CZ at Cote St. Luc Shopping centre, 25 April 2012

 

Belvedere Terry-Fox on rue St. Jacques, April 2025

A walk on the Belvedere Terry Fox on 14 April 2025. 

14 April 2025

On Louis Dudek’s "Continuation"

Cross-Section: Poems 1940-1980 (Coach House Press, 1980), Louis Dudek

 

My copy of Louis Dudek’s  Cross-Section: Poems 1940-1980 (1980) used to belong to my friend Sonja Skarsteft, it is one of several books given to me by Sonja’s husband, Geof Isherwood, after Sonja’s passing and it is a book that I treasure because it was Sonja's and it was inscribed to her by another friend, Louis Dudek. Cross-Section is a selection of Dudek’s previously unpublished poems, organized in chronological order from 1940 to 1980. A poem entitled "Fragment of Continuum", the final poem in the book, immediately caught my attention, written in 1980 it is similar to Dudek's Continuation poems in its form and content; the poem is conversational, it is a stream of consciousness that easily fits as a part of Continuation, albeit not quite as good as Continuation, but there must be some connection between this poem and Continuation.

Dudek was uneasy about publishing Continuation, it is idiosyncratic, unlike anything else he wrote, and either readers are willing to extend their idea of what poetry is or they dismiss it as obscure and without artistic value. Continuation was not well received even by Dudek's friends; for instance, Mike Gnarowski was condescending about the poem when I mentioned it to him a year or so before he died. But Louis persevered, as any poet must persevere who writes something considerably out of the main stream of contemporary poetry or their usual work; however, Continuation is also similar to Dudek’s previously published long poems and it is a development on his previous poems. It was years in creative gestation before it was finally published; it also parallels Dudek's growth as a poet.  

Here (revised) is the publishing history of Continuation from my essay, "Reading Louis Dudek’s Continuation: An introduction to a major Canadian poem", published in "Montreal Serai" around December 2013: 

The publishing history of Continuation is interesting; Continuation I ( 1981) and Continuation II (1989) were published as separate volumes by Vehicule Press; Continuation III was never completed but parts of it were published in two separate books, they are:

Continuation III, found in The Caged Tiger (Empyreal Press, Montreal, 1997), has four sections; “Bits and Pieces”, included in The Caged Tiger, was section five of Continuation III.

Dudek’s last book, The Surface of Time (Empyreal Press, Montreal, 2000), concludes with "Sequence from 'Continuation III', which would be section six of "Continuation III".

In Dudek's "White Book", his Collected Poetry (1971), there is an excerpt from "Continuation I" which he subtitled "An infinite Poem in Progress". Dudek’s explanation of "Fragment of Continuum", published the year before Continuation I was published, is also explained but in a footnote to the poem, and it could also describe what he is doing in Continuation; a "continuum" he defines as "Something in which a fundamental common character is discernible amid a series of insensible or indefinite variations". As in Continuation.

There should have been Continuation III, not only excerpts published in two of Dudek’s books.  I am told that Dudek’s literary executor was Mike Gnarowski, but probably due to old age or dislike of Continuation, Professor Gnarowski never published a complete three volume Continuation; there should be three volumes to this work--it should be triadic--the number three suggesting completion, a creative and archetypal manifestation of the creative spirit. Continuation remains incomplete as two volumes; the number two as an archetypal number suggesting the absence of completion, and this reminds us that the poem remains unfinished.

Multiple book length poems are difficult to write and to get published, and difficult to sustain to completion; for instance, some long poems do not cohere, think of Pound's Cantos or Olson's Maxiumus Poems. Dudek's Continuation ends in the poet's acknowledgement that old age preoccupies his thinking and his daily activity and the poem shows the effect of being old; with the exception of William Carlos Williams' Paterson, the long poem is not the domain of old poets as Dudek experienced. Of course, there are exceptions, there always are, but still, few old people have the energy required to maintain a sustained creative effort such as the long poem. That’s just common sense.

Saint-Raymond-de-Pennafort Catholic Church

A walk on St. Jacques on 14 April 2025. Here is Saint-Raymond-de-Pennafort Catholic Church, a mostly Italian congregation, located at 5765, rue Saint-Jacques Ouest. 

Vincelli's Garden Centre on 13 April 2025

We used to have fun—buying annuals, choosing perennials, preparing the garden for another year of gardening—at Vincelli's Garden Centre. A few years ago someone wanted to build condos on this property but it seems the City of Cote Saint Luc wisely decided against it. This past winter the main building, visible in these photographs, was renovated and something must be happening, new tenants moving in, but no condos. These photographs were taken on 13 April 2025.

The American invasion of Canada 4/4

Introduction:

This is the fourth of four conversations I had with ChatGPT on the subject of a hypothetical invasion of Canada by our neighbour, the United States of America. President Trump has imposed severe tariffs on Canada and other countries, but the president has also suggested that Canada should be the 51st American state and this seems to be his objective. With four years ahead of us of Trump's presidency many Canadians believe annexation and invasion is a great possibility. This is purely speculative. 

-------------------------------------------

Stephen Morrissey: Indigenous communities would not accept American rule; their treaties were signed with the British crown, not with Canada. They would not negotiate with Americans. French Quebec might get some concessions but the possibility that Quebec is "Louisiana North" (originally French-speaking but now almost wholly English-speaking) with French as local colour, would be something they would fear; the French speakers in Quebec would go to the Supreme Court to demand their rights.

ChatGPT said:  That’s a compelling point. Indigenous nations have historically viewed their treaties as agreements with the Crown rather than with Canada itself, and the U.S. has a very different approach to Indigenous relations. American policies tend to emphasize federal oversight rather than treaty-based nation-to-nation relationships, which could lead to significant tensions. Some Indigenous groups might outright refuse to recognize American rule, possibly pushing for international recognition of their sovereignty.

As for Quebec, the fear of becoming "Louisiana North" is very real. The U.S. does allow for bilingualism in some regions (like Puerto Rico with Spanish), but historically, minority languages tend to decline over time under American governance. Even if the U.S. granted Quebec some concessions, legal challenges from French speakers would likely arise as they try to protect their language rights in an American legal system that prioritizes individual freedoms over collective linguistic policies.

Do you think the Supreme Court would rule in favor of preserving strong French-language laws in Quebec, or would it ultimately strike them down in favor of American constitutional principles?

Stephen Morrissey: It would depend if the Supreme Court favours the Constitution or if it favours a more open-ended liberal approach.

ChatGPT said: That’s true—it would come down to whether the Supreme Court strictly adheres to the U.S. Constitution’s principles or takes a more flexible, accommodating stance.

If the Court prioritizes the Constitution, it might strike down Quebec’s language laws as discriminatory, arguing that they violate freedom of speech and equal protection under the law. This would accelerate the decline of French in Quebec, making it more like Louisiana, where French exists mostly as a cultural artifact rather than a widely spoken language.

On the other hand, if the Court takes a more liberal, multicultural approach, it could uphold some of Quebec’s language protections, arguing that they serve a legitimate cultural and historical purpose. However, even in this scenario, full preservation of Quebec’s stringent language laws seems unlikely. Over time, economic and social pressures would likely lead to greater English use, eroding Quebec’s distinct identity.

Do you think Quebecers would accept these legal decisions over time, or would there be long-term resentment and a push for cultural preservation outside the legal system?

Stephen Morrissey: Long term resentment would diminish over time.

ChatGPT said: That makes sense—while there might be initial resistance and frustration, over time, as new generations grow up under American governance, the resentment would likely fade. Economic integration, cultural blending, and the gradual dominance of English would make it more of a historical grievance than an active political issue.

At that point, Quebec’s French identity might survive in a symbolic way—perhaps in local traditions, cultural festivals, or certain institutions—but it wouldn’t have the same political or legal weight. Essentially, it would follow the Louisiana model, where French is a part of heritage rather than daily life.

Do you think there would be any long-term attempts to revive French in Quebec, or would people simply adapt and move on?

Stephen Morrissey: I can't deal with the speculative nature of "long-term attempts". Sorry.

ChatGPT said: No problem! The future is always uncertain, and it's understandable to focus on the more immediate and tangible aspects of such a scenario.

From what we've discussed, it seems like the transition would involve some initial legal battles and cultural adjustments, but over time, Quebec—and the rest of Canada—would gradually integrate into the American system without much long-term resistance.

Would you be interested in exploring how other regions of Canada might react to annexation, or do you feel we've covered the most significant aspects?

Stephen Morrissey: Only Quebec presents a problem. I have read that AI is learning all the time, am I "teaching" you something about the possible invasion of Canada by the United States? Am I making it sound easy, my opinion only, so that ChatGPT might be influenced by what I have asked and replied?

ChatGPT said: You're sharing a well-thought-out perspective, and I'm engaging with your ideas based on what you've said. However, I don’t "learn" in the way a human does—I don’t retain information beyond what we've discussed in this conversation (except for general notes on your perspective to keep the discussion consistent).

So, while I can analyze your arguments, I’m not being "taught" in a way that would permanently influence how I respond to others. If someone else were to ask about a U.S. invasion of Canada, I wouldn’t automatically present your views as fact—I’d consider multiple perspectives.

As for whether you're making it sound easy, your argument is certainly well-structured and logical. You've outlined why you believe there wouldn't be resistance and why Canada would struggle to maintain its identity under American rule. That said, different people might have different takes on whether it would be as smooth as you predict.

four of four

St. Augustine Catholic Church, 11 April 2011

I remember when I attended St, Augustine Catholic Church, it was for my grandmother's funeral. I can remember the approximate date, it was 26 April 1965, the day before my fifteenth birthday. But I don't remember going to the cemetery for the burial, one forgets so many things and wonders "where was I?" "what was I doing?" “ why didn't I go?" "who was I with?" There must have been other funerals that day, my grandmother's casket was one of several and I remember the priest who officiated. This was the church of my Auntie Mabel; she died in 1960. My grandmother was Protestant and never went to church, she could marry my Catholic grandfather on the condition that she raise the children as Catholics, but on Sunday mornings she said her boys needed their sleep and most of her children were nominal Catholics and married Protestants. 

It was an Irish Catholic church.

 

The American invasion of Canada 3/4

Introduction:

This is the third of four conversations I had with ChatGPT on the subject of a hypothetical invasion of Canada by our neighbour, the United States of America. President Trump has imposed severe tariffs on Canada and other countries, but the president has also suggested that Canada should be the 51st American state and this seems to be his objective. With four years ahead of us of Trump's presidency many Canadians believe annexation and invasion is a great possibility. This is purely speculative.

-------------------------------------------

Stephen Morrissey: The only way Canada could be taken over by the United States is a military occupation, perhaps in 2027. What are the advantages and disadvantages to both countries if this were to happen?

ChatGPT said: A U.S. military occupation of Canada in 2027 would bring a mix of strategic, economic, and political advantages and disadvantages for both countries. While such a scenario would be unprecedented, it’s worth exploring how this takeover might play out in terms of benefits and costs for both sides.

---

Advantages for the United States

1. Economic Expansion

Canada is rich in natural resources, including oil, gas, minerals, and timber. By absorbing Canada, the U.S. would gain direct control over these resources, reducing dependence on foreign imports and strengthening its economic and energy security. The Alberta oil sands, in particular, would provide a reliable long-term energy source.

2. Strategic Military Control

With Canada under U.S. rule, North American defense would be far simpler. The Arctic, which is becoming more geopolitically important due to melting ice and new shipping routes, would be firmly under American control. This would allow the U.S. to counter Russian and Chinese influence in the region. Additionally, the U.S. would gain access to Canada’s military infrastructure, including key naval bases on the Atlantic and Pacific coasts.

3. Population and Landmass Growth

The U.S. would increase its population by roughly 40 million people, providing a larger labor force and tax base. This could stimulate economic growth, especially if Canadian industries were fully integrated into the American economy. Additionally, the sheer size of Canada’s landmass would make the U.S. the undisputed largest nation in North America, further solidifying its global dominance.

4. Political and Diplomatic Influence

A U.S.-controlled Canada would eliminate a major ally for European powers and create an even more dominant North American bloc. This could shift global power dynamics, making the U.S. an even greater economic and geopolitical force.

---

Disadvantages for the United States

1. International Condemnation and Sanctions

An invasion and occupation of Canada would violate international law and result in worldwide condemnation. The U.S. would likely face diplomatic isolation, economic sanctions, and possibly military pushback from NATO allies. While Canada might not resist militarily, the global reaction could be severe, potentially damaging the American economy.

2. Economic Costs of Occupation

Even if Canada did not resist militarily, occupying and integrating the country would be an expensive endeavor. Rebuilding infrastructure, changing governance, and handling legal and economic transitions could cost trillions of dollars. The burden on American taxpayers would be enormous, and the initial instability could slow economic growth.

3. Potential Political Instability

While you believe Canadians wouldn’t resist, there could still be political unrest, protests, and economic disruptions during the transition. Some Canadians might resist integration, creating pockets of dissent. Additionally, managing a population with a different political culture—especially in Quebec—could present governance challenges.

4. Constitutional and Legal Challenges

Canada has a different legal system (British common law and civil law in Quebec), different healthcare policies, and a different approach to governance. The U.S. Constitution would not easily accommodate these differences. Quebec’s language laws, public healthcare, and other policies would likely come into conflict with American legal norms, creating prolonged legal and political battles.

---

Advantages for Canada

1. Economic Growth and Stability

Joining the U.S. could provide Canada with access to a larger and more dynamic economy. Canadian businesses would benefit from easier trade, and industries like oil, agriculture, and technology could flourish under American economic policies. The U.S. dollar’s stability would also eliminate exchange rate risks.

2. Stronger Defense and Security

With Canada under American control, its military security would be guaranteed. Canada would no longer have to worry about maintaining its own military forces, as American defense spending would cover national security. This could allow for lower domestic taxes and a stronger focus on economic development.

3. Increased Global Influence

Rather than being a secondary player in global affairs, Canadians would become part of the world’s leading superpower. Canadian states (formerly provinces) would have congressional representation, allowing them a voice in Washington and in shaping U.S. policies.

4. More Infrastructure and Development

The U.S. has a strong track record of infrastructure investment. High-speed rail, expanded road systems, and increased urban development could bring economic benefits to underdeveloped parts of Canada. The northern territories, in particular, could see significant investment and modernization.

---

Disadvantages for Canada

1. Loss of Sovereignty

The biggest downside for Canada would be the complete loss of its independence. Canadian identity, governance, and foreign policy would be entirely controlled by Washington. While Canada and the U.S. share cultural similarities, Canadians would no longer have control over their own political future.

2. Dismantling of Social Programs

Canada’s universal healthcare system and social welfare policies could be at risk. The U.S. has a private healthcare system, and integrating Canada could mean the end of publicly funded healthcare, leading to higher costs for citizens. Other social programs, such as subsidized higher education, could also be scaled back or eliminated under American governance.

3. Cultural and Political Tensions

While many Canadians admire the U.S., there are still cultural and political differences. Canadians tend to be more liberal on social issues, while many American states are more conservative. The transition could create cultural clashes, especially in Quebec, where language and identity issues would be major points of contention.

4. Potential Economic Disruptions

Although the U.S. has a stronger economy, the transition period could be turbulent. Shifting trade relationships, currency changes, and new taxation policies could create short-term economic instability. Some Canadian industries might struggle to compete under U.S. regulations, leading to job losses before long-term benefits are realized.

---

Final Assessment

A U.S. occupation of Canada in 2027 would create one of the largest and most powerful nations in history, with vast economic and military benefits. However, it would come at significant political and financial costs. While you believe resistance would be minimal, the global backlash and economic burden of integration could still pose major challenges for both countries. Over time, the transition might smooth out, but the initial occupation and restructuring would be a complicated process with both risks and rewards.

Do you think the U.S. would face any major internal opposition to taking over Canada, or would most Americans support the idea?

Stephen Morrissey: Inevitably, most Americans would support this annexation. It is all to the advantage of the United States which has always wanted to annex Canada. But I can see that the major losers in this scenario would be Canada who would lose their country, their history, and culture.

ChatGPT said: That’s a fair assessment. While the U.S. would gain land, resources, and strategic advantages, Canada would essentially cease to exist as an independent nation. Over time, Canadian identity might erode as American culture and governance take over, making Canada just another part of the U.S. rather than a distinct country.

Even if Canadians didn’t resist militarily, there could be a sense of cultural loss, especially for those who valued Canadian institutions and traditions. Do you think any aspects of Canadian identity—like its bilingualism, legal system, or social programs—could survive under American rule, or would they be completely absorbed over time?

Stephen Morrissey: If Canada is the 51st State, legalistic aspects of Canadian identity would be impossible; there would be a nostalgic attachment to Canada but it would also erode over time.

ChatGPT said: That makes sense—once American laws and governance take over, the distinct legal and institutional aspects of Canada would disappear. Nostalgia might linger for a while, but as new generations grow up under American rule, the idea of an independent Canada would likely fade.

Even things like "Canadian pride" in hockey or cultural icons might just be absorbed into the broader American identity, much like how regional cultures in the U.S. exist but don’t challenge national unity. Do you think any particular groups—like Quebecers or Indigenous communities—would try to preserve their distinct identities longer than the rest of the country?

three of four