When considering J. Edward Chamberlin’s question of “why should underlying title be vested in the storyline of the settler society? […] Why not change underlying title back to aboriginal title?” (loc 3032-3041 of 3425), the power of a name is what first comes to mind.
This theme – the power of a word – is found throughout many eras of literature. Is a name simply a name, as William Shakespeare debates in Romeo and Juliet? Or is there power in a name, as Christopher Paolini explores in his Eragon series? Chamberlin makes the argument for both. He writes that:
Nothing would change if underlying title were aboriginal title. It would be a fiction. The facts of life would remain the same. Yet of course they would not remain the same, because this new title would constitute a new story and a new society. Our understanding of the land would change. Our understanding of aboriginal peoples would change. Our understanding of ourselves would change. Our sense of the origin and purpose of our nations would change. (loc 3051 – 3060 of 3425)
Nothing would change, yet everything would change.
When we name something – whether that is the self or other – we give it a purpose, a starting point for comprehending it. The name – the title – shapes our perspective, and if we aren’t careful we may create a confirmation bias.
The ‘underlying title’ that Chamberlin discusses is the narrative that the settlers began when they started to arrive. By keeping the settler title(s), we neglect the first peoples whose land we dwell on. We fail to see anything other than what we expect to see.
The “theatres of desecration” (Chamberlin loc 3013 of 3425) – residential schools, relocations, loss of ceremony – have in large part helped to form this underlying title, the dominant narrative in Canada. These theatres have claimed the land in the name of settlers. These acts have created “a fiction – a story” (Chamberlin loc 3013 of 3425) of who owns the land.
So what would happen if we changed the underlying title – the idea of ownership?
The underlying aboriginal title – First Peoples, Metis, Inuti title – rather than the settler title would open many new possibilities for finding what Chamberlin calls the “common gound” (loc 2957 of 3425), or in other words, the common stories that connect both settlers and First Peoples. We must be synergistic to move forward. Changing the underlying title from European to aboriginal is Chamberlin’s recommendation for making this shift in ownership narrative. It would remind all of the vast history of the land, would provide deeper reconciliation, and a path to co-existance with all peoples who call the land known as Canada home.
So why is this justified? We come back to the questions of “what’s in a name?” (Shakepeare 2.1.85). By changing the underlying title, the rivers would not shift, nor would the laws of the land change. The basic structure of how we all live day-to-day will remain the same. Thus, there is no physical power within the name.
By changing the underlying title, what would change is our perspective – how we see our land, our history. In this, the power of the name is found within the validation it would bring to First Peoples stories.
What Chamberlin argues is that everything would change for the better. At least, eventually we can hope everyone would see that this is better. We could be the new exemplar: we confronted our past, acknowledged our losses. We made space for a new, inclusive country. It would help to balance the dominant narrative. We – the second largest titled land area in the world – could be the example for other countries.
We can set the stage for addressing not only the holocaust of slavery and the horror of continuing racism […] to rest the atrocity represented by the indiginous dead, those who to this day are forbidden to return to dust, but are scribbled in it. And we can move beyond the archetypal antagonism between the barbaric and the civilized that sustains so many conflicts around the world. We can replace the theatre of desecration with the theatre of a decent burial (Chamberlin loc 3079 of 3425).
Within the world of education, British Columbia is moving towards an era of decolonized teaching. Educators are learning new pedagogies that are more inclusive and tell a more authentic story of Canada. We are bringing First Peoples ways of knowing into the K-12 classrooms, and are actively working to . It is here that we see the change for the better; we see that how we understand something has power of us.
Ammendment (March 7 2021)
Early in February, Dr. Paterson provided feedback on blog posts to date. She highlighted a element of ‘what’s in a name’ that I had not previously considered: capitalization. We use caplitalization for proper nouns – “specific people, places, things, or ideas” (O’Brian). When Chamberlin talks about the ‘aboriginal title’ it is not capitalized; he is categorizing this group as a common noun – as something generic, unspecific. In this act, Chamberlin is not calling attention to any particular aboriginal group, leaving the question: what title should we choose from? This adds another element of complexity to changing the title.
Additional Notes:
Citations for Chamberlin are based off of Kindle for iPad. Location approximations are the following:
3032 – 3041 is approximately page 229
3051 – 3060 is approximately page 230
3013 is approximately page 228
2957 is approximately page 225
3079 is approximately page 231
Works Cited
“Certainty: Canada’s Struggle To Extinguish Aboriginal Title”. UBCIC. N.d.
https://www.ubcic.bc.ca/certainty_canada_s_struggle_to_extinguish_ab
original_title. Accessed January 24, 2021.
Chamberlin, J. Edward. “Eleven – Ceremonies”. If This Is Your Land,
Where Are Your Stories? Finding Common Ground. Kindle ed. Toronto:
Vintage Canada, 2004, loc. 2882 – 3193 of 3425.
Harvey, Megan. “Story People: : Stó:lō-State Relations and Indigenous
Literacies in British Columbia, 1864–1874″. Journal of the Canadian
Historical Association, vol. 24, no. 1, 2013, pp. 51-88. DOI: https://doi.
org/10.7202/1024997ar.
O’Brian, Elizabeth. “Common & Proper Nouns”. Grammar Revolution. n.d.
https://www.english-grammar-revolution.com/proper-nouns.html.
Accessed on 7 March 2021.
“Origin Of The Name Canada”. Government of Canada. 2020.
https://www.canada.ca/en/canadian-heritage/services/origin-name-
canada.html. Accessed January 24, 2021
Shakespeare, William. “Romeo and Juliet”. The Norton Shakespeare. 3rd
edition, edited by Stephen Greenblatt, et al., Norton & Norton Inc.,
2016, pp. 957-1035
“True Name”. Fandom. N.d. https://inheritance.fandom.com/wiki/True_
name#:~:text=Because%20the%20Ancient%20Language%20allows,
be%20able%20to%20control%20him. Accessed January 23, 2021.
Hi Samantha,
I really enjoyed your post this week. I think you make some really salient points about the ways that names hold power over how we perceive and interact with our environment. I can’t help but think here of things like product names, which are crafted precisely to entice consumers, and give them an idea of what the product is, by taking advantage of certain auditory/linguistic associations (I did a project on this in my first year linguistics course!). This alone demonstrates that names have more power, even on a subconscious level, then we may realize. I think it says a lot, furthermore, about Canadian colonialism that we have thus far refused to change the underlying land titles. This is such a low-risk change, as it would not require a dramatic readjustment in our everyday lives. As you point out, it would simply acknowledge rightful Aboriginal claims to the land, and encourage settler-Canadians to revisit narratives about our past. However, Canada is so keen on clinging to ideas of terra nullis and their ownership of the land that they are completely unwilling to make this otherwise simple but effective change – this is reflective of Canada’s extreme reluctance to acknowledge their past wrongdoings. My only worry, though, is that if this were done, it may be on a performative level, precisely because it would change so little about our everyday lives. It might be too easy for the land title to be transferred to aboriginal custody, thus easing our own consciences, whilst racist laws and law enforcement policies run rampant. Ergo, I wonder, do you think that changing the land title alone is sufficient for reconciliation? Or, alternatively, is there any way to ensure that such a change would really allow us to shift our narrative without simply becoming a token action? Thank you so much for your blog post – I found it to be really thought-provoking!
Hi Victoria,
I really like the connection you made to product names. I had not thought of this significance, but they definitely do hold an influence over us.
Labeling the changing of the ‘underlying title’ as a low-risk endeavor is an accurate one. Though names can hold a power, do we want current colonial names to continue to hold the negative power they do? I was thinking a lot about my high school – named Sir John A MacDonald – and how a petition has moved renaming it forward. There are many alumni adamantly against this, and I have a hard time understanding what exactly they will be losing, when those of Mi’kmaq and Metis ancestry will gain much.
I agree with you thoughts that done for publicity, this change in title will not address the underlying issues. I do not believe changing the title – even if done in an authentic way – would be sufficient. It could be the starting point though for true reconciliation; a way to bring awareness to those who still choose not to see the ‘other’ stories of our land. Thank you for your question, and furthering my own thoughts!
The notion of the ‘power of a name’ reminds me of “Four Souls” by Louise Erdrich. In the last section of the book, we learn that one of the characters has failed to give a name to her own child. While the child himself is a little strange in his mannerisms, an Elder relates this to the fact that “the spirits don’t know him!” (Erdrich 200). The passage surrounding this outburst highlighted to me the power of a name; the child remains nameless to the reader, and because of it we never get a sense of who the boy really is — if he truly is different as the Elder claims, or if it is related to shyness or some other character feature.
In a slightly related note, I recently had a conversation with a family member who works for the City of Pitt Meadows. She mentioned how the city was redoing the signs for parks in the area and they would include the Katzie First Nation language. This is an initiative to “recognize their tradition territory and history” (City of Pitt Meadows July 29, 2020) of the Indigenous peoples of Pitt Meadows. While a small gesture, I still feel that it is a great acknowledgement and a move to being more inclusive.
If you are interested in what parks are receiving these new signs, follow this link: https://www.pittmeadows.ca/our-community/news/media-releases/new-park-signs-include-katzie-first-nation-language
Hi Cayla!
‘Four Souls’ sounds like it is a perfect addition to the novels I mentioned that explore this theme.
The initative taken bt Pitt Meadows is such a great step towards acknowledgement. It is also great that the city is taking the time to collaborate with the Katzie First Nation in translating. Including the translated name helps to further understand the story that goes along with the traditional name; I feel Chamberlin would appreciate this move! Thank you for sharing this project!