Wow!! When do we get to watch this doc!!

Amazing!! Dr. Cornett is an amazing academic and activist!

A real treat to know that a true “homme engage” is being honored by his fellow montrealers

Ever since i first worked in montreal , composing Muisc fr the film “Nous sommes Jeunes” for cnadian Pcific railroad, and later on duirng my eight joyous years condcuting the Monteal symphony matinnee concerts for young people, i was always overwhelmed by the adventuorous spirit and high artistic standards combined with DARING TO GO BEYOND BOUDERIES.

when i met DR cornett and first worked with him, i felt he was the embodiment of this special quality. Like most other musicians, who cam as i did, as performers in the Montreal Jazz Festival, I was thrilled to be in his class and wished tat i could enroll as a senior-student at McGill in rder to TAKE classes with this extraordinary man.

Like Mrshall McLuhan, he took the role of the university professor to a new level. All his guest artists as well as his students came away inspired.

Alanis Obsawin is one of the finest documentary film makers in the world and the combination guarentees a document that will show the special gifts that Canadians have for uisng film and media to uplift, educate and inspire.

i am telling all my friends in the States and everywhere i go aroud the world to look out for this film and learn more about
the amazing life’ work of notre cher Professor Norman

Bravo, merci et salu!!

David Amram
amramdavid@aol.com

Congrats Dr.Cornett

That’s great news . all the best and much success. Marion

I meet Dr. Cornett at many vernissages and am looking forward to seeing the film that will document his particular talents in communicating art values.

Dr. Cornett is the kind of professor I dreamed of having through my university years. I wish him all the best.

Dr. Cornett is a true social innovator who re-imagined the future of the education system with his model of experiential learning and “dialogic sessions.” His method is one of true learning – a forum of discussion, deep engagement, challenges and opinions. Students found their voices in his class because he created a space for them to do so. Leaders were born under his tutelage, and it is a huge loss for McGill to not champion an innovator of Cornett’s capacity. Sir Ken Robinson calls for a transformation of the education system. See his TED talk here http://is.gd/H3s What Cornett brings is the answer.

Quelle bonne nouvelle d’apprendre que le film sur le Dr. Cornett sera projeté à Montréal. Ce sera l’occasion de souligner sa grande contribution d’éducateur et d’humaniste. Ce n’est pas fréquent que l’on rencontre des gens qui survolent le domaine des arts et des sciences avec cette envergure intellectuelle. J’ai rencontré le Dr. Cornett lors d’un vernissage et j’ai été impressionnée par sa perception lumineuse tout-à-fait originale de mes œuvres. C’est cet esprit original, libre et honnête qui lui a valu son renvoi de McGill. C’est un signe de sclérose lorsqu’une institution ne peut plus tolérer en son sein des “rebelles” épris de liberté de pensée.

How amazing it was for me to sit in the Toronto’s Hot Docs theatre to experience Alanis Obomsawin’s stunningly beautiful documentary about Professor Cornett. She captures his wisdom, his clarity, his profound caring… I saw students made to feel unique.. their reflections not graded but absorbed with utmost respect. I saw a window into a true educator who nurtures individuality and freedom of thought. How radical! An professor who builds rather then tears down.

As an actor/singer I am proud to have been a dialogic partner in Professor Cornett’s class. I remember being surprised and delighted to hear his students/my audience’s honest reflections on my work. They pushed me, inspired me and made me want to share every nuance of what it is to do what I do with them.
Professor Cornett’s unique methods should be part of every academic institution. Instead Mcgill has tossed aside what is spectacular. How can educators be so stupid?

Professor Cornett can not be silenced. He will publish and continue to dialogue because he must… and we will follow. Those who have tasted his brilliance will follow him anywhere..

NORMAN CORNETT is a rock star!

Il y a quelques années, j’ai eu le plaisir d’être invitée dans une de ses classes d’étudiants sur une rencontre portant sur ma musique. Ce fut un beau moment!

I first met Dr Cornett while I was in Montreal and exhibiting at Gallery Gora. He had taken quite some time to really study the context of my images.
I was invited to his class to speak about my work and it was truly an interesting experience.
Congratulations Dr Cornett on the film and your dedication to the arts and thank you for
your interest in my art.

As an artist, it is not everyday one has the honour of coming across such an individual as Dr. Cornett. It happenend to me about five years ago during my vernissage at Galerie dÁvignon. There he was, a quiet man sitting unobtrusively in the corner, writing notes and little did I know at the time, the scope and breadth of his imagination and mind. That became apparent in the following weeks after the show and culminated in the dialogic session for which I was the guest speaker! What an experience and rare treat indeed to be part of! It was the sort of experience you come away from, feeling totally connected to the universe- challenging, invigorating and utterly dynamic. Thank you Dr. Cornett!

I had the pleasure of being a dialogic partner in March 2008, after Dr. Cornett saw the exhibition of my video “Exercises in Napery” at the Fofa Gallery. The uncensored feedback and questions from the students and the discussion generated during the dialogic session challenged me to think about every aspect of my artistic process. The discussion delved deeper and further than any of the classes I’ve taken. I believe this kind of exchange—where personal perspectives are pushed, reexamined and shifted to see in a new light—is a true gift. I am grateful to have had this experience and to have witnessed first-hand Dr. Cornett’s “theatre of learning”. As the youngest, solo dialogic partner thus far, I’ll carry with me the genuinely encouraging and enthusiastic energy of that session.

It was a pleasure to welcome Dr. Cornett to my art exhibit MY JOURNEY INWARD on Sunday, June 7, 2009, a display of 125 works. He asked pertinent and profound questions and challenged visitors with his insight. I look forward to watching the upcoming NFB documentary.

I’ve never seen one man make things happen like Dr. Cornett. ‘You can do it,’ is one of his catch phrases (he likes to put an emphasis on the can), and he certainly has done so. It has been two years now since I was a student in Dr. Cornett’s last class at McGill University. Since that time it astounds me how much he has accomplished. I nervously anticipate Obamsawin’s documentry. It is somewhat different to speak your mind outside a more or less safe classroom environment. I am very excited to witness Cornett’s ideas in such a different context, to see him as uncensored as he made us when he was a professor. And I hope that educators throughout Canada are taking notes on what he has to say.

I was a student for only 3 days in a course with Dr. Cornett. That was enough to change how I think about art and literature. Amazing! Thank you Dr. Cornett
Wilfred

At one of my exhibitions there was a man who I met once and never forgot.
Not knowing who he was, I found his questions and the things he said triggering my interest, making me realise that this was different from the many approaches that I, as the exhibiting painter, forget (or prefer to forget) later. He invited me to be the guest speaker to his Dialogic Session at McGill University, which I didn’t attend, simply because I was too shy to accept it then. That was in 2005. The person I met was Dr. Norman Cornett.

Recently, I’ve been knee deep in a project that involves art in the form of poetry and painting, and need a bit of advice in regards to how to realise it, and interesting enough it is Dr. Cornett that came to my mind, as the one person I met years ago, who has struck me as a singular personality in the world of art in Montreal. What is even more interesting is the timing. I get to meet him at a time when I can give back a drop of attention to his work, which is something I so look forward to know more about.
I do thank Alanis Obomsawin, the director of the documentary “Since when do we divorce the right answer from an honest answer?” and the NFB, to give us this chance.

One of my most memorable art appreciation sessions was with an exhibition by Sue Adams. Dr. Cornett arrived at the gallery with his class asking each student to wear ear plugs and select a sculpture to write about, no artist statements titles of works etc were allowed. Once they were finished he collected all the papers and allowed them to read about the artist and the sculptures then they were asked to write a second paper. Brilliant! Sue was then invited to speak to the class. Unorthodox teaching methods indeed, we are in dire need of more academia that think outside the box!

Marian Read, Director Galerie d’Avignon

I had a pleasure to be invited by Dr. Norman Cornett twice as an artist-guest in his widely recognized dialogic series, first at McGill University and second at Concordia University. Both times were unlike anything else I ever experienced in terms of giving lectures, artist’s talks or being part of panels.

I arrived to a group of young people who, for many months prior to my arrival, studied my videos, sound works and drawings. Under the guidance of Dr. Cornett, though without any influence on his part, the students have conceived complex and often poetic texts, all in response to visual, photographic or sonic material they viewed together. Dr. Cornett was an amazing speaker himself, fully engaged in the process of discovery of some unknown yet knowledge.

Dr. Cornett has an incredibly sophisticated mind and is a ground breaking educator. The interdisciplinary quality of his teaching, his insistence on highest possible quality of research and his comparative approach within fields such as contemporary art, culture in general, or religion (to name a few that I witnessed first hand), prepared him to be a perfect intellectual leader for younger minds. Dr. Cornett is a person able to excite, entice and challenge his students, all at the same time. The film about of Dr. Cornett offers a wonderful opportunity to celebrate his teaching as impeccable intellectually and full of scholarly vigor

Dr. Cornett, thank you for the unforgettable experience. For me as artist, you created a safe zone of inspiration and free exchange of ideas. For the students engaged in the process, you offered an open forum, where no question was impossible and no answer was forbidden. Thank you again.

Monika Weiss, artist
New York City, June 10, 20

I feel fortunate and grateful for the time I spent in Professor Cornett’s class.

Class with Cornett was always engaging, imaginative, informative and best of all…FUN!

Eddie Mueller, thank you for your time, energy, and unending educational efforts.

Michael Charendoff
aka Ouroboros

Dr Cornett is truly passionate about art and knowledge and he is able to transcend the usual hierarchy present in our world, (he is interested in all forms of art without any preconceived ideas (you will see him at vernissages at the Musée d’art Contemporain as well as at the opening of most artists/gallery (obscure or not) that cares to invite him. One thought he once shared with me a couple of years ago, ‘A society cannot think of advancement without the arts’ (Art is a place where ideas can be tested and that we can then appropriate, (integrate in our lives). Congratulations to the filmmaker and to Dr Cornett! André Laroche

it has been a great privilege to have had the opportunity to discuss and share in our passion for art and life,felicitation dr.C,….geza hermann

I first met Dr. Cornett when he attended my art opening last February. His insightful questions and observations and his willingness to talk openly and honestly encouraged others to engage in dialogue – you could feel the very atmosphere in the gallery change. Every time I see him at various art shows his keen eye, interpretations and deep intellect leave me inspired, as did Ms. Obomsawin’s documentary about him. Oh how I wish I could have been so lucky as to have had him as a professor while I was in University.

I don’t know wether this the right way to proceed but as my letter to The Gazette of Montreal dated June 18th about Ms obomsawin’s documentary on Dr. Cornett was not published in that paper, I here agree to have it posted on this site.

Jean Antonin Billard

Professor Cornett currently teaches at CreativeBoost.ca.
His next ‘dialogue’ partners include:

Frédéric Back : Saturday, July 11th,1 p.m.-3 p.m.
Sue Adams : Sunday, July 12th,1.p.m.-3 p.m.
Susie Arioli : Monday, July 13th,6 p.m.-8 p.m.

For reservations please leave a message on 514.844.7752 or send an email to registration@creativeboost.ca

The NFB Documentary on Montreal’s Norman Cornett
Most people associate documentary features with historical figures: kings, princes, prime ministers, presidents that have lived hundreds of years ago and their lives, as important as these might seem, have no direct relevance for our times. Rarely, if ever, do we see a documentary on someone who is very much alive and whose life and work can inspire us or make us appreciate essential human qualities that lack at so many levels in our society. In this respect the documentary by Alanis Obomsawin, released by the National Film Board of Canada, is a happy exception because it features McGill University’s firing of Dr. Norman Cornett and the circumstances that surround this unhappy event. We learn about his “unorthodox” but very effective teaching methods that despite the negative label inspire and motivate the student. We see his work in the classroom; his interaction with the students, some of whom, totally puzzled at first, discover their inner voice at the end of the course. The interviews with students, colleagues and collaborators reveal all the qualities of a knowledgeable and dedicated teacher, a fearless spirit and a compassionate human being. To use the description provided by John Griffin in his article “Fired by McGill, Beloved Prof. Inspires a Filmmaker,” published in the Montreal Gazette of June 13, 2009: “Parroting opinions expressed by profs in structured lectures are not for him. Cornett is by the conservative standards of McGill University … a subversive teacher. A great teacher, but subversive.”
With a tasteful balance between pointed criticism that presents the unadorned truth, and a strong sense of obligation for revealing the facts, the documentary discloses what many of us are ashamed of admitting. The “subversive” teacher was fired, dismissed without a word of explanation. What’s even worse, despite Obomsawin’s two letters, the university didn’t deem necessary to participate in the film, and the Internet petition, including 742 signatures from all over the world did not accomplish his reinstatement. The beloved Prof. was let go after 15 long years of teaching. The hard fact hits home: Dr. Cornett is fired because he couldn’t “divorce the right answer from an honest answer.” The subtitle tells us something not only about the reasons of his dismissal but also makes us realize that truth and open discussion are not valued in academic circles. Yet, institutions of higher learning should be at the forefront of all new experiments, investigations, discoveries and ideas, whether nurtured in the classrooms of orthodox, unorthodox or “subversive” teachers.
Perhaps it’s time to stop and think about the mandate of our educational institutions. Besides knowledge, what other values do we want to introduce to our university students? What example do we want to set for our future academics, doctors, lawyers, teachers, politicians? What sort of social organization do we want to promote by allowing such harsh treatment of our intellectuals? Are there different standards of evaluation for academia and the rest of humanity? It’s time to admit the insensitivity of methods used by those who hold power. It’s time to make them understand that Dr. Cornett’s inspired teaching is relevant. If his open-minded dialogue cost him his job, then we should stop and think of our cherished democratic values that are now being altered, corrupted, rigged and manipulated. Have we become numb towards the loss of these time-honoured ideals or has someone hijacked it from us?
Anait Brutian
These comments were originally written after viewing the NFB documentary on June 16, 2009 and sent to the Montreal Gazette as a letter to the editor on June 18, 2009.

Norman Cornett is a rare human being with an unfaltering dedication to life and the enrichment of his students’ lives. I can atest to the fact that he is a gifted teacher and leader. I am a better person for having been encouraged by him to live a fuller life. As I have said before and will say again I am a huge supproter!

Where does one begin in describing the Creative Boost ‘Body and Soul’ experience? With the incredibly fascinating guests? The well-informed and innovative teacher? The range of engaging students? Or the dynamic class context that bring all of the elements together under an umbrella of creativity and inquiry? All of these ingredients mesh together towards quite an adventure.

This summers’ workshop opened up many new doors for me. I loved meeting all of the participants and speakers, as well as tapping into music and the arts from a fresh new angle. When the class ended a ‘Body and Soul’ party followed with guest musicians improvising together, others jamming on canvases with paint, and some collaborating on the typewriter with words…the creative engagement continued to linger on. For me this was an exciting endeavor that came about as a result of this workshop and the strong bond between all involved.

I’m very much looking forward to continuing my encounter with the arts this fall in the class, ‘Stream of Consciousness’.

‘Dialogue’ with international award-winning composer,Hans Tutschku,professor of composition at Harvard University.

Saturday,26September2009,18h00-20h00.

Galerie Samuel Lallouz 1434 rue Sherbrooke Ouest, Montreal Québec,
Tel: 514-849-5844
email: reception@galeriesamuellallouz
Fax: 514-849-5643

Andria Minicucci
Galerie Samuel Lallouz
Tél. : (514) 849-5844

reception@galeriesamuellallouz.com

$25 all taxes included;$20 seniors,students,and groups of 5 or more.

thank you Mr Carole K
meeting with writer RAWI HAGE,and composer HANS TUTSCHKU? has been such an uplifting creative experience for me. Your dialogic session are very precious moments in my life, I am looking forward to the next encounter.Much Love. Streamnick Vie naya

The case of Norman Cornett is troubling indeed. Years pass but the truths of his story remain largely unheard. Silence is not his friend but his foe. Where would he be now if he had accepted a private deal and closed the door on the issue of the “freedom of learning” he dedicated his career to? His case certainly would not have been heard by the Quebec Labour Board, and the board certainly could not have ruled in his favor, as they have recently done.

If he had been wrong, and McGill had acted justly in terminating his position, he would have had no leg to stand on before the courts. As this is evidently not the case, it appears he did well to hold firm against intimidation. It is apparent that justice is not always served but often must be sought.

I believe in due process and furthermore, in this case, I believe justice will be granted. I simply hope all those who face similar trials are not cowed into silent submission, where their stories will fade. To remain unspoken is to deny the chance for these lessons to become learning blocks for all.

I am presently engaging with Dr. Cornett (we call him Carole K) in the Stream of Consciousness sessions which he is doing. I have to say that these are amazingly exhillerating, from conception to content to experience. We are introduced to artist works without a context beyond the works themselves (Carole K obviously likes the element of suprise) & engage in writing our impressions of said works as they come to us, slightly directed by suggestion, but ultimately left to our own raw impressions. Carole K’s way of presenting art is “diagogic”, meaning (if I understand properly) putting us in a position to dialogue or interact off the cuff with the works of art in question – & then eventually, in conjunction with our writings, with the artists themselves. The teaching method is intriguing & inspiring – non-academic but “intelligent”, & especially experiential. We listen to music blindfolded, write rushing responses to bits of poetic text as well as music, read whole texts & respond as we will to them on our own. When we meet the artists, Carole K reads, in his quirky dramatic style, parts of our various texts annonimously, & said bits lead to provocative (& loosening)discussions. The artists we’ve dialogued with up to now have seemed to enjoy the process as much as the audience.Carole K is very kind, & yet nevertheless in the best sense likes to put his audience out of their comfort zone via the strong art works he selects for us to dialogue with. This is magic – a class where the idea is that the only wrong question is the unasked question (one of Carole K’s repeated sayings), but where you are challenged to immerse yourself in deep waters. As you can tell from my expressed enthusiasm, I’m taken. Thanks – djuana

I was fortunate to have taken two classes taught by Professor Norman Cornett while I was completing my undergraduate degree at McGill. He is an unparalleled pedagogue always willing to help students find their voice by engaging them with his unique dialogical method.

By bringing guests from all fields into the classroom for open conversation, Prof. Cornett created a nonjudgmental, nurturing space within which students were validated as individuals and given free reign to voice, explore, and make tangible the world of ideas.

While my time at McGill taught me many things, without Prof. Cornett, I would certainly not have had the well-rounded education that his classes ensured. It is lamentable that McGill did not recognize the value of his approach, something none of his students would hesitate to affirm. His departure from the university is certainly a loss for the student body, if not the administration.

I encourage everyone interested in what the spirit of education looks like when it finds a classroom to attend a free screening of Alanis Obomsawin’s documentary Professor Norman Cornett: “Since when do we divorce the right answer from an honest answer?” this Wednesday, October 7th at the CineRobotheque, 1564 St. Denis Street. The film will be followed by a discussion on alternative teaching methods with Norman Cornett and Alanis Obomsawin.

Educator George Leonard describes lecturing as “the best way to get information from teacher’s notebook to student’s notebook without touching the student’s mind.” The information that Dr. Norman Cornett presents takes an alternate route, arriving soundly at its proper destination – the minds of his students. And staying there.

Throughout my undergraduate degree at McGill, I took two classes with Dr. Cornett, neither of which had anything to do with their course titles, and both of which stirred me on an intellectual level that no other course has before or since. The tone was set as we walked into class with theme songs like Trooper’s “Raise a Little Hell” blasting, and the sentence starter “I believe…” scrawled on the blackboard. Cornett’s students were engaged in a complex dance with our own identities – simultaneously cloaking ourselves in pseudonyms and anonymous readings, while revealing truths about – and to – ourselves through no-holds-barred reflections and candid dialogic sessions. He hurled an issue at us, be it same-sex marriage, Aboriginal land rights, or the Holocaust, and shattered our apathy. Employing media as varied as contemporary dance, short story, musical performance, documentary film, and political cartoons, Cornett showed his students not only that we were capable of formulating educated opinions about contemporary issues but more importantly, that our opinions mattered.

By my fourth year at McGill, I was achieving excellent grades but was jaded and frustrated. I despised the formulaic, institutional learning that I felt was being imposed upon my once agile mind. Another day, another A. Depressed and on the verge of dropping out, I consulted Dr. Cornett. Not only did he convince me to stick it out for one more semester, but he set me on a lifelong pedagogic quest. For my final project in his course, I painted a self-portrait, literally seeing myself in a new light thanks to Dr. Cornett’s guidance.

A few months ago I attended the premier of Alanis Obomsawin’s excellent film profiling Dr. Cornett and his ongoing struggle with McGill administration (if one can call such a one-sided battle a struggle) at Toronto’s Hot Docs film festival. Sitting in a row with several of my former classmates, the lights dimmed and I was transported back to the Birks building, circa 2002. I felt the anxiety of anticipation – will he read (anonymously) one of my reflections to the class? After the screening, Cornett’s Q & A transformed into one of his famed dialogic sessions. He thoughtfully addressed a range of topical questions and comments, facilitated audience dialogue with Obomsawin and with his wife Laura. One moment was particularly illustrative of Cornett’s care for each and every one of his students. In the midst of a rambling but insightful answer to a question about applying his pedagogic theories to the teaching of maths and sciences, Cornett paused, looked into the theatre’s upper rows, and with eyes alight exclaimed, “Dora the Explorer!” He had spotted one of his former students, and without missing a beat, called her by the name that she had assigned herself for his class years before.

Having completed an MA in Education and currently enrolled in teacher’s college, I am perpetually shaping and refining my ideas about effective teaching. Thanks to Dr. Cornett, one thing is for certain – my pedagogic philosophy involves raising a little hell.

Emily Rose Antflick, McGill BA Hon 2004

The city of Montreal boasts a significant distinction besides passionate hockey fans, poutine and great smoked meat. With four major universities and over 165,000 university students, Montreal tops North America’s student ratio at 4.72 students out of every hundred people. Students hail from well over 150 countries. With diverse faculties, it would seem that epistemology would be a subject of avid exploration, and that acceptance of a spectrum of pedagogical methods would be rather generous.

However, the abrupt and unexplained dismissal of Dr. Norman Cornett, the popular albeit unconventional, longtime professor at McGill University, raises questions about control over teaching methods. If instilling a love for learning is considered an important criterion for teaching, it seems that Dr. Cornett’s unique style should be seriously examined.

Montrealers have the opportunity evaluate the subject of alternative learning methods this week, as Alanis Obomsawin’s film bearing the professor’s name, will be screened by the National Film Board from October 7-14.

Tom Paul
NDG

Living in the movies…

“Sense”

many words take hold of our lives
despite us
Nicole Brossard

I won’t say I know when I can’t,
a place in the sun turning midnight
as if there’s such a thing
as telling sun at midnight –

won’t forget the way words with teeth
hang out in places next to silence –
can’t begin to fathom
which is biting which.

I won’t give in to the articulate
when it’s pulling possibility
falsely up short – can’t
say – won’t say – there’s nothing plausible
in raising a hand to salute a past friend.

I am in the web of my intentions fast-tracked,
I don’t know what you know, only know
I’ve realized, stung, I can’t get out easily
on the strength of being forgotten
or shocked.

There’s the fiery mandate
of gentle souls standing up for themselves –
I won’t pretend the words aren’t seductive,
the exchange alive, something volatile
overriding sad common sense

I’m currently taking a course with Dr Cornett, nominated Carol K. in the society of friends.
Perhaps a course is not even the right word, there are no books to study, no evaluation, nobody has to struggle to be the first in the class.
It is a gathering, a reunion of people, a community, and the main purpose is to share.

I went to watch a documentary on Dr Cornett made not too long ago by a Canadian director.It is about the loss from an Institution such the Mcgill, of a character, a man which twisted the usual academic way of teaching and truly succeeded at it.
I’m not Canadian therefore i know almost nothing about the educational system here, but after all i’m not that surprised of what i heard.
I left the cinema, frustrated, angry, sad, but also full of hope and illuminated by the dedication and the passion of Dr Cornett, and pleased by the reactions and the stories of his students.

Between many, what struck me the most is his concept of open learning.Not only books teach us something. People around us do so, we teach to ourselves, but that is considered unconventional. Somehow we have barriers, we are limited, we cannot go beyond the standard “safe” methods, the unknown. Whatever is alien, somehow different form the usual, will hardly find space into society.
What about engaging ourselves to different experiences? To break into a new real perception of everything that surround us, from music, to arts, daily life.
To speak out our own thoughts, impressions, to have the FREEDOM of letting our opinions be heard.

His methods of teaching touches universal fields and it reminds me, how limited we are, as individual, to speak out for our self, to tell the truth without having fear that someone will shut us up. And funny enough i’m in North America, country where democracy and freedom are advertised all over the places.
Tell the truth is one of the most scary things. I remember a quote from George Orwell, saying” In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act”.

Watching at the classes he was giving i felt like he was the leader of a new revolution. A believer. Not only in himself, but mainly in those out there sitting in a classroom waiting to open their books and listen or read words that are dead. Instead they found someone who made them listening to music blindfolded, asking them just one thing: “put in words whatever comes to your mind”. Read a poem and engage yourself with the person who is writing. Each lessons is a surprise.

That is what we do in our meetings too. The first time Dr Cornett ask us to put the blindfold on, i was a little confused, but also intrigued. Since the first lesson, i got the benefit of understanding a different approach to music, poetry, visual arts. I was not following any specific rules. I was just awakening my senses, opening the gate of my consciousness and i tried to give space to everything that passed in my mind. Improvisation! just like a jazz session.
Content and not form.
This is something i always fought for. Is not how nice it looks like, is about the taste, the smell, the sounds, is our soul.

There is no right or wrong , no good or bad, there is only our own personal thought, uncensored, unplugged and anonymous. What makes us learn is also the possibility of listening to other people’s opinions and engaging ourselves in conversations. The cherry on the cake is the chance of meeting the artists whose works makes the streams of our consciousness flow.

So i now dive myself into a new society, based on truth, understanding, sharing and caring. Truth that comes from our voice, understanding that we all are capable humans, caring because we have a name and we are not just numbers, sharing, because that is what we do and almost everything in life should be based on this value.
Each meeting with Dr Cornett, and the other students, is a real lesson, cause after all, we are all there to learn something, and when the time to meet an artist came, he\she isn’t there just to teach us something, but to have a unique new experience, just like us.

I’m truly touched by his devotion and how he still stands, where others would probably fall, or settle with “enemy”. Is great example and few people are able to stay firm in what they believe in, and both history and our present days teach us that.
I hope his intentions to teach and give chance to everybody to experience new fields, will endure in time, and at the moment, i’m glad to have this chance.

Even when the changes we are hoping for, seems will never come, through support and a continuous effort ,we can see a small gleam of light into so much darkness. Holding on to it is so much more than words, is action.
It should be a duty of all of us to be able to continuously believe in ourselves in whatever way we feel is right.

Thank you
Maya

The Film Community Against Fascism, Supports Cornett

Canada, according to the U.N. has one of the five highest standards of living in the world. Among the rights that countries have, is the right to education, and the concept of education in a developed country such as Canada, is quite different from mere instruction, and what makes the difference, lies in teaching the students “ to think”. This thinking skill makes the difference between a University, and a Technical College or school.

In Mexico, an underdeveloped country, the terrible problems of violence notwithstanding, we have not only one of the oldest Universities in the Americas, but one of the most prestigious in the world; The National Autonomous University, UNAM, which was recently presented with Spain’s Prince of Asturias Prize. The award shows that even in the developing world – one finds this odd to put in writing , but is indeed true- it is impossible to think about any sort of restraint on the right to teach any subject as important as religion studies certainly are for human development, in any university department . Courses on this subject are quite common in the curriculum of most of our institutions of higher learning.

On the other hand, Canada’s equivalent to Harvard, Mc Gill University in Quebec, has made an unthinkable mistake, restraining the right to teach its students to think, by removing Dr. Cornett from his teaching activities – even in the face of the disagreement publicly expressed by, literally, thousands of students.

What is the difference then, between the lack of respect for the human rights of citizens by a totalitarian regime, and the attitude shown by Mc Gill in restricting the right of its students to think?

This question that Mc Gill, refuses to answer – quite a paradox- is answered by another question, expressed in the works of contemporary conscious film directors, such as Laurent Cantet in his film “Entre murs” –recipient of the Golden Palm award at Cannes in 2008- about the meaning of present day education in France, or in Almodovar´s “Bad education”, about complicity between fascism and religion in Spain. Certainly, Alani Obomsawin’s documentary “Professor Cornett” , is a real document that will prevent Canadian society to ever forget this shameful event for both Quebec and Canadian education. This documentary is meant to generate awareness.

Mc Gill’s intolerant attitude is not far from Spain’s fascist regime under Franco. When on 12th October 1936,in Salamanca´s University Miguel de Unamuno, said to the fascist Millan Astray: “…What is imposed by force cannot convince… Universities are sacred temples, and teachers are their supreme priests”; Millan Astray, without batting an eyelid, simply riposted: “Death to intelligence, long life, to death”.

This fascist attitude by Mc Gill, reminiscent of Nazi book burning, repression and eventual annihilation of the Jews, and overall inhibition of freedom of thought, should be taken as a warning sign of thinly veiled hypocritical fascism, which neither Canada’s stature in the concert of civilized nations, nor the libertarian spirit that has always characterized the province of Quebec, can allow.

Cornett is not alone, counting not only with right and reason his side, but also supported by increasing numbers of people who are conscious of the importance of the right to education.

Leopoldo Soto

México City, 5th October 2009.

Yves,
Je suis d’accord avec votre position. On n’impose pas une réforme à une population. Comme on n’impose pas une école alternative à un milieu. Il faut que ça vienne de la volonté des citoyens et des pédagogues.
La créativité des différents milieux est telle actuellement que le MELS pourrait aller se rhabiller avec ses “nouvelles” idées. Mais il ne fait pas confiance, ni aux milieux, ni encore moins aux enfants malgré son discours généreux. Il croit qu’en les imposant il fera avancer le Québec: c’est une idée d’un autre siècle.
Entre nous, mon cher Yves, la mission de l’école ne devrait-elle pas être la suivante: nuire le moins possible à l’apprentissage?

Professor Norman Cornett leads an exploration of Kamila Wozniakowska’s art at galerie Eric Devlin.

Saturday,31Oct2009,13h00-15h00.

Cost:$25[all taxes included] $20[students,seniors with valid id].

For registration:tel.[514]256-2483.

Hi hi George Elliott Clarke!

At Doctor Cornett’s Stream of Consciousness session on Saturday, we were graced by the presence of the poet & novelist George Elliot Clarke, writer of, among many books, a novel in verse entitled “I and I” (2009). The discussion of this book was spirited as well as confrontational – to wit, confrontational in a way that I myself was part of, regardless of my being impressed by Clarke’s masterful craftsmanship & storytelling abilities.

The confrontation arose in connection with a long section of the book taken up by a brutal rape scene, this in a book darkly splayed where the ground is basically the poetic & the tragic rendered large & raucous, &, as Clarke said, also rooted in: an adolescent mentality (his own) from the 70s; a desire to interest people in their teens & twenties in the 2000’s (though not only them); a homage of sorts to Graphic novels, comic books, & horror movies; stylistically, in auditory feel, diction, & content, a fresh continuation of the literary traditions of twentieth century North Americans, pivotally Black North Americans, many of whom have a style that is possibly more “accessible” & still “revolutionary” in ways that the less accessible can’t be, given the latter often presuppose a type of education which many people don’t have.

The book is about much more than rape. There are historical elements, particularly delineating Halifax & the 70s world of the black, disenfranchised in Halifax – also a fair amount about Corpus Christi Texas at the time of the 70s in all its cruelty, pulp, prejudice, & circumstance. The personal story of black, disenfranchised Betty & Malcolm gets told, a young love story full of guts & tragedy, humiliation & back-stabbing, sweetness & damage, hope & horror.

My problem with the rape scene – the rape of young Betty – has nothing to do with the inclusion of rape in the story – not at all, & particularly not in this book, where the rape has so many political as well as dramatic implications. Rather (& I can’t shake this feeling), I felt the amount of energy afforded the rape scene, resulting in a huge number of pages so taken up by rape in a relatively short book about so much else – felt the plethora of detail & the on & on & on of salacious detail was frankly over the top in a way that was gratuitous, in the sense that it became almost the most lasting part of the book upon finishing – most lasting for this reader I guess, & this in a disturbing way, because it set up in the back (& front) of my mind an attitude of “rape as interesting in its essentials – as ‘entertainment’ even” – that’s the worst part – “rape as entertainment”.

Don’t get me wrong – I don’t think the author intended the rape to be foremost “entertainment” – I tend to think that what’s there in the book re the rape was an earnest attempt to represent horror. Nevertheless, I question why the rape scene & all its build-up was given so much room when the murder of the rapist, equally disturbing & necessary – the murder of the rapist was quick & gut wrenching without going on & on & on – just enough to hit the reader up the side of the head – just enough to serve the bloodiness of the plot in a way that rendered reader (rightfully) uncomfortable. Why was the rape (or for this reader) so seemingly studded with GLEE (oh dear) – how am I to process this without my feeble judgement knocking on the author’s door with my questions re salaciousness? The confrontation that came up was difficult – we’re in a group where we’re supposed to say what comes – I say what came…

On thinking afterwards I was lead into thoughts re types of reaction – I thought about how some people are perhaps naturally more inclined in terms of content to distinguish between reality & representation, & how others (like me) find representation nearing in power of reaction to reaction to reality – that is, you give me something ostensibly relishing the ugly, I will react as I reacted here. Nevertheless, I am not a reader incapable of distancing myself so as to not be able to take in what is being offered, distressing or no, as I apparently was in relation to “I and I”…hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

I’m wondering if anyone is thinking, reading this, that I’m a bitching feminist (again oh dear). To that I would say firstly that feminist is not a dirty word to me – but but but – more importantly that this is not so much about ideology as about a different sensibility. I have never been a fan of horror – is that my problem? & yet & yet – I read lots of stuff with horrific aspects. George, of course an adolescent mentality is what it is – & adolescent boys – smile – do I sound like a dumb girl? Oh! I have a question: we were in a group where only some of the people had read “I and I”. You did some amazing reading of amazing parts of your book, but never read anything at all from the rape section: what was up with that? Was very pleased to meet you – forgive me if I ask questions you may find miss the point…Djuanaxo

Jazz composer/musician/researcher [ with the Smithsonian] Charles Ellison in ‘dialogue’ with Professor Norman Cornett.

Nov 14, 1-3pm.

$25 tax.inc./$20 students/seniors w/ID

Galerie Samuel Lallouz 1434 Sherbrooke W.,#200. 849-5844

Good day….

Thank You, Thank You, Thank You for providing us with an opportunity to be in dialogue with our wonderful guest, Charles Ellison. I don’t usually write in these types of forums, but yesterday afternoon’s session “In Dialogue with Jazz composer/musician and researcher, Professor Charles Ellison”, was truly good for the soul. How I wish I had had the opportunity of being taught be these two gentlemen — Dr. Norman Cornett who initiated these classes and Professor Ellison! But, wait a minute, I did! It’s never too late, if one chooses to use life as a constant laboratory of learning. I’m realizing that yesterday’s session (although it was way too short), gave me more nourishment than an entire semester of ‘ordinary’ teachings could have given me. I was truly touched & moved by Prof. Ellison’s genuine love & passion for his craft AND his true commitment to sharing it with the world. He didn’t have to, but he chose to do so. I can’t say I know much about the “technical” aspect of music, but after hearing Prof. Ellison in dialogue with us, I now feel a certain kind of freedom in that it doesn’t matter what I know or don’t know…what matters is that I love rhythm and I love music and it’s wonderful to be in the presence of someone who is so totally inspiring and makes me want to take on life even more fully than I have so far. I realized that there are so many things to be appreciated in this world; so much beauty; so much to discover & explore, yet humans seem to focus on what’s wrong, what doesn’t work, or worse the “correct way” of teaching… Dr. Cornett & Prof. Ellison’s approach to learning are to be treasured and I for one, am extremely grateful for this precious gift! My life is richer today because of it. Thank You. I can’t wait for the next time. Bonsaï

When did feminism become a dirty word? – Reflections on the dialogue with George Elliot Clarke

Last night my friend Brandee asked me ‘Why the foul mood?’
‘Because Dr. Cornett (Carole K, I know!) asked me to comment on the dialogue with George Elliot Clarke and now I’m trying to figure out a way to say why it is not okay to write so carelessly and callously about rape without sounding overly emotional or defensive and it makes me so angry that any of this is even still an issue.’
‘I don’t think I could.’
‘I don’t think I can either but now it’s too late to pull out, I’m all worked up about it’.

A few hours after this exchange, I finally remembered that I didn’t sign up for this class to make well-informed, -quoted and -balanced academic arguments – I will talk another time about why I signed up and how much more I learned. – In fact keeping my emotions out of this comment would be hypocritical, there’s no reason for me to justify or defend how I felt about reading this book and listening to the author talk about it.

I was not happy with the choice of I&I and I was very unhappy sitting through a 2 hour celebration of it mostly by people who hadn’t read it. I was not happy that after reading one critical feedback and a 5 minutes ensuing dialogue between Mr. Clarke, Djuana and myself, Carole K. chose to focus exclusively on positive reflections. I felt betrayed by the people who had privately expressed as much if not more irritation over the book but now decided to remain silent. Lastly I am also unhappy with myself for not speaking up again when Mr. Clarke repeatedly stressed how much “fun” he had writing a book that I find if not misogynistic at the very least counterproductive and reactionary on the subject of violence against women. I am on the other hand very grateful that Djuana had the courage to speak up and now expressed her and many of my thoughts in her comment from Nov. 9.

I don’t have to explain why I find it disturbing that a middle aged literature professor had “so much fun” wallowing for what seems an eternity in a young student’s brutal rape committed by a fictional middle aged literature professor. I don’t have to illustrate how Spiderman’s “with great power comes great responsibility” applies to this book and I don’t have to exemplify how Tarantino empowers his female characters where Clarke strips his protagonist of everything she ever had or will have including her revenge and her life.

Everyone knows that men use, have always used rape to threaten, dominate and domesticate women because they are terrified of their power. In I&I Mr. Clarke chose to retell an ancient story: A pretty girl becomes a woman, she starts to discover and explore her sexuality, her intellect and her power and immediately the men around her come and strip her of all that and more, they rape her, belittle and ridicule her, avenge her, go to prison for her, thus indebting her forever to them and finally they kill her. Does this story really need to be told again and again and again? There’s nothing new in it, it’s utterly unoriginal, all Mr. Clarke does is give it some shiny new clothes so that the anticipated “younger audiences” can have as much “fun” with the story as men had throughout the ages. I doubt it’s lack of imagination, no, it’s easy, lazy, a crowd pleaser and ties into the fantasies of many readers and writers.

Chris Brown publicly complains about unfair treatment in the media, Mike Tyson sits on Oprah’s couch and jokes about beating up his wife, George Elliot Clarke thinks rape has great entertainment value as long as you clad it in skilful verses.

All I really want to say is that I’m tired of beating around the bush. It is not okay to write this callously and carelessly about rape. To paraphrase Charles Ellison, art has the power to be uplifting and uniting, reminding us of the best in us. Art can move us forward and – to me – this book does nothing of this.

I was not sure who our 5th stream was going to be but I did imagined our guest of the day was Prof George Elliot Clarke, and I was so curious to hear other comments and opinions from the Streamniks, but mostly why he wrote a book with such a content.

My opinion was heard by everyone in the room while Carol K was reading it, some were surprised, perhaps I was too harsh, others looked emotionless, but I want to believe these were people who did not read the book.
I heard my voice and I still agree with what I wrote even after all the comment and explanations provided by the writer.

To be honest, I didn’t feel I should have stood up and confirm again my opinion on the book during the dialog. After the professor replied to Mario’s comment and questions, telling her that most of the people reacted positively to the story and that these are mostly teenager’s memories, I felt that there was going to be limitations on the dialog. (on the content of the book and not the form)
What else can I say on a book which, following the author opinion, should be address to teenagers; what else can I say about someone who is amused on writing about rape, people getting chopped, blood, death..
I have nothing else to say after the session, because I cannot understand and accept, as a woman and as a person, to be amused by such tragedies, that are already part of our reality. But that is just my reality, which will be heard and probably accepted, but possibly not understood by everybody.
I always stood up for my opinion, good or bad, and most of the time I was surprised seeing that others are just not sensitive as I am; I was and I still am disappointed that violence, rape, sexual abuse and all the horrible things happening in real life, should be celebrated by media, told in books and perhaps in music too.

Is this book addressed to teenagers? My answer is no
Is this book a comic, fun, unrealistic story? I’m really not sure.
Do I want to read and analyze the memories and obsessions of a teenager, now grown up, and yet, in his actual age, still think this is fun? No!
Too bad for me, because I did like the form and I thought that some passages were very well written. I did enjoy some of his poetry.

I was told to write an honest answer on what i was experiencing, and so far I think I did stick to my duty, and not just during this meeting with Professor Clarke but in others too.
And if you ask me, I would do it again.

However, i decided to keep my silence, not for the fear of being judged for my fair opinion, but simply because I felt there was not going to be a meeting point in the dialog.
I would have been more frustrated and the comment I heard were enough for me.
I couldn’t read a book that others found entertaining. What else is there to say?
My final decision is to leave this book at the same page I left if before that Saturday.

On the other hand I was very much pleased on meeting and listening again to Professor Charles Ellison.
The dialog was a real lesson, accessible even to those with a basic knowledge of music, and the session became also a live performance.
His music reminds me of good and beautiful things in life and also how sound can become healing for our body and mind.
I’m often looking for this kind of feedback in arts; to me is to take a journey into beauty in whatever way I define it and perceive it, wishing to find growth and inspiration.

Is a good treat for the soul and that day, I left the gallery with a big smile on my face, pleased that I have two ears to listen and just one tongue to speak!
Very often too many words are not needed. Let’s keep more silence and ponder on our thoughts. We will still find answers.

A big thank you to Dr Cornett who makes all this possible.

Maya

small poem for Pierre Nepveu striking up his sense of place…

and darkness settled on his shoulders
like a job.
Carol Ann Duffy

I am not the place I’ve meant to be
not the song with humming chorus
that never needed a stamp of approval –

not those notes you had no problem
believing in. Here comes the redwing blackbird
tapping out a tone including monotone –
not the music lifting or bravely snuffed out.

In the park today the ducks with heads tucked.
Gulls & their bits of crying baby sounds
heading away from us, our ears straining
to figure out the language that is
something else’s language.

I am not in queue announcing where the true refrain should join…

If it was loud, then loud it was.
The clouds didn’t even murmur.
We walked the river’s edge holding hands.
There was an appetite for silence,
real noise won out

Last Tuesday evening, we had the great pleasure & privilege of welcoming author Pierre Nepveu to our “Streams of Consciousness” class. I was really looking forward to this session as so far, I have truly enjoyed and appreciated all six of the sessions with the guests Dr. Cornett invites in to come & dialogue with us about one of their works, whether it is music, literature, poetry, art… Tuesday evening was for me another wonderful gift and I believe that our class has also give Mr. Nepveu a gift. A gift of acknowledgment for his work, his great sensitivity, his willingness to share part of himself with us and most importantly, for being part of a conversation inside which we all got to be expressed, whether in writing, in reading or simply in listening. That being said, in the spirit of “dialogue” Dr. Cornett has invited me to share something I wrote as a result of reading “Mirabel” by Pierre Nepveu, since there is not enough time to read everything in class. I gracefully accept to share my thoughts from the poem on Page 33 and I INVITE ALL OTHER STREAMNIKS to do the same. Here it is:

After reading page 33, I experience the passing of an era, a way of living that was no longer to be lived. A seemingly banal occurrence of days past, juxtaposed against modern day displacement of many peoples around the world. Was it a foreshadow of things to come? Perhaps we could have paid more attention… or perhaps it is simply evolution taking its own natural course…Many more people have been and still are displaced around the world. Many centuries ago, the Natives were displaced because some people decided to take over the land they had not only been living on; a land they were protecting, nurturing, tending…I wonder if any of this could have been prevented or even whether it even “could” have. What is it that defines a place? Is it shaped by the people, the land, the animals, or is it what WE actually say & do that shape a place? Perhaps place actually shapes us and who we get to be inside that space. So when we are displaced from what we’ve come to know, some people feel lost, and some people move on to another space. Some people it seems are lost forever, while others adapt.

Thirty or so years later, do the fields, now so empty and quiet, know the difference? Do they care? Have they experienced the upheaval or better expressed in French the “bouleversement” associated with displacement or maybe for Mother Nature, it was to be expected. I try to imagine what impact this huge man-made infrastructure, the grand design of “some bureaucrats”, has had on the tectonic shift of our collective consciousness, our planet…

P. 37 – I would love to have Mr. Nepveu’s thoughts on the following, as I didn’t get to ask in class….

“Progress is more than just a question of the future; it should give the past back its integrity as well….” I find this sentence fascinating, very profound and yet I cannot explain it to myself. Perhaps we’re all made to think that progress is a GOOD thing; it’s about moving forward, growth, expansion, better & more. But there is always a cost & benefit equation to everything we do. How does progress give back integrity to the past??? I would love to hear Monsieur Nepveu speak to this line….

Bonsaï

“Mirabel – Soft and sad, dark and swampy with little flecks of sunshine, a bird with a broken twig for a wing.

There’s a deep sadness throughout the book, and like a breeze, it very gently blows through you and it touches your heart on the way and your heart resonates. The sadness is almost impersonal, I want to say neutral or accepting, collective, ancient but I’m missing the right word here. I’ll try again, with an unlikely comparison: The narrator has taken this sadness upon himself the way Jesus took the cross – not that I know anything of Jesus or his cross. Another image that arises is that of the first people whose land was taken; an ancient soul coming back to witness tragedy unfold again. Nothing can be done but someone has to be there and bear it and bear witness. It’s not easy this witnessing but so important that someone is there who sees things for what they are, without drama or delusion and stays, doesn’t run, does not get busy, but witnesses and carries the cross – again, I don’t completely understand what I’m writing here and why so solemn.

Most people have a choice to feel the sadness or to ignore it. They might feel it sometimes at the movies or listening to Leonard Cohen, maybe while making love, but mostly they will protect themselves from it. And other people, like my mother, don’t have a choice, they have no protection, no boundaries, no choice. It’s painful and it compromises your ability to live in society but if you trust the sadness and stop chasing some other people’s dream, you’ll be alright. And you can’t keep it either, keeping it will kill you with depression or drive you mad, you have to let your heart be soft and the sadness blow through, surrender to it completely and it’ll take you with it and leave you cleaner and older and with less to hide. Maybe that’s what the shamans do, they carry some of the collective sadness and madness and so the others can be more at peace.

That’s why I think Mirabel is an important book, important for everyone, no matter if they read it or not, but some of those who read it will be a little cleaner and older and with less to hide.”

… I’d written this text earlier and thought it fit well into the discussion and the fantastic meeting we had with the author Pierre Nepveu. Thank you M. Nepveu, it was a pleasure and a privilege!

The forgiving woodland poem

“If existence offered a way out somewhere
other than the sleep of eternity
then it might be a woodland”
Pierre Nepveu

I thought of you after you lost your home
as simply as a symptom of gregarious flu
your heart beating against the nicks, flying into
the window sealed against opening, sharing
the bitter talk with your singular mate –
I thought of you with no way to go
forward or back.

It’s weather – the way weather can claim
to be nobody’s fault – the way giving in
has you talking in circles the night before you give up
a good fight you’ve realized
is a useless fight –

it’s the cloud like a strong thumb crushing the roof
there above the life you’ve known,
the passion for hope
sickly like when inevitability
is all wrong.

Woodland – place to pay the debt without
giving up your block of goat cheese & warm wine –
these in your knapsack, the ferns so thick
you’re reminded of sprouting corn,
the blank hill overseeing.

Woodland – forget the gruff, the unfriendly
asking you what you’re here for.

There’s the power that could send you away
without notice – nevertheless, trees
& trees & trees, a miniscule pond,
the heron, uncaring, that has you caring –
woodland, heaven, whistling insinuation,
the arrogant fences
pulled down…

Photos of the dialogue with Dr Cornett, Kamila Wozniakowska Nov 27 (with flashing-light paintings by Jean-Marie Martin; see her paintings at
http://images.google.ca/images?client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&hl=fr&source=hp&q=Kamila+Wozniakowska&btnG=Recherche+d%27images&gbv=2&aq=f&oq=)
.
and of our previous Oct 31 visit to the galerie Eric Devlin to see Wozniakowska’s After Revolution art, can be viewed at
http://www.flickr.com/fdmillar/sets.

Dear Streamnicks”,
I am afraid that any words that I might use might be inadequate te describe the experience that I have lived with Dr Cornett and your group last Tuesday. Afterwards, I keep the impression that I could only get a few glimpses, although extremely revealing, of the marvelous group of individuals who were in front of me.
I sensed the depth and the variety of so many experiences, of so many sensibilities,
and my joy to feel it could not help but beind tempered by the knowledge that I would miss so much of what you had to say and to create.
This is why I am so happy to be able to read a few more comments and poems on this site: each of them gives some extension, some new dimensions to what I have tried myself to create. But beyond the book itself and your creative reading, there was an encounter, a true dialogue, a real event from my point of view. Thank you all and to Dr Cornett.

Ceci est une réponse en français à “Bonsaï” concernant la question qu’elle n’a pas pu poser durant notre rencontre, à propos de la phrase: “Le progrès, dit-il, n’est pas seulement affaire d’avenir, il doit aussi rendre le passé à son intégrité”. Ce propos est tenu par un planificateur et il s’agit d’une référence ironique à une anecdote qui s’est réellement passée. La “maison Nepveu”, dans la côte Saint-Louis de Mirabel, habitée par des cousins de mon père, a été déplacée pierre par pierre et les spécialistes en histoire de l’architecture ont alors constaté que le toit original avait été modifié depuis la construction au 18e siècle. Ce nouveau toit était très beau et se prolongeait au-dessus d’une grande galerie, comme pour beaucoup de maisons traditionnelles au Québec. En reconstruisant plus loin la maison, on a supprimé ce toit en surplomb ainsi que la grande galerie, pour rétablir le plan original.
Mon idée, ici, est que parfois les spécialistes utilisent leur science avec arrogance. Pour eux, rétablir ce modèle ancien est un “progrès” par rapport aux modifications apportés par les habitants des lieux au fil des décennies. J’y vois un manque de respect du temps humain,de la vie concrète des êtres, une vision technocratique, épurée et figée de l’architecture et de la culture en général.
D’où mon ironie,à travers les propos que je prête à ce technocrate qui prétend tout savoir et qui méprise le bon peuple et le sens commun…
Est-ce que ma réponse vous satisfait, chère Bonsaï?

Cher Monsieur Nepveu,

Merci de prendre le temps de répondre à ma question au sujet de votre phrase “Le progrès, dit-il, n’est pas seulement affaire d’avenir, il doit aussi rendre le passé à son intégrité.” Je saisi exactement le sens maintenant et j’avoue que vous soulevez un point qui vaut la peine d’être examiné. Il semble que dans notre effort de moderniser tout, selon les dernières technologies ou méthodologies ou réformes, on semble laisser aller quelque chose. Certains disent que le progrès, “c’est la vie”, on y peut rien. De là mon commentaire précédent au sujet du changement. Est-ce qu’il s’agit de suivre le cours de l’évolution et se mettre à la fine pointe des temps modernes et tout oublier ce qui est venu avant nous ? Ceux qui choisissent de résister au changement sont-ils “figés dans ce qui n’est plus”? Devons-nous “keep up or die off..?” Un exemple à l’appui: les journaux, les revues et les livres se font de plus en plus remplacer par les textes electroniques. Oui, il est important de sauver les arbres et l’énergie, mais est-ce qu’il faut anéantir le plaisir de tourner les pages d’un bouquin en anticipant ce qui apparaîtra sur la prochaine. Pour ma part, je trouve que c’est dommage….

Quel plaisir d’entendre ce grand artiste nous parler avec simplicité et passion de son art et de son cheminement. Ses prestations au piano m’ont éblouie par leur sensibilité et sa virtuosité. Quelle solidité aussi.

Merci au Dr.Cornett d’avoir invité cet artiste exceptionnel dans le cadre des “rencontres dialogiques”

Photos of 13 Dec 2009 “Cornett & Pierre Forget” can be viewed at
http://flickr.com/fdmillar/sets

My multimedia reflections on Pierre Nepveu, Lignes aeriennes/Mirabel is at http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AZyl0UPbjZBlZGd4Nm16empfMjQ2Yzl3ZmtwZzQ&hl=en
The present site does not permit the insertion of links, let alone photos, art, music etc.

We regret to inform readers that on Christmas, and again on New Year’s weekend, someone vandalized galerie Samuel Lallouz.

Four female figures stand shimmering and shivering outside the Galerie Samuel Lallouz, their backs turned to Sherbrooke Street. They have no protection against the elements or the passers-by. They sway slightly in the wind, fragile and foreign under the Canadian snow. Two of them have been knocked down for their brazenness.

The women are Sirens, aluminum-cast figures of allure and provocation by award-winning Nova Scotian sculptor, John Greer. Some loutish Ulysses, forgetting himself, has knocked two of them down, taking his anger out on women, on art, for all the drunken misadventures of men.

It’s the same old story. Why are we surprised?

Pass on by, Ulysses, as you are supposed to. Block your ears, hide your eyes, bind your body. Go on home to Penelope. Ask her to knit coats for them instead. It’s cold on Sherbrooke Street in winter.

BEAUTIFUL MINDS an interdisciplinary series in the arts:

Dr. Ivar Mendez,NICOLE BROSSARD,John Greer,STEPHANIE BOLSTER,NAIM KATTAN,CARMINE STARNINO,and more in ‘dialogue’ with Professor Norman Cornett.

12January-27March2010

Tuesdays,18h00-20h00;Saturdays 13h00-15h00.

galerie Samuel Lallouz, 1434 Sherbrooke west

Contact:[514]849-5844 reception@galeriesamuellallouz.com

Please note that this new series permits people to
‘go with the flow,’ so that you may attend as time permits.

We have no expectation that all those enrolled will make every meeting of BEAUTIFUL MINDS.

Kindly note that ‘dialogue’ partners may change without prior notice.

Registration in progress.

In response to Erin Moore’s galician-portuguese poetry book “O Cadoiro”

Lisbon is sleeping
I m following the poet’s steps
but…
this is my book too!
wait!
I m getting lost

(lost in space
lost in time)

Fall in the nineteen sixties
five o’ clock in the morning
three teenagers walk along the river
o rio Tejo

(for the purpose the two friends slept at home)

eager for strong emotions

What s happening? here,
Portuguese – Galician poetry?
who s who?
who s speaking?
…lost again

estaçao fluvial
doca pesca
capitania do porto

the river banks look wild

(ervinhas)

the promenade takes the girls from
Belem to the Cais do Sodré
in time for the opening of the fish market

Somos jovems
we r young
it s dawn
and I m happy

when we arrive
the women

the peixeiras

feet in the frozen river waters
still unpack
the fish
just arrived

A poem!
a poem!
you are writing a poem!
how pompous of you!

Up your ass!
who cares
about beeing understood, who cares
about understanding
the Rei Dom Dinis won’t scorn you!

Madame miel

How Norman McLaren drew directly on film, 1944
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Norman_McLaren_drawing_on_film_-_1944.jpg
He made a very simple frame to hold the film, and moved down one frame at a time, by hand. Blinkety Blank (1954-55 — I got the date wrong above) uses this technique as well as visual persistence to create “virtual” movement, as does Pierre Hébert’s whiteboard technique. . See McLaren`s own statement in
http://archive.sensesofcinema.com/contents/cteq/05/35/norman_mclaren.html

Dr. Cornett’s new session, Beautiful Minds, started last Tuesday January the 12th at Galerie Lallouz. In it we were invited, one after the other, to read the same (inspiring and wonderfull) text. Six different people, six different voices.
I keep wonderind:
Was my voice, MY OWN voice?
It certainely was. But how much? A 100%? 80%? More? Less? What do we owe to others, where is the balance?…
It will certainely be, for me, a good subject of inquiry for this new session with Dr Cornett.

“I am taking dictation from my body.
I am holding an auction, but
who would want these things?”
John Amen

A place
in the wavelength
of catastrophe
where a “they” walks
singing, blood
dried on offended skin –
on scant clothing –
babies under
the rubble no longer
rumbling –

a sky the same
as sky anywhere
on a hot afternoon
not differentiating
loss from excess,
time to grieve & wail
from timely peaceable –
not signalling
what everything else is signalling
dark-spirited, homely-amazed,
properly disputing
the faceless churn of wreckage –
physical, spiritual –
the hard glimmer
of nowhere to be
thankful, loss it’s own irony
as survival pays
no dividends easily…

Miles away
a Miles Davis song
a Haitian poet listening
till she’s bent like
a territorial ricochet of emotion,
her words a staggering proposition
dancing on bloodied point

I too have chosen to be part of Dr. Cornett’s new sessions called “Beautiful Minds”. Now that I’ve experienced three months of this particular type of learning during the summer with “Streams of Consciousness”, I couldn’t pass up this opportunity once again. I am pleased to see that we are going to be exploring more interesting topics that lead us to think, ask questions, wonder, examine and learn, for the simple joy of expanding the mind. Our group has now grown with two more people joining us…each voice bringing something to the conversation. This evening was about examining our perceptions, our senses, and how we describe Reality… Is the glass FULL or is it EMPTY? Who gets to say? Who really knows the absolute truth? Interesting….I can’t wait for next time.

We’re reading Nicole Brossard in Doctor Cornett’s class. We only learned this last session. I was surprised, never thought I wouldn’t recognise a text by Nicole. We were given little swatches from a recent book. I read them & reacted, responded open endedly & also focused on a passage at a time, without bigger context. Now, 2 days later, I’ve read 50 pages of a 114 page book, a translation. I am messmerized – the book is dreaming it’s characters, I am allowing a dreaming book to enter…

____________________________________________

The freighted pedestrian

“I have no doubt: we are often in the front rows of pain
trying to comprehend how it is that one day we take
flight and on the next repeatedly bruise ourselves against
the world or wander thousands of kilometres away from
desire in our labyrinth of images. Discover where the little
folds of tenderness come from that, now and again, close
up over us like scars, and fire.”
Nicole Brossard

The freighted pedestrian has a dark face with a bright ignorance that climbs
reconstructive breathing exercises at moments you least expect – goes
out into the bitter wood guided by existential sweet tooth – falls
out of step blandly going histrionic quiet. The freighted pedestrian
tells tales on bruises happening, expects someone to listen, falls
down a well of silence in search of an authentic future
that will only bite down when there’s no honest choice –
the freighted pedestrian scrambles the mindless taut.

Meanwhile I want to grow a grove in a blank place,
have grape vines grappling, the taste of orange surviving
all the ways a life can forget the safe normative –
all the ways, the missteps, the candour without
hope hoping nevertheless – strong coffee, big clouds,
the next time to get passed hesitant Go haunting
the recurrent, salivating
rainy season…

*

The freighted pedestrian #2

“I must look after my solitude. Be able to count on it to
astonish me, to plot and to go on with this madness for
speaking even as I abandon my own language…”
Nicole Brossard

To get from here to there
rather far a field
she could take feather steps,
advertise a patient way

of delaying gratification –
go gingerly well shod,
stick to a swept path
with odd dips into the grass

for musing. The morning has blessed
the freighted pedestrian
on days more nervous than these
for showing a little restraint –

for knowing
what the turtle knew
slow to understanding
as he must have been.

There is, of course, another way:
burst out because on fire,
all the pounding glamour

in tangling hair & reach –
a ticklish whim caught
sweaty above the upper lip,
scenery a blur of merging shots

quite merciful – the next grand adventure
tranquil or no, aflame or no,
but at least no longer
a trickery all behind her.

Love the Brossard. It’s a real stretch to abandon the male gaze but worth it. I`ve been comparing the French and English versions. Am too overloaded with other tasks to write much now but thought I’d mention that “nice cliche” is a mistranslation — surprising in view of the many collaborations between Lotbiniere-Harwood and Brossard. The slip is in missing a French preposition (d’). The “beau cliché” is not Laure as a baby, but her mother’s womb. See full text of my comments at http://docs.google.com/View?id=dgx6mzzj_268dn8rjgfg

Bolster’s Pavilion; feelings, observations, clues. http://docs.google.com/View?id=dgx6mzzj_272djqnw6hc

Le cas Cornett
Réflexions sur une impasse

Marc Chénard

Présenté en juin dernier dans le cadre d’un festival dédié à la culture autochtone, un documentaire de l’Office national du Film du Canada a été visionné en première québécoise par un public si nombreux que l’auditorium de la Biliothèque nationale du Québec était comble. (À la demande publique, les organisateurs ont même décidé d’ajouter une supplémentaire le lendemain, chose un tant soit peu surprenante car le sujet de cette production n’avait vraiment peu de rapport à l’événement si ce n’était que l’ethnicité de la réalisatrice. De plus, en octobre dernier, le film a été projeté de nouveau, cette fois-ci au cinéma de l’ONF pendant une semaine complète.)
Son titre un tant soit peu ampoulé (Since when do we divorce the right answer from an honest answer?) brosse le portrait d’un académique, le Docteur Norman Cornett, professeur de longue date à la faculté des études religieuses de l’Université McGill, mais démis de ses fonctions en 2006. Réalisé par la cinéaste Alanis Obomsawin. le film traite des circonstances quelque peu nébuleuses entourant ce congédiement. « Nébuleuses », doit-on le dire, car l’institution refuse de justifier sa décision, ne donnant suite à aucune des requêtes d’entrevues de la cinéaste, sans oublier les demandes d’explication répétées du professeur.
Bien que le film suive la filière de l’histoire, il ne peut qu’exposer le point de vue de la partie lésée. On y voit donc le professeur prodiguant un « enseignement » que l’on pourrait qualifier à tout le moins d’inhabituel; en effet, celui-ci se démarque de l’approche classique, dite « magistrale » – fondée, bien sûr, sur la transmission univoque de connaissances d’un maître vers ses disciples – par une démarche plus intuitive, démarche procédant d’une discussion ouverte entre les étudiants à qui on laisse entière liberté d’exprimer leur idées et opinions, sans coupures ou censure que ce soit (un fait que le docteur réitère volontiers avec sa formule chérie unrestricted, uncensored, unplugged.). Entre des séquences tournées en salle de classe, la réalisatrice intercale des propos et témoignages d’autres académiques (dont un collègue professeur, retraité de l’Université), d’anciens étudiants, d’invités de circonstance, les uns les plus encenseurs que les autres à son égard.
Sans vendre la mèche dès le départ, le film campe son sujet pour tout à coup laisser tomber la nouvelle de son congédiement vers le milieu de la projection. Peu à peu, on suit le professeur dans ses démêlés, faisant face à une institution campée dans un mutisme total. Des procédures juridiques s’ensuivent, incluant une comparution devant le tribunal du travail de la province (ce conflit de travail en milieu académique étant, apparemment. un précédent dans les annales de cet organisme public), suivi par une tentative de l’Université de le soudoyer (voire « d’acheter » son silence) en lui proposant une compensation monétaire somme toute nominale, offre refusée par le Docteur, résolu de ne pas lâcher prise. Depuis, l’impasse persiste, le professeur s’attendant toujours à l’explication, l’institution refusant de lui la livrer.
À sa première montréalaise, le film a interpellé les spectateurs; l’auteur de ces lignes, présent à la séance, a constaté l’intérêt du public lors d’une période de questions en salle, puis de discussions plus informelles tenues dans une aire de réception. Depuis la projection, beaucoup de voix se sont fait entendre publiquement, entre autres, les témoignages affichés sur le présent site qui appuient autant le professeur que de faire part d’une incompréhension à l’égard de l’attitude de l’institution.
Pourtant, en lisant les propos livrés sur le cas, ceux-ci se contentent dans la grande majorité des cas à se tenir au simple constat, soulevant essentiellement les seules questions que peu d’intervenants dans le débat osent vraiment aborder, quitte à se mouiller en proposant une explication probable de cet état de fait.
Dans les lignes qui suivent, nous tenterons justement de traiter de cette problématique épineuse, non pas en prenant la partie de l’Université, ni encore de lui fournir un quelconque alibi pour le disculper, mais bien de mettre en relief quelques points qui puissent éclairer un tant soit peu la situation.
D’emblée, il importe de bien identifier cette autre partie en cause. Sa raison sociale, on la connaît, mais la nommer en lui pointant un doigt accusateur ne suffit pas. En tant qu’organisme d’enseignement supérieur, l’Université McGill est une institution sociale. De par nature, une institution joue un rôle dans une culture, rôle doté également d’un pouvoir qui accroît en fonction de son importance. D’aucuns peuvent douter ici du rôle tenu par les établissements d’éducation supérieure dans une collectivité, voire de la crédibilité qu’elles ont en tant que pourvoyeurs du savoir. Mais l’envers de cette médaille, ou la face cachée si l’on veut, est justement cet enjeu de pouvoir lié à cette responsabilité. En tant qu’institution, une université est une collection d’individus (employés, étudiants) somme toutes anonymes, mais doté d’un considérable pouvoir d’ensemble. Dans le cas de McGill, on peut bien invoquer des têtes dirigeantes comme le principal ou le chancelier, mais ce sont que des figurants, des prête-noms d’un pouvoir dépassant largement l’autorité de ces seuls acteurs.
En tant qu’organisme complexe, l’institution a un caractère fondamentalement opaque, ses processus de décision obscurcies par une chaîne de commande virtuellement impossible à suivre, non seulement pour ceux qui se trouvent à l’extérieur de celle-ci mais bien aussi à chacun des maillons qui la constitue. Ainsi est-il de toute bureaucratie, où chaque palier ne connaît que ceux qui lui sont attenants et où les réels preneurs de décisions se dissimulent derrière une hiérarchie de structures administratives opaques.
Toutes ces considérations ont une incidence sur le cas exposé dans le documentaire. L’impasse dans laquelle se trouve le docteur Cornett en est bel et bien une imposée par une institution qui use (sinon abuse) d’un pouvoir qu’il détient, le plaçant de ce fait dans une position de force, son opacité bureaucratique lui permettant d’afficher, à l’égard d’un individu laissé seul devant ce monolithe impénétrable, une attitude à la limite irresponsable.
Pour certains, il y aurait lieu de voir un certain parallélisme entre ce cas et le purgatoire (sinon l’enfer) vécu par le protagoniste Joseph K dans le célèbre roman de Kafka Le procès. On pourrait effectivement abonder en ce sens, mais cela ne nous en aide en rien, car on se contenterait de se ranger du côté des interventions qui braquent constamment les projecteurs dans une seule direction.
Mais comme tout conflit implique au moins deux parties, il est tout aussi essentiel de retourner les projecteurs afin de vraiment éclairer la cause dans son ensemble. Doit-on se contenter de voir la partie lésée comme victime d’une quelconque machination d’un pouvoir occulte qui, par un simple coup de tête, décide de se départir de lui?…
Pour revenir une fois de plus à l’institution, il faut comprendre que celle-ci existe et se maintient en raison d’un cadre de principes, d’une déontologie, d’attentes envers ces membres constituants, voire de rituels et de conventions à respecter. Dans le cas d’une université, tous ces éléments s’appliquent et la dérogation à l’un ou l’autre de ceux-ci est toujours sujette à sanction.
Considérons de nouveau l’approche pédagogique épousée par le Docteur Cornett. D’une part, sa démarche n’est pas sans rappeler celle de la maïeutique préconisée par Socrate, sa méthode consistant à laisser les auditeurs accoucher de leurs pensées et d’arriver à la vérité par le questionnement de ceux-ci. Ainsi se déroulait ses cours, durant lesquels il agissait comme intermédiaire et non comme transmetteur de connaissances. Or, une telle pédagogie ouverte ne peut que contredire le modèle traditionnel universitaire, axé sur le principe magistral, tel que mentionné au début de ce texte. Cette incompatibilité fondamentale ne peut se concevoir, du point de vue de l’institution, comme une dérogation de son cadre de principes, voire d’une convention fondamentale qui régit l’enseignement à tous les niveaux.
À ce titre, reprenons quelques-uns des propos inclus dans l’une des interventions sur ce site, l’un des rares qui s’interroge justement sur la méthodologie pédagogique du professeur. (Voir plus haut, en date du 8 octobre 2009, commentaire signé par Yves). S’adressant sur la tentative d’un responsable du Réseau des écoles publiques et alternatives du Québec de « récupérer le travail extraordinaire du docteur Cornett dans les réformes du Ministère de l’éducation (…) », l’auteur poursuit un peu plus bas dans ces termes : « Étant donné que les réformes du ministère de l’éducation tournent autour de ce qu’il est convenu d’appeler “L’approche par compétences”, principalement orientées sur la tâche à accomplir, il y a lieu de se demander quelle compétence le Dr Cornett tente de promouvoir, et comment il entend l’évaluer ? » Il y a donc lieu de se demander à quelle fin sert un tel exercice de laisser libre cours aux étudiants d’exprimer leurs opinions, plus ou moins informées, sur une question ? Comme tous et chacun ont un bagage de connaissances différentes, ne court-on pas ici le danger de mésententes par des lacunes dans les compétences individuelles, voire à des apories en matière d’outils (ou de grilles) d’analyse permettant un débat plus rigoureux entre les participants. À suivre cette approche, on se dirige essentiellement vers une subjectivité absolue, relativisant ainsi toute notion de vérité ou de fausseté. Laissons le dernier mot ici à Yves : « Et si je m’aventurais à enseigner comme le fait le bon docteur, le Ministère de l’éducation serait très insatisfait et mon cégep tenterait de me faire perdre mon emploi. Heureusement je suis syndiqué. Mais s’il était possible de montrer que je n’enseigne pas la compétence exigée je pourrais perdre mon emploi tout de même, même si les étudiants apprécient ce que je fais. » N’est-ce pas ce que l’Université tente de faire à son tour ? Ne trouve-t-on pas là l’explication de la perte de l’emploi du Docteur Cornett ?…

Apportons ici quelques nuances. Cette approche d’acquisition de compétences est particulièrement importante dans un premier cycle (de baccalauréat) où l’on procède d’une idée de base : celle de dispenser des connaissances à un sujet encore non éclairé. (Dit autrement : l’étudiant est un genre de vase vide – ou peu rempli – qu’il faut remplir à tout prix, au risque même de le faire déborder.) Si l’étudiant passe l’épreuve (et un premier cycle en est une, cet auteur pouvant parler d’expérience) et qu’il veuille poursuivre aux niveaux supérieurs (Maîtrise, Doctorat), la dispensation des connaissances continue de plus belle, mais l’étudiant, lui, bénéficie d’un peu plus de latitude sur la manière de les appréhender, de les trier et de les articuler en une vision plus personnelle, l’aboutissement de ce processus étant la rédaction d’une thèse de recherche.
Ce que le docteur Cornett propose donc c’est d’initier en quelque sorte ce processus de connaissance préconisé davantage dans les études aux cycles supérieurs dès l’entrée au premier cycle : les étudiants disposent-ils de tous les outils nécessaires pour articuler une pensée critique aussi efficace que perspicace ?
Sans être dénuée d’attrait, ni d’un certain sens, l’approche préconisée par le Docteur Cornett peut s’appliquer avec succès dans un domaine restreint d’études, en l’occurrence les sciences humaines. Quant aux sciences exactes, l’enjeu premier est d’assurer la transmission de connaissances précises (lois physiques et chimiques, principes mathématiques, techniques statistiques), d’où l’inefficacité de procéder à l’accumulation d’opinions subjectives. Après tout, est-il besoin de débattre la loi de la gravité ?…
À ce même titre, notons ici une autre remarque faite dans les commentaires postés sur ce site.
(Émilie-Rose Affleck, 5 octobre 2009). Diplômée de McGill, et ancienne étudiante du docteur, celle-ci relate une anecdote particulièrement éclairante :
In the midst of a rambling but insightful answer to a question about applying his pedagogic theories to the teaching of maths and sciences, Cornett paused, looked into the theatre’s upper rows, and with eyes alight exclaimed, “Dora the Explorer! (un sobriquet donné à une étudiante, une des pratiques du professeur, n.d.a.).”
Ce qui retient l’attention ici, c’est l’observation que le docteur donna une réponse somme toute assez floue sur la pertinence de sa méthode dans le domaine des sciences exactes, chose que celles-ci tolèrent mal. Il faudrait bien sûr entendre vraiment les propos du docteur à ce sujet pour tirer une conclusion, mais d’après le témoin, tout semble confirmer notre hypothèse.
Et notons-le, cette intervenante chante les louanges du docteur dans son commentaire, bien qu’elle révèle à son insu une autre faux-pas du docteur.
Throughout my undergraduate degree at McGill, I took two classes with Dr. Cornett, neither of which had anything to do with their course titles, and both of which stirred me on an intellectual level that no other course has before or since.
On se réjouit bien sûr que l’étudiante en question ait été stimulée à un plus haut niveau intellectuel, mais le seul fait d’avoir suivi deux cours dont le contenu n’avait rien à voir avec leur titre représente, pour l’institution bien certainement, une sérieuse entorse dans le cursus d’étude.

Dans le présent exposé, il m’ était essentiel, ne serait-ce que par probité intellectuelle, de traiter de la problématique sur ses deux versants afin de soulever quelques-unes des dimensions qui, jusqu’à maintenant, ont échappé à la majorité de observateurs et personnes impliquées de près ou de loin dans ce litige.
De cette analyse, il en ressort la conclusion suivante : d’une part, on retrouve une institution intransigeante dotée d’un pouvoir qui lui permet de disposer à sa guise de tout élément jugé incompatible ou nuisible à ses principes et traditions; d’autre part, on a un individu qui, par acte de conscience, résiste à ce pouvoir qui lui empêche de prodiguer sa philosophie pédagogique. En se servant donc de l’interprétation proposée ici, on peut comprendre (sans nécessairement approuver) le silence de l’Université McGill, parce que personne accepterait leur explication de la démission du docteur Cornett par le seul fait qu’il porte atteinte aux conventions et traditions de cette institution. L’impasse persiste. Mais comme les institutions meurent beaucoup plus difficilement que les personnes, un destin semble à tout le moins scellé d’avance.

Marc Chénard

Nicole Brossard stands as a leading feminist voice in literature.

She has twice won the Governor General’s Award for her writings.

She has published 19 poetry collections,eight novels,a play,many essays,and several pieces for the radio,and founded a feminist newspaper.

Ms. Brossard received the Prix Athanase-David,the highest award in literature conferred by the Government of Quebec.

She will ‘dialogue’ with us on:

Saturday,06February2010,13h00-15h00,at galerie Samuel Lallouz.

Cost:$25[all taxes included]; $20[all taxes included]students with valid ID.

Contact:[514]849-5844 reception@galeriesamuellallouz.com

Bonjour professeur Cornett,
Merci pour cette invitation à participer à la rencontre dialogique entre les ‘’Beautiful Mind’’ et la poète Nicole Brossard
Quelle intéressante façon de provoquer le dialogue que ces intrusions incognito dans l’œuvre (Fences in Breathing, roman Lemeac 2007) de N. Brossard. Au départ, en faisant lire à vos étudiants des paragraphes choisis sans connaitre l’auteur du livre, pour ensuite les amener à interpréter spontanément entre les lignes leur version des faits et finalement partager avec l’auteur des extraits récoltés afin de provoquer un échange sur l’art.
Ce fût pur moi une expérience très enrichissante et je vous résume des bouts de phrases ou des mots de Nicole Brossard qui résonnent, cheminent en moi. Car peu importe le médium de création choisi certains propos sont universels et se rejoignent sur le pourquoi d’Être d’un artiste.
I write to make trouble and provoke discussion, tension,,,question
Veut la lumière mais ressens le sombre
Je….Sois …… Je…. collectif
L’homme n’est ni ange ni bête…………..Blaise Pascal
Conditions humaines
Corps du texte…constructions….. Espace
Que le lecteur soit hanté, intrigué qu’il y est mystère et exploration
Mélancolie et le présent….. Écrivaine du présent
Create a narrative
Vieille civilisation avant…. maintenant rien ne seras plus jamais pareil …manipulation des gênes … nouvelle civilisation
Virtuality…. all possibility
Individu ….démocratie!….. Individu… individu….. Démocratie?

What I tried to admit was right to myself (for Nicole)

“It is time to do something that might cause
embarrassment. Let emptiness mother your child.”
John Amen

Totally crushing song – do you get the hope – is it enough
to leave you toasting past life, turning off the football game?
Is it the way a song is supposed to be, or something
half-sure, craftier?

I am my own name lacking the sensation of trusting recognition.
In the midst of a morning memory, I light up, go dark again.
(There’s that poet who knew to be a citizen with conviction could be
the warmest thing.)

And what of the sentence – the way it deploys
gladiator myth you can’t take back – strong
arm wrestle pronouncements like
what’s in back of a broken fiction?

You sent me pictures of your grandkid today
just four weeks old with the air of an old soul.
See baby looking blank – see baby with thumb in mouth
the epitome of the soothing, dumb song.

I’m not going to black out all the signals coming in
just to finish up quickly – not going to put psyche money
on red for any reason other than to arrive.
Involved in the cultural icons, I will
stop long enough to tell those who care
the economics of hope
have a hard time
reacting…

responses to reading Pavilion by Stephanie Bolster. Pages 1-40:
I’ve read this twice. The first time, I felt nothing at all, no response, I enjoyed the delicate wistful mood in certain of the lines.
On second reading, again, no strong feelings, but I begin to enjoy a bit this same wistfulness I find in other sections besides the Japanese Pavilion. The lines I enjoy most remind me of painting a moment in time. A circular stillness.
“Window” touched me somewhat. It evoked a feeling of loss and nostalgia, but ever so subtly. Bolster’s writing reminds me of touching things with a feather. Sometimes I have no sense of feeling in the writing, sometimes I sense feelings of loss whose intensity seems at first reading to be hidden behind that light graceful feathery touch, for instance the loss of D. and her daughter.
The description of the animated film about the crane girl touched me. I forgot it was a description of an animated film and it became real for me, and I felt sad.
Most of the poems after “Late” I do not like, with few exceptions. When they become more prose-like, and lose what feels to me like their rhythmic quality, I become irritated, and just want to race through them, and can’t be bothered to try to grasp or feel them. I realize that the rhythm of poems that I don’t grasp, or that don’t touch me in their content, is what remains to give me some pleasure. On the whole, I do not feel very touched by these poems.

I wondered about my lack of response to much poetry and wondered how much might be due to my lacking an affinity, at least until now, for the English lanugage. If the mood isn’t strong, nor are there compelling images or ideas that resonate, I find myself fairly unresponsive. After the dialogic session with Stephanie Bolster, I did finding myself feeling somewhat more fondness for a few of the poems she read. I enjoyed her reading her own poems, finding a crystal clarity in the quality of her voice.

This session this evening made me very interested in discovering how people respond to poems the way they do. Some stay with the image and bring it even more alive, expanding on it, or deepending it, some go quite far afield in their imaginations in their association to an image that has a lot of valence for them. What makes us respond the way we do? I would love to explore this. The dialogic session with Professor Bolster stimulated my interest in this process.

Goat boy

“…When he was four,
my brother bit me because I was not him.
No one was.”
Stephanie Bolster

When I was four
I told my brother Ross
he was a red red rose –
this before, long before
he could understand
the slight, only a year old
at the time – also before
I really got the humour & yet
I laughed, watching him through
the bars of his crib, fatally
attractive.

When Ross was four
so much he simmered
from his crucial place in our landscapes –
serious lad he could do what was expected & yet
what was expected always trumped
his seriousness, his passion
a little goat boy larger
than our discoveries
of where he wasn’t
fitting in.

When we are both nearing fifty
nothing is as large as
what we’ve left behind
not meaning to. There’s the grown
aspect of our childishness
that haplessly keeps
us near – the place
with the red red rose
he can never forgive me
insisting on – never
lost or found simply
a place for small children
to give out not able
to give way

The classes I took with Professor Cornett have brought a transformation that is simply soul-changing. This is the most important thing to have happened to me in many many years, and at the end of my life, I feel sure I will look at it as a vital turning-point in my life. It has profound implications in very personal ways, a very healing process. It was a struggle, to be open in ways that I’ve lived closed off from the nourishment that the arts bring – a struggle to keep opening the doors, embarrassed about my rough, stark, aesthetically unrefined responses, but I hated to miss one single class. I felt more profoundly nourished by your classes than anything in ages.

Saturday Feb 13’s poem, I now find out, is “Next Door Cafe” by Carmine Starnino from his new collection This Way Out. And Tuesday Feb 16’s is “Our Butcher”.

Taking the last first: the title changes everything; I had been reading this in the first person. Now I pay attention to the 3rd person: I, says the poet, could be “he” and then launches into a five stanza riff on animal anatomy, a bloody baroque riff indeed, neatly wrapped up in the last two lines. It still makes me uncomfortable, but the blood and guts are easier to stomach within the frame: I-he-I-meat-paper.

I am gradually though not willingly learning to live with cognitive dissonance, hold onto quite separate and contradictory experiencings of poems/paintings/sculpture in tension, without trying to resolve them. I’ll see how long I can keep up the balancing act of multiple responses. Am I a different self each time?

Now for “Next Door”. Certainly saturnine. Not a mood I care to inhabit. On first reading I was might put off by this dispeptic sketch of dissipated drunks: Alexander Gray with a chaser of Francis Bacon. Then I read this ad from London Review of Books (reprinted in a G&M column) which I think sums up the persona of the poem (not Carmine I hope, but a mask):

“Yesterday I was a disgusting spectacle in end-stage alcoholism with a gambling problem and not a hope in the world. Today I am the author of this magnificent life-altering statement of yearning and desire. You are a woman to 55 with plenty of cash and little self-respect. When you reply to this advert your life will never be the same again.” That persona.

Figuring out John Greer’s sculptures (which we tried to do on Feb 13 and 16) is so tricky — including following clues through ancient sculptures and the trail of Greer’s own work, that I had to put my thoughts in a 5-page hypertext document. It is an attachment at http://sowhatz.ning.com/forum/topics/john-greer-sculptures. Just click on “John Greer, sculptures.doc” to open it, and you will be able to read it, view photos of different sculptures, and follow the web links.

This week’s guest received a nomination for the Governor General’s Award in literature[2009],and serves as editor of Maisonneuve magazine.

Carmine Starnino discusses THIS WAY OUT.

Saturday

February 27, 13h00-15h00

galerie Samuel Lallouz, 1434 Sherbrooke west

Contact: [514] 849-5844 reception@galeriesamuellallouz.com

Cost:$25[all taxes included]; $20[students with valid ID]

Singsong gauntlet, puckered & half-stitched

“…We are counted
one by one into this dead end,
where the bandwidth’s slow and we speak
not speech but yeses and nos that add up
to a scoop of that, a pound of this. What bliss.”
Carmine Starnino

The graces in our cups, a calling in sync with mythical bells, the walk to the corner knowing where you’re going with all motives hidden – the moon in the day sky, & here we are, alive with the small promises we’ve managed to keep. Romantic query – is it as much about healing as loving? The kids in knee high boots, jungle jackets, lean slacks – décolleté & the nervousness of achieving – how to look them straight in the heart not judging? The winners losing smiles to next competitions, the singsong gauntlet of whatever challenger haply invested in the next result.

Today so much light it’s fantastical. Notes that reach the outer edge of sublime, the song a kite never finishing. Puckered & half-stitched, the total effect, the chasers after a glee like stung-looking lips on a child with heart shaped face peeking up through blankets out of a jogger mom’s reinforced stroller. We are going down to the river to rest. Puckered & double-stitched, we’re awaiting the moment that refuses no exit, resurrects enjoyment, appreciates the views.

Singsong half-stitched, gauntlet puckered. The way the suburb tries but fails to control its own maps, a hungry intention with stringent appetite. Then on streets all houses, 2 blocks above the river, smells & sensations mid-morning all about quiet pinching wishbones – mythical memory infusing subtle place with gaudy apprehension – love on a stick, ready to stir, ready to be held chest-high to orchestrate liveable belief in the broken down, double jointed, parrying memories…

Carmine Starnino “This way out”

Commenting part 1;

Gloomy at times. Gloomy yes, but fun.

These pages are about conformity. The conformity of people living in “shoebox flats” where even doors are “class-conscious” (p.14). It reminds me of Pete Seeger’s (1963 written) song “Little boxes” in which conformity means university for other class-conscious people: “All the same”.

All the same, but inviting. For it is also Starnino’s uplifting quality of writting throughout these pages that prevents the reader from sinking into dispair (especially if you feel particularly down the day you are asked to do the reading). Scraping dog shit from your shoes is not necessarily what comes first to your mind while visiting Rome. It is however all this shit that he dares talking about that differentiates Starnino from the traditional and boring half truths and half lies of today’s discourse.

Shit brings, in these cases, inexpected and beautifull surprises.

Starnino belongs to this tradition of daring artists who help us thrive through today’s world shit.
Shit happens.

Commenting parts 2 and 3:

“One has emotions about the strangest things” quotes Starnino (p. 63). As a gift he offers us his own raw emotions. Happy and beautiful memories (about his father or the butterflies of his chidhood) cohabit with his gloomiest thoughts.

No hiding.
No “rise and shine” obligation.
No going around.
“Bouts of truth-telling” accepted just as they are.

I won’t forget this “Tale of the Wedding Ring”, Carmine. Next time I watch the moon I’ll think about you:

“This little you had
You left behind
To be found”

The Lady of Shalott

A hasty note: big things are coming March 6, 9 and 13 on neurobotics and much else. On Tues Mar 2 we read about the Farhoud, the bloody pogrom in Baghdad in 1941 that shattered the hopes of a generation. A terrifying passage: an eyewitness acount of the storming of a city.* I recognized the quotation as Naim Kattam’s autobiography “Farewell Babylon”. See also his 2006 article “can a Jew be an Arab” in http://jewishrefugees.blogspot.com/2006/11/can-jew-also-be-arab-naim-kattan.html
I look forward to meeting this polyglot writer, very much part of the new intercultural Quebec.
*it could have been the sack of Rome, the fall of Constantinople, any city in Europe in the 14th or 18th c., Kigali, the fall of Saigon, the killing fields of Cambodia, Shatila…

Saturday,13March2010,13h00-15h00

A internationally-renowned neuroscientist,an accomplished sculptor and photographer,Dr. Ivar Mendez will discuss,” The Sciences,the Arts,and the Human Condition,” with Professor Norman Cornett.

Dr. Mendez created the “deep brain stimulation” procedure,and performed the world’s first “teleneurobotics” surgery.

He forms the subject of documentaries by the DISCOVERY CHANNEL and other film producers.

Dr. Ivar Mendez serves a consultant for UNESCO,particularly in the developping world.

Cost:$25[all taxes included] ; $20[with valid student ID].

Limited seating.

Please reserve: reception@galeriesamuellallouz.com [514]849-5844

Location:galerie Samuel Lallouz, 1434 Sherbrooke west