I have delved into the issue of cultural appropriation/misappropriation before, attempting to explain where I think the line should be drawn, and I’ve also discussed the need to ensure authenticity when approaching stories and resources attributed to Native Americans. To briefly (and inadequately) sum up those arguments  (really, read the longer posts):

1. Some items/symbols are restricted and should not be used outside the culture because doing so disrespects these items/symbols. Doing so is cultural appropriation/ misappropriation.
2. Other items/symbols are not restricted and are freely shared between cultures, and as long as they are not used to perpetuate stereotypes about the people from whence these items/symbols come, there’s no problem. This is an issue of respect, not cultural appropriation/misappropriation.
3. If you’re not sure, ask. More importantly, listen.

Contemporary expressions of indigenous culture, by indigenous artists. “Beat Nation” opened the same day that the Inukt brand became available at the Montreal Museum of Modern Art.

Recently a boutique has come under fire after its products were made available at the Montreal Museum of Fine Arts. A number of indigenous people have expressed their concern that these products are culturally misappropriated and perpetuate stereotypes.

The designer, Nathalie Benarroch, has this to say,“… do you have to be French to eat a baguette? Do you have to be Italian to speak Italian? This is just fashion. I’m not trying to be philosophical, or political, or cultural, or historical. We all have deep, intense, challenging lives, and fashion is light. That’s what I like about it.”

Others disagree, including Laich-kwil-tach artist Sonny Assu, “Look at Beat Nation: that is the authentic voice of indigenous people right there,” he said. “Showing that we’re not succumbing to the stereotype and that we’re not pandering to the tourist esthetic to make a quick buck.”

Despite the fact that I am annoyed beyond belief by Ms. Benarroch’s total refusal to actually listen to the concerns of indigenous people while claiming to honour them (a common refrain among so many people engaged in cultural misappropration), I think a nuanced analysis is needed here. I believe this, because to simply dismiss every item sold at Inukt as ‘cultural appropriation/misappropriation’ will not educate Ms. Benarroch, and it isn’t entirely accurate. I value accuracy.

Footwear/Accessories

Some of the boutique’s footwear and accessories are apparently made in Wendake (Huron-Wendat) by First Nations artisans. However obnoxious it might be for some to see non-natives in moccasins and fur hats, items like these do not tend to be restricted in indigenous cultures, and most would agree that if they are going to be sold, the benefit should go towards First Nations people.

My criticism: the website claims all footwear and accessories are made on First Nations reserves, but does not list which ones. If these items are actually produced by First Nations artisans, they should receive credit on the website. I also think it is legitimate to question what percentage of the profits actually flow to the people who make them.

Images of indigenous people

The item description includes this: “Printed on one side with a black and white picture of legendary Chief Joseph, who is given an instant style with a shot of fluo feathers…”

There are a number of items that display the images of indigenous peoples, such as shirts, bags and chairs and so forth.

As is usual among ‘native-inspired’ goods, these pictures feature only old-style photos of people from Plains cultures. Chief Joseph is identified by name, but his indigenous name (Hinmatóowyalahtq̓it) and his nation (Wal-lam-wat-kain, Nez Pierce) are not mentioned. Still, this is better than the anonymous “First Nations woman“, and the bizarrely anonymous Sitting Bull.

My criticism: These images are not culturally restricted, but they are deserving of respect. At a minimum, they should be properly named and their nation should be identified. Indigenous people are not decorations. If you ‘respect’ indigenous people, then indicate this by showing you’ve done at least some research in order to discover who these people were and what they accomplished.

Carrying around a ‘fob’ of a caricature of an indigenous girl is…creepy, and frankly racist, even if it comes from a reserve.

There is a deeper issue at play as well. While images of actual indigenous people are not (in my opinion) exactly cultural misappropriation, the propagation of these particular Plains nation images plays into the mainstream homogenisation of ALL indigenous cultures as being similar to Plains cultures.  Very rarely does the fashion industry reflect the diversity of our nations, and instead chooses to rely on worn-out tropes, constantly recycling Plains culture as seen through the Settler lens.

I would like to see more diversity of representation in the fashion industry, if our historic figures are of such interest to designers, but above all, I believe these images need to be presented respectfully and in context.

There is a difference between actual historical figures, and caricatures of native people.

However, I draw the line at caricatures. They play into wider racist stereotypes of red face and are inherently problematic as a result. Designers must not wave these concerns aside, believing themselves to be outside of such cultural contexts.

I do not consider any of these images to be cultural misappropriation which I’m defining as the misuse of restricted cultural items/symbols. In the first case, actual indigenous peoples are depicted, though they should not be presented anonymously. As well, were they presented in a disrespectful manner, I would consider that extremely problematic.

In the second case, caricatures are racist stereotypes, and are to be avoided. There is nothing respectful about these stereotypes.

Random names and images

The boutique itself is name “Inukt”. The word inuk means human in Inuktitut. However, Inuit people also identify themselves as Inuk (singular), and have different names for people who are not Inuit. A number of items in this store have the phrase, “I am Inuk and my heart is free!”

My criticism: That is great, if you are actually Inuk, but would anyone carry around a bag that states, “I am Japanese and my heart is freeeeeeee” if they were not actually Japanese? The phrase appropriates a cultural identity and attributes it to the person displaying the item. That is bizarre, and inappropriate. I consider this to be cultural appropriation/misappropriation.

The boutique also assigns random indigenous names/words to its products, without any explanation as to the origin of these words. Most of the words are Anishinaabe, and some appear to be from various other indigenous languages.

Choosing random words from other languages to label products and make them seem more ‘exotic’ is hardly new. However, given the fact that indigenous languages are severely threatened because of a history of repression wherein our own peoples were forbidden to speak their languages, designers should be treading lightly. At the least, providing a translation and identifying which LIVING language these words come from, would help demonstrate that the designer is not wholly ignorant of the words she is borrowing.

“West coast” symbols rival homogenised “Plains” symbols in terms of recognition and anonymity.

Using these words is not in itself cultural appropriation/misappropriation in my opinion, but they do play into a wider power structure wherein non-indigenous peoples often have more opportunities to access indigenous languages in study than do indigenous peoples themselves. As a result, most scholarly work done in our languages, is done by non-indigenous linguists. This is a complex issue that cannot be delved into in any proper depth here, but it does complicate things. It may not be appropriative, but it is problematic.

A “west coast” symbol is used on a number of different products at Inukt, each of which is given a different name in Anishinaabe…sold at a store using an altered word from Inuktitut. The cultural mishmash here hurts my head. Anyway, I do not know if this particular symbol is restricted. Nor do I know who designed it as no attribution is provided by the boutique’s website. It is possible that this particular symbol has been culturally appropriated/misappropriated, but I leave that judgment up to someone from within the many cultures incorrectly mashed together as “west coast”.

This fur coat goes for $3750.00.

The fact is, the majority of the items at this boutique are not created by First Nations people, and are not even remotely ‘indigenous’. The boutique mostly consists of luxury fur items with a ‘native’ name slapped onto it. These items are not appropriative, just poorly labelled.

My final assessment

I think there is good reason for the controversy. There are examples of cultural appropriation/misappropriation, as well as reliance on racist stereotypes. Not all the products at this boutique fall under these categories, but more work could certainly be done to identify the communities where the footwear and accessories are made, as well as untangling the mishmash of cultures Ms. Benarroch uses to label her items and boutique.

Designers need to do a better job of communicating with indigenous communities if they wish to use indigenous symbols and languages to represent their products. The relationship between indigenous peoples and Settler Canadians is often strained, but it is amazing what some open and honest dialogue can do. As Justice Murray Sinclair recently put it:

I personally don’t see anything inherently wrong with society using images from our culture appropriately, its when those images are used inappropriately that I have a problem…

…I want Canada and all its institutions to be proud to include us in the imagery of this country, not solely because there’s a profit to be had, but because its who we are and who this country is. If we demand that they stop using those images, we lose something. All of us. We will continue to be invisible.

For me, the issue of respect is central, and respect is shown through actions, not platitudes. Inukt could be doing a much better job at this.

Information

If you feel it is inappropriate that these items continue to be sold at the Montreal Museum of Fine Arts you can contact:

• Sylvie Labrosse (Manager of the Fine Arts Boutique) at slabros@mbamtl.org
• Nathalie Bondil (Director of the Montreal Museum of Fine Arts) at nbondil@mbamtl.org.
• You can also contact Allison Skinner at info@distillgallery.ca as the Inukt line being sold at her gallery in Toronto as well.
• There is a contact form on the Inukt website available here, if you wish to reach out directly.

Update

Thomas Bastien, Press Officer for the Montreal Museum of Fine Arts reached out to let us know the following:

“The Boutique and Bookstore is more than just a shop; it aims to promote cultural and artistic diversity”, states Sylvie Labrosse, manager of the boutique. “Following the comments we have received in the past few days, we have decided, in consultation with Nathalie Bernarroch, that our boutique was not the best place for the launch of her collection. We have therefore contacted personally various members of the First Nations community, as well as visitors who have taken the trouble to share their opinions with us, to apologize and to let them know that the Inukt products will be withdrawn from the boutique in the next few days”, she added.

As well, Allison Skinner from distill gallery in Toronto wrote me to let me know that as of two weeks ago, Inukt products are not being shown there.

A beautiful reworking of an iconic image from Elsipogtog, by artist Fanny Aishaa. The original photo was taken by Ossie Michelin, a reporter for APTN and the woman is Amanda Polchies.

Though I will be writing on the events that took place on October 17, 2013 (timeline put together by Dylan Powell) when the RCMP raided a peaceful blockade by members of the Elsipogtog Mi’kmaq First Nation, for now I just want to provide people with some already available and excellent resources on the subject. What I won’t be doing is linking to the plethora of unbelievably racist articles that are pouring out, branding the people of Elsipogtog as everything from terrorists, to puppets of environmental NGOs. These pieces already have mainstream attention, capture mainstream attitudes towards indigenous peoples, and are pretty successfully creating the official narrative.

If you want to delve deeper, or need resources with which to counter these portrayals, here you go!

If you have time for only one article, then you need to read this one, written by Martin Lukacs: “New Brunswick fracking protests are the frontline of a democratic fight.”

It does an excellent job of refocusing attention on the reason the blockade existed in the first place, and on the fact that the area in question has never been ceded to Canada, and thus is not owned by Canada. The people of Elsipogtog have been branded as law breakers, but the legality of Canadian actions in that area are completely undermined by this very central fact.

To keep us in that vein, here is an article from 2012 which discusses the fact that 67% of people in New Brunswick support a moratorium on fracking. This is an intensely controversial practice and people throughout Canada and the US, native and non-native alike, stand in opposition to it. The people of Elsipogog are not on the fringe of an issue here, they are in the majority.

One of a series of posters put together by tumblr user flailingphantasm for October 18th solidarity actions.

For a really good breakdown of arguments about the rule of law, as it is so lopsidedly applied in this case, Daniel Wilson provides us with, “Out of order: Indigenous protest and the rule of law“. He brings up some important issues about the public’s love affair with the ‘rule of law’ from such a distinctly one-sided perspective, which ignores the underlying illegitimacy of Canadian claims to the land in question and the unceasing violation of the ‘rule of law’ by the Crown.

For a more fullsome legal analysis of ‘rule of law’ as it pertains to Aboriginal peoples, this invaluable article by OKT Law is a hard counter to the arm-chair lawyers that populate comment sections and who advocate cracking down on indigenous peoples: “Do we need the ‘Rule of Law’ in New Brunswick to deal with native protestors?” This article, along with the Lukacs article are probably two of the best resources you can use to learn about the issue, and counter the misinformation out there.

This article: “Elsipogtog “Clashes” 400 years in the making”, by Dru Oja Jay, goes into good detail about some of the history of the area, and how high tensions have run between the Mi’kmaq and the Canadian government. State violence against the Mi’kmaq people has been an ongoing problem, and Elsipogtog is merely the latest in a line of such.

Lesley Belleau describes the cycle of abuse between the Canadian state and indigenous peoples as expressed in what happened to the people of Elsipogtog. Her piece, “Elsipogtog: The Realities of Abuse” helps name the behaviours and the coping strategies used, as well as locating this specific incident in a wider history of a a relationship gone terribly wrong.

Graeme Decarie discusses ‘legal’ versus ‘right’ in a blog post and goes into detail as to how the events in Elsipogtog are part of a wider issue facing all people in New Brunswick and throughout Canada.

Leanne Simpson, in her brilliant piece “Elsipogtog Everywhere” brings more context to the deeper issue of the land, and the way in which reconciliation cannot occur without a conversation about that land. If you need to know what deeper acts of resurgence are occurring outside of reactive blockades to deal with lack of consultation and the prioritising of corporate interests over the wishes of all people living in the area, then this article provides it. This is one of the most honest and hopeful pieces I have read on the subject, and it helped me deal with the flood of emotions I’ve been experiencing since watching this all go down on October 17th.

By the way? What the heck is fracking? Here is a video that provides a simple, clear description of the process of fracking, summarising the pros and cons: “CNN Explains: Fracking“.

This was the first reworking of Ossie Michelin’s image, by artist Gregg Deal.

Recently, a claim was made by He Who Shall Not Be Named (because the guy literally gets paid to troll, and every little mention puts more money in his bloated pocket) that the people of Elsipogtog are basically puppets of foreign environmental groups. The article “Fracking Indigenous Country” (under the donation appeal) is a very long, but detailed rebuttal of any such claims. If you were at all wondering about whether this could be true, this article does an amazing job of completely demolishing these fantasies.

Rex Murphy really put his foot in it as well. Here are two very good responses to his patronising, racist article: “Rex Murphy and the Frames of Settler Colonial War” by Corey Snelgrove, and “Dear Rex: Colonialism exists, and you’re it” by Nick Montgomery.

Jian Ghomeshi put out an audio essay on the incident, summarising the different opinions and posing some of the important questions the public needs to be asking. He also helps you learn how to pronounce Elsipogtog

There have been a lot of conspiracy theories going around about provocateurs and US military involvement and so on. Here is an incredibly detailed article by Gord Hill about the tactics and equipment used during the raid which should help dispel some of the most outlandish rumours without downplaying the level of violence initiated by the RCMP: “Overview of RCMP deployment against Mi’kmaq blockade, Oct 17, 2013.”

Another article by the same author questions the rumours about provocateurs setting fire to the RCMP vehicles: “Statement on Provocateurs, Informants, and the conflict in New Brunswick.” Snitch-jacketing, or labeling people as provocateurs or agents of the state is an incredibly divisive and dangerous practice and whether the rumours are spread by law enforcement or our own communities, we have to be careful.

Ossie Michelin’s original, iconic photograph.

While this next article is not about Elsipogtog, it is nonetheless a very important read. “An open letter to peaceful protestors” debunks a lot of the myths about way peaceful protest was used during the Civil Rights Movement, and clarifies the difference between peaceful, and legal. The need to be organised rather than simply reactive, is highlighted and explained. Every person wanting to be involved in any sort of protest, solidarity action or larger movement, needs to read this article and really think about what it is saying.

To wrap up, I want to thank the artists who have so quickly responded with their support of the movement.

It is so easy to get bogged down by all the problems indigenous peoples face. Poverty, suicide, addiction, disease, incarceration, homelessness, violence — where does one even begin to address these things?

We can cast our nets widely, and see the big picture in all its ugly colonial horror. This is absolutely necessary; but philosophically deconstructing colonialism can only get us so far when so many indigenous peoples are struggling just to have their basic needs met.

For more stunning images, click on the picture to visit Strong Families.

We can cast our nets more narrowly, and focus on a single issue. This is essential to those of us who require tangible outcomes. Perhaps you start a recreation program for youth in your home community. You pour your time and energy into it, trying to ignore political infighting, trying to be responsive to the kids who are coming to the program hungry, sleep-deprived, or who stop coming altogether because things at home are too complicated. You hold on to the successes, and this helps you survive the failures. You try not to take any of it personally and you remind yourself that you can’t solve all the problems of the community on your own. You have to focus — just do this well, that is your part.

We can and we do both of these things. We come back to big picture issues when possible, and we do on-the-ground work. That is the reality that does not grab the headlines, and is so rarely acknowledged by the wider public. The myth of the lazy, corrupt Indian is overpowering. It obscures the amazing work that so many of our people are doing every single day.

What can unite so many different Peoples?

Strong Families focuses on mothers in this series, but does not ignore the communal nature of child rearing.

Much ado is made of our divisions and differences, and this is so successful because the narrative of our sameness is foundational to colonial policies. Our differences are only highlighted in terms of conflict, whether discussing historic conflicts between us, or political struggles between us today.

Our differences are not a source of weakness, and we should approach them for strength. In the old days we traded with one another; not just for material goods, but also for intellectual and spiritual ones. Arguably, we do the same thing today. Just as we learn the Anishinaabe origins of the jingle dance, we also learn the Maori origins of the Language Nest.

What unites us, aside from our shared history of colonisation? There are many things I could name, but in my opinion, none are so important as: our children, our land, and our education.

Our children

A frightening prediction.

The practice of removing our children from their families and communities did not end with Residential School. It did not end with the sixties scoop, but continues today. In Manitoba, indigenous children make up twenty per cent of the total child population and seventy per cent of the children in Child and Family Services care. That is seven times the rate for non-native children.

In Manitoba, changes to the entire child welfare system were introduced via legislation rammed through with no consultation with indigenous communities (p.49), ostensibly giving indigenous people more control, while replicating the crushing workloads and underfunding that made the system such a failure in the first place.

We all have a role, whether we are parents or not.

Losing our children continues to wreak havoc on our ability as peoples to pass along our languages and cultures. Flipping that around to focus not on the loss, but rather on the children who remain and those children in care that we can reach, we must recognise the incredible potential that exists for us to support and nurture our children.

I am not referring here to just mothers and fathers, but rather our communities as a whole. We do not have to be parents to play a part in nurturing the next generations. Raising strong, rooted, healthy children is the most important act of revolution our peoples can accomplish. Nothing has been so interfered with than our ability to do exactly this.

Our land

In terms of land, First Nations in Canada occupy one half of one per cent of all the land south of the 60th parallel. That miniscule percentage of land continues to be encroached upon and the erosion of our traditional territories has been unceasing since Contact.

Even in urban areas, we can find ways to access the land.

The loss of our land impacts us on so many levels. Our traditional classrooms are on the land, and our pedagogy is rooted in our specific territories. How this manifests itself in specific teachings differs from people to people, but we certainly have this in common. When we are separated from the land, we cannot model our relationship to it, we can only speak of it. This is contrary to the fundamental nature of indigenous education, which is practice based. Ignoring for the moment, the vast economic consequences of having such little access to our territories, the loss of land has a fundamental impact on our ability to pass on our culture to future generations.

To once again turn this in a positive direction, we need to pay attention to successful attempts to use what land we do have access to in culturally relevant ways. This is possible even in urban areas, as people like Leanne Simpson have pointed out. The importance of access to the land is something that unites all indigenous peoples, and provides us with a concrete way in which to ensure our cultural survival through land-based teachings. Those teachings will vary, and their diversity is vital to our growth.

Our education

For me, all of this boils down to education. I have spoken out against top-down attempts to implement educational reform, but now I want to talk about alternatives. The First Nations Education Act is going to be passed. It will be full of words, and funding will be slow to follow, if it ever truly does. It will not meet our needs, because it has not been designed by us.

So what now? I believe we need mobilisation on a massive scale, and I believe that this can happen in a way that takes advantage of our diversity, rather than being crippled by it.

In the 50s, when indigenous peoples were moving to urban centres in large numbers, volunteers came together to create a system of programs and services that were delivered through what are now known as Friendship Centres. No one asked for permission first, or waited for legislation to be passed, they simply saw a need and tried to meet it.

This ‘do it first, ask later’ approach is being used in all our communities bother urban and rural, in one way or another. Perhaps we are blind to this because so many needs remain unmet, but it is high time we start acknowledging our strengths, and the fantastic work being done by so many.

I think that it is easy to get bogged down in our differences when we begin discussing delivering indigenous education. So many different languages and cultures, some with access to the land, and others whose access is very restricted. Communities with decades of experience delivering their own systems of education and ensuring their students will also be successful in Canadian institutions versus communities who are just now thinking of how to try this. Access to hundreds of fluent speakers versus a handful in a different territory.

Resurgence, now! Sovereignty summer schools?

I believe we need a national movement, one that also takes advantage of the experiences and expertise of our relations throughout the Americas and in other colonised territories. A movement focused on doing first, asking later, and one that is centered around our children, our land, and our education. I believe we need to pool our considerable resources and expertise in order to set up and implement a system of temporary ‘schools’ akin to the Freedom schools during the Civil Rights movement.

When I say akin to the Freedom schools, I refer to the intention to encourage our children and ourselves to become social change agents through the creation of temporary, volunteer-driven educational programs that must tie into wider action. Our ‘sovereignty summer’ did not materialise the way some hoped it would, but that is not to say nothing was being done. With some planning over these coming winter months, we could be ready to implement a nation-wide program in all our communities, urban and rural, that would sow the seeds for more lasting educational reform.

We could do this by creating for this one year, a system of ‘sovereignty summer schools’ which would provide us with an opportunity to learn about the challenges facing us, the strength and resources we have available to us, and the actions we can take to work towards lasting changes.

I see this as a temporary effort, because the need is immediate and pressing, the long-term goal is a systemic and well-developed system of indigenous education designed and implemented by our own peoples, and such massive effort based on volunteerism cannot be indefinitely sustainable. In addition, we do not know what would come out of these schools and where they might lead us.

I believe that mobilising in this specific way, will help us to continue forming important relationships between our Peoples, so that our year long or life long work will become more effective. The idea is not to stop what we are doing just to focus on a single project for a short period of time, but rather to find a way to connect with one another through this effort.

There have been so many initiatives taking place: teach-ins and youth conferences along side already established educational programs. We have brilliant and dedicated people who are working hard to create change. What we do not have is a unified effort that is capable of not only respecting our differences, but also drawing strength from those differences in order to link our efforts.

For a time, the pan-Indian movement drew us together and stressed our commonalities. I believe that now is the time to celebrate our differences and share our successes, our expertise, and our energies. I would argue that during the past year, our youth have been lit from within, and we need to ensure that fire continues to burn. Many of those youth have already come up with concrete suggestions for the implementation of the kind of national effort I am talking about here; but few people have heard them.

I am specifically not suggesting topics, methods of delivery, or goals because I think this has to be a communal effort and so many amazing ideas and programs are already out there to draw upon.

A lot of time and effort has been spent on attempting to raise the awareness of Canadians as regards indigenous struggles. What if we focus instead for a time on raising our own awareness? What could we accomplish next summer with some collaboration now?

Our children. Our land. Our education.

Thoughts?