Introduction
In recent years, a growing number of studies have documented minority linguistic space in multilingual cities, particularly through the framework of linguistic landscapes (LL), which Landry & Bourhis (Reference Landry and Bourhis1997:25) define as: ‘The language of public road signs, advertising billboards, street names, place names, commercial shop signs, and public signs on government buildings’. They propose that a city's LL may be indexical of ethnolinguistic vitality among minority linguistic communities (Landry & Bourhis Reference Landry and Bourhis1997). According to Ben-Rafael, Shohamy, Amara, & Trumper-Hecht (Reference Ben-Rafael, Shohamy, Amara and Trumper-Hecht2006:10) LL may also serve as symbolic of the construction of public space, an index of power relations between linguistic communities in cities where two or more groups strive to gain or maintain legitimacy on the linguistic marketplace (Bourdieu Reference Bourdieu2001). LL studies have often focused on various kinds of fixed texts, such as signage related to governmental institutions or private businesses (e.g. Boudreau & Dubois Reference Boudreau and Dubois2005; Ben-Rafael et al. Reference Ben-Rafael, Shohamy, Amara and Trumper-Hecht2006; Lado Reference Lado2011), street signs (e.g. Coupland Reference Coupland2012), and advertisements (e.g. Landry & Bourhis Reference Landry and Bourhis1997). In many of the above studies, the arrangement of languages on an establishment's exterior signage is taken to represent linguistic practices on the interior.
Conversely, some studies, such as Hornsby (Reference Hornsby2008), Leeman & Modan (Reference Leeman, Modan, Shohamy, Ben-Rafael and Barni2010), and Coupland (Reference Coupland2012), examine LL in relation to the commodification of minority languages—Breton in France, Chinese in Washington DC, and Welsh in Wales respectively. In such cases, language is regarded as ‘a visible index of ethnicity that, when linked to various products, places and experiences, contributes to the commodification of culture typical of the symbolic economy’ (Leeman & Modan Reference Leeman, Modan, Shohamy, Ben-Rafael and Barni2010:196).
In response to the developing body of LL research, Jaworski & Thurlow (Reference Jaworski, Thurlow, Jaworski and Thurlow2010:2–3) propose the notion of semiotic landscapes (SL): ‘any (public) space with visible inscription made through deliberate human intervention and meaning making’, and also ‘how we interpret space in ways that are contingent on geographical, social, economic, legal, cultural and emotional circumstances’. Jaworski & Thurlow (Reference Jaworski, Thurlow, Jaworski and Thurlow2010) draw from Lefebvre (Reference Lefebvre and Nicholson-Smith1974/1991) and Harvey (Reference Harvey2006) to propose that the construction of space is a discursive practice. While SL provides a framework for various kinds of semiotic analyses, few landscape studies to date, whether LL or SL, have examined social actors' discursive construction of minority spaces (see Modan Reference Modan2007 for a notable exception). Indeed, Mitchell (Reference Mitchell, Jaworski and Thurlow2010:184) suggests that semiotic landscape studies might ‘be profitably integrated with text-based analyses by linking representations of place in discourse with individuals’ experiences of place'.
With many landscape studies' emphasis on the exterior linguistic markings of minority social space, one is led to ask, like Mitchell (Reference Mitchell, Jaworski and Thurlow2010), how social actors who regularly frequent such spaces describe linguistic practices from within. Does their discourse indicate that the sign on the front of an establishment truly indexes linguistic practices on the inside? The present article describes discourses of minority francophone space as related to the Centre culturel Aberdeen,Footnote 2 a francophone cultural center in Moncton, New Brunswick, Canada, that has been shown to be Acadian territory in an anglo-dominant linguistic marketplace (Keating Reference Keating2014). I begin by examining Lefebvre's (Reference Lefebvre and Nicholson-Smith1974/1991) notion of social space, followed by Heller & Labrie's (Reference Heller, Labrie, Heller and Labrie2004) Canadian minority francophone discourses and their relation to Franco-Canadian social actors and cultural institutions. I then introduce the social context of the study. In the analysis, I present four discourses of minority francophone space, elicited from members and close associates of Aberdeen. Finally, I discuss how these discourses correspond to Heller & Labrie's modernizing and globalizing discourses, Lozon, McLaughlin, & Heller's (Reference Lozon, McLaughlin, Heller, Heller and Labrie2004) findings, and Lefebvre's tripartite division of social space.
Social space
Lefebvre's (Reference Lefebvre and Nicholson-Smith1974/1991) model of space consists of conceived spaces, perceived spaces, and lived spaces. Lefebvre (Reference Lefebvre and Nicholson-Smith1974/1991:38) describes conceived spaces as those spaces conceptualized by power holders in a society, such as urban planners. The notion of conceived space is related to the original purposing of a space, regardless of eventual social practices within it (Lefebvre Reference Lefebvre and Nicholson-Smith1974/1991:38). Perceived spaces refer to actual physical spaces and the social practices within them, including behavioral norms for such spaces, which Lefebvre (Reference Lefebvre and Nicholson-Smith1974/1991:33) frames in terms of Chomsky's competence and performance. Finally, lived spaces represent the intersection of the first two types of space and are comprised of actors' mental representations of a physical space, formed through their daily experiences within it (Lefebvre Reference Lefebvre and Nicholson-Smith1974/1991:39).
All three elements—perceived spaces, conceived spaces, and lived spaces—coalesce to produce social space (Lefebvre Reference Lefebvre and Nicholson-Smith1974/1991:53, 68–73). Lefebvre (Reference Lefebvre and Nicholson-Smith1974/1991:73) proposes that social space is continually constructed by actors and linked to past actions, while allowing for future ones, and is
not a thing among other things, nor a product among other products, rather, it subsumes things produced, and encompasses their interrelationships in their coexistence and simultaneity—their (relative) order and/or (relative) disorder. It is the outcome of a sequence and set of operations, and thus cannot be reduced to the rank of a simple object.
He adds that ‘every language is located in a space. Every discourse says something about a space (place or sets of places); and every discourse is emitted from a space’ (Lefebvre Reference Lefebvre and Nicholson-Smith1974/1991:131–32). Lefebvre's framework, then, lends itself well to an insider's view of the discursive construction of minority linguistic spaces.
In the present study, the term discourse is used in the Foucauldian (1977) sense, referring to a group's socially constructed knowledge base related to its beliefs, its social practices—including linguistic practices—and its living conditions, including, but not limited to, its socioeconomic position, its status in the social stratification of the larger society, and so on. Discourses inform and influence future social practices of the group (Foucault Reference Foucault and Bouchard1977). Or, as van Leeuwen (Reference van Leeuwen2008:6) states, discourses ‘not only represent what is going on, they also evaluate it, ascribe purposes to it, justify it, and so on’.Footnote 3
To show how discourses circulating among minority social actors may directly contribute to their construction of social space, in the next section I describe Heller & Labrie's (Reference Heller, Labrie, Heller and Labrie2004) Canadian minority francophone discourses and their influence on the changing roles of social actors and social spaces in francophone communities in anglo-dominant regions.
Canadian minority francophone discourses, social actors, and cultural centers
The term francophone is, broadly speaking, synonymous with French-speaking (OED Online 2014) and may be used as a noun denoting those who speak French, or as an adjective, referring, for example, to places or institutions where French is the official language or dominant language of practice.
Heller & Labrie (Reference Heller, Labrie, Heller and Labrie2004:18–20) describe three prominent minority francophone discourses circulating in Franco-Canadian regions outside of Québec from the late 1700s until present: the discours traditionaliste ‘traditionalist discourse’, the discours modernisant ‘modernizing discourse’ and the discours mondialisant ‘globalizing discourse’. The latter two figure into the present analysis and are developed below. For clarity, I refer to them in English translation—modernizing and globalizing.
Heller & Labrie (Reference Heller, Labrie, Heller and Labrie2004:18–20) propose that the modernizing discourse emerged during the 1950s as Franco-Canadian intellectuals began to question social systems established and maintained by the traditional francophone elite. This discourse is characterized by the rejection of many traditional values and practices and by an emphasis on political power, reflecting an effort to provide equal rights to each member of Canadian francophone communities, regardless of social status. The modernizing discourse promotes a monolingual francophone nation-state in Canada, with language serving as the principal symbol of identity (Heller & Labrie Reference Heller, Labrie, Heller and Labrie2004:18–20).
Lozon and colleagues (Reference Lozon, McLaughlin, Heller, Heller and Labrie2004:205) observe that, in the 1970s, when the modernizing discourse was prevalent in minority francophone communities, cultural centers were often established as minority francophone social spaces, serving as ‘organizational structures of the community's social and cultural life’.Footnote 4 These cultural centers were known to host activities for francophone communities and to promote political involvement and job placement (Heller Reference Heller2003a, Reference Heller2003b; Lozon et al. Reference Lozon, McLaughlin, Heller, Heller and Labrie2004). Importantly, they were conceived as monolingual francophone spaces in anglo-dominant regions.
Heller & Labrie (Reference Heller, Labrie, Heller and Labrie2004:20–23) propose that, in the past few decades, as members of Canadian minority communities participate with increasing frequency in the postnational, global economy,Footnote 5 the globalizing discourse has emerged. Francophones now seek employment outside of traditionally francophone regions; and, in the new economy, their linguistic competence has become a material resource, marketable in extra-regional and international spaces (Heller & Labrie Reference Heller, Labrie, Heller and Labrie2004:20–23). This discourse includes ‘the increasing domination of English and the valorization of multilingualism’Footnote 6 (Heller & Labrie Reference Heller, Labrie, Heller and Labrie2004:20).
Labrie & Heller (Reference Labrie, Heller, Heller and Labrie2004:417) affirm that both the modernizing and globalizing discourses continue to circulate in Canadian minority francophone communities, creating luttes discursives ‘discursive conflicts’ between groups of social actors supporting differing interests. These social actors are not necessarily tied to the former political elite; many have vested interests that reach beyond the promotion of their local community (Heller Reference Heller2011:184–89). Their francité ‘Frenchness’ is now fluid, associated less with traditions and more with interactions in multiple networks on the global scale (Labrie & Heller Reference Labrie, Heller, Heller and Labrie2004).
As social actors' roles have morphed, the role of minority francophone social spaces also has begun to shift. For instance, Heller (Reference Heller2003a, Reference Heller2003b) describes a Franco-Ontarian cultural center that, in the late 1970s, played a key role in establishing a collective francophone identity in the local community. In the late 1990s, however, the center's administrative structure was modified to include an emphasis on local economic development. At that point, when redrafting the center's charter, its administrative council, made up of local social actors, redefined the term francophone to include even those speaking French as a second language (Heller Reference Heller2003a). While this particular group's decision is indexical of a progressive discourse of francophone space, Lozon and colleagues (Reference Lozon, McLaughlin, Heller, Heller and Labrie2004) have shown that discursive conflicts often occur among social actors associated with such cultural centers. These conflicts may continue to shape actors' discursive construction of minority francophone space.
To illustrate how another group of francophone social actors has contributed to the construction of social spaces, in the next section I focus on the Acadians, a minority francophone group scattered throughout Canada's Atlantic Provinces—New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Prince-Edward-Island, and Newfoundland and Labrador. I give particular attention to their struggle to establish and maintain francophone physical and discursive spaces in the bilingual urban center of Greater Moncton.
Acadie, Greater Moncton, and the Centre culturel Aberdeen
French settlers founded the territory Acadie in 1604, in today's Nova Scotia (Daigle Reference Daigle and Daigle1993:3). Due to its strategic location, Britain and France battled over Acadie for nearly 100 years, until 1713, when France ceded it to Britain (Daigle Reference Daigle and Daigle1982:37, Reference Daigle and Daigle1993:1–25). For the subsequent forty years, the British called for the Acadians to swear an oath to the Crown, yet they repeatedly refused (Daigle Reference Daigle and Daigle1982:36–43). Finally, from 1755 to 1763, in events now called the Grand Dérangement ‘Great Upheaval’, Charles Lawrence, the lieutenant governor of Nova Scotia, effected several waves of deportations, involving approximately 11,000 of the 13,000 Acadians (Daigle Reference Daigle and Daigle1982:42–46; Laxer Reference Laxer2007:55–88). In 1763, following the Treaty of Paris, small groups of Acadians were permitted to resettle in remote regions of today's Maritime Provinces (Thériault Reference Thériault and Daigle1982:48–50); and, for the following 200 years, they lived in the margins, lacking strong political representation in a society where English served as the language of political and social power (Laxer Reference Laxer2007:113–44).
In the mid-twentieth century, with the migration of francophones to urban centers, movements advocating Canadian francophones' sociopolitical status and linguistic rights gained momentum (Dubois Reference Dubois, Valdman, Auger and Piston-Hatlen2005:83–86; Laxer Reference Laxer2007:191–227). In New Brunswick, where the majority of Acadians resettled, French and English were declared co-official languages in 1969 (New Brunswick Official Languages Act, SNB 1969, c 14). According to the 2011 Canadian census,Footnote 7 francophones, mostly Acadians, constitute 31.6% of New Brunswick's total population of 739,900.
New Brunswick's largest bilingual economic center, Greater Moncton, is situated in the southeast, and is composed of Riverview, a primarily anglophone city; Dieppe, a predominantly francophone city; and the City of Moncton, officially declared bilingual in 2002 (City of Moncton 2013b). In 2011, of the 109,770 residents in Greater Moncton, francophones accounted for 35.8%, whereas anglophones accounted for 64.2%.
As recently as the late 1970s, English was unequivocally the legitimate language in all of Greater Moncton's public spaces, in spite of the province's official bilingual mandate (Boudreau & Dubois Reference Boudreau, Dubois and Chevalier2007). Today, it can still be difficult to determine the legitimate language in any given social situation, whether official or informal, public or private, even in francophone spaces (Boudreau Reference Boudreau, Bulot and Messaoudi2003; LeBlanc Reference LeBlanc2008; McLaughlin Reference McLaughlin2010). Indeed, Boudreau (Reference Boudreau, Bulot and Messaoudi2003) maintains that for Acadians in Moncton to assert their provincially mandated right to speak French, it is important to create spaces, both physical and discursive, where they may affirm their identity. Due to this fluctuating linguistic marketplace (Bourdieu Reference Bourdieu2001), some Acadian social actors remain engaged in establishing French as a legitimate language in all public spaces (Boudreau Reference Boudreau, Bulot and Messaoudi2003).
In recent years, Acadian artists have been shown to be among this group of social actors (cf. Boudreau Reference Boudreau, Bulot and Messaoudi2003; Keating Reference Keating2011). Laxer (Reference Laxer2007:292) states that ‘to an extent that would be unusual in larger societies, the struggles in Acadie about identity and social change are fought out by writers, painters, musicians and even theatre companies’. Boudreau (Reference Boudreau, Bulot and Messaoudi2003) further demonstrates that several authors from Greater Moncton have created a discursive space where the réalité acadienne ‘Acadian reality’, is transformed into a ‘place for [the] production and reproduction of the modern Acadian identity’Footnote 8 (Boudreau Reference Boudreau, Bulot and Messaoudi2003:173). One of these authors proposes the notion of l'Acadie d'ici ‘Acadie from here’, or the creation and production of art in Acadie expressly for cultural promotion (Boudreau Reference Boudreau, Bulot and Messaoudi2003:188–89). There is, in fact, a physical space in Moncton where this discourse is realized on a daily basis: the Centre culturel Aberdeen, which is said to be ‘one of the most important parts of the cultural infrastructure of New Brunswick and Acadie in Atlantic Canada’ (Centre culturel Aberdeen 2014a).
The Centre culturel Aberdeen, housed in a former anglophone high school, figures prominently in Moncton's linguistic landscape (Boudreau & Dubois Reference Boudreau and Dubois2005:197; Centre culturel Aberdeen 2014a). According to Roméo Savoie (n.d.), a founding member, in the early to mid 1980s the local school district discontinued use of the building's top floors, so artists established studios in former classrooms. The district eventually closed the school, intending to demolish it, at which point the artists formed a co-operative organization in 1986 and purchased the building (Centre culturel Aberdeen 2014a; Savoie n.d.). This co-op was conceived as a francophone institution, dedicated to the creation, diffusion, and promotion of Acadian art (Centre culturel Aberdeen 2014a; Savoie n.d.). Today, the Centre is home to independent artists and a variety of organizations, including film production companies, a school of dance, visual artists, and a poetry press (Centre culturel Aberdeen 2014b). Aberdeen also houses prominent Acadian cultural organizations and has provided a platform for some associates into political service (Centre culturel Aberdeen 2014b, Keating Reference Keating2014).
Lozon and colleagues (Reference Lozon, McLaughlin, Heller, Heller and Labrie2004) describe a cultural center in Moncton, likely the Centre culturel Aberdeen, where they conducted fieldwork between 1991 and 2002, including twelve interviews among seven of the Centre's members (Lozon et al. Reference Lozon, McLaughlin, Heller, Heller and Labrie2004:217–18). Their analysis reveals a discursive conflict between older artists who had personally experienced the Acadian social rights movement of the 1960s and 1970s and younger artists between the ages of twenty and thirty-five who now reap the benefit of the older generation's efforts (Lozon et al. Reference Lozon, McLaughlin, Heller, Heller and Labrie2004:218, 224). The older artists stressed the importance of continued efforts to preserve the Acadian identity through the establishment of Acadian territory or institutions, affirming elements of the modernizing discourse, while the younger artists spoke more of the ‘intrinsic universal value’ (valeur intrinsèque universelle) of art than its importance in promoting the Acadian cultural cause, illustrating their alignment with elements of the globalizing discourse (Lozon et al. Reference Lozon, McLaughlin, Heller, Heller and Labrie2004:220).
In the 1990s, Lozon and colleagues (Reference Lozon, McLaughlin, Heller, Heller and Labrie2004) affirm that participants considered this cultural center to be an important institution for the promotion of the Acadian culture and identity; and Keating (Reference Keating2014) demonstrates that those associated with Aberdeen, regardless of age, continue to speak of its integral role as an Acadian social institution. However, while Lozon and colleagues (Reference Lozon, McLaughlin, Heller, Heller and Labrie2004) state that the globalizing discourse was only emergent at the time of their analysis, Keating (Reference Keating2011) shows it to be increasingly prevalent, even among older artists.
Importantly, Lozon and colleagues (Reference Lozon, McLaughlin, Heller, Heller and Labrie2004:217) mention that ‘members, whether they are francophones or anglophones, accept that French is the language of use in official reports’Footnote 9; however, they do not discuss participants' description of linguistic practices in Aberdeen. With the increasing prevalence of the globalizing discourse among those close to Aberdeen, it is possible that their conception of francophone space also has begun to shift.
In this analysis, I present discourses of minority francophone space elicited from members and associates of the Centre culturel Aberdeen. In interviews, I posed some variant of the following question: Le Centre culturel Aberdeen, c'est un centre francophone, n'est-ce pas? ‘The Centre culturel Aberdeen, it's a francophone center, is this right?’. I discuss participants' responses to this question in terms of Heller & Labrie's (Reference Heller, Labrie, Heller and Labrie2004) modernizing and globalizing discourses, as well as Lefebvre's (Reference Lefebvre and Nicholson-Smith1974/1991) triad of social space: conceived, perceived, and lived spaces.
Methodological framework
I conducted the principal fieldwork for this study at the Centre culturel Aberdeen during ten weeks in spring 2010. I chose this period because, during a pre-fieldwork visit in 2009, a member of the community suggested this would be the best time to contact artists, since they typically prepare for summer and fall festivals early in the year. Also, due to renovations beginning in February 2010, Aberdeen was closed for the entire summer of 2010; thus, it would not have been possible to continue observations on the main floors. I returned for two weeks in June 2012 to speak to the director about the renovations' immediate effects, at which time I also consulted Aberdeen's charter documents.
In 2010, I interviewed twenty-eight members and associates of the Centre culturel Aberdeen, sixteen men and twelve women whose ages range from the early twenties to the early sixties. Of this group, three participants were founding members of Aberdeen; three hold administrative positions; two are past members of the administration; and ten have been closely associated with the Centre for fifteen years or more. These participants include artists of all disciplines (visual art, poetry, film, graphic arts, music etc.) and directors of cultural organizations. The present analysis does not separate the participants by age, sex, regional background, or artistic discipline, as discourses on the topic do not differ greatly across these categories. I refer to these participants by pseudonym.
The data were collected and analyzed according to Constructed Grounded Theory methodology (CGT) (Charmaz Reference Charmaz2006), an inductive method of qualitative analysis that is associated with, but distinct from Glaser & Strauss's (Reference Glaser and Strauss1967) Grounded Theory. In CGT, the researcher enters the research context with broad-reaching research questions. The aim is not to confirm or disconfirm pre-established hypotheses, but to elicit participants' emic descriptions of a social context. As the analysis progresses, the researcher compares participants' responses to previous research in the field, and in this way formulates a theory that is grounded both in the data and in the literature (Charmaz Reference Charmaz2006:96–122).
In a CGT study, data may include transcriptions of interview conversations, field notes related to ethnographic observation, objects, or photographs, depending on the phenomena to be observed; above all, the data must be ‘rich and sufficient’ (Charmaz Reference Charmaz2006:18). The two most frequently used methods of data collection in CGT are the interview conversation, based on pre-established, open-ended questions, and ethnographic observation (Charmaz Reference Charmaz2006:21–35). CGT analytical methods are not dissimilar to a traditional discourse analysis (cf. Gee Reference Gee2011); however, they provide a detailed framework for data coding and analysis.
In the present study, the interview conversation was my primary means of data collection. Guided by a set of questions aimed at eliciting discourses of linguistic practice in various social spaces, I questioned participants generally about local varieties of French, their work, their association with Aberdeen, and about the Centre itself. I coded the transcribed interviews in the program MAXQDA. These transcriptions do not take into account phonological variants found in Acadian French; however, morphological variants of Acadian French are noted.
As a secondary means of data collection, I conducted ethnographic fieldwork for ten weeks.Footnote 10 Typically, I spent at least an hour each weekday in Café Aberdeen. Since members of the Centre and of the Acadian artistic community often congregate there, it was a key location for me to contact participants and observe interactions. I also attended twenty-one Acadian artistic events in Moncton, including concerts, gallery openings, poetry readings, literary discussions, an art lecture, and a dance performance, to detail who was attending such events, which people or organizations were collaborating to host the events, and how language was used in these environments. I kept a journal of field notes with detailed descriptions of these events and of other observations made during conversations off-record.
Analysis
Participants' responses regarding the language(s) of the Centre culturel Aberdeen were far from unanimous. In this section I discuss four discourses of minority francophone space related to the Centre culturel Aberdeen. Importantly, this analysis targets participants' discourses related to linguistic practices in Aberdeen as an institution, and not in their own artistic production. As Heller & Labrie (Reference Heller, Labrie, Heller and Labrie2004) also found, the boundaries of these discourses are not strictly differentiated, so examples used in one category might also seem to fit in another. Accordingly, I have attempted to classify the following excerpts by their predominant features.
Discourse 1: Conceived francophone space
I begin by examining participants' discourses related to Aberdeen as a conceived francophone space, that is, a space where French serves as the institutional language of operations, as detailed in its organizational documents. When asked about the language(s) spoken in Aberdeen, two participants cited here refer to its linguistic mandate, and one refers to Aberdeen's importance in promoting Acadian culture. Eleven other participants also make reference to the Centre as a conceived francophone space.
In (1), Jacynthe, associated with the Centre for sixteen years, affirms that Aberdeen is a conceived francophone space, since the Charte de fonctionnement ‘Charter of Operations’, was originally drafted in French. She clarifies that this choice was made because the original founding members of the Centre were former students at l'Université de Moncton, the local francophone university. At the same time, even while asserting that the official language of Aberdeen is French, Jacynthe first acknowledges that the Centre is not closed to anglophones.
(1)
Like Jacynthe, Vincent, a founding member of Aberdeen, affirms in (2) that French is the official language of the institution, in accordance with its linguistic mandate. He emphasizes the importance of this distinction at the federal level, in securing funding for the arts. For Vincent, the conceived space of the Centre is francophone, if only for economic reasons.
(2)
Below, in example (3), Alain, a member of the administration, agrees that while two anglophones are members of Aberdeen, the anglophone community calls Aberdeen ‘The French Center’. The participation of anglophones within the Centre does not, for him, change the linguistic mandate of the space. Alain acknowledges the tendency of artists to privilege art above language; however, in his view, while the quality of the work is important, it is equally if not more important that this work is accomplished in French. Lastly, he asserts that the Centre culturel Aberdeen is one of the most important establishments in today's Acadie.
(3)
The above examples have shown that participants affirm French to be the official language of the Centre culturel Aberdeen's conceived space, as designated by its charter, in accordance with the wishes of the original founding members, and in view of its status as an Acadian cultural institution. A founding member affirms that, pragmatically, Aberdeen's francophone mandate is also advantageous in securing government funding. This discourse of conceived francophone space corresponds with Lozon and colleagues' (2004) findings that Aberdeen was originally designated as a space for the promotion of the Acadian language and culture, in accordance with elements of the modernizing discourse (Heller & Labrie Reference Heller, Labrie, Heller and Labrie2004). Still, Alain and Jacynthe both admit that other languages are spoken in the Centre. If the conceived space of the Centre culturel Aberdeen is francophone, what are participants' observations of linguistic practices in the social interactions of its perceived space?
Discourse 2: Perceived multilingual space
In this section, I discuss participants' discourses on linguistic practices in Aberdeen's perceived space, that is, the space of everyday social practice in the Centre. While the discourse of conceived francophone space is evident in the following excerpts, participants also attest to the presence of other languages in the Centre. In sum, eight participants hedge their responses regarding languages in Aberdeen's perceived space; three of these excerpts are included below.
In (4), Robert, associated with the Centre for seven years, affirms that “the heart of the Centre is francophone” and that the Centre's founders were all francophones. At the same time, he maintains that artists from all linguistic backgrounds are welcome, describing Aberdeen as a space primarily for artistic creation, where language is secondary.
(4)
Next, Jean, associated with Aberdeen for fifteen years, speaks of a distinction between Aberdeen's official language of policy, and language as it plays out in the daily operations of various organizations. In (5) he acknowledges that French is the Centre's institutional language of operations, appealing to the authority of the Administrative Council; nevertheless, like Alain he affirms that the Centre has anglophone members. Jean also mentions that several of Aberdeen's organizations invite artists of varied linguistic backgrounds to perform or exhibit art, publicizing these events both in French and English. His comment that art is able to transcend any linguistic code echoes Lozon and colleagues' (2004) findings regarding their participants' insistence on the universality of art.
(5)
Indeed, a few weeks after my interview with Jean, I attended an exhibit's opening night hosted by one of the Centre's galleries. At this event, general introductions were made in French, but an invited artist from Germany introduced his own art in English.
In (6), George, another founding member of Aberdeen, speaks of an anglophone artist whose studio was in Aberdeen during the Centre's earliest days. The phrasing of his remark, “we received her, we accepted her in the Centre”, suggests that the founding members made a conscious choice to admit this artist into their membership.
(6)
From early on, at least one anglophone was present in Aberdeen's membership, even when the language of the Centre's conceived space had been established as French. Perhaps, then, the apparent incongruence between the official language of Aberdeen's conceived space and linguistic practices in its perceived space has existed from its earliest days.
In the above examples, participants’ discourses have demonstrated that, though French continues to be referred to as the official language of the Centre culturel Aberdeen's conceived space, it is possible and even welcome for other languages to be heard in its perceived space. While there seems to be a consensus among participants that the preferred language of daily work in Aberdeen is French, there is a desire among some participants to host artists from other regions and linguistic backgrounds to perform, exhibit their art, and even create. Thus, according to participants' description of Aberdeen's perceived space, French remains the hegemonic language of the core group of actors in the Centre, while artists from other linguistic backgrounds may participate in the Centre's perceived space in a peripheral way. Unfortunately, given that I interviewed only francophones, the present data set does not allow for a deeper analysis of anglophone members' participation in Aberdeen.
This section has detailed participants' discursive conflicts regarding linguistic practice in the social space of the Centre culturel Aberdeen. On the one hand, participants' insistence on French as the language of the Centre's conceived space aligns with essentialist elements of the modernizing discourse (Heller & Labrie Reference Heller, Labrie, Heller and Labrie2004). On the other hand, their acceptance of artists from various nationalities and linguistic backgrounds corresponds with the globalizing discourse's emphasis on extra-regional networking and the valorization of multilingualism (Heller & Labrie Reference Heller, Labrie, Heller and Labrie2004).
Discourse 3: Bilingual lived space
The excerpts in the previous section reveal that the discourse of a conceived monolingual francophone space may conflict with actual linguistic practices in Aberdeen's perceived space. In the present section, I discuss excerpts from three participants who reframed Aberdeen as a bilingual lived space. I use the notion of lived space here, because these participants describe not official language policy or actual linguistic practices in the Centre, but their personal representations of Aberdeen's role in Moncton's bilingual community.
In (7) below, Martin, a member of the administration, addresses the Centre's need for a bilingual website, in French and English, expressly to reach a wider clientele.
(7)
Martin does not necessarily contradict a previous statement in which he affirms that French is the everyday language of the Centre (Keating Reference Keating2011:132); he merely affirms that the clientele Aberdeen seeks as peripheral participants is not restricted to francophones.
In (8), Zachary, associated with Aberdeen for fifteen years, declares that it is not a francophone center, but a bilingual center managed by francophones.
(8)
Zachary's description of Aberdeen as a bilingual center seemingly contradicts his statement only minutes later, when he declares that people can “live out moments in French” and “share their experiences in French”Footnote 14 in the Centre (Keating Reference Keating2011:149). Zachary's apparent ambiguity toward Aberdeen's linguistic role stems from two factors: his personal investment in actively promoting the Acadian language and culture through collaboration in multiple Acadian cultural events on the one hand, and his association with the anglophone community through his business's clientele and his own personal social ties on the other. He clarified to me that it is precisely due to his close connection with anglophones that he is driven to promote the Acadian culture. Interestingly, Zachary is in his early forties, part of the age group in which we would expect the globalizing discourse to dominate given Lozon and colleagues' (2004) findings. Instead, Zachary's remarks are evidence of a clear conflict between the modernizing and globalizing discourses. Labrie & Heller (Reference Labrie, Heller, Heller and Labrie2004:406) state that, in a social situation where discourses are in conflict, a social actor ‘may occupy a position revealing contradictions, tensions, ambiguities, and gray zones’Footnote 15. Indeed, Zachary's conflicting perspectives on Aberdeen's linguistic mandate indicate a ‘gray zone’ in his description of Aberdeen's lived space.
In (9), Noël, a member of the campaign financing Aberdeen's ongoing renovations, proposes that the Centre serves as a space where mediation and contact may be fostered between Greater Moncton's francophone and anglophone communities.
(9)
Noël's description of Aberdeen as a lived space in which Moncton's two linguistic communities may coexist contradicts the notion of Aberdeen as a conceived, enclosed francophone space. He does not appeal to the roots of the Centre; instead, his answer is imbued with traits of the postnationalist globalizing discourse (Heller & Labrie Reference Heller, Labrie, Heller and Labrie2004), reordering conceived francophone space to serve as a space for mediation between members of the minority and majority linguistic groups.
In this section, Martin, Zachary, and Noël characterize Aberdeen as a bilingual lived space. These three participants describe the space as not only open to an anglophone clientele, but also potentially serving to mediate conflicts between members of Moncton's linguistic communities. At the same time, Zachary's comments in (8) demonstrate that conflicting discourses of francophone space exist, even in the utterances of one person. Importantly, since only three of the twenty-eight participants referred to this emerging discourse of bilingual lived space, it is by no means dominant. Their remarks may, however, signal a shift in the discourse of linguistic practice related to the Centre's conceived space.
Discourse 4: Plural conceived francophone space
In 2012, Aberdeen's director informed me that the Centre had been restructured internally: while it was formerly a co-op, it now functions as a not-for-profit organization, a change directly related to ongoing efforts to receive government funding for the building's renovations. In the Centre's new Statuts et règlements ‘Statutes and regulations’, French is declared to be the official language of the organization. In the same document, part of the description of Aberdeen is as follows.
Partenaire incontournable du développement de sa municipalité, de sa province, de son pays et du peuple acadien,Footnote 16 il participe activement à l'écosystème des arts et de la culture et de la francophonieFootnote 17 au niveau local, provincial, national et international. … le Centre est confortable pour ses membres qui sont activement engagés dans son développement, invitant pour les artistes de la communauté et de l'extérieur et accueillant pour le public de différentes cultures qui est de plus en plus nombreux à le fréquenter. (Centre culturel Aberdeen 2012)
‘An essential partner in the development of its municipality, of its province, of its country and of the Acadian people, it actively participates in the ecosystem of the arts and of culture and of la francophonie at the local, provincial, national, and international levels … the Centre is comfortable for its members who are actively engaged in its development, [it is] inviting for artists from the community and from the exterior, and welcoming for the public from different cultures who frequent it in greater and greater numbers.’
The above excerpt first details the Centre's role in Acadie, as well as its involvement in la francophonie, at the local, provincial, national, and international levels. The final lines, however, are indicative of a newly stated institutional value, underscoring outreach to nonlocal artists, ‘from the exterior’, as well as to the public ‘from different cultures’. It is not clear if these artists and this public are meant to be francophones or if the statement refers to people from various regions, with diverse linguistic backgrounds.
Further, part of the newly articulated goals and objectives of the Centre are as follows (Centre culturel Aberdeen 2012).
• Établir, administrer et maintenir un centre d'art multidisciplinaire afin d'éduquer le public et accroître sa compréhension des arts
‘To establish, administer, and maintain a center for multidisciplinary art in order to educate the public and increase its comprehension of the arts’
…
• Établir et gérer à l'intention du grand public un centre communautaire …
‘To establish and manage a community center for the greater public …’
Again, each of the goals and objectives indicates that the Centre now exists for the greater public and not solely for its members. However, the linguistic background of the clientele is once more left to interpretation.
The director further stated that the Centre's new not-for-profit status requires it to maintain a higher profile in Greater Moncton, through community activities offered multiple times a year. He affirmed that all publicity for these events would be bilingual—in French and in English. Conversely, he stated that all activities would be hosted uniquely in French, and performers would be predominantly Acadians. In fact, in August 2012, in partnership with the City of Moncton, the Centre hosted Acadie Rock, a festival featuring Acadian musicians, one of its first major events since reorganization. This event was publicized in both French and English and has now become an annual event (City of Moncton 2013a).
Thus, according to Aberdeen's new charter, the social space originally conceived of as a homogenous minority linguistic space, primarily for artistic creation, has, nearly thirty years later, opened its doors as a plural conceived francophone space, serving as a beacon of Acadian culture to Greater Moncton's bilingual community, further signaling the increasing prevalence of Heller & Labrie's (Reference Heller, Labrie, Heller and Labrie2004) globalizing discourse, even in relation to a prominent Acadian cultural institution.
This new direction for Aberdeen is best expressed below in (10). Nicole, associated with Aberdeen for eleven years, states what she believes to be its most important quality, first affirming that art is the core of the Centre, clarifying that artistic production occurs both in French and in English, since Aberdeen is not part of ‘a francophonie enclosed on itself’, but one where ‘anglophones are welcome’.
(10)
Nicole's above statement effectively recapitulates elements of the four discourses found in the present analysis, while offering a progressive conception of the local, Acadian manifestation of la francophonie. For her, no matter the official language associated with conceived francophone spaces, the lived francophone spaces of today's Acadie are no longer tied to an essentialist conception of the Acadian identity, but to a pluralist, postnational identity, as represented in the globalizing discourse (Heller & Labrie Reference Heller, Labrie, Heller and Labrie2004), in which contact with English, or any other language, is embraced.
Discussion
The above data represent a continuum of discourses of minority francophone space related to the Centre culturel Aberdeen, ranging from the discourse of a conceived, or planned francophone space, to the discourse of a perceived space, the space of actual practice—where competence in French is preferred in daily participation in the Centre, but where peripheral participants may speak other languages in artistic collaboration, to a bilingual lived space—where mediation between linguistic communities may be possible, to a new plural form of conceived francophone space.
Even still, Aberdeen's conceived language of policy, French, has not changed from its beginnings through its present reorganization. With its francophone linguistic mandate, all official functions of the Centre, including meetings, documents, and so on, will remain in French. The participants cited above affirm that most daily activities in the Centre occur in French. Thus, in the conceived space of the Centre, as an institution and as a workspace for artists and cultural organizations, French continues to be the legitimate language (Bourdieu Reference Bourdieu2001), while other languages are not censured by members. When coupled with the Centre's ongoing mission to partner in Acadian cultural development, its role as a conceived minority linguistic space, established during a period when the modernizing discourse was prevalent in Acadie (Lozon et al. Reference Lozon, McLaughlin, Heller, Heller and Labrie2004), remains in part.
Aberdeen's members' and associates' apparent ambiguity as to the language to be used in the Centre's perceived space signals that discursive conflicts between the modernizing and globalizing discourses, however, continue to take place in this group of social actors (Labrie & Heller Reference Labrie, Heller, Heller and Labrie2004), as Lozon and colleagues (Reference Lozon, McLaughlin, Heller, Heller and Labrie2004) had originally documented, though these conflicts are no longer associated with specific age groups. The present findings correspond with theirs insofar as elements of the globalizing discourse are common among those associated with Aberdeen, especially regarding the universality of art. These findings differ, however, in that now the globalizing discourse also applies to participants' discourses of minority francophone space. For many members of the Centre, and for the administration in particular, the discourse of a monolingual minority francophone space, conceived expressly for francophone participation, has shifted, as Heller (Reference Heller2003a, Reference Heller2003b) also found.
Aberdeen's new mandate of community engagement is another sign of this shift. To attract members of Moncton's greater public to the Centre's activities, the administration intends to market all events in both French and English. Importantly, events marketed bilingually will be conducted solely in French. This new vision of outreach to the anglophone community is, from my observation, novel in comparison with the area's other prominent francophone institutions, such as l'Université de Moncton, which exist uniquely to serve the francophone community, mostly Acadians. Aberdeen's intentional dissemination of Acadian culture to a multilingual market may signal an intentional commodification of linguistic and cultural goods, as is found in the globalizing discourse (Heller & Labrie Reference Heller, Labrie, Heller and Labrie2004:21; see also Hornsby Reference Hornsby2008; Leeman & Modan Reference Leeman, Modan, Shohamy, Ben-Rafael and Barni2010; Coupland Reference Coupland2012). As a not-for-profit organization, however, Aberdeen's stated outreach is less about economic gain than cultural education and diffusion. In the future, it would be interesting to attend events sponsored by Aberdeen to take note of those in attendance, both francophones and anglophones, in order to gauge the effect of the Centre's new mandate.
While it might also appear that Aberdeen's new desire to attract an anglophone clientele to its events is due solely to obligations regarding the use of public funding, it is important to note that I elicited comments regarding the plural nature of the Centre's lived space in 2010, well before the new Statuts et règlements were drafted and approved by a majority of voting members. Clearly, the discourse of plural francophone lived space was already in circulation and may have influenced wording choices in Aberdeen's new organizational documents related to its conceived space.
Finally, Lozon and colleagues (Reference Lozon, McLaughlin, Heller, Heller and Labrie2004:228) speak to minority francophone cultural centers' challenge in ‘at the same time maintaining an inclusive and homogenous solidarity, based on a common past and heritage’ while also keeping ‘an openness to the world’.Footnote 18 They conclude by reflecting on the ‘possibilities of reinvention of the institutional structure as the basis for cultural production [that is] strictly francophone’Footnote 19 (Lozon et al. Reference Lozon, McLaughlin, Heller, Heller and Labrie2004:228). Indeed, the present analysis has detailed discursive processes involved in constructing the Centre culturel Aberdeen's social space, processes that have contributed to its reorganization and subsequent reinvention as a plural francophone institution ‘open to the world’, just as one would expect in a period when the globalizing discourse is increasingly dominant among social actors in Canada's minority francophone communities (Heller & Labrie Reference Heller, Labrie, Heller and Labrie2004).
As with any research grounded in a qualitative approach like CGT, this study's findings are limited to a certain group of social actors in a particular social space, at a precise moment. It must be considered as a snapshot of what was, not predictive of things to come, especially as the negotiation of identities among social actors is a constant yet unpredictable phenomenon. In order to observe long-term effects of the Centre culturel Aberdeen's renovations and reorganization, it is important to continue collecting longitudinal data on its engagement with the community and on linguistic practices among regular and peripheral participants. For one, it could be that, in advertising bilingually, the Centre is less concerned with attracting anglophones to its events than with performing an element of the local Acadian identity namely, bilingual competence in French and in English (cf. Coupland Reference Coupland2012:22–23). This possibility merits further investigation. In the future, it would also be beneficial to gather data among the few anglophone members, particularly regarding their participation in the Centre's institutional meetings and gatherings, since the present analysis did not adequately address this issue. Additionally, given the emergent discourse affirming the Centre as a space of mediation, it would be fruitful to interview members of Moncton's anglophone community regarding its role in the city and, more generally, vis-à-vis their level of participation in francophone spaces.
Conclusion
In applying Lefebvre's (Reference Lefebvre and Nicholson-Smith1974/1991) tripartite notion of social space to Moncton's Centre culturel Aberdeen, the present analysis has shown how a conceived space, designated for the use of a minority language, may in fact be linguistically heterogeneous in the daily social interactions of its perceived space and especially in actors' description of its lived space. If one were to conclude, based on the building's sign seen in Figure 1, that French is used in all circumstances in Aberdeen—as a linguistic landscape study might maintain—one would underestimate the complexity of social space within the walls of this former anglophone school. The present study has demonstrated the degree to which, in the continued documentation of multilingual cities' linguistic landscapes, it is important to investigate social actors' discourses regarding linguistic practices in prominent minority language spaces like the Centre culturel Aberdeen. For, just as social actors' trajectories are not fixed but fluid (Heller Reference Heller2011), so are the trajectories of social spaces which these actors continue to discursively construct.
The Centre culturel Aberdeen's entrance facing Saint George Street.
