- In this lesson I say that our capacity for understanding or making meaningfulness from the first stories is seriously limited for numerous reasons and I briefly offer two reasons why this is so: 1) the social process of the telling is disconnected from the story and this creates obvious problems for ascribing meaningfulness, and 2) the extended time of criminal prohibitions against Indigenous peoples telling stories combined with the act of taking all the children between 5 – 15 away from their families and communities. In Wickwire’s introduction to Living Stories, find a third reason why, according to Robinson, our abilities to make meaning from first stories and encounters is so seriously limited. To be complete, your answer should begin with a brief discussion on the two reasons I present and then proceed to introduce and explain your third reason from Wickwire’s introduction.
Our ability to ascribe meaning to stories by First Nations communities is limited for three reasons. First, we are disconnected from the social process and context in which these stories were first told. As we learned in lesson 2:2, stories were the means by which First Nations communities asserted their right to the land. These stories were often told at a potlatch or other gatherings of nations, and land ownership could change as stories changed. This social context was important because it gave meaning to First Nations’ rights and ownership over the land. The link between land and story here is incredibly important, as evidenced by the Supreme Court ruling of 1995 which gave equal weight to First Nations oral history as historical evidence in land claim disputes. These processes were interrupted during the cultural genocide. Potlatches were banned and the important social link between stories and land was disrupted. This is the second reason that inhibits our ability to understand first stories. The attempted destruction of First Nations culture and the banning of cultural practices crucial to the practice of storytelling and land claims has had a serious impact that is still felt today.
There is a third reason, brought up by Harry Robinson in his book with Wendy Wickwire, “Living by Stories: A Journey of Landscape and Memory.” In his view, the stories of how First Nations people came to own the land have been ignored (Wickwire, p.9), a significant mistake because these stories held the answer about why First Nations have been assigned the land as opposed to whites (Wickwire, p.9). He tells a story about two twins, one black and one white. The white twin was banished, and this is why First Nations were here before whites (Wickwire, p.9). Although this story is told with some variations, the explanation remains intact- First Nations were here first, and rightfully so.
Wickwire speaks of “a living Coyote linked to Harry by generations of storytellers” (Wickwire, p.8). This sort of connection cannot be replicated by modern (white) retellings of first stories, as evidenced by how writers’ terms for Coyote were fundamentally different than how a First Nations storyteller would describe him (Wickwire, p.8). Words like “trickster” were used in the written versions of Coyote’s story, but never by the storytellers. Modern written stories simply lacked the “detail, dialogue and colour” (Wickwire, p.8) of the oral stories. Wickwire also makes mention of how we erase things that give context and meaning to these stories, such as removing the names of the original storytellers, locations, and the communities where these stories were told in written editions (Wickwire, p.8). These omissions disturb the narrative of the story (Wickwire, p.8).
Wickwire also talks about how the Boasian tradition ignored recent stories from First Nations, instead focusing on past, mythic stories “set in prehistorical times” (Wickwire, p.22). She quotes Harkin, who says their “goal was to document ‘some overarching, static, ideal type of culture, detached from its pragmatic and socially positioned mooring among real people'” and “‘systematically suppressed…all evidence of history and change'” (Wickwire, p.22). Just as we have suppressed First Nations culture during the period of cultural genocide, so too have academics who seem to have had a preconceived notion about what stories were important to understanding First Nations people, history, and culture. It’s another way in which we undermine our ability to make meaning of First Nations stories by refusing to examine equally important modern stories that First Nations have used to make sense of their position in the world in the 1920s and beyond.
Finally, Harry Robinson speaks on the importance of “living by stories” (Wickwire, p.29). These stories needed to be passed down through generations because they give meaning and help First Nations understand the importance of the land, their culture, and their history (Wickwire, p.29). This is something that has been diminished, deprived, and nearly destroyed during the age of residential schools, the 60’s scoop, etc. I would like to leave you with several links I found while reading about residential schools.
Here is a report from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission that talks about how the oral tradition can be used for reconciliation through the stories of ancestors that have worked toward it in the past. It also talks about our history of cultural genocide and how we can work toward reconciliation.
Here is a project that attempts to document the oral history of residential schools.
Here is a CBC documentary that features several residential school survivors.
And another short documentary about the deaths at residential schools. The former Indian Affairs minister literally used the phrase “final solution” when talking about the “Indian Problem.”
And finally, here is a powerful Canadian heritage minute about residential schools.
I would like to point out that these links and videos may be upsetting to you as they deal with child abuse and death. But that’s the reality of our history.
What do you think about the importance of living by stories?
What did you learn in school about residential schools/cultural genocide?
Works Cited
CBCTheNational. “Death at Residential Schools.” Youtube, 2015. Web. 07 Oct. 2016. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdR9HcmiXLA.
CBCTheNational. “Stolen Children | Residential School Survivors Speak out.” Youtube, 2015. Web. 07 Oct. 2016. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdR9HcmiXLA.
“Healing the Legacy of the Residential Schools.” Where Are The Children. N.p., n.d. Web. 07 Oct. 2016. http://wherearethechildren.ca/en.
Jerchlaw. “The Changing Statue of Oral History as Evidence.” Jerchlaw.com. P. Michael Jerch Law Office, 23 Apr. 2009. Web. 07 Oct. 2016. http://www.jerchlaw.com/Oral%20history_T’silhqot’in.pdf.
Robinson, Harry, and Wendy C. Wickwire. Living by Stories: A Journey of Landscape and Memory. Vancouver: Talon, 2005. Print.
Russel, Andrew. “What was the ’60s Scoop’? Aboriginal Children Taken from Homes a Dark Chapter in Canada’s History.” Global News. N.p., 2016. Web. 07 Oct. 2016. http://globalnews.ca/news/2898190/what-was-the-60s-scoop-aboriginal-children-taken-from-homes-a-dark-chapter-in-canadas-history/.
TheHDInstitute. “Heritage Minutes: Chanie Wenjack.” YouTube. YouTube, 2016. Web. 07 Oct. 2016. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_tcCpKtoU0.
Truth and Reconciliation Canada. Honouring the Truth, Reconciling for the Future: Summary of the Final Report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada. Winnipeg: Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, 2015. Web. 07 Oct. 2016. http://www.trc.ca/websites/trcinstitution/File/2015/Findings/Exec_Summary_2015_05_31_web_o.pdf.
Hi Marissa,
Thanks for your post and for adding such informative videos on the Residential school system. I attended primary and secondary school in Alberta until 2005 and surprisingly did not learn anything is school about this part of Canada’s heritage. It wasn’t until I came out to B.C as a young adult, that I learned about the horrible and tragic history. My first experience learning in depth about the Residential schools was during my first visit to hear survivors speak at Truth and Reconciliation Day in Vancouver. One of the things that I remember clearly is the detail that many of children were forced to learn english and banned them from speaking their native languages, as well as stripped them of their traditions. How traumatizing to not only be taken from your family, but to have any semblance of home and to be unable to communicate in any way. As we have discussed in past lessons, the use of language helps us define ourselves and the lives that we lead. The deprivation of language would be dehumanizing and create tension among all the children and teachers. I think that the initial struggles that come with lack of language would not hold a candle to the harm that would come of losing the ability to communicate with family and to continue on their culture and tradition. In the same way we have talked about land and home being taken from the First Nations people, taking their children also takes away any sense of home. It’s so horrific- I can’t even begin to imagine it. My question to you is this: do you think that stripping children of their native language would give them more short term or long term challenges?
Children whose parents decided not to speak their native language growing up definitely experience issues with their language and identity later in life. Forcefully stopping children from speaking their language leads to the same. So there are more long term challenges, such as connecting to an identity and culture that you haven’t been entirely a part of, or communicating with family members who don’t speak your language. It’s short term and long term, really- everyone loses. UBC actually has a First Nations endangered languages program with language classes taught by elders, so it’s good to see an attempt to revitalize the language and give students an option to learn their heritage language.
Hi Marissa,
When I first entered into UBC and was registering for my second language requirements, I had first selected to take Cree which would require me to go to a classroom that was not on campus and in the evening. I didn’t want to do all that but I wanted to learn Cree. It would have been my first language if my great-grandmother hadn’t married a white man, Scottish. I was not allowed to register at it did not meet the requirements for the C/D/F grading (or whatever it is called). I took Spanish instead which is only spoken in South America (except Brazil – Portuguese) because of who they were colonized by.
There are still Indigenous languages but not at the rates they should exist instead what we have are products of the colonization of the Americas by Britain, in my case, I appear White and only speak English. I likely wouldn’t have sought out to learn Cree had the degree requirements not been there. I may be so far removed now from the First Nations culture but I still am connected. I have all the luxuries of European materialism (my parent’s were upper-middle class) and yet, I always felt like our routines and stories were meaningless. They were empty. I still feel this way. If that is a result of long-term results of a people losing their language, than yes, I certainly think stripping children of their native language as well as everything else cultural (beliefs, dress, food, routine, traditions, rituals, etc). has long term challenges even if possibly so subtle they are not recognized as being such like myself.
Cheers
— Colleen
Hi Colleen,
Sorry for the late reply. I think it’s great that we have language programs like the First Nations Endangered Languages Program at UBC. UBC’s collaboration with the Musqueam nation/native speakers is crucial to the program. The institution can be useful in reserving and revitalizing language but it can also be an obstacle to learning, as your experience shows. Language really is so tied into our personal and cultural identity, and I am not surprised that many children who grow up disconnected from their parents’ or grandparents’ language face such challenges. Thanks for sharing your story.
Marissa