Nothing to add

It is sad and disappointing. The Globe and Mail story revealing Norm Hardie’s interactions with some staff, co-workers and others was well researched, thorough and utterly disheartening. That Hardie himself has since corroborated some of the claims is further dispiriting.

The Times reporters and publisher, as well as this columnist, have been challenged in recent days for not wading into this story— admittedly a big deal in our community. We stand accused of fumbling our responsibility by not retelling the Globe findings in these pages.

These are fair and understandable criticisms.

Yet it is not at all clear to me, even now, what we might add to this story that would be useful or illuminating to our readers. At least not yet. The story has been throroughly circulated in our community. And widely discussed. There has scarcely been a gathering of more than a couple people over the past week or so in which Hardie’s behaviour hasn’t been the topic of conversation and consternation.

I struggle see to see the value in merely regurgitating the Globe story or Hardie’s response, both of which are well established in this community’s consciousness.

There may yet be further revelations— perhaps more details uncovered by this newspaper. And readers can be assured that if that happens we will report it.

Further, there is no moral ambiguity to this story. It is creepy and worrying. There is no “on the other hand” rationalization to these complaints—to these advances. There is no debate, no extenuating circumstances. Only degrees of creepiness.

There is also the very real risk of appearing to ‘mansplain’ what is apparent to everyone. Is there really a need for another man to acknowledge what is obvious? I don’t believe our readers need this newspaper to tell them these actions are wrong, despicable and hurtful.

It is certainly fair and appropriate that readers are permitted to express their views and opinions through the letters to the editor— within bounds of decency and legal propriety. And these have been placed front and centre in these pages and that will continue.

Other comments, however, have seemed either rash, a piling on, or an over-eager need to distance the writer from a brand that has until recently helped propel the County’s economic growth. Too many of these declarations feel self-serving—and in doing so tend to distract from the important discussion we are all having as a result of this story.

There are other interesting bits, but I fail to see them as adding to our understanding to this serious issue.

For example, I have minor quibbles to the Globe story and the coverage by other venues such as CBC’s As it Happens and The Toronto Star.

Norman Hardie didn’t invent Prince Edward County, nor is he the founder of the County wine sector. Nor is this community the exclusive retreat of the hip and cool. It is much more than this—but complexity makes a far less interesting, less dramatic story.

It was necessary, therefore, for these news outlets to inflate Hardie’s importance and the role he plays in this economy in order for his fall to have greater impact. This community had to be tarnished, as well, in order to put the drama in sharp relief. Had the same revelations been made at XYZ warehouse in Eganville or Cornwall, I don’t expect they would appear in the Globe and Mail.

Yet, this small complaint is meaningless in the broader context of this issue.

The story, too, has a Shakespearean quality. The fact that Norman Hardie’s name is so intrinsically woven into the brand, the product and marketing of his winery, is intriguing. Both his given and family name. It is not unusual for a product—especially one that lives or dies by personal craftsmanship—to bear the family name. It is far less common that both first and last name come to define the marketing and branding the way his has. A more insightful observer might even suggest it may be reflective of over-sized ego that would presume his advances were welcome.

But even in these bits of speculation, I find little merit. More distraction than useful information.

So perhaps it isn’t necessary to chew on every bit of scandal, to gnaw on every new morsel of detail— whether real or speculated.

Perhaps it is enough for us to sit quietly and think about the significance of such events in terms of our own lives. As a dad to three bright, able and strong young women, there are important messages for them in this story.

They don’t need me to explain what they are.

rick@wellingtontimes.ca