Book Review: Michael Ignatieff's 'True Patriot Love'

Iggy addresses the question that has puzzled so many

by John Geddes on Friday, April 17, 2009 11:31am - 34 Comments

Book Review: Michael Ignatieff's 'True Patriot Love'There is a passage in True Patriot Love, Michael Ignatieff’s new book about successive generations of extraordinary men in his mother’s family, in which his uncle, George Grant, comes to terms with being a Canadian.

Grant, who would later become famous in his native country as the author of Lament for a Nation, was thriving at Oxford in the years after the Second World War, but he couldn’t deny the tug of home. “I love England,” Grant told his mother, “and think it is the greatest country on earth—but Canada is in one’s heart—in a way that this country can never be.”

Reading that plain-spoken, almost plaintive, expression of patriotism from so long ago, one has to wonder if Ignatieff ever experienced a similar moment of his own. If he did, it must have hit him when he was much older than his Uncle George was when he realized how obstinately Canadian he was at the core.

ALSO AT MACLEANS.CA: An exclusive excerpt from Iggy’s new book

Grant returned from Oxford as a young academic and made his name as Canada’s most public conservative philosopher, bemoaning the rise of American dominance, secularism, and technology, and eulogizing the passing of the old Christian, small-town Canada.

Ignatieff answered the call of home only in late middle age, when he decided to take a stab at Canadian politics, surprising many who had assumed he was settled permanently into an enviable expatriate existence, first in England and then New England, which his success as a writer had won him.

His new book is sub-titled “Four Generations in Search of Canada,” but “Four Generations in Search of a Reason to Be Canadian” would have been better. Like Ignatieff, all three of the forebears he writes about could easily have made it in the British or American big leagues.

The chronicle starts with George Munro Grant, Ignatieff’s great grandfather, an influential early advocate of Confederation, who wrote Ocean to Ocean, the first account of a trip across Canada. His son, Ignatieff’s grandfather, was William Lawson Grant, a formidable educator as principal of Upper Canada College, who exemplified a brimming confidence in Canada’s potential after World War I. Then came George Grant, the unrelenting, disillusioned believer in a Canada he feared had ceased to exist.

Ignatieff proposes patriotism as the sustaining motif in this grand lineage that reaches down to him. On one level this is merely a convenient way to package campaign fodder for a man who, after all, hopes the next federal election will make him prime minister.

Yet there’s more to it than that. Ignatieff’s attempts to defend patriotism as a motivation are more interesting than any stump speech. Without quite saying so, he’s finally addressing the question that certain highly educated, frankly ambitious Canadians have puzzled over ever since he defied their expectations by returning to Canada in 2005: Why give up a Harvard professor’s chair, a regular pulpit in the New York Times Magazine, a loyal British fan base—all for dreary old Ottawa?

Ignatieff makes an attempt at defining the patriot, whose abiding loyalty is to country, by contrasting him with the cosmopolitan, whose attachments don’t run to flags and anthems. This is a risky gambit for him, since it’s bound to remind readers that the pre-politics Ignatieff—public intellectual, best-selling author, novelist and screenwriter—epitomized the latter category. “The best argument on the patriotic side is that cosmopolitan attachments depend upon the security that countries provide,” he writes. “Anyone who doesn’t think he needs a country, anyone who believes they are beyond the local attachments of the national state, ought to visit a refugee camp.”

Ignatieff has indeed visited some. So perhaps this particular cosmopolitan came to realize that his passport mattered only when he saw first-hand what it meant to be stateless in a hard world. It’s patriotism as a self-preservation calculation. However, Ignatieff also lays claim to a warmer sentiment. “With love of country, you have to keep it simple,” he asserts. “You love what you love, and that’s good enough for you.”

Now that sounds more like a politician with an instinct for the lowest common voting denominator. But don’t worry—that breezily reductive voice takes over True Patriot Love only in spurts. For the most part, this book carries enough of the subtlety of Ignatieff’s writing from before he became leader of the Liberal Party of Canada to hold a reader’s attention. His evidently genuine fascination with his family tree elevates the narrative.

The steady current that runs through the book is the way the Grant men are always trying to imagine a Canada worthy of their own impressive capacities. If this were just a matter of personal aspiration playing out, the pursuit might soon grow tedious. But there’s something more universal at issue here: the question of whether public life can be made to matter as much in a second-tier country like Canada as in a first-tier cosmopolitan centre.

It’s a doubt that should resonate for anyone who has had second thoughts about settling for, say, Toronto rather than New York, or Bonn rather than Berlin, or maybe even Sydney rather than Shanghai. Anyone who wonders why Ignatieff came back.

Bookmark and Share
  • hosertohoosier

    Finally a leader who combines an old stock Canadian aristocratic bearing with Tsarist Russian aristocratic bearing.

    • DisplacedCanadian

      Wow. I really feel bad for you. I don’t read enough books — I read lots of papers, online articles, etc – but this book sounds like a lot of fun. Remove your political blinders just for a moment. It’s people like you who make me ashamed to be a Canadian. He’s a Canadian, just like you and me! Let go of your hate.

    • Bocanut

      Yep,another upper class twit pretending to care.

  • DR

    I think George Grant would have really liked “Gran Torino”

  • Mike G

    Thanks for this. I’ve finally gotten around to reading “Blood and Belonging”, and it makes an interesting comparison. He seems to have written a lot of books about basically the same thing, i.e., who am I, who are we, and what exactly are these concepts we identify ourselves by? It seems to me these are very poignant questions for the “cosmopolitan”, modern world, especially in Canada where nearly all of us originally came from somewhere else and are only here for the donuts and democracy, yet find ourselves lumped together and having to make collective decisions to improve and maintain our society.

    It seems like Ignatieff, in all his many writings about this question, still hasn’t figured out the answers, but perhaps the mere fact that he is on an endless search for understanding national identity makes him more Canadian than the content of his books.

    I’m not sold on him as a politician yet, but I do intend to read more of his writing.

    • http://www.savedarfur.org Sophia Geffros

      I am we as you are me as you are he and we are all together!

  • John

    Interesting article, and seems like an interesting book.

  • http://MySpace.com/ElectroPig1 ElectroPig™ Von FökkenGrüüven

    We need to have a truly representative government in Canada again. I’lll call it…hmmm…the “Canadian People’s Republic”…let’s face it folks, with everything that’s going on today, Canada definitely needs some serious C.P.R.!

  • Lucas R

    Voilà qui donne sérieusement envie de lire le dernier Ignatieff. « I grew up in a Canadian household where my parents did think that life was elsewhere » est un état d’esprit largement répandu parmi les Canadiens, spécialement dans la part croissante des immigrants. Beaucoup ne ressentent leur attachement patriotique qu’après avoir vécu l’ailleurs. Selon moi, le rapport qu’ont les Canadiens avec leur pays est très malléable en dépit de racines profondes: je considère cela comme étant un patriotisme particulièrement sain.

  • George

    If Ignatieff becomes Prime Minister, one could really say “only in Canada”. A guy who spends some 30 years outside the country, then comes back and is appointed by a bunch of Liberal hacks to the leadership of the party, in my view cannot and should not be elected Prime Minister of Canada. If he is, I will indeed be ashamed to call myself a “Canadian”.

    • DisplacedCanadian

      And this has nothing to do with the crux of the article – nice going George!

      • kc

        Tall poppy syndrome. I wonder if Canadians will outgrow this childish reflexive behaviour in my life-time?

    • Brian

      Actually George, if he becomes PM it will be because he has been elected by Canadians – why would you be ashamed of democracy?

      • George

        Ignatieff is a kind of Frankenstein, part Russian, part Anglo, part American and finally probably the smallest part Canadian. Actually physically he resembles the Frankenstein as was played by another Russian actor, Boris Karloff. He spent most of his life outside Canada teaching at universities and writing books and articles. In the U.S., he even wrote something like this “We Americans should support the war in Iraq…” During all that time he did nothing for Canada, not even paid a penny of taxes here.

        For some reason, the back room boys of the Liberal party, decided that he should be their leader. They provided him with a safe seat in Toronto while not allowing anyone else to contest his candidacy. When contrary to their plans, Stephane Dion was elected leader of the Liberal Party, they did a great political assassination of Dion, to the point that they even messed up his final TV address to show him as incompetent. All this with Ignatieff’s approval and support. So democracy is rather far away from all of this.

        Any way, we shall see if Canadians will indeed elect the grandson of a Russian princess, who was absent from Canada during the whole of his most productive life.

        • Critical Reasoning

          who was absent from Canada during the whole of his most productive life.

          Ah, yes. Before he was reincarnated as Ignatieff in 1947, he lived a short but intensely productive life as a monarch butterfly in South America in 1945-46. This was by far the most productive of his many lives, but not once during those two years did he fly over to Canada.

          • Sylvia Dennis

            A few words to those who are expressing their ugly demeaning remarks about Michael Ignatieff. What have you done for your country? How many years have you lived in Canada? How does your intelligence compare with Michael’s? Your glass appears to be very low in content. Please fill it with love and knowledge. It will help you to feel better about yourselves and others.

          • http://www.jackmitchell.ca Jack Mitchell

            He must have been a particularly virtuous butterfly to return as George Grant’s nephew.

          • http://www.savedarfur.org Sophia Geffros

            Was that common knowledge?:*0
            At any rate, In Canadians: a Portrait of A Country and its People, Roy Macgregor sets out to interview George Grant- and he’d become moderately optimistic in his old age.

          • James

            A few words to those who are expressing their ugly demeaning remarks about Michael Ignatieff. What have you done for your country? How many years have you lived in Canada? How does your intelligence compare with Michael’s? Your glass appears to be very low in content. Please fill it with love and knowledge. It will help you to feel better about yourselves and others.
            ======================================================

            I have live here, paied taxes, voted in elections, worked in the economy and volenteered in the community. I have lived here 27 years. I am smarter and probably faster then Mr. Ignatieff. As proff I offer that I haven’t joined a political party or attempted to wade neck deep in the slime that congeals around Ottawa. Complaining about others who raise valid concerns about people seeking high office is silly. If their motives and history diminish their chance or disqualify them from the office then it is important that they be so vetted.

            JH

    • Conan the Agrarian

      George, why wait until Ignatieff’s election to be ashamed? Start now. Except instead of being ashamed “to be Canadian”, try being ashamed of being a narrow-minded twit.

      • George

        No, Conan, I will not start now, because I believe in the intelligence of Canadians and that they will reject this fraud Ignatieff during the next elections. I personally voted Liberal most of my life, but this time I will do everything possible to see them lose.

        But you didn’t answer any of the points I made earlier. Let me repeat. Ignatieff is a fraud politically speaking because he did not win the leadership of the Liberal Party in an honest way but was pushed through the back door by the Toronto Liberal Establishment. He is a fraud, because he was never loyal to the elected leader Stephane Dion and worked hard behind his back to depose him. He is a fraud, because after being absent for thirty years, he really doesn’t know Canada well enough to lead it. All these points will be well exploited by the other parties during the next elections and I am pretty sure that after the elections I will rather feel as “a proud Canadian”.

    • danby

      Neil Young hasn’t lived in Canada in 40 years, yet he was number 14 on the list of “Greatest Canadians Ever”
      Does this mean he’s not a Canadian?

      Is there a rule book I can consult on this?

      • George

        I never said that Ignatieff is not “a Canadian” or “a great Canadian writer”. He already received the Governor General’s award in 1987 and was even shortlisted for the Booker prize for his novel Scar Tissue. So, by all means, let him write novels and biographies and achieve all the greatness he can that way.

        I simply say that a guy who was absent from Canada most of his adult life, should not suddenly show up and become Prime Minister of this country. This is because from the political standpoint and the standpoint of real life and needs of Canadians, he is a neophyte and it would be a big mistake to let him direct this country in perhaps the most difficult time in a generation or two.

        Show me any other country, where someone who left it just after university graduation, came back some thirty years later and became its political leader.

      • Wayne

        Neil Young has lived on Salt Spring Island for 40 years now – admittedly you might not want to inlcude it in Canada as it is indeed full of frustrated left wing nuts however techinically it is still Canada.

        • James Connors

          John Stuart Mill; the gift that keeps on giving.

  • http://deleted Sandi

    Some of the comments are pretty stupid. They don’t care – they want an excuse to attack and think they’re saying clever thing…..sigh..

    Oh, by the way, do you consider Gretzky Canadian? Polish roots, living in L.A. for over 17 years now? Hmmmm….other no more Canadian – Martin Short, William Shatner, Leslie Neilson, Walt Disney, and the list goes on.

    • John.K

      Walt’s father Elias was born a Canadian. Sort of like Ignatief’s grandparents were Russian nobility, so he’s The Count, Elias is known around here as “that Disney fella whose boy had something to do with movies”

    • George

      None of them are trying to become Prime Minister of Canada.

      • Conan the Agrarian

        Call me crazy, but I’m more interested in which of the two plausible winners of the next election under our execrable first-past-the-post system would provide better governance, than in the question of where they spent the past few decades.

      • danby

        You’re right George.
        It’s a goddam plot to sell Canada out to foreign interests…..

    • jp

      Walt Disney was Canadian! you’re kidding.

  • Derek Pearce

    In our small way Canada is experimenting with becoming one of the first (if not THE first) postmodern nation. Maple leaves/hockey/and curling aside, we are evolving into a “state, a governed unit, that exists in the world” from a colonial nation-state. This doesn’t mean you ignore the tug at your heart when you hear the national anthem or when a soldier is killed by and IED, or that you raise your hackles because a guy had the nerve to work in the UK and US. It means we are grown up enough to judge a person’s ability to do a job– in this case the job of PM– by their talent/intelligence/work ethic etc. Ignatieff has to work on his retail politics but he’s certainly worthy of the job, a postmodern PM for postmodern Canada.

  • James

    In our small way Canada is experimenting with becoming one of the first (if not THE first) postmodern nation. Maple leaves/hockey/and curling aside, we are evolving into a “state, a governed unit, that exists in the world” from a colonial nation-state. This doesn’t mean you ignore the tug at your heart when you hear the national anthem or when a soldier is killed by and IED, or that you raise your hackles because a guy had the nerve to work in the UK and US. It means we are grown up enough to judge a person’s ability to do a job– in this case the job of PM– by their talent/intelligence/work ethic etc. Ignatieff has to work on his retail politics but he’s certainly worthy of the job, a postmodern PM for postmodern Canada.

    =================================

    Never felt that heart tug. Sorry, can’t help you there. Postmodernism isn’t a state of being. Its a form of literary critique. Please go and look it up. It would help things alot if people used terms at made any kind of sence.

    JH

From Macleans