ESCalate Student Grant Final Report
Breathing out ‘the songs that want to be sung’[1]: A dialogue on research, colonization and pedagogy with a focus on the Canadian Arctic
Heather Moquin
PhD Candidate
University of Glasgow
March, 2010
Introduction
The grant provided by ESCalate has been used towards my doctoral research. The purpose of this report is to offer a summary of this research. For this, I provide short summaries of the chapters and sections of my thesis and include highlights of the objectives, methodologies, discussions, reflections and conclusions which have made up my research.
Chapter 1: Introduction
This research has had a focus on the Canadian Arctic while, through the process of conducting the research, academia has become a parallel and integrated context which I have also considered.I have chosen away from conducting fieldwork for this research and have instead relied solely on published writings by Inuit (my ‘source literature’) and non-Inuit for my ‘data’. The overall research question is as follows:
How have Inuit responded to colonization through writing and what do themes from these writings - and corresponding themes in writings by non-Inuit – convey regarding ideal pedagogies for overcoming challenges stemming from reliance on rigid conceptions of identity?
Behind this research question sit three main objectives which I have addressed within my thesis. These are as follows:
1) Considering the long history of exploitative research on Inuit, and considering questioning and reflection on my own positionality as a non-Indigenous researcher, one objective has been to conduct this research in an ethical and respectful manner, considering the facets of such an approach.
2) A second objective has been to place different texts regarding colonization, research and pedagogy – in relation to the particular context of the Canadian Arctic – in conversation with each other and to write a text accordingly.
3) After recognizing similarities between pedagogies deemed as ‘ideal’ for overcoming challenges from the perspectives of Inuit and perspectives more broadly, a third objective has been to characterize ‘ideal’ pedagogies, highlighting the crossover of these perspectives.
Section 1: Locating the research
Chapter 2: A change in direction
In this chapter of my thesis, I reflect on a conference presentation which occurred in the first year of my doctoral research. At this conference, I was questioned on issues of positionality and representation as a non-Indigenous researcher with aims of researching an Indigenous context. I discuss how such questioning has come to be seen as almost standard for research areas of contention and seen to be protecting marginalized contexts which have been exploited historically. I also reflect, however, that in the case of my research, acontextual questioning led to me feeling divided from my contextual experience and connections and subsequently the practical impetus and realities which motivated my research initially.I discuss further that when acontextual, questioning within academia, though perhaps seen as standard and necessary,cannot protect marginalized contexts or people as research relationships are contextual and ethics of research(ers) are developed in interaction with subjects of research not from the application of acontextual academic standards. I surmise, then, that standards within academia, instead of protecting marginalized contexts, may instead be protecting us as academics from fully realizing the centrality and influence of our subjectivities within research. Such reflections on this experience invariably led to very careful consideration of the ethics of my own research and a decision to conduct research that ‘listened’ to context and therefore the decision to rely on the process of reading published writings for the data collection of this research.
Chapter 3: Listening to context
In this chapter with an aim of highlighting my processes of reading as listening and writing as conversation between texts and with an aim of grounding my research in a consideration of ethics, I begin with the presentation of a literature review on ethical versus exploitative research within the Canadian Arctic where texts by Inuit speak to and back to research in or on the Arctic. This review, which I discuss as ‘researching the research’, leads into a questioning on stereotypical narratives regarding Aboriginal peoples and subsequently into a discussion on the nature of ‘truth’. This consideration of ‘truth’ is located within a Foucauldian definition of discourse whereby that which is shown or depicted as ‘real’ or ‘true’ is dependent on what a particular narrative is used for and who holds power over the knowledge being portrayed. This discussion leads into the consideration that there are therefore particular versions of reality of the Arctic which have been marginalized historically. In choosing to listen to writings by Inuit, I privilege these knowledge claims within this research as these writings tend to offer different perspectives to those which have become hegemonic and authoritative.
Chapter 4: Considering the categories
Carrying on with the theme of ‘listening’, in chapter four I ‘listen’ to the humanities within this research. Located within the social sciences and drawing on what some refer to as an atypical methodology for the social sciences by relying on literary methods, I felt it was important to transparently and clearly depict my consideration of the literature drawn on within this research. Therefore, in this chapter I consider the literary categorizations which writings by Inuit have been classified within and the relevance of these categories. I first consider ‘Inuit writing and literature’ broadly discussing perspectives on the history of Inuit writing and perspectives on the varied purposes and motivations behind Inuit as writers. Next, I reflect on the broad category of ‘Native literature’ which has been problematized as a category both too narrow, in that some prefer to not be defined solely by the ‘Native’ portion of the label (Hoy, 2001, p. 6), and as a category too broad, in that some express that the diversities within such a category get subsumed through the broadness of the label (Hoy, 2001, p. 6; Acoose, 2001, p. 46 & 47). This label has not been directly addressed within the source literature and Inuit writing is contained only marginally within this wider category. I discuss how this marginal status of Inuit writing means that this writing is both excluded from participation in wider critical discussions on categorization as ‘Native literature’ while it is also protected from wider challenges which trouble the wider category and therefore there is more freedom for Inuit writing to develop and exist in more independent and natural spaces. I go on to also consider the relevance of three more categories. I discuss how the label of ‘post-colonial literature’ is considered to be inappropriate for Inuit writing as the term ‘post-colonial’ inherently considers the colonial period as past. Finally I discuss how I consider the categories of ‘resistance literature’ and ‘testimonial literature’ as both relevant labels for Inuit writings, and highlight how the latter category is seen as particularly relevant for my thesis where I came to consider the source literature writings as testimonies which I was ‘listening’ to.
Chapter 5: Intertextuality
In this chapter I consider the term ‘intertextuality’ which I have drawn on as a guide for the writing of my thesis as a conversation between different excerpts of texts. Returning to discuss the nature of ‘truth’, I highlight how an intertextual understanding where truth is seen as partial, perspectival and constructed through relations is consistent with Inuit perspectives and my own perspective of truth. Moving forward from this discussion, I reflect on how, within the writing of my thesis, I encountered challenges making the text final which was reflective of concerns over the representative nature of language. I discuss how language can be seen as rigidly representative while it also can be considered less rigidly. In this thesis, I have chosen to privilege the less rigid perspective on language as I bring different perspectives and terminologies together and allow them to sit side-by-side while I observe where they fit together and where they differ. In the final section of this chapter, I draw on my considerations of intertextuality to return to and address the questioning I encountered on positionality and representation at the conference discussed in chapter 2. After considering various perspectives on the nature of ‘speaking for others’ I respond by highlighting a need to consider different subject positions within text and ways for a text to inherently contain questioning on being taken as representative. This facilitates the realization that though a text can be seen to speak for, it can also be seen to speak in other ways, to speak to and so that others can speak to each other within text. Though I acknowledge the reservations on and the limitations of textual conversation (i.e. as highlighted by Hoy, 2001), I discuss how dialogue within text is potentially useful for learning about and recognizing similarities and differences in perspectives.
Chapter 6: The methodologies
In this chapter I consider my methodologies in more depth. After reviewing the need to identify the processes of reading and writing as my methodologies, I return to my misgivings with textual research where I conclude that textual research can be practical and dialogic if a posture of empathetic criticality is adopted. Such a posture facilitates recognition that as researchers we are part of the world we research which elicits a greater sense of empathy and the facilitation of dialogue. Here I point to links to Freire’s (in Freire & Faundez, 1989, p. 48) assertion that dialogic work not be basist nor elitist as “rigorous thought must not deny naivety in its attempt to go beyond it.” Further,adopting such a posture and the nature of textual research has meant that this research was slow and careful which facilitated a return to areas of practical concern to the context being studied. In the next section I situate my methodologies, first considering the nature of ‘standards’ within academia with which my research is in reaction to, before considering alternative theoretical perspectives which I feel are located close to my methodological approach. Finally in this chapter, I review theoretical perspectives which have influenced the consideration of my reading and writing methodologies respectively.
Section 2: Reaffirming context
Chapter 7: The Canadian Arctic
In this chapter and the next, I rely largely on the source literature to reaffirm the contextual focus of this research. In this chapter, I consider the Canadian Arctic context generally. I first describe how many refer to the approximate time period of the 1910s until the 1970s as the period of initial or historical colonization for Inuit in Canada. Next, I discuss that, in the accounts of colonization I have read, Inuit tend to highlight transformational, violent and painful aspects. I go on to discuss contemporary impacts of colonization where high levels of social health challenges such as substance abuse and suicide are considered. I discuss here that Inuit tend to describe colonization as occurring distinctly in general terms for three generations of Inuit, from those who experienced historical colonization as adults, to those who experienced this period as children to those young adults and children in the contemporary Arctic who have experienced colonization more indirectly through the impacts felt by their parents’ and grandparents’ generations. Finally, I look at the maintenance of contemporary impacts of colonization. Here I consider the Canadian state’s role in maintaining difficult conditions for many Inuit, where I discuss the non-recognition of Inuit within Canadian law as highlighted within the film Kiviaq versus Canada (Isuma, 2006) and the lack of full implementation of land-claim agreements.
Chapter 8: Educational and schooling spheres
In a similar vein to chapter 7, in this chapter, I draw largely on the source literature to reaffirm the context of this research, this time focusing more specifically on schooling and education. I begin by considering Inuit pedagogy before colonization before considering perspectives on mainstream education which was introduced into the Arctic through Inuit children being forced to attend residential schools during a period of historical colonization. I review here broader impacts, such as confusions in identity, which many attribute to the introduction of mainstream schooling and a need to live and study within two separate cultures (i.e. Freeman, 1988). I go on to consider how many discuss the contemporary system of education within the Canadian Arctic as having reached crisis levels with a very high number of school leavers (i.e. Statistics Canada figures (Tait, 2008, p. 18) highlight that 51% of Inuit in Canada have not completed high school). I also consider how many of the challenges discussed as occurring for those at primary and secondary levels of education are also evident at tertiary levels of education. Of particular relevance for this thesis are discussions on challenges with rigid identity constructions as a barrier to education. Finally, I discuss how many point to education as the way forward from the high levels of social health challenges in the Arctic.
Section 3: “Being Inuit is just a story”[2]
Chapter 9: Narratives as harmful
In this chapter I consider how narratives can be harmful to conceptions of identity. I begin with a discussion on the loss of freedoms Inuit discuss as occurring through colonization, where I highlight how contemporary discussions tend to focus on the loss of ideological freedoms or losses in a freedom to name oneself or reject labels altogether. I then turn to focus on how narratives can be harmful to self conceptions of identity, particularly when narratives are considered to be rigidly true. I begin this discussion with a contemplation on the relevance of formal terminologies of trauma, which have origins in clinical and medical discourse, to experiences of colonization and ongoing impacts from historical colonization within the Canadian Arctic. Formalized terminologies of trauma are rarely drawn on in a formal sense within the source literature, an observation I use to argue that there is a need to be wary of such formal terminologies as individual, unique stories can be subsumed by the over-generalizing nature of discourse. I move on to consider the use of Inuit culture essentialisms for strategic political purposes and discuss how many Inuit highlight that in the harkening back to essentialisms there is an idealization of non-physical aspects of culture not a desire to return to the past as it was actually lived (i.e. Cournoyea, 1988, p. 286). I also highlight, however, the danger of essentialisms and point to links discussed between reliance on rigid constructions of cultural identity and social health challenges in the Arctic (i.e. Kaukjak Katsak in Wachowich et al, 1999, p. 199). In the final section of this chapter, I discuss that many Inuit point towards education as a route for the restoring of freedoms lost through colonization, a discussion with obvious links to Freire’s (1973, p. 46) “education as the practice of freedom” which I expand upon within chapter 11.
Chapter 10: Narratives as affirmative
On a similar theme tochapter 9 but from the alternative angle, in this chapter I look at the affirmative aspects of narratives. Through the reading methodology utilized within this research, I came to see that the narratives I read are often responsive to historical colonization and contemporary impacts. In this chapter I consider how the construction of a narrative can be a facilitative process for cultural and identity affirmation and resilience to challenges in life. Here I discuss how the process of narrative construction has been recognized within academic literature as a process for fostering resilience and accommodating trauma. Writing is seen as a process particularly conducive to the accommodation of trauma through its allowance for fluctuation, between for example remembering/forgetting and realism/fiction, which is highlighted as characteristic of trauma recountings (Kirmayer, 1996). I next consider how sharing of narratives is also seen as a facilitative process for cultural and identity affirmation and for coping with challenges in life. I discuss here how the collective sharing of narratives on colonization and contemporary experiences of Inuit offer spaces for dialogue and the contesting of hegemonic or authoritative narratives held as true. I next present the source literature speaking to and back to these themes on constructing and sharing narratives as affirmative. Finally, I discuss how in the reading of the source literature I also came to see how Inuit writings tend to affirmatively question hegemonic ‘truths’ in four main ways:1) deconstruction, 2) offering alternative accounts, 3) reversing the gaze and 4) reactionary humour. Drawing on examples from the source literature, I expand on each of these.
Section 4 (Chapter 11): Conversations on pedagogy
In this chapter, I consider perspectives on pedagogies with a focus on those considered ‘ideal’ for overcoming challenges in life stemming from reliance on rigid conceptions of identity. I begin by considering ‘ideal’ pedagogies as discussed by Inuit within the source literature. Here I discuss how three principles important to Inuit pedagogies from the past (namely imaginative freedom for invention, experiential learning and a holistic approach) are still considered as relevant in the contemporary Arctic. I also discuss four contemporary aspects also considered as ‘ideal’ aspects to pedagogy within the source literature: 1) the importance of the land; 2) bilingualism; 3) inclusion of narratives on Inuit identity, culture, history and knowledge; and 4) inclusion of elders and their knowledge. Next, moving out to consider broader perspectives on pedagogy, I discuss wider critiques of mainstream pedagogy which have similarities with critiques raised within the source literature, such as a predominance on only recognizing learning within institutions as valid. After tracing my path in the recognition of similarities between Inuit ‘ideal’ pedagogies and ‘ideal’ pedagogies more broadly where I emphasize a need to recognize the fact that we are all different paradoxically as a site to begin to recognize and discuss points of connection, I move on to discuss five aspects of ‘ideal’ pedagogy discussed more broadly by critical learning theorists. These aspects can be summarized as follows: 1) a revaluing of so-called ‘soft’ skills such as imagination which I discuss as necessary for all creative processes; 2) promoting the reclaiming of identity constructs through a tolerance for imaginative freedoms; 3) tempering these freedoms through dialogic processes where humility is mentioned as a key quality for both the teacher and learner; 4) a consideration of these pedagogies as contextualized ways of living; and 5) a consideration that these are pedagogies of resilience in that they can be used to teach learners how to negotiate the paradox of essentialist language. Finally in this chapter I consider crossovers between Inuit ‘ideal’ pedagogies with these five broad aspects of ‘ideal’ pedagogies.