Hello again everyone.
For Lesson 2:3, I decided to answer Question 3, which is as follows:
3] In order to address this question you will need to refer to Sparke’s article, “A Map that Roared and an Original Atlas: Canada, Cartography, and the Narration of Nation.” You can easily find this article online. Read the section titled: “Contrapuntal Cartographies” (468 – 470). Write a blog that explains Sparke’s analysis of what Judge McEachern might have meant by this statement: “We’ll call this the map that roared.”
I decided to answer this question because I felt that it built off of my previous blog post well, where I spoke about familiar discomfort. Give it a read if you plan on reading this blog because I will, most likely, be referring to it throughout.
In Sparke’s article “A Map that Roared and an Original Atlas: Canada, Cartography, and the Narration of Nation,” he mentions a historic moment in Indigenous and Canadian legal history in the section titled “Contrapuntal Cartographies.” In this section, Sparke tells the story of the moment that Chief Justice Allan McEachern denied the Wet’suwet’en and Gitxsan people’s efforts to stake claim to the lands that were historically their own. Upon further research, I discovered that their evidence that these lands were theirs was mostly through oral stories (first stories, as we’ve learned, were often the way to communicate laws of Indigenous people.) When McEachern denied that oral tradition was a valid enough way to establish law, the Wet’suwet’en and Gitxsan people turned to cartography to communicate where their rightful land was in a way that the Canadian legal system could understand.
In a historic moment (not in a good way) McEachern proclaimed that he would refer to the map they created as “the map that roared” (Sparke, 468). This can be taken a few different ways. First, I will speak about the meanings that Sparke suggests and then I will speak about my personal perspectives on what McEachern meant.
Sparke first mentions a movie from 1959 entitled, “The Mouse that Roared.” Upon further research, this movie was known for comedic depiction of Cold War politics. Sparke acknowledges that this could mean that McEachern was trying to make a “derisory scripting of the plaintiffs as a ramshackle, anachronistic nation” (Sparke, 468). This comment could have been an attempt to make a caricature of the Wet’suwet’en people, however, Sparke also mentions Don Monet. Don Monet was a cartoonist that drew under the Gitxsan and Wet’suwet’en people and perceived McEachern’s comments as a form of resistance. This resistance was to the First Nation’s cartography, or remapping, of the land. In their cartography, the Gitxsan and Wet’suwet’en people left out a lot of trap, property, electricity, and pipelines. They also left out logging roads, and other marks of “Canadian colonialism on native land” (Sparke, 468.)
My personal interpretation of McEachern’s comments is that they are purely derived from fear and racism. I think that racism is stemmed in fear of what we do not know. When using the word roar, a word that is often associated with fear, McEachern was talking about the map and the Wet’suwet’en and Gitxan people. I believe that seeing First Nations people, who were unfamiliar to him themselves, outline the land in a way that wasn’t familiar to him, McEachern was uncomfortable and most of all afraid of the potential for the Wet’suwet’en and Gitxan people to take control.
This article is not about First Nations, but is kind of interesting in how it speaks about the relationship between racism and fear.
Work Cited
Sparke, Mathew. “A Map that Roared and an Original Atlas: Canada, Cartography, and the Narration of Nation.” Annals of the Association of American Geographers 88.3 (1998): 468-470. JStor. Web. 18 Feb2020.
Henderson, Mark. “Racism is learnt from fear of the unknown.” The Times UK, 29 July 2005. Web. 18 Feb 2020.
EmiliaBrandoli
February 25, 2020 — 1:18 am
Hey Chase, great post. I answered the same question also and found it super interesting the more I read into this case and I couldn’t believe how timely this question turned out to be. I also doubled back and read your familiar discomfort introspection. I really think its fantastic (albeit it challenging) to be able to look at all this information and be able to say how the hell is this not more widely known/taught instead of becoming defensive and combative. I think this case is an excellent example of how deep seeded racism is in the legal system, and as you point out, fear. I think one more element in the mix is control of power. I feel like we are seeing a little bit of history repeating with this case, what is your take on how (27 years later) the Wet’suwet’en and Gitxan people are being portrayed in the media in relation to land claims and this map?
ChaseThomson
February 28, 2020 — 4:54 pm
Hi Emilia!
I am so happy that you brought up current issues, as they were in my mind when I wrote this blog post but I didn’t want to take away from the lesson itself. However, I think it is so relevant to what we have been discussing.
I think that the media’s portrayal (albeit, not all media) is sort of echoing Judge McEachern’s sentiment and, honestly, racism. I think that the Wet’suwet’en people protesting for the rights to their land, rights that are indeed their own, is being represented by media (and bigots on social media) as a big insult to Canada. I don’t think some people are really seeing the true importance of these protests, and are only believing the biased coverage that is out there right now.
It is honestly crazy to me to have written this post while all of these current events are taking place; history is truly repeating itself.
grace owens
February 25, 2020 — 6:54 pm
Hi Chase,
Great post! I enjoyed the way you set it up, how you first delivered the meaning Sparke intended and then included your own opinion, to incorporate very relevant and timely additions. Due to the current events, regarding land claims and pipelines, it leads me to speculate what would have happened HAD McEachern listened more to the Wet’suwet’en and Gitxan people in regards to their wishes for the Map? This can relate to colonialism and European takeover of First Nations land as a whole, but do you think if changes had been made to the allotted land rights, even minor ones, that we today would be living with a more equal “map”? Or do you think that no matter the division back then that still we would be thinking it wasn’t enough and land battles would still be going on in present day 2020?
Hope you had a great break!
Grace
ChaseThomson
February 28, 2020 — 4:57 pm
Hello again Grace!
I am a little conflicted on how to answer this question. I do believe that if McEachern had respected the Wet’suwet’en people’s land claims that, perhaps, the landscape of Indigenous land rights in this country would look different today. However, I think it would have taken a lot more than just McEachern’s verdict. I think that, even if he had sided with them, there would be a lot of issues today because the Canadian Government is still ignoring and disrespecting the land rights of Indigenous people.
So, in short, do I think it would have improved conditions? Perhaps. Do I think there would be no issues today involving Indigenous land rights? No.
Thanks for the tough question!