Regular contributor to the Daily Point of View section DutyPatrick Moreau admits to having a “controversial spirit” and not being afraid of the intellectual contest.
This is undoubtedly why he did not hesitate to bring together some of his texts published since 2017 in the pages of the newspaper – to which are added a few texts previously published in the Opinion section, in addition to a few previously unpublished ones.
“I have a very clear penchant for confronting ideas, for debate, for controversy; I like to discuss, exchange opinions, argue, defend, if necessary with vigor, the point of view that I have made my own,” he writes in the introduction toWrite against the grain. Around fifty texts which have been grouped around a few themes: the return of a censorship which does not speak its name, the erosion of our capacity to truly read literature, the cancel culturerecent attempts to “desexualize” the French language or even the increasingly rare recourse to historical perspective.
“These are often reactions to current affairs texts read in the Quebec press,” explains Patrick Moreau in an interview. Subjects that appeal to me for different reasons. And often because I disagree with the ideas stated in a text. » He avoids getting too immersed in politics, except through subjects that have a cultural background, such as language.
And rather than blindly attacking wokism, a word of which we will only find one occurrence in these texts, Patrick Moreau is rather interested here in some of the symptoms of this “cultural nebula”, such as the culture of cancellation or self-censorship in academia.
“We realize that there is behind [ces symptômes] issues which are not political, but which are more philosophical and which, for my part, really concern me. I don’t really know how to define myself. At this point, it’s not entirely clear. Let’s say that I defend a certain fairly traditional conception of rationality, universality, etc. I like to call it humanism, because it’s a bit of an all-purpose term. And it is clear that this perspective is very much in the minority today in the teaching environment. »
Really going against the grain?
Born in France in 1967, Patrick Moreau grew up in Paimpol, a small town on the Breton coast. Based in Montreal since 1994, he has been teaching at Ahuntsic College for almost thirty years. Essayist, he notably published Why do our children leave school ignorant? (Boréal, 2008) and These words that think for us (Liber, 2017). Patrick Moreau also directed the magazine for several years Argumentof which he is still a member of the editorial committee today.
Does he really feel like he’s swimming “against the tide”? Inclusive writing or cancel culture: are these not still epiphenomena and exceptions, trends which remain marginal after all?
“That’s the paradox,” recognizes Patrick Moreau. Minorities within the population, but imposed as incontestable truths by administrations, by people in positions of authority, who use state power, of which they are depositaries in a certain way, to impose views which, in my opinion opinions, are political. » And this is what swimming against the tide means above all to him. It means opposing forces which are far from being in the majority, but which are in this case extremely powerful, to the extent that they are rooted in the administration.
As proof of this strong trend, he cites in particular all the controversy which surrounded the use of the n-word. We all have the impression, he recalls, that the prevailing point of view is that, if the term can have racist connotations, it nevertheless remains possible to use it, for example, in teaching contexts.
“The reality is that, in CEGEPs, and I have had multiple testimonies of this, many teachers have changed the works they had read,” underlines Patrick Moreau, referring to the Candid by Voltaire, perhaps the work of the 18the century the most read in all CEGEPs and that many no longer teach because the word in question appears there.
“There is a kind of self-censorship that is being established. This is one of the phenomena that I find most worrying. Because we have the impression that the common sense option wins, but, in reality, behind it, the pressures are so insidious and so strong that it is in reality self-censorship which wins. »
Without hesitation, Patrick Moreau defines himself as someone on the left. “But who belongs to the traditional left, the one who was interested in the social, in the fight against poverty, who sought to limit the power of the private sector. Perhaps it is also the fact of being French, of being a foreigner, an immigrant, but I absolutely do not recognize myself in what we call today in Quebec the left, which, for me, in fact is an outgrowth of liberalism, of liberal individualism. And liberalism, as far as I know, has never been a left-wing ideology. »
A praise of the debate
It’s a bit there, he thinks, the clash which exists today. “The community narcissism which is currently triumphant,” he also writes in one of the texts ofWrite against the graindiverts for its own benefit the generous ideas of tolerance, respect, and dignity of individuals which are at the heart of the ideals of democracy. »
“We have people who, by strictly and only defending minorities, believe themselves to be progressive, whereas, for me and for many people of my generation, it is a liberal “agenda”, which has nothing to do with the fight against capitalism,” believes the essayist, before drawing attention to the rampant clientelism of educational institutions, which also play into the hands of neo-liberalism.
In these texts, Patrick Moreau constantly praises the healthy confrontation of ideas. Like many, noting that doubt and irony are mistreated, he has the impression of living today in the “kingdom of kitsch” that Kundera spoke of, where “everything must be taken seriously”.
What is the tumor that is eating away at public debate today? The absence of thought, answers without hesitation this supporter of the “crossfire” of ideas, which, according to him, is a matter of intellectual hygiene. “As soon as we approach sensitive issues today, in a lot of areas, the simple fact of questioning this or that notion, even with rational arguments, becomes a kind of crime against thought. »