Thinking of how Jan/Feb came together reminds me of how much I have learned since September. When I started, I didn’t know that magazines worked months ahead, that there were multiple layout options for every article, or that there were hours of discussion and collaboration. When I was browsing the newsstands for something to read, I had never really thought much about all that behind-the-scenes work. Now it’s nearly all I see.

What I have realized, through this process of revisiting past issues, is the diversity of topics that relate back to life in Alberta. I often felt that Alberta was a rather uniform place to live, where everyone had similar feelings on issues. I was unaware of the plurality of opinions and how those opinions related to me. I was disconnected from other Albertans who cared about penmanship, or the use of language, or the health of the human spirit. It seems like a ridiculous notion to pigeonhole an entire province, but AV brought my province’s personality to light. The quality of the magazine’s writing also speaks for itself. It makes me very happy to be from a province where there is so much deep thought about important and relevant issues.

But getting back to the Jan/Feb issue. University of Calgary associate professor Harry Vandervlist wrote “Citizen Taxpayer,” which discusses the use of political language in Alberta. The deck reads “What would George Orwell say about political language in Alberta?” I was drawn into this article by how poignantly it addresses the issue of muddled language.

Nearly everyone is guilty of vague or imprecise language. We often use short phrases and idioms to summarize larger ideas. I do it every day. It has become so ingrained in our speech patterns that it can become hard to distinguish what is clear from what is unclear. I think knowing another language can help. For example, if it were raining profusely we would say “it’s raining cats and dogs.” If a person were to translate this to French and say the same thing (“il pleut des chats et des chiens”) the speaker would be looked at with utter befuddlement because the expression does not translate. Expressions and idioms allow us to communicate using shortened language, permitting us to “say more with less,” but information can get lost in translation.

One example of muddled language cited by Vandervlist is “false equivalency.” To demonstrate this concept, he uses the example of bookstores and libraries. He retells a conversation he had with a “private-sector representative” about the differences between the two book providers. The private-sector representative could not understand why libraries were funded and bookstores were not. As a result he saw them as equivalent. I found this example to be very effective; in fact, a tangent started in my head as I was reading. Libraries are so fundamentally different from bookstores in their purpose. A bookstore has to move product and entice people into material consumption. A library is meant to be a public record of literature and be universally accessible. It was infuriating to see them portrayed as equals. Through false equivalency they are both defined as book providers. When the distinction is lost it can become hard to justify their co-existence, especially when one is publicly funded and the other is not. The power of language lies in the ability to define the differences between two similar entities and as a result provide the means to distinguish them from each other. Ignoring the differences can make two fundamentally different concepts seem equal when they aren’t. The difference is the defining factor.

When Vandervlist writes about the necessity for clear language he turns to throne speeches to illustrate the deterioration of political language. He discovers that between 1978 and 2011, “citizens” have become “taxpayers”. This subtle shift in terminology demonstrates how political language in Alberta has been corrupted. Vandervlist says this is evidence of how we are encouraged by politicians to think of the government as a business. When a corporation goes bankrupt people don’t normally grieve its demise. In the corporate world, we believe that it is the survival of the fittest. If you can’t compete, get out of the game. The idioms can go on forever. These types of ideas distort reality by simplifying it. They allow politicians to hide what they’re saying, diluting their meaning and creating a wall between the people and the government’s decisions. Confusing language removes any transparency. Comparing a government to a business is yet another case of false equivalency. The government’s number one priority should be to provide services to its people, not to make a profit or meet the bottom line like a business.

At risk of creating my own false equivalency, governments and businesses are like the library/bookstore comparison. It would be wonderful if a library made a profit, but that is not its primary purpose. The government falls under the same category. It is important for a government to be in financial order—it would be wonderful if there were no deficit—but the primary purpose of a government is to provide services to its people, its citizens. A business does not have that responsibility. The sole factor in measuring a business’s success is if it makes a profit, because then it can reinvest and make more money. There are business-like aspects to a government, of course, but the government has a larger purpose and therefore they cannot and should not be compared or equated.

But Vandervlist seems to think 2012 is a year for change in political language. Is it possible that politicians may actually start to say what they mean and mean what they say? With politicians like Naheed Nenshi and Alison Redford who promise more transparency, it seems as though there may be hope once again.

Whether or not 2012 becomes the year when leaders start to actively communicate with their constituents, awareness is the first step to recovery. So it’s comforting to know with articles like Vandervlist’s that we are at least on the right path.

AV is a magazine that publishes articles and thoughts that provoke serious contemplation. An article like Vandervlist’s makes me question what I value as an Albertan and how the province as a whole can be made better.

As a whole this experience of digging through AV’s past has given me an opportunity to identify with my home in a way I had not previously conceived. AV is a magazine that has a mandate. Like a library, it has the ability to chronicle the evolution of political and social-minded Albertans. It can also be a beacon for those, like me, who didn’t know they were looking for deeper thought and intellectual involvement in this province.

Sincerely,

Nicole (The Intern)

To read my previous blog posts, as well as others on the site, click here.

For information on the Twitter Campaign and for the official rules click here.

Click here to read “Citizen Taxpayer” by Harry Vandervlist.

On the cover is k. d. lang, hand on head, elbow shielding her eyes from the prairie sun. It is one of the few covers with a celebrity on the front.

The piece that caught my attention was “Paradigm Shift” by Chris Turner. It struck me as bold—an open letter to the future Premier of Alberta. I had never read anything like that before. In a province like Alberta, where the same party has been in power for 40 years, I rarely hear open criticism about it. So I read the article once, twice, then a third time for good measure. What kept pulling me back was the humour and lightness given to such a serious topic.

Turner writes about renewable energy in a way that makes it seem like a no-brainer. “Energy is your government’s biggest power source, its job creation engine and revenue pump, its claim to fame and its biggest headache. Alberta will define itself on the world map of the 21st century by how it handles its energy situation. The tarsands, in particular.”

And yet, it is still blatantly obvious that any progress towards what Turner suggests would be a miracle. Even with the persuasive arguments that he makes, it seems unlikely the current Conservative government will act on his suggestions.

Our current government is minimally interventionist. Some people would argue that this is a good thing because it allows people to fend for themselves, it’s survival of the fittest. But what if the weaker “person” in this case is the environment? The environment cannot scream and protest the way people can when defending themselves. It remains silent and suffers quietly.

One key distinction that Turner makes is that the oil sands don’t have to be evil. If used correctly they can be a source of energy and wealth without eradicating everything in its path. It can be a source of stability as opposed to a cherry on top. At the moment, Alberta is riding a wave of prosperity. Eventually that wave will crest and reach shore. We have a brief moment to act before the wave breaks and leaves us with nothing. Turner says we must act quickly and find ways to make the wave sustainable.

Alberta has been a place where people can be footloose and fancy-free. That won’t always be the case. The time for readjusting our expectations should be when we have the ability to be mobile and adaptive—not when we’re left with no other option. Turner is saying that time is now. We have an opportunity with new leadership. Alberta needs a visionary who isn’t just concerned with the present. With the potential of a province like Alberta, we need a leader who can make tough choices—without taking more resources away from programs and services that need it.

Sincerely,

Nicole (The Intern)

To read my previous blog posts, as well as others on the site, click here.

For information on the Twitter Campaign and for the official rules click here.

Click here to read “Paradigm Shift” by Chris Turner.

In a feature article entitled “No Place To Age”, freelance writer Hope Smith reacts to the challenges facing our long-term healthcare facilities. Bed shortages for those who need them is one of the clear driving points in her article. Having full-time care is essential to long-term care, regardless if it is from a facility or from you giving up your job to take care of an elderly parent.

The difference between homecare and long-term care all comes down to money, time and energy. Smith writes that long-term care provided by a facility is very restricted in Alberta: not enough beds for those who need them. As a result people are forced into homecare arrangements—which means relatives pay for someone to make house calls 4-6 times a day or they quit your job and do it themselves. None of these options are ideal.

The striking part of this problem is that aging is something we all face, so the fact our long-term health system is in shambles is disturbing.

From personal experience, I know how frustrating it can be. A few years ago, my grandfather sold his home of 50 years to move into an adult living building. He could no longer mow his lawn and the housework was too much for him. It seemed like the moment he moved out, his once vivid memory started to become muddled. Soon he needed assistance, which, luckily, was available in his current building. Eventually, the building staff called my mother and told her my grandfather needed more care than they could provide and that we should start looking for a new home.

The waiting lists were horrendous: most places with a year waiting list—minimum. But my grandfather needed the care now, so my mother and uncle paid the exorbitant fees to have someone look after him. As time passed my grandfather became unhappier. He was eventually moved to a short term full-care facility where someone could watch him at all times. He loved it there but he was not allowed to stay because it was only meant to be a transition-care facility. After six months in a place he loved he was forced to move. He resented having to move and even though the new and final place was closer to us (he was less than 10 minutes away), he was unhappy—until he couldn’t even remember what he was unhappy about anymore.

My concerns are about stability. When dealing with a person who needs a constant and stable atmosphere it is not in their best interest to move them around all the time. Unfortunately, this is how our system works. There is always a waiting list. Then the family is put in the position of hoping the wait is less than expected—knowing full well this means that some other family has to lose someone in order for you to get their room.

My family was also lucky that private care was an option. Without the money from my grandfather’s house, the care he needed would have been impossible to provide. So what happens to families that can’t afford the care they need? Who will take care of them? My grandfather used to joke, “Nobody gets outta this world alive!”, but the sad fact is we don’t have the amenities in place to make the inevitable manageable. People are scrambling for stability when they should be spending time with those they love.

Smith writes, “If those of us who are edging toward old age don’t get involved, we will have no control over what could be a rather bleak future.” And a bleak future it will be, if there is no roof over our heads.

Sincerely,

Nicole (The Intern)

To read my previous blog posts, as well as others on the site, click here.

For information on the Twitter Campaign and for the official rules click here.

With a Blackberry poised in the hand of political blogger Dave Cournoyer on the cover, the June 2009 issue of Alberta Views focuses on all things media: from internet upstarts to the shape of book publishing in the province. Author George Melnyk’s feature report “The Tomes, They Are A-Changing” examines how some publishers are managing to adapt to the digital age while others don’t make the cut.

One of the largest draws to books, personally, has always been the physical object. As a self-proclaimed bibliophile there is something magical and awe-inspiring about a physically bound book—its smell, its texture, its inability to escape time or aging. But temporality aside the new wave of e-reading has affected more than just how people read and relate to writing. With the emergence of e-reading comes a whole new on slot of conundrums forcing publishing houses to reinvent themselves.

The fact is Alberta book publishers are trusted to provide a quality product that is culturally relevant in our province. Without taking the leap into e-publishing they risk losing readers who have “gone digital.” Add to this the pressure of our current economy and its no wonder smaller houses (and even larger ones) are starting to fold. It was just a few weeks ago when Canadian publisher McClellan & Stewart was bought out by international conglomerate Random House. Together they will face new publishers such as Amazon and Kobo, both rumoured to be starting publishing divisions.

Small publishers that manage to stick out this industry renovation will likely have the support of small independent bookstores. Local stores are more likely to stock the regional work of their writers and stay away from more mainstream titles. Independent bookstores provide a solid venue for readers to browse content from trusted sources and still know that what they will read will be significant to their regional identity.

But where e-reading is concerned, does it really matter where you buy your virtual product? When buying something online it is hard to visualize whom you are supporting, be it a small company or a behemoth. Most people have limited brand loyalty and shop only for the best deal. What worries me is that if the printed book should truly become extinct, what will happen to the independent bookstores dedicated to selling relevant cultural materials? Some may argue that if those stores cannot foster enough business they shouldn’t be in business, but the cultural importance of their merchandise should be protected from the wrath of supply and demand.

This is where government support should intervene. According to Melnyk, unlike BC and Ontario, Alberta does not offer tax credits to publishers. Alberta publishers do receive larger grant blocks from the Book Publishing Industry Development Program (BPIDP) but only because there are less publishers in the province. It is unfortunate that external funding for book publishers in Alberta is minimal when our cultural identity should be a priority for the government (seeing as it is continually marred by bad press from the oilsands.)

Overall, Melnyk leaves me with the impression that the publishing industry will survive this latest incarnation of the written word by adapting. If the world decides books are useless and digital media is where it’s at, then publishing houses will change. They will follow the course of evolution and maybe one day someone will think it’s interesting to actually have a hardcopy of something and books will make a comeback. I just hope it never comes to either extreme: people should be able to read the stories and histories about their cultural community and choose how they read them. Local publishers should have support from the government so that they don’t have to be bought by larger companies just to survive.

Sincerely,

Nicole (The Intern)

To read my previous blog posts, as well as others on the site, click here.

For information on the Twitter Campaign and for the official rules click here.

In one of the May issue’s features, past president of the Alberta Legislature Press Gallery Darcy Henton writes about political apathy during our last provincial election in 2008. In “The Year Alberta Stayed Home” Henton discusses the momentum that Liberal party leader Kevin Taft felt going into the election and the disappointment that followed when only 41% of eligible voters actually voted (down from 45.12% in 2004). It was the election that saw the Progressive Conservatives gain 12 seats and the opposition shrink to 11 MLAs across 2 parties: 9 Liberals and 2 NDPs.

So what happened?

According to Henton the leadership shift from Ralph Klein to Ed Stelmach was a key factor in the renewal of enthusiasm for the PCs. People who had been fed up with the Tories under Klein were willing to give Stelmach a chance. Conservatives wanted a change in leadership, not party, and so steady-Eddy was elected. Lasting only one term, Stelmach stepped down late last year.

With new leader Alison Redford at the helm of the PCs, it is safe to say that unless more than 41% of voters turn out, the 2012 election may just be a repeat of what happened in 2008. But the PCs aren’t the only party with a new leader this time around. The Liberals have Raj Sherman, the Wildrose Alliance has Danielle Smith and the Alberta Party has Glenn Taylor. The NDP leader Brian Mason remains the only veteran of the 2008 election.

With all these new fish in the pond, this coming election should be interesting and hopefully surprising. At the same time, if you look at historical evidence, voter turnout spikes every second PC leader. Having dropped to a 30-year low in the 2008 elections (as well as a national record for lowest turnout), it feels safe to say the only way to go from here is up.

I did a little digging of my own because the question “When was the last time Alberta had a decent voter turnout?” would not leave me alone. Apparently the answer was 1993 when Ralph Klein first ran for the PCs. That year, there was a 60.21% voter turnout. Before that it was in 1982 with 66%, when Peter Lougheed was in office and running for re-election.

But even with a massive turnout, it is unlikely the seats will be distributed any differently. Henton talked with former Liberal MLA Ed Gibbons, who told him he believed voters in Edmonton had decided “it was better to sit at ‘Ed’s table’ than elect the opposition.” Edmonton had gained 10 new conservative seats, putting the Tories in 13 of the city’s 18 ridings. It seemed to Gibbons that Edmonton suffered from “winner’s mentality,” meaning it was more important to vote for the party with the most seats as opposed to the party they were the most sympathetic to.

Henton’s article ends with a question posed by Alberta Federation of Labour president Gil McGowan. “Once all the big projects are built, what will be left?” he asks. This makes me wonder about the efficiency of a political party too long in power, because at some point they will run out of ideas and have no opposition to fall back on to maintain any semblance of ingenuity. Now that is a scary thought.

Sincerely,

Nicole (The Intern)

To read my previous blog posts, as well as others on the site, click here.

For information on the Twitter Campaign and for the official rules click here.

Inside is an article on penmanship in elementary schools. I must confess that I have been looking forward to this article since I first started planning my blog entries. I have always been interested in the subject. Even now the irony of me writing an electronic blog doesn’t escape me.

I am perhaps one of few “young people” that still considers penmanship an essential part of education. I started learning cursive early, at the age of six, because my older sister would come home with cursive homework and I instantly wanted to learn it as well. For this reason an article like the one written by former Alberta Views staffer Amber Bowerman easily caught my attention amidst the featured articles in this issue like David King’s essay “School Principles” about the condition of our schools or Connie Howard’s report “Ill Wind Blowing” on multiple sclerosis in Alberta.

In “The Quill is Gone” Bowerman talks to students, teachers and administrators alike about the pros and cons of the digital medium and its impact on good ol’ fashioned penmanship.

Writing by hand is a stressful venture for many young people. From a very young age my classmates and I were encouraged to type up our assignments (I remember it started as early as grade 4). I remember classmates trying to write papers in text lingo. That pretty much guaranteed them a fail. In my mind I compare it to shorthand. Shorthand is useful for notes but if you are writing something to be taken seriously it is not the appropriate language to use. Even though the content of what my classmate wrote might have been acceptable, the mode in which she tried to communicate it was not correct. Her failing that assignment was a hard way to learn something so simple.

Bowerman discovers that the positives of handwriting seem to have greater influence than the positives of typing. “Handwriting remediation specialist Jeanette Farmer asserts that the act of handwriting helps develop children’s neural pathways, improves self-control and may even help combat attention deficit disorder.” I have never heard of someone developing self-control through typing.

“Handwriting is all-encompassing. It requires a visual, a physical, a cognitive. It uses the whole child.” Says occupational therapist Jan Olsen in an interview with Bowerman.

In contrast, digital media such as instant messaging, email and texting has created a generation that is more textual than verbal. I doubt I am the only one to notice that tweens and teens, when out in public, are generally quiet because their heads are down and they are texting each other instead of chatting. The transition from verbal to textual communication could be attributed to the proliferation of mainstream cellphones in the early 2000s. With the introduction of texting, abbreviated communication became the standard unless you wanted to pay an arm and a leg. Thus text lingo was born. Teachers say one clear pro technology argument is that students are writing more. However I think there is an important distinction to be made: these abbreviations, though useful, can cloud clarity and make simple concepts confusing to understand.

I have many friends in their twenties who still do not understand the difference between “to” and “too” because when they text they avoid the conundrum by typing “2” instead. This trickles back to elementary school: what were these kids being taught instead of their homonyms? Typing, computer peripherals, internet usage. Sure, those computer skills have become invaluable but ground level grammar and language skills have taken a hit. Though odd to most, I text in complete sentences—making me a radical for my generation. However I am not alone in my attitudes. I have friends who are as equally picky, believing texter abbreviations make you sound ridiculous.

Needless to say, Alberta, like the rest of the world, is migrating toward a digital world. It didn’t surprise me that a magazine like Alberta Views would publish an article on this subject. In fact, I was looking for it from the moment I started looking into Alberta View’s history. I am surprised it took me until a 2007 issue of the magazine, because it seems fitting that a print magazine should write about the impacts of the digital world. Even so there are still reasons to teach the old methods, like handwriting. Whether for personal, social or economical purposes there are many advantages to penmanship. We just can’t let ourselves forget it.

Sincerely,

Nicole (The Intern)

To read my previous blog posts, as well as others on the site, click here.

For information on the Twitter Campaign and for the official rules click here.

One of the articles published in Alberta Views’ April issue was written by award-winning journalist Darcy Henton. He writes about the conditions in Alberta’s prison system. In particular, he focuses on the contrast between the Maximum Security prison and the Remand Centres in both Edmonton and Calgary. What were most appalling were the conditions in the Remand Centres.

Henton talked with many people for this article including, inmates, lawyers, doctors, the Alberta Ombudsman, jail guards and the Solicitor General. All agreed that conditions were abysmal yet nothing was expected to change. With descriptions of over-crowding, mouldy food, abuse between inmates and all around neglect, I became curious as to whether anything has been done since this article was published.

Trusty Google led me to the answer. I came across the government of Alberta website and they had details about the New Edmonton Remand Centre that Henton referred to in 2006 with so much skepticism.

“Preliminary plans have been drawn up for construction of a 1,500-inmate facility in Edmonton, but [Solicitor General] Cenaiko has to get his cabinet colleagues to approve the $250-million capital plan,” writes Henton. “Even if he gets approval this spring it will be at least five years before construction is completed.”

Well, it being nearly 2012, five years have passed since Henton weighed in on the Edmonton Remand Centre. Here is an update of what has happened since.

• The New Edmonton Remand Centre began construction in 2007. It is scheduled to be completed by Fall 2012.
• It is being built next to the Edmonton Young Offender Centre at 127 St & 186 Ave, surrounded by city land, the Anthony Henday Freeway and an environmental reserve.
• The size of the centre is roughly 16 hectares, the equivalent of 27 CFL football fields.
• In can house up to 2,808 inmates in “10 different pods of units”.
• The project has cost approximately $567.6-million

The difference in the estimated numbers from Henton’s article in 2006 and the current details is astounding. Its capacity is 46.6 per cent bigger and its cost is 56.0 per cent greater. In 2006, Henton states there was a total of 2,335 prisoners in provincial custody. By that number, the new Remand Centre could house all the prisoners, province wide… and then some. The space covered by the facility is 45.7 per cent of West Edmonton Mall (which until 2004 was the largest shopping mall in the World.)

Henton mentions that the average stay in a Remand Centre was 13 days in 2006. Now that period has increased to 18 days. The number of total inmates has also increased by 22.5 per cent over the last 5 years.

Population growth aside, this seems like a behemoth project with all the funding implications associated with it, such as staffing, maintenance and tenant care. I am in no position to estimate the cost of running this facility, but I have a feeling it will be a large annual expense for the province. I would have never known about this had I not read the April 2006 issue of Alberta Views. It makes me curious about how many other people are unaware of such a large facility being built to house our province’s unruly citizens.

Sincerely,

Nicole (The Intern)

To read my previous blog posts, as well as others on the site, click here.

For  information on the Twitter Campaign and for the official rules click here.