The Battle of Vimy Ridge in 1917 has long been seen as a defining moment in the development of Canadian national identity. Many historians and media representations describe it as the point where Canada began to see itself as more independent from the British Empire. However, as the CBC documentary Why the Battle of Vimy Ridge Matters points out, the meaning of Vimy has changed over time. It has been celebrated, forgotten, and reinterpreted depending on the historical moment. This raises an important question about how we remember Vimy today and what role media plays in shaping that memory. Using the ideas of Harold Adam Innis, we can better understand how different forms of media influence the way Canadians think about Vimy Ridge and its importance.
Innis argued that all media have what he called a “bias,” meaning they shape how people experience time and space. He explained that some media are time biased, while others are space biased. Time biased media focus on preserving information over long periods and help societies stay connected to their past. Examples include monuments, oral traditions, and durable forms of communication. Space biased media, on the other hand, focus on spreading information quickly across large areas. These include newspapers, radio, television, and digital media. While space biased media allow information to reach more people, Innis warned that they can create what he called an “obsession with present mindedness,” where people focus so much on the present that they lose a deeper understanding of history. He argued that this can be dangerous because knowledge of the past may no longer guide the present or the future (Innis, 1951).
The CBC documentary on Vimy Ridge is a strong example of a space biased form of media. As an online video, it is designed to reach a wide audience quickly and make history engaging and relevant for viewers today. The documentary focuses on how the meaning of Vimy has shifted over time, rather than presenting it as a fixed or unchanging event. The narration by Peter Mansbridge highlights this idea by suggesting that Vimy continues to demand interpretation from each generation. This reflects Innis’s idea of present mindedness because the documentary encourages viewers to think about what Vimy means now, rather than only focusing on what it meant in 1917. At the same time, the video does include elements of time bias by referencing historical footage and discussing how memory has evolved over a century. However, its main purpose is to communicate broadly and engage audiences in the present, which makes it primarily space biased.
The Government of Canada’s Vimy Memorial website presents a slightly different approach. It combines both time bias and space bias in a way that reflects the strengths of each. The monument itself is clearly a time biased form of communication. It is a physical structure built to last, meant to preserve the memory of those who fought and died at Vimy Ridge for future generations. It emphasizes continuity, remembrance, and national identity over a long period of time. However, the website that presents this monument is space biased because it allows people from across Canada and around the world to access information about Vimy instantly. The site shares historical facts, images, and interpretations in a format that is easy to distribute and consume. In this sense, the website acts as a bridge between past and present by using modern technology to share a deeply historical symbol.
Both the CBC documentary and the Vimy Memorial website attempt to help Canadians understand the past, but they do so in different ways. The documentary invites reflection and reinterpretation, which makes history feel relevant but can also risk focusing too much on present perspectives. The website and the monument emphasize remembrance and continuity, which helps preserve the significance of Vimy but may present a more fixed and official version of history. When these two forms are considered together, they create a more balanced understanding. The time biased elements help anchor Vimy in Canadian memory, while the space biased elements ensure that this memory is shared widely and remains meaningful today.
Overall, Innis’s theory helps show that the way we remember Vimy Ridge is not just about the event itself, but about the media through which it is communicated. The meaning of Vimy continues to evolve because different media highlight different aspects of its significance. These artifacts do help Canadians understand the past, but only when we recognize how they shape that understanding. In this way, remembering Vimy is not just about looking back, but about actively deciding how the past will influence Canada’s present and future.
References
Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. (n.d.). Why the Battle of Vimy Ridge matters [Video]. YouTube.
Innis, H. A. (1951). The bias of communication. University of Toronto Press.
Veterans Affairs Canada. (n.d.). Canadian National Vimy Memorial. Government of Canada. https://www.veterans.gc.ca
Hi Owen, I agree with what you said that the CBC documentary is mainly space-biased, and the Vimy memorial and website combine both time and space bias. I liked how you explained that the documentary encourages viewers to think about what Vimy means in the present. This point connects really well to Innis's idea of present-mindedness. I also agree with your point on how the monument preserves memory overtime, while the website helps distribute that memory widely. Your idea that a website may have a more fixed meaning of history was interesting to me because it shows how rememberance is not neutral. That made me think more on how institutions have such a big role in shaping national memory not just presenting the facts. Overall, I think your post did a great job in showing how Vimy Ridge is rememebered and interpreted through media.
ReplyDeleteI really liked how clearly you explained Innis's idea of time-biased and space-biased media and applied it to both the CBC documentary and the Vimy memorial website. Your point about present-mindedness was interesting as I also brought it up in my blog post. It's interesting because it shows how even when media aim to preserve history, they can shift focus toward what the past means now rather than what it meant in its original context. One thing your post made me think about is whether the "official" nature of the website might limit alternative interpretations of Vimy, compared to the documentary's more open-ended approach. What do you think?
ReplyDelete