Denis Smith and the Journal

Journal of Canadian Studies/Revue d'etudes canadiennes Editor Editorial Assistants Editorial Board RALPH HEINTZMAN Redacteur ARLENE DAVIS Assistantes MARGARET PEARCE JEAN-PIERRE LAPOINTE Comite de redaction MARGARET LAURENCE HARVEY McCUE JACQUES MONET, S. J. W. L. MORTON W. F. W. NEVILLE GORDON ROPER DONALD V. SMILEY DENIS SMITH PHILIP STRATFORD T. H. B. SYMONS W. E. TAYLOR CLARA TH0 MAS JOHN WADLAND MELVILLE H. WATKINS ALAN WILSON Denis Smith and the Journal With this issue, the Journal of Canadian Studies finds itself, for the first time, without the guidance of its founding editor, Denis Smith. Exactly ten years ago, well before Canadian studies had become a fashionable enthusiasm, he and a number of colleagues at Trent University, especially the University's first president T. H. B. Symons, diagnosed the need for a new Canadian scholarly Journal and committed the young university to the support of one. The new quarterly was to be distinctive in a number of ways. In the first place, it was to address itself to the entire range of studies relating to Canada. "This journal has been founded," wrote Denis Smith in his first editorial, "in the belief that the life and history of Canada, still largely unexamined, deserve common study by persons of many approaches and attitudes. The Journal is concerned not only with politics, but with the whole range of Canadian studies, so far as they throw light upon our collective experience and character." Implicit in these words and in the tone of that first editorial was an approach to Canadian studies which was to be, in a sense, the special vocation of the Journal. It was to be a scholarly journal, certainly, presenting the results of original reflection and research at the highest level, but it was not intended that it should merely duplicate the work of existing journals. It was to convey through its editorial policy something of the urgency of Journal of Canadian Studies 1 self-understanding in this country: to the normal academic virtues of detachment, it hoped to add the civic virtues of concern. This hope was symbolized by two decisions concerning the form and content of the Journal. From the outset, the editorial board declared, as it still does, that it sought above all "manuscripts which are likely, in both subject and approach, to be of general as well as spec·ialized scholarly interest." The Journal had no intention of publishing self-indulgent articles written only for the initiate: it wished to print only those which, without any compromise of professional and scholarly standards, would make a genuine contribution to the cause of understanding by assuming for their audience the entire academic community. If the pursuit of selfknowledge was indeed a matter of some urgency in Canada, then the complacent specialization and balkanization of modern scholarship must be resisted, but resisted in an intelligent manner, one that would stimulate and liberate scholarship instead of shackling or degrading it. If an informed awareness of the country's history, culture, and immediate circumstances was essential to its social healti1, and possibly to its survival , then it was equally essential to promote the communication of insights across the boundaries of the various disciplines and even across the boundary between the academic community and the general educated public. That was, of course, the reason for the Journal's catholic embrace of all fields of study relating to Canada, but it was also the reason for the kind of article which it proposed to favour. A second decision of symbolic importance concerned the provision for an editorial in the new journal. This departure from the normal pattern of scholarly journals ·involved at least an element of risk. Would it compromise the scholarly ideal of objectivity? Would it discourage potential contributors who might be offended by the views of the editors? The answer, as it turned out, was partly yes and partly no. 'It is clear that the 2 Journal has lost some potential contr·ibutors, but it has gained others who were sufficiently stimulated to contribute a rejoinder, or who were simply attracted by its lively air of relevance. The editorial helped to set the tone of the review by providing a symbol...