It’s a common misconception that the study of history is simply a task of memorizing names and dates. Little could be further from the truth. As recent discussions of Canada 150 have demonstrated, the past is a dynamic, contested, political, and vibrant field of study.
For some, Canada’s confederation 150 years ago marked the birth of the Canadian nation, but others question this statement. Given, for example, that Britain did not grant Canada full legal freedom until the Statute of Westminster in 1931, does 1867 make sense for celebration? Moreover, if Canadian citizenship was not a legal status until 1947, is Canada 150 really Canada 70? Many point to the battle of Vimy Ridge as Canada’s “baptism by fire”— Canada 100? Others rightly remind us that Indigenous peoples have lived on these lands for thousands of years, and that Canada 150 is for some a celebration of violence. Colonialism 150?
Faced with this real contest of dates, the task for those with an eye to the past is not to consider which dates mean the most, but, rather, which narratives. It’s a task Canadians have been asked to do before. In 2004, the CBC launched a nation-wide contest in which Canadians were invited to select who they believed was “the greatest Canadian.” Unfortunately, the results demonstrated a limited narrative of Canadian identity. Of the top ten names chosen: all were men; none were poor; none were Indigenous; and only one was an ethnic minority.
If the past is used to define a people, as official discourse suggests, to overlook the experience and influence of those beyond the dominant group has a serious implication for contemporary citizens.
In the year 2017, it is essential to consider the narratives we wish to tell.
My own research examines the stereotypes that have surrounded Indigenous populations in Canada in both historical writing and contemporary practice. I study, for example, two of the most persistent colonial imaginings of Indigenous women: the “Indian Princess” or the “squaw.” Each of these stereotypes are hypersexualized constructions that wrongly portray Indigenous women as primitive, open to conquest, or as unworthy of the respect afforded to their Euro-Canadian counterparts. These ideas are little discussed in the current conversations of government celebrations. If narratives continue to ignore these realities of Canada’s colonial past, these stereotypes will continue to permeate public perceptions of Indigenous peoples with adverse effects. Indigenous women, for example, report being “victimized by violent crime at a rate almost three times higher than non-Aboriginal women.”[1] Beliefs are not insignificant. When a society’s historical narrative stigmatizes and dismisses a people there are real and potentially harmful consequences.
So, what does this mean for Canada 150? How can we do better? The bottom line is that if we want to keep our dates, we need new narratives.
The year 1867 is the product of a political history—the passage of the British North America Act. Let’s add more politics to the mix. Let’s learn about treaties with Indigenous peoples. Let’s learn about the construction and coercive impact of the Indian Act. Or let’s have new timelines. With an Indigenous presence on this land for thousands of years, there is no shortage of material from which we can develop meaningful conversations about what Turtle Island has been and what it can be. In particular, space can be made for the voices of Indigenous peoples in the academy and beyond.
Clearly, history means more than memorizing names and dates. But what is also clear is that traditional approaches to knowing the past are insufficient to create a vibrant society of reconciliation. Let’s take this opportunity to have difficult conversations. What narratives will we tell this year? Celebration, confederation, colonialism? Resistance, recovery, reconciliation?
There is no shortage of benefits to the endeavour. As Roberta Jamieson, president and CEO of Indspire, recently told a gathering at the University of Waterloo, once we collectively know the truth of Canada’s past, “we can dream together.”
Lucy Vorobej's research interests include the history of medicine and the history of Indigenous peoples in Canada. Her current research, under the supervision of Dr. Heather MacDougall, examines the continuities and changes of social images of Indigenous peoples within government programs for health during the shifting cultural and political climates of post-World War II Canada.
[1] Truth and Reconciliation Commission, “Honouring the Truth, Reconciling for the Future: Summary of the Final Report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, 179.
Top banner: Archival photo of the The Mohawk Institute Indian Residential School, the first of Canada's residential schools. Photo courtesy of Woodland Cultural Centre, Brantford, Ontario. Learn about Save the Evidence.
