I don’t
like David Suzuki. That’s been the case for many years now, ever since I showed
up at a book-signing in Victoria to interview him and discovered that the man I
had thought of as a kind, wise environmentalist was in fact an obnoxious, rude
guy who made no attempt to hide his contempt of the fans gazing at him all
fawn-eyed and adoring.
I’ve generally
kept my opinion of him to myself, however, for fear of seeming un-Canadian. I
don’t know what the process is for becoming a beloved Canadian icon, but have
long recognized that once someone achieves that status, any Canadian who dares
to say otherwise is really in for it.
But a story this week from the Sun Media chain was just too good for me to pass up. The story
featured a series of emails from John Abbott College in Quebec about Suzuki
receiving more than $40,000 in fees and expenses for a speaking
engagement at the college in October.
I posted
the story on Facebook and mentioned the long-ago book signing as my reason for
being a bit gleeful at seeing Suzuki in the muck. Within minutes, dozens of people had posted
comments. Within an hour, there were almost 50 comments and 20 “shares” of my link
to the story. By this morning, the comments were up to 62 and there’d been 26
shares.
And the people
writing the comments were MAD: Mad at Suzuki for being rude and horrible to
them at some point as well; mad at me; mad at Sun Media; mad at the
Conservatives (not sure how they got dragged into the debate); mad at anyone
saying mean things about a man who’d done such great things for environmental
awareness.
“WOW! You
hit a hotspot here!” noted one Facebook friend.
Clearly. There was a lot of passion
in people’s comments, whether out of love for Suzuki and the work he has done
or because others also had lingering feelings of bitter betrayal after being treated
roughly and rudely by him.
Ultimately,
the heated exchange brings to mind that old saw about whether you can hate the
sin but love the sinner. Can we admire Suzuki’s work while also acknowledging
that at times he's an arrogant, unpleasant jerk?
I’d guess
that all of us have done things in our lives that we’re not proud of. So I’m
always pretty careful to avoid assessing the total sum of a person based on the
dumb decisions or big mistakes they’ve made.
I think it’s
possible to make good presidential decisions while also being a pathetic
womanizer, or to be an amazing athlete even while lying blatantly over a very
long time about your use of performance-enhancing drugs. You can’t take the
measure of a person’s contribution to this world solely by looking at their
worst errors in judgment.
That said,
there are obviously some acts that tend to knock you right out of everybody’s good
books forever – pedophilia, violence against your spouse or children, planning someone’s
murder, ripping off vulnerable people or charities, racism. Personally, I find
hypocrisy very difficult to forgive as well, which is why I now count as
unredeemable fallen stars like Elliot Spitzer, Lance Armstrong, Tiger Woods, and
a long list of two-faced pseudo-Christians in the U.S. who foment hatred and judgment while behaving loathsomely in private.
With David
Suzuki, that’s a harder call to make. The stories of his rough treatment of
people are numerous enough that we can conclude he’s got a real capacity to be
a rude, arrogant bastard. But hey, the world is full of guys like that, and
mostly I don’t waste a thought on them.
So why does
Suzuki’s bad behaviour evoke such passion – in me and all the people on that
Facebook thread?
One problem
is that he just SEEMS so amiable and kind when we see him on TV that we come to
believe that it’s true - that we “know” the man. Then we meet him in person, witness
him treating us or his fans rudely, and feel an astonished sense of betrayal
that he isn’t who we thought he was.
For others –
people who haven’t met him yet, I suspect - Suzuki’s personal “brand” is so
synonymous with being a responsible, caring and aware citizen of the natural
world that any attack on the man is seen as an attack on environmentalism.
In this
particular case, there was also the fact that Suzuki’s college-girl demands and
enormous speaking fees were played up heavily by a controversial media network that’s
more or less the Fox News of Canada. It’s a muck-raking, biased network that
responsible, caring and aware citizens of the natural world love to hate.
At the end
of the day, the story has confirmed rather than changed my opinion of Suzuki. That he might want pretty young women to walk
alongside him to hold all those annoying fans at bay is not much of a surprise
to me, because I witnessed his arrogance in Tanner’s Books many years ago and
know that arrogant men see themselves as outside the rules that govern the rest
of us.
I do feel
for the people who are having their rose-coloured glasses torn away for the
first time, though. I remember how that
felt.
As for the
enormous speaking fees and the fact that Suzuki did indeed get that phalanx of
girl bodyguards he requested, that reflects most poorly on the Quebec public
college that agreed to those demands. What were they thinking? What truly good works at the college might that $40,000 fee have funded?
That college
administrators didn’t hesitate in providing Suzuki with attractively dressed
female students also gives the lie to decades of big talk about not objectifying
women. Our academic institutions have often led that conversation, and it’s very
disappointing to see that the commitment to respectful treatment of women lasts
only until a coveted speaker makes a sexist demand.
However, I can
separate the personal from the professional. I still love the environment and
those who have dedicated their lives to the struggle. I’m thankful for the work
of the David Suzuki Foundation and Suzuki himself. I will not let my personal feelings
for Suzuki detract from my appreciation of his work.
But I’ll
also give my instincts a quiet little high-five for being right all those years
ago, when I first caught a glimpse of a very different man underneath that genial
smile.