Ruin Nation: Richard Hancox’s Moose Jaw or “Now it’s an air town” by Lianne McLarty (May 1990)

 

Nationalism serves contradictory ends. It can preclude differences in the interests of imposing a fictitious homogeneity over diverse regions and identities. Yet, it can also mitigate against such an imposition of universality by articulating precisely those histories the concept of unity occludes. The question of nation necessitates both a consideration of the ways in which nationalism is mobilized in the interests of established power, as well as an exploration of how articulations of the specificities of identity and place can resist those imperatives. Richard Hancox’s experimental documentary Moose Jaw (1990), explored this double impulse of nationalism. It demystifies the concept of nation by suggesting that its signifiers are inextricably linked to economic interests, a technological will to mastery and colonialization. Nation is understood as the imposition of an economic, technological and racial order onto geographical locations. MJ reveals that “the nation” is in ruins. In his attention to the inextricable link between identity and place, Hancox points out these ruins are seen most clearly from the margins.

 

That identity is inconceivable outside of place is suggested from the outset of the film. The first image in MJ is of overhead highway signs directing the way to the city and points beyond. Hancox also uses this signifier of place for the title and director credits, grounding his film in the particular. His authorial presence is clearly suggested by the title “Rick Hancox’s MJ,” but his identity is also inscribed by place; the other title reads “with Moose Jaw’s Rick Hancox.” This insistence that identity cannot be understood outside of a broader context is repeated in the point of view shot which shortly follows of Hancox holding a childhood photograph in front of him against the place it was taken. As if to emphasize place-in this case his boyfriend home-the image is cropped so that Hancox and his mother are positioned to one side of the frame. Notions of identity, invoked by the photograph, are not only historically, but spatially specific. Indeed, the first visual reference to Hancox is a shot of his shadow (taken with a hand-held camera which he holds at his side) as he walks along railway tracks; his presence is articulated in a specific context (MJ is, or used to be, a rail town). His shadow, assuming the shape of the rails and ties, fuses, as it were, with the place.

 

The intercutting of old family photographs with public places (like the train station and a national park), as well as the commentary by Hancox and his parents which emphasize the place depicted in the photographs, suggest a fusion of the autobiographical with social places and events. This is particularly prominent in the commentary heard over an image of the building where Mr. Hancox once worked. Recollections of private significance about knowing Molly and Jack who used to live in the back, and Molly hanging out laundry, turn into a story about her witnessing a mid-air crash. Private events collide with the publically significant.

 

Using fragments of his autobiography as the vehicle, Hancox suggests that identity is site specific and therefore contingent on the system of signs that constitute that site. He invokes himself as directorial presence in point of view shots in which his hands are often seen, as well as in shots of him with his camera taken from another perspective. But, he also demonstrates that this identity, as filmmaker, is constructed in relation to cultural landscapes. It is significant that when Hancox positions himself in the frame—that is, when we see him in the “third person”—is it in relation to cultural discourses (reading a book, watching TV, going through an archival filing cabinet, posing in front of an antique car with his camera as if part of a museum display, and pressing his face against a train window in what could be read as a parody of the tourist, the ultimate consumer of culture.)

 

In fact, the two stories Hancox’s parents tell about his childhood frame him within the parameters of consumer culture: his mother and father recount stories about Eaton’s and the Super Market respectively. The first time we hear the name “Richard” called—this is a recurring aural motif—is in the context of his mother’s Eaton’s story about calling him in the women’s department when it was time to leave. Later in the film, Hancox’s identity is still attached to the now deserted Eaton’s, this time by his father’s voice. When his mother calls “Richard” Hancox cuts to a young male and an adult female in a store display, unabashedly linking his identity with the culture of consumer capitalism. This shot is followed by an image of a store display window in which reflections of Hancox, as well as the Super Market sign, are visible. Soon after, Hancox’s father recounts that the Super Market manager, significantly, threatened to pull his advertising from the newspaper for which Mr. Hancox worked, if he didn’t come down and stop his son from rolling cans in the aisles. Hancox’s childhood, and by extension his identity, is consumed by signs of consumption.

 

The image of Hancox lying in the berth is the only time he is shown not in relation to culture (either as maker or consumer); he immediately turns out the light-this subject cannot  be seen outside of the culture which surrounds him. In fact, his name is even turned into music at the end of the film when he combines it with a techno-beat. “Richard” (and the abbreviated “Rich”) is repeated to the point of meaninglessness; even his name is no guarantee of an individual identity outside of cultural constructions. MJ’s point that identity is formed in relation to culture is underlined by Hancox’s construction of himself as a tourist: he goes “home,” but home is, to paraphrase Ursula Le Guin, a place he’s never been (the town has changed). He visits the tourist sits and reads travel brochures on the train ride into MJ. As a tourist his goal is not just to see the sites, but to consume the sites he sees.

 

MJ weaves this concern with identity as not only cultural recollection, but of cultural collection, into the context of historic and contemporary Moose Jaw. Hancox suggests that the past (like identity) is only retrievable as signs (memory is a photograph, a newspaper article). He also reminds us that the same is true of the present. Actual business signs are a dominant image in the film but Hancox generally constructs MJ as a collection of signs primarily through the motif of tourism. MJ is introduced as a tourist site through Mac the Moose and a voice-over commentary that explains how the community hosted dinners to raise money for a “spanking new tourist information booth.” Reference is also made to a visitor who b ought a souvenir cap and went looking for tourist attractions. This commentary, with its reference to dining and shopping, clearly emphasizes consumption but it is, particularly, the consumption of signs of MJ (moose burgers were even featured at one of the diners). The museum exhibits and gift shop (with their rows of MJ paraphernalia) further code the city in relation to a tourist economy and the production and circulation of images of itself. Even the residents of the city are constructed as tourists in their own town: they can eat at the “Café Arizona” and gamble at “Las Vegas of the North.” The only time Hancox actually shows people, they are spectators at a parade: promotional culture for the community which allows visual consumption of it for its members.

 

Yet, Hancox reminds us that the signs which constitute place cannot necessarily be trusted. Interestingly, a shot of the crowd at the parade taken from above the street-the parade is out of sight-constructs them as spectators of nothing. Like Mac the Moose, “Las Vegas of the North” and the “Café Arizona,” the parade is a sign of place which is out of place, literally out of the frame. While these representations can be read as an expression of a desire to be somewhere else through the appropriation of other cultures, they also point to the artificiality of signs generally. For example, a white friend of Hancox informs the viewer that his band has to “pretend to be Mexican for three days” for the opening of the Café Arizona; Hancox later focuses on the poster for the events which promises “Live Latin Entertainment.” These signs are suspect, they don’t hold water: Mac the Moose, we are told, leaks.

 

The signs of place Hancox foregrounds are empty, they refer to nothing-this is especially evident in the frequent images of signs (many in disrepair) on the buildings of closed businesses. In some cases, all that literally remains is the sign. The Temple Gardens ballroom was demolished for a parking lot but, as Hancox points out, “The sign’s still there.” As if to emphasize “nothing,” Hancox focuses on a building and zooms out so that the parking lot in front consumes the frame. This image belies the sense of plenty invoked in the voice-over which lists a variety of products manufactured in MJ. Similarly, a voice-overreports of the closing of a Robin Hood mill “that gave MJ its mill city nickname.” The nickname remains but it drained of its meaning as the material relations and economic potential suggested by the mill vanishes. A grain terminal is turned into a complex with many facades and the train station is literally empty: we’re told, “It’s like a dungeon in there.” It, too, is just a façade: Hancox is unable to get inside to film. As one voice-over comments about the effects of the rail cuts on MJ, “Now it’s an air town.”

 

More particularly, the railway, as an icon of regional as well as national identity, is shown to be rooted in economic imperatives (“They watch out for themselves; their decisions are made in Toronto;” they’re only interested in the bottom line). It is in the disparity between the promise of prosperity offered by the railroad and the current economic deprivation, that the train, as sign of “national unity,” is de-railed. The railway is shown to be a symbolic currency motivated by centralized interests generated by its historic role in making unification, in the form of federation, possible. It is interesting that the train which is trashed is “The Canadian,” its project in ruins. Since it no longer serves the economy’s need it is reduced to a meaningless sign, a frozen museum exhibit.

 

It is Hancox’s concern not just with signs of place but with the material relations that constitute that place and the relationship between the two, that prevents MJ from slipping into a nihilistic postmodern lament about the death of the social and the triumph of simulacra. One of the reasons that signs of place are so clearly suspect in MJ is that Hancox is careful to draw attention to the disparity between signs of well-being and the lived experience of economic deprivation. It is in this sense that signs are empty. When the signifier and the experience are irreconcilable the artificiality of the sign is more evident, its relation to nothing more apparent. This is most poignantly expressed in the relation drawn between Mulroney’s official discourse about economic prosperity (“Canada has one of the highest standards of living and one of the best qualities of life”) and images of rural poverty and a defunct business. The business is, ironically, named “Comet Transport.” Despite Mulroney’s declaration of progress, this business has come to a full stop (we see a shot of one of its abandoned trailers). Similarly, the city council chambers are luxuriously renovated (for the third time since 1961) but the public sites to which Hancox refers are barren and deserted. MJ draws attention to the economic effects of budget cuts to the railway through recurring images of closed businesses with boarded windows and voice-over commentary about how the town is hurting. For example, when asked what she would do with a five hundred dollar shopping spree by a radio host, a caller replies that she has “two boys at home” and would buy groceries. This is followed by a sign advertising “all you can eat” and images of Hancox in an otherwise empty restaurant with a half-eaten dinner he seems to have abandoned. Again there is a disparity between the promise of consumption (in excess) and the reality that there is no one dining. As if to underline the disparity, Hancox signals his own privilege in his choice not to finish his meal. Signs of consumption (physical sustenance) are undermined by the lived experience of economic disenfranchisement the film foregrounds.

 

MJ’s general movement from a prosperous past to a deprived present mitigates against the notion of history as progress. Hancox’s father reminisces about a time when the town was “alive,” as opposed to the dungeon it’s become. History is not only not progress, it might very well signify the opposite. A voice-over extolling modern Western societies’ technological accomplishments is juxtaposed with reports of death by transport (one man died when his tractor overturned, six sixteen year old boys were killed in a car crash and thirty seven died in the mid-air collision referred to earlier-this last example is related in some detail). In focusing on a history of technological, as well as other disasters, Hancox avoids a nostalgic lament for the past. The city sat under several feet of dirty and water and a house exploded with no apparent cause. Even his childhood memories are marked by violence: bbs were lodged in someone’s chin, he and his friends waged a “pitched battled in the street,” and suffered the principle’s strap.

 

MJ is not only no nostalgic, it reveals how signs of nation and the technological tools that support it collude with the imperatives of colonialism. Hancox implicates the train in the project of colonization through a drawing of a steam engine speeding through the prairie landscape. The engine serves the dual function of dispersing the buffalo on the tracks ahead and providing support for white settlers to fight off charging natives. This re-signification of the train as a tool of colonization avoids a romanticization of it and challenges the idea of history as technological progress; the question is, progress for whom?

 

This question is addressed in the sequence which follows. A Native legend about starving brothers who turn into stars is heard over images of rows of RCAF planes and is intercut with an account of the inauguration of the Saskatchewan provincial government which invokes blatantly racist stereotypes in its description of Native peoples. Technology and the discourse of colonialism displace the native story; native history is suppressed, a fascination with stars is turned into a fascination with instruments of empire. Natives’ explanation of their own realties (in the form of the legends) is supplanted by the colonial construction of them as “grotesque and gaudy.” Yet, Hancox turns the tables and assumes this identity for the colonizer as he cuts to an image of a plane which has been turned into a monument. It is the will to master the stars (rather than become them) that is grotesque and gaudy. The marginalization of native histories by dominating discourses is also made apparent as Hancox cuts from the Native legend to images of animated dinosaurs and tombstones over which are heard a report of the Queen’s 1959 visit to MJ and Mulroney trying to explain the reasons for the cuts to VIA train. Official discourses replace and drown out the fainter sounds of native drumming and chanting; the colonizer (both monarch and federalist) is associated with death-the account of the Queen’s visit even reports on the death of her driver, tellingly in the limo. This section ends with an out of turn version of a monarchist song and images of photographic negatives of the royal visit. The official discourse of Ottawa is contested as well: on a couple of occasions Hancox edits Mulroney’s voice to repeat pat political phrases rendering it nonsensical.

 

That native histories are still suppressed by colonial interests is evident as Hancox cuts from the legend sequence to a museum brochure which invites us to “be a time traveler” as it displays images of white settlers. A similar point is made when he juxtaposes a voice-over which refers to a map of MJ made in 1703 by a royal geographer with an image of a bookstore window in which a sign advertising “Westerns” is prominently displayed. The commentary foregrounds the colonial privilege of mapping, the thus claiming, territory, and of re-naming the culture as well (“what he(the royal geographer) called the late moose jaw culture”)-he even has the privilege to declare it deceased. The cut to the store ad for Western novels suggests another example of the privilege to construct history through images of nation and, importantly, the continuation of this practice in the present.

 

While MJ is about the interconnectedness of identity and place it also challenges those very terms. Hancox does not posit a stable, individual identity, or subject, but one in flux (in the final section, the landscape, seen from his perspective from the train window, alternates direction from one shot to the next). This is an identity inscribed by multiple (and conflicting) cultural discourses (one of the final images of Hancox is as multiple reflections in mirrors). Similarly, place is not the natural landscape but a museum, a collection of cultural artifacts. In drawing attention to how certain constructions of place privilege some identities (in this case regional and racial) over others, Hancox demonstrates the need to dismantle a nationalism which has as its project the suppression of differences in the interests of economic and racial dominance. MJ challenges the authority of such empty signs as the railway and the monarchy to signify nation and reminds us, “all that is solid melts into air.”