Delgamuukw v. the Queen was a trial between the Gitxsan and Wet’suwet’en people and the B.C. and federal governments over aboriginal title and self-government for the claims of ownership and jurisdiction of lands. During one tension filled courtroom day, Chief Justice Allan McEachern was presented with a map; a reproduction of the First Nation’s map. Upon unfolding the huge paper reproduction, Chief Justice McEachern said “we’ll call it the map that roared” (Sparke, 468). Sparke’s interpretation of McEachern’s slogan, if you will, is that his words appeared to refer to the idiomatic notion of a paper tiger. The map is roaring to life and clawing at McEachern’s stubborn and possibly bigoted hands and face.
Sparke made a connection of McEacherns slogan to a 1959 Peter Sellers movie, “The Mouse that Roared.” He remarks as such the comments might be interpreted as a “derisory scripting of the plaintiffs as a ramshack-led, anachronistic nation” (468). However, the reference to a roaring map simultaneously evoked the resistance in the First Nations’ remapping of the land. It fights for all the trap lines, the property lines, the electricity lines, the pipelines, the logging roads, the clear-cuts, and all the other accoutrements of Canadian colonialism on native land! The repeated return to maps during this battle was a key component at the attempt to outline sovereignty.
Although McEachern did not rule in favor of the plaintiffs, the Supreme court overruled his decision and made it possible for a retrial. The Gitxsan and Wet’suwet’en people claimed ownership and legal jurisdiction over 133 individual hereditary territories, which is a total of 58,000 square kilometers of northwestern British Columbia. This is proof that oral stories are a valuable source of history. My people used their oral histories as principle evidence in the case, and won!
Coming from the Gitxsan band, I did not witness this event. However, it was one of the most proudest moments my na’a was able to experience. She sat in the courtroom and listened to the banter back and forth between the defense and her people. I don’t remember much of her stories regarding this particular event, partly because as a kid you aren’t really interested in land claims and partly because my memory seems to evade me here and there. I am extremely proud to be Gitxsan and I enjoyed being able to write this blog and share a piece of my history with you.
———————————————————————————————————————-
http://www.thecourt.ca/2007/12/10/the-anniversary-of-delgamuukw-v-the-queen-two-legacies/
http://www.gitxsan.com/community/news/delgamuukw-decision-anniversary-signals-a-return-to-the-supreme-court/
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): 463- 495. Web. 04 April 2013.
Hi Kayla, thank you for sharing a part of your history.
Wow, what a powerful statement and powerful image. “We’ll call it the map that roared” for me, conjures up feelings of fierceness and persistence, and in reference to the case of the Gitxsan and Wet’suwet’en people fighting for their land and successfully claiming ownership and legal jurisdiction, the truth of that statement really came out as a success.
Your sharing of the court case brought me to think about how the jurisdictions hold up in today’s courts and politics. Are the premises still abided by and boundaries honoured? Unfortunately I do not know enough legally historically and legally to make an assessment myself, and I’m sure the matter is incredibly complex, even for those with the adequate knowledge.
I really wish historically significant events like these are thought in the public school system, and more widely shared. Think about what kind of change that would make in increasing solidarity, advocacy and mobilization for aboriginal rights and claims to land.
Again, thank you for your post, and sharing your stories! Look forward to reading more to come 🙂
Vivian
Hi Kayla – a great blog, I remember well the Gitxsan and Wet’suwet’en struggle to claim their territory from the Canadian government, my sister was a land claims researcher for the Gixtsan at that time 🙂
One of the interesting features of finding coincidences with someone else’s position in a subject is that it validates one’s analysis. I am glad/relieved that you also looked beyond the argument of Sparke according to which the mention to the ‘roaring paper’ was more than an obscure reference to Mao’s dictum of paper tiger or an allusion to the Cold War dynamics. One of the questions that puzzled me when I was writing my post and that immediately came back to me after reading your post on the same subject had to do with the author’s inability, or unwillingness to address the metaphor of the ‘ma that roared’ as a site of contestation? Although, the Chief Justice comment seems to have been dropped rather than made, which from a psychoanalyst perspective will have much more value, it seems that the options that Sparke explores in order to explore the uttering of the Chief Judge are not sufficient. But then the question will be why he does not dwell more extensively on the metaphoric value of the words uttered by the Chief Justice? It is true that he does hint, or indicates a subtext that suggests that the Chief Justice is really dismissive of the map and by extension what it implies, but it seems that a lot more could be made there beyond using it as the title of the article. Yet another question that comes to the fore is the rationality under which the Chief Justice flew the zone that was under dispute? Although the question about the motive behind the flying over the territory seems irrelevant, it seems that it points to the incomprehensibility, the distance that exists between the demands of the plaintiffs and what they understand they were searching. Thanks for your post.