Within the traditional viewpoint of European literature, First Peoples stories come across as myths and legends. Taking on the label of children’s tales (Miracle), these stories have been stripped of their value.
Few First Nations writers are in a position to take the time to comb through the oratory, story, drama, and poetry in its original form and glean the principles of First Nations story creation from it.
The body of our oratory in its totality and original form, free of the so-called interpretive teachings, is the oldest oratory and constitutes our sacred texts. In order for criticism to arise naturally from within our culture, discourse must serve the same function it has always served. In Euro-society, literary criticism heightens the competition between writers and limits entry of new writers to preserve the original canon. What will its function be in our societies?
Lee Maracle (85)
Maracle writes that there are too few scholars who study “First Nations writing and writers” (84), and many are not First Nations themselves. The experts who are, “automatically becomes an expert” (85) in all First Nations cultures. The bodies of works within this field – within First Nations “oratory, story, drama, and poetry” (85) – are high in numbers, and the time it would take to sort through is too long for scholars to learn the principles that make up First Peoples literature. This poses a problem of bringing in more First Peoples representation into the developing nation of a decolonized Canada.
Traditionally, literary canons are subjectively determined by critics, writers, editors, and other scholars (Davey; Frye; Sanders). So what will the function of literary criticism be within our societies, when we have limited critics, editors, scholars who specialize in First Peoples literature? What values will be assigned? How will future canons be determined
The idea of a canon of literature is the idea of “intellectual heritage, literature, and theoretical frameworks” (Maracle 92) being preserved to ensure the culture of a nation is preserved (Davey; Kramnick; Lecker).
But, how do we define Canadian culture – Canadian Heritage?
Frye and Maracle both advocate that Canada is a divided nation. We are connected by ” immense railways” (Frye 27). Each province – each group of peoples – identify in their own way. Can we have only one Canadian canon? Or dare we have many?
In Maracle’s view, her society – Salish society – uses (and will continue to use) stories as a means to “grow and transform” (85) oneself into a self-actualized member of society. Her society will continue to learn from past stories, and (re)create these story within a “modern context” (85).
It is the responsibility of every Sto:lo to enter the world, to go out and create new stories so that we don’t return to our ancestors boring. In one of our creation myths, we come here to create new story, to gain some sort of awareness of the impact of behaviour on hidden being (mind, spirit, and heart), so we can return to the world of hidden being and teach about consequences.
Maracle (85)
The notion of ‘literacy’ is changing within the academic world. With it, the notion of the canon is as well (“Feminism and the Canadian Literary Canon”). Refuse, a work of literature created by seeks to redefine the Canadian ‘canon’ – CanLit – to be more inclusive, to appropriately represent Canada as a multicultural, diverse nation. The editors view their work as “a kind of community-formation and a kind of care-work” (14), showing a strong parallel to where Maracle sees her society as being headed in terms of criticism – of being represented accurately.
Editors even go as far as to reference Maracle’s 1988 reading of I Am Woman, where she stormed the CanLit stadium to have her voice heard.
Works Cited
Davey, Frank. “Canadian Canons”. Critical Inquiry, vol. 16, no. 6, 1990, pp.
672-681.
Frye, Northrop. The Bush Garden: Essays on the Canadian Imagination,
eBook. House of Anansi Press, 2017. Richmond Public Library.
“Feminism and the Canadian Literary Canon”. CanLit Guides. 15 November,
2016. www.canlitguides.ca/canlit-guides-editorial-team/an-
introduction-to-gender-and-sexuality/feminism-and-the-canadian-
literary-canon/. Accessed on 12 March, 2021.
Kramnick, Jonathan Brody. “The Making of the English Canon”. PMLA, vol.
128, no. 5, 1997, pp. 1087-1101. DOI: 10.2307/463485
Lecker, Robert. “A Country Without a Canon?: Canadian Literature and the
Esthetics of Idealism”. Mosaic: An Interdisciplinary Critical Journal, vol.
26, no. 3, 1993, pp. 1-19.
Maracle, Lee. “I Am Woman – Lee Maracle – A Native Perspective on
Sociology and Feminism”. Issuu, 26 August, 2019.
www.issuu.com/cymykamo58102/docs/0889740593-
i_am_woman_by_lee_maracle. Accessed on 12 March, 2021.
Maracle, Lee. “Toward a National Literature: A Body of Writing.” Across
Cultures, Across Borders: Canadian Aboriginal and Native American
Literatures, edited by Paul Warren Depasquale, et al., Broadview,
2010, pp. 77-96.
McGregor, Hannah, host. “Refuse: CanLit in Ruins”. Secret Feminist Agenda,
season 3, episode 7, Wilfred Laurier University Press, 16 November,
2018, www.wlupress.wlu.ca/Scholarly-Podcasting-Open-Peer-
Review/Secret-Feminist-Agenda/Season-3/Episode-3.7-Refuse-CanLit-in-
Ruins. Accessed on 12 March, 2021.
McGregor, Hannah, et al., editors. Refuse: CanLit in Ruins. Canada Council
for the Arts and Ontario Arts Counscil, 2018.
Sanders, Arnie. “The “Canon” of English Literature”. English 211: English
Literature Beowulf to Dryden, Goucher College. 2012.
www.faculty.goucher.edu/eng211/canon_of_english_literature.htm.
Accessed on 12 March, 2021.
Thorkelson, Erika. “Setting the CanLit Canon on Fire”. University Affairs, 6
March, 2020. www.universityaffairs.ca/features/feature-article/setting-
the-canlit-canon-on-fire/. Accessed on 12 March, 2021.
Unreserved. “Lee Maracle Stormed CanLit Stages to Make Sure Her Story
Was Heard”. CBC, 16 March, 2018. www.cbc.ca/radio/unreserved/how-
indigenous-authors-are-claiming-space-in-the-canlit-scene-
1.4573996/lee-maracle-stormed-canlit-stages-to-make-sure-her-story-
was-heard-1.4578124. Accessed on 12 March, 2021.
Hi Samantha,
I really liked your posting this week as it got me thinking about my other love, medieval history and the study of it. I found “[t]he bodies of works within this field – within First Nations “oratory, story, drama, and poetry” (85) – are high in numbers, and the time it would take to sort through is too long for scholars to learn the principles that make up First Peoples literature” particularly thought provoking. It is almost as if the excuse of ‘there’s too much, and other things are more interesting’ is being made. The very same thought is held in the study of Medieval manuscripts. Countless manuscripts remain unread/untranslated because of the sheer quantity and the lack of “automatic experts” — instead already translated works are written on again, and again, and again (you would think after awhile they would stop finding new arguments to old papers but you would be wrong).
I get the sense from your post that with Indigenous mythology/storytelling/oral/written/etc. many think of them as “too simplistic” (as you pointed out they are often downgraded to children’s tales) and therefore not worth going into further detail on.
Having been told some traditional Indigenous mythology when I was young, I wonder how I would react to the same stories today; if I would take greater meaning from them now that I’ve taken a few Indigenous literature courses.
I can’t really think of a question directly related to your blog…but I am in need of a group for the end-of-term project and I was wondering if you would be interested in forming one with me?
Thanks for the great read!
~Cayla
Hi Cayla,
Thank you for your comment! You make a great point: “It is almost as if the excuse of ‘there’s too much, and other things are more interesting’ is being made”. When I think of this, what comes to mind is not ‘more interesting’ things, but more normative things. As Lutz mentions in ‘Myth and Memory’, many First Peoples stories bring in the supernatural – for example, Pauline Johnson’s ‘Legends of Vancouver’, to add to our class’s growing canon – and though European literature has seen a ‘supernatural’ theme within the gothic novel, this has been a human-centered supernatural, where as First Peoples stories have a heavy nature focus (I may have swerved off-topic, but your comments have gotten my brain looking at new paths!)
I think the pondering that you mention – regarding how you would interact and react to First Peoples stories today had you been introduced to more – is an excellent question in itself. I have thought a lot about this myself while reading your response, and while writing my reply, and I wonder that had I been more exposed to this literature, would I have less of a restricted learning ability (I am unable to make connections when hearing something; I have to see it in writing for it to make sense). Had I been exposed to more oral story telling forms, would this have been different?
Thank you also for reaching out about the group work; I hope you were able to see my email through canvas earlier tonight. I have just heard back from the group I had reached out to, and they had space for a fourth. I do look forward to your group’s conference postings! I’ve really been enjoying and appreciating the viewpoints you have been bringing to the questions/class.
Hi Samantha,
Thanks for your great post! I think you’re asking questions that are very important for us: questions about what a Canadian canon (or Canadian canons) might be, and what kind of communities can be formed and transformed through “criticism”–literary studies or creation like what we’re engaged in now. It seems that Maracle’s argument would imply that there would have to be multiple “Canadian” canons, insofar as communities like Maracle’s Salish nation would need to work within their own stories. This part does seem somewhat at odds with Frye’s idea–not so much in disagreeing about the importance of literature to a nation as about what a nation might be. It is a mark of my own ignorance that, with all the currency of the term “First Nations,” I don’t think I ever really thought of Indigenous communities as nations in the way Canada might be a nation.
This is a theme I’ve seen developing in a few posts recently. Does our future ask for the formation of a more unified, inclusive community or an assemblage of communities–a nation of nations? (Maybe not an answerable question . . . )
Thanks and all best!
Hi Connor,
I would agree with your assessment of ‘multiple canons’. I also think of the social aspect in particular that Maracle writes about – and you mention in your post – and how each society is different; each society requires different substance.
Your mention of “Indigenous communities as nations in the way Canada might be a nation” is so reflective, and so thank you for sharing. I would agree with you – with the curriculum that many of us grew up with in, this is not highlighted. We have been so fortunate in this course to see so many varying perspectives and narratives to further our understandings.
Your question is thought provoking, and an excellent one. Canada does have that feeling of a nation of nations (I immediately think of my various moves across the country, and the cultural shock that accompanied each one). In my own view, my own hope I suppose, I see Canada’s future as inclusive, celebratory, and unified in this appreciation of differences. I sometimes feel that attempting to put the label of “Canada” as the unifyer will not do justice to the decolonial pedagogies so many are fighting towards. Can we be unified under a nation whose original goal was to destroy other nations (such as the Beothuk)?
Thank you for your comment! It has been enjoyable reading your thoughts on the topic.
Hi Samantha,
I really enjoyed your blog post. It made me do a great deal of reflection. Your opening sentence did a fantastic job of consuming me, and forcing me to reflect on the social interaction we have with mythology and storytelling, in reference to indigenous experience in Canada. Specially through the scheduling of our education system. which brings the question of why Indigenous stories are placed under history and social studies rather than Canadian Literature in elementary and secondary schools.
Highlighting the change that is taking place in literature and the change required of Canadian Literature, is something that I find to be a point being made in many of my classes, when discussing what is allowed to be identified as Canadian literature, and I am thankful for you having placed an emphasis on the topic, and I like to share your hopeful take for the possibility of a more inclusive and welcoming experience in Canadian literature, that share the multicultural experiences of all, not just the European writers that are highlighted.
Thank you for your post, and for a thought consuming read.
Mia
Hi Mia,
Thank you for the lovely comment. Your question of “why Indigenous stories are placed under history and social studies rather than Canadian Literature in elementary and secondary schools?” is so thought provoking. I had not given this much thought, but you are so correct – all I have learned has been through either Socials, teacher education, or my own research (personal novel choices). Things are slowly starting to change, as you mention in reference to my post, which had clouded over this fact that were they not, English classes would make developing a inclusive, truly ‘Canadian’ canon challenging.
Another thought that your comment recalled to me is the mis-representation of First Peoples, Metis, Inuit in various fictional works (‘Twilight’, the ‘House of Night’ series) and the varying controversies/issues put forward due to this lack of authenticity. This is another area we are seeing change in within the English departments, as now most K-12 teachers now use this link <http://www.oyate.org/index.php/resources/41-resources/how-to-tell-the-difference> to evaluate literature for biases.
Thank you again, and I look forward to future conversation!