Canada’s unofficial national sport, hockey, is an enormous part of Canadian culture. Many Canadian citizens have contrasting views on how the game is perceived. In my essay I am going to explore the variations between Gzowski and Coupland view against Cormack and Cosgrave’s. Within the paper I will also express my opinion on how I perceive the wonderful game of hockey.
Gzowski and Coupland approach Canadian hockey as our nations pride. They both explain in their readings how every Canadian of every class, region and gender loved the game. They perceived hockey as a part of Canada and our culture that grew with us and into our society. However, not everyone might watch it through the television or the radio, but every individual Canadian knows something about the game and takes pride in it. As stated by Peter Gzowski in “Hockey Was Us”, “Television was only one mirror of hockey’s appeal”, there were journalist, novelists and play writers all equally passionate about hockey. In the reading by Peter Gzowski, he describes his childhood and how hockey played a major role in his life. Because of his love for the game, Gzowski furthered his enjoyment for hockey into a…show more content… The chapter ‘Our Game’: Hockey, Civilizing Projects and Domestic Violence perceived hockey to be a “social relation between the people and the state”. The reading talks to many different people and their perspectives on the game. Michael Novak perceived the game as a secular religion. Novak expressed his thought on hockey as being a “natural religion” which influences the emotional and violence responses to those who believe. Another person, Roy McGregor, novelist and journalist, had the same opinion as Novak. He believed that the goal Sidney Crosby scored in the 2010 Olympic finals triggered an emotional response to Canada’s victory, explaining that it testifies to a secular-religious