Loonies & Libraries

A recent news headline stated, "Loonie high despite US debt debate," referring to Canada's one-dollar coin, known colloquially as a loonie; so-dubbed in the late 1980s because one side of the coin features an image of a loon--a commonly-known bird in Canada. That leads me to the topic of this piece: Toronto city councilor Doug Ford, who's been behaving like a bit of a strange bird lately. Some might say he's even been acting a little loony by creating a silly spectacle with world-renowned Canadian author Margaret Atwood. Ford has been ranting publicly lately about possibly closing some of Toronto's libraries. Atwood, who lives in Toronto, and who clearly values libraries, has been speaking out against the possible closures. Ford seems proud of proclaiming publicly he has no idea who she is, despite her world-wide fame.

"Well good luck to Margaret Atwood. I don't even know her. If she walked by me, I wouldn't have a clue who she is..." Ford said recently, seeming proud as a peacock for appearing so ignorant. "She's not down here, she's not dealing with the problem. Tell her to go run in the next election and get democratically elected. And we'd be more than happy to sit down and listen to Margaret Atwood" (Toronto Star, July 26, 2011).

Doug Ford's claim that he doesn't know anything about Margaret Atwood is astounding in itself since her photo and image have regularly been in book stores, in newspapers and magazines, and on television for many years. To Ford's credit, if he really doesn't know who she is, or anything about her literary status in Canada and around the world, at least he's being honest, and acknowledging how little he knows. But whether one has ever read Atwood's works, or likes her writing, or enjoys her public persona, I believe most thinking people who are reasonably aware of Canadian literary culture would at least know who she is. Amazingly, Doug Ford seems not in that category.

Ford's public declaration that he wouldn't know Margaret Atwood if he saw her could just be his way of trying to make the point that city council, not private citizens, will decide where council will spend the city's money. But if that's the case, there are better and more-sophisticated ways he should articulate this, which he seems unable or unwilling to attempt. His assertion that he and city council will listen to Atwood only if she gets elected to city council is also an astonishing display of condescension and arrogance; not only toward Atwood but also, implicitly, to every other Toronto resident who has an opinion or question about council's plans, actions, or ideas. I'm appalled that a city councilor, hired and paid by his city's residents, would take this position. Perhaps Ford is feeling insecure and overshadowed by his younger brother the mayor, and has been saying outrageous things to get attention.

On the other hand, Doug Ford's public and seemingly boastful claim that he doesn't know who Margaret Atwood is could be his way of consciously trying to diminish and demean her as a person--especially if he feels threatened by a thinking, intelligent, and successful woman who knows the value of literature, and who disagrees with him about closing some of Toronto's libraries. By implicitly negating Atwood as a person, and her literary achievements as well, perhaps Ford thinks he can make the case that she is nothing and a nobody; that her voice and opinion as a citizen of Toronto, as a person, and as a respected author are worthless. By suggesting he would value Atwood's ideas only if she were on Toronto's city council he implies she would then, and only then, be a 'somebody' and 'important' as a person, just like he clearly thinks he is.

Observing this situation as a bystander, as I am, Doug Ford's diatribes in these regards also help him to portray himself as a misogynist, at least regarding Margaret Atwood. He seems to be thinking--if in fact he actually is thinking--'if I tell her often enough that she and her useless ideas about libraries are stupid and worthless, she'll eventually see I'm right and quit bothering me.' Ford seems to take pride in depicting himself as a macho redneck-buffoon and human bulldozer with no knowledge of one of the most-renowned female authors in Canada and the world. He seems happy and ready to push anyone, especially an outspoken woman, out of the way if she has a point of view--in this case about libraries--that differs from his.

I don't know Doug Ford. Privately, he might be a gentle, loving, gracious, and warm-hearted man. But some of his public comments and implications about Margaret Atwood as a person and the relative importance of her ideas about libraries suggest otherwise. I don't know Atwood either, but I've seen her on television and heard her speak in radio interviews; situations which are staged and often verbally choreographed to varying degrees. Presumably, however, her concern as a Toronto resident, along with her intellect, intelligence, and awareness of cultural issues might at least help city council determine what to do about its libraries.

Instead, Doug Ford, who implies he has a lot of clout in determining which libraries, if any, might be closed, portrays himself as being closed to others' ideas unless the person expressing them is on city council and therefore--to his way of thinking--as important as he believes he is. In this context, as a budget committee member he's been carrying on publicly as though he personally holds the purse strings to the City of Toronto's money. Either by design or circumstance, he's been portraying himself as the defacto mayor, city hall spokesman, and budget committee spokesman and chairman, all rolled into one. If Ford is acting on his own in this regard, no doubt he's helped by the fact that his brother is the mayor. This implies Doug Ford, although just an ordinary councilor, has special status and can suggest, rightly or not, he's in charge of how Toronto city council spends taxpayers' money.

I don't live in Toronto and I'm not privy to any of Toronto city council's business. So I don't know if closing some of Toronto's libraries would be a good move or not; maybe it is, maybe it isn't. Doug Ford might have reliable and current user statistics to back up his threats or intentions to support and/or recommend closing some libraries. Realistically, though, the notion of closing some of Toronto's libraries actually might be the brainchild--to use the term loosely--of Doug Ford's baby brother, the mayor. If so, perhaps Doug Ford is just the carefully choreographed front man and public patsy; floating the idea with the public, and denouncing Margaret Atwood in the process.

Finally, as one who has worked in the media and in government communications and public affairs, I realize some political situations, confrontations, and related scenarios can be carefully orchestrated but made to appear accidental and spontaneous. So, Doug Ford's claim that he has no idea who Margaret Atwood is might not even be true. Perhaps he's been making his outrageous public comments about her just for effect. Maybe he's well-aware of her and even might have read some of her writings.  
In this context, could the recent verbal jabs between Ford and Atwood be part of a plan? Are they really friends or at least passing acquaintances? Is it possible they share a common concern for libraries, and for spending Toronto's money wisely? Is it possible this supposed spat between these two personalities could be staged, with the intent of drawing attention to the possible plight of some of Toronto's libraries? If so, did they decide in advance which of them--the brash councilor, or the high-profile writer--would be the perceived ogre and presumed savior of the city's libraries? Food for thought.