DIALOGUE

Introduction to Our Team’s Intervention Strategy: Our Call to Action

Given its interdisciplinary nature, conceptualizing cosmopolitan subjectivities rests upon complex understandings of equal moral standings and of civic and political commitments to all humans of the world. It goes well beyond the boundaries and bondages of the nation-state, thus providing superior sophisticated understandings of the era’s key question: How shall we live together? (Hébert, 15)

As we have been focusing on establishing a common ground between cosmopolitanism and indigeneity through which our Canadian identity can be improved for the better, it has become apparent that this task is a complex and sensitive one. While that’s not to say that achieving this sort of mutual understanding between all citizens including Aboriginals in unachievable, it is indeed ideal. However, with this being said, it is pertinent to explore the importance of trying to rebuild our Canadian identity in a way that includes those that Canada has historically oppressed. Therefore, the call to action we will be focusing on in this dialogue is the necessity to modify our Canadian identity to become more inclusive and accepting of Aboriginal culture. How we will suggest this can be done, is by creating an intervention strategy that integrates both cosmopolitanism and indigeneity into this equation.

By examining the way Canadians identify themselves among immigrants, discussing the contemporary Aboriginal culture, rethinking contemporary Canada’s nationality and indigeneity, exploring cosmopolitanism in comparison to multiculturalism, and analyzing the figure of the Indian— it is clear that our research provides substantial support that will aid in the strategic development of this call to action. In this regard, our intervention strategy will also involve problematizing Canada’s current multiculturalism policy, as we will suggest that perhaps the integration of cosmopolitanism will further our aims; particularly, by further exploring the idea of cosmopolitanism and where it intersects with Canadian literature, we can develop an intervention strategy that can help us better represent our collective history to the rest of the world. We hope that by establishing a common ground that enables a sort of collective understanding and respect for one another— jointly enabled by cosmopolitan subjectivities and the recognition of indigeneity— we can modify our national identity to reflect this refined meaning of what it means to be Canadian.

Central Points, Issues, and Questions

• It is interesting to recognize how the evolution of the Indian identity throughout Canadian literature has been an imperative component to the construction of our national identity → both identities are dependent on one another.
  • In this regard, it is clear that while Canada prides itself on being diverse and multicultural, our identity is still tainted by the historical discrimination of Aboriginal peoples on this land.
• It is always important to challenge the opinions proposed in the current conversation; for example, King’s “I’m Not the Indian You Had in Mind” subverts the stereotypical depiction of Aboriginal peoples in the mainstream media
• Canadian publishers and ‘Canadian’ artists are being overlooked in favor of those from hegemonic nations à this relates back to the unequal distribution of power that exists among nation-states
  • Why are Indigenous Canadian artists deemed less important or worthy of notable recognition?
• Although Canadian citizens identify as supporting multiculturalism, the harsh reality is that the Aboriginal culture and its people are still heavily oppressed in comparison to other minorities
  • How can this problem be rectified? How can Aboriginals become equally represented in our ‘multicultural’, Canadian society?
  • By understanding how Canadian citizens view themselves in comparison to immigrants, we can gain a better understanding of what makes us both strong and weak as a collective nation
• Can cosmopolitanism be regarded, in some ways, as more effective than multiculturalism?
  • Multiculturalism in Canada seems to be associated predominantly with immigration above anything else à it seems as though Canada’s First Nations populations are not a crucial component of our multicultural policies.
• It seems as though Canada, along with the rest of the world, still finds itself perpetuating cultural and ethnic divides.
  • Perhaps cosmopolitanism can facilitate the change we are looking for → equality cannot be met until we stop this categorization
  • Cosmopolitanism has the power to encourage the appreciation/ experience of other cultures, which can have the effect of making us appreciate our own more
    • Potential incentive: Perhaps this can ignite an inclination among Canadians and the Canadian government to improve the portrayal of Aboriginal culture globally and in literature too
• Conversely, at the 1991 International Workshop on Indigenous Knowledge and Community based Resource Management, Chief Robert Wavey of Fox Lake Nation argued that Aboriginals have survived cultural extermination and grow stronger every day (Wavey 1991)
  • Is his assertion insensitive to the Aboriginals that feel otherwise?
  • Is Wavey appreciating the silver lining of the situation, or is he ignorantly neglecting to acknowledge the detrimental effects that colonization has had on other Aboriginal peoples?
• Does Canada’s modern literary work fairly represent realities or has it been altered for some purpose?
  • How do we resolve these ongoing problems while ensuring that Aboriginal culture is preserved?

Short Quotations Demonstrating Dialogue Perspectives

• “I think the first step to improving our current Canadian identity is to acknowledge the ways in which Canadian citizens view themselves; by holding up a mirror to them and asking how they identify themselves, we are able to gain a better understanding of what makes us both strong and weak as a collective nation” (Balao, “Annotated Bibliography”).
  • This quotation is immensely significant to the purpose of our study, as the first step towards improving is recognition. By self-identifying ourselves as Canadians and specifically what we associate with being Canadian, we can take the appropriate steps towards improving our national identity for the better. If we are not aware of our current representation, how will improvement come into fruition?
  • Specific to the annotation from which this comment is derived, it is evident that while we self-identify as proud citizens from a multicultural nation, Canada’s multicultural policies require additional interrogation.
  • Improving the Canadian identity to encompass indigeneity and cosmopolitan subjectivities requires a collective effort. Therefore, indicating the strengths and weaknesses of our current identity will better assist our educative pursuit; this sort of information can help policy-makers and regular citizens become more aware of the course of action that is necessary to be taken.
• “Godard takes a cynical view towards literature and the idea of identity formation as she argues that literature no longer serves to strengthen national identity, but as a consequence of the Cold War it instead serves to “further its economic security in an era of global capitalism” (211). Due to the rapidly occurring changes in Canadian society, there has not been sufficient opportunity for “genuine classics” (212) to emerge, and so this incoherency has become a characteristic of Canadian literature itself. Additionally, it is noted how those outside the hegemonic cannot create coherent narratives, instead producing fragments of “a nation in formation.” (212).”
  • This excerpt from the Godard article annotation serves to illustrate how Canadian identity has been fragmented from the very beginning of the nation’s formation. Due to forces brought upon by globalization, this lack of coherent unity in literature and its subsequent lack of influence in identity formation has been continued.
  • This quote also acknowledges the lack of depth in Canadian literature, as opposed to artists in other countries, as is noted by Neia in her comment: “It is no doubt that in terms of mass media exposure and literature as well, it is as though American individuals appear to be more recognized and praised for their crafts, while Canadians do not see as much recognition, or at least recognition of the same degree. ”
• “It often seems as if Canada’s First Nations population(s) are not a crucial component of our multicultural policies. We, as a nation, are focused more on immigration as a means of building a multicultural nation than integrating First Nations. In order to make progress, all parties need equal representation” (MacLeod, “Annotated Bibliography”).
  • While Canada’s multiculturalism policy is a part of our identity that we cherish immensely, we need to improve our representation of Aboriginal peoples and their culture.
  • This leads into a potential integration of cosmopolitanism, as Hébert’s piece discloses the ways in which it can be advantageous to the Canadian society, and world in general.
  • Clearly, equal representation is key; unfortunately, it is something that we still continue to struggle with as we hide behind the facade of encompassing all cultures through multiculturalism.

Conclusion: Possible Strategies for Taking Action and Intervening in the Future of Canadian Literature

Before delving into our conclusions and suggestions it is essential to point out that literature on its own cannot solve the systemic problems that remain in Canadian society today that stem from its colonial past. However, with the following notions we hope to at least be able to generate conversation surrounding  the issues we have previously mentioned in this summary.

In the Godard article in our annotated bibliography, it is noted that many Canadian publishers are being bought out by American and other global publishers, who likely would not have the same interest in publishing Canadian content, more specifically indigenous content. In order to ensure the continued existence of Canadian National literature, a possible course of action could be to do research into how to facilitate the continued existence and growth of Canadian indigenous literature, particularly the voices that go against colonial norms and provide a platform for them to strengthen their voices.

Ideas that come to mind in how to pursue this growth is the exploration of digital options. In this course, we’ve already had much discussion of the possibilities that the Internet brings toward literature and discussion, and as such a highly accessible platform that isn’t as constrained by monetary costs as the traditional publishing industry, it could be employed in order to increase the visibility of indigenous people and their literature.

What also must continue, are challenges to the hegemonic such as King’s “I’m Not the Indian you had in Mind,” and getting these messages across to the Canadian reading public. Though it is impossible to make something ‘popular,’ however, through the existing cultural and educational institutions that Canada has, there can be more of an emphasis placed upon this literature of disruption in order to promote a wider understanding of indigenous matters amongst the Canadian population.

Lastly, relative to our main concepts of cosmopolitanism and indigeneity, further research must be conducted and discovered to aid in improving not just Canada’s identity, but our historical representation in Canadian literature. While the transition towards adopting cosmopolitan subjectivities would indeed take some time, we suggest that educating the public about the advantages of cosmopolitanism would be an effective starting point. Similarly, we recognize that cosmopolitanism and indigeneity are representative of juxtaposing concepts, however, once Canadian citizens (including Indigenous peoples) become more aware of the ways in which cosmopolitanism can advantageously change Aboriginal and Non-Aboriginal relations, perhaps then it will become more feasible and attainable. Imperatively, education of its policies and how it differs from multiculturalism is what is essential to facilitating a sort of change regarding this matter. Therefore, with the combination of increasing the representation of Aboriginal literature in print and specifically online, along with the integration of educative policies, perhaps a common ground between cosmopolitanism and indigeneity can be cultivated, and our Canadian identity can also be improved as a result.

Suggested Focus Areas & Questions for Future Research

Including literature from First Nations and other minority groups:

Over the course of this project we have touched upon the need to be more inclusive when it comes to accessing literary works from ALL Canadians, regardless of ethnicity or background.  This poses a number of socioeconomic challenges as well as challenges associated with translation.  This could be translation into official languages or into non-official ones, and also includes untraditional ways of storytelling.  We discussed, during this course, the importance of preserving culture in its natural state.  Something is lost when we put oral tales down on paper.  This is one topic I would like to research in greater depth.  What is lost when works are translated into English, what are the effects, and what are the solutions?

Works Cited

Hébert, Yvonne. Dr. Yvonne Hebert – Faculty of Education. University of Calgary, September 2015. Web. 20 April 2016.

“I’m Not the Indian You Had in Mind.” National Screen Institute. National Screen Institute, 19 February 2007. Web. 20 April 2016.

Inglis, Julian. “Traditional ecological knowledge: concepts and cases.” International Program on Traditional Ecological Knowledge: International Development Research Centre, 1993. Web. 19 April, 2016.

“True Canadians: Multiculturalism in Canada debated.” CBC Digital Archives. CBC Digital Archives, 14 September 2004. Web. 20 April 2016.