The Power to Speak
The Speaking to Memory: Images and Voices from St. Michael’s Residential School exhibition at UBC’s Museum of Anthropology, is a space itself which speaks to memory. Placed on Musquem land, MOA exists within a territory that is constantly negotiating a position of power with the Canadian government under the Authority of the Indian Act established in 1867. Filled with First Nation artifacts, MOA bears testimony to the incredible ingenuity, intelligence and resourcefulness of these people and their respect and connection to the land. The struggles of the First Nation people to have a “place” and “voice” within the colonization of Canada is part of what Speaking to Memory is about.
Speaking to Memory provides an opportunity for viewer’s to read firsthand some of the sobering testimonies, written on simple white rectangular cards displayed along the walls given by previous students of St Michael’s Residential School. These testimonies are reflective of the agenda of the Canadian Government that established the Residential Schools system and serves to make these testimonies even more poignant.
The Deputy Minister of Indian Affairs, D. Duncan Campbell Scott is quoted as saying the schools were established “to get rid of the Indian problem… [and to ensure they were] absorbed into the body politic”. His desire “that the country ought not to continuously protect a class of people who are able to stand alone” becomes manifested by the very acts committed against the Residential School students as recorded in their testimonies. The government nor those who stood in positions of authority within the Residential School system offered protection. In one testimony, Peggy Shannon recalls an incident where her sister was beaten so badly by a supervisor “she looked dead… [and that the] supervisor’s knew what was happening and [about the] sexual abuse and nobody did anything.”
These stories render the apologies by the Canadian Government and various church organizations ineffectual; platitudes made more important by the formal banner-style of presentation and their placement together within an alcove of the space shared by the testimonies and photographs of St Michael’s and its students. The language in these banners is mostly formal and the apologies have a hierarchal presentation where what they are apologizing for often doesn’t even occur until midway through the entire text. This type of formality in style and language contrasts greatly with the simplicity of the format and language of the student’s testimonies, reiterating position of power.
This power struggle is even evident within the enlarged photograph taken by Beverly Brown display on the wall opposite the student testimonies. Here the casual poses and body language of the children in the school ground photos adjacent the rigid poses of the March to Sunday Service and Sunday Uniforms for Girls reflects a contrast between the mediated and unmediated lives of the Residential School children. Without Beverly’s photos what kind of visual record would have been available for presentation and whose voice would it reflect, student, school authorities or government?
Even the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s mandate to provide a format for Residential School student’s to have an opportunity to share their experiences because of “the emerging and compelling desire to put the events of the past behind us” while admirable begs the question: who has the “emerging and compelling desire”? Is it the residential school students who do not want to have to continually re-remember incidents that are traumatic and disturbing? Or, is the Canadian Government who doesn’t want to live with the shame that potentially threatens their worldwide image as world “peacemakers”? What type of effect would there have been if the students’ testimonies were enlarged so they dominated the space and the official government and church apologies were minimized and placed flat on a table outside the exhibit space?