{"id":28,"date":"2015-07-24T12:16:42","date_gmt":"2015-07-24T19:16:42","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/470classconference\/?page_id=28"},"modified":"2015-08-14T21:50:17","modified_gmt":"2015-08-15T04:50:17","slug":"annotated-bibliographies","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/470classconference\/annotated-bibliographies\/","title":{"rendered":"Annotated Bibliographies"},"content":{"rendered":"

Jocelyn Bussieres
\n<\/strong><\/h3>\n

I plan to look at Indigenous ways of knowing as articulated within the academy as both a form of resistance to and in relation with Western epistemologies. While I do intend to continue to narrow my research more specifically to highlight the voices of First Nations’ people within the Canadian context, I will also be drawing on the anti-colonial discourses of sociologists of colour such as Patricia Hill Collins and GJS Dei. While not wishing to homogenize or create a hierarchy for experiences of violence and oppression as key factors that inform and limit Indigenous ways of knowing, I hope to highlight similarities and contrasts between different the different frameworks of colonization that the Western historical cannon allows. With this, I will put a focus on not only Western epistemologies but the faculty\/study of History, and how this can be challenged by Indigenous knowledges and memories.<\/p>\n

In attempting to compare and contrast historical discourses around colonization and oppression (and the symbiotic Western epistemologies involved), I will be using an intersectional approach that keeps in mind the interconnectedness of capitalism, heteropatriarchy, violence and colonialism. An example of this would be looking at capitalism in the academy and in colonial discourses in Canada and how this informs Western epistemologies and both devalues and appropriates Indigenous knowledge systems.<\/p>\n

Shahjahan, Ahmed Riyad. \u201cMapping the Field of Anti-Colonial Discourse To Understand Issues\u00a0of Indigenous Knowledges: Decolonizing Praxis.\u201d McGill Journal of Education. <\/i>213-240(2005). Web. 3 August 2015.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Riyad A. Shahjahan looks at anti-oppressive and anti\/post-colonial pedagogies within the Western system of higher education. In\u00a0Who Am I? Reclaiming the Self,\u00a0<\/em>Shahjahan is explicit in identifying his own voice as a scholar and writer (a Bangladeshi, able-bodied male), directly challenging pursuits within the academy to obscure or disregard one’s voice\/background\/identity in the name of “objectivity”. Said objectivity simply assumes sameness in the backgrounds of readers and imposes a presumptuous homogenizing truth in one’s work, language and thought frameworks.<\/p>\n

Shahjahan speaks as a member of the academy, who uses academic theory and writing as a means for resistance, decolonization and healing\u00a0<\/em>(with a heavy emphasis on the importance of spirituality in knowledge systems not to be rejected in the name of “rationality”), but is also critical of this challenging relationship of using the masters tool’s to dismantle the master’s house, “we are transfixed in Eurocentric modes of thought, in that we have an ambivalence towards its ideas, even though we must decolonize the academy.” (229)<\/p>\n

One of his strongest discussions is around language in anti-colonial academic writing. He asks, “who are we writing for?” and notes that much anti-colonial scholarship is “exclusive to a certain readership” (231) He attempts to navigate this in his discussion around spirituality, and engaging personal\/spiritual knowledge and memory with higher learning and theory. Shahjahan is effective in approach to Indigenous knowledges as, knowledges\u00a0<\/em>and not static. This is important to acknowledge that while history, memory and tradition are vital to Indigenous ways of knowing, they “are cumulative in that they are able to combine with the complexities and particularities of modern world systems.” (227). Furthermore, he notes that “Western” knowledges have appropriated Indigenous knowledges, and while Western epistemologies are oppressive and violent, the relationships between ways of knowing are often symbiotic (symbiotic does not infer sameness or equality).<\/p>\n

McIssac, Elizabeth. \u201cOral Narratives as a Site of Resistance: Indigenous Knowledge, Colonialism\u00a0and Western Discourse.\u201d Indigenous Knowledges in Global Contexts: Multiple Readings of <\/i>Our World. <\/i>89-91 (2000). Web. 6 August 2015.\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

I feel that I need to begin my discussion of McIssac’s article with the fact that I did find it, in some areas, problematic, distant, and not a voice that I wish to particularly highlight in this conference. I am adding it to this anobib because of McIssac’s discussion around “class consciousness” and “colonial consciousness”, with a heavy focus on the intersectionalities between capitalism, colonialism and historical discourses. \u00a0I take issue in McIssac’s identity as a non-Indigenous woman doing research surrounding First Nation’s orality and “consciousness”. Her article takes a particularly anthropological and voyeuristic tone, and while she acknowledges her positionality and notes that one of the biggest challenges in her research is this “mediation of orality” (who hears, interprets and relays the interviews), in which she is imposing all of her own epistemologies as a non-Indigenous woman, speaking about Indigenous consciousness. The article does seem to operate within the problematic realm of Wester epistemology as introduced\u00a0by Coleman, and could potentially be used as an example of oppressive imposition of these limiting frameworks.<\/p>\n

Specifically, this article focuses on the Kimmirut Inuit community in Northern Baffin Island. McIssac interviewed elders to gain an understanding of how Inuit narratives and “consciousness” (around class and colonialism) fall into the “confines of historical materialism” (87) and whether “[traditional practices and oral storytelling acting as forms of] resistance rearticulate or subvert dominant discourses.” (89)<\/p>\n

McIssac’s use of language around definitions of “class and colonial consciousness” emphasize knowledge in reaction to oppression and within the frameworks of capitalist belief systems. McIssac acknowledges the fact that her focus of class consciousness relies on Western epistemologies that are heavily informed by capitalist belief systems. She emphasizes the significant role that capitalism (as a discourse, language and hegemonic norm) plays is colonialism, and Western epistemologies in the realm of History. When capitalistic values and language are not part of traditional Inuit knowledge systems, the histories, discourses and “class consciousnesses” do not translate to the epistemological frameworks presented by Western discourses around colonization and its ongoing legacy.<\/p>\n

Gretta Dattan<\/strong><\/h3>\n

I want to look deeper into\u00a0the reading of Indigenous Canadian literature through Western epidemiological terms\u00a0contrasted with the analysis of Australian Aboriginal literature. Indigenous peoples on both the Australian and North American continents were colonized primarily by the British and both have as a result undergone somewhat similar horrors over the past few centuries and\u00a0continue to suffer under similar social and economic constraints and conditions. I want to explore how Coleman’s concepts can be compared and applied to peoples and cultures outside of Canada. Oftentimes literature by oppressed Indigenous communities is considered to be primarily\u00a0political\u00a0and involve expressions of hardship and difficulty resulting from centuries of suppression and genocide, \u00a0or to simply be ‘primitive’. This view needs to be reconsidered, I believe the articles below begin to explore how varied both Australian Aboriginal and Canadian Indigenous literature is and how we can begin to approach both in a respectful, aware way. For decades the distorted lens of the colonizer’s Eurocentric literary analysis has robbed Indigenous and Aboriginal works\u00a0of the respect they deserve.<\/p>\n

Gilbert, Helen. “Black and White and Re(a)d All over Again: Indigenous Minstrelsy in Contemporary Canadian and Australian Theatre.”Theatre Journal<\/i> 55.4, Theatre and Activism (2003): 679-98. JSTOR<\/i>. Web. 02 Aug. 2015.<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n

Helen Gilbert<\/a>, a professor at Royal Holloway University outside of London, specializes in the theatrical expression of marginalized communities. In her riveting article she explores how theatrical whiteface can be seen as a, “revisionist tactic designed to deflect-and reverse-the imperial gaze and critique the racist stereotypes it has circulated.” The concept of claiming whiteness on the stage is portrayed as a liberation and an opportunity for Indigenous theater to explore, analyze, and experience\u00a0European\u00a0artistic perspectives from the inside out. Obviously Indigenous Peoples have long been forced to submit to the constraints of European artistic theory, creation, criticism, etc. but in the case of whiteface the Indigenous person\u00a0is empowered and explores Western artistic creation through choice and action.<\/p>\n

However, can the use of white face in theater be at all likened to the Indigenous use of European literary styles and forms when used in an intentionally subversive manner? Could this be the ‘white face’ of literature? The fantasy of theater and of racial changes on the stage plays with white settler fears and fantastical delusions about the Indigenous experience. Can the white settler have the same experience watching a white face production as reading politically pointed Indigenous literature-that of displacement, confusion, and perhaps a new understanding? As Gilbert stresses in her article, white face performance is both a social critique and release. She writes, “by stressing the performativity of race alongside the enormous power (still) invested in skin color as a categorizing and stratifying tool, indigenous whiteface acts directly address the racial hierarchies that have undergirded the settler\/invader cultures in which they are staged.” However, is white face necessary to generate these ideas, feelings, and thoughts? Could white face actually be counter productive and alienate all white audiences to the point that they no longer engage with the ideas and themes present in the piece?<\/p>\n

Haig-Brown, Celia. “Indigenous Thought, Appropriation, and Non-Aboriginal People.” Canadian Journal of Education \/ Revue Canadienne De L’\u00e9ducation<\/i> 33.4 (2010): 925-50. JSTOR<\/i>. Web. 02 Aug. 2015.<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

In her piece, “Indigenous Thought, Appropriation, and Non-Aboriginal People,” York University’s\u00a0Celia Haig-Brown<\/a>\u00a0explores the\u00a0possible answers to the question,\u00a0\u201cWhat is the relationship between appropriation of Indigenous thought and what might be called \u2018deep learning\u2019 based in years of education in Indigenous contexts?” After searching to find the true meaning of cultural appropriation<\/a>, she relies on the knowledge of the First Nations Peoples of British Columbia to help guide her better understand how Indigenous culture is undervalued, appropriated, and subjected to the Procrustean Bed of Western Literary criticism. Her passion to help support Indigenous literature while also acknowledging the dangers of appropriation and misinterpretation and misidentification make for a truly interesting web of ideas and thoughts.<\/p>\n

In the article, Haig-Brown delves into what she determines to be three different kinds of cultural appropriation, those being, “: (a) commercial exploitation, (b) modernist \u201caffinity,\u201d and (c) post\u2010modern quotation.” Each brand of appropriation comes with its own set of distinct moral and cultural issues while also isolating Indigenous communities. One particularly interesting kind of appropriation that Haig-Brown explores is that of bio-piracy<\/a> in which genetic information is taken from Indigenous peoples for DNA research. Could the British system of trying to eliminate Australian Aboriginals through preventing Aboriginal Peoples from marrying and having children also be considered a form of biological appropriation? Obviously it is already a colonial suppression and violence against the community but, by attempting to take control of Aboriginal genetics, could it be said to also be biological appropriation-which continues to this day as a genetic legacy?<\/p>\n

Haig-Brown also explores the difficulties around the study of Indigenous art, stating, “Not only within the arts does such colonial occupation recur. What does it mean and what happens when one (attempts to or) does occupy culturally\u2010 based concepts, beliefs, values, and thought processes for purposes other than what may have initially been intended by the originators? What is the significance of original intentions and the world unfolding in unanticipated ways?” This sparks many interesting ideas and reflections that should be observed when encountering Indigenous art and text–how does one study Indigenous literature and art with respect and knowledge?<\/p>\n

Justice, Daniel Heath. “Introduction: Conjuring Marks: Furthering Indigenous Empowerment through Literature.” The American Indian Quarterly<\/i> 28.1 (2004): 3-11. JSTOR<\/i>. Web. 30 July 2015.<\/strong><\/span><\/a><\/p>\n

In his article, “Introduction: Conjuring Marks: Furthering Indigenous Empowerment through Literature<\/a>,” Daniel Heath Justice expounds upon the immense importance the written word has always had for Indigenous communities. Justice <\/a>is a both a writer and a professor at UBC where he teaches First Nations Literature and leads advanced research courses. In his article he describes the challenge of leaving behind the web of Western thought and theory when we approach Indigenous literature, and he acknowledges the difficulty in doing so. In a sentiment which mirrors the purpose of this conference, he concludes his article with the words, “Good intentions alone do not decolonize bodies and spirits–it takes action and commitment to do that. Healing, like education, is an active process. Writing about decolonization does not much matter unless we live its principles and-like these writers-take the risk of sending them out into the world.”<\/p>\n

Justice raises important concerns regarding Indigenous relationships with the written word. He writes, “Native peoples in North America have a long and often vexed relationship with the unpredictable power of the written word. Those marks on paper, hide, bark, and canvas have served as both tools of liberation for Indigenous communities and as weapons of devastation used against them. Indigenous peoples were literate in their own systems of meaning long before Eurowestern colonization, but European-derived languages and their various forms of transmission (often forced or coerced) created a very different relationship to literacy, one which was formative to the Christianizing and “civilizing” processes of Eurowestern colonization.” The Indigenous experience with literature and writing itself is varied, complex, and very different from the settler experience. The complex and layered relationship between Indigenous communities and individual and literature should always be understood and respected when approaching an Indigenous text, but what is the best way to do this, to view the literature itself through a sociohistorical\u00a0lens of awareness?<\/p>\n

\u010cer\u010de, Danica. “Social Protest and Beyond in Australian Indigenous Poetry: Romaine Moreton, Alf Taylor and Michael J. Smith.” Antipodes<\/i> 26.2 (2012): 143-49. JSTOR<\/i>. Web. 02 Aug. 2015.<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n

In her article, “Social Protest and Beyond in Australian Indigenous Poetry: Romaine Moreton, Alf Taylor and Michael J. Smith,” Dania\u00a0\u010cer\u010de\u00a0<\/a>\u00a0explores the\u00a0various ways to analyze Australian Indigenous Poetry. She describes the difficulty of analyzing Aboriginal poetry<\/a> as she\u00a0avoids relying on Western theory and\u00a0while appreciating historical and socioeconomic background, also works to appreciate the art in itself without Western influences.<\/p>\n

Cerce\u00a0also\u00a0explores the complexities surrounding critical review of Aboriginal literature and how resistance and sociopolitical criticism is expressed through Aboriginal poetry. Highlighting artists such as Romaine Moreton<\/a>, Cerce also looks at how the power of Aboriginal words contrast sharply with the hollowness of the Australian government’s statements<\/a> apologizing for the horrors of colonization. Our governments and leaders need to be aware of Indigenous understandings and should work to view\u00a0their writings, statements, and speeches through an Indigenous perspective, not simply a Western one.<\/p>\n

\n

 <\/p>\n

\u010cer\u010de, PhD, Danica. “Associate Professor Danica \u010cer\u010de, PhD.” University of Ljubljana Staff<\/i>. University of Ljubljana, n.d. Web. Aug. 2015.<\/div>\n
DeGeers, Marcia Ellen. “Biopiracy: The Appropriation of Indigenous Peoples\u2019 Cultural Knowledge.” Biopiracy: The Appropriation of Indigenous Peoples\u2019 Cultural Knowledge<\/i> (n.d.): n. pag. University of New Hampshire School of Law<\/i>. University of New Hampshire School of Law. Web.<\/div>\n
Gilbert, Helen. “Professor Helen Gilbert.” Royal Holloway University Professors<\/i>. Royal Holloway University, n.d. Web. Aug. 2015.<\/div>\n
Government, Australian. “Apology to Australia’s Indigenous Peoples.”Australian Government<\/i>. Australian Government: Our People, n.d. Web.<\/div>\n
Haig-Brown, Celia. “Celia Haig-Brown of York University.” Celia Haig-Brown<\/i>. York University, n.d. Web. Aug. 2015.<\/div>\n
Justice, Daniel. “Daniel Justice | First Nations and Indigenous Studies Program.” First Nations and Indigenous Studies Program<\/i>. University of British Columbia, n.d. Web. Aug. 2015.<\/div>\n
Moreton, Romaine. “Australian Writing by Romaine Moreton.” Australian Writing by Romaine Moreton<\/i>. Asu.edu, n.d. Web. Aug. 2015.<\/div>\n
STARS. “2013 Poster Campaign.” Poster Campaign<\/i>. Students Teachings About Racism in Society, n.d. Web. 03 Aug. 2015.<\/div>\n

Melissa Kuipers<\/strong><\/h3>\n

Cherubini, Lorenzo, Julian Kitchen, and John Hodson. \u201cAboriginal Epistemologies and New Teacher Induction: The Context of Bi-Epistemic Research Endeavour.\u201d Brock Education. <\/i>18.1 (2008). Web. 3 Aug 2015.<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n

In “Aboriginal Epistemologies and New Teacher Induction,” Cherubini, Hodson, and Kitchen discuss teacher induction programs and the lack of focus on Aboriginal epistemology in the field. Cherubini et al. discuss how Indigenous epistemologies “‘fared spectacularly badly’ in university settings” and as a result, school systems tend to stick to “mainstream knowledge hierarchies,” that is, “Eurocentric paradigms”. They discuss the Ontario Aboriginal Policy Framework that recommends that faculties of education in Ontario induct more culturally-knowledgable\u00a0and aware Aboriginal teachers. Through the induction of more Aboriginal teachers, Aboriginal epistemologies can be introduced, epistemologies that “focus on pedagogy that teaches through culture and fosters student awareness about the intricate connections they share with other and the natural environment”. Cherubini et al. also mention Aboriginal educators’ role in “preserving Aboriginal languages and cultures to further the self-determination of Aboriginal students”.<\/p>\n

By training more culturally-knowledgable Aboriginal educators, Aboriginal epistemology can be introduced. To move toward\u00a0epistemic justice, training Aboriginal educators is an important step. Not only does introducing more Aboriginal instructors help preserve language (through the teaching of First Nations Languages<\/a>), it also helps to preserve “cultural and linguistic traditions”.<\/p>\n

FNSA, and FNESC. “Curriculum and Resources for First Nations Language Programs in BC First Nations Schools.” (2009). Web. 3 Aug. 2015.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Johnston, Ingrid, Lynne Wiltse, and Kylie Yang. \u201cPushing Comfort Zones: Promoting Social Justice Through the Teaching of Aboriginal Canadian Literature.\u201d <\/b>Changing English: Studies in Culture and Education. <\/i><\/b>21.3 (2014): 264-277. <\/b>Taylor & Francis Online. <\/i><\/b>Web. 1 Aug 2015.<\/b><\/a><\/p>\n

In their 2014 study, Johnston, Wiltse, and Yang take a critical look at the Canadian Literature curriculum in Canadian high school classrooms, exploring the value of taking a social justice approach in English classes by teaching Indigenous literature instead of the \u201csame familiar canonized texts,” like In\u00a0<\/em>Flanders Fields<\/em><\/a>\u00a0<\/i>or,\u00a0more likely,\u00a0American texts<\/a>.\u00a0Their study included eight high school teachers from six Canadian high schools, and entailed that each educator teach from a core list of Multicultural Canadian texts.<\/p>\n

Drawing on Boler and Zembylas’ “pedagogy of discomfort,” Johnston et al.\u00a0focus on\u00a0two teachers who step out of their comfort zones and teach texts that stray form the typical lit canon:\u00a0Monkey Beach<\/a><\/em> by Eden Robinson and Keeper’n Me<\/a><\/em> by Richard Wagamese. The teachers “encouraged critical inquiries into ways they and their students might begin to re-evaluate their world views and potentially consider ideas for social transformation”. The teachers discussed stereotyping, land issues, environmental issues, and the importance of language. Prompted by the novels, students were taught the \u2018multiple, heterogeneous, and messy realities of power relations as they are enacted and resisted in localities”.<\/p>\n

Interestingly, many students resisted discussing Aboriginal issues before reading the texts.\u00a0One teacher said that, “anytime students encounter something Aboriginal, there is an anger associated to it.”\u00a0One can assume that these reactions are a result of the colonial teachings in North American high schools. As Johnston et al.\u00a0explain, “the dominant Discourse of the school tends to silence other practices”. Clearly, de-colonizing literature classes is an important step to take towards epistemic justice.<\/p>\n

McCrae, John. “In Flanders Fields.” 15 May 1915.\u00a0TheGreatWar.co.uk.\u00a0<\/em>Web. Aug 3 2015.<\/p>\n

Lapointe, Micheal. “What’s Happened to CanLit?” Literary Review of Canada<\/i>. Web. 03 Aug 2015.<\/p>\n

Robinson, Eden. “Monkey Beach”\u00a0GoodReads.com.\u00a0<\/em>Web. 3 Aug 2015.<\/p>\n

Wagamese, Richard. “Keeper’n Me”\u00a0GoodReads.com.\u00a0<\/em>Web. 3 Aug 2015.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

 <\/p>\n

Kevin Sun<\/strong><\/h3>\n

What does the Indigenous epistemology entail, and how does it contrast to the Continental epistemology<\/a>? The problem that I\u2019ve forced myself to acknowledge even before exploring this question is the problem of my investment in Continental epistemology. It is a problem that I will continue to struggle with as my research continues, and I ask that those who share my problem continue to struggle with it as well.<\/p>\n

Chandler, Michael. “Indigenous Education and Epistemic Violence.”\u00a0Education Canada<\/em>\u00a050.5 (2010). Web. 30 July 2015.<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

Despite my problem, it is clear to me that differing epistemologies creates tension that has finally been acknowledged and yet is far from being relieved. Nowhere is this tension more explicit and fatal than in Canada\u2019s school system<\/a>. Michael Chandler<\/a> brings this epistemic tension into light, pointing out its consequence that \u201ca disproportionate number of Indigenous students in every province routinely underperform academically, drop out of school at inexcusably tender ages, fail to graduate from high school in heart-stopping numbers, and are woefully under-represented in institutions of \u2018higher\u2019 learning.\u201d As he identifies the problem, however, Chandler also acknowledges the difficulty of formulating its solution\u2014a solution that ideally requires deep understanding of not only Indigenous and Continental epistemology but of epistemology itself: how we know how we know. A very tall order.<\/p>\n

Hart, Michael Anthony. “Indigenous Worldviews, Knowledge, and Research: The Development of an Indigenous Research Paradigm.” Journal of Indigenous Voices in Social Work <\/em>1.1 (2010): 1-16. PDF file.<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

A less tall order for adherents to the Continental epistemology is to understand or at least attempt to understand Indigenous epistemology and what it entails on a critical level. Michael Anthony Hart<\/a> offers such an understanding as he formulates an \u201cIndigenous research paradigm\u201d (1). This paradigm<\/a>, based on the Cree<\/a> perspective, differs from the standard Continental research paradigm in these ways, among others:<\/p>\n

The recognition of the spiritual as a source of knowledge.<\/p>\n

The recognition of the researcher as subjective.<\/p>\n

The employment of Elders as major sources of knowledge.<\/p>\n

The holistic<\/a> understanding that everything is connected (thus discrediting the isolation of variables).<\/p>\n

The resolve to conduct research for the ultimate benefit of the local community.<\/p>\n

Lavallee, Lynn Frances. “Practical Application of an Indigenous Research Framework and Two Qualitative Indigenous Research Methods: Sharing Circles and Anishnaabe Symbol-based Reflection.”\u00a0International Journal of Qualitative Methods<\/em>\u00a08.1 (2009): 21-40. PDF file.<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

While Hart does not provide an actual example of research conducted using this kind of paradigm, Lynn F. Lavall\u00e9e<\/a> does. Her paper provides a fascinating account of how she consciously used the Indigenous epistemology in conducting research and how this created problems in the academia, with its investment in the Continental epistemology.<\/p>\n

Coleman, Daniel, et al. \u201cDifferent Knowings and the Indigenous Humanities.\u201d English Studies in Canada <\/em>38.1 (2012): 141-159. Web. 3 Aug. 2015.<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

In a dialogue transcript focusing on Indigenous perspectives in the academia, Daniel Coleman and several other scholars<\/a> discuss how the \u201c[I]ndigenous knowledges\u201d have come into focus as a response to Continental knowledge, becoming \u201ca key site for decolonization\u201d (144). The discussion notes that the kind of \u201cepistemicide\u201d committed against Indigenous peoples in Canada happens \u201caround the world,\u201d highlighting the fact that Canada\u2019s plight is not unique\u2014it is part of a universal conflict<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Language is key to knowledge. This discussion brings up the very interesting point that whereas Continental languages (such as English) are \u201cnoun-oriented,\u201d Indigenous languages are \u201coften verb-oriented\u201d (148). The significance of this distinction is demonstrated in a question posed by Continental linguists<\/a>, which asks why the Cheyenne word for duck\u2014\u201c\u0161e\u2019\u0161e\u201d\u2014is so similar to the Cheyenne word for rattlesnake\u2014\u201c\u0161e\u2019\u0161enov\u00f4tse\u201d (150). The answer is in their \u201cmovement\u201d (151). Thus, whereas Continental languages and its epistemology focus on subjects themselves, Indigenous languages and its epistemologies focus on the actions that those subjects take\u2014how they interact with and change the world.<\/p>\n

Every people and all the cultures of the world come from a place. All people are coming into the world to learn. And they learn from the knowledges that begin within a particular place, and that place defines for a group of people what it is, how they relate to the world, how they relate to each other, and how they\u2019re going to survive and live within that particular place <\/em>(144).<\/p>\n

This is common ground, Earth that will still exist once decolonization is complete. Even as Continental and Indigenous epistemologies conflict in how they perceive the world, it is important and necessary to acknowledge that they ultimately share a common goal\u2014to enrich the lives of their people.<\/p>\n

Durnin, Katherine. \u201cIndigenous Literature and Comparability.\u201d Clcweb: Comparative Literature and Culture <\/em>13.2 (2011).\u00a0Web. 3 Aug. 2015. \u00a0<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

Is comparative literature<\/a> the way to make use of this common ground? Katherine Durnin<\/a> states that \u201c[o]ne of the main impulses behind the comparative study of literature is the recognition that literary forms and practices are shared across cultures, and the desire to discover what exactly is shared and how that sharing takes place\u201d (2). Continental epistemology is different from the Indigenous epistemology, and many of those differences are irreconcilable; however, this does not mean that one cannot learn from the other. Sharing between literatures and ways of knowing is valuable precisely because it is done between such different groups, and \u201ccomparative methodology needs difference as much as it needs comparability to proceed\u201d (8).<\/p>\n

Works Cited<\/p>\n

Chandler, Michael. “Indigenous Education and Epistemic Violence.”\u00a0Education Canada<\/em>\u00a050.5 (2010). Web. 30 July 2015.<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

Coleman, Daniel, et al. \u201cDifferent Knowings and the Indigenous Humanities.\u201d English Studies in Canada <\/em>38.1 (2012): 141-159. Web. 3 Aug. 2015.<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

“Cree.”\u00a0The Canadian Encyclopedia.\u00a0Historica Canada<\/em>, n. d. Web. 4 Aug. 2015.\u00a0<\/a><\/p>\n

Durnin, Katherine. \u201cIndigenous Literature and Comparability.\u201d Clcweb: Comparative Literature and Culture <\/em>13.2 (2011).\u00a0Web. 3 Aug. 2015. \u00a0<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

“Epistemology.”\u00a0Encyclopaedia Britannica<\/em>. EB Inc., 2015. Web. 4 Aug. 2015.<\/a><\/p>\n

Hart, Michael Anthony. “Indigenous Worldviews, Knowledge, and Research: The Development of an Indigenous Research Paradigm.” Journal of Indigenous Voices in Social Work <\/em>1.1 (2010): 1-16. PDF file.<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

Lavallee, Lynn Frances. “Practical Application of an Indigenous Research Framework and Two Qualitative Indigenous Research Methods: Sharing Circles and Anishnaabe Symbol-based Reflection.”\u00a0International Journal of Qualitative Methods<\/em>\u00a08.1 (2009): 21-40. PDF file.<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

McLeod, Saul. “Reductionism and Holism.”\u00a0Simply Psychology<\/em>. SimplyPsychology.org, 2008. Web. 4 Aug. 2015.\u00a0<\/a><\/p>\n

Macaulay, Monica, and Kisten Syrett. “Why Major in Linguistics?”\u00a0Linguistic Society of America<\/em>. LSA, 2012. Web. 4 Aug. 2015.\u00a0<\/a><\/p>\n

Shah, Anup.\u00a0“Rights of Indigenous People.”\u00a0Global Issues<\/em>. Anup Shah, 16 Oct. 2010. Web. 4 Aug. 2015.\u00a0<\/a><\/p>\n

Shuttleowrth, Martyn. “What is a Paradigm?”\u00a0Explorable<\/em>. Explorable.com, 2015. Web. 4 Aug. 2015.\u00a0<\/a><\/p>\n

“The Education System in Canada.”\u00a0Study Canada<\/em>. CEC Network Inc., 2003. Web. 4 Aug. 2015.\u00a0<\/a><\/p>\n

“Why Study Comparative Literature?”\u00a0BU Modern Languages & Comparative Literature<\/em>. Boston U, n. d. Web. 4 Aug. 2015.\u00a0<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Jocelyn Bussieres I plan to look at Indigenous ways of knowing as articulated within the academy as both a form of resistance to and in relation with Western epistemologies. While I do intend to continue to narrow my research more specifically to highlight the voices of First Nations’ people within the Canadian context, I will […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":31737,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-28","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/470classconference\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/28","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/470classconference\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/470classconference\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/470classconference\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/31737"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/470classconference\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=28"}],"version-history":[{"count":42,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/470classconference\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/28\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":151,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/470classconference\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/28\/revisions\/151"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/470classconference\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=28"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}