Figuring out this place called home is a problem (87). Why? Why is it so problematic to figure out this place we call home: Canada? Consider this question in context with Chamberlin’s discussion on imagination and reality; belief and truth (use the index). Chamberlin says, “the sad fact is, the history of settlement around the world is the history of displacing other people from their lands, of discounting their livelihoods and destroying their languages” (78). Chamberlin goes on to “put this differently” (Para. 3). Explain that “different way” of looking at this, and discuss what you think of the differences and possible consequences of these “two ways” of understanding the history of settlement in Canada.
Chamberlin quotes Oscar Wilde: “We should live our life as a form of fiction. To be a fact is to be a failure” (124). If we only focus on the facts, what is and what is not, then we are not truly living and feeling. In We Are in a Book! by Mo Willems, two characters realize they are in a book (here is an animated video), and one asks when the book will end. They spend the rest of the time in trepidation on this particular concept until the book ends.
Even in this fictional story, the concept can similarly be applied to life–by thinking only of practical goals/timelines we are also disregarding what we personally take and enjoy from life. It is in fiction where we begin using our imagination to apply ourselves to alternate realities and future possibilities. “[Stories] share not so much a common understanding of the world as a common need to make sense of it” (Chamberlin, 202). It is through stories where we begin to understand a reality of our history together as humans.
What connects us to Canada? How has Canada marked us?
However, our stories serve a different purpose than a ‘pure’ narration of settlers filing land claims. Certain stories and cultures are usually unable to be told or translated, left unmentioned in history textbooks or generalized into some event/act of removal, like “Trail of Tears”. In truth, does Canada represent a home for everyone who resides in it, if some people are left out of the narrative, if “aboriginal people around the world will tell you they feel like strangers in the languages they now speak?” (Chamberlin, 81). Their sense of self is missing in many ways, and the path to finding home signifies much cultural reconciliation and rebuilding in bridging communication between both communities.
In Canada’s history of settlement, those who tell the story demean the value of the people conquered and claim such under their own purposes. It is the people they portray poorly (or fail to) that suffer with the consequences. Chamberlin describes the two ways of understanding this history as 1) “a history of dismissing a different belief or different behavior as unbelief or misbehavior” and 2) “of discrediting those who believe or behave differently as infidels or savages” (78).
Both approaches project superiority but differ in ethics. The former allows the aggressor to ‘correct’ behaviors or beliefs, convinced that they are helping, not hurting. While they eventually occupy the land, it can be seen as a more passive approach. The consequences of this approach is most often a feud of ethics. A retaliation of sorts is likely to ensue from expropriating that which isn’t necessarily in one’s domain. This approach states that other cultures are perversions and misguided in comparison to their own, which then leaves a void for cultures that are overcome by said logic.
The latter‘s belief system allows them to demonize their subjugate to the extent of savages. This approach lacks empathy and humane compassion. Physical retaliation is the immediate response and in these acts of violence, culture is destroyed, and ethical debate remains. Warfare is expected when one group believes it has the right to decide for the other group’s lives and for removal of human conscience. Due to both ways’ portrayal of the oppressed group, they are incapable of creating a cohesive community.
This “different way” of looking at settlement, what is ultimately imperialism, is the principle of many conflicts in the world. In this case, they fail to portray that Canada is “not the soil of spot of earth on which we happen to have been born … but that community of which we are members [of]” (Price, 1). Instead, they use the stories’ perspective to undermine settlement issues and change the power dynamics. They altered reality to their fit, without consideration of the community as a whole, from how they removed the credibility of those oppressed, and whose history they silenced.
(Note: I use ‘they’ & ‘them’ to describe both settlers and those they have oppressed, in terms of bringing them together from previous mentions like “us” vs “them”).
Works Cited
“A Brief History of the Trail of Tears.” Cherokee Nation. N.p., n.d. Web. 17 Sept. 2016.
Chamberlin, Edward. If This is Your Land, Where are Your Stories? Finding Common Ground. Toronto: AA. Knopf. 2003. Print.
Chemistryguy. “Elephant and Piggie – We Are In a Book (Animated).” Online video clip. Youtube. Youtube, 19 Apr 2016. Web. 17 Sep. 2016.
Kurious. Canada Fingerprint Country Pride. Digital image. Pixabay. 2 Mar. 2015. Web. 15 Sept. 2016.
Price, Richard. “A Discourse on the Love of Our Country.” Commemorating the Revolution in Great Britain. Meeting-House in the Old Jewry, London. 4 Nov. 1789. Speech.
Willems, Mo. We Are in a Book! New York, NY: Hyperion, 2010. Print.
Hi Jenny,
I appreciate that you understand the power dynamics that still occur between Canadian governments the Indigenous peoples of Canada, and that you also understand whose land we are learning on right now (unless you are taking this class while outside of Canada.)
In reality, as a fourth generation Canadian, I also understand that this is not really our land, and that we need to set up some sort of continuous reconciliation with indigenous peoples, or else the cycle of imperialism will continue. I like that you used the word ‘imperialism’ for what settler Canadians are sometimes unknowingly taking part in. It’s a blunt word with a negative connotation – but really, is there any other word the describes what we have done better. Minds, bodies, cultures all imperialized for generations by settlers looking for new homes.
I’m wondering Jenny, how you would change think the dynamic of “us” vs “them” in Canada between settler and Indigenous peoples. You touched on that in the very last sentence of your post right before your citations, and it sparked my interest.
I would make Indigenous education mandatory – perhaps everyone should learn some of the language of the people whose territory they are living on, and if the language is extinct, then there should be lessons as to how that happened. I think it would be advisable to teach those lessons from elementary school because according to studies of child psychology from a course that I took last semester, racism becomes understood in children by age seven. Early intervention is important.
A good documentary about Jane Elliot’s experiment on her 3rd grade class and later on adults can be viewed through this web address: https://vimeo.com/153858146. I could not find the version that I watched for my class, but this one was fairly close.
Hi Sarah, thank you for your insight! I think that going along with the term imperialism and how we may generally impose ourselves and perspectives on others (should I even begin to mention cultural appropriation?), it is important to look at things in a bird’s eye view. It can even start from conversations: are you listening or are you waiting to speak, for example. I too am still learning more and more about this topic. I am attending UBC, but when I fly back home to the U.S. I realize that U.S. doesn’t have the same indigenous arts that YVR airport does and I believe it isn’t represented in general.
I think that it’s important for dialect to include the people as a whole, and not divide them, as us vs. them suggests. Deviating from the topic a bit but I was particularly intrigued by Ben Shapiro’s somewhat controversial (American politician, I don’t know if he delves in Canadian politics) logic on how #BlackLivesMatter and certain aspects of institutional racism can divide us more than unite us together — in that we are ghosthunting again. I shall paraphrase his argument: “If we think racism as just a societal whole, because I want to be on your side, we have to fight racism together, not divide people up. I want facts, not feelings.” I think that trying to change this dynamic can be misleading at times. And in retelling stories as an education, I believe we should use facts, yet still give them their own opportunity to speak, and the learners their own space to think about. I haven’t thought about the exact ways to bring upon this change in specifics, but I agree that there should be Indigenous education, as a way of preserving cultures and teaching future generations awareness of history as it is, then a missing presence of it.
Thank you for the documentary link, I will watch under self-education things to do when I have time. I have found that within all the psychology classes I have taken (mostly on developmental and social aspects) that early childhood intervention as well as some other little fact I learned–that middle school is a transformative period for everyone–is important in many aspects of development. I think children are definitely able to have some grasp of understanding their unique ethnicity and where they come from, so that in learning more about indigenous culture and traditions they have a more open-minded view on other varying and different cultures in general.
Hello Jenny,
just so you know that it was an amazing reading experience for me to look through your essay. I particularly like the way you analyse and criticise the nature, the problematic aspects as well as the negative effects of the imperial narratives, which, with their intent of justifying the European settlement in Canadian history based on the contempt on the Indigenous people and cultures, negate the effort towards “finding home”, “cultural reconciliation and rebuilding in bridging communication between both communities”. However, it struck me as interesting that the first two paragraphs of your article seem to juxtapose realism and imagination in a competitive relationship. Although I agree with you on the strength of imagination which offers alternatives and possibilities of what the reality could have been, I wonder if you agree that it is the more factual information such as about the Canadian colonial history from Indigenous people’s perspective that we need when it comes to the issues of identifying Canada as home? Will knowing the fact that some stories informed by colonizing discourse are being promoted while some other stories representing the Indigenous claims are “usually unable to be told or translated” help find the two communities come to terms and eventually call Canada their home?
Regards,
Patrick
Hello Patrick! Thanks for reflecting upon my words. I just finished replying to Sarah’s response and have come to the conclusion there that yes, we would need facts when we try to identify and educate as a whole, so that we can separate our own personal justifications from stories evoked in emotion. Although it is in particular difficult to find (I suppose) objective articles on news events, I think that by initially learning about the facts and statistics we can, from there, build some foundation on what is missing and what people consider as part of their identity.
Both facts/logic and fiction/imagination is essential to have an understanding of things. I particularly am fond of fiction in that quoting John Updike in an interview, is like a civilizing tool that “allows us to live lives that will never be our own”. While we may never be in others’ shoes, in being able to connect to their particular thoughts and feelings through their stories, we can still gain a sense of value from them. Certain books based on taking inspiration from cultural beliefs, like Motorcycles & Sweetgrass (a fictional story based on a character who calls himself Jack, representing Nanabush, who is in Ojibway mythology a trickster and shapeshifter, but no one really understands him or his motives in the small town), brings these mythologies to life.
To answer your last question, an open dialogue where both sides speak their truths is needed. I am not aware of how the current progress (I would hope) is coming along in Canada, but I would think that it is definitely an ongoing process that starts with the people in both sides.
Hi Jenny,
Thucydides once said “the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.” Although I don’t agree with the ethics of this statement, the victors of war write the stories that we often hear as history today. Neither approaches are preferable, but what other way could we approach history when it will always be written in someone’s perspective whether they are trying to be objective or not?
I agree that it is in fiction that we begin to use our imaginations for an alternate reality. At the same time, our reality is often a fiction that we manifest as we grow. If it is imagination that dictates our view on reality, where does home really reside? Is Canada really home? As you said previously, the Indigenous People’s sense of self is missing in many ways. Why must one’s sense of self be tied down by a geographical location? Bridging communications between communities is an excellent way of trying to fit into a circle.. but what if you’re a square? Although it can be disadvantageous to be alone in a world that is, now, so interconnected, would it be helpful to develop their sense of identity without tying them down to material, land?
Thanks! Always a pleasurable read.
-Jamie
Hello Jamie,
Your quote reminded me of one film scene in Cloud Atlas, where the delusion (or actual representation of one of the character’s past experience?) tells the character that “the strong eat, the weak are meat.” A more extreme version, I know. That’s a good question, since a lot of history told in certain countries is going to be inevitably subjective in one way or another, yet I feel as a whole that having this perspective of nationalism/imperialism also pits countries against one another in trying to justify who is right. I think the concept of “honor” in victory is a part of human nature that also disregards humanity.
In terms of identity, I think a lot of places can feel like home. Take UBC’s motto: a place of mind. I like to add on to the home is where the heart is quote and say that at least for me, in terms of land/property, I don’t consider any of that a home. Home is an open roof; my heart travels too much, and I have no right to stop that. Home should be in moments where we feel like we belong, not as a concrete place. I suppose it’s similar to the alternate places in Stranger Things, which somewhat refer to imagination and reality. Home should be something intangible. I think connections in communities can be more easily made now. It probably isn’t helpful to have social and economic forces (and the government) that come around with land and property rights, but that is what society has become. People still fight over land rights nowadays probably because in terms of colonization, that is not just geographical but cultural territory. The interview question asking about land rights in this link https://www.culturalsurvival.org/publications/cultural-survival-quarterly/none/our-land-our-identity-our-freedom-roundtable-discussio go over this a bit.
I like how you phrased your questions in which “our reality is a fiction we manifest as we grow.” Because ultimately we filter all this information that the world gives us, and choose which to believe in and which to ignore.
Thank you for your comment!
-Jenny
Hi Jenny,
One part of your blog that really caught my eye was in the second paragraph, where you spoke of using stories and our imagination to visualize future actions and possibilities. I find this very interesting as I find that stories are often regarded as entertainment instead of exploring how stories can be utilized by a group as a tool. Stories can act as a fantastic way to teach social behaviour to a group. It can also serve as a way to undermine behaviour, such as oppression, like you were talking about in your blog entry. Also, more in line with the original part of the blog that attracted with me, our own internal narrative/stories can allow us to explore a situation without having to actually experience it, and thus explore all options. I often think that, because stories in a variety of different formats surround us, we underestimate the power of stories.
Hi Hope,
Part of my initial inspiration in writing the second paragraph was a while ago when my friend had written a research paper on the importance of childhood fairytales and its positive impacts on children–I don’t know the specifics of her arguments but I can imagine how it would relate to the entire gist of the power of stories and of imagining in being in other people’s shoes. I remember learning about Kohlberg’s Stages of Moral Development and I suppose that in the morals of stories is where children are able to develop an outsider’s perspective at first, as well as an understanding of how other things may function and look like to other people? Thomas King brings another interesting perspective of storytelling and history where history comes from the past, and can be utilized to manipulate people into thinking that stories are the past: http://www.ucobserver.org/culture/2013/09/moment_truth/ It makes me question too, the validity of all these stories we hear about and what perspective actually gives the truth in an outsider’s point of view? Or if that’s even possible?
Hi Jenny,
I was also drawn to your second paragraph where you emphasize the importance of stories as they allow for imaginative experiences. I really liked this part of your blog post because I think that too often stories are viewed as unrealistic because of the fact that they allow for imagination and because of their association with fantasy.
I think that your post does a great job of showing that stories can serve many purposes and in fact can be a good tool for communication. I think you also make a good point that stories can be deceiving especially when certain truths are left out.
I really enjoyed reading your post and it has definitely made me think more about the significance stories have. I think it is important to see how stories are viewed positively, in the fact that they can be an outlet for imagination and negatively in the instances where they are used to deceive the truth of situations such as settlement issues which you mentioned. Do you think that stories could be considered more significant if more people were educated about what they can do?
Hi Chloe,
Thanks for your insight! Adding on, I suppose satire in stories also serves to emphasize both political and artistic purposes by showing how unnecessary something is, by making a certain ‘truth’ a surreal reality (ex: George Orwell’s Animal Farm as a comment on how animalism/pigs represent communism/tyrants and a general exposure on corruption of power).
“Draw a monster. Now tell me: why is it a monster?” -Janice Lee
I think stories can influence how we perceive and believe in things. By believing in certain aspects sometimes it can be the story that influences us but sometimes it is our own interpretations that influence our beliefs. Either way, it really depends, but how one uses stories definitely is a powerful skill to have. We should be educated on how easily convinced our minds can be, like what biases we may have – such as confirmation bias and all other sorts of psychological flaws we easily oversee.