Home » Producers (Movies or TV)
Category Archives: Producers (Movies or TV)
This is the second post in a two-post series on Denys Arcard (you’ll need to refer to the first post for the context of what follows. Click here for the first post: Denys Arcand: A quick Québec film industry backgrounder — Post 1 of 2
Arcand is quite significant on four fronts:
- He is the most important, “still-surviving” influential “second-era” filmmaker to have made the transition into a third-era filmmaker,
- Like other former second-era filmmakers, he has for the most part abandoned the ideals of the second-era when making third-era films (of which his third-era films have been his most successful),
- Both his second and third-era films are extremely well-known, influential, and have marked Québec’s and Montréwood’s film industry forever.
- [Note: when I refer to the expression Montréwood, it denotes a much more “Montréal” specific phenomena related to Québec’s pop-culture, rather than a province-wide activity]
- He is probably Québec’s greatest filmmaker of all time.
Québec’s film industry really didn’t take off until the beginning of the second era, and Arcand was born at the right moment to be of the right age when he became fully engaged as a filmmaker (from a nationalist and age-bracket point-of-view). His first films came out in the early 1960s, and he created, or participated in the creation of 10 major films from the 1960’s until the first referendum in 1980.
Of these second-era ultra-nationalistic films, a few have marked Arcand’s place in history (they were films kept the ball of nationalist momentum rolling, or at least they gave the ball a few good, hard spins). “On est au coton” from 1970 is one of the best known.
“On est au coton” was actually censored by the National Film Board based because it did not meet Board policy standards (The NFB had the authority to censor it because it was a private matter owing to the fact that they produced it – not because of government censorship [we’re not that kind of country, after all]). I think uncensored versions of it only began to be sold on the open market during the last 10 or 15 years. The film’s theme was about francophone labourers of the 1950’s, working under appalling conditions in Québec’s Anglophone-managed textile industry (I’m sure you can infer the spin Arcand took with this film). The film also included two members of the FLQ (a Québec terrorist organization from the late 60’s / early 70’s) calling for armed revolution. On one hand, it was held up as a lightning rod for those calling for sovereignty. On the other hand, others decried that it twisted reality by sensationalizing issues which were not reflective of the reality for the majority. Regardless, it was a long time ago (45 years ago), and I believe it’s good for everyone to be fully aware of film and the context of the time. But it was a matter for another generation and now for the history books – I think most people recognize that. The film has been made available for free online viewing on National Film Board’s website at the following address: https://www.onf.ca/film/on_est_au_coton/.
It’s interesting to note that On est au coton gave rise to an expression commonly used in modern Québec French: “Être au coton” means “to be at one’s wits end”
Other well-known Arcand films, from Québec second film era, were Québec: Duplessis et après (regarding the politics of the Quiet Revolution), and Le Confort de l’indifférence, which mourned the loss of the “nationalist dream” following the 1980 referendum. For many, this latter film signalled the end of Québec’s second–era of films.
From the 1980s onwards, Denys Arcand, like most other major filmmakers, abandoned the themes of second-era films and concentrated on populist, modern and all-inclusive films with global appeal.
After the 1980 referendum and after his film Le Confort de l’indifférence, I think Arcand felt there was no more point in creating films which created ideological divisions in society, or which had nationalist aspirations — and he laid that aspect of his filmmaking to rest. Even if one wanted to make a point, one could still do it in an inclusive manner — just as any family dispute can be discussed without making individual family members feel isolated or rejected. In passing, this is also why I do not ascribe to the notion that nationalistic debates are “tribalistic” in nature (at least in our context in Canada), because tribalism denotes a “them and us” connotation – whereas I’m of the mindset that we’re all in this together, that it’s a family affair, and that it is to be discussed in this latter context.
In an interesting comparison, just as Denys Arcand chose to make Le Confort de l’indifférence to signify the end of second-era films, Pierre Falardeau chose to make Elvis Gratton to signify the end of second-era films, and to then move on with life (see the post on Elvis Gratton).
It was the mid 1980s transition towards third-era films which really saw Arcand’s artistic genius and abilities take flight. I think it is owing to the fact that he liberated himself (and his movies) from second-era constraints that he was able to finally produce works which found universal appeal. His subsequent success was phenomenal.
I’ll briefly mention some of his most successful third-era films. But I’ll provide you with Wikipedia links if you want more information.
Jésus de Montréal (1989) won the Jury award at Cannes and an Oscar.
Other notable information: Denys Arcand also has made many short films. He has been decorated with Canada’s, Québec’s and even France’s highest awards. He is highly sought after for interviews, and been the invitee on many of Montréwood’s most high profile talk shows. His works and life are also the subject of intense study at university and in academic circles. In essence, he incarnates Québec cinema on many levels, and has set the bar for generations to come.
If you’re learning French, I’d recommend taking in some of the above-mentioned films. Not only will they provide you with an interesting way to practice your French, but they will provide you invaluable cultural context.
Related post: Montréwood Movies
Fabienne Larouche makes a lot of the magic happen behind the scenes on the TV sitcom and drama front, and is the creator of many popular shows. Here’s where she’s different and why she’s being mentioned… If I were to ask many of you who was the creator of the wildly popular NBC show “Friends”, you likely wouldn’t know. However, if you were to ask many Québécois who created the popular sitcoms and dramas (both past and some present) Virginie, Unité 9, 30 vies, Trauma, Fortier, and Les Bougons, a chuck of the people would recognize Fabienne Larouche’s name.
As we saw in our earlier series on Montréwood, many of those working behind the scenes are celebrities in their own right. There seems to be a collective appreciation by society for those who bring the screen to life; almost to the extent of gratitude and praise for helping to build and reinforce a society’s vibrant culture.
As a writer and producer, Larouche has been involved in many more television productions that just those mentioned above (which have been among some of the most popular programs in evening television during the last decade).
With four main television networks, writing or directing for one television show probably wouldn’t change the world. But if you have written, directed, or played a major hand in the creation of 25 of some of the most popular and best known evening sitcoms and dramas spread across the main networks – all in a 20 year span – then you’ve left your mark on television, the direction it takes, and what society expects in terms of entertainment. Those are pretty big shoes to fill!
Surprisingly, we don’t see Larouche very often on screen herself. But her face is recognizable to many in the industry, and those who know her programs. However, if a new program comes out, and you know it was Larouche who created it, you’re going to pay attention.
Shows which will be airing for the fall 2014 season are:
- 30 vie (Radio-Canada)
- Unité 9 (Radio-Canada)
These two programs will be broadcast on Radio-Canada’s fall season across Canada. See if you can catch them (Tou.tv also has online streaming).
An Anecdote: Some of Larouche’s programs are now showing on television in France. One of them, Fortier is actually being “dubbed” from Québec French to France French (I was surprised to learn this). You’ll sometimes hear Québécois say people in France occasionally have difficultly understanding a Québec accent. I can only assume this is because the program in question has heavy bouts of Joual, a colloquial way of speaking in Québec which is not familiar to those in France. This is probably a good way to lead to the next post which will be on Joual.
PREFACE: I wrote another post on Julie Snyder, complete with videos, which traces how she has gone from a show-biz celebrity to a de facto politician for sovereignty. You can read that post here: Québec’s 20 most trusted individuals: 14th and 15th positions [post 8 of 11] (#263)
We’re now half way through the group of 12 famous Quebec personalities who most Anglophones could not identify when polled (see the previous post “The Poll that Shocked”). We’ll continue with the remaining 6 personalities mentioned in the polls.
Julie Snyder, like Guy Lepage (earlier post), is a well-known interviewer and TV show producer, but the nature of her productions are quite different.
I particularly remember growing up in rural Alberta, watching Julie Snyder’s show L’enfer c’est nous autres after school on Radio-Canada in the early / mid-90s — light-hearted TV variety show in which she conducted amusing interviews, or took part in various events. She always wore eccentric-themed dresses (flower bouquets glued on her dresses, a working water-fountain dress, a dress in the shape of unlikely objects like a guitar, bowling pin, etc, etc.). Her wacky clothes became her trademark of sorts and added to the fun atmosphere of her shows. If one of your friends was wearing any piece of flashy clothing, you could joke with them that they looked like a “Julie, in the flesh” (the uniting factor of pop-culture).
Born in 1967, she’s been on and off the TV since age 18 (more “on” than off). A couple of generations have grown up watching her on television.
Her interviewing style matured into a more conventional manner with the inception of her show Le Poing J on the TVA TV network in the latter half of the 1990s. Her interviewees were newsmakers in cultural spheres (singers, actors), and she also brought on various controversial figures as well. Her handling of controversial topics earned her a new respect, and her style as an advocate for numerous societal issues began to define her in the eyes of the public.
After hosting her own interview show in France for a couple of years, she returned to Québec and galvanized her name (and career) into the history books as the TV producer and host of the wildly popular, weekly reality TV singing competition Star Académie which aired on TVA for 10 years until 2012 (you’ll recall from an earlier post that Marie-Mai’s career was launched on Star Académie – with Julie having played a direct hand in the launch of Marie-Mai’s career, as well as those of many others). Because of her show helped to launch so many singing careers, the ampler, popularity and impact of her show on the Québec singing industry cannot be underestimated (in terms of artistic contribution, as well as pure economics). Closely resembling Canadian Idol in style, but with a much deeper concentration of viewer penetration, Star Académie repetitively drew in over 2 million viewers, breaking records for viewership for a Canadian television program.
Snyder put Star Académie on hold in 2012 and concentrated on other matters, while continuing to develop, produce and host the television game show Le Banquier on TVA (a show similar to “Deal or No Deal”). Because the prize stakes are so high (prizes climbing as high as $1,000,000), the show attracts record audiences (exceeding 2 million viewers – again, record breaking territory for Québec and Canadian television).
Being a central figure in the star-culture of Québec, some of her best known friends are amongst some of the biggest stars and icons in Québec, as well as the francophone world in general. Her friendship with Céline Dion is particularly prominent. It’s often a publicly shared friendship, and Julie and Céline are regularly seen together on television, with Céline having been featured in Julie’s numerous shows.
Pop-culture in Québec often crosses paths with politics. While most celebrities do remain politically neutral on the public stage, the political opinions of many well-known artists and icons are sometimes thinly veiled and can often discerned by the public (after all, 1+1 always equals 2). But only a handful of celebrities venture to publicly endorse specific political parties, ideologies, or people in an overt manner. Snyder’s personal integrity for standing up for issues she feels strongly about is well-known, and she by no means has hidden her political inclinations — throwing her support behind the Parti Québécois and sovereignty.
[Note: The purpose of this blog is not to politicize celebrities — even if they politicize themselves in the grandest of ways. So I’ll leave it to the readers to do their own research if further interest exists. However, from time to time, I may bring up political affiliations if it may provide depth of context for the topic being discussed.]
Apart from her political activism, Julie Snyder is also a staunch advocate of several issues, including gender equality, specific health-related matters, and state secularism in Québec (with the latter having been a hotly debated issue in the last provincial election – further defining Snyder’s political activism).
Much of her career has developed and continues to be featured on TVA (you’ll recall the last post highlighted Pierre Bruneau’s career on TVA). Snyder’s spouse of almost 15 years, Pierre Karl Péladeau (often simply referred to as PKP), is the former CEO of Québecor, the communications company which owns TVA. The Péladeau family continues to run Québecor. Pierre Péladeau is now a Parti Québécois MNA in the Québec legislature (the equivalent of an MLA, MPP, or MNL). They have children together.
Julie’s career continues to flourish, and it is certain that her influence, popularity, and causes close to her heart will continue to leave their mark on Québec society and culture as a whole.
Suggestions for additional research:
- Star Académie
- Le Poing J
- Le Banquier
Please only view non-pirated content through official websites when conducting web-searches for content. Songs featured on Star Académie are available for purchase through legal venues (please do not pirate – the hard work of artists form part of our cultural fabric).
Continue to refer back to this post every few of months (I may update it periodically). Snyder’s political engagement has become more and more public and more frequent since initially writing this post. She makes regular political on-air statements, and in late 2014 engaged in a battle of words (a very bitter, personal and public one at that) with the CAQ leader, François Legault (and Snyder has in the past lambasted Premier Couillard when he was a former Health Minister in Jean Charest’s cabinet).
Without having been elected, her political self styling and her use of a very large public microphone is beginning to show traits of morphing into a de facto politician, without a seat or portofolio of course. As Québec’s most watched person on television, she is using her role to compliment and back-up the political campaigning and positions of her husband, the billionaire media-mogul, Pierre Karl Péladeau (who is expected to become the leader of the Parti Québécois, lest the tide unseeingly turns against him in the run-up to the PQ leadership convention in May, 2015).
It is quite interesting, and considering this very different and new “business empire”-cum-“media-star” political partnership, neither Québec, nor Canada has ever seen something quite like this before (the Snyder-PKP political team). It could possibly lead to one of the most significant political shake-ups and show-downs in Québec’s and Canada’s history.
Without wanting to overplay it, only time will tell if it goes down this road.
A four to eight year chess-table is being slowly laid out. However, we are only at the very beginning of this game, and not nearly enough moves on that chess table have been made yet to tell what direction it will take. Syder’s and PKP’s ultimate goal is Québec’s sovereignty – full stop, period! And for them, the faster the better (PKP has said in the last few weeks that he has zero interest in governing Québec. He wants to get in, hold a referendum, win it, and then get out).
But because the chess moves are only starting to be made, there are way too many factors to tell what will happen. Some of the unknowns:
- Couillard’s government still has four years to govern. At the end of those four years, will he be more popular than PKP, and if so, will that thwart PKP’s hopes of becoming Premier in the next government mandate? If not, will PKP be interested in sticking around for a whole “eight years” for the second general election if he can’t win the next one? Will his party tolerate such a situation?
- The “Conflict-of-interest wildcard”: Will he be allowed to keep his media fortune without being forced to sell it off? Many believe he would never HAVE made it this far if it wasn’t for his and Snyder’s fame, money and influence convincing decision makers to day to put their confidence in PKP (ie: people in the party and PKP’s riding voted for him because of his stature). But many feel this gives an unequal and unfair advantage, and thus are advocating for him to be forced to sell his media empire.
There is also a fear (even in certain aspects of the sovereignist movement, that the TVA/Canoe/newspaper news & commentary segment of his media empire will not challenge him, for fear of what happens when he returns to the CEO seat after politics). It becomes extremely complicated and interwoven with so many other aspects: His wife, Snyder, is the most watched person in Québec media – either on stage or as the creator of Québec’s most popular programs – and she is given free reign because here projects are all on her PKP’s personally owned networks – and thus that holds huge influence over the electorate. Also refer to the prior post No Way, Le Figaro! for poignant examples of other complicated twists this whole rigmarole is taking — to the point that it is now reaching as far away as Alberta.
With this being said, there’s also another Julie Snyder association to the whole “conflict-of-interest” conundrum. In Québec, to ensure all candidates and parties are on equal footing and nobody has more of an advatage than others (either for party positions, or elected positions), there are very strict spending laws with respect to campaigning and advertising. Travel and paid television airtime is included in this equation. Those with the most media expoure often tend to have a leg up anytime there are party votes or electorate votes. Spending caps are designed to even out the amount of media exposure any one candidate can get. BUT it has the appearance of a conflict of interest when PKP has the money to pull “personal” media attention-getters, and when Snyder has the television programming power with which to air those activities as a “private family affair” (rather than a politcial one).
It’s seemlingly an important possible loophole which other politicans (foes or friendly) cannot compete with. I’ll give you a couple of examples. A couple of months there was the ice-bucket challenge. Snyder and PKP went on a “family vacation” to the Madeleine Islands where they participated in the ice-bucket challenges as a “family.” Snyder was interviewed and was part of a great deal of media appearances (both live, and as repeat feeds), with her husband standing in the background, just “tagging along” (I watched it live on TVA Salut Bonjour). It was not considered a political campaiging expenditure in the legal sense, but it had all the allures of campaigning to far off regions of Québec, raising PKP’s profile in those regions, and then broadcast repeatedly across the province through Snyder’s own “private” media appearances. How can other politicans compete with this?
The same thing happened with their “family” jaunts to Scotland and Barcelona to be present for their respective referendums. In many ways, the Snyder-PKP self-paid family vacation became just as much the news story as the referendums themselves. PKP spends the money, and Snyder pulls in the television appearances. It’s an issue – and this is why attempts have been made to come up with some sort of binding parliamentary resolution requiring that Party heads (ie: PKP, should he win the PQ party leadership) “and” their immediate relatives (ie: Julie Snyder) must sell all shares which they hold in any media company (rather than just restricting it to Party heads). PKP already said there’s no hope in hell that he will do that.
He states his ownership of Québecor was inherited from his father, and he has every intention to pass it to his own children when they become adults (they’re young children right now). (Note: Snyder owns Productions J, which produces all of her shows – much like Oprah’s company “Harpo”… and then Productions J sells them to or cooperates with Québecor and its media affiliates to air her programs – which in turn, owing to the fact that they constitute some of the most successful TV programs in Québec’s and Canada’s history, bring in Québecor’s/TVA’s/QMI’s ratings – and thus a huge chunk of PKP’s sorce of cash. It’s complicated, but can you follow?).
Will attempts to restrict politicians from owing media companies be successful, and can such a resolution be passed? I don’t know. Due to the complexity of the matter, many people have their doubts (there are major legal, and possible constitutional implications). Laval University, which Couillard requested to produce a research paper and recommendations on the issue, declined due to the politicization of the topic. But what happens if such a binding resolution can be attained? And what happens if it cannot? Both answers have major implications.
- IF PKP does become Premier in 4 years time (and, of course, there is no way of knowing), who will be in power in Ottawa to face him down in a possible referendum? Will it be Harper? (with a minority or majority government?), Trudeau? (with a minority or majority government?). What will they be able to bring to the table to counter PKP? Harper has never been popular in Québec, and his French is not good enough to carry on any type of major debate in French (imagine what would have happened in the 1995 referendum if Canada’s Prime Minister at the time was rock bottom in the polls in Québec and could not have debated or carried any make-in-or-break-it speeches or arguments in French!!).
What about Trudeau? PKP is arguing that Trudeau’s father (Pierre) is responsible for all of Québec’s woes. Will PKP-Snyder use the media to try to transform that into some type of provocative public anger against Trudeau, leading to Trudeau having to enter a referendum fight with low popularity? Will Justin Trudeau be able to counter other Snyder-PKP societal connections in Québec’s media? (Snyder is well connected with Québec’s media, and there is a possibility she could organize a large segment of Québec’s media against who ever is in power in Ottawa. Imagine what would happen in 10 or 20 of Québec’s most popular and influential celebrities and television figures all publicly turned against Ottawa at once – be it Harper or Trudeau. Read the post Le Plateau for a bit more insight into this card).
- PKP is not immune to ideological criticism. He is currently campaigning as a left-of-centre politician to rally the PQ’s traditional base, but many people are pointing out that his past actions as a major business figure fly in the face of this (ie: his past as a union buster, fiscal conservative, and numerous other associations indicate he has right-right ideologies). This has divided many people who support the Parti Québecois. He needs a united supporter base with which to advance any agenda (either prior to or after any PQ leadership campaign). Will he be able to move forward if that base is fractured regarding their take on him? Is this where Snyder will try to intervene to consolidate that base via her position as a powerful media figure?
- But, with all this said… Québec’s public today is VERY DIFFERENT than Québec’s public in 1995 and 1980. There is no longer life-long loyalty to any one party, and dare I say to any one ideology in Québec. In very general terms, Québec’s electorate is very much like electorates elsewhere in Canada (it’s no longer the odd-sheep out in that asepect – and is very much a Canadian electorate in form and substance). It seems that Québec’s public votes based on “feelings”, the “personality” of party leaders (with less emphasis on party platforms or a party’s ideology than what existed 20 years ago), and they they vote more and more in “pragmatic” rather than ideological terms (ie: how will their vote affect their wallet and services — and in particular, retirement.
Remember, Québec’s population is getting older). PKP’s life has been devoted to business (the Snyder-PKP team are billionaires)… and will he be able to win over such an electorate considering his platform is ideological? Will he be able to use his and Snyder’s media and business history to shift what is essentially an ideological argument to one which can be viewed as a practical one? That’s a major shift, and if has never been tried before in the sovereignty sense… at least not to the extent it will have to be tried if he wishes to win a referendum.
- Will Snyder be able to use her media profile to isolate Ottawa and wrestle away the hearts and minds of Québec? (She is already producing some popular programs, which happen to also be quite nationalistic).
- What happens if Couillard shows that his fiscal cut-backs were good for Québec in four years time? Will PKP be able to win based on the economy-card if Couillard takes the wind out of his sails.
- We’re heading into possible turbulent times with the drop in oil prices… but it could be good for Québec’s export sector, and could keep Couillard in power in four years time. What will PKP do then?
- On the reverse side, what happens if oil prices rebound, even to record heights, in four years’ time? If the dollar goes through the roof, it could spell dark days for Québec’s manufacturing, exports, and thus any ruling party. Will that be a god-send for PKP to defeat Couillard? Will the Snyder-PKP team pounce on the opportunity through the media and consolidate their chances?
- If there is a new Printemps Érable in the spring of 2015 in protest regarding Couillard Liberal budget cuts (right around the time of the PQ convention – which is possibly why the PQ leadership convention was delayed until May 2015), how much momentum and ammunition will that give to PKP? And will it have a tangible effect he can carry with him for 3-4 years until the next general election? Keep in mind that Snyder was a major figure in the Jeannettes movement of the last Printemps Érable in 2012… and she could use her media position to build it into a downhill rolling snowball (which has to crash into something at some point). Just how long can they keep that snowball rolling?
Can Léo Bureau-Drouin, Martine Desjardins, and Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois be rallied to support any stances PKP or Snyder may take in any future Printemps Érable? (They were key figures, and arguably the success-drivers of the last Printemps érable. Their notariety and inclusion in any future Printemps érable may be a necessity, but which may come with a double-edged sword for Snyder-PKP). Whereas Bureau-Drouin’s and Desjardin’s support can almost be guaranteed (with them both having respectively been a former PQ MNA and defeated PQ MNA cadidate), Nadeau-Dubois may prove to be a thorn in the side of any Snyder-PKP attempts to fuel, fan, or even organize a new Printemps Érable. Nadeau-Dubois is already giving clear signals that he is not a fan of PKP, let along a supporter. Lise Payette even tried to convince him in late 2014 to at least support PKP in principle for the sake of sovereignty, if for nothing else, but he wouldn’t hear any of it.
Seeing as Nadeau-Dubois is the most publicly followed of the three “Érabliers-à-trois” (for lack of a better term for these three individuals), what will happen if he denounces PKP (or Snyder) in any new Printemps érable, either in spring 2015, or any time after that? There’s a possibilty it could fracture the PQ, and sovereignists in general, even more than what they already are.
- As you can see above, there are a number of bumps in the road, and mini-hurdles which would have to be overcome, one-by-one, step-by-step, for the Snyder-PKP team to achieve their goal. In the behind-the-scenes strategy rooms of the Parti Québécois (and perhaps more relevant, in PKP’s own office), they would have to lay out a road map… a long scroll with a beginning (now) and and end (sovereignty), and every step, as well as every hurdle which could come along between those two points. So as to stay on track, they would have to take their best guesses as to how they would chronologically play out.
What not many in the media have picked up upon is that Couillard, to date, seems to be a “silent” strategist. I get the impression he’s not thinking one step ahead, but perhaps 10 or 20 steps ahead (I could give numerous examples, but I won’t go into that here). Bottom line, I’m guessing he probably has the ability to also draw out a mirror image of the same political strategy the PKP team has drawn for themselves, and he’s likely to try to thwart off in advance (quite possibly with large degrees of success) numerous necessary steps in the Snyder-PKP strategy road map… perhaps so far in advance, and to such a degree of effectiveness, that it could make it so the Snyder-PKP team can’t even find the anticipated foot-holds they were hoping and planning for (simply because Couillard was able to anticipate them in advance, and remove those footholds). This is pure conjecture on my part, but Couillard is a brain surgeon by profession, and he has an extremely analytical mind. He’s shown this with numerous decisions he has made.
- And then, probably the most import factor, what about Québec’s general lack of appetite for a referendum or hard sovereignty stances (which is very different from soft nationalism, or even a soft sovereignty position). The hard sovereignty advocates of yesteryear (much of the generation from the 1970s) are now going into retirement, if they’re not already there. It takes public support to win a political battle.
Has the PKP-Snyder team taken up the torch too late? The younger generations and immigrant 1st & 2nd generation Québécois, those which more economic room to risk, have a much more “global outlook” on life and their place in the world (as opposed to a “nationalistic inward outlook”, which has always been needed in the past in order to consolidate mass support for sovereignty.
The last attempt to foster this type of “nationalistic inward outlook”, La Charte des valeurs, didn’t exactly go very far, and even backfired to a large degree). Perhaps the Snyder-PKP team may simply be too late for the times, and perhaps, if for nothing else, this could already predetermine the destiny of their efforts. But we will not know this until a good number of chess moves are played in the coming months, and possibly coming years.
As you can see… there are a million different things which could happen. But if you follow things (and you can only really do so in French if you wish to get a true “feel” for what is happening – which is the reason why Anglophone media hasn’t seemed to clue in to any of this), you can see the starting point of strategies and various plans (A, B, C, D, etc.) taking form by way of subtle statements and stances in the media.
It’s really anybody’s guess. But I guarantee you, the run-up to the next provincial election in four years time will be anything but dull. Stay tuned.
ADDENDUM 2015-04-01: A few updates…
- PKP sold off Sun News TV, but still owns all the rest
- PKP’s campaign transportation (charting airplanes) will be accounted for as campaign expenses
- The 2012 student protest leaders (Desjardins, Bureau-Drouin, Nadeau-Dubois) are nowhere to be seen during the renewed (but sputtering) 2015 spring student protests. The rest pretty much remains the same (for now).
- The spring student protests were a total flop. They sputtered, then their leadership started to in-fight, they then became the laughing stock of all, then they died. The super-hero trio of 2012 (Nadeau-Dubois, Bureau-Drouin, and Déjardins) was nowhere to be seen. Instead, the leadership consisted of no-name and incoherent unknowns.
- Unlike 2012, there was nothing Snyder could have involved herself in, protest-wise, without looking like she would be involving herself in something foolish. So that was out of the cards for her this time around.
- Yesterday Dominic Maurais of Radio-X interviewed Vincent Marissal, a well-known newspaper columnist. Marissal wrote a column in which he touched upon a massive star-studded rally Snyder is trying to put together for the crowining of PKP as head of the PQ.
- Marissal states that he has inside info that Snyder is wielding her influence as one of Québec’s best connected media and cultural personalities to call in favours from many in the artistic world her owe her one (singers, artists, TV personalities, etc.). She is trying to get 101 personalities to appear in a massive show to support PKP on May 8th.
- Marissal asserts that this has left many artists uncomfortable, but many owe her for past favours. It is a conundrum for many artists. In addition, many fear being damage to their careers if they refuse to Snyder’s call, and subsequently find themselves locked out of Québecor’s (TVA, and by extension Productions J) media sphere (which controls 40% of Québec’s media).
- Later on the same interview show, Pierre Céré, one of those running for the head of the PQ, insinuated that Vincent Marissal’s assessment is not necessarily wrote. He stated that it worries him, That is big news – and it is going over the head of most people.
- To add to all of this, the purported rally is to take place in Québec City’s new Ampithéatre ($90 million hockey & multi-purpose stadium) owned by Vidéotron, which is owned by Québecor, and thus owned by PKP. It may take the defacto form of a giant “Thank-you PKP” festival (after all, Québec City die-hard hockey fan residents have been desperate for the construction of a new stadium with which to try to attract the Nordiques back to the city). The rally’s goals would thus be to win the hearts and minds in the Québec City region, and turn them to PKP, AKA Jesus — all in a region where PKP and the PQ desperately need votes.
- If people were only aware…
- My thoughts: An extremely dangerous situation, if it’s true. What single other politician (provincial or federal) can compete with such Snyder-PKP tactics. Whether it works or not will be whether people manage to see through it.
From here on in, for the sake of simplicity and efficiency, anything political to do with the PKP-Snyder-PQ ménage à trois will be written as addendums to the post No Way, Le Figaro! (#76) (Click the preceding link to access that post).
I also wrote a piece on her background and how it fits into her officially becoming the unofficial (or unofficially becoming the official) one-woman communications / publicity / marketing department of the entire Parti Québécois and Bloc Québécois political machine.
You can read it here in the post Québec’s 20 most trusted individuals: 14th and 15th positions [post 8 of 11] (#263)
——————– FIN ——————–
Guy A. Lepage was mentioned in this blog’s first post as being the host of Tout le monde en parle.
Where does one begin (or end) when talking about Guy A. Lepage? From a pop-culture point-of-view, he has a long list of accomplishments – a force unto himself over a period of 30 years, with wide reaching appeal in Quebec culture (but from his youthful looks and energy levels, you’d never guess he was born in 1960!).
It would take a book to write about the number of cultural and popular awards he has won, or just how well-known he is with Francophones.
In pop-culture, there are past references we can all recall from when we were younger; references you can joke about any time, and have them instantly understood by your peers. These shared experiences create a feeling of belonging, commonality, and sense of “yah, I remember that — yes, we are cut from the same mould – , and yes, we get each other in a way nobody from another culture could”.
That’s why pop-culture is an important building block to nationhood in the social sense. In an English-Canadian context, an example of might be the “Chicken Lady” from Kids in the Hall. Despite how long the show has been off air, many Anglophone Canadians in their 30’s or 40’s (maybe even 50’s) would instantly understand the context if you mimicked the Chicken Lady. Even regurgitating that the “Polkaroo” call from Polkadot Door makes for instant recognition — a bonding feeling of “Yah, I get you… we’re definately hatched from the same nest!” (mention Polkaroo to someone in Prince George, Moose Jaw, Windsor, or St. John and you’ll get the same nod and smile).
Guy Lepage has appeared in so many popular programmes, on so many different media platforms, that it could be said he has been a source of many Québec pop-culture references over the past 30 years. He has become a bonding figure for Québec pop-culture and society in general through the major events in Québec during that period. That’s a powerful force in all senses of the word. Whether it’s on purpose of inadvertent, pop-culture holds sway and influence over public opinion on a range of issues. Being at the helm of numerous programmes also means one has a degree of control over the business and economic end of what the public will see when they turn on their television or radio in the evening.
He rose to stardom as one of the main actors in the regularly aired comedy group Rock et belles oreilles (simply known as RBO). It ran for nearly 15 years on TV. For comparison sake, its presentation style was similar to that of Kids in the Hall. Kids in the Hall could be considered risqué for its time, often making fun of issues like sex and homosexuality, at a time when it was daring to touch upon those subjects on TV — let alone make fun of the issues (remember the “anal probes”?). In a national sense, the programme probably played some role in pushing the envelope of public awareness and acceptability.
With that reference in mind, RBO also used humour during the same era, but to a broader and deeper degree (sexual inuendo, homosexuality, politics, sovereignty issues, Anglophones, Francophones, public figures of all streams and colours, and various ethical issues). The majority of the sketches may not have been overly controversial, but by integrating humour into sensitive topics, RBO captivated the province and drew in the masses.
Since the programme disbanded, the actors went their separate ways and continued on various paths of stardom. But none of them achieved the status of Guy Lepage today.
In the early 2000s, he became more focused on the actual production of TV programmes. He created the Québec version of the France TV programme Un gars une fille, which ran weekly on Radio-Canada from 1997 to 2003. Apart from being the producer, Guy was also the main co-actor. The show became supremely popular, centered on the funny and quirky dynamics between a husband (played by Lepage) and his wife. The success of the series cannot be underestimated. It’s one of the most internationally prize-winning TV series in Canadian history, and has been adapted and copied in 26 other countries, more so than most any other TV programme in the history of television — full stop. With that, Lepage has a larger-than-life status in Québec and francophone pop-culture (it may now be more apparent why I mentioned two posts earlier that there were Francophones seemingly “shocked and horrified” when Le Journal de Montréal poll revealed the vast majority of Anglophone Canadians had absolutely no idea who Lepage was – despite the international accolades he has attracted towards both Québec, and Canada as a whole).
Since Un gars une fille went off the air in 2003, Lepage was further propelled into the sky when he adapted the France TV interview show Tout le monde en parle to create the still-running Québec version, starting in 2004 (the topic of this blog’s first post).
Apart from these achievements, Lepage has been an actor in several movies, he’s been the host of several major TV events (Québec national award ceremonies, annual galas, live televised celebrations, etc.), a stage-actor, an actor in commercials, and the producer of other artistic endeavours (with the TV comedy Les Chick’n Swell also having been galvanized in Québécois collective memory).
One of the most surprising aspects of his career is his brilliance as in interviewer. Perhaps it is owing to his boldness stemming from his RBO days of pushing the envelope into uncharted territory, or perhaps it is his overall confidence stemming from his contact with all aspects of society – but it’s undeniable that his talents as a provocative, probing, and quick-witted interviewer are quite unique. There are elements of Québec society who may not agree with the direction he takes his interviews, which battles he picks and choses – or who he choses to single out in interviews (he does have political and social opinions), but few would deny his talent. He nonetheless deserves much respect and accolade.
With all of this behind him, it’s a wonder Guy A. Lepage has time to sleep. And with his energy levels and determination, it will be interesting to see what comes next, what it will lead to, and how it will shape Québec society’s collective views.
References to search online to view or read:
- Tout le monde en parle (TLMEP)
- Un gars une fille
- Rock et belles oreilles (RBO)
Radio-Canada sells past programmes in various formats. Please do not pirate.