Question: In the following paragraphs in her essay, Maracle answers her question describing what she sees to be the function of literary criticism in Salish society. Summarize her answer and then make some comparisons between Maracle and Frye’s analysis of the role of myth in nation building.
In Maracle’s writing, she writes on the traditional criticism in First Nation narratives, often made by Western culture. As Western culture continues to grow in power and prevalence, it becomes apparent how often we look down on items that do not reveal as similar to ours. Lee poses that European literature becomes a rule or law of standard that is compared to when addressing or evaluating traditional First Nations stories. Thus, there is a sense of superiority or supremacy imposed by the European culture over the marginalized communities of the First Nations people.
Theorists in the First Nations community apply analysis in connection to their society’s knowledge with consultation to the origin of the story, such as in cases of oral footnotes used by the Salish people. Criticism is done by individuals within the culture who understand its base and Maracle stresses that these criticisms cannot be done by members outside the community who do not have the contextual background needed to fully understand the impact of the story and the cultural implications behind it. Thus, Western members should not and cannot use their methods to define, criticize and evaluate the stories of the First Nations stories. One item of note is the cyclical manner of Western culture and its ability to slowly engulf the other cultures that attempt to life within the same space as it. As per the government, the education system is built upon the ‘winners’ which are the Europeans that reside in Canada. The newer and younger generation are taught these theories and teachings of the European society, which further separates them from the First Nations culture as a whole. It becomes almost impossible for First Nations to have a culture within a society where it becomes constantly less and less prevalent in the coming years. Without proper systems in place, First Nations culture becomes powerless as there are no individuals in place that have experienced enough of the sacred culture, to pass down the tradition, or become involved with the culture.
Another key note is the differences between oratory and story. Oratory is aimed to shape the understanding of the listener, carrying wisdom, theories and knowledge in the form of stories and myths. One particularly important and interesting point is the process of healthy doubt. In our culture, doubt is common, but it can be very toxic to how we interact with our own culture and cultures outside of us. In the Salish community, people are able to extrapolate on the old stories to judge and examine the stories that exist today. In this form, they birth new myths that allow them to change their own narratives that are not bound to time. I feel that this is very interesting compared to Western culture where we often look back on old texts and judge their inadequacies compared to modern theories.
Maracle’s writings can also be seen in Northrop Frye’s writing in regard to the role of myths in nation building. Unity is one aspect of the role that myths play in a nation. It becomes integral to the culture that surrounds it, by defining the common belief among the people and creating a sense of familiarity among the community members. This proves to be stark difference when Frye describes the position of Canada, with its barren and disconnected lands. Frye presents the large spaces between Canada as physical boundaries that show the disunity among the country, and it becomes metaphorically representative of our lack of respect for the other inhabitants who occupy its space. Canada is not a land of myths, but rather a land that just so happens to have people. There exists history, but there does not exist a unity in the sense of creating an environment where all communities are shared and equally expressed. Frye claims that this is the consequence of constant revolutions. There is no time for a foundation to develop a refined myth for the nation and thus no unity can become of it.
At the end of the day, both writers recognize the importance that stories play in information a collective identity and the importance of unity that draws on proper a national literary foundation. I believe that this notion is something profound that I had never thought about. I often read about stories and myths of other cultures, but never stopped to ponder on the cultural myths that surrounds Canada. I believe that both writers realize this and ultimately advocate that stories are powerful constructs. Stories can bring upon happiness, hearth, but I can also bring madness and chaos, as is seen by the unit on stories. Thus, stories are important, and there is strength to the nationalism that is associated with a proper literary foundation that both writers agree upon.
Works Cited
“Nationalism as a Cause of World War I.” Alpha History. Alpha History, n.d, https://alphahistory.com/worldwar1/nationalism/, Accessed February 25, 2020
Frye, Northrop. The Bush Garden: Essays on the Canadian Imagination. Introduction by Linda Hutcheon. Concord, ON: House of Anansi Press, 1995. Print.
Maracle, Lee. “Toward a National Literature: ‘A Body of Writing.’” Across Cultures, Across Borders: Canadian Aboriginal and Native American Literature. Ed. Paul DePasquale, Renate Eigenbrod, and Emma LaRoque. Toronto, ON: Broadview Press, 2010. 77-96. Print.
Von Heyking, John. (2010) ‘Multiculturalism and problems of Canadian unity’ University of Lethbridge Research Repository