Disrupting Normative Narratives and Encouraging Relationality Through Treaty Education
By Amanda Vindevoghel Cundall
Introduction
Prior to ECCU 400 my knowledge of First Nation’s participation in Canadian history was, I thought, sufficient. I had learned that they lived on this land and that many were nomadic, following the buffalo. When settlers came, they participated in trading at forts. My Social Studies and Native Studies classes in elementary and high school taught that they lived in tipis, were resourceful in their use of that which they got from the land, and that they were a very spiritual culture. I was awed when our Native Studies teacher brought in a drumming circle. He offered them tobacco and told us it was sacred to them. I didn’t understand how giving performers a pack of cigarettes was sacred, but I went along with it. At that time, I had no idea that they weren’t performers. It wasn’t a play. And he wasn’t giving them a pack of smokes but offering a sign of respect for allowing us to be part of an important cultural practice.
After high school graduation I went straight into University. My first semester I took the required English 100, but was able to take it through the First Nation’s University of Canada. I don’t remember a lot of material save for on piece; “A Cry of Stone”. I cannot recall specifics, but I know it was emotional in parts. The rest of my degree in International Studies heavily featured History, Political Science, and language classes, but none focused on First Nation’s peoples in Canada.
My first “real” career-focused job out of university was in the legislative building working for elected officials. There were a lot of passionate people in that building who wanted to make positive changes for the people of Saskatchewan. There were (and still are) a lot middle and older-aged white men whose perspectives blur into one another because they are so boringly similar. I don’t think they had much in the way of Treaty education. There were definitely outliers, but they aren’t the ones that are hoisted to the rank occupied by decision-makers because they might shake things up too much. It is interesting that people are provided media training, but not once in four years did I hear about Aboriginal Awareness Training being offered.
Aboriginal Awareness Training was one of the first things I did when I moved to SaskPower in 2014. I was working in the Sustainability Office that did work focused on the triple bottom line, social, economic and environmental sustainability. I took part in the same training four years later when I moved into my current position and was astounded both times as I was reminded of just how little I knew.
ECCU 400 has taken that original feeling of being astounded and multiplied it by an unfathomable amount. From the first class I felt welcomed and as though I was in a safe and non-judgemental learning space. The door had been opened, I just needed to walk through each week, and I am so grateful I did. Through readings, presentations, guest speakers and class discussions, my mind has been expanded. It has given me knowledge, but also changed the way that I think about history and First Nation’s peoples in Canada.
My limited knowledge prior to this class, beyond the trainings already mentioned, came largely from textbooks and curriculum written from the colonizer perspective. Even as I learned more, I still did not grasp the relationality between treaties and historical and current situations in Canada. The understanding of First Nation’s beliefs and perspectives has completely turned my interpretation of treaties and treaty processes on its head. The knowledge from this class has built a foundation of truth that I intend to continue building upon and sharing with my future students. I will honour the learnings from this class through teaching future generations in a way that will disrupt normalized colonial narratives, build empathy and respect for First Nation’s peoples and their experiences, and encourage relationality through introspection and acquisition of knowledge.
Disrupting Normalized Colonial Narratives
Normalized colonial narratives have become so pervasive that many don’t realize that they are participating in their perpetuation. I didn’t grow up around anyone who was hateful of First Nation’s peoples, but they also weren’t respectful of them either. I now understand that ignorance does not equate to innocence and even after all this time, First Nation’s peoples are continually being harmed by the perpetuation of normative colonial narratives and ignorance.
Things have begun to slowly change, and in my memory, it started with the changing of socially acceptable names for First Nation’s peoples. There were frustrations voiced by those not in the First Nation’s community because they didn’t understand why it was so important. The point these people didn’t understand is that “Names are linked to identity, and notions of identity are fluid.” (Vowel, C. pg. 13) Vowel goes on to discuss that acceptable names may also change due to previously acceptable terms, even when not directly linked to past hurts (like Indian to the Indian Act), may no longer work because they’ve been “co-opted” and have taken on a different or even derogatory meaning. What seems so apparent though, is that First Nation’s peoples shouldn’t have to explain why a name doesn’t work for them. They should be given at least enough respect that their preferences for a name be honoured.
As there are numerous distinct groups within the broader umbrella of what is considered to be First Nation’s peoples in Canada, vowel suggests we “Be prepared to listen to what people have to say about the term you use, and to respect what they suggest you call them instead.” The golden rule of treating others with the respect that you would expect from them is taught very early in schools. It is ironic then that these curriculums and the governments who created them and further the societies in which they exist, do not extend that respect to Indigenous peoples even when it relates to something as simple as respecting what they would like to be called. It is not surprising though when we learn that disregard for Indigenous peoples in Canada was present from the moment settlers made contact and has been perpetuated by governing institutions since.
The continued harm being caused by normative narratives was painfully apparent on week two when Janine* spoke to our class about her experiences. Not only was she brought up in a system that told her she was less-than, but she is still hearing those messages through the actions of her colleagues and organizational leaders. This type of messaging keeps Janine and other Indigenous peoples in a box built by colonial systems. Regardless of the hard work they put in, unless someone else gives them permission to do more, they are confined into the boxes settlers are comfortable keeping them in which was the case in the denial of a promotion to Janine that was instead given to a white man.
As a resilient Indigenous woman, Janine turned to her traditional beliefs and practices to find healing. Sharing her story was emotional and clearly difficult, but it is beneficial for students to hear these difficult stories because it helps them relate. We’ve all experienced hurt and disappointments in our lives, and in that way, we can understand some of the feelings Janine may be experiencing. But to be able to understand that this hurt is continually caused by the very institutions that are supposed to protect the people of our Country, is appalling, and students should know that. Being able to relate to experiences such as Janine’s is what is going to engage students and drive them to learn more and insist on better.
With the aim of educating future students to work toward reconciliation, the notion of helping them relate to Indigenous peoples and their history in Canada must be continued throughout their education. But how do teachers of non-Indigenous ancestry go about doing that? Dr. Dwayne Donald (2013) in “Teachers, aboriginal perspectives and the logic of the fort” hit the nail on the head when he wrote, “[teachers] —feel woefully unprepared to lead their students in meaningful consideration of Aboriginal perspectives.” It only makes sense then, to start at the beginning with creation stories.
Before settlers arrived, Indigenous peoples thrived. They had their own societies, justice systems, education systems and deep spiritual beliefs. They viewed the land and all that it provided as a gift from the Creator. They protected the land and took only what they needed for survival which is in complete juxtaposition to the intent of settlers to use the land to gain as much prosperity as possible. For thousands of years different Indigenous groups coexisted, and it was with the intent of coexisting that they entered into treaty negotiations with colonial settlers. To understand that First Nation’s peoples were incredibly spiritual and that they viewed the land as a sacred gift should be enough to understand that they would not willingly sign the land over and end the only way of life they knew.
As Dr. Donald discusses in the article mentioned above, Canada’s creation story as taught through the curriculum, was that of the fur trade and the Fort. Canada’s history as taught like this though, negates the thousands of years of Indigenous societies living on this land. The Fort narrative paints settlers as a more dignified cohort bringing new and better ways of living to share with First Nation’s peoples. Instead of focusing on the interrelatedness of both settler and Indigenous histories in Canada, the Fort story perpetuates an “us vs. them” narrative. The story of settlers in Canada cannot be told without the inclusion of First Nation’s peoples, and likewise, the story of First Nation’s peoples in Canada cannot be told without the inclusion of settlers.
For generations our educational curricula have separated the history of First Nation’s and settlers in Canada. The idea of separate histories, of settlers coming to Canada, surviving and thriving, is continually perpetuated as exemplified in the 2010 Vancouver Olympic HBC commercial shown in class. This video exemplifies the continuing belief in the colonial creation story. It completely ignores Indigenous peoples and their role in assisting settlers when they arrived, or the part they played in shaping Canada. Language like “We came, we survived” very much feels like “we conquered” and perpetuates the Fort logic of “us” and “them”, “insiders” and “outsiders”. The message in this video negates to mention that “their” success was found not through pure hard work, but at the expense of Indigenous peoples and their traditional knowledge.
One of the ways to understand the interrelatedness of the shared histories of peoples in Canada is through the context of what Dr. Dwayne Donald refers to as “métissage”. Dr. Donald explains, “As a research practice, métissage is focused on relationality and the curricular and pedagogical desire to treat texts—and lives—as relational and braided rather than isolated and independent.”(Donald, 2009 pg. 9) Creating a focus on relationality through treaty education is the topic discussed in the following section.
Building Empathy and Respect Through Relationality
Treaty education begins by understanding key First Nation’s beliefs such as the Cree belief in Wahkohtowin, which means “everything is related”. As explained in the Cree Natural Law video, “It is one of the basic principles of Cree Natural Law passed through language, song, prayer, and storytelling. The elders explain that by following the teachings of Wahkohtowin individuals, communities and societies are healthier.” It was in the spirit of beliefs such as Wahkohtowin and Witaskewin (“Witaskewin” is a Cree word meaning “living together on the land.” (Cardinal and Hildebrand, 2000 Pg. 39)) that First Nation’s peoples entered into treaty negotiations. They viewed the treaties as agreements by two sovereign nations to live respectfully and cooperatively with each other while each was able to maintain their way of life. And they viewed these agreements as sacred.
As previously mentioned, the First Nation’s peoples were incredibly spiritual. Through the inclusion of spiritual elements such as the pipe ceremony in treaty processes, they were sealing these agreements with sacred promises that would last forever. As proof that settlers involved in treaty negotiations understood this, people point to the inclusion of the words “until the sun shines, the grass grows and the rivers flow” in treaty documents. As sacred agreements the First Nation’s peoples trusted the government to adhere to there promises, but as we now understand, that was never their intent.
The government knew that in order to sell and prosper from Canadian lands, they would need to first remove the Indigenous peoples that occupied it but knew they wouldn’t be successful if they went about it forcefully. As historical accounts show, the true spirit and intents of treaty agreements were never honoured. Instead a “…truly sordid history of repression by the Canadian nation in service of the dispossession of First Nations – the banning of cultural activities, suppression of economic activity, physical violence, land dispossession, forced relocation, psychological and sexual abuse in residential schools, forced sterilization, and the removal of traditional governments.” (Jay, 2013)
The colonial government recorded treaty negotiations via paper and pen, in a form and language not understood by Indigenous peoples. They neglected to include the spirt and intent of the expectations of the First Nation’s peoples in their writings which became law. This law has since been used to justify actions taken to “civilize” and “integrate” Indigenous peoples into colonial society. As a result, horrendous treatment, such as that experienced in residential schools has featured heavily throughout Canada’s history since the signing of the treaties.
Margaret Larocque spent nine years in various residential schools and survived many traumas. The first trauma was being taken from her family and community at a very young age. At home she’d been raised by her parents, relatives and community members. She had known only strong community and then found herself isolated and far from home. Her mental, physical and emotional health all suffered throughout her time at these schools, and in later years she spent a lot of time focused on healing. While she was able to find success, she witnessed many of her peers fall victim to unhealthy coping mechanisms. Margaret said, “I get upset because Canadians don’t understand the history and I tired of explaining to them; they got rich off of First Nation’s land.” But it wasn’t just the land that was taken. It was time with family, traditional teachings, cultural practices and an entire way of life that was taken.
The systematic suffering of Indigenous peoples at the hands of colonial settlers has been missing from the Canadian curriculum. Students need to understand that the prosperity found by early settlers is inextricably linked to the exploitation and suffering of Indigenous peoples. Once that understanding has been reached, and only then, can people move forward on the path of reconciliation.
A Way Forward
In June of 2015 the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (TRC) released their report and 94 Calls to Action. In March of 2018, then Canadian Senator, Murray Sinclair was interviewed with an aim to discuss how Canadians can work toward reconciliation. There were many interesting points made in that interview, but the one comment that really stuck with me was, “you’re already involved in reconciliation if you like it or not”. (Sinclair, 2018) As peoples in Canada we are all involved in reconciliation. As an educator I am given the chance to have a deeply positive impact on reconciliation through the inclusion of thoughtful treaty education in my teachings.
“Mainstream education is an extension of colonization insofar as it has been used to promote a dominant narrative of the past and privilege certain ways of knowing (Tupper, 2005).” (Tupper and Cappello, 2008. Pg. 563) In the spirit of reconciliation, and as a teacher, I have the responsibility to change the dominant narrative as stated by Tupper and Cappello. This cannot be fully realized through teachings in subject-specific silos. Providing students a holistic view of treaty education across the curriculum will not only interrupt common false narratives but will create champions of truth capable of making changes necessary for reconciliation. “So, what to do? It has become clear to me that the real work of reimagining curriculum and honouring other ways to be a human being involves the articulation of a new story that guides us to live on more ethically relational terms with humans as well as our more-than-human relations (Donald 2012). Of course, we cannot just make up stories that suit our interests and desires and expect people to follow them enthusiastically. Stories that give life emerge from people sitting together in the spirit of good relations and thinking carefully on their shared future as human beings. For me, such work of is guided by the Cree concept of wahkohtowin (LaBoucane-Benson et al. 2012) which teaches that, as human beings, we are enmeshed in series of relationships (human and more-than-human) that give us life.” (Donald, 2015)
Conclusion
Ignorance is not innocence, and I am not innocent of ignorance. But I can move forward committed to combatting ignorance within myself and through teaching treaty education. There are so many ways treaty education can be included across the curriculum and I am looking forward to finding fun, creative and impactful ways to do this. I want all students to recognize their roles as treaty peoples and their responsibilities for reconciliation. If I can successfully do this as I grow in my own knowledge of treaty education, I will have honoured my commitment to disrupt normalized colonial narratives, build empathy and respect for First Nation’s peoples and their experiences, and encourage relationality through introspection and acquisition of knowledge.
References
BearPaw Media and Education. (2016, June 8). Wahkohtowin: Cree Natural Law. YouTube.
Cardinal, H., & Hildebrand, W. (2000). Treaty elders of Saskatchewan: our dream is that our
peoples will one day be clearly recognized as nations. University of Calgary Press.
CBC News. (2018, March 23). Sen. Murray Sinclair: How can Canadians work toward
reconciliation. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2Lv21Ktz84
Donald, D. T. (2009). The Pedagogy of the Fort: Curriculum, Aboriginal -Canadian Relations,
and Indigenous Métissage.
Donald, D. (2013). Teachers, aboriginal perspectives and the logic of the fort. The Alberta
Teachers’ Association.
Donald, D. (2015). Homo Economicus and Forgetful Curriculum: Remembering Other
Ways to Be a Human Being. http://blogs.ubc.ca/inearthscare/files/2019/06/Donald-2012.pdf
Erasmus, J. Classroom presentation. January 18, 2021.
Jay, D. (2013). Know Your Rights: A treaty primer for non-natives. The Media Co-op.
Paula Kirman Radical Citizen Media. (2014, March 30). Margaret Larocque Residential School
Survivor – TRC. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ki5kNR_LB-E
Tupper, Jennifer A, & Cappello, Michael. (2008). Teaching Treaties as (Un)Usual Narratives:
Disrupting the Curricular Commonsense. Curriculum Inquiry, 38(5), 559-578.
vancouverite1989 (2010, January 18): We Were Made For This (Vancouver 2010 Olympics).
YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dLsFkZKj63U
Vowel, C. (2016). Just don’t call us late for supper: Names for Indigenous peoples. Indigenous writes: A Guide to First Nations, Métis & Inuit Issues in Canada. Highwater Press.
*Name changed to protect privacy.