? Rmhermen 23:35, Dec 6, 2003 (UTC)

This is tricky. Metropolis does have the same connotation but it's not as strong in English as it is in French. It does suffice and conveys the same feeling. there doens't seem to be anything better that comes to mind.fvincent 20:18, Dec 8, 2003 (UTC)

Radio-Canada is the French language CBC, however they are seperate entities. Radio-Canada is not a Corporation, it is la societe Radio-Canada and it is headquartered in Montreal. It is a network, and its mission is to provide French language tv and radio uniformely throughout the federation. However, they cannot go around the fact that 90% of Francophones who use their language in all aspects of life on a daily basis live in Quebec. The content is very often being produced in Quebec by Quebecers. I lived in the province of Alberta for 3 1/2 years and aside from the local 6PM newscast, the only thing you'll see there is Quebec culture. This is of course different in Acadia and to a lesser extent in Ontario where about half a million Franco-Ontariens live. -- Mathieugp 16:51, 8 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Radio-Canada produces a whole lot of TV shows in French. It is an important cultural tool for the Québécois (and for the French-speaking people elsewhere in Canada). In fact, Radio-Canada enjoys a very good reputation as an "all-around" TV station and can compete with privately-owned stations such as TVA and TQS. Currently, most of the programming is locally-produced and includes good sitcoms ("Les hautes et les bas de Sophie Paquin" or "Rumeurs" for instance), good variety shows ("Le match des étoiles", a dance competition for TV stars), lifestyle shows ("Ricardo") good quizz shows ("L'union fait la force") and good children/teen shows ("Kif-Kif"). CBC has more trouble funding and producing local shows because it has to compete directly with American channels, as well as regional Canadian private channels. Hugo Dufort 07:20, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Just looked in my big Webster's to see if I had done the right thing by translating metropole into metropolis. It has "The chief city (or capital city) of a country, state or region." I was using it in this sense. Toronto is the metropolis of Canda because it has the largest number of inahbitants and the biggest economy. Ditto for Montreal re the province of Quebec, or for Vancouver re the province of British Columbia. Like Vancouver, Montreal is not the capital, even though it is the biggest city in the province, and the one with the most cultural activities and treasures. I agree that the phrase sounds weird though, upon rereading it. Any suggestions for a rewrite? Radio-Canada or officially "La société radio-Canada " or the SRC is the French language division of the CBC. Some of the Ontario broadcasts of the SRC are produced locally in Ontario (such as local news and a few others) while others, such as the national news, are produced in Montreal (which has the biggest concentration of studios and offices of the SRC in Canada) and others still are produced in local studios of the SRC elsewhere in Canada, such as in New Brunswick.

Thanks for the answers. I don't know about metropolis. In the strictest sense it seems correct. It just strikes me as odd. Every definition I looked at said slightly different things. Rmhermen 03:09, Dec 8, 2003 (UTC)

It seems odd to me too. Each time I see the word I think either of the Fritz Lang movie or I hear the deep voice of the fast talking announcer at the beginning of the Superman animated series, telling us about "dazzling" Metropolis, home of the Daily Planet, and of Superman. Translation is not an easy task! If you can find something better put it in!

You can replace metropolis by metropolitain area. -- Mathieugp 16:51, 8 Dec 2003 (UTC)

I am not sure metropolitan area captures the centralness to the culture aspect. Cultural center, maybe? Rmhermen 16:56, Dec 8, 2003 (UTC)

Being from Montreal, I would not mind, but a lot of folks from Quebec City and elsewhere would object. Besides, what would a cultural center like Montreal be if it weren't for the fact that it drains creative individuals from all over Quebec and elsewhere? In any case, I have no objection to either "metropolis" or "main cultural center" or "most populated metropolitain" area. ;-) -- Mathieugp 19:56, 8 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Metropolis also means the largest city, so Montreal is the metropolis of Quebec, Toronto is the metropolis of Ontario, etc. That's kind of an archaic usage though...now, metropolis just means any big city, so it's unusual to say "the metropolis." Of course, it really just means the mother city of an ancient Greek colony :) Adam Bishop 19:59, 8 Dec 2003 (UTC)

I'm really sorry to learn that Wikipedia restricts who can contribute to what:

• (cur) (last) . . 17:04, 8 Dec 2003 . . Mathieugp (This page presents the culture of Quebec, not a caricature of "French-Canadian" culture as perceived from Toronto.)

French-Canadian vs Quebecer

Speaking of caricatures Mark Orkin, an otherwise serious and very prominent corporate lawyer wrote two interesting little books, richly illustrated with caricatures, a few decades ago. One was titled "Canajan, eh?" And the other was titled "French-Canajan, eh?" The two books looked at the variations in the way Canadians speak the two most "popular" languages in their country. At the same time the books explored a bit the basic elements of culture for those who happen to live and work in French or in English in Canada. Now, Mark Orkin was a very English fellow from a very English family, growing up in a very English part of Canada. Yet he had quite a bit of sensibility for the two languages and the cultures around them. When one reads certain media coming from certain parts of English Canada one sometimes has the impression that people like Mark Orkin are the exception and that English Canada is filled with individuals who for the most part cannot or do not want to understand anything about Quebec. I have been fortunate up to now in that I have never met such individuals and also fortunate in that I know other media (from English Canada) who are more concerned with spreading information than fanning political fires and heating up controversies. Some of the articles in Wikipedia are a bit "off" or a bit ignorant when it comes to Quebec's History, but there is no deep prejudice or a desire to make political capital, at least for now. All that is required is some hard work and checking up facts. I hope. 2003-12-08, 21:01

Not unlike the Inuit who wish not to be called Esquimaus by others for reasons of human dignity and respect, Quebecers do not like being called French Canadians, a name given to them by the British Conqueror (that's after being called "the conquered people" for decades). Meanwhile, Quebecers held on to the name Canadiens even after they had successfully been made a minority under the Union regime. When they could no longer call themselves Canadiens because they were no longer the majority and there was no hope to reverse the trend, they called themselves Canadien-français or Canayens while they were being called French-Canadian, or French Canadian or Canadian-French, or damn Canucks, or Pea Soups etc.

In the 1960s, the Canadien-francais of Quebec decided that since they were the majority in Quebec (former French Canada) they had every right to call themselves Québécois and invite everyone in Quebec to do the same. This change was revolutionary and it would have never occurred had it not been for the baby boom. In the 1970s, young Quebecers were insulting themselves with "maudit Canadien-français soumis!" (damn submissive French Canadians!).

In English, Québécois gives Quebecer. Things would be simple if all people in Quebec and elsewhere used the word Quebecer when speaking of the citizens of Quebec, but since some think that being "Québécois" means to be called Gendron or Gauthier, they reject this identity because they are not of French-Canadian origin themselves. It is not really their fault, as this is what they were told of Quebec nationalism and while Francophones of Quebec were increasingly identifying to Quebec, the Anglophones of Canada were identifying to Canada alone, getting rid of British reliques. The two social transformations occured in parallel, not really aware of what the other side was doing, the political battle not helping at all. That is why some Canadians still call Quebecers "French Canadians" and some Quebecers call Canadians "les Anglais" (the English) even today. That is what was called "the two solitudes". Two culturally and linguistically distinct nations coexisting inside the same political frontiers, only aware of each other's presence when stepping on each other's toes. -- Mathieugp 22:07, 9 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Technically speaking, the commonly accepted English spelling is Quebecker. The rules of English pronunciation require the k to give it a hard sound. fvincent 14:18, Dec 10, 2003 (UTC)

That is not accurate. The "Quebecker" spelling is also accepted, that is true, but in all official writings of the public administration, only "Quebecer" is used. Even the Montreal Gazette writes it like that nowadays. ;-) -- Mathieugp 15:12, 10 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Ok, after a bit of digging, I find that they are both accepted. However, we should choose one and use it consistently. While Quebecer might make ample sense to someone from here, I would prefer the term Quebecker because we cannot assume the average person coming here will properly pronounce Quebecer. fvincent 16:11, Dec 10, 2003 (UTC)

Cartesian approach, private schools and BD

Where should these go? Some are crucial, some less, but they all merit some mention:

1- Cartesian approach

When the French speaking citizens of Quebec (notice that I am trying to avoid a minefield) discuss any subject, for profit or pleasure they usually take a Cartesian approach to it. This is deeply embedded in their culture. They debate any issue, minor or major by making a logical construction of their point of view. In contrast, most other inhabitants of North America take an adversarial approach to any discussion or debate. They calculate logically what their viewpoint should be, then they add a 20% (or 30% or more) exageration on top, expecting to have to abandon it when they must come to a compromise in a discussion.

Thus, any form of debate (be it at a party or in federal-provincial discussions) between the "two solitudes" can be at best very complicated and at worst a terrible nightmare. The French speaking citizens of Quebec usually arrive at any discussion with what seasoned negotiators call the "minimum acceptable position" from which there is no retreat or compromise possible. The people on the other side keep their minimum position well hidden and declare their "maximum position". One side expects a give and take followed by a discount in each other's position, while the other side expects a give and take where each side's position could be rebuilt completely anew (if enough logic is used) but cannot be simply discounted. Some persons call the Cartesian approach "Jesuitical disputation" but in fact the Sulpician fathers of "Le College de Montreal" and every single private school in Quebec also taught the same approach and everybody who has been to these schools and is teaching in any establishment in Quebec is doing the same. Yes, there are exceptions: For instance, those with experience in labor union negotiations and related dealings are used to the adversarial approach, and come to the table with maximum demands while keeping their minimal acceptable position hidden. But these are exceptions! So, where to put this cultural element which explains quite a few of the communications problems betwen the "two solitudes"?

You can put that under Foreign Influences/France, in a paragraph on philosophical heritage I guess. This could be a very interesting subject, touching cartesian thought, dialectic, determinism, empiricism etc. ;-) -- Mathieugp 08:14, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Hmm, I'm not sure this is an appropriate subject but this might only be due to my conception of Wikipedia as a resource of objective facts and not a repository of social analysis, which is what this strikes me as being. As a second point, I don't think it is all that difficult to find people willing to adopt the adversarial approach. Quebec has its distribution of debating styles as varied as any other large population. You would have to present a good amount of research to back up such a claim and Wikipedia does not strike me as a journal for advancing social theories. This last applies to all of your points, anonymous poster (please post your name, I like to know who I am talking to!) I do appreciate, however, your putting it in Talk first before dropping it straight into the text. You are courteous, if incorrect! ;)

fvincent 15:24, Dec 11, 2003 (UTC)

I agree with User:Fvincent that social analysis doesn't belong inside this article. -- Mathieugp 16:31, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)

I am not giving you personal analysis but making summaries of descriptive explanations available in Le Devoir, La Presse and elsewhere over the years. Granted, since this is a talk page I have not bothered giving the full context all the time, up to now. Problems in bargaining styles have been repeatedly noted by political commentators. Let us take as an example the question of the boundaries of the province of Quebec. People from the mostly English speaking parts of Canada usually approach this question with a "maximalist" position, starting off by saying that 3/4 or even 9/10 of Quebec's territory can be taken away from it if it wants to separate or become independent orleaveCanada (you pick the correct term as you please) or even if it wants to just behave in an "unconstitutional" manner. French speaking intelectuals as well as the government of Quebec have, instead of taking a "maximalist" position stating that much of the Canadian Arctic and all of Labrador belongs to them, chosen in contrast to simply declare that the existing boundaries of Quebec (with the exception of the watershed line between Quebec and Newfoundland in the Labrador region) are absolutely immutable, and not debatable. This declaration is butressed of course by numerous logical and legal argument, but it is after all a "minimalist" position. This is not analysis on my part but a restating of many an article on the topic. Just do a search in La Presse or better yet Le Devoir. 2003-12-12, 00:15

Based on what you have written above you CAN claim:

- When dealing with Quebec's boundaries, the federal position is maximalist and Quebec's position is minimalist.

What you CANNOT claim:

-[When] French speaking citizens of Quebec ... discuss any subject, for profit or pleasure they usually take a Cartesian approach to it.

You have taken one topic and extended the rationale over a much larger scope to a subsection of the Quebec population. This is not sound reasoning.

Second, political bargaining style does not belong in an article of the Culture of Quebec. The Culture of Quebec is not, in my opinion, about the personality of les Quebecois but rather the arts and activities that are popular, common and widely available in Quebec and its regions.

fvincent 17:55, Dec 12, 2003 (UTC)

2- Private schools

Quebec has the highest proportion of children going to private schools in North America. Middle class, lower middle class and even working class families scrimp and save to send their children in those schols. Upper middle clas families will refrain from buying another car or more luxury goods in order to pay for all of their children going to their chosen private school. Often several generations in the same family will have attended the same school. The persons these children will have met, the cultural traits they pick up will follow and influence these children for the rest of their lives. The first question that comes up when learning about somebody is where did he go to school. This is often denounced as a penchant for elitism, but in fact an elite class is usually defined as making up 9% or 5% or less of a society. 17% of the school population of Quebec currently goes to a private high school. The figure is even higher in urban centers such as Montreal where 30% of high school students are in the private sector. The denunciation of elitism comes because only a few who pass rigorous exams are admitted to most private highschools. Money is not enough, with a few exceptions. The global effect is of an entrenchment of many cultural traditions. Of course, some of this should go in the article on Quebec education, but because of the cultural mindset it gives there should be something about it somewhere here. But where?

I didn't know that. However, I can guess that Bill 101, underfunded public schools, and colonized minds have something to do with it. I think it belongs in Quebec education and lack of social justice. ;-) -- Mathieugp 08:14, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)

I am beginning to sense that you are drawing conclusions from facts (which opens you to accusations of having "an agenda"; to be clear, I am not accusing you of having one, I am simply stating it could be interpreted that way). It is my understanding that Wikipedia is an NPOV presentation of facts with context (the distinction between context and drawing conclusions is blurry, I grant that). Please feel free to disagree with my opinion. That being said, many of the facts you present here do belong in an article on Quebec Education, however, I don't think that phrases such as "denunciation of elitism" can be inferred from high-school attendance statistics.

fvincent 15:24, Dec 11, 2003 (UTC)

I support User:Fvincent on the idea that we should only present cultural and social realities, not give our opinions on them, just put them in their rightful context.

I have created a section on private schools in the article on the Quebec education system. It seemed like a logical place to do so since there were already private post-secondary institutions mentioned there. I have cut out loaded words like "elitism" and "denunciation" and have instead noted the oposition of the public sector's teacher's union and their reasons, and stated the presence of an ongoing debate on the topic. You can see the nature of the opposition (and quite a few interesting facts on the private sector) in more detail in the PDF files that the Centrale des syndicats du Quebec has placed on the Web. For the opposite viewpoint you could take a look at the Web site of La Fédération des établissements d'enseignement privés du Québec. 2003-12-12, 00:15

The addition to the education page was very well done.

fvincent 17:55, Dec 12, 2003 (UTC)

3- BDs or bande dessinées

The Franco-Belgian "bande dessinée" or BD is one of the most important cultural importations in postwar Quebec. Interestingly enough they come from Belgium as well as France. BDs routinely outsell novels and other types of books in the adult market as well as in the youth and chidren sectors. Where do we put this? I started off this Quebec culture article with an analysis of the importance of Asterix on how the good people of this province and/or region and/or state and/or nation (still more minefields!) viewed their cultural identity. Somebody took it off completely. OK, fine, somebody else put other things which were not falsehoods in its place and the ball went on rolling, and that is what counts. But we have to put Asterix, Tintin, and so many others who have (and still do) influenced our Culture _somewhere_, and give some form of explanation as to why this is important. 2003-12-10, 21:00

Under literature? I always considered Asterix to be brilliant illustrated literature for ages 7 to 77. -- Mathieugp 08:14, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)

I am one of the people to have removed the Asterix analogies. Even though I might find them accurate, I do not think Wikipedia: Culture of Quebec is the appropriate place. An encylcopedia does not offer analogies but rather a description of the topic to introduce it to someone who may have never heard of Quebec. I always imagine that I am writing for an alien from another planet who is doing research on humans. Asterix references may be totally lost on them. :)

I begin to understand better our differences. While, it seems to me, you are trying to "explain" the Culture of Quebec, influenced our Culture _somewhere_, and give some form of explanation as to why this is important, my view is a descriptive one. Certainly BD has a prominent place in the Culture of Quebec. I'm not sure if it belongs in visual arts or literature. You can make an argument for either one.

fvincent 15:24, Dec 11, 2003 (UTC)

PS: Gaston LaGaffe was the best. :)

I liked the Asterix analogy. That's definitely how a lot of people in Quebec understand their situation. It is true though that some would object to putting BDs under litterature. Maybe we can create a BD section? -- Mathieugp 16:31, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Yes! Yes! Creating a BD section would solve both the problem of wondering wether to put BDs in literature or art and the problem of considering them mainly a French or a Belgian influence. 2003-12-12, 00:15

By the way, I do not remember who put the structure up, but whoever he or she is should work on it a bit more again. As is, it does not reflect our orderly Cartesian bent anymore!! ; )

The structure is certainly not finalized but it at least gives a framework.

fvincent 17:55, Dec 12, 2003 (UTC)

I am not the only masked rider

If you take a look at certain sections in Wikipedia such as those involving computers you will find quite a lot of editors who do very good or excellent (which means better than most of mine) additions to articles without registering, and they leave only an IP number as their mark. I do not know why they do things so, but I remain anonymous because I find it gives me a certain philosophical attitude towards what I write and leave in the Wikipedia. When my name or a pseudonym is not there I can keep my cool when somebody erases all that I have done. That is the rational explanation. Maybe, on the irrational side I like the idea of being a romantic masked editor, dashing off into the Intenet on my trusty steed after having left my mark of politeness. Heigh-ho Titanium, awaaaay! Cataclop, cataclop, cataclop, cataclop. This probably comes from reading too many "bandes dessinées" 2003-12-12, 00:15

Yeah. I'd say you had an overdose of "something"... ;-) Hehehe. -- Mathieugp 05:26, 12 Dec 2003 (UTC)

I agree that anonymity does not have any relationship with quality of Wiki'ing, however, I personally find it strange to talk to an IP address. :) I asked and you declined as is your right. Fair enough. fvincent 17:37, Dec 12, 2003 (UTC)

Just in case you are wondering

Just in case you are wondering why User:Angelique popped in out of nowhere to remove the "Voir" weekly as part of the important printed media in Quebec, here is an explanation: During an interview for the Voir weekly for the week of March 1st, Robert Libman, president of the Quebec chapter of the B'nai B'rith in Canada stated that he did not think Yves Michaud was an anti-semite and that his remarks had been distorted. He was interviewed after it was revealed that the report of the B'nai B'rith on anti-semitic indicents in Canada did not include the Yves Michaud affair. The article of the Voir can be read here: B'nai Brith va-t-elle trop loin? (in French). In any case, User:Angelique, because she had never heard of the Voir before, decided that it didn't exist and therefore the comments of Robert Libman were irrelevent. Therefore, the next time you grab a copy of the Voir in the Montreal metro, make sure you visit your psychiatrist right after because you are in fact dreaming the existence of this paper. ;-) -- Mathieugp 16:31, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Empty Stuff

I have "decommented" some of the items in the article so as to encourage people to start writing on the subject. Mathieugp 16:27, 7 Jan 2004 (UTC)

HEY watch out the ridiculous numbers!

BTW Canada has only 25 million habs, the USA only got 290 millions... this makes 315 million people INCLUDING the 7 million ppl living in Quebec as if the didnt spoke english as well! Far from the 350 millions of english ppl surrounding quebec! And french speaking ppl are 83% of quebec's population, makes it less than 13% of english speaking ones, and about 4% of allophones!

On top of it, independance projects could be shown as a positive way of enforcing the culture and the views of this nation!

You're incorrect. The population of Canada is 32.6 million, the US 300 million, and Quebec 7.6 million. The number of English-speakers in North America is in the 325 million range. G. Csikos 5 August 2007

You are correct. 290 + (32 - 7.5) != 350. The number should be modified according to the current figures on Demographics of Canada and Demographics of the United States. However, your assertion that Quebec's people also speak English is innacurate. As a first second or third language, English is spoken (to some degree) by about 45% of Quebec's population. 45% - 9% of native Anglophones = 36% of people who speak English as their second or third language. Most people here, like me, speak English because French is not sufficiently promoted as a vehicular language in the workplace. -- Mathieugp 13:34, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Indeed, about 80-83% of people in Quebec speak French at home, with their friends, etc -- it is their functional language. We could say that they "live" in French, since they can listen to French-language radio shows & watch locally made TV shows (some of them being quite good) and go to all-French cinemas (with the latest Hollywood blockbusters dubbed in French, of course -- see the "Cinemas Guzzo" chain for instance!), French-language service in restaurants and stores, all-French roadsigns, and so on. In fact, most people outside the Montreal metropolitan area can live in French all the time, and stubbornly refuse to learn English; it is, surprisingly, quite easy. We could qualify the Quebec province as a "French bubble in a sea of English" (which is the rest of North America). While most "francophone" Québécois can speak at least a few words of English, only 20-30% of them can follow a simple conversation in that language (functional level); truly bilingual people aren't plentiful here. Hugo Dufort 07:12, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

A funny thing is that although Québécois speak French, they aren't very interested in the French European culture. They feel more North American. This often leads to false assumptions among Frenchmen and Americans, who think they will find either "Cajuns with fur coats" or "French-speaking cowboys" in Quebec. Sorry... no fried gumbos and no beret-wearing mimes here (although you'll find gourmet burgers with blue cheese, and nice duck rillettes). Hugo Dufort 07:12, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Immigration to the United States/Franco-American

Well, first of all, I'm not sure how the term Franco-American relates to the culture of Quebec. Second, not all French Canadians who live in the United States (either historically or today) are "known as" Franco-Americans. I suppose I could go to Culture of Asia and add: "A great proportion of Asians emigrated to the United States between... These people are known as Orientals." No one could dispute that there are some who call Asians in the United States Orientals, but it is not what they are "known as". If, as I suspect, Franco-American is the term used in New England for French-Canandians living there, one should make that specific. Second, that Jack Kerouac is the most famous American of French Canadian ancestry is a POV statement. Even if he is the most famous one of the so-called Franco-Americans from New England, it is still a POV statement. -Acjelen 13:11, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

Québécois immigrated in large numbers to the US and (to a lesser extent) to the Western Canadian provinces between 1880 and 1940. There were a serie of economic crisis in the province; sometimes, entire villages moved south and established themselves in New Hampshire, Maine or Vermont. Up to 1 million Québécois left the province during the crisis of the 1930s. At first that diaspora established thriving communities. However, they were quickly assimilated into the American culture and most of them had lost all of their original culture in less than 3 generations. This part of our province's History has been explored in the TV serie "Les tisserands du pouvoir" (Claude Fournier, 1988). Hugo Dufort 07:24, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Foreign influences

I disagree with this statement

"many Quebecers agree that at least within North America, New York City is the best place for shopping, theatre, and picking up new trends, while at the same time, New Yorkers say the same thing about Montreal."

As a New Yorker, I have never heard anyone say that about Montréal. They say that about New York.

171.159.192.10 20:39, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Forget that, the whole New York part is odd.

"New York

While Toronto dominates English Canadian culture, Montrealers (and by extension, Quebecers) tend to prefer New York City (namely Manhattan) as a travel destination[citation needed], and because of its appeal as a "global city". Despite the higher prices and a generally unfavourable exchange rate, many Quebecers agree that at least within North America, New York City is the best place for shopping, theatre, and picking up new trends.[citation needed]"

What kind of silly drivel is this?

It is only true for bagels and for the Jazz festival. ;-) Hugo Dufort 07:25, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

comedy... needs expending

hi.

I was thinking that the aprt of 'québec humor' needs to be bigger. The Québécois have a good sense of humor, which is aprt of their daily lives. They also have alot of comedy stuff, as 'just for laughs', 'tetes a claques' 'Deux minutes du peuple' and many other TV shoes 'Dans une Galexie près de chez nous' 'le coeur a ses Raisons' etc.

I tihnk their needs to be more stuff aobut comedy, cuz it is really a role in their lifes. see 'tetes a claques' for an exmaple on wikipedia.

Chris

About this article

I have made some changes to this article and have added some tags. The article seems to be full of assertions (some no doubt true, some no doubt opinions) that do not have citations. In addition, parts of the article have clearly been written by French-speakers. Monsieur Net (talk) 14:19, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

This article was abandoned a while ago. The most advanced effort on this topic is this attempt at creating a meta-portal:

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilisateur:Clou/Brouillons/Portail_culture_qu%C3%A9b%C3%A9coise

While doing this portal, which is an update of a previous one I also started, it became apparent that Wikipedia, even in French, is unfortunately not yet ready to offer a portal to Quebec's culture for lack of good quality articles and some important missing parts. While it is clear that there is a lot of material, for example numerous stubs on famous persons, movies, music albums etc., there is just not enough yet to embrace it in its globality. Maybe next year? Once there is enough material, we will be able to import the portal, which I find has a decent structure already, into English Wikipedia and fill the blanks with translations, which hopefully native English speakers will help us fix. ;-) -- Mathieugp (talk) 22:29, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Hollywood

I believe that instead of "argot" - "slang" would better explain the difficulties that stems from movies being dubbed in France dialogue (at least according to Wikipedia's own articles on the word "argot" which does not seem a good fit for this situation). In addition, I assure you that the majority of French Quebecers understands French as spoken in France perfectly - with the exception of slang - which makes Mario Dumont's unreferenced claim that he and his children understood nothing of Shrek 3 absurd or to the very least exaggerated (he is a politician afterall). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.137.245.209 (talk) 19:04, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Culture of Quebec. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20061019071806/http://www.unesco.org:80/courier/2001_07/uk/education.htm to http://www.unesco.org/courier/2001_07/uk/education.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110919063513/http://www.infotouriste.ca/humoriste.php?v=quebec to http://www.infotouriste.ca/humoriste.php?v=quebec

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 18:41, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Culture of Quebec. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070701163039/http://www.riaa.com/goldandplatinumdata.php?table=tblTopArt to http://www.riaa.com/goldandplatinumdata.php?table=tblTopArt

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:52, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Culture of Quebec. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040604160348/http://jydupuis.apinc.org/pdf/ to http://jydupuis.apinc.org/pdf/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:21, 15 August 2017 (UTC)