![Sample our Area Studies journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5922/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Area-Studies.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
This article argues that the Murdoch Mysteries series as a collective whole can be read as a definitive text on the Canadian psyche, on its cultural identity, and its underlying philosophy. Canada shares a history with the United States, and because of this, Canada’s peace, freedom, common order, and prosperity, all elements of its identity and moral character, have been defined contingently upon its geopolitical relationship to the United States. The series illustrates that foundational philosophies are not irrelevant to perceptions of truth or interpretations of historical events, that historical narratives may play a role in the formation of the culture and its principles and practices of morality, and that together law and morality define the character and identity of a people.
Acknowledgments
An earlier version of this article at was presented at the Middle Atlantic and New England Council for Canadian Studies (MANECCS) Biennial Conference in Portland, Maine in 2016. The author is very grateful to Andy Holman for his comments, recommendations, and editorial insights. Thanks are also extended to Elizabeth Trott and Janet Wesselius for their encouragement to pursue the publication of this research on the connection between philosophy and popular culture.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.
Notes
1. For an overview of the political, scientific, and socio-cultural movements, events, and the historical personae that have been woven into the text of the series, see Ricci and Bahmanyar (Citation2015).
2. Though I do not agree with Nietzsche’s oft-cited and variously translated aphorism against positivism—“It is precisely facts that do not exist, only interpretations” (Notebooks Summer 1886 to Fall 1887 and The Will to Power, Aphorism 481)—I tend to agree with a belief that “all things are subject to interpretation.” Interpretation here means placing things in context. Therefore, context must be approached carefully; Canada’s history (including intellectual history) and culture differ from those of its southern neighbors both in development and practice.
3. All dialogue presented in this article has been transcribed by me from repeated personal close-captioned viewings of DVD and Broadcast episodes cross-referenced with the episode scripts cited in the List of References at the end of this essay (Murdoch Mysteries Citation2009-2016; The Murdoch Mysteries Citationn.d.).
4. On this point see the writings of Canadian thinkers John Watson, John Macdonald, George Paxton Young, Charles Taylor, George Grant, and many others. The major influences on Canadian thought include German and British Idealists, whereas American thought in the late 19th and early 20th centuries was heavily influenced by the British empiricists, utilitarians, and social contract theorists, through which American pragmatism was born. See Armour (Citation1981), Armour and Trott (Citation1981), Trott (Citation2019), McKillop (Citation1979), Mathews (Citation1988), Meynell (Citation2011), and Angus (Citation1997, Citation2013).
5. In “What Lies Buried,” Brackenreid reminds Murdoch that “the law is not about fairness.” There is an implication that justice is about fairness, and Murdoch “chose justice over the law,” and that “he did right.” What is of note here is loyalty, which exists between Murdoch and Brackenreid. We also learn of a loyalty that exists between Giles and Constable Hodge who had helped Giles cover up the death of Finch. Hodge discovered Finch’s attempt at blackmail and, unfortunately, would be responsible for Finch’s death. Giles and Finch would protect each other as did Murdoch and Brackenreid on various occasions. In “What Lies Buried,” loyalty is characterized as “the only moral force that can exist on the same plane as the truth itself,” coupled with the observation that inevitably loyalty and truth will clash with some cost to the individuals involved.
6. Similar claims could be made for several of the characters of visiting historical figures such as American industrialist Andrew Carnegie, British politician Winston Churchill, Prime Minister Wilfrid Laurier, American humorist Mark Twain, American lawman Bat Masterson, Canadian artist Tom Thomson, American anarchist Emma Goldman, Serbian-American inventor Nikola Tesla, and Canadian author and icon Lucy Maude Montgomery.
7. In terms of Platonic idealism, it would be easy to imagine Murdoch and Pendrick, whose inventiveness may represent the intellect, the rational soul of Canada. Further, one can see Julia Ogden and Emily Grace as symbolic of courage and the spirited soul of Canada. Crabtree and Higgins are representative of the appetitive Canada guided by moderation. Finally, Brackenreid could be a symbol of the evolution and maturation of the harmonized elements of that soul.
8. In the episode, Clegg asserts that Canada is not neutral and that it had sought the break up of the American Union in the 1860s. Whether or not these assertions are true would be irrelevant for the pragmatic Clegg. Possession of the letter or the gold would give him the power to interpret these claims as the truth. Contrastingly, for Murdoch possession of the gold and solving the murder would give him the power to demonstrate Clegg’s assertions as calumnies.
9. Meaning and truth emerge from the interaction of these elements and the interactions in turn are dependent on the proportionality of each element.
10. This scene, with Harper playing the role of Armstrong, does not appear as part of the episode in DVDs released in the U.S. It appears as a special scene separate from the episode. The scene ends with Crabtree placing a newspaper on Armstrong’s desk saying: “It’s called a newspaper, Armstrong. Try reading one.” That line would have had significant political meaning for a Canadian audience, but perhaps not for a U.S. audience.
11. With Aleksandr Kubyshkin, I have previously argued that Harper, during his leadership of the New Conservatives, consistently failed to see things from an historically and culturally Canadian perspective (Timko and Kubyshkin Citation2016, 42).
12. In 2010, Liberal Party of Canada leader Michael Ignatieff declared to an audience that Harper was trying to move the center ten degrees to the right. See Ibbitson (Citation2010). In the same vein, see Martin (Citation2015).
13. On closer inspection, the comparison may not be all that subtle. In “Murdoch Air,” Pendrick responds to a feigned competition to fund the building of his “Arrow.” In fact, the Canadian Arrow was entered the X-Prize Competition.
14. Laurier’s ambivalence brought him criticism from both Anglo and French Canada. From one perspective, Canadians were honor and duty bound to support the interests of the Empire. From another, their involvement would be seen as little more than colonials in service to a master of another house. Canada was at a crucial point in history. Would it or would it not assert itself as master of its own destiny? Symbolically, the Boer War was a political “test match.”
15. Here we have two instances foreshadowing Murdoch’s remarks to Rebecca James in Season 9.
16. There is perhaps little doubt that the destruction of the Avro Arrow and its existing technology did have the effect of possibly providing the United States with an aerospace advantage over Canada. Many of the scientists and engineers who worked on the Arrow went to work in the U.S. While writing this paper, I could not help but notice that Don McBrearty who directed a number of Murdoch episodes also directed the CBC miniseries The Arrow. When I went to look at this mini-series, I found that it tries to advance the conjectures of conspiracy theories surrounding the Avro Arrow. Here we find what I would like to think of as interpretations of the facts. What were the reasons for canceling the production of the Avro Arrow? Was it that it was too costly? Was it that the Americans could not abide by the possibility that Canada possessed aerospace technology much advanced of that which existed in the U.S.? The Globe and Mail published no fewer than three editorials (February 21, 23, and 25, 1959) which not only pointed out a contempt that the U.S. had for Canadian technological knowledge, but also argued that the end of the Arrow and its technology would cost Canada its economic and political independence (See Smith Citation1995, 320 and 636 n158).
17. The emphasis should be on what Clegg believes or perceives to be in U.S. interests, whether or not it is in fact in such interests.
18. Repeating my previous assertion with some additional emphasis. Additionally, Clegg’s offhand reference to the Irish should allow some to recall General James Wolfe’s offhanded reference to Highland Soldiers in the Battle of Quebec (1759): “No great mischief if they fall.”
19. It is worth noting that the American union, the Knights of Labor, were at the peak of their membership at the time of the Haymarket Riot in 1886. Also, it would be remiss of me not to point out that distinguished Canadian educator, social reformer, and philosopher John Clark Murray began writing his hallmark analysis of labor and property, The Industrial Kingdom of God, in the summer of 1887. Murray wrote against viewing labor as a commodity and defended giving workers their just wage. He talked not only about the rights of property, but also, more importantly, about the obligations of property. In their “Preface” to the publication of Murray’s manuscript, Leslie Armour and Elizabeth Trott point out that “[i]f one attends only to Murray’s surface recommendations—his proposals for shared ownership, co-operatives, courts of arbitration, better laws protecting trade unions from others and from the possibility of internal corruption, more effective education, better welfare and public insurance schemes—one may well miss the radical nature of his ideas about the community and the political structure” (Murray Citation1981, xxiv). Goldman’s philosophy and activism may have been more at home in Canada than in the U.S.
20. As Goldman’s ideas are portrayed in this episode, one can possibly imagine that they are articulated in substance and in a manner with which Canadian anarchist George Woodcock would feel comfortable. In Anarchism: A History of Liberal Ideas and Movements, Woodcock (Citation1962) indicated that Goldman was part of a small group from a younger generation that “brought fresh vigor” (249) to the anarchist movement, that she was an” anarchist celebrity” and “a dynamic personality” (439).
21. These questions are not dissimilar to those with which Murdoch was confronted in the Constance Gardiner/Ava Moon case. The best description of the importance of the Constance/Ava episode to the series, to the formation of Murdoch’s sense of justice and moral character, and, perhaps, to the thesis of this essay can be found in Ricci and Bahmanyar (Citation2015, 165).
22. “No great mischief,” indeed. In this episode, Meyers is framed by Clegg for the murder of a double agent. When it is revealed that Laurier has surrendered Meyers to the Americans for unsanctioned actions and that there will be no U.S. trial, that Meyers will “die in the shadows,” we hear the following comment from Brackenreid: “Well, Murdoch, Meyers thought he was faster than the elephant, but in the end, he got squashed.
23. There is an interesting set of exchanges between Murdoch and Brackenreid on begging the question in “Confederate Treasure.” Murdoch seems to accept that begging the question is part of how one pursues truth and justice in detective work. We need to remind ourselves that begging the question does not constitute an invalid argument or act of reasoning. It is an informal rather than a formal fallacy, and informal fallacies, while affecting the persuasiveness of an argument, do not affect the validity of the argument.