Language

In my opinion, language and words we use have a lot of power. When referring to Indigenous peoples there are different terminology has has come and gone, and many that are still being used. Some terminology used when referring to the First peoples of Canada includes “Native”, “Indian”, “Aboriginal”, “First Nations” and “Indigenous”. By taking a First Nations class and Decolonization class in my Social Work program I have been educated not the right terminology to address the First peoples of Canada. In my decolonization class, we have been thought and instructed to use to term Indigenous, as that is the correct term to address the First peoples of Canada. When reading historical documents and work done by historians, I notice the terminology used are “Native” and “Indian”. I have to understand that these terms are not acceptable and should not be used so it is quite surprising for me to hear and see these be used in this day and age, even in the university.

This semester, I took an Indigenous literature class and we analyze work done by Indigenous authors. When discussing the works or analyzing what we have read, I always find it shocking to hear fellow students use “Natives” when referring to Indigenous people. I believe we should not use this words because historically, they have been used to degrade and as a form of insult to Indigenous peoples. Since we’re moving forward and changing the way Indigenous people have been treated from the past, we should also refer to them appropriately and respectfully as a way to show our respect.

This article shared by my professor in history class discusses the terminology which should be used when addressing Indigenous peoples: http://www.cbc.ca/news/indigenous/indigenous-aboriginal-which-is-correct-1.3771433

WHO, WHAT, WHEN, WHERE AND WHY??

questions

The first reading for History class answered some of the questions that I was asked previously. What is History and how do you do it? I read the article When Was Canada? and this seemed to answer the questions posed last week.

One of the main ideas I took away from this reading is the fact that history is retelling of history is not a fluid process. Different factors come into place such as the ideology of the historian (they are the ones telling us what went on) and the various approach historians take. While reading this article, one thing I questioned was how do historians decide what is important and what isn’t important to be retold. I believe this is where the idea of the historian’s ideology comes in. In line with this thinking is how do historians decide WHOSE story is important. Then again, this comes in line with the historians’s ideology.

The article mentioned the use of “whats” and hows”. This is in line with the question posed in my first post. What is history and how is it told.

Although this article answered a lot of questions for me, I came out with more questions. Questions that might not be answered because “that’s just how some things are”. At the end of it all, some individuals are ghosts voice will never be heard.

 

What is History And How Do You Do It?

history

First Day of History 1120: September 7, 2016

Before we had to leave the class, we had to write down on a piece of paper as to what we thought history was and how it was done.

My Response:

  • Events and stories of the past that is passed down through documentation or storytelling
  • It is told by people who experienced the life events or by other watching on
  • History is re told

Before this day, I had never taken a history class, except for Social Studies in High School (at this moment it seems like a million years ago).

This was a great experience for me to think about what I knew about history, what I thought history is and how it could be interpreted .