A Map of Canada: The Geography of Apologies and Identity

The recent fiasco over Hilroy’s glossy notebooks, which omitted Newfoundland and Cape Breton from their Canadian map, has reignited a long-standing debate about geography, identity, and what it means to be part of a country. On the surface, this seems like a minor issue – after all, who gets upset about an exercise book? However, scratch beneath the surface, and you’ll find a complex web of history, politics, and cultural sensitivities that are worth examining.

The error, attributed by Hilroy to a production mistake, is hardly surprising. In recent years, maps have increasingly been created with algorithms and automated design tools, rather than human cartographers who understand the nuances of geography. This can lead to mistakes like the one made by Hilroy – not just errors in detail, but also a lack of context about why certain regions might be significant.

For Newfoundlanders and Nova Scotians, the omission was not just an oversight – it was a slight against their identity and history. The two provinces have long been seen as outliers within Canada, with distinct cultures and traditions that set them apart from other parts of the country. When they’re left off a map, it’s like erasing their very existence.

Premier Tony Wakeham’s response to the controversy – “You can leave Newfoundland off an exercise book, but you can’t erase us” – was a blunt reminder that geography is not just about lines on a page, but about people and their experiences. The incomplete map also raised questions about what it means to be Canadian: if some provinces are left out of the national narrative, do they really feel part of the country?

Sean Cadigan, a history professor at Memorial University in St. John’s, pointed out that Newfoundland did not join Canada until 1949 – and even before that, it was often left off maps and descriptions of the country. This is not just an old habit, but also a reflection of the complex and sometimes fraught relationship between Newfoundland and the rest of Canada.

The apology issued by Hilroy’s parent company, ACCO Brands, has been welcomed as a step in the right direction – but it also raises questions about accountability and responsibility. If the mistake was due to human error, why did it take so long to notice? What measures are being taken to prevent such mistakes from happening again?

The map on Hilroy’s notebooks may seem like a trivial issue, but it speaks to deeper concerns about identity, geography, and what it means to be part of a country. As we move forward, it’s worth considering not just how we create maps, but also how we understand and respect the complexities of place and culture.

Newfoundland and Cape Breton may be small in terms of population, but they have a large presence in the national conversation – and it’s time we start listening to their stories. The controversy highlights the need for more nuanced discussions about Canadian identity – one that acknowledges the country’s diversity and complexity, rather than trying to impose a single narrative or definition.

It remains to be seen whether Hilroy will follow through on its promise to correct the map and improve its design process. However, one thing is certain: the controversy has sparked an important conversation about geography, identity, and what it means to be Canadian.