Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Shaking rattles in all directions : a case study/story of a female "Indian" student attending a EuroCanadian… Calliou, Sharilyn 1996

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-ubc_1996-090558.pdf [ 10.81MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0054953.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0054953-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0054953-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0054953-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0054953-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0054953-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0054953-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0054953-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0054953.ris

Full Text

SHAKING RATTLES IN ALL DIRECTIONS: A Case Study/Story of a Female "Indian" Student Attending a EuroCanadian University (1991- ), Located on The Traditional Territory of the Musqueam By SHARILYN CALLIOU [Michel Band] B.Ed. (Secondary), The University of Calgary, 1979 Dip. Ed. (Phil, of Ed.), The University of Alberta, 1991 M . A . (Educ. Studies), The University of British Columbia, 1993 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Centre for the Study of Curriculum and Instruction) We accept this thesis as conforming to ttye/r^ui^«d-^tand!ar<J T H E VNTVEkS^OV B T ^ T T B H T C O L U M B I A April 1996 ® Sharilyn Calliou, 1996 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. ^Departrfient of J y The University of British Columbia )/)^t^TiJC^O './) Vancouver, Canada DE-6 (2/88) ABSTRACT T h r o u g h use of a r e v e l a t o r y case study, as d i s c u s s e d by Y i n in 1984, this researcher i n t r o s p e c t i v e l y e x p l o r e s the u n i v e r s i t y e x p e r i e n c e of a f e m a l e student e n r o l l e d in graduate studies. Q u e s t i o n s related to her post-secondary e x p e r i e n c e s as a n o v i c e researcher a n d as a student w e r e as k e d in four broad areas: e m o t i o n a l , p h y s i c a l , c o g n i t i v e , and s p i r i t u a l . The i n t e r v i e w questions, la r g e l y unstructured and open-ended, i n t e n d e d to p r o b e the p o s s i b l e n e e d for self- a n d i n s t i t u t i o n a l awareness about c e r t a i n , i d e n t i f i a b l e , m i t i g a t i n g factors w h i c h affect the nature of the post-secondary student e x p e r i e n c e . The answers reveal a degree of d i s j u n c t u r e b e t w e e n the subject and the e x p e r i e n c e of b e i n g " s c h o o l e d " in this post-secondary setting; h owever, the l i m i t e d s a m p l e s i z e of one - and the i d i o s y n c r a t i c nature of the informant's e x p e r i e n c e - c a n n o t a l l o w c o n c l u s i v e g e n e r a l i z a t i o n s or r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s to be f i r m l y s upported. T h e p r i m a r y focus q u e s t i o n for this research was: D o w e need to (re)consider the research process? The p r o n o u n - w e - refers to a n y o n e interested in the nature of q u a n t i t a t i v e and/or q u a l i t a t i v e or other research methods, and may i n c l u d e those t r a d i t i o n a l l y c o n s i d e r e d 'inside' the i n s t i t u t i o n a nd those l o c a t e d 'outside' due to reasons of heritage, c u l t u r a l c a p i t a l , e c o n o m i c w e a l t h , l e g i s l a t e d d i s b a r m e n t or for other reasons of access d i s a b l e m e n t . S i m i l a r l y , this q u e s t i o n may be of interest to those w h o are themselves c o n s i d e r e d p e r i p h e r a l or o u t s i d e 'mainstream' soci e t y . This q u e s t i o n may a l s o attract p a r t i c u l a r attention as i n c r e a s i n g n umbers of students f r o m different e t h n o c u l t u r a l , gender, class, r e l i g i o u s a nd other v a r i a b l e s of 'disadvantaged' b a c k g r o u n d s c h o o s e to attend post-secondary in s t i t u t i o n s , t r a d i t i o n a l l y the preserve of c h i l d r e n of European descent. The s u b j e c t i v e p r o b i n g indicates that this student e x p e r i e n c e d d i s j u n c t u r e b e t w e e n her w o r l d v i e w , as related to the nature of c o g n i t i o n , research, c a n o n and s e c u l a r i z a t i o n . - a n d the ii W e l t a n s h u n g presented through the c u r r i c u l a of this p o s t secondary i n s t i t u t i o n . H i g h l i g h t s of the f i n d i n g s i n c l u d e her p e r c e p t i o n s that: (a) the nature of the research process she is i n t r o d u c e d to is o n e w h e r e r a t i o n a l i t y is p r i v i l e g e d , d e n u d e d of any e m o t i o n a l (or other) bases; (b) research processes are more i n v a s i v e than f r i e n d l y ; (c) the c a n o n does not i n c l u d e those she might c i t e a u t h o r i t i e s ; a nd (d) the post-secondary e x p e r i e n c e is s e c u l a r i z e d . In c o n c l u s i o n , this research suggests that a l t h o u g h a p a r t i c u l a r h o m o g e n i z a t i o n process, w h i c h may be c h a r a c t e r i s e d as W e s t e r n s c i e n t i f i c , may appear to be in p l a c e at post-secondary l e v e l s , p a r t i c u l a r students are a b l e to resist overt and h i d d e n c u r r i c u l a r i n t e n t i o n s . H o w e v e r , further study is suggested to d i s c o v e r the nature of such resistance and the p o t e n t i a l v a l u e for ( d e ) ( p o s t ) c o l o n i a l i s i n g c u r r i c u l a . i i i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT ii PREFACE vii The 'Nay-sayers' v i i A 'Yay-sayer' ix These G o o d Reasons A r e M y G o o d Reasons xi INTRODUCTION 1 O f Dissertations & Expectations 1 Beware, Beware Of Committee Members Bearing Homemade Christmas Cake ... 1 Strong M o t i v a t i o n 2 Resistance and Uncertainty 3 Not to the M a n o r Born 4 Four Areas to Contemplate 8 Stay Awake, Stay A w a k e 8 Wake-up Call s 11 Ignorance is Bliss(ful)? 12 But what happens when I think-feel too much? 12 Statement of Interest: Whose? 15 Research Needs Data 16 PART I: EMOTION IN COGNITION; COGNITION IN EMOTION 19 W h o Knows W h e r e & W h e n These Things Begin Really - 19 Ad o p t i o n of Constructs. Whose? 25 Interview Layout 26 Snowstorms 28 Stories 28 VIA Snowstorms 29 Expectations Overturned * 30 The V e r y Idea of Being A Researcher 31 Tracki n g an Unexpected Line of Inquiry 36 Introduction to the 'West' 37 H o w Stories A r e Encoded: A n Example 41 The D.O.M 46 Whose? Is A n Important Question 48 Canon Speak-Write 49 Feeling Disjunctured 51 Mind/Feelings/Body/Spirit 54 Separating From Self 55 M i n d 'Games', Philosophy Is Still A n O.K. 'Thing' To Do? 57 As k i n g M e H o w I "Do Data" 59 Conceptual Analysis 63 Who s e Consructs? 64 Language Arts: Language & Thought 66 Not Language Arts, But Language W a r r i n g 69 M.A. W a l k Across A Stage 72 M o r e Learner Than Teacher 73 Try i n g To Temper Anger 75 iv Other V o i c e s Exist? 77 Squeak-Squawk: Whose V o i c e Do I Use? 80 W h o s e School(ing)? W hose Language Said/Not /Said? 82 Bicultural Emotional Roller Coastering 84 Otherisation 89 Halfstory 90 O n e Species-ism, C o l l e c t i v e Interdependence 93 PART II: BRIEF WALK: THEN I NEED SOME NEW MOCCASINS, THE SOCIOSPIRITUEMOECOPOLITICOCULTURAL & OTHER WHITE NOISE OF RESEARCH 97 False Start(ling) 97 The Serious Play of Questions and Answers 101 Eco n o m i c a l l y Y o u A r e 102 There A r e Margins They Taught M e That In School 103 What Is Under Construction Here? 105 Procedural Requirements 106 Interviewer's f i e l d notes 107 Interviewee's fi e l d notes 110 The Western Realm 112 Strewn W i t h Absurdity 113 What Is A n Assumption of This Research? 114 M o r e R.R.P 114 Sympathetic, But Must Understand Who's Inside, Who's Outsi d e 117 Inside/Outside: What is The Possibility Really? 118 Genesis in the Library 122 Feels Like Starting O v e r & O v e r & O v e r & O v e r 125 Perhaps, 'Topic', Not Problem? 127 A Little Readerly Summation 128 Oh, The Story(ing) Business 132 Dear Anthropologists, & Educational Researchers: I A m Not a Problem 134 Problem Becomes Rich Source of Information 140 Can "They" Hear O u r O w n Labels? 141 Radical C h i c , But Still Anthropology? 143 Like Case Studies 146 The M e t h o d 151 Hampton to the Rescue 153 The 'Good' Researcher's Field Notes, W e l l , A c t u a l l y a Journal Entry (Too Tired For Field Notes) 156 After a Long Day of Interviewing 156 Interviewer's Doubts About Case Study & Setting 157 Lucky I G o t A n Interview 157 Interpretation Begins 159 A l l Is Not What It Seems 160 Language is Just Language? 164 I Thought W e Didn't Say "Indian" A n y w a y 165 THE RESEARCH QUESTIONS 167 Compulsory: Question A: 167 If time, O p t i o n a l Questions: 167 v PART III: CANONICITY: BUILT ON AN INFLATED CURRENCY OF EUROHERITAGEIZATION 169 A Theoretical Starting Point 169 Theor i s i n g Warm-up Exercise 1 70 Let's Try Feminisim: "Oh! Oh! W h i t e on Red" 171 The persistence of euroH? 173 Iroquois leader, Conassatego 173 Stay Awake, Stay A w a k e Again 1 75 Today's the Day! 1 76 part III: canononicity: built on an inflated currency of euroheritageization 177 forts, and the need for (de)fortressing 177 the fort at the forks 1 78 listening-hard & keeping my mouth shut 181 ever euroheritageization 182 porno enamoration 184 textual genetic parentage 187 inclusiveness discourses, the possibility? 191 modernity, whose paternity? 193 so i c o i n this word: euroheritageization 195 a disenchantment of the pomo-universe 197 the postmodern invitation to (re)legitimate emotion 198 emotionally laden contact 201 again, all touch, and no contact? 203 local agency and localism 206 responsibility nor relativism 208 agency as a sense of place, but be skeptical 210 place theft 211 but the primitive is acknowledged 214 retheorising 215 intellectual dishonesty 218 my rousseau 226 PART IV: ACCULTURATIVE SECULARIZING 232 POST-INTERVIEW: HOME ALONE 237 Mrs. A n g e l a Sydney 237 CONCLUSION 239 I D i d Not Come Here To, But I D i d 239 Storytelling 239 EPILOGUE: POSSIBLE BOOK JACKET REVIEWS 243 & M o r e 243 && More, M o r e 243 POSTSCRIPT OF GRATITUDE 245 BIBLIOGRAPHY 246 v i PREFACE Research, f r o m the French recherche, m e a n i n g "to f i n d again," is an a l l t o o h u m a n a c t i v i t y . W e are c u r i o s i t y thrill-seekers p o k i n g about, c o u n t i n g , o b s e r v i n g , a s k i n g , p r o d d i n g , a n a l y z i n g , measuring, c o n c l u d i n g and e n g a g i n g in related a c t i v i t i e s . O f t e n a l l of these a c t i v i t i e s are q u i t e s a t i s f y i n g ; e v e n more so, if f unded. Thus, to ask: "Do w e s t i l l n e e d research?" is, perhaps, t o o o b v i o u s l y easy to answer. There are c o n d i t i o n s l i k e H u m a n I m m u n o d e f i c i e n c y V i r u s (HIV) a n d c a n c e r to cure, holes larger than Texas in the p r o t e c t i v e c h a m b e r of o z o n e s u r r o u n d i n g the earth to r e f i l l , i n c r e a s i n g numbers of unfed c h i l d r e n in 'First' W o r l d C o u n t r i e s stuffed w i t h w e a l t h to n u t r i t i o u s l y feed, and a h o m e t o w n team ba s k e t b a l l c l u b s l u m p e d l o w e r than a p a i r of p u p p y beagle's ears to support. W i t h so many a v a i l a b l e p u z z l e s , I agree that research is needed. H o w e v e r , if a s e c o n d q u e s t i o n is posed: "How d o w e research these p u z z l e s a n d problems?", then there might be d i f f i c u l t i e s c o n s t r u c t i n g an a n s wer satisfactory to a l l . Whose k n o w l e d g e co u n t s may c o m p l i c a t e the a c c e p t a n c e of p o s s i b l e answers in terms of the n o r m a t i v e standards of o b j e c t i v i t y , p r e c i s i o n , v e r i f i c a t i o n , s i m p l i c i t y a nd a d e q u a c y of e v i d e n c e . T h i s s e c o n d q u e r y suggests a t h i r d : "Do w e need to (re)consider the research process?". The 'Nay-sayers' D o w e r e c o n s i d e r ? S ome might understand this as straightforward. A r e s o u n d i n g , "No, w e d o not," might w e l l s w e l l . No; just f o o l i s h , t ime-consuming, p o l i t i c a l l y - s e n s i t i v e i m p u d e n c e . No, just p h i l o s o p h i c a l n i t - p i c k i n g . G o o d reasons can be c o n s t r u c t e d , e x t r i n s i c or i n t r i n s i c to the research process, to d i s s u a d e (re)examination and to leave w e l l e n o u g h alone. For e x a m p l e , o n e reason w h i c h might be g i v e n is that r a t i o n a l i t y is u n d e r s t o o d as a staple of e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l v i i breakthrough. R a t i o n a l i t y is the high(er)(est) state of c o n s c i o u s n e s s , a state w h i c h is separate f r o m or a b o v e that of e m o t i o n a l or sp i r i t u a l states of a p p r e h e n s i o n . T h i s high(er)(est) state of c o n s c i o u s n e s s is the best a p p r o a c h to 'make' or 'discover' k n o w l e d g e . A r g u m e n t s in f a v o u r of r a t i o n a l i t y a l s o f a v o u r the s t e r i l i z a t i o n of subjectivit(y)(ies) w h i c h may o r i g i n a t e f r o m e m o t i o n a l , gender, e t h n o c u l t u r a l , s p i r i t u a l , or other sources. Passions must be kept at bay in o r d e r not t o o v e r w h e l m obse r v a t i o n s , not to s u l l y data, a n d not to c o n t a m i n a t e c o n c l u s i o n s . A s w e l l , the 'nay-sayers' might argue, asserting p r o p o s i t i o n s b o t h l o g i c a l l y a n d s e q u e n t i a l l y , that s u r v e y i n g and i n t e r v i e w i n g t e c h n i q u e s , w i t h a l i t t l e p o l i t i c a l l y - s e n s i t i v e j i g g i n g for these p o l i t i c a l l y - s e n s i t i v e times, are s t i l l our best methods to c o n d u c t necessary research t o insu r e certainty, p a r t i c u l a r l y in the s o c i a l sciences. There s t i l l exists the need to get out there to the p e o p l e a n d f i n d out this time! W e just need more accurate i n s t r u m e n t a t i o n to ins u r e the f i n d i n g s on w h i c h d e c i s i o n s , d e r i v e d a n d enacted, are e s t a b l i s h e d . H o w p o o r are the poor? W h a t are the Nisga'a r e a l l y like? W h y can't that K e nny read yet? Don't w e sp e n d e n o u g h m o n e y o n teac h e r e d u c a t i o n ? There might be e n c o u n t e r e d the sense that the p r o m i s e of e m p i r i c a l , a n t h r o p o l o g i c a l , s c i e n t i f i c or other forms of non-First N a t i o n s i n s t r u m e n t a t i o n a n d procedures, i m p o r t e d into such f i e l d s as e d u c a t i o n , may st i l l be f u l f i l l e d . A n o t h e r argument might be made that f i n d i n g s d e r i v e d f r o m E u r o d e r i v a t i v e m e t h o d o l o g y lends itself w e l l to e u r o t h e o r i z i n g ; that is, i n t e r p r e t i v e a n a l y s i s of f i n d i n g s requires a parade of k n o w n experts. These t h e o r e t i c a l templates, themselves d e v i s e d f r o m p a i n s t a k i n g l y t h o r o u g h Euroresearch, e x p l a i n 'the' 'world' q u i t e w e l l enough. A l t e r n a t i v e paradigms must, w e l l , r e m a i n al t e r n a t i v e . A f i n a l argument might be made that research, in a d d i t i o n to b e i n g r a t i o n a l , o b j e c t i v e a n d a n e m o t i o n a l , must als o r emain d e v o u t l y , r e l i g i o u s l y secular; that s p i r i t u a l i t y a n d 'science', - or fait h a n d reason or b e l i e f and Truth - must remain d i v o r c e d f r o m any s e n s i b i l i t y of C o d . O u r c o n c e p t s of C o d and spiritus (do)(can)not b e l o n g in the hypothesis-testing rigor of the laboratory; the t h e o l o g i a n c a n n o t w o r k as scientist. v i i i Fair e nough, a l l g o o d reasons to not waste t i m e in r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n of the research process, for aren't these questions of pr o c e d u r e a n d not ques t i o n s of ju s t i c e ? A 'Yay-sayer' H o w e v e r , I am not a 'nay-sayer'. I i n t e n d no offense. I d o not suggest that research enterprises be d i s c a r d e d altogether. But, if asked, then I w i l l answer, "Yes, please reconsider." W h i l e s t u d y i n g at a Eu r o C a n a d i a n un i v e r s i t y , situated on the t r a d i t i o n a l t e r r i t o r y of the M u s q u e a m , I i n i t i a l l y became, and qui t e u n i n t e n t i o n a l l y , a researcher of the research process. I meant to d o my research and exit. I d i d not intend to p h i l o s o p h i c a l l y r e c o n s i d e r so many aspects of the research assignment expected. H o w e v e r , my e m o t i o n a l , gendered, "Indian," s p i r i t u a l , (ir)rational, working-class-rooted messy self kept i n t r u d i n g into this research process a n d p r o m p t e d further p h i l o s o p h i c a l self-questioning. T h r o u g h this q u e s t i o n i n g , I d e v e l o p e d my in t u i t i v e q u a l m s about graduate study post-secondary research into s ome a r t i c u l a t e reasons to support r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n . The f o c u s on r a t i o n a l i t y leaves me in despair, frustrated, u n f u l f i l l e d , s addened, amused, a n x i o u s , f r i g h t e n e d a n d int r i g u e d . I, in short, f o u n d myself f e e l i n g e m o t i o n a l . I se e - b e l i e v e there is e m o t i o n in c o g n i t i o n a n d c o g n i t i o n in em o t i o n . I als o see myself in c o g n i t i o n ; try as I have, I am u n a b l e to leave my m u l t i p l y - l a y e r e d subjectivit(y)(ies) at the d o o r of the lab. I have t r i e d s t i f l i n g these intrusions, but! then! they! bubble! up! l i k e ! a! plate! of! f r i e d ! l i v e r ! and! onions!! Besides, if w e are to be a n e m o t i o n a l makers of k n o w l e d g e - s o l e l y r a t i o n a l e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l p i o n e e r s - in o u r c o m m u n a l quest to eng i n e e r a s o c i a l l y - c o n s t r u c t e d r e a l i t y , then I'm sure C o d wouldn't have g i v e n us a l l these great e m o t i o n s a nd p u n c t u a t i o n marks! As w e l l , I've read just a b out a l l the v a l o r i z e d researched products I can stomach about my s e l f a n d my p e o p l e (known, l e g a l l y a n d l e g i s l a t i v e l y in C a n a d a as "Indians"). W i t h f e w e x c e p t i o n s , a n t h r o p o l o g y a n d ix education-dressed-up-as-anthropology or education-dressed-up-as-science must stop if a starting point for researched investigation continues to be based on the query: "I wonder how the Indians do it." Racism is passe and a violation of Canada's Constitution Act, Section 15(1) (R.S.C. En. Canada Act, 1982 (U.K.), 1982, c.11; See: Imai & Hawley, 1995, p. 270). Enough hypothesizing that if x is "Indian," then it will follow that y. "Indian" is not a species independent of all two-leggeds. Thirdly, for those who require quantification, if we are to break the theoretic bonds of culturally reproductive frameworks, then, perhaps, there is need for some new theory-lenses to look at all these keen findings. Intellectually rigorous analysis might be fashioned from non-patriarchal or non-Euro or non-secular theories. I have reservations about the usefulness of unquestioned authority of any canon used to fashion and support the answers to troubling questions. Finally, I was raised Catholic. I identify myself as a lapsed Catholic for I do not practice regularly the rituals and responsibilities required ; yet, my faith does not disappear. I accept that God/Creator or THE BICHOLYMANIFESTING is an all-determining reality. My spiritus-soul lives as part of my integrity within a very humbling, interconnected, living, finely spun energy of relationships. Reverence, love, compassion are elements which must be in my research process. And don't offer to put me in a theology department. After all, Descartes (1596-1650), quoted often in the literature I have been instructed to inspect, conceded humbly that "For there is no doubt that God is capable of creating everything that I am capable of perceiving" (Descartes, 1641/1988; 1641, Sixth Meditation, p. 50, para. 72). At this location known as University, one is almost obligated to knowledgeably repeat the Cartesian dualism, that mind and body are split (Ibid., Second Meditation, pp. 16-23). There is, however, in my seminars much silence about the (pres)(exist)ence of 'Cod' in Descartes' Meditations. This material world is also a spiritual world for me. I need always to remember and to deepen my reverence for the x life-force-mystery-beauty-spirit-power of a l l beings and to e x h i b i t r e v e r e n c e w i t h i n my re l a t i o n s h i p s . I'm lou s y at this reverential praxis at times; but, I have i d e a l s , f o u n d e d on bel i e f s . These Good Reasons Are My Good Reasons I v i e w g o o d reasons as just that: g o o d reasons, that is, p l a u s i b l e e x p r e s s i o n s of grounds for or grounds against support of a p o s i t i o n . In fact, w e l l e n o u g h argued g o o d reasons for or against a p o s i t i o n might f i r m into belief; and, action(s) f o l l o w s belief. I d o not pr e s u m e that o u r be l i e f s are a l w a y s o v e r t l y a n d i n t e n t i o n a l l y d i s s e c t e d before e a c h a c t i o n ; that is, s o m e t i m e s I l i v e l i f e h a b i t u a l l y or u n c o n s c i o u s l y . Therefore, e x p r e s s i o n of my a f f i r m a t i o n that there is n e e d to re c o n s i d e r the research process is neither to sl i t h e r a l o n g s ome moral hig h g r o u n d nor to c o n v i n c e o n e 'nay-sayer' to decamp. I speak-write for myself, b e l i e v i n g that I c a n n o t speak for a n y o n e else. In s p e a k i n g - w r i t i n g I do, perhaps, offer an alternate p e r s p e c t i v e , but this a l t e r n a t i v e is an o f f e r i n g - not a co n s t r u c t e d argument to persuade. I have no asp i r a t i o n s to r a l l y the u n d e c i d e d nor to l i v e n up a para d i g m shift. I b e l i e v e , and, have no d i f f i c u l t y w i t h , the fact that e v e r y o n e f i n d s the v e n u e to express a u t o n o m o u s l y his or her o w n preferences, o p i n i o n s , arguments in a s o c i a l l y - b e l i e v e d w o r l d . M y e x t r e m e l y l i m i t e d k n o w l e d g e of b i o d i v e r s i t y informs me of the nec e s s i t y of d i v e r s i t y for species s u r v i v a l ; and, thus, I b e l i e v e e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l d i v e r s i t y is of e q u a l i m p o r t a n c e to our shared s u r v i v a l as a species. I c o n s i d e r e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l d i v e r s i t y l i k e an a n t i d o t e to the w e i g h t of homogeneous, mas s i f i e d o p i n i o n - t h o u g h t w a r n e d of by O r t e g a de G a sset in 1932 or to the fearful c o n f o r m i t y d r a m a t i z e d by G e o r g e O r w e l l in 1949. W h a t f o l l o w s are my go o d reasons, w h i c h are not based on research d i r e c t e d in t r a d i t i o n a l l a b - l i k e or etlnno-life-lab-like settings. I d i d not c o u n t survey responses nor a n a l y t i c a l l y c o d e i n t e r v i e w transcripts to generate these f i n d i n g s . This is my p h i l o s o p h i c a l e x a m i n a t i o n of xi s o m e of the ass u m p t i o n s of the research process I e n c o u n t e r e d as a graduate student. M y f i n d i n g s , w h i c h c a n be d e s c r i b e d as personally-generated data, are p r o v i d e d in a, perhaps, un u s u a l r e n d e r i n g for presentation of the disse r t a t i o n genre. In fact, I not g o i n g to present the f i n d i n g s of this p h i l o s o p h i c a l i n v e s t i g a t i o n at a l l . H o w e v e r , the members of my Ph.D. C o m m i t t e e saw p r o m i s e in this data a n d b e l i e v e d this case study/story to be w o r t h y of p u b l i c r e c o r d i n g a n d d i s s e m i n a t i o n . These f i n d i n g s are presented in four larger sections, w h i c h i n c l u d e : 1) A n e m o t i o n a l c o ( g n i ) ( n d i ) t i o n i n g ( S O U T H - Em o t i o n a l Realm), 2) The s o c o i o s p i r i t u e m o t s c o p o l i t i c o c u l t u r a l w h i t e n o i s e of r e s e a r c h i n g (WEST - P h y s i c a l Realm), 3) C a n o n i c i t y : E u r o h e r i t a g e i z a t i o n i n g ( N O R T H - C o g n i t i v e Realm), and, 4) A c c u l t u r a t i v e S e c u l a r i z i n g (EAST - S p i r i t u a l Realm). A t times, these f i n d i n g s sound-read l i k e garage tapes w h e r e i n a m u s i c i a n records some h a c k i n g a r o u n d ' before t a k i n g i d e a motes into a stu d i o for f u l l p r o d u c t i o n . As w i t h s u c h sessions, there a p p e ar moments of c r e a t i v e insight a n d instances of i n e v i t a b l e s e l f - i n d u l g e n c e . The pr o d u c t s of c r e a t i v e i n s p i r a t i o n a n d s e l f - i n d u l g e n c e almost a l w a y s generate some good-natured humour. Thi s p r o d u c t is n o e x c e p t i o n . W i t h i n these pages the s c h o l a r l y u n d e r l a y is o v e r l a i d w i t h humour. If there's o n e t h i n g I've kept and, perhaps, sharpened w h i l e in r e s i d e n c e as a graduate student, this is my sense of humor. N o t that I ever i n t e n d e d to c o m e here to be humourist. So let us go then you and I. x i i INTRODUCTION 1 Get back, get back. Get back to where you once belonged. Get back [Sharilyn]. Go home. (Lennon & M c C a r t n e y , 1969) Of Dissertations & Expectations Beware, Beware O f C o m m i t t e e M e m b e r s Be a r i n g H o m e m a d e Christmas C a k e I a m a f e m a l e of First N a t i o n s Ancestry, born A p r i l 24, 1953. I left the m i d d l e - c l a s s p r o f e s s i o n of c l a s s r o o m t e a c h i n g in June of 1989 to return to u n i v e r s i t y in January of 1 9 9 0 to pursue graduate studies. This s h o u l d be a s i m p l e story to t e l l ; after a l l , r e t u r n i n g to graduate s c h o o l is not a u n i q u e e x p e r i e n c e . Yet, this is a t r o u b l e s o m e story to t e l l as I a r t i c u l a t e my thoughts-intuitions-feelings-sensations about b e i n g 'schooled' - again. T h e story does not u n f o l d as n e a t l y a n d s e q u e n t i a l l y as d i d the w r i t i n g of my Master's thesis. A n y w a y , I was d e f t l y f o r g e t t i n g an i n i t i a l c o n c e p t i o n of my dissert a t i o n project a n d b e g i n n i n g to w r i t e my w a y int o a n e w area of interest, w h i c h I d e e m e d to be m u c h more 'academic'. I resisted the e n c o u r a g i n g i n v i t a t i o n s of my Ph.D. c o m m i t t e e members to risk self-exposure a n d talk about m y pe r s o n a l j o u r n e y t h r o u g h graduate studies. I w i s h e d to retreat into t i d y , s c h o l a r l y , third-person, a c a d e m i c c o m p o s i t i o n by c o n s t r u c t i n g through language an alternate history of First N a t i o n s e d u c a t i o n a n d s c h o o l i n g . I guess I'll get to that someday. 2 O n e D e c e m b e r day, I w a n d e r e d o v e r to my neighbour's house to r e c e i v e her reactions to my newest v e r s i o n of the d i s s e r t a t i o n proposal. Lately, I j o k i n g l y c a l l m y s e l f the 'Picasso' of w r i t i n g styles as I adopt and abort so many forms of d i s s e r t a t i o n - l i k e text. T h e response f r o m this Ph.D. c o m m i t t e e m e mber left me u n d e r s t a n d i n g that an o r i g i n a l d i s s e r t a t i o n p r o p o s a l c o u l d not be e a s i l y a b a n d o n e d . W e l c o m i n g me w i t h coffee and h o m e m a d e C h r i s t m a s cake, Dr. A., f o r m e r l y , Dr. W., s u r p r i s i n g l y , stood up to my protests that the a u t o b i o g r a p h i c a l a c c o u n t of my s c h o o l i n g was best left s h e l v e d ! I resisted her c h a l l e n g e s that w r i t i n g about this post-secondary e x p e r i e n c e was w o r t h w h i l e . N o t often is s o m e o n e so b r a v e l y resolute in the face of my stubbornness. Strong M o t i v a t i o n A battle of w i l l s ensued. I r e c o g n i z e d that my reasons for d r o p p i n g the research p r o j e c t w e r e in e f f e c t u a l in light of her threats to resign f r o m my c o m m i t t e e . A c t u a l l y , she c o n v e y e d that t w o members of my c o m m i t t e e w o u l d resign if I c o n t i n u e d to retreat into a less u n i q u e the hi s t o r y of s c h o o l i n g for Persons of First N a t i o n s A n c e s t r y [herein: P F N A ] . The p o t e n t i a l of b e i n g c o m m i t t e e l e s s left me breathless. That's strong m o t i v a t i o n to r e c o n s i d e r s e r i o u s l y . I t rudged the weary, long, three b l o c k s northward to my basement apartment. I am c o n v i n c e d that Dr. A. loves me; however, I d i d c o n t e m p l a t e the d i s e q u i l i b r i u m in p o w e r b e t w e e n student and c o m m i t t e e member. I let the rain a n n o u n c e the m a r t y r d o m of a student p o w e r l e s s in the e q u a t i o n of Ph.D. c ommittee. O n c e home, I r e c o n s i d e r e d . I fretted. I fumed. I fussed. I d i d not k n o w what she desired. I c o u l d not outguess her intentions. I d i d not see-understand the merit(s) of what Dr. A had located. S o m e w h a t angered and c o n f u s e d , I began to w r i t e that afternoon. W h i l e p r o o f r e a d i n g the first draft, I s m i l e d , because, er, perhaps, Dr. A. saw s o m e t h i n g I missed s i t t i n g right under my nose. I d i d , as requested, t e l l the story of what Dr. A. c a l l s my '"personal j o u r n e y " as a graduate student. The resultant story, s o m e w h a t l i k e a case study f o c u s on this o n e part of my e d u c a t i o n a l j o u r n e y , f o r c e d me to a r t i c u l a t e s ome of the q u a l m s I have felt as a graduate student p o n d e r i n g a n d q u e s t i o n i n g the nature of research - e s p e c i a l l y as related to a s i g n i f i e r related to one part of my planetary i d e n t i t y kit. rattle-rattle-rattle-rattle Resistance a n d U n c e r t a i n t y T h i s is an u n c e r t a i n l y t o l d story. I d i d not inte n d to w r i t e a d i s s e r t a t i o n l i k e this. I l i k e to w r i t e in my j o u r n a l but I d o not admit p e o p l e to those pages. I t h i n k some thoughts-feelings are best kept p r i v a t e a n d protected. I d i d not inte n d to be so personal w h e r e i n I leap f r o m f l i g h t s of angry, ( i l ) l o g i c a l p o l e m i c to p o e t i c images and fr o m d o g g e d a n a l y s i s to l o g i c a l (persuas)(argumentat)ion. I resist(ed) self-exposure. I am unce r t a i n of the lesson(s) here to share w i t h others a n d I was unce r t a i n about the form of sh a r i n g r e q u i r e d . The i n t u i t i o n s s e e m e d tr a p p e d in a s u b c o n s c i o u s n e s s a nd I d i d not k n o w h o w to make the f l u i d thoughts s o l i d e n o u g h for p o t e n t i a l readers to f o l l o w . A l s o , my story of disser t a t i o n c o n s t r u c t i o n ruggedly (un)(en)folds as a struggle to be taken t h o u g h t f u l l y as an a c a d e m i c v o i c e w h i l e a r t i c u l a t i n g my e x p e r i e n c e s as a post-secondary s t u d e n t v o i c e in pursuit of three letters s i g n i f y i n g a c a d e m i c c r e d e n t i a l l i n g . T o t e l l this my story meant that I had to co n f r o n t my c o n s t r u c t i o n s of 'what' is a c a d e m i c a n d what is not; w h e r e I i n h e r i t e d these constr(uc)(ic)tions; and my resistance to s i m p l y s p e a k i n g as w h o I am - w h o I am for now. W h e n I began w r i t i n g this d i s s e r t a t i o n , I was not yet as b r a v e - k n o w i n g as Emma L a R o c q u e (1990) w h o states that [tjhere is t r e m e n d o u s pressure to read a n d w r i t e s c h o l a r l y a r t i c l e s , theses, a n d dissertations. U n f o r t u n a t e l y , t o o many scholars a p p a r e n t l y assume s c h o l a r l y 4 w r i t i n g must, by d e f i n i t i o n , be pedantic, s t i f l i n g , and soul-less! But I am M e t i s - I refuse to let c o n v e n t i o n a l dictates of W e s t e r n s c h o l a r s h i p bury me in d r y dust (p. 143). I f e a r e d a n d d e s i r e d e r a s u r i n g the c o n v e n t i o n s w h i c h have erasured me. In c o m p o s i n g these words, I c o m e to understand the s e n s i b i l i t y that a c a d e m i c w r i t i n g n e e d not suffer f r o m gravity. M y resistance is a l s o c o n n e c t e d to my desir e to NOT (re)invent the " I n d i a n " for d i s p l a y , strewn across these pages l i k e a s p e c i m e n p r e p p e d by a mic r o t o m e . I am p o s i t i o n e d at the computer; not in the c u p b o a r d or at a bl o c k a d e . I d i d not c o m e here to w r i t e an "Indian's" story. I n i t i a l l y , I c a m e here to c o m p l e t e a s c h o l a r l y c o n c e p t u a l a n a l y s i s about c o m m u n i t y - b a s e d c u r r i c u l a ( C a l l i o u , 1992). Then, w i t h one graduate degree in hand, I c h o s e to c o n t i n u e a c a d e m i c studies. W h y not? I (can) l o o k the part: I wear t h i c k glasses a n d talk t o mys e l f a l t h o u g h I d o not yet o w n an elb o w - p a t c h e d t w e e d jacket. I r a t i o n a l i s e d that o n c e Iwrote this paper a n d I p r o v e d my a c a d e m i c legwork, then I w o u l d possess the f r e e d o m to t e l l my story w i t h m y v o i c e ; that is, s p e a k i n g f r o m w i t h i n my o w n l o c a t i o n a l subjectivit(y)(ies). T h i s story c a m e l i k e a gift; a n d in the e n d I feel the f r e e d o m of Emma LaRoque's (1990) a d v i c e that there is no "necessary d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n b e i n g a sc h o l a r a n d a p o e t i c writer, or a poet" (p. 143). I t h i n k I understand-feel that now. Not to the Manor Born L e R o y Lit t l e Bear (personal c o m m u n i c a t i o n , December, 1994), says that "Ph.D. stands for Post H o l e Digger, and that my parents w i l l be happy to learn that I'll be a b l e to get a real j o b w h e n this is a l l over." I think-feel that, w h e n this is c o m p l e t e , I w i l l e m b r a c e the Z e n - l i k e s o l i t u d e of such p h y s i c a l t o i l . T h i n k i n g , t h e o r i s i n g a n d tes t i n g a s s u m p t i o n s about pr i n t text is a r duous l a b o u r i n g ; and perhaps, at times, risky ex(certion)(posure); e s p e c i a l l y , if o n e is not to the U n i v e r s i t y born. A c c o r d i n g to Canada's Indian Act, I am an "Indian," that is "a person w h o pursuant to this A c t is registered as an Indian or is e n t i t l e d to be registered as an Indi a n " (R.S.C., 1985, c. 1-5, 2(1); see Imai & H a w l e y , 1995, p. 4). In fact, 120 year ago, I c o u l d not be at a C a n a d i a n u n i v e r s i t y as an "Indian" (Ibid.,). Canada's Indian A c t (1876) states in S e c t i o n 86(1) that a n y "In d i a n " w h o may be a d m i t t e d to the degree of D o c t o r of M e d i c i n e , or to a n y other degree by a n y U n i v e r s i t y of Learning, or w h o may be a d m i t t e d in any P r o v i n c e of the D o m i n i o n to p r a c t i c e l a w either as an A d v o c a t e or as a Barrister or C o u n s e l l o r or S o l i c i t o r or A t t o r n e y or to be a N o t a r y P u b l i c , or w h o may enter H o l y O r d e r s or w h o may be l i c e n s e d by any d e n o m i n a t i o n of C h r i s t i a n s as a M i n i s t e r of the G o s p e l , s h a l l i p s o facto b e c o m e e n f r a n c h i s e d [that is, be r e m o v e d of a l l a b o r i g i n a l rights] under this A c t (see Venne, 1981, p. 47). Thi s p r o v i s o stands w i t h the Indian A c t s (1880, Sect. 99(1); 1884, Sect. 99(4); 1886; Sect. 86; 1906, Sect. 111; see Ve n n e , 1981, pp. 83, 99, 146, 217). The e l i m i n a t i o n c l a u s e 'disappears' w i t h a m e n d m e n t s to the 1927 v e r s i o n of Canada's Indian A c t . So, I'm here f r e e l y a n d w i t h o u t fear of p u n i t i v e a c t i o n for attendance at the A c a d e m y . I am not p o s i t i o n e d or l o c a t e d w i t h i n the A c a d e m y by v i r t u e of bir t h or i n h e r i t a n c e . I am the 'Other' w h o s e i d e n t i t y is "registered" on a "Band List," that is, "registered as an Indian in the Indian Register" on "a list of persons that is m a i n t a i n e d under s e c t i o n 8 [of the Indian Act] by a b a n d or in the D e p a r t m e n t [of Indian Affairs] (R.S.C., 1985, c. 1-5, 2(1); see Imai & H a w l e y , 1995, pp. 5, 3, re s p e c t i v e l y ) . I am the 'Other', m u c h t h e o r i s e d about in researched a n d p u b l i s h e d a c a d e m i c studies. I am the 'Other' w h o s e presense so far in the i n t e l l e c t u a l or a c a d e m i c w o r l d has been a to k e n one, a c o m p o n e n t in ritual references to gender, race a n d class. . . . N o t f o u n d i n numbers as authors of c r i t i c a l texts, or in refereed j o u r n a l s , l a c k i n g 'scholarly' r e s p e c t a b i l i t y , d e f y i n g e s t a b l i s h e d norms and forms (Bannerji, 1993, p. x i v ) . I c a n n o w c o n c u r w i t h Bannerji. Yet, before I f i n d B a nnerji (and others l i k e her), I am l e a r n i n g a bout the e n o r m i t y of this o b s e rvation. I learn at this p l a c e of b r i c k , stone, glass a n d c e m e n t s p r a w l i n g in a forest-like setting. I learn to l o o k for myself in b i b l i o g r a p h i e s a n d ind e x e s at entries l i k e : m a r g i n a l i s e d , Indian, v i c t i m i s e d , C a n a d i a n N a t i v e , oppressed, ( i n ) v i s i b l e m i n o r i t y et cetera. Imagine l o o k i n g for y o u r s e l f in an entry l i k e " v i c t i m / v i c t i m i z e r " or "oppressed" (see, for e x a m p l e , Rosenau, 1992, pp. 228, 223). M y mother a nd my father didn't t e a c h me to t h i n k of m y s e l f l i k e that. As I have i n t e r a c t i v e l y p rocessed m i l e s of text, that is, signs e n c o d e d by auth(or)(esse)(itie)s, w i t h the i n t e n t i o n of c o n v e y i n g m e a n i n g to a u d i e n c e s , I w i t n e s s the nu m e r o u s la b e l s used to i d e n t i f y a n d locate me. In r e a d i n g I have d i s c o v e r e d a E u r o p a l i m p s e s t i c narrative w r i t t e n o v e r m i n e again a n d again. Interactive, however, does not mean c o n t r o l . I o n l y (re)(inter)act. I c o m e to d i s c e r n that there are s p e c i f i c reasons for the e x c l u s i o n of "Indians" f r o m this m i l i e u ; a n d that "Indians" are q u i t e a research industry. I g r o w u n c o m f o r t a b l e d e c o d i n g a n d repulse s o m e aspects of this p h y s i c a l l y textual e n v i r o n m e n t as I b e g i n to understand that texts are not just designs o n paper but m e a n i n g f u l l y b e l i e v e d signs w h i c h have effects ( l e g i s l a t i v e , e d u c a t i o n a l , e m o t i v e , material) on the readers in th e i r c a p a c i t y as l e g i s l a t i v e enforcer, c l a s s r o o m teacher or c u r i o u s bystander. I a l s o c o m e to understand that these signs have d i r e c t effect on those w h o may have never p a r t i c i p a t e d in the c o n s t r u c t i o n of the signs or never read the text. BUT! I d i d not c o m e here to d i s c o v e r or to anal y s e h o w "Indians" (R.S.C., 1970, c.l-6, s.5.) are 'talked about', that is, to stride the c i r c u m f e r e n c e of a b o u n d a r i e d d i s c o u r s e extant about a p a r t i c u l a r p o p u l a t i o n , v a r i o u s l y i d e n t i f i e d as Nati v e , First Peoples, A m e r i n d i a n , Savage, Illi t e r a t e , Indians (Status, non-Status or otherwise), P r i m i t i v e , ( U n ) C i v i l i ( s ) ( z ) e d , C a n a d i a n N a t i v e , A b o r i g i n a l , First N a t i o n s or otherwise. I d i d not c o m e here to b e c o m e (dis)located. I d i d not 7 c o m e here to e x p l o r e the t r o p o l o g i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e , to dissect the legal a n d l e g i s l a t i v e r e a l i t y of "Indians," or to (re)experience the d i s j u n c t i v e of b e i n g "Indian" (R.S.C., 1970, c.l-6, s.5.) in C a n a d i a n society. I d i d not c o m e here to have the 'world' stop m a k i n g sense. In fact, I d i d not c o m e here to be the "Indian." M y post-secondary s c h o o l i n g e x p e r i e n c e is c o n f l i c t e d w i t h the p o l i t i c s of i d e n t i t y a n d my resolve to study and to resist is a l s o strengthened by these p o l i t i c s of ide n t i t y . Looking for an out in a world closing in Trying to be as real as I could be Confused by definitions of being free ( T r u d e l l , 1992, b o o t l e g tape, no b i b l i o g r a p h i c reference.) I struggle. I struggle to remember. I struggle to keep r e m e m b e r i n g . I struggle to keep r e m e m b e r i n g w h o I am. we don't have time/ for more mind wasting lies whatever it is you're going/we're not going to buy it it's time to say something/not a time to be quiet Rant and roll heartspeak from the spirit say it loud so everyone can hear it ( T r u d e l l , rant a n d r o l l , 1994, n.p.) T h e struggle (en)un)folds and I am alte r n a t e l y l e a r n i n g h o w to d r o w n a n d l e a r n i n g h o w to swim. A n d , r e a l i t y is in h o w y o u s w i m . (Trudell, 1992, b o o t l e g tape, no b i b l i o g r a p h i c reference.) Four Areas to C o n t e m p l a t e A l t h o u g h there are many areas of angst, an o m n i p r e s e n t e x i s t e n t i a l nausea, I n ame four. T hese are: (1) A n e m o t i o n a l C o ( g n i ) ( n d i ) t i o n i n g ; (2) T h e s o c i o s p i r i t u e m o e c o p o l i t i c o c u l t u r a l W h i t e N o i s e of R esearching; (3) C a n o n o n i c i t y : E u r o h e r i t a g e i z a t i o n i n g ; and (4) A c c u l t u r a t i v e S e c u l a r i z i n g . Stay Awake, Stay Awake Existential in the sense that I f i n d that the free(dom)(will), a u t o n o m y as it were, I b e l i e v e I have is not. M y c h o i c e s are l i m i t e d ; my op t i o n s of my o w n making. O f course. I c o u l d q u i t graduate studies. I see that as c o w a r d l y . Jaspers (1941) says I c a n a n d must r e m e m b e r to put up an i n t e r i o r resistance to the s o c i a l - w o r l d i m p o s i n g on me: "Do not lose y o u r s e l f in w h a t is m e r e l y known!" (p. 204). I suspect that Jaspers was not w r i t i n g d i r e c t l y to me w h e n he i n v o k e d i n d i v i d u a l s to be aware. Besides, what c o u l d Jaspers k n o w of the p a i n of our P e o p l e , in w o r d s s p o k e n l i k e the w o r d s of B u f f a l o B i r d W o m a n of the H i d a t s a N a t i o n . In her w i n t e r years, she remembers, w i t h s ome d i s b e l i e f and self-doubt, the times of b u f f a l o and deer, (fear)(feel)ing "our Indian ways are a l m o s t gone" (in N a b o k o v , 1991, p. 182). H e r son "grew up in the w h i t e man's 9 s c h o o l " a n d is " h e l p i n g t hem [the H i d a t s a people] to f o l l o w the w h i t e man's road" w h i l e she sees the H i d a t s a l i f e in the shadows at sunset (Ibid.). What/how ca n e x i s t e n t i a l i s t s speak of the long, l o n e l y sadness l i k e that of an a n o n y m o u s O m a h a ? She, w h o k n o w s in her heart-mind that n o w the face of a l l the land is c h a n g e d and sad. The l i v i n g creatures are gone. I see the l a n d desolate and I suffer an u n s p e a k a b l e sadness. S o m e t i m e s I w a k e in the night, and I feel as t h ough I s h o u l d suffocate f r o m the pressure of this a w f u l f e e l i n g of l o n e l i n e s s (Nabokov, 1991, p. 184). Exis t e n t i a l i s t s write-wrote from the c o m f o r t of t h e i r o w n c o u n t r i e s ; w o u l d that t h e i r w o r d s c o u l d ever c o n v e y the e n o r m i t y of the bleakness s p e a k i n g w h e n one is made to forget one's Self-Land o v e r a n d o v e r again. B e c a u s e of those w h o d o remember, I can r emember too. I f i g h t f e e l i n g t r a n q u i l i s e d up here, s t r u g g l i n g against a c c e p t i n g p a r t i c u l a r u n d e r s t a n d i n g s a bout a n u m b e r of t o p i c s . Eventually, I f i n d that s ome Red A l e r t [bad pun, mea culpa] c o n s c i o u s n e s s s e i z e s h o l d of me n e a r l y each t i m e I p i c k up a text(book) or enter a c l a s s r o o m (as student or lecturer). I am paralysed, enraged, s a d d e n e d or a n i m a t e d w i t h the erroneous, e n l i g h t e n e d or a c c u r a t e content of c e r t a i n textual (pre)(as)sumptions. In my "personal j o u r n e y " here, as Dr. A. refers to it, I am n o w t o o w i d e a w a k e - l i k e s o m e o n e w h o f i n a l l y p u l l s o v e r to the s h o u l d e r of the asphalt h i g h w a y after d r i v i n g 14 hours across the p r a i r i e s , h i g h on c o f f e e and cigarettes, o n l y to f i n d S/HE C A N N O T G E T T O SLEEP. I am awake. A W A K E 10 I am disquietingly awake. I don't want to sleep anymore. I would welcome the restful sleep of ignorance. How to stay awake Sockajuwu? How to stay here? How to stay awake here? And, there is my people sleeping since a long time but aren't just dreams the old cars without engine parking in front of the house or angry words ordering peace of mind or who steals from you for your good and doesn't wanna remember what he owes you sometimes I'd like to fall asleep too. close my eyes on everything But I can't I can't. [Sockaj uwu. 1970, n.p.] 11 I d i d not k n o w I was w a k i n g up again. I d i d not k n o w I was s l e e p i n g . I d i d not k n o w w a k i n g a g a i n (c)(w)ould be so p a i n f u l . I d i d not know. L i k e a w o m a n s l e e p w a l k i n g in a sn o w s t o r m , I d o k n o w the i m p o r t a n c e of not f a l l i n g a s l e e p i n s i d e the c o l d . Keep Keep Keep Keep w a l k i n g walking walking w a I a m p r o u d of my e t h n o c u l t u r a l identity. I am p r o u d to be I n d i a n N a t i v e A b o r i g i n a l M o h a w k C r e e S i o u x S t o n e y M i c h e l B a n d heritage. I d o not w i l l i n g l y s e l f - i d e n t i f y as "Indian." Yet, in this c o n t e x t "Indian" seems to have meaning. M a n y lab e l s r e l a t e d to my ancestry seem to have meaning. A m I a w a k e now? Or, am I o n l y d r e a m i n g . BUT! I am more than "Indian." I am als o right-handed, h e t e r o s e x u a l , l a p s e d C a t h o l i c , w o r k i n g class poor. H o w e v e r , whereas I c o u l d stop b e i n g right-handed, the status of " I n d i a n " seems i n d e l i b l y e t c h e d in the c o n s c i o u s n e s s of 'Others'. H o w e v e r , p r i d e in heritage a n d s k i l l f u l l y m a n i p u l a t i n g a f e w p a r a l l e l rows of beads here & there are not the same as m e t h o d i c a l l y a n a l y s i n g the depths of the p s y c h o p o l i t c o - m i l i t a r y s o c i o e c o l e g i s s p i r t u v i o l e n c e a n d other carnage s t r e n g t h e n i n g the resistance of The People, my ancestors, to e n a b l e the p r i d e of my s u r v i v a n c e . In the basement of the M a i n a nd Law li b r a r i e s , w h e r e the "Indian" b o o k s are, I c o m e to t r u l y respect the m e a n i n g of 'survival'. I am, at times, grateful to be here, s u r p r i s e d to be here, proud. Wake-up C a l l s M y w a k e f u l n e s s is fed by disparate events a n d c o n d i t i o n s : post-modernism, Eber H a m p t o n (1988), c r i t i c a l pedagogy, d e c o n s t r u c t i o n i s m , O n e i d a s c h o l a r Dr. Chr i s j o h n ' s h u m o u r 12 a n d k n o w l e d g a b l e n e s s , s t r u c t u r a l i s m (and what comes after), neo- a n d p o s t - c o l o n i a l i s m , the First N a t i o n s H o u s e of Learning, d i s c o u r s e theory, post-Columbus c o n s c i o u s n e s s (for e x a m p l e , G e r a l d V i z e n o r , 1994), Dr. Kirkness, r e v i s i o n i s t history, my c o u s i n , e t c e t e r a . T e a c h i n g t w o s e n i o r - l e v e l " I n d i a n " courses at the post-secondary le v e l hasn't h e l p e d me sl e e p w e l l nights either. I had no id e a that the p r i c e of a d m i s s i o n to this post-secondary i n s t i t u t i o n was to be a persistent case of Four R e a l m (that is, f e e l i n g s , actions, thoughts, spiritus) i n s o m n i a . Ignorance is Bliss(ful)? N o t Really. N o t re a l l y . No. No. N o i g n o r a n c e is o n l y ignorance. what we can't face looks for us anyway ( T r u d e l l , 1994, n.p.) But what happens when I think-feel too much? W h e n I beg i n to thi n k - f e e l , 'Gee, maybe, C a l l i o u y o u are a Pri s o n e r of War' (see, for e x a m p l e , B l a c k Elk, 1990 in T r u d e l l , 1994, n.p.) a n d that makes sense. W h e n I c o n s i d e r that Jesus! G o d ! In! Heaven!, there's an a l l o u t "shameful, secret war" b e t w e e n N a t i v e a n d n o n - N a t i v e p e o p l e s (see C h a r l e s t o n , 1994, p. 15), and that makes sense too. W h e n I study-think-sift-feel serious, a c a d e m i c print-text about m y s e l f a n d m y p r e s u m e d l e a r n i n g style (see, for e xample, W a l k e r , D o d d & Bog e l o w , 1989), my ri g h t - h e m i s p h e r i c 13 br a i n - m i n d a c t i v i t y (see, for e xample, Ross, 1982), my l i n g u i s t i c i n t e g r i t y lost to f o r e i g n l i n g u i s t i c i m p e r i a l i s m (see, for examples, Battiste, 1987; or Johnston in New, 1991), my s c h o o l i n g as inter n a l c o l o n i a l i s m - not, ah, a c a d e m i c e x c e l l e n c e (see, for e x a m p l e s , A l t b a c h & K e l l y , 1978; Perl e y , 1993), I h u r t & h u r t & h u r t some more. W h e n I b e g i n to deconstruct the ( i l ) l o g i c of (pre)(as)sumptions about myself, my m o m and dad, my grandfathers a nd grandmothers, my brothers, my sisters a n d my co u s i n s , o u r Land-Mother and B I C H O L Y M A N I F E S T I N G , I laugh at the absurdity. T h e n I stop a b r u p t l y b e c a u s e a l l of these (pre)(as)sumptions are an i d e o l o g i c a l m a t e r i a l i t y a f f e c t i n g me. W h e n I b e g i n to locate other ( i l ) l o g i c a l subsets of t e x t u a l i t y a bout The P e o p l e a n d my di g n i t y , my resistance, my i n t e l l i g e n c e , my strength, my t e c h n o l o g y , my e p i s t e m o l o g y , my valu e s , my v e r y presense s i n c e t i m e i m m e m o r i a l , I h o o t & w h o o p because We/I su r v i v e . "Hey," I'd say a l o u d w h i l e i n t e r p r e t i n g a stretch(y) (of) text a bout us, "That's me , my mom, my dad, my brother, my PEOPLE, written and writhing about inside those polished, published words-statements-paragraphs-texts. You better justify that with more than a footnote or cross-reference citation to some 'research'." A n d , e v e n t u a l l y , I hear, I hear the sounds of rattles. Rattles startle, awaken, heal, vanquish, calm, protect, St sing with deep memories. I have deep memories which breathe-reside-in-me. In one dream, I am out on the prairies, running; a coolish, low-sun impact kinda day. I am loping purposefully. I am obviously on a discovery patrol. I am black. I have a grey companion. I am somewhat anxious. I am coming to the crest of hills and I see an enclosed structure. I dislike the presense, the presense of permanence. So I run some more. I am a Black Wolf. I run to another crest. I see another structure. Another crest. Another structure. Another&another. I am running hard now. I am beginning to panic. I sense the compassion of my companion running with me, running without judgement to view-feel what I view-feel. I feel I must find someplace they are not. I run to a final crest and look long at the wooden, square structure. I agonise with the understanding that they are here everywhere. I turn my head and retreat. I comprehend that I can't get back to where I once belonged. Now I am awake and I sense-see them here — everywhere; their buildings, highways and shopping malls sunk into the blood, dust, bones and ashes of my people. Sunk deep. I must learn to accept that they are here. I must learn to accept change. I must learn to accept change with compassion. Statement of Interest: Whose? 1 I t h i n k - f e e l - k n o w n o w that some of my c o m m i t t e e members d e s i r e that I a r t i c u l a t e s o m e of the sounds of these b e a u t i f u l , s o o t h i n g , a l a r m i n g , startling rattles I hear; the m e a n i n g s t h e r e i n ; a n d the effects of such meanings on me as I pursue a Do c t o r a t e of P h i l o s o p h y in a F a c u l t y of E d u c a t i o n at a E u r o C a n a d i a n university. Frankly, their d o g g e d p r o d d i n g to make me p r o d u c e this self-re(flex)(ect)ive, a u t o b i o g r a p h i c a l e x c u r s i o n e l u d e s me. I no lo n g e r have my enthusiasm(s) for post-modern j u x t a p o s i t i o n a l authori(ity); w h e r e i n , as Lather (1991) - a n d others - r e c o m m e n d that "to w r i t e 'postmodern' is to w r i t e p a r a d o x i c a l l y a ware of one's c o m p l i c i t y in that w h i c h o n e c r i t i q u e s " in order to "at o n c e " i n s c r i b e a n d subvert (p. 10). I f e e l c o m p e l l e d to move on i n t o u n p i o n e e r e d territory, to deconstruct further the language c o n s t r u c t i o n related to the his/herstory of my s c h o o l i n g . I am u n c o n c e r n e d about c o m p l i c i t y a n d s e l f - c o n s c i o u s s u b v e r s i o n . N o t yet, though. I am encouraged-instructed to w r i t e about this j o u r n e y as a f e m a l e graduate student of First N a t i o n s Ancestry. W o u l d the study be as p o p u l a r if i n s t r u c t e d to w r i t e a b o u t this j o u r n e y as a First N a t i o n s graduate student of a C a t h o l i c u p b r i n g i n g . In fact, o n e c o m m i t t e e m e mber states that I am not w r i t i n g a bout s c h o o l i n g or e d u c a t i o n or e v e n "Indian education." 'Terrific,' I mutter s i l e n t l y to myself, 'A l i t t l e late t o get in t o a Ph.D. c a n d i d a c y in p o l i t i c a l s c i e n c e or law'. I ta l k often to myself up here. A l t h o u g h I o n c e wrote, "I was the research," ( C a l l i o u , 1994, February, p. 73), I am not c o m f o r t a b l e w i t h m a k i n g that p u b l i c . I w a nt to and I don't want to e x p o s e these events a n d c o n d i t i o n s of v i o l e n c e a n d e l a t i o n , d e p r e s s i o n a n d laughter, a n i m a t i o n a n d paralysis. I d i d not c o m e here w i t h any "foreshadowed p r o b l e m s " (see, M a l i n o w s k i , 1922, pp. 8-9) about my i n s t i t u t i o n a l i s e d s c h o o l i n g v o y a g e or about "Indians." I d i d not c o m e here to be a p e r f o r m a n c e art case study of one w h o is "nouveau statused ... in tra n s i t i o n f r o m o n e p o s i t i o n to ano t h e r w h e r e the te n s i o n s of n e w e x p e r i e n c e are v i v i d " (see, Dean, E i c h o r n & Dean, 1967, p. 2 8 5 re.: t y p o l o g y of informants). I d i d not c o m e here to wr i t e about myself. Even if I agreed, h o w w o u l d I d o this? S u ppose I put my f r e s h l y s p r o u t e d e n t h u s i a s m on h o l d a n d s h e l v e my e x a m i n a t i o n of se l e c t e d , p u b l i s h e d , print passages (16xx-1994) [to expose] my reac t i o n s to the (re)presentations of a p a r t i c u l a r p h e n o m e n o n of s c h o o l i n g for a p o p u l a t i o n d i v e r s e l y i d e n t i f i e d as, for examples, Savages, A m e r i n d i a n ( C a l l i o u , 1995, N o v e m b e r , p. 1, unfinished.) et ceteras? S u p p o s e I get back rather than m o v e on ? H o w w o u l d I d o this? Research N e e d s Data I have not kept d e s c r i p t i v e or inte r p r e t i v e f i e l d notes. D o I f l i c k o n a tape r e c o r d e r a n d interrogate myself, u s i n g different 'voices' for i n t e r v i e w e r a n d i n t e r v i e w e e ? W h y don't I trust m y s e l f to (re)tell this p i l g r i m a g e of post-secondary educ a t i o n ? W e l l , there are issues of d e s i g n c r e d i b i l i t y a n d r e l i a b i l i t y (for e x a m p l e , t r i a n g u l a t i o n ; see, for e x a m p l e , M c M i l l a n & Sch u m a c h e r , 1989, pp. 187-196, re. c r e d i b i l i t y , internal and external v a l i d i t y , etc.). O n e does not de s i r e , as Dr. M. c a u t i o n e d in my E D U C 5 0 8 (Introduction to Educ a t i o n a l Research M e t h o d s class) to "create an a r t i f i c i a l p i c t u r e of a s i t u a t i o n " ( C a l l i o u , Journal Entry, 25-01-1991). H o w c r e d i b l e is my e y e w i t n e s s testimony? I am a w f u l l y o p i n i o n a t e d . I am prone to h y p e r b o l e . O f course, I c o u l d ' l i e my head o f f . W h a t a c u r i o u s c o l l o q u i a l i s m . The image created is d e l i c i o u s l y absurd. Just as o n e t e l l s o n e l i e t o o many, does one's head just p l o p off at the ne c k just b e l o w the ears? I c o u l d be a l l of this. H o w e v e r , 'trained' ethnographers are i n v i t e d by s o m e (for e x a m p l e , D e a n & W h y t e , 1958) to l o o k b e y o n d the truthfulness of the informant a n d o b s e r v e rather 17 w h a t the informant's statements reveal about his or her f e e l i n g s a nd p e r c e p t i o n s , a n d w h at inferences can be made fro m these about the ac t u a l e n v i r o n m e n t or events he or she has e x p e r i e n c e d (cited in H a m m e r s l e y & A t k i n s o n , 1991, p. 112). O.K., O.K., so e ven lies have in t e r p r e t i v e v alue. Self-given e y e w i t n e s s t e s t i m o n y is not my u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the usual basis of c r e d i b l e research. But w h o may I go to and ask for such personal data? U s u a l l y , the researcher ventures a f i e l d ( u s u a l l y off-campus) and c a r e f u l l y c o l l e c t s t e s t i m o n y (that is, data) f r o m e y e w i t n e s s e s (that is, informants) to the p o i n t of saturation (that is, e n o u g h already); and then performs s o m e t h i n g " s c i e n t i f i c " a n d " d i s c i p l i n e d " ( M c M i l l a n & Schumacher, 1989, pp. 6-7). The researcher quests to v e r i f y k n o w n i n f o r m a t i o n or to generate different data; perhaps, e ven to v e r i f y , to f a l s i f y or to generate t h e o r y (Ibid., p. 7). A d d i t i o n a l l y , i n t e r v i e w i n g myself, is not e x a c t l y a t y p i c a l e x a m p l e of e t h n o g r a p h i c , m u l t i m e t h o d c o r r o b o r a t i o n (See, M c M i l l a n & Schumacher, 1989, pp. 397, 399). A f t e r a l m o s t f i v e years on-campus, I d i d not c o m e here to i n t e n t i o n a l l y s e l e c t m y s e l f - or, "Indians" - as "unit(s) of a n a l y s i s " of a "phenomen[on][a] w h i c h the researcher selects to understand in d e p t h regardless of the n umber of sites, p a r t i c i p ants, or d o c u m e n t s for a study" (Ibid., p. 180). A s w e l l , data c o l l e c t i o n (with p r e c i s i o n ) and t h e o r y g e n e r a t i o n are not u s u a l l y d e s c r i b e d as f u n - f i l l e d a c t i v i t i e s . T h i s is serious and hard (read: scholarly) Puritan W o r k E t h i c i s m , w h i c h W e a v e r (in T o k a r c y z k & Fay, 1993), herself a " M e n n o n i t e H a r d Worker," d e s c r i b e s as more about " i n d i v i d u a l a c h i e v e m e n t " than " c o m m u n i t y b u i l d i n g " (p. 119). As s o m e o n e w i t h w o r k a h o l i c t e n d e n c i e s , I thought-felt I d i d not p e r c e i v e engaged 'scholarly' e n d e a v o u r as play. Yet, I confess that w r i t i n g is, for me, mostly g o o d fun. Is it serious i n v e s t i g a t i o n to sit in my study (Ah, t o o gr a n d i o s e , try back c o r n e r of my bedroom), ( m i s ) ( d i s ) c o m p r e h e n d i n g s i g n i f i e r s of (en)(de)coded text? I d i d not c o m e here to p l a y and have fun. That is not s c h o l a r l y . I c a m e here t o , here t o h e a r / n o t hear here t o . . . ? PART I: EMOTION IN COGNITION; COGNITION IN EMOTION 19 w h a t w e c a n ' t f a c e l o o k s f o r u s a n y w a y ( T r u d e l l , 1994, n.p.) rattle-RATTLE-rattle-RATTLE Who Knows Where & When These Things Begin Really -[The research setting: A basement room. Sound of chairs scraping. W e l l , not exactly scraping because the f l o o r is carpeted w i t h the ugliest, orange, shag rug this side o f Texas. E a c h shag is about 1.5 inches long. Sound o f questions muttered aloud. " L i k e , so how do you want us to begin?" and "How d i d yo u f i n d me?" Sound o f phone c o r d being yanked out of the w a l l . Sound of John T r u d e l l s i n g i n g somewhere i n the room. Sound of d i g i t a l c l o c k numbers cla c k i n g . Sound of eager pens snapping. Sound o f cigarette smoke rising.] Interviewer: This is f r o m a paper y o u w r ote t h r o u g h o u t 1994-95 w h e r e i n y o u w a n t e d to c l a r i f y that c u r r i c u l u m itself may be qu i t e b e n i g n , but I n t e n t i o n a l i t y h o l d s more c l u e s about overt o u t c o m e s ( C a l l i o u , 1994-95, December-February ). Is this a p l a c e to b e g i n the i n t e r v i e w ? [Pause w h i l e awaiting assent. S l i g h t l y agitated movements w i t h s p i r a l o f a c o i l notebook.] I thought this might be an app r o p r i a t e p l a c e to b e g i n the, ah, our i n t e r v i e w . Interviewee: Hhhmmm, never c o n s i d e r e d text a l o c a t i o n a l p l a c e before, ah, I l i k e that. I've p r o b a b l y spent more t i m e in books than in the bush. Interviewer: [Interviewer clears throat. Selects and reads a passage f r o m an unpublished paper w h i c h the interviewee wrote i n 1994-95. Subject looks resignedly out the window, w h i c h faces East.] I tend, late l y , to begin stories at the south as I b e l i e v e most stories a nd t e a c h i n g a nd l e a r n i n g have e m o t i o n a l content, currents and undertows brought t h r o u g h t h i s G r e a t W i n d of interspecies contact. The e m o t i o n a l realm is s y m b o l i z e d t h r o u g h the e l e m e n t of water. W i t h o u t water, there is no li f e . W i t h o u t e m o t i o n s , there is a l s o no lif e . Emotions, l i k e water, can f l o w in riv u l e t s or oceans. Emotions d e n i e d b e c o m e f r o z e n , l i k e water s o l i d i f i e d , w h i c h is s t i l l in m o t i o n at a s l o w e d m o l e c u l a r l e v e l . F rozen water is st i l l water. Even f r o z e n e m o t i o n s are st i l l e m o t i o n s . The season of s u m m er suggests that our e m o t i o n a l realm needs to be nurtured and that our e m o t i o n s f e r t i l i z e a c t i o n , thought and spiritus. A s y m b o l i c a s s o c i a t i o n w i t h a d o l e s c e n c e suggests that o v e r - i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i t h intense f e e l i n g s c a n result in a c t i o n s of t u r b u l e n t impetuosity. H o w e v e r , w i t h o u t o u r e m o t i o n a l w o r l d , w e are lost for one cannot cognate j o y nor i n t e l l e c t u a l i z e tears to f a l l at the death of a l o v e d one nor feel satisfaction in our actions. O u r e m o t i o n s are a l w a y s ev i d e n t , but I f i n d that my em o t i o n s are often b u r i e d in an i n t e l l e c t u a l l i f e . Y e t the e m o t i o n s are there as subverted text, a m o t i v a t i o n to a r t i c u l a t e a statement ( C a l l i o u , 1994-95, pp. 12-13). [Interviewer stops reading, and then, continues speaking.] 21 I thought-felt South, w i t h the E m o t i o n a l Realm, might be a p l a c e to b e g i n the i n t e r v i e w and then to p r o c e e d W e s t (Physical), N o r t h (Cognitive) and East (Spiritual). [Interviewer hesitates. Waits for response from the interviewee about the delineation of the Four D i r e c t i o n s of the interview. None forthcoming. M o r e 'thick' silence, w h i c h is d i f f i c u l t to describe. Interviewer wonders if this w o u l d be a time to w r i t e a fi e l d note, that is a written personal account (usually considered a private document) of the event f r o m the point-of-view of the ethnographer who is i n t e r v i e w e r i n g (see, for example, Pratt i n C l i f f o r d , 1990, pp. 47-70). Interviewer wonders how lo n g one should decently wait for a response.] Interviewee: N o t c e r t a i n , I'm c o m f o r t a b l e w i t h that. I c a u t i o n in that p i e c e that this l i n e a r i t y is dangerous, because starting at the Southern R e a l m may seem to p r i v i l e g e e m o t i o n and a r t i f i c i a l i z e " f e e l i n g s as a pre-c o g n i t i v e phase in an attempt to isolate the a f f e c t i v e f r o m the c o g n i t i v e r e a l m " ( C a l l i o u , 1994-95, p. 23). There is a l s o a, er, or, the t e n d e n c y to b e g i n a li n e a r r e c i t a t i o n : "Here an e m o t i o n , there a thought, and over there a se n s a t i o n " [Interviewee's emphasis]. T h ere is, I b e l i e v e , e m o t i o n in c o g n i t i o n ; c o g n i t i o n in spirit u s ; a c t i o n in e m o t i o n ; spi r i t u s in a c t i o n , sensation in a c t i o n et cetera. A n d , these four key terms - e m o t i o n a l , p h y s i c a l , c o g n i t i v e , s p i r i t u a l - are u m b r e l l a terms for subsets; for e x a m p l e , i n t u i t i o n i n s i d e of c o g n i t i o n . I do not r e c o g n i z e w h e r e I i n h e r i t e d , c o nstructed, d i s c o v e r e d or o t h e r w i s e a c q u i r e d this belief. [Interviewee continues speaking, reciting f r o m the unpublished paper under discussion.] 22 These realms are c o n n e c t e d , in s i m u l t a n e o u s o p e r a t i o n , a n d thus, s u c h p a r t i c u l a r i z a t i o n c o n t r a d i c t s my u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the non-linear sense of the M e d i c i n e W h e e l teachings. Therefore, this four-part c o n s t r u c t i o n I have b e g u n to use for papers becomes, perhaps, a dangerous s e q u e n t i a l r e d u c t i o n i s m where: 'First, w e l o o k at the e m o t i o n a l , then w e lo o k at the p h y s i c a l , etc.'. For c o n v e n i e n c e , however, I use this step-by-step process because I understand the u n d e r l y i n g w h o l i s t i c r e l a t i o n a l i t y as f o u n d a t i o n ( C a l l i o u , 1994-95, p. 23). [Interviewee stops reading. Pause on tape again. Participant continues speaking.] If we go South, then w e must p i o n e e r W e s t and so on. I want it u n d e r s t o o d that I, er, that I be aware that this is an o r g a n i s a t i o n a l d e v i c e . I don't d e s i r e that this use of d i r e c t i o n s be i m m o r t a l i z e d l i k e N o v a k and Gowan's V e e (1984, pp. 55-75). Besides, the M e d i c i n e W h e e l is not 'mine' a n d I was not raised in this t r a d i t i o n . I've a d o p t e d the M e d i c i n e W h e e l as a means to re(turn)(place) s ome integ(rity)(ration) into myself, w h i c h b e c a m e v e r y d i s c o n n e c t e d at this u n i v e r s i t y , l o c a t e d on the t r a d i t i o n a l territory of the M u s q u e a m . T h e d i r e c t i o n s are l i k e natural terms, a k i n d of c o d i n g perhaps? Integration, integrity, integrate are s t i m u l a t i n g words. The root is Latin, integer; that is, i n , e q u a l to "before" a n d tangere, m e a n i n g "touch" (see H a w k i n s & A l l e n , 1991, pp. 737, 476). There suggests to me that w i t h i n this d e f i n i t i o n related to w h o l e n e s s , to a c o m p l e t e n e s s , that e n t i r e t y exists preexistent to touch. Perhaps, w h e n we be g i n to tou c h , w e b e g i n to d i s c e r n a n d feel individu(al)(ated) parts. A w a r e n e s s of separate p i e c e s emerges. H o w to re c o n n e c t ? I f i n d that w h e n I b e g i n to speak-write of this h e u r i s t i c , then I get agitated b e cause I b e g i n the d i s m a n t l i n g a n d I w o r r y about that. 23 [Interviewee looks up and views the interviewer f u r i o u s l y s c r i b b l i n g notes. S m i l i n g , the interviewee continues speaking.] So, M e d i c i n e W h e e l th i n k i n g - f e e l i n g - s e n s i n g - s p i r i t i n g r e m i n d s me to address m o r e than the c o g n i t i v e r e a l m of research I do, that, ah, w i t h i n the W h e e l , e m o t i o n a l (or, affective), p h y s i c a l , c o g n i t i v e (or, mental, i n t e l l e c t u a l ) a n d sp i r i t u a l realms are a l l of o n e p i e c e , w h i c h c a n be s y m b o l i s e d as one c i r c l e . A n d , a c i r c l e is, itself, an abstraction. A c i r c l e is not a thr e e - d i m e n s i o n a l c u r v e so d r a w n that a l l 'points' (not solid) are e q u i d i s t a n t f r o m a center. In this construct, w h i c h represents e g a l i t a r i a n i s m , no po i n t is p r i v i l e g e d . So, if w e b e g i n here, I get agitated; b e cause I want to avert the t r a d i n g of a lin e a r s e q u e n t i a l format for a c i r c u l a r s e q u e n t i a l o r g a n i s a t i o n . I t h i n k - f e e l - b e l i e v e - w o r r y that c i r c u l a r i t y b e c o m e s a c o n s t r i c t i o n w h i c h may force t o o l i t e r a l a li n e a r i t y . Thus, I b e l i e v e that I am v i e w i n g , er, and, a l s o c o m p r e h e n d i n g a m u l t i - d i m e n s i o n a l l y i n t e r c o n n e c t e d t e n s i o n of events c o n n e c t e d w i t h the energies of relat(i o n a l i t y ) ( t i o n s h i p s ) in a c o n t i n u u m of past-present-future. Or, at, least, I try to see that. [Pause.] So easy to speak so i d e a l i s t i c a l l y . I c o n s t a n t l y r e m i n d m y s e l f that I can't abuse the M e d i c i n e W h e e l as some e x p e r i m e n t a l m ethodology; the M e d i c i n e W h e e l is Sacred, g i v e n to the two-leggeds by the C r e a t o r / T H E B I G H O L Y M A N I F E S T I N C . I have to rev e r e n c e that, learn-remember h o w to reverence this sacredness. Interviewer: [Unexpectedly f i n d i n g a moment for a question.] A h , so, is this s ome fo r m of c u l t u r a l (re)appropriation? That is, a d o p t i n g as yours s o m e t h i n g w h i c h is not? Interviewee: I have (re)considered that. W e n d y Rose (1992) writes s ome hard h i t t i n g , honest w o r d s in a chapter "The Great Pretenders, Further R e f l e c t i o n s o n W h i t e s h a m a n i s m . " She opens w i t h this q u o t a t i o n f r o m M a r g o T h u n d e r b i r d (1988): 24 T h e y c a m e for our land, for what grew or c o u l d be g r o w n o n it, f o r the resources in it, a n d for our c l e a n a i r a n d pure water. T h e y stole these things f r o m us, a n d in the t a k i n g t hey a l s o stole our free ways and the best of our leaders, k i l l e d in battle or assassinated. A n d now, after a l l that, they've c o m e for the ve r y last of our possessions; n o w they want our pride, our history, our s p i r i t u a l t r a d i t i o n s . T h e y want to rewr i t e and remake these things, to c l a i m t h em for themselves. The lie s a n d thefts just never e n d (Thunderbird c i t e d in Rose, 1992, p. 403). O n what/whose author(ity) d o I adopt this h e u r i s t i c a p p r o a c h to c o n s i d e r the integr(ity)(ation) of ob s e r v a t i o n s or f i n d i n g s or understandings? M y b o o k t e a c h i n g s are e x t r e m e l y l i m i t e d (Pepper & Henry, 1986; Sunbear, W i n d & M u l l i g a n , 1991). I a l s o had a c o n v e r s a t i o n w i t h F l o y P e pper (1993), and, later w i t h C y Eagleheart, at a M e d i c i n e W h e e l g a t h e r i n g in A u g u s t of 1994. S i n c e then I have attended t w o other M e d i c i n e W h e e l gatherings. Each W h e e l was different. I c o n t i n u e to listen-watch hard and learn; more, l i k e meditate-absorb. I d o not adopt w i t h disrespect. I d o not adopt for gain. In a p p r o p r i a t i o n , there is the sense of e x p l o i t a t i o n , p a r t i c u l a r l y , for f i n a n c i a l gain. Y o u can't eat m o n e y though. [Laughter on tape. Pause.] T h e integ r a t i v e p o t e n t i a l of the M e d i c i n e W h e e l makes sense to me. N o t to adopt the M e d i c i n e W h e e l because I am not of that c u l t u r e assumes a c e r t a i n e s s e n t i a l i s m that o n l y those b o r n to an i d e o l o g y may be of that persuasion. Therefore, o n l y b o r n C a t h o l i c s c a n be(gat) C a t h o l i c s . A l s o a s s u m e d is that one is in stasis, f r o z e n i n s i d e what one is b o r n to in this l i f e . T h i s is b e c o m i n g a p o o r ' r a t i o n a l i s a t i o n ' t o o c l o s e to f a b r i c a t i o n to g i v e an i n t e r v i e w e r a satisfactory answer. I a l w a y s i d e n t i f y myself as not a M e d i c i n e W h e e l 'expert'. U n t i l I am t o l d I am t r a i n e d , I w o u l d not go out and set up a M e d i c i n e W h e e l . I d o use the most b a s i c of the t e a c h i n g s of in t e g r a t i o n a n d the need to pay attention to the Four D i r e c t i o n s - R e a l m s to o r g a n i z e my 25 f e e l i n g - d o i n g - t h i n k i n g - s p i r t u s i n g . Is this c u l t u r a l a p p r o p r i a t i o n ? I have c o m e to b e l i e v e that The M e d i c i n e W h e e l is p o w e r f u l e n o u g h to protect itself f r o m my c o n s c i o u s l y d e l i b e r a t e or c a r e l e s s l y u n c o n s c i o u s ( m i s ) a p p r o p r i a t i o n . A d o p t i o n of Constructs. W h o s e ? Interviewee: [Nods. Shrugs. R o l l s a cigarette.] I r o n i c a l l y , e a r l i e r in my research career, I never felt that I had trespassed i n t o c u l t u r a l a p p r o p r i a t i o n w h e n I a d o p t e d or a p p r o p r i a t e d the well-argued thoughts of other p h i l o s o p h e r s , theorists, s o c i a l c r i t i c s , whatever. For example, A n t o n i o Gramsci's (1891-1937) e x p l a n a t o r y c o n c e p t is k n o w n as hegemony, w h e r e i n classes are persuaded to accept-self-adopt-support the system of b e l i e f s (moral, c u l t u r a l , s o c i a l , etc.) h e l d by those in p o w e r (see, for e x a m p l e , G r a m s c i , trans, by H o a r e & N o w e l l - S m i t h , 1995, pp. 12-13). Later in my t e a c h i n g career here, I d o qu e s t i o n my at t r i b u t i o n of this u n d e r s t a n d i n g "of the 'spontaneous' c o n s e n t g i v e n by the great masses of the p o p u l a t i o n to the general d i r e c t i o n i m p o s e d on s o c i a l l i f e b y the d o m i n a n t f u n d a m e n t a l group" to G r a m s c i (trans, by Hoa r e & N o w e l l - S m i t h , 1995, p. 12). H e is the p u b l i s h e d author(ity), but I feel I am p a r t i c i p a t i n g in the (re)ma r g i n a l i s a t i o n of i n d i g e n o u s thought by c i t i n g this autho(ity) over an i n d i g e n o u s author(ity) e v en if they don't use the same f o u r - s y l l a b l e word. That's just o n e moment of the ex i s t e n t i a l nausea I e x p e r i e n c e ; the sense that be-ing-ness is l i m i t e d w i t h prevalent forms of thought, w h i c h here are born of the 'Mas t e r & M i s t r e s s ' house, er, laboratory. Interviewer: So y o u use G r a m s c i (1995) c a u t i o u s l y , but don't c o n s i d e r that Sacred? Interviewee: I n i t i a l l y , I didn't t h i n k of his words as Sacred. Y e t I d o respect his t h i n k i n g - f e e l i n g to look, to w a k e up, to say to others, "Wake U p and Look!" So n o w I use his 26 w o r d s by s a y i n g his name. Hegemony, for now, f u n c t i o n s as a sign I g i v e m e a n i n g to w h e n I need to represent actions-thoughts-feelings w h i c h m a i n t a i n an irreverent i m b a l a n c e . A l l w o r d s have power. I feel the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of t r y i n g to c o m m u n i c a t e his i n s i g h t f u l n e s s r e s p e c t f u l l y a n d r e s p o n s i b l y to undergraduates. In a way, I've c o m e to see these oral a n d print b i b l i o g r a p h i c c i t a t i o n s as an act of respect for e x e m p l a r y t h i n k i n g . H o w e v e r , the (re)enactment of c i t a t i o n to o n l y o n e author(ity) creates a m o n o c u l t u r a l t e x t u a l i t y . This m o n o l i t h i s m is w h at c o n c e r n s me, unnerves me. [Pause on tape. Interviewer checks equipment. Mutters aloud, "Look's like everything's taping." Shuffles through sheets of paper while trying to reassemble an interior understanding of the sequence of the interview.] I n t e r v i e w Layout Interviewer: Yes, w e l l , a p p r o p r i a t i o n , that was interesting. A h , to return to the b e g i n n i n g of this i n t e r v i e w . I l o c a t e d the four areas of 'existential nausea' y o u m e n t i o n e d e a r l i e r a n d these appear to 'fit i n to' the Four D i r e c t i o n s / R e a l m s of the M e d i c i n e W h e e l . For e x a m p l e : 1) Part I: A n e m o t i o n a l C o ( g n i ) ( o n d i ) t i o n i n g ( S O U T H - E M O T I O N A L ) , 2) Part II: The s o c i o s p p i r i t u e m o e c o p o l i t i c o c u l t u r a l 'White' N o i s e of R e s e a r c h i n g (WEST - P H Y S I C A L ) , 3) Part III: C a n o n i c i t y : E u r o h e r i t a g e i z a t i o n i n g ( N O R T H - C O G N I T I V E ) , and 4) Part IV: A c c u l t u r a t i v e S e c u l a r i z i n g (EAST - SPIRITUAL) 27 O f course, I understand that y o u m e n t i o n that four is a si g n i f i c a n t number, but not the [Interviewer's emphasis.] number. For e xample, H a m p t o n (1988) uses S i x d i r e c t i o n s to c o n s t r u c t a f o u n d a t i o n a l m o d e l for e d u c a t i o n for PFNA. In r e v i e w i n g his i n t e r v i e w data, the t e x t u a l ( i n t e r ) c o n n e c t i o n s l e d to his search for a non-Euro 'model', "metaphor or a pattern" to i l l u s t r a t e the subsets of relations. H e i n c l u d e s t w o a d d i t i o n a l d i r e c t i o n s - a b o v e and b e l o w - to represent Sky Father and Earth Mother. S ome others i n c l u d e a Seventh d i r e c t i o n , this b e i n g for the A n c e s t o r s (Hampton, 1988, pp. 15-16). Interviewee: Yes, Four. Don't y o u think-feel y o u r segments fit a l m o s t t o o neatly? [Laughter.] I w o n d e r h o w that happened? [ M o r e chortles.] The p a r a l l e l i s m is a l r e a d y a s k e w [ E v e n more chuckles] b ecause I d o not a r r i v e here at this c a m p u s in the summer, a s s o c i a t e d w i t h the south. But in some ways the story does be g i n w i t h me b e i n g s o m e w h a t of an e m o t i o n a l ( l y naive) adolescent. N o w is that fair? I'm not e x a c t l y une tabula adolescent rasa w h e n I a r r i v e o n this l u x u r i o u s l y forested campus, w i t h f l o r a in f u l l - f o r c e b l o o m at the most u n l i k e l y t i m e s of the year. I'm fr o m A l b e r t a w h e r e w e d o not plant gardens un t i l after Q u e e n V i c t o r i a ' s birthday. Even that's a li t t l e r i s k - t a k i n g because it can s n o w in July. I have some rather strong o p i n i o n s , e m o t i o n s and b e l i e f s w h e n I a r r i v e here to study w i t h Dr. A. I am not unaware, for examples, of f e m i n i s m or the c i v i l rights m o v e m e n t or e t h n o c u l t u r a l o p p r e s s i o n or or g e n o c i d e . W h a t I am, maybe, more n a i v e about is the w h o l e p r i v i l e g i n g of r a t i o n a l i t y ('the mind', p u r p o r t e d l y l o c a t e d in the 'brain' or 'head area' somewhere). So, I am naive, but c e r t a i n l y not i n e x p e r i e n c e d . A n y w a y , what w e r e y o u asking? Interviewer: S h o u l d w e run through the d i r e c t i o n a l a s s o c i a t i o n s now? Interviewee: No. Let's p o s i t i o n them w i t h each focus area of d i s c u s s i o n as these d i r e c t i o n a l p o w e r s are e n c o u n t e r e d . Interviewer: O.K. [Interviewer shuffles through papers, l o o k i n g for appropriate question. Interviewee sits quietly waiting.] 28 Snowstorms Stories Interviewer: You've been here s i n c e January of 1991 now? W h a t d o y o u r e m e m b e r about the start of this graduate student career? Ah, maybe, w e s h o u l d start w i t h y o u r a r r i v a l . [Coaxing] W o u l d that be s o m e p l a c e to begin? Interviewee: U s u a l l y , w h e n I lead a (read)(decod)er south, I b e g i n w i t h a story. [ L i g h t A s i d e : h i g h l y manipulative i n d i c a t i o n that this research quest begins where I direct.]. T hese are s o m e t i m e s humorous or s o r r o w f u l or sad or e l a t e d or amused. T h r o u g h the s t o r y t e l l i n g I d e s i r e to (re)establish some sense of and/or response f r o m the a f f e c t i v e d o m a i n . S u c h i n t r o d u c t i o n s might be c o n s i d e r e d m a n i p u l a t i v e hooks; however, for me, the stories are a t tempted prompts to c o m m u n i c a t e some of my in t u i t e d subtext of a t o p i c . A s I e x p l o r e s ome of those h uman i n t a n g i b l e s or ineffables that ill u s t r a t e that there is e m o t i o n in c o g n i t i o n ; that e m o t i o n a n d c o g n i t i o n are not d i v o r c e d , I am b e w i l d e r e d as to h o w to c o m m u n i c a t e s u c h f i n d i n g s . A n d , these f e e l i n g s - if not numbed-out by cog n i t i v e - b a s e d p r i m a c y - are a l s o part of the a c t i v e part of (ap)(com)prehension. I b e l i e v e that part of r e ( c o g n i z ) ( c o u p ) i n g j u s t i c e is feeling justice [Interviewee's emphasis], w i t h e m o t i o n a l and p h y s i c a l certainty. For e x a m p l e , I t h i n k j u s t i c e can a l s o be e x p e r i e n c e d k i n e s t h e t i c a l l y . There is a Four R e a l m 'Good' F e e l i n g i n s i d e and a r o u n d us. 29 A n d stories assist and a c c o m p a n y the mental gymnastics. The M e d i c i n e W h e e l reverses a tr a d i t i o n a l (O.K., p a t r i a r c h a l , perhaps) d e r o g a t i o n of e m o t i o n a l (teach)(learn)ings as suspect, not serio u s or c o n c o c t e d by a s i l l y heart. So, let's start w i t h a story. H h hmmm, am I b e c o m i n g to o p r e d i c t a b l e ? V I A Snowstorms In January of 1991, I ar r i v e in a freakish s n o w s t o r m s i l e n c i n g the c o s m o p o l i t a n n o i s e of a c i t y I c o n s i d e r a s e c o n d home. I l o v e the ocean. N o r m a l l y , the train r i d e is about 18 hours; however, the s n o w f a l l e l o n g a t e d the trip to a p p r o x i m a t e l y 57 hours. As usual, my li f e is t i n g e d w i t h irony. I had i m a g i n e d myself t a k i n g my first long-distance train t r i p w i t h a g o o d l y a m o u n t of d i g n i t y a nd d e c o r u m (that is, l e i s u r e l y meals served in style, cigarettes i n the s m o k i n g lounge, the p e n n i n g of 'scholarly', d e s c r i p t i v e and p o t e n t i a l l y p u b l i s h a b l e letters a bout the 'Canadian' l a n d s c a p e , etc.). Instead, the train trek b e c a m e a ni g h t m a r i s h o v e r t u r n i n g of e x p e c t a t i o n s , as I ill u s t r a t e i n this letter I w r ote 07-01-91. Dearest M --: We are at a standstill again! Sided with another split rail. This romance with trains may he short-lived. The train departed 4.5 hrs. late from Edmonton. We did not arrive in Jasper [Alberta] until 9:00 P.M. - which is normally a 5.5 hr. car ride on wintery highways. Then we sat in Jasper for ages. The train was only @ Blue River when I awoke this morning, not even to Kamloops [British Columbia] which we did not get to until 1030 this AM. There has been a grease fire in the kitchen and numerous 'situations'. The train is now low on water and unable to get 30 water at Boston Bar because the lines were frozen. This train is now 9.5 hrs. off schedule. Every minute regained seems to get lost again & again. Meals have been complementary today. Shee! I spent my first day, my first official day, as a graduate student on VIA Rail. I am beginning to wonder if I will get to talk with you ever...again...or wonder when I will begin graduate studies. I am just now beginning to weary of the whole nonsense. . . . Dinner is now delayed due to water shortage & they are rationing coffee. They are talking about bringing up the buses as the train is running out of H20 and steam is an essential component of the energy system here. Winds have been gusting up to 70 MPH ( C a l l i o u to A l e x a n d e r , p e r s o n a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n , January 7, 1991, p. 1). [Note to researcher/interviewer: "Personal c o m m u n i c a t i o n s may be letters, memos, t e l e p h o n e c o n v e r s a t i o n s and the l i k e . Because they d o not p r o v i d e r e c o v e r a b l e data, p e r s o n a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n s are not i n c l u d e d in the reference list. C i t e p e r s o n a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n s in the text o n l y ( A m e r i c a n P s y c h o l o g i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n , 1991, p. 110).]. [Interviewee continues speaking.] In retrospect, the d i s p a r i t y b e t w e e n the e x p e c t a t i o n s and e x p e r i e n c e of the t r a i n trek mirrors the e n s u i n g d i s j u n c t u r e b e t w e e n my a n t i c i p a t i o n of graduate s c h o o l and the realit(y)(ies). Fits. I'm v e r y nearsighted. M a y b e , my nearsightedness sets me up w i t h e x p e c t a t i o n s w h i c h get q u i c k l y o v e r t u r n e d w h e n I a c t u a l l y e n c o u n t e r what I o n l y see in a b l u r in the d i s t a n c e . Expectations Overturned The V e r y Idea of B e i n g A Researcher 31 Interviewer: O h , overturned? H o w so? Interviewee: W e l l , I don't think-feel I c a m e here to be a researcher. A c t u a l l y , to be v e r y t r u t h f u l , I had no e x p e c t a t i o n w h a t s o e v e r of c o m i n g here to do research a n d to become a researcher [Interviewee's emphasis]; or to in i t i a t e a " c o n t i n u i n g f a s c i n a t i o n w i t h the research process it s e l f " ( C a l l i o u , 1994, February, p. 72). A t that time, research is for me the r e a l m of st e r e o t y p i c a l w h i t e lab coats, mice-for-hire, the reek of f o r m a l d e h y d e , the c l i c k of pens a nd the snap of c l i p b o a r d s . I am here because, as I state in a letter, that I w a nt to e x p l o r e ideas and thoughts to take 'Awareness' w i t h me to my next l i f e for as y o u k n o w I b e l i e v e that o n l y my p h y s i c a l b o d y w i l l s o m e d a y d i e a n d that the 'spiritus' of S h a r i l y n is on quit e a lengthy, e x t e n d e d j o u r n e y ( C a l l i o u t o A l e x a n d e r , personal c o m m u n i c a t i o n , February 25, 1991, p. II). A n y w a y , I'm sorry; I t h i n k I am w a n d e r i n g from y o u r q u e s t i o n . Smoke? [Interviewee jabs an open package at the interviewer.] W e l l , then, d o y o u m i n d if I smoke? [Interviewee doesn't wait for a response f r o m the Interviewer. She lights up anyway.] I c a m e to study w i t h Dr. A. (formerly, Dr. W.), m u c h e x p e r i e n c e d in c o m m u n i t y e d u c a t i o n p r a c t i c e . I c a m e w i t h , I think, a rather e l e g a n t l y s i m p l e q u e s t i o n . M y p r i m a r y research q u e s t i o n was: 'When is a f i e l d t r i p just a f i e l d trip?; a n d w h e n does it e x h i b i t i n t e n t i o n s of c u r r i c u l u m for c o m m u n i t y m a k i n g ?" [Interviewee's e m p h a s i s ] ( C a l l i o u , 1992, June, p. 14). I won't bore y o u w i t h the details of that p a r t i c u l a r t h e o r e t i c a l study (see C a l l i o u , 1992, July, for a 32 rather o v e r q u a l i f i e d a n s w er to that question.). I b e l i e v e I thought-felt I w o u l d stop here a bit, d o som e t h i n k i n g , a n s w er my qu e s t i o n and go back into a c l a s s r o o m s o m e w h e r e in the universe. The i d e a of e v en b e i n g a researcher is i n t r o d u c e d to me on the first d ay of my M a g i s t r a l studies. I w r i t e in a letter: I enclose a photocopy of Day 1's [i.e. UBC: Faculty of Education: EDUC508] handout in research. I feel like a peasant because I don't know any of this. The Director of this program came in and stressed the need that all UBC gradfsj in the Faculty of Education be exemplary researchers. The recommendation is that the Grad complete another course in a specialized area of research once the teacher-researcher has chosen the design methodology s/he will choose to do thesis work. . . . As the 3 hour lecture progressed I felt overwhelmed. . . . Much of the discussion seemed to me to be a rehash of the classical scientific method (Calliou to Alexander, personal communication, January 12, 1991, pp. 1,2,3). A l t h o u g h I d o not understand e x a c t l y what is e n t a i l e d , I l i k e d the s o u n d of that phrase: " e x e m p l a r y researcher." I am uncertain about my o r i g i n of a b e l i e f that u n i v e r s i t y is a p l a c e w h e r e i n d i v i d u a l s just 'thought' d e e p 'thoughts' about t h e i r b e l i e f s , m i n d p u z z l e s a n d questions. For me, U n i v e r s i t y is this rather private p l a c e to retreat to make sense; not a p u b l i c f o r u m of rese a r c h e d f i n d i n g s c o n s t r u c t e d f r o m f o r m u l a i c i n v e s t i g a t i o n designs. B o y was I wrong! [Laughter on tape. W e l l more l i k e guffaws, except guaffaws makes interviewee sound too raucous.] I guess, p r e v i o u s l y , I hadn't r e a l l y c o n s i d e r e d who makes [Interviewee's emphatic aside: ah-hem, for whom], or how, or where or when k n o w l e d g e is made; and the i m p l i c a t i o n s and/or 33 c o n s e q u e n c e s of k n o w l e d g e p r o d u c t i o n as the l e g i t i m a t i o n of p r i v i l e g e d n a r r a t o l o g y (see, for e x a m p l e , Lyotard, 1993a, pp. 31-37). N o w because I've been i n t r o d u c e d to Lyotard's (1993a) thought I can't r e m e m b e r h o w I tho u g h t - b e l i e v e d the w o r l d was w o r k i n g . H e observ e s that in p o s t i n d u s t r i a l s o c i e t y a nd post-modern c u l t u r e that the q u e s t i o n of the l e g i t i m a t i o n of k n o w l e d g e is f o r m u l a t e d in diff e r e n t terms. T h e grand narrative has lost its c r e d i b i l i t y , regardless of what m o d e of u n i f i c a t i o n it uses, regardless of w h e t h e r it is s p e c u l a t i v e narrative or a narrative of e m a n c i p a t i o n (Lyotard, 1993a, p. 37). I didn't e v en k n o w r e a l l y that s o m e b o d y or s o m e b o d i e s had been w o r k i n g t o w a r d s a G r a n d N a r r a t i v e - perhaps, t r y i n g to regain w h o l e n e s s after the T o w e r of Ba b e l business. I am startled that there has been - is - this d o g m a t i c side to the k n o w l e d g e industry. T h i s d o g m a t i s m c o n t r a d i c t s my sense of l i f e l o n g learning. A n y w a y , I was u n a c c u s t o m e d to this k i n d of talk out there in the f i e l d w h i l e I s u p e r v i s e d recess or taught G r a d e 5 art or h e l p e d G r a d e 2s set up a terrarium. O d d , because I had w o r k e d at a U n i v e r s i t y Research Station as a Research Assistant . That w o u l d have been about 1 9 7 6 i s h , I guess. S o m e w h e r e in the f o o t h i l l s , male scientists t r a c k e d P e r o m y s c u s m a n i c u l a t u s - that is, d e e r m i c e - in winter; retrofitted b u i l d i n g s to reduce g i g a j o u l e (that is, a measurement of heat) loss; a n d measured f e c a l b a c t e r i a counts in a sewage water recharge station. I guess, then, I d i d not r e a l l y c o n s i d e r that these researchers w e r e m a k i n g d i s c o v e r i e s w i t h i m m e d i a t e c o n s e q u e n c e to the m a t e r i a l i t y of d a i l y l i v i n g -- even into t e x tbooks and classrooms. But if I t h i n k of it now! W h a t d i d I t h i n k was happening? Interviewer: So, you're not yet at M i c h a e l Young's (1971) " n o t i o n of k n o w l e d g e b e i n g s o c i a l l y o r g a n i z e d or c o n s t r u c t e d " (p. 19)? Interviewee: Yes, exactly. I mean if I r e a l l y search my m e m o r y banks, w h i l e I was at that research station, there was lots of talk about the d i s c o v e r i e s , but there wasn't a n y k i n d of 34 p h i l o s o p h i c a l , er, e t h i c a l debate about the uses and abuses of k n o w l e d g e making. T h e s e guys w e r e pretty p r a c t i c a l . There might have been some, but I wasn't there for that k i n d of talk. Yet. I don't shouldn't make myself s o u n d to o n a i v e because through o b s e r v a t i o n I c o u l d see that the 'men' d i d the s c i e n c e at the research station a n d the w o m e n raised the c h i l d r e n or w o r k e d in ad j u n c t p o s i t i o n s . I am observant e n o u g h to tabulate the n u m b e r of males versus f e m a l e 'scientists'. H o w e v e r , I am not yet l i k e D o r o t h y S m i t h (1987) in terms of c o n s i d e r i n g research, theory, er, insights as a p o p u l a r i z e d patriarchal interpretation of what w e are a l l s u p p o s e d to know . She states that the templates of the thoughts a n d images w h i c h w e d o use are those w h i c h d o not arise d i r e c t l y or s p o n t a n e o u s l y out of people's e v e r y d a y l i v e d r e l a t i o n s h i p s . Rather they are the product of the w o r k of spe c i a l i s t s o c c u p y i n g i n f l u e n t i a l p o s i t i o n s in the i d e o l o g i c a l apparatus . . . O u r c u l t u r e does not arise s p o n t a n e o u s l y ; it is 'manufactured' " (p. 19). Later, J u l i a Penelope's (1990) P.U.D. (that is, Patriarchal U n i v e r s e of Disc o u r s e ) (see pp. xxvi-xxx) is r e a l l y g o i n g to e x t e n d my s e n s i b i l i t y and a n x i e t y about pat r i a r c h a l e x c l u s i o n w h e r e i n c e r t a i n 'voices' are c o n s i d e r e d i n a d m i s s a b l e . M y awareness of k n o w l e d g e , er, d o c t r i n e p r o d u c t i o n b e c o m e s c r u c i a l ; c r y s t a l l i s e d as I de c o n s t r u c t p u b l i s h e d text related to myself as a laminated-card-carrying P FNA. T h i s k n o w l e d g e - m a k i n g a n d k n o w l e d g e - r e i f i c a t i o n d e x t e r i t y b e c o m e s q u i t e e m o t i o n a l l y d i s t u r b i n g , d i s a b l i n g a n d e m p o w e r i n g for me as I c o n t i n u e in this e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l - a f f e c t i v e - s p i r i t u s odyssey. A n d , here I am not naive. I grasp, somehow, that this w h o l e perform(ance)(ativity) of 'knowledge' (see Lyotard, 1993a, pp. 41-47) is about language - wo r d s s e q u e n c e d in c e r t a i n order, l o g i c -an d about g e n o c i d e . The language t h i n g c o n n e c t s q u i c k l y . I t h i n k - f e e l - i n t u i t this comes, p a r t i a l l y , f r o m my e x p e r i e n c e as a teacher u s i n g a W h o l e Language A p p r o a c h as d e s c r i b e d in a Br i t i s h study c a l l e d Language-for Life, o r i g i n a l l y p u b l i s h e d 35 in 1976. T h i s study investigated "language s k i l l s w i t h i n the c o n t e x t of t e a c h i n g the use of E n g l i s h " (p. x x x i ) . As a teacher I then a c c e p t e d the role - not the p r i m a r y r o l e - that "language plays in g e n e r a t i n g k n o w l e d g e and p r o d u c i n g n e w forms of b e h a v i o u r that t y p i f i e s h u m a n e x i s t e n c e a n d d i s t i n g u i s h e s it f rom that of a l l other creatures" [Their i t a l i c s . ] ( B u l l o c k , 1976, p. 47). H o w e v e r , I don't enter u n i v e r s i t y a r c h a e o l o g i z i n g (Foucault, 1972) k n owledge-language-power and such. I enter here t h i n k i n g that d i s c u r s i v e is an a d j e c t i v e m e a n i n g 'roaming', 'rambling' or 'roundabout'. [Laughter. Subject laughs readily at herself.] T o o k me a w h i l e to d r i n k i n , understand, the depthful m e a n i n g of the term, d i s c o u r s e , and Foucault's (1972) insights into d i s c o u r s e as a r e o c c u r i n g presense of signs, u n i f e d by r u l e s - r e l a t i o n s h i p s in i n t e r p l a y , w h i c h are, for him, t o o often " a c c e p t e d w i t h o u t q u e s t i o n " (Foucault, 1972, p. 25). Language b e c o m e s l i k e a c o r r a l . The a c c e p t a n c e hegemony-like. If you're i n s i d e that c o r r a l , y o u better speak-accept l i k e s o m e b o d y i n s i d e that c o r r a l . If you're g o n n a q u e s t i o n h o w y o u speak-write-accept-(ap)(com)prehend i n s i d e that c o r r a l - w e l l , w a t c h out! H e r e c o m m e n d s that w e must d e f i n e " i n what c o n d i t i o n s and in v i e w of w h i c h analyses c e r t a i n of t h e m are l e g i t i m a t e ; and w e must i n d i c a t e w h i c h of them ca n never be a c c e p t e d in any c i r c u m s t a n c e s " (Ibid., p. 26). So, his concept-insight is a l i t t l e bit more than just j a r g o n , s p e c i a l i z e d t e c h talk w i t h i n or i n d i c a t i v e of a f i e l d . Or, that's h o w I understand his idea. W h a t I am e n c o u n t e r i n g and d e c o d i n g in and out of the l i b r a r i e s here has me l o n g i n g to r e t h i n k s ome of those years I was t e a c h i n g r e a d i n g c o m p r e h e n s i o n , because this is s u p r a c o m p r e h e n s i o n . For me, to d i s c e r n this d i s c o u r s e f o r m a t i o n is to see language as an instrument of desire, an e x p r e s s i o n of w i l l as a w e a p o n of v i o l e n c e , as a f o r m of i m p r i s o n m e n t , e t c e t e r a . W h o s e w i l l ? W h o wants to be v i o l e n t ? H o w is this v i o l e n c e j u s t i f i e d ? W h y v i o l e n c e rather than c o m p a s s i o n ? V e r y p o w e r f u l stuff for me. A n y w a y - w h e r e w e r e we here? 36 A h , yes. In retrospect, I see h o w this b e l i e f about U n i v e r s i t y as t r u l y an 'Ivory Tower' t h i n k tank, l e d me into a c l a s h [rattle-rattle-rattle-rattle] about h a v i n g to j u s t i f y my sense of thinking-feeling-intuiting-as-research, as valid a m e t h o d o l o g y as q u a n t i t a t i v e or q u a l i t a t i v e templates. I a m o n l y s p e c u l a t i n g , but I t h i n k this b e l i e f is based on a c h i l d h o o d c l a s s i s t b e l i e f that w e a l t h y p e o p l e go to university. Hhhmmm...so o n l y w e a l t h y p e o p l e have the l u x u r y of t i m e to think? No, that a l s o a l m o s t sounds l i k e w e a l t h y p e o p l e are smarter whereas s o c i o e c o n o m i c a l l y i m p o v e r i s h e d i n d i v i d u a l s neither have t i m e nor the a b i l i t y . [Pause on tape. Sounds o f papers rustling.] In fact, further in that same letter, I remark, that "I got i n t o a d i t h e r t r y i n g to t h i n k about w h i c h research m e t h o d o l o g y I c o u l d use to answer que s t i o n s " ( C a l l i o u to A l e x a n d e r , p e r s o n a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n , January 12, 1991, p. 3). T r a c k i n g an U n e x p e c t e d Line of Inquiry ["Non-directive questions, then, are relatively open-ended, rather than r e q u i r i n g the interviewee to p r o v i d e a specific piece of i n f o r m a t i o n or, at the extreme, s i m p l y to reply 'yes' or 'no' " (Spradley, 1979 i n Hammersley & A t k i n s o n , 1991, p. 113). In this case, the interviewer has located a 'key' term, that i s , 'dither', a l l o w i n g the subject-client-informant to expand the response about this c onfusion about lo c a t i n g an acceptable procedural f o r m and sequence to conduct research.] Interviewee: A h , yes, a dither. By January 17, 1995, I a m w r i t i n g about the c o u r s e r e q u i r e m e n t to create a hypothesis, to id e n t i f y v a r i a b l e s (dependent, i n d e p e n d e n t , i n t e r v e n i n g , o r g a n i c , plastic-fantastic et cetera), to frame hypotheses in 'testable' form, a n d g e n e r a l l y to match a 'do-able' t o p i c w i t h 'do-able' d e s i g n instruments (survey, closed-form q u e s t i o n s , L i c k e r t scales, 3 7 e t h n o g r a p h i c i n t e r v i e w questions, etc.). I try earnestly to use these q u a l i t a t i v e a n d q u a n t i t a t i v e f r ameworks. A g a i n , I'm a 'babe in the forest' because I d i d not e x p e c t to ar r i v e here a n d be s n o w e d in under j a r g o n and te c h n i q u e . I d i d not see myself t r y i n g to self-educate m y s e l f to be a researcher. I a l s o encounter, or, c o l l i d e s i c k e n i n g l y into, u n e x p e c t e d l y i n t o the W.W.S. Int r o d u c t i o n t o the 'West' Interviewer: The W.W.S.? Interviewee: Yes, the W a l l of W e s t e r n S c i e n c e , the W.W.S. In a j o u r n a l entry, I w r i t e , at "Day 6 of G r a d Studies:" This whole narrowing and specifying made me feel that I was becoming too scientific. [Respondent's parenthical aside: A t D a y 6 no less!] / felt some angry resentment that the wording and selection of topic would become almost too obscure to satisfy the requirements of the textbook requirements. I fairly howled with laughter and with rage when I read the statement: 'Certain philosophic and theological questions, which perhaps important to the individuals who consider them, cannot be tested empirically and are thus of no interest to science or the scientist' (Kerlinger, 1973, p. 20, quoted in C a l l i o u , 1991), ( C a l l i o u , Journal entry, January 17, 1991, p. 2). Interviewer: Ah, w h e r e w o u l d the W e s t be for you? Interviewee: [Interviewee begins to speak and interrupts herself w i t h laughter.] G o o d q u e s t i o n . 38 [Again laughter.] Everybody's west of somebody. I guess for me, 'Western' refers to one of those d i s c o u r s e things F o u c a u l t is in s i g h t f u l e n o u g h to locate. I don't refer to any s p e c i f i c g e o g r a p h i c l o c a t i o n -l i k e Europe, per se; but more a mode of t h o u g h t - f e e l i n g - b e l i e v i n g , w h i c h seems to o r i g i n a t e in E urope and this W e s t e r n i z e d mode of t h i n k i n g - f e e l i n g - b e l i e v i n g becomes-is a c o l o n i z i n g agen(t)(cy). Interviewer: Oh. So, even though y o u had w o r k e d at a ' s c i e n t i f i c ' research station, y o u had not r e a l l y q u e s t i o n e d the basis of s c i e n c e ; ah, or, l i n k e d s c i e n c e w i t h c e r t a i n c r i t i q u e s related to p a t r i a r c h a l or d o m i n a n t or e c o c i d i c c r i t i q u e s ? Interviewee: O f course, Europe isn't r e a l l y a c o n t i n e n t p h y s i c a l l y . It's not s u r r o u n d e d by water l i k e other c o n t i n e n t s . A n y w a y , ah, yes, y o u r que s t i o n . No, not re a l l y . I mean I kept ge t t i n g hints. For e x a m p l e , I attended a b i o r e g i o n a l congress ( M a i n e , 1990) and r e a l l y f e l l 'in l o v e ' w i t h the i d e a of the d e e p l y reverential b e l i e f structure for a l l l i f e f o r m s h e l d i n d e e p e c o l o g y , as d e s c r i b e d by D e v a l l and Sessions (1985). I think-feel I d o that - f a l l in l o v e w i t h ideas. I a m aware of the (eco-)feminist r u m b l i n g s about Francis B a c o n (1561-1626) b e i n g c o n s i d e r e d an off-Continent p r o g e n i t o r of a pla n to d i s c o v e r more a u t h e n t i c e x p l a n a t i o n s of nature, e x p l i c a t e d as a 's c i e n t i f i c ' method. I e v e n w e n t and hunted up and bought N o v u m O r g a n u m - a 1947 v e r s i o n , not an o r i g i n a l 1620 c o p y - to lo c a t e passages w h e r e he expresses his d e s i r e "to o p e n a n e w w a y of u n d e r s t a n d i n g , a w a y by them The Off- untried and u n k n o w n " (p. 76) w h i c h he d e t a i l s as the s c i e n t i f i c m e t h o d (Section LXXXII, pp. 115-116). Bacon's "them" refers to o f f - c o n t i n e n t a n c i e n t s . T h e i r Elders I guess. I have no desir e to roast Bacon. H o w e v e r , e m o t i o n a l l y , I start to get both agitated and satisfied because the c r i t i q u e starts to e x p l a i n - if, e x p l a n a t i o n is e v e r p o s s i b l e -som e of the i n s e n s i t i v e and e c o c i d a l a c t i v i t i e s I had w i t n e s s e d w h i l e w o r k i n g o n a s e i s m i c c r e w in A l b e r t a (1974ish). I mean I a m naive. I must have w a t c h e d trucks r u n n i n g up an d d o w n 39 roads in the f o o t h i l l s for w eeks before I asked our Party M a n a g e r [Aside: That's the nickname for the Assistant C r e w Boss.] what they w e r e ha u l i n g . I was t o l d that they w e r e f i l l e d w i t h c h e m i c a l s to p o u r i n t o the 'hole' to make d r i l l i n g easier. I w e p t w h e n I r e a l l y u n d e r s t o o d w hat c h e m i c a l s a n d the d y n a m i t e meant as damage to our Earth-Mother. So, I c o m e to u n i v e r s i t y w i t h p r a c t i c a l e x p e r i e n c e , l i f e his/herstory. The e n c o u n t e r s w i t h the (de)constructive c r i t i q u e fleshes out some t h e o r e t i c a l u n d e r s t a n d i n g of these e x p e r i e n c e s . I feel satisfied that I am l e a r n i n g to a r t i c u l a t e s ome of my mis g i v i n g s ; but I a l s o a l w a y s seem to feel uneasy. I don't then g i v e e n o u g h c r e d i t to the m a t e r i a l i t y of ideas or i d e o l o g y . W o r k i n g s e i s m i c a n d c o l l e c t i n g the p a y c h e q u e is a human, a two-legged, d e c i s i o n . I c o l l e c t e d some of those paycheques. So m u c h for my ethics? These p a y c h e q u e s pay for the c o m p l e t i o n of my B.Ed. Tears, in retrospect, w e r e p r o b a b l y not e n o u g h to re p a i r the d i s r e s p e c t f u l , u n e t h i c a l b e h a v i o u r c o d e d as o i l e x p l o r a t i o n or resource d v e l o p m e n t or m a k i n g a l i v i n g . Ilf s e l f - e d i t t i n g b e d w o r r y that what I d e s c r i b e next may be c o n s i d e r e d very, v e r y N e w A g e c l i c h e . That's a pr o b l e m , lately, for me. I fear s l o g a n i z a t i o n . Insight gets s l o g a n i z e d . Slogans are t o o g l i b . W e k n o w the slogans, but the s e l f - d i s c i p l i n e of a c t i o n is w h e r e there seems to be less success. H owever, I d o b e l i e v e that w h at w e d o to Earth-Mother, w e d o to ourselves. A m a z i n g , h o w c h i l d r e n of 'Cod' or T H E B I G H O L Y M A N I F E S T I N G (my t r a n s l a t i o n of the S i o u x , W a n k a n Takan ) s e l f - r a t i o n a l i z e b e h a v i o u r w h i c h is not reverent. A n d , no o n e up here in this forest of c e m e n t & b r i c k & stone b u i l d i n g s is t a l k i n g about h o w our (dis)(un)(re)covered k n o w l e d g e p r o d u c t i o n process might be c o n s i d e r e d f i r s t l y as r e v e r e n t i a l ; that, the B I G H O L Y M A N I F E S T I N G is i n f l u e n c e d by each word, thought, a c t i o n , f e e l i n g that is p e r f o r m e d , w h e r e i n e v e n thought is p e r f o r m a n c e and has c o n s e q u e n c e p r o d u c t i o n . Interviewer: [Interrupting]. W e l l , it is a relativist p o s i t i o n e d w o r l d . P e o p l e d o get to make t h e i r o w n d e c i s i o n s , make up their o w n minds. There's no o v e r a r c h i n g dogma. I mean y o u are not suggesting s h u t t i n g d o w n the entire o i l industry? W h a t about jobs? 4 0 [Interviewer stops speaking abruptly. L o o k s to interviewee, who does not respond i n any manner. A b a n d o n i n g the spontaneous s p i e l , interviewer continues w i t h another spontaneous interview question.]. Yes, y o u m e n t i o n e d o n c e that y o u were t o l d that y o u b e l o n g e d in the t h e o l o g y d e p a r t m e n t of this campus? Interviewee: O h , h o w d i d y o u hear that? I was. Yes, at this campus, l o c a t e d on the t r a d i t i o n a l t e r r i t o r y of the M u s q u e a m , I was t o l d this. N o witnesses, but true. S h o u l d I c o m m e n t up o n this t h e o l o g y business now? Later as y o u dema r c a t e d in Part IV? [L o n g pause on the tape saturated w i t h the smells o f a g r i l l e d cheese sandwich. Interviewee is thumbing through o l d copies of research texts. M u t t e r i n g , interviewee continues.] W e s h o u l d go back a n d c h e c k that K e r l i n g e r (1973) reference as I d i d not note t i t l e , p l a c e of p u b l i c a t i o n a n d p u b l i s h e r in the j o u r n a l entry. Y o u r c o m m i t t e e w i l l be on y o u for that. N o w - ah, yes, n o w w h e r e w e r e we? By the sixth d ay of graduate s c h o o l , I am h o w l i n g w i t h laughter and rage a n d f e e l i n g f r i g h t e n e d a n d w r i t i n g i m a g i n a r y responses to scientists. [Respondent-informant-subject-interviewee reads verbatim f r o m a journal.] [ W h i l e the respondent is reading, interviewer makes a quic k note: Question: I wonder i f I c o u l d ask i f I c o u l d make photocopies o f the j o u r n a l entries and p r o v i d e the documentation needed for the relentless committee questions re. sources. D o a l l these photocopies go into some massive appendix? H e l p this t h ing w i l l end up wei g h i n g 2.4 kilograms.] I find the frightening tone of this dismissive statement to be a bit scary and a confirmation of the criticisms of science. This statement exemplifies trying to shut out the human (& most intriguing) side of who we are. But this is somehow not measurable and can't exist ...how sad; how 41 shortsightedly dogmatic. The blase and definiteness of the assertion that these are question of 'no interest' really made me want to cry out ' But hold on Dr. Kerlinger. . . ( C a l l i o u , Journal entry, January 17, 1991, p. 2).. [Informant stops. Stretching, she reaches for a thesaurus.] these are i m p o r t a n t questions: e s p e c i a l l y to educators - c o m m u n i t y or o t h e r w i s e - w h e r e the t e c h n i q u e , art or s c i e n c e is fraught w i t h a l l manner of d i f f i c u l t , e t h i c a l questions. A s I reread this j o u r n a l entry, I am surpris e d at the p o w e r f u l e m o t i v e w o r d s there - angry, f r i g h t e n i n g , sad, resentful - at this e a r l y day of graduate studies. I am a l r e a d y s t r u g g l i n g w i t h the e p i d e m i c p r o h i b i t i o n of c e r t a i n ways of (observ)(comprehend)ing and the l e g i t i m a t i o n of c e r t a i n t o p i c s of i n v e s t i g a t i o n , the d e s p i r i t u a l i s a t i o n of k n o w l e d g e - m a k i n g and the p r i v i l e g i n g of c e r t a i n v o i c e s . T h i s surprises me. I am d i s c o n c e r t e d as I reread about that s i x t h d a y of graduate studies. I d o not i m a g i n e that I w i l l b e c o m e a de t e c t i v e to d e l e g i t i m a t e a c c e p t e d b o u n d a r i e s or ways of understanding. E v e n t u a l l y , it's b ooks l i k e F o u c a u l t ' s (1972) The A r c h a e o l o g y of K n o w l e d g e w h i c h c o n f i r m my need to q u e s t i o n , w h i c h invites that, [w]e must a l s o q u e s t i o n those d i v i s i o n s or g r o u p i n g s w i t h w h i c h w e have b e c o m e so f a m i l i a r . C a n one accept, as such, the d i s t i n c t i o n " b e t w e e n di s ( c o u r s e s ) ( c i i p l i n e s ) l i k e p h i l o s o p h y , s c i e n c e , r e l i g i o n (p. 22)? I e x t e n d this i n q u i r y into the ' p o l i t i c a l ' realm w h i l e s t u d y i n g a r t i c l e s to b a c k g r o u n d my s e l f for t e a c h i n g E D U C 4 4 2 , c r i t i c a l issues in s c h o o l i n g for PFNA. I c o n t i n u e to w a n d e r about the e m e r g e n c e of a d i s c i p l i n e sanct(ion)(ifi)ed as N a t i v e Studies, to c o n s i d e r the f o r m u l a t i o n of this d i s ( c i p l i n e ) ( c o u r s e ) . H o w Stories A r e Encoded: A n E x a m p l e 42 For e x a m p l e , M c S h a n e (1984) recounts the h o r r o r - f i l l e d tale of a s e c o n d grade O j i b w e c h i l d w h o was r e c o m m e n d e d for treatment after his d a y d r e a m i n g was d i a g n o s e d as m i l d l y p s y c h o t i c . ' O b s e r v a t i o n ' i n d i c a t e d more than this a n d he was d i a g n o s e d as h a v i n g b e h a v i o u r a l a n d e m o t i o n a l problems. " S c h o o l personnel had often o b s e r v e d h i m staring v a c a n t l y off i n t o space; often he was so s l o w c o m p l e t i n g his work and he t o l d ' w i l d ' stories at t i m e s s a y i n g they w e r e true" (p. 81). H o w e v e r , w h e n a S o c i a l W o r k e r of F N A b e c a m e i n v o l v e d , she f o u n d the bo y a n d grandparents in strong re l a t i o n s h i p s . The grandfather "encouraged his d a y d r e a m i n g " and had instructed h i m to f o l l o w this i m p u l s e w h e n e v e r it h a p p e n e d - to strengthen that gift; a n o t h e r a v e n u e of awareness. The grandfather mentors and guides in d i s c u s s i o n of these dreams w i t h his grandson. Thus, the p e r c e p t i o n of another w a y of a p p r e h e n s i o n is not e v e n c o n s i d e r e d by the s c h o o l p e r s o n n e l . The s c h o o l i n g e x p e r i e n c e here is, perhaps, u n i n t e n t i o n a l in that a b e l i e f sustains i g n o r a n c e of this c u r r i c u l a r - i n s t r u c t i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e o c c u r r i n g b e t w e e n c h i l d a n d grandparent. T h e r e are those F o u c a u l d i a n language rules in o p e r a t i o n about h o w situatio n s are l a b e l l e d , e n c o d e d , d i a g n o s e d and the language entails c o n s e q u e n c e p r o d u c t i o n in a d d i t i o n to d e t e r m i n i n g w h o m sh a l l be c l a s s i f i e d as i l l , u n w e l l , u n b a l a n c e d - m a r g i n a l i s e d - and w h o sh a l l not. A n d , I don't e ven t h i n k the p r i m a r y emphasis here s h o u l d be on "Indian" grandparent a n d " I n d i a n " c h i l d b e cause that c o d i n g reifies, ah, mystifies, "Indians." In the process of m y s t i c a l i z i n g the 'visionary' "Indian" this v e n u e of what is c a l l e d dream(ing) is safely a n o m a l i s e d , d e l e g i t i m a t e d . Yet, again not c o n s i d e r e d s e r i o u s l y as a v a l i d , c r e d i b l e , l e g i t i m a t e f o r m of (ap)prehension. C e r t a i n l y not a b e h a v i o u r or set of b e h a v i o u r s ( p h y s i c a l , mental et cetera) to be nurtured in classrooms. H e l p , where's the t e x t b o o k on v i s i o n questing? W h o w o u l d take s e r i o u s l y a v i s i o n quest as a research paradigm? T h i s is a h i g h l y s e l f - r e f l e x i v e m e t h o d o l o g y w i t h as m u c h p r o t o c o l as setting up an e x p e r i m e n t a l d e s i g n w i t h s e l e c t i o n of v a r i a b l e s , stratified r andom s a m p l i n g a n d a p p r o p r i a t e i n s t r u m e n t a t i o n . W h e n these 43 p o t e n t i a l i t i e s of e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l c r e a t i o n - d i s c o v e r y - i n s i g h t are c o n s i d e r e d , t hey a p p e a r to be e x o t i c , m a g i c a l and/or sorcery. These ways of (ap)(com)prehending b e c o m e m a r g i n a l i s e d , not a part of the e x p l i c i t (regular, tr a d i t i o n a l ) c u r r i c u l u m by m a k i n g them e x o t i c - s o m e h o w not necessary for e v e r y d a y l i v i n g inthe late 20th century. I am aware that p r e j u d i c e is e x t e n d e d b e y o n d s i m p l e p h y s i c a l acts of e x c l u s i o n (for e xample, "Indians" not a l l o w e d in a l c o h o l - s e r v i n g establishments) or s p i r i t u a l acts of ' O t h e r i s a t i o n ' (for e xample, c o d i n g "Indian" w o r s h i p as pagan). There is a l s o the d e n i a l of methods of coming to know - I l i k e that o r i g i n a l Latin m e a n i n g of c o g n i t i o n , c o g n i s e r e equals 'coming to know'. There is in that w o r d a sense of c o n t i n u o u s c o m i n g - i n g - to know; no f i n a l i t y , an a m b i g u i t y , c a p t u r i n g a sense of m o t i o n . I r e m e m b e r n o w that I f i e r c e l y a p p l i e d myself to s k i m m i n g and s t u d y i n g about research -a n y t h i n g o n the shelf in the o l d C u r r i c u l u m Library. Mmm, miss the c o m f o r t of that garden b e h i n d Scarfe. Y o u c o u l d c a t c h s ome great s u n s h i n e there and p e o p l e had brought in a l l these plants for t h e i r o w n reasons and y o u c o u l d feel the energy of that l i t t l e garden. A n y w a y - I'd just sit and d e c i p h e r this strange (toy)(beast)(puzzle). Sometimes, I make notes, but, g e n e r a l l y , I don't. I'm a l o u s y note maker and I s e l d o m refer to t h em anyway. I just go back to the b o o k an d (re)digest a c h u n k of text. In the (re)reading, I sometimes forget w h y I returned to that 'place'. [Pause on tape, punctuated w i t h the c r i n k l e of the f o i l o f a cigarette package.] [Interviewer's note: Question: H o w do I tactfully discuss the dangers o f second-hand smoke?] O b v i o u s l y , I had been c o n s t r u c t i n g the w r o n g b i b l i o g r a p h i e s before I hit K e r l i n g e r (1973). For e x a m p l e , Scheffler's (1967) praise of p h i l o s o p h e r s of e d u c a t i o n and the a n a l y s i s of t h e i r v a l u e . H e states, (and I leave the passage w i t h his o r i g i n a l use of the m a l e pronoun): [Reading f r o m Scheffler's text. Remarkably, she locates the passage, f r o m the shelves of a modestly-stocked at-home l i b r a r y , without re f e r r i n g to notes.] 44 Such an analysis, indeed, exemplifies the contribution the philosopher of education can make when he conceives his function to be neither the spinning out of implications from general doctrines nor the authoritative pronouncement of basic and intermediate values for the guidance of schools [Interviewee adds the parenthetical aside - and field trips, I suppose. Punctuation of light giggling.]. He can try to clarify our fundamental ways of thinking about education: the concepts we employ, the inferences we make, and the choices we express. He can render explicit the criteria of judgment we use in reaching educational decision. He can test our common assumptions indirectly by striving for a systematic picture that will embrace them all. He can analyze the major positions taken on issues of educational policy by exposing their premises, consequences and alternatives. In sum, he can improve our understanding of educational contexts and the problems they generate [His italics.] (Scheffler, 1967, p. 5). Of course, no one dare construct that all-embracing "systematic picture" anymore in light of the P O M O fear of grotesque narratology. There are other texts. One of my favourites is The Logic of Education (Hirst & Peters, 1979; Orig. 1970). Yes, yes, these are all men. Scary, because it's just like Code's (1991) observation that womyn in 'Western' society inhabit this male-thoughtform-constructed exterior 'reality' wherein the structures and limits of their knowledge are derived from the experiences of a select, intellectually and socially privileged group of men: the philosophical system builders. This suggestion affords a partial explanation of the cognitive dissonance many female and feminist philosophers experience with the ontological divisions embedded in mainstream epistemology (p. 61) his/herstorically and currently. 45 I should cite a womyn. How about Roland Martin's Changing the Educational Landscape, Philosophy, Women, and Curriculum (1994)? Of course, womyn in philosophy is contentious. Do you recall that scene, er, where Martin weaves in Woolf's thesis regarding her desire for requiring a room of one's own to describe Martin's trip to "the philosophy of education shelves" (p. 125). 'Where is the book on gender and education by Dr. X, that woman who was a candidate last year for a position in this university?' I asked the librarian once I found my way through the catacombs? T do not see it on your shelves.' 'We have been advised that it is sociology and not philosophy,' she said. 'What about the treatise on past women philosophers of education by Dr. Y who was on the short list the year before? On loan?' 'For that one, you will have to go to the history library,' she told me. 'May I venture to inquire as to the whereabouts of the slim volume on the education of girls and women by Professor Z, the women whose tenure decision is still in limbo?' This query seemed to stump her but gaining confidence from a short computer search she announced, as if she had seen just about enough of me, that for this one you will have to go to the women's studies shelves. Feeling a good deal less exhilarated than I had when I walked in, I muttered that it looked as if women doing philosophy of education were not doing philosophy of education. 'We put the books where we are told,' she protested as I stomped out (p. 125). What a feel she has for scenes, eh? Anyway, I retell Jane's story because as I enter this research-process-business I forget all about the D.O.M. 46 T h e D.O.M. Interviewer: The D.O.M.? Interviewee: Yes, the D o m a i n O f Men. "Oh! Oh!" here c o m e s this w o m y n (& an "In d i a n " too) w h o is c o n t e m p l a t i n g d o i n g p h i l o s o p h y . [Interviewee pauses and looks out the window. Mutters to herself: 'I keep forgetting gender, sexual preference, age and all that seem to matter so terribly to some people. *] Excuse me a minute. [Pause. The sound of rather thick coffee being poured into a R o y a l D a l t o n coffee mug; saucer absent. No, I made that part up. A c t u a l l y , it's a plastic travel mug f r o m Motomaster, "...an environmentally considerate motor o i l " (Motomaster, date unknown).] Interviewee: [Continuing.] L i k e R o l a n d - M a r t i n , I o b serve the o b l i g a t o r y p l a c e m e n t of text a u t h o r e d by P F N A p l a c e d in the s p e c i a l i z e d b o o k ghettos on- and off-campus. I r e m e m b e r o n c e I r a n s a c k e d a Seattle b o o k s t o r e l o o k i n g for another c o p y of E x i l e d in The Land of The Free (Lyons, M o h a w k , D e l o r i a , Jr., H auptman, Berman, C r i n d e , Jr., B e r k e y & V e n a b l e s , 1992). I'd lent m i n e to s o m e o n e and needed another c o p y to c h e c k a page n u m b e r reference. D i s a p p o i n t e d , I n o t i f i e d my spousal unit that I c o u l d not locate the text A N Y W H E R E ! H e ad v i s e d that I seek in the N a t i v e A m e r i c a n s e c t i o n of the bookstore. Sure enough, there the e d i t i o n s o l i d l y sat. But this is a p o l i t i c a l s c i e n c e text c h r o n i c l i n g the e m b e d d e d d i s c o u r s e of P F N A on the f o r m a t i o n of U.S. d e m o c r a c y - not q u i t e in the same league as Laubins' (1975; O r i g . 1957), Th e Indian T i p i , Its H i s t o r y , C o n s t r u c t i o n and Use! O f course, h i s / h e r s t o r i c a l l y P F N A are s t e r e o t y p e d as unlettered and u n s c h o o l e d savages w h o are not astute his t o r i a n s , p h i l o s o p h e r s or p o l i t i c a l commentators. 47 [Pause on tape. Interviewer's note to herself: W h e n these pauses occur, h ow lo n g should I let them go on? M a y b e I should ask another question to keep the momentum?] Interviewee: R e m e m b e r that p i o n e e r researcher G e o r g e C a t l i n ? Interviewer: A h , researcher? C a t l i n ? I t h i n k he was a painter. Interviewee: I l i k e to t h i n k of h i m as a researcher. Look again at Catl i n ' s (1989) p u r p o s e in this passage, w r i t t e n in 1832, w h e r e he exposes his d e v o t i o n to d o c u m e n t i n g P F N A w i t h a light heart, i n s p i r e d w i t h an enth u s i a s t i c hope and r e l i a n c e that I c o u l d meet an d o v e r c o m e a l l the hazards and p r i v a t i o n s of a li f e d e v o t e d to the p r o d u c t i o n of a lit e r a l a n d g r a p h i c d e l i n e a t i o n of the l i v i n g manners, customs, and c h a r a c t e r of an i n t e r e s t i n g race of people, w h o are r a p i d l y p a s s i n g a w a y fr o m the f a c e of the earth - l e n d i n g a hand to a d y i n g nation, w h o have no historians or b i o g r a p h e r s of t h e i r o w n to portray w i t h f i d e l i t y t h e i r n a tive l o o k s and history; thus, s n a t c h i n g f r o m a hasty o b l i v i o n what c o u l d be saved for the benefit of po s t e r i t y ( C a t l i n , 1989, Letter #1, p. 3). Interviewer: W e l l , in 1832 P F N A aren't k n o w n or p u b l i s h e d as p h i l o s o p h e r s or historians. Interviewee: W e l l , gee, I w o n d e r why. Interviewer: [Frowns audibly.] Interviewee: Right, anyway, n o w w e are g o i n g to get tagged as P F N A author(itie)s first b efore a d m i s s i o n to the b o o k s h e l v e s of v a r i o u s d i s c i p l i n e s . T h i n k about w h e r e y o u f i n d C a t l i n ' s b o o k in the bookstore. Y o u don't go to the U.S. male writer s ' s ection? Interviewer: W e l l , no, I wouldn't l o o k there. There is no s e c t i o n l i k e that in a bookstore. [Interviewer grabs a post-it and prints a hurried reminder.] 4 8 Interviewee: For me, my hunt for Lyons, M o h a w k , D e l o r i a , Jr., H a u p t m a n , Berman, G r i n d e , Jr., B e r k e y a nd V e n a b l e s (1992) seems to p r o c l a i m that an i n d i v i d u a l must be first k n o w n as an "Ind i a n " or w r i t e r f r o m the p e r i p h e r y or some other i n t e l l e c t u a l s u b u r b and y o u ' l l earn that b e f o r e a reput a t i o n for mathematics or j u d i c i a l l a w is e x e r c i s e d . W h e r e w i l l they put y o u r b o o k s w h e n y o u are p u b l i s h e d ? W h o invents these categories a n yway? W h o s e ? Is A n Important Q u e s t i o n Interviewer: Y o u are s a y i n g then that y o u are not k n o w n by y o u r words? Interviewee: No, not if y o u r b o o k gets t h r o w n into the First N a t i o n s b i n a n d not in the bins of one of the d i s c i p l i n e - d i s c o u r s e s . A n y w a y , I detoured. That'll make c o d i n g these transcripts u n n e c e s s a r i l y d i f f i c u l t . Sorry. A p p l e (1990), or M c C a r t h y (1990), for examples, are t r y i n g to get clear [Interviewee's emphasis] about race, class, w e a l t h , p o w e r and other factors as related to s c h o o l i n g a n d e d u c a t i o n ; but t h e i r play(discourse)ground(ing) is a some 'thing' l a b e l l e d s o c i o l o g y . S o c i o l o g y i m p l i e s those aspects of measurement and t e s t a b i l i t y not f o u n d in p h i l o s o p h y . P h i l o s o p h e r s , perhaps, just possess a larger laboratory setting: that is, l i f e . "Oh! Oh!" as S a l l y , D i c k or Jane w e r e p r o n e to e x c l a i m i n g , in the D i c k and lane series, at un s e t t l i n g , c u r i o u s or i n t e r e s t i n g m o ments in th e i r middle-class, E u r o U n i t e d S t a t e s i a n l i v e s (Gray & Arbuthn o t , 1958, see, for e x a m p l e s , pp. 33, 46 or 80). A s I start this graduate studies a p p r e n t i c e s h i p , I am p u z z l e d at the u n a n t i c i p a t e d focus o n s c i e n t i f i c i n q u i r y . I am just s k e p t i c a l that measurement substantiates k n o w i n g that; p a r t i c u l a r l y k n o w i n g that for everyone. That measure is a fact stated, w e l l , O.K.; but that measurement is truth. I might k n o w this and I might k n o w that for m y s e l f - but I don't t h i n k - f e e l - b e l i e v e I c a n know this a n d that for others. 49 [Pause on tape. L i g h t chuckles. The sound of a thermos cap u n t w i s t i n g f o l l o w e d by the sounds o f hissing.] D o y o u m i n d if I take a c u p of y o u r coffee? Isn't language m a r v e l o u s l y vague? I mean language c o u l d get so far a w a y from reality. So, w h e r e w e r e we? Oh , yes. P h i l o s o p h y , the p r o b i n g of m ind, morals and language to see what light might be y i e l d e d to i l l u m i n a t e any p o t e n t i a l of e x i t f r o m the p r o v e r b i a l cave. I a l s o had to learn to operate o u t s i d e of these f r i e n d l y , o l d , p h i l o s o p h i c a l texts [Interviewee's emphasis.]. In a letter, I see again the c o n f l i c t b e t w e e n my a n t i c i p a t i n g that U n i v e r s i t y is this p l a c e to n e s t & b r o o d & t h i n k and the d emands of h a v i n g to first b a c k g r o u n d m y s e l f about w hat e v e r y o n e else is t h i n k i n g and researching. T h e n to s h o w you've really read the words, really understood [Interviewee's emphasis] y o u pay homage to these f a c e l e s s others w i t h te x t u a l c i t a t i o n s - l e g i t i m a t i n g this almost incestuous k i n s h i p - and, ah, r e p r o d u c i n g a standard g e n e a l o g i c a l b i b l i o g r a p h i c d o c u m e n t a t i o n . A n d , the student talk starts to i n c l u d e these names, too. N o one ever says something, l i k e , ah, "Oh, yes, that's l i k e s o m e t h i n g my M o t h e r t o l d me," or, "Gee, U n c l e Fred said that a l l the time; for e x a m p l e , 'You gotta w a t c h those g o v e r n m e n t guys a l l the time.'." A n d , of course, we're d o i n g that right now; c o n s t r u c t i n g the c i t a t i o n s a nd the b i b l i o g r a p h y ? Interviewer: W e l l , there are references w h i c h just n a t u r a l l y arise, ah, have to arise, for this c o n v e r s a t i o n to proceed. C a n o n Speak-Write Interviewee: Yes, there appear to be, almost an i n e v i t a b i l i t y . I c o m e to understand, a l i v i n g , b r e a t h i n g c a n o n i c a l g e n e a l o g y of author(ities) to connect; but not as f a m i l y , not 50 p e r s o n a l l y . I've just c o m e in from the f i e l d - that is, c l a s s r o o m t e a c h i n g — w h e r e the e m p h a s i s is on language e x p e r i e n c e , the e n couragement and n u r t u r i n g of learners m a k i n g t h e i r m e a n i n g for the m s e l v e s . T h i s has been d e s c r i b e d as w h o l e language, based on the Language for L i f e (1976) study in B r i t a i n . In this a p p r o a c h language is itself a " h e u r i s t i c " w h e r e i n t a l k i n g , l i s t e n i n g , w r i t i n g a nd r e a d i n g are t h e m s e l v e s are engaged in i n t e r d e p e n d e n t r e c i p r o c a l a c t i v i t i e s as speakers a n d listeners a n d writers and readers ( B u l l o c k , 1976, p. 50). T h i s i n t e r a c t i v i t y s e e m e d to be to suggest a saubject-to-sibject 'spekking', w h e t h e r self-to-self or self-to/with-others. T here w u z a reel sense for me in the h o l e languedge a p p r o c h that, ah, sorry, I was h a v i n g a G r a d 1 W h o l e L a n g o o w e j e D e j a Vu. A h? Yes, i n f o r m a t i o n , observations, sensations c o u l d be ar t i c u l a t e d a n d then transformed through language into k n o w l e d g e ? That k n o w l e d g e wasn't s o m e t h i n g out there. That d i s t i n c t e x p e r i e n c e s c o u l d be re v i s i t e d . Perhaps, better k n o w n thro u g h e x p r e s s i o n v i s u a l l y , o r a l l y , s c u l p t u r a l l y or in print. I mean it's the same, a n d it's not, in c l a s s r o o m s here. There's just so m u c h to process. I am uncer t a i n w h e n or w h e r e I w i l l get t o self - m a k i n g m e a n i n g in my studies. I'm surprised. I w o n d e r if I w i l l ever have t i m e to p r o d u c e an o r i g i n a l t hought - e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l or otherwise. Interviewer: [ S k i l l f u l l y prompting.] Yes, a lot to read? Interviewee: [Reading f r o m a letter handily l y i n g about the bedroom-den.] I also feel dogged by the realization thai I cannot read it all plus not read-deeply enough for deep concentration. I like to mull and stew about what I read. Also, with all of this reading I feel that I don't have enough time to enjoy my personal philosophic reflections about my past experience. This too, I feel is a rich resource to be mined. It all feels somewhat 51 overwhelming. There is so much information to he managed ( C a l l i o u t o A l e x a n d e r , January, 1991, n.p.). I d i a l o g u e w i t h text, interrogate text, have these in t e r i o r m o n o l o g u e s w i t h text, don't see text as s o m e t h i n g to m e m o r i z e but more s o m e t h i n g to p r o v o k e me to t h i n k - f e e l . I have been r e a d i n g s i n c e I was about 3 1/2; and, for me, d e c o d i n g signs a n d sig n i f i e r s of a text is s i m i l a r to the G r a n d I n q u i s i t i o n or a go o d e p i s o d e of M a t l o c k - the T.V. lawyer. [Pause o n tape.]. F e e l i n g D i s j u n c t u r e d Interviewer: The re a d i n g seems to o v e r p o w e r you? Interviewer: [Mimes a self-administered half-Nelson.] Yes. H o w e v e r , it's more than the r e a d i n g list load. The j o u r n e y is about c o m i n g to terms w i t h the intentionali(ty)(ties) of text(uality) - that interpretations are i n s c r i b e d a n d l i v i n g , b r e a thing. I am in t r i g u e d that I am c o m m e n t i n g on this d i s j u n c t u r e so early. That is: I c a m e here to a n s w e r my questi o n . The ins t i t u t i o n d emands that I p r o d u c e an a d e p t l y r e s e a r c h e d a n s w e r - fair enough. I don't l i k e s l o p p i n e s s or o v e r g e n e r a l i t i e s as m u c h as the next person. Ye t I didn't c o m e up here to be thinking publicly [Interviewee's emphasis]. I c a m e here to m u l l - t h i n k - i n t u i t - p l a y . I d o not d i s r e s p e c t books or articl e s . I feel i n s t r u c t e d t o read & read & read s o m e more. Print is e n t e r t a i n i n g , i n f o r m i n g , e d u c a t i n g , s t i m u l a t i n g , nauseating, t h r i l l i n g , s a d d e n i n g , s i c k e n i n g . But, somewhere, right f r o m the v e r y b e g i n n i n g , I feel m y s e l f b u r i e d in text, w h i c h , later, feels o p p r e s s i v e and self - a l i e n a t i n g ; u n t i l , f i n a l l y I, a m s p e a k i n g a d e q u a t e l y as a de c o n s t r u c t i o n i s t , a n d c o n f i d e n t l y use my n e w s k i l l s to self-describe my si t u a t i o n as o n e w h e r e I 52 f e e l - p e r c e i v e myself as erasured. By February 25, 1991, I w r i t e in a letter that "I have b e c o m e to o e n c l o s e d by text l a t e l y in the U n i v e r s i t y e x p e r i e n c e and this is d a m a g i n g to 'spiritus' " ( C a l l i o u to A l e x a n d e r , personal c o m m u n i c a t i o n , p. 1). Eventually, I resent s o m e t e x t i f y i n g a s f i c t i o n a l i s i n g , as ( r e ) c o l o n i s i n g , and, at times, as a persistent forms of s e l f - a l i e n a t i o n , self ( r e ) c o l o n i z a t i o n and e p i s t e m i c - a f f e c t i v e - s p i r i t u a l v i o l e n c e . I don't t h i n k I'd e v e r t h o u g h t bef o r e of texts as t o x i c or as a for m of v i o l e n c e . T o x i c f a c t i c i t y w h i c h w o u l d have me l y i n g o n my bed or st a n d i n g in the s h o w e r w e e p i n g about this his/her/ourstory of M y People. [Silence. M o r e silence.] [Interviewer and interviewee fuss w i t h smoking materials. Interviewer j u s t manages to r e f r a i n f r o m l i g h t i n g a filter-tipped cigarette.] Interviewer: S h o u l d I s k i p f o r w a r d to that, to that resentment related to b e i n g a P F N A an d w h at y o u f i n d w h e n y o u l o c a t e y o u r s e l f in text? Perhaps, e x p a n d on that i m p a c t of Viswanathan's chapter, "The b e g i n n i n g s of English literary study in B r i t i s h I n d i a " (in D o n a l d & Rattansi, 1992, pp. 149-170) on you? [Pause. Sounds of chair i n s c r i b i n g into the thick shag.] Interviewee: No. No, because that "Indian" t h i n g isn't h a p p e n i n g st r o n g l y yet in 1991; not u n t i l 1992, w h e n I am t e a c h i n g as a Sess i o n a l . I'm not yet a r t i c u l a t i n g my uneasiness w i t h this f o r m of mental t e r r o r i z a t i o n or c o n t i n u a n c e of m e n t a l / c o g n i t i v e ( r e ) c o l o n i z a t i o n , or, as I name it e u r o h e r i t a g e i z a t i o n . I have extreme p h y s i c a l and e m o t i o n a l reactions to u n d e r s t a n d i n g the e u r o c e n t r i c nature of a c a d e m e n t i a , but that's s o m e t h i n g I'll d i s c u s s at the c o g n i t i v e realm. [Pause. The sounds of a lighter and a deeply exhaled breath o f cigarette smoke.] I never c o n n e c t e d w i t h sof the research terms, for example: i n d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e s . But ero c e n t r i c ? N o w there's a term that p l o p p e d s o l i d l y into my schema. I c a m e here as a c o m m u n i t y educator. I c a m e here as s o m e o n e w i t h more of a p r i m a r y interest in c o m m u n i t y - b a s e d c u r r i c u l u m and i n s t r u c t i o n than e m o t i o n a l d i s j u n c t u r e , or d i s l o c a t i o n . Then, 53 there is my e v e n t u a l extreme resistence to the d i c h o t o m y of o b j e c t i v i t y a nd s u b j e c t i v i t y . By late January, 1991, I am i n f o r m e d of the p o t e n t i a l bias - hence, c o n t a m i n a t i o n - a researcher might b r i n g to a study. Doesn't c o n t a m i n a t i o n of data s o u n d l i k e a s c i e n c e f i c t i o n s c e n a r i o to you? A n y w a y , I am p a r r o t i n g that / have a particular bias [unstated]. / recognized that it is important that I survey and keep a mental goal of keeping my 'mind' out of this, remove my opinions, and really listen to what I am to be told. . . . I had never considered that I might have a particular hobby horse and that I might want to ride this hobby horse through my study to win face. I do have a bias [unstated] as a researcher and the best I think I can do is to be upfront about this or these biases [never stated]. My personal lenses keep other truths from emerging or any semblance of truth from emerging at all ( C a l l i o u , j o u r n a l entry, January 25, 1991, n.p.). O f course, there's many things g o i n g on in this entry. 'Bias', 'subjectivity', 'objectivity', 'contamination', (versus 'pure' [Perhaps, v i r g i n a l ? How's that as m e t a p h o r i c reference to the m a l e r e v e r e n c e for unsullied?] research), 'truth' are n u a n c e d words-of-meaning w h i c h are c o n t e x t dependent. As w e l l , in retrospect, I v i e w my personal lenses as p o t e n t i a l o b s t a c l e a n d a l s o i n t r i n s i c to me. I c a n n o t r emove these lenses -[Interviewee removes glasses momentarily and mimes.] l i k e these ones. O f course, w i t h my lenses off, I'm n e a r l y b l i n d . W h a t strikes me about this entry t h ough is that I set a " g o a l " to "keep my m i n d " o u t s i d e of, or, ah, d i v o r c e d f r o m my interests. In the years to f o l l o w this entry, my mind-heart-spiritus emerge, if not o v e r p o w e r , my m e t h o d o l o g i c a l progress. I am p u z z l e d at my earnest w i l l i n g n e s s .54 to b e c o m e a 'mindless' (and souless) researcher. Now, I q uery w hat biases I was ref e r r i n g to in this j o u r n a l entry, b ecause I never state them. I just mouth the s o c i a l i s a t i o n that: B e w a r e Researchers H a v e Biases. I mean, perhaps, my biases are gifts of c a u t i o n or (second)(in)sight; not a l w a y s s o m e t h i n g to e l i m i n a t e , to scrub out, to d e n ounce, to fear. N o w if this l e c t u r e r was ref e r r i n g to biases of racism, sexism, ageism, this was not made e x p l i c i t in this lecture. The n e e d to be re v e r e n t i a l of a l l l i f e f o r m s not e n u n c i a t e d . Eisner (1992) makes that o b s e r v a t i o n about the need for o b j e c t i v i t y as more impor t a n t than the n e e d for s u b j e c t i v i t y as a means to d i s t i n g u i s h s e e m i n g l y di f f e r e n t states of b e i n g , in the W e s t e r n t r a d i t i o n , of k n o w l e d g e and belief, a nd that most of us are taught "that s u b j e c t i v e j u d g e m e n t s c a n n o t be trusted" (p. 11). W h e n I t h i n k about his words, I t h i n k about b e i n g taught not to trust myself; to b e c o m e self-alienated, to dissect and digest and q u o t e e v e r y o n e first seems to be the p r i o r i t y before I untangle my o w n thoughts-feelings-observations. A n d , I don't t h i n k b e i n g r a t i o n a l c a n happen if I'm 'getting busy' (dis)(mis)trusting myself, my o w n f e e l i n g s , my o w n hu n c h e s & i n t u i t i o n s , my o w n l o c a t i o n in this giant m u l t i - d i m e n s i o n a l two-legged e q u a t i o n . [Sounds of 'sqwarrk', 'graack' and 'hssist'. Unfortunately, a break i n the tape occurs at this point. Interviewer's note. I d i d not reconstruct the ensuing conversation f r o m memory. The f o l l o w i n g transcription picks up f r o m approximately f i v e minutes later. I hate tape recorders. The next time I interview, I w i l l have w o n the 6-4-9 L o t t e r y and I w i l l have one o f those computers where people speak d i r e c t l y and text appears. Yes! Yes! Yes!] M i n d / F e e l i n g s / B o d v / S p i r i t Interviewer: So, s o m e t h i n g is happening? A spl i t of some sort? 55 Interviewee: I'm not c e r t a i n as to h o w to c o n t i n u e . There is m u c h e m o t i o n a l r o l l e r c o a s t e r i n g related to b e i n g a graduate student. There is the m u l t i f a c t o r i a l s i t u a t i o n of s c h o o l i n g as p l a g u e d w i t h i n e q u i t y as related to e t h n i c i t y ( p r i m a r i l y , in my case, the " I n d i a n " i d e n t i t y , h i s t o r y et cetera), gender and class. I can e m pathise w e l l w i t h the c o n t r i b u t o r s to the c o l l e c t i o n of essays, W o r k i n g - C l a s s W o m e n in the A c a d e m y , Laborers i n the K n o w l e d g e Factory ( T o k a r c y z k & Fay,1993), w h o share their sense of dis(juncture)(location) as e d u c a t i o n p r o v i d e s interclass access and m o b i l i t y . H o w e v e r , before I go 'there' — to race, class, gender, etc. - this entry is p a r t i c u l a r l y poignant, because I realise n o w that I ar r i v e at u n i v e r s i t y w i t h a sense of Four R e a l m intactness. Yet, here I am t h i n k i n g that I'll r e m ove my(self)(mind). By the e i g h t h w e e k of graduate studies, I w r i t e in a letter This change in myself of becoming too prose-centered and not 'spiritus' or imagery centered - with a balance between the two -1 have found to become quite disturbing and rather frightening. I found today at the beach . . . that I began to break the stranglehold that text prose has on me too much lately. . . . I think I was being truthful when I told you, during the rdng. of Giroux, that I felt I was drowning. Symbolically and literally ( C a l l i o u to A l e x a n d e r , personal c o m m u n i c a t i o n , February 25, 1991, p. II). H e r e I w i t n e s s m y s e l f t a l k i n g about the m i n d and the spi r i t as s o m e h o w separate w h e n , in fact, there is o n l y o n e me. Sep a r a t i n g From Self 56 Interviewee: I am split(ting). That's not a ver y apt descriptor. I guess d i s j u n c t u r e d works. As I r e c a l l myself d e s c r i b i n g myself as these o p p o s i t i o n a l segments, w i t h the c o g n i t i v e o v e r ( p o w e r i n g ) ( b u r d e n i n g ) , v i a text, the spiritus, I am di s t u r b e d to see myself segmented, w i t h o u t t o o m u c h c o m m e n t a r y that this is an unusual c o n d i t i o n . I mean, l o o k at this, in eigh t w e e k s of graduate studies, I a m s p e a k i n g of myself as separate pieces: m i nd, spiritus. Isn't that i n c r e d i b l e ? I am m e n d i n g this sense of dis j u n c t u r e . M y d i s c o v e r y of the M e d i c i n e W h e e l r e m i n d s me that I am not s o m e Four R e a l m fragmented beingness . For me, the M e d i c i n e W h e e l is a he u r i s t i c , a med i t a t i o n d e v i c e w h i c h keeps the Four Realms in front of me as I c o n s i d e r my lif e j o u r n e y . Interviewer: A n d y o u s y m b o l i z e , s i g n i f y that w i t h s e l f - i n v e n t e d terms l i k e think-feel? Interviewee: Yes, a n d that's not l i n g u i s t i c p l a y or vanity; because, p a r a d o x i c a l l y , e v e n w h i l e I am ar g u i n g that c o g n i t i o n is a v a l i d f o r m of research, I a m al s o d e s p e r a t e l y t r y i n g to f i n d a w o r d in Eng l i s h w h i c h shows that as I am t h i n k i n g , I a m al s o f e e l i n g ; that there is e m o t i o n in c o g n i t i o n ; that I am not this c o m m o d e w i t h four pull-out drawers l a b e l l e d : p h y s i c a l , e m o t i o n a l , c o g n i t i v e , s p i r i t u a l . R e a d i n g the w o r d s of Elder/Chief Louis S u n c h i l d , the foc u s of Lightning's (1992) graduate studies, r e a l l y c r y s t a l l i z e s , for me, a s e n s i b i l i t y of h o w thought a n d heart are integrated at every moment. Thus, the need to take respectful care of our heart-mind. S u n c h i l d speaks of the c o m p a s s i o n a t e mind-consciousness (pp. 224-227). S o m e h o w c o m p a s s i o n a t e m i n d encapsulates, for me, the d i r e c t integration of e m o t i o n in c o g n i t i o n a n d I start to p l a y w i t h terms l i k e : t h i n k - f e e l or logic-heart or heart-logic or feel-perceive. English b e c o m e s a ve r y l i m i t i n g , w o r l d - f r a g m e n t i n g language for me and I f i n d myself w i s h i n g I c o u l d speak C r e e a n d c r a w l & n e s t i n s i d e the integ(rity)(ration) of the w o r d for c o m p a s s i o n a t e - m i n d because there seems to be a w h o l i s m there I d o not f i n d in English d i c t i o n a r i e s . [ C l a c k o f tape recorder shutting o f f unexpectedly. Interviewer locates a fresh tape. Interviewee sits quietly waiting.] 57 A l l of these e m o t i o n a l t u r m o i l s are also h i n t i n g at me to l o o k i n s i d e . I r e c a l l f o r m u l a t i n g this str(a)(o)ng(e) f e e l i n g that this a l i e n a t i o n process must be l i k e that e x p e r i e n c e d by my P e o p l e in the d i s j u n c t u r i n g of c o l o n i a l s c h o o l i n g , o n l y I'm here v o l u n t a r i l y . I r e a l l y can't e x p l a i n the sense of f e e l i n g I have here. M i n d 'Games'. P h i l o s o p h y Is S t i l l A n O.K. 'Thing' T o Do? Interviewer: Yet, t h i n k i n g , a k i n d of p h i l o s o p h i c a l i n v e s t i g a t i o n , is the a p p r o a c h y o u struggle to assert in research? Y o u argue for an old - f a s h i o n e d f o r m of t h i n k i n g ? P r o b l e m s o l v i n g events a n d c o n d i t i o n s through language? There's this p h i l o s o p h i c s i d e to y o u r beingness w h i c h seems to re q u i r e y o u start e l s e w h e r e before y o u get to d e s i g n i n g schemes of measurement? There are ineffables more s i g n i f i c a n t to y o u than what some might c o n s i d e r s o l i d l y m e a s u r a b l e in st a t i s t i c a l l y c o u n t e d responses? Interviewee: Ah-huh, just t h i n k i n g ? Or, p h i l o s o p h y ? W h a t term to use? A l s o , let's r e m e m b e r that a numeral is o n l y a s y m b o l representing a construct - k n o w n as 1 or 1,000; or, that a metre is a l s o an ' a r t i f i c i a l ' unit based on some standard ( C h r i s j o h n , personal c o m m u n i c a t i o n , 1994 [?]). By a r t i f i c i a l , I d o mean arbitrary. A metre c o u l d be shorter or lo n g e r than it is a c t u a l l y s o c i a l l y - b e l i e v e d to be. I'm not s a y i n g these standards of measurement are s i l l y or u n u s e f u l . S u c h measurements as hectare or acre are d a m m useful w h e n f i l i n g a la n d c l a i m to repatriate s t o l e n lands. [Interviewer starts s c r i b b l i n g furiously.] A n d , w h i l e 'me' is f i s s u r i n g , I am also b e g i n n i n g to sense that p h i l o s o p h i c a l i n v e s t i g a t i o n , or, rather, mind-generated c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n s isn't c o n s i d e r e d e n o u g h here. T h e i n t r o d u c t o r y m ethods c o u r s e is d r i v i n g me c r a z y as I try to squ i s h my c o m m u n i t y e d u c a t i o n c u r r i c u l u m interest (by this time, w o r d e d as W h a t is c o m m u n i t y - r e l a t e d c u r r i c u l u m ? ) ( C a l l i o u to A l e x a n d e r , 58 M a r c h 1, 1991, p. 2) into a qu a n t i t a t i v e or q u a l i t a t i v e i d e o l o g i c a l frame. I f i n d that "I s t i l l c o u l d not m a ke this q u e s t i o n into r e a l l y a qua n t i t a t i v e or q u a l i t a t i v e study" and, ah, that "the m o r e I st e w e d about this, the more I felt this is a c o n c e p t u a l a n a l y s i s pursuit" (Ibid ., p. 2). I never i n t e n d e d to have to make such a case for the m i n d as a research m e t h o d o l o g y ; nor, d i d I a n t i c i p a t e that d o i n g so w o u l d be a risk. I d i d not expect to be c h a l l e n g e d about the v a l i d i t y of t h i n k i n g . I was b e c o m i n g frustrated a n d I r e a l l y w a n t e d to a v o i d p r o d u c i n g [Respondent-subject-interviewee begins reading f r o m another j o u r n a l entry.] another 'pretend' mess like that stupid teachers' survey idea I had. ['They' made me.] I thought I would have to come up with a study which fit quantitative/qualitative modes somehow and that I didn't know how to do it. Instead, I still wanted to get to the business of analysing community-related curriculum. So I went to Dr. M~'s office and explained community-related curriculum to him from my notion, my bias, through my eight year practice. . . . He was quite helpful and told me that I would be describing the parameters of the definition; the criteria of constructs for the definition and trying to assess the adequacy of the definition. [Interviewee's b o l d i n g . ] ( C a l l i o u to A l e x a n d e r , M a r c h 1, 1991, p. 2). The M a r c h 1, 1991, m e e t i n g w i t h Dr. M. meant much. Yet, I had to fight for m i n d as a v i a b l e f o r m of k n o w l e d g e - p r o d u c t i o n . H o w does one dress up t h i n k i n g w i t h m e t h d o l o g i c a l t e r m i n o l o g y ? I r e m e m b e r e d my l o g i c course. I d i d go to the li b r a r y a n d I re-examined some textbooks. I d i d not even c o n s i d e r that I w o u l d make k n o w l e d g e , that is, a c e r t a i n t y a bout events a n d c o n d i t i o n s as they t r u l y are. I k n o w I create e x p e r i e n c e s ; ah, or e x p e r i e n c e e x p e r i e n c e s . A l t h o u g h s o m e t imes I just have e x p e r i e n c e s v e r y u n c o n s c i o u s l y . I struggle to make 59 sense of, make m e a n i n g f r o m these e x p e r i e n c e s ; but m a k i n g k n o w l e d g e wasn't part of my agenda. I was g o i n g to p r o d u c e a d e f i n i t i o n u s i n g Copi's (1982) I n t r o d u c t i o n to Lo g i c . T o get c l e a r a bout the useage of a term - word(s), random a l p h a b e t i c a l s equences w h i c h w e assign a n d agree to as h a v i n g m e a n i n g - is a thou g h t f u l , rigorous process; but I didn't sense that I was m a k i n g this c l e a r to the c o u r s e lecturers. I w a n t e d to understand h o w I was c o n c e p t u a l i z i n g a n d u s i n g this term: c o m m u n i t y - b a s e d c u r r i c u l a . A t least, Dr. A. had f i g u r e d out what I was on about. I t h i n k at that t i m e I b e l i e v e d that if I d i d some serious s e l f - r e f l e c t i o n here I w o u l d return to the f i e l d a n d be more s k i l l f u l l y adept in t r a n s l a t i n g this c o n c e p t to p r a c t i t i o n e r s w h o w e r e u s i n g a com m u n i t y - b a s e d c u r r i c u l a r a p p r o a c h , or wer e ready to try this a p p r o a c h . Interviewer: A n d , this p h i l o s o p h i c a l , er, l i n g u i s t i c , or, c o n c e p t u a l a p p r o a c h wasn't p e r c e i v e d as useful? Er, v a l i d ? A s k i n g M e H o w I "Do Data" Interviewee: In retrospect, I think-feel that I am ar g u i n g that p h i l o s o p h y is s t i l l a leg i t i m a t e f o r m of engaged research. P h i l o s o p h e r s just don't c o u n t a nd i n t e r v i e w a n d "do data" as Patti Lather s c o l d s (1991, pp. 123-125). O f course, at 1991, I'm not there yet w i t h a po s t p o s i t i v i s t i c , d e c o n s t r u c t i o n i s t , p o s t-Columbusian, post-paradigmatic, or a n y othe r sort of post-outlook, ready to "question the bas i c a ssumptions of what it means to d o s c i e n c e " (Lather, 1991, pp. 6-7). So, in this letter, I speak of 'pretending' to co n s t r u c t a survey m a s q u e r a d e m e t h o d o l o g y design. I a l l o w myself to engage f u l l y in the pretense; f a k i n g product(ion) w i t h a pa r a l l e l c o n s c i o u s n e s s that I c o u l d 'think' it up on my own, w h i c h I d o by c o n s t r u c t i n g this i n d u c t i v e argument; I fight w i t h p u z z l e m e n t that I have to go and locat e informants to l e g i t i m a t e w h a t I might think-feel-discover. I had not e x p e c t e d this type of de f e n s i v e n e s s to o c c u r at U n i v e r s i t y . I t h i n k my larger fear was b e i n g a b l e to answer s a t i s f a c t o r i l y , t o myself, my qu e s t i o n 60 a bout the 'essential' nature of a g e n u i n e c o m m u n i t y e d u c a t i o n f i e l d t r i p e x p e r i e n c e . I t h i n k - f e l t I k n e w I had to d e f e n d the eventual answer; I had not a n t i c i p a t e d h a v i n g to so st r e n o u s l y d e f e n d the m e t h o d of l o c a t i n g an answer or d i s c u s s i n g the l e g i t i m a c y of p h i l o s o p h y in the c o n s t r u c t i o n of a t h e o r e t i c a l d e f i n i t i o n . I had not a n t i c i p a t e d that s c h o a r l y w o r k is a risk. I t h i n k - f e l t I thought-felt that u n i v e r s i t i e s w e r e f i l l e d w i t h a l l these 'gentlemanly' types; that, s o m e h o w , a l l i n t e l l e c t u a l s w e r e a l s o q u i t e w e l l - mannered. A n d , in retrospect, I d i d not c o m e here to D O S C I E N C E [Interviewee d i d actually speak i n capital letters. I c o u l d hear the extreme emphasis.] I t h i n k the sounds of trains c r a s h i n g w o u l d be apt at this point. [Laughter on tape.] RATTLE-RATTLE-RATTLE-RATTLE Fortunately, the day e n d e d a f f i r m a t i v e l y w i t h Dr. M. g i v i n g me an e x t e n s i o n o n my E D U C 5 0 8 assignment, l e a v i n g me f e e l i n g good to be out of the cumbersome possibility of the teachers' survey because it was such descriptive work with not as much room for interpretation as this. I like the 'total thinking' aspect of this topic ( C a l l i o u t o A l e x a n d e r , M a r c h 1, 1991, p. 3). Dr. M.'s o f f i c e is not the o n l y l o c a t i o n a n d t i m e I w i l l d e f e n d my c o n c e p t u a l a n a l y s i s t e c h n i q u e s . I'll d o that right to the c o n c l u s i o n of the defense of the Master's thesis. Self-generated mind-work seems, somehow, suspect to some here. However, it is very difficult [for me right now] to develop this conceptual analysis design methodology and even trying a preliminary skim through 61 describing how I will approach 'studying' the development of a definition is really difficult. How does not describe 'thinking'? I enjoyed how C--H--and I camped this up in the C - - Restaurant Friday evening where the researcher would sit in smokery cafes, drinking coffee (capacinnos), studying the racing forms, throwing the Ching, discussing the 'concept' with restaurant 'regulars' and basically mulling&stewing ( C a l l i o u to A l e x a n d e r , p e r s o n a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n , M a r c h 4, 1991, p. 1). Interviewer: Yet, e v e n t u a l l y , m u l l i n g & s t e w i n g , sticks as y o u r preferred a p p r o a c h ? By February of 1994 y o u state, I used to j o k e about my Master's research and stated that my m e t h o d o l o g y c o n s i s t e d m a i n l y of reading, s m o k i n g , d r i n k i n g (coffee), q u e s t i o n i n g , s k e t c h i n g a n d t a l k i n g (to myself) ( C a l l i o u , 1994, February, p. 73). Y o u didn't b e c o m e an ethnographer or statistical analyst? Interviewee: Yes, to the first q uestion. Yes, to the second. I mean l o o k at the f i n a l M.A. product. I had to count, [Interviewee's emphasis] l i t e r a l l y count, q u a n t i f y the n u m b e r of ti m e s p a r t i c u l a r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s a ppeared in c o m m u n i t y e d u c a t i o n texts. T h e a p p e n d i c e s ( C a l l i o u , 1992, pp. 197-205) are littered w i t h tables of t a b u l a t i o n to c o n f i r m w e a k or strong s u b s t a n t i a t i o n of my self-s e l e c t e d c o d i n g of features of c o m m u n i t y e d u c a t i o n theory. I r e m e m b e r f e e l i n g p u z z l e d that the request, no, i n v i t a t i o n , to generate o r i g i n a l research is here, but, ah, that I must d o c u m e n t the o r i g i n a l research, in this case, w i t h the thoughts (quantified) of others. I b e c o m e an et h n o g r a p h e r in that I j u s t i f y that I i n t e r v i e w e d c o m m u n i t y e d u c a t i o n textbooks to d e v e l o p this p h i l o s o p h i c a l study to c o n s t r u c t a t h e o r e t i c a l d e f i n i t i o n of c o m m u n i t y - b a s e d c u r r i c u l a . But w h e n I thi n k - f e e l - r e c a l l that w h o l e p e r i o d n o w of f l e d g l i n g researcher, I just get t r e m e n d o u s l y weary. I 62 felt t o r tured; c o n s u m e d w i t h self-doubt. This uneasy queasiness is related to p a t r i a r c h a l p r i v i l e g i n g of r a t i o n a l i t y , means of m a k i n g r a t i o n a l , and, ah, the, a c c e p t a b l e forms of e x p r e s s i o n . I don't yet c a p t u r e t h e i r impacts on my life right then as I st r o l l N i t o b e G a r d e n s ( m u l l i n g & m u s i n g ) or sit s o m e w h e r e in the sunshine. The e m o t i o n a l e r o s i o n of h a v i n g to e x p l a i n that m u l l i n g & m u s i n g is v a l i d , legitimate, a n d c r e d i b l e as a means to ferret out 'stuff that c o n t r a d i c t s my a n t i c i p a t i o n that I c a m e to U n i v e r s i t y to t h i n k those 'deep thoughts'. [Extended sounds of laughter.] I d o not d e n o u n c e q u a n t i t a t i v e or q u a l i t a t i v e m e t h o d o l o g i e s , per se ; a l t h o u g h I w i l l b e c o m e rather j a u n d i c e d and attack the inherent e u r o c e n t r i s m by 1994. I b e l i e v e there are many methods - ones w e have not even c o n c e i v e d as yet. I d o not w i s h to enter the d i c h o t o m o u s debate of q u a l i t a t i v e versus quantitative. I c a m e here to a n s w e r a q u e s t i o n for myself; not to rove the c o u n t r y s i d e w i t h a c l i p b o a r d or a tape recorder. I d i d not a n t i c i p a t e the v o l u m e of e m o t i o n a l strength I w o u l d have to turn up in order to s u r v i v e d e f e n d i n g that I o n l y n e e d e d to t h i n k about something. That is v i o l e n c e I d o not understand. In t e a s i n g i n q u i r i e s , I w o u l d ask w h y Dewey's writing-thoughts-intuitions w e r e c o n s i d e r e d i n s i g h t f u l and/or c r e d i b l e , w h e n books l i k e D e m o c r a c y and Education (1966; O r i g . 1916) or his E x p e r i e n c e a n d e d u c a t i o n (1963; O r i g . 1938) are not c o n s t r u c t e d on the basis of even o n e q u e s t i o n n a i r e . I s o m e t i m e s j o k e that John wouldn't s u r v i v e a d o c t o r a l defense here because e v e r y o n e w o u l d d e m a n d he i d e n t i f y a n d then d i s s e c t his m e t h o d o l o g y . Y e t his p h i l o s o p h i c a l e x p l o r a t i o n s , that is, s e t t i n g out his thoughts in a readable form, i n f l u e n c e generations of i n t e n d i n g teachers. S o m e h o w w e have c o m e to p l a c e (over)emphasis on s c i e n t i f i c process rather than p r o d u c t a nd that l i n k s into the p o w e r of an i n s t i t u t i o n to l e g i t i m a t e what w i l l c o u n t a nd what is l e g i t i m a t e - that is, a u t h e n t i c a t e d , v a l i d , c o n f i r m e d - as a form-technique of k n o w l e d g e p r o d u c t i o n [Interviewee's emphasis]. I am not yet asking, l i k e s ome others, for e x a m p l e Lather 63 (1991), "To what extent does method p r i v i l e g e f i n d i n g s ? " (p. 124). W h e n I do, I h o w l that q u e s t i o n . C o n c e p t u a l A n a l y s i s I d i d not a n t i c i p a t e f e e l i n g so e m o t i o n a l l y stressed just b e cause I was e n g a g e d in s e l f - d e l i b e r a t i o n . Yet, it is the e m o t i o n a l t u r m o i l f o l l o w i n g , p a r a l l e l i n g , c o m p l e m e n t i n g my t h i n k i n g w h i c h gives me strength, in a way, to c o m p l e t e this battle. The b a f f l i n g part is that no one t o o k me a s i d e to t e a c h me h o w to 'do' c o n c e p t u a l a n a l y s i s or t a x o n o m i c c a t e g o r i z a t i o n or et cetera. A l t h o u g h I d i r e c t l y ask my c o m m i t t e e to g i v e me relevant references, there w e r e no d i r e c t i v e s g i v e n . I returned to my l o g i c t e x tbooks and b a s i c p h i l o s o p h y t e x t b o o k s a n d (re)self-taught m y s e l f some basics. I return to Hirst a nd Peter's (1979), in The L o g i c of E d u c a t i o n , o r i g i n a l l y p u b l i s h e d in 1970, and their e x p l i c a t i o n of c o n c e p t u a l a n a l y s i s as useful m e t h o d o l o g y to a n s w e r q u e s t i o n s l i k e , "What is . . . ?," w h e r e thoughtful a n a l y s i s makes l o g i c a l l y e x p l i c i t the a p p r o p r i a t e c o n d i t i o n s for usage of c o n c e p t s (pp. 3-5). O f course, I'm r i l e d up again w h e n I start to d e mand, "Whose concepts?" However, Peters and Hirst (1979; O r i g . 1970) stress that such a n a l y s i s "cannot be d o n e a d e q u a t e l y by just e x a m i n i n g the use of w o r d s in any s e l f - c o n t a i n e d way" as w o r d s are l i n g u i s t i c a l l y , s o c i a l l y , c o n t e x t u a l l y e m b e d d e d and l i n k e d w i t h k n o w l e d g e and e x p e r i e n c e (p. 8). Therefore, c o n c e p t u a l an a l y s i s is about p r e c i s i n g as o r d i n a r y language is a r e c o r d of c o n n e c t i o n s and d i s t i n c t i o n s that men [and w o m e n ] w i t h p r e d o m i n a n t l y p r a c t i c a l purposes have f o u n d it important to make. It is therefore a v a l u a b l e guide, but it s h o u l d never be treated as a r e p o s i t o r y of u n q u e s t i o n a b l e w i s d o m (p. 8). In my case some of these c o n n e c t i o n s and d i s t i n c t i o n s are pretty d e e p l y h i s t o r i c a l l y e m b e d d e d w i t h i n the events of c o l o n i a l i s m , c o l o n i z a t i o n , et cetera. Interviewer: I don't r e c a l l Hirst or Peters getting into c o l o n i a l i s m as a key f a c t o r in q u e s t i o n i n g the embeddedness. W h o s e Consructs? Interviewee: No, I but I take d i r e c t i o n f r o m t h e i r o u t l i n e of m e t h o d and do. H o w e v e r , w h e t h e r men or w o m e n , the p o i n t of c o n c e p t u a l a n a l y s i s is to c l a r i f y d i s t i n c t i o n s that w o r d s have been d e v e l o p e d or i n v e n t e d to designate, that is, "to get a better grasp of the s i m i l a r i t i e s a n d d i f f e r e n c e s that it is p o s s i b l e to p i c k out" (Ibid., p. 8). The intent is to strip the f u z z i n e s s and locate, h o p e f u l l y , essential features of a construct. I guess this c o u l d be c r i t i q u e d as a r o m a n t i c or d o g m a t i c quest for e s s e n t i a l i s m , o p e n to severe r e j e c t i o n as N e o - P l a t o n i s t or g u i l t y of G r a n d Nar r a t i n g . H o w e v e r , I b e l i e v e there is a great deal of d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of essentials to assist m eaning-making and the (un)ethical issues a s s o c i a t e d w i t h i m p o s i t i o n of ess e n t i a l s u p o n others. For e xample, the nature and content of E u r o c u r r i c u l a f o r c i b l y i m p o s e d o n P F N A illustrates h o w some essentials are d e e m e d of more v a l u e , w o r t h i e r , better, et cetera. R a c i a l , g ender or other base-bias to w o r d s is racism, s e x i s m , et cetera. So, I a m never easy w i t h the research process. I am al w a y s f u s s i n g w i t h aspects of this process. I keep q u e s t i o n i n g the s o l i d i t y of c o n c e p t s and constructs w i t h the questions. Interviewer: M o r e questions? lnterviewee:Yes, for examples: "What is this term to represent?" "What's this mean?" What's this mean to me?" "What g o i n g on here?" For e x a m p l e , 'Canadians' is a construct and not one v e r y o l d in c o m p a r i s o n w i t h t i m e i m m e m o r i a l . I w o u l d feel a n x i o u s l y uneasy w h e n I d i s c o v e r e d statements r e l a t i n g to the fact that this is b o t h a con s t r u c t and a po w e r f u l one. For e x a m p l e , M e n n o B o l d t (1994) w r i t e s that the C a n a d i a n 'national interest' is an a r t i f i c i a l construct, a d e v i c e of the r e i g n i n g C a n a d i a n 'establishment' for asserting its p o l i t i c a l , e c o n o m i c , and s o c i a l h e g e m o n y o v e r the C a n a d i a n nation. It is used to create the i l l u s i o n that there exists a n a t i o n a l h o m o g e n e i t y of interests, and that [Canadian Federal] g o v e r n m e n t p o l i c i e s are d e s i g n e d to p r o m o t e these interests. Thus, it serves to l e g i t i m a t e g o v e r n m e n t p o l i c i e s . But c l e a r l y the 'national interest' is not a r r i v e d at by a n y r a t i o n a l c a l c u l a t i o n s , r e f e r e n c e d to the 'national good' as d e f i n e d by the m a j o r i t y of C a n a d i a n s . M o r e often than not, assessments and d e f i n i t i o n s of the 'national interest' are made b e h i n d c l o s e d doors - p o l i t i c a l , b u r e a u c r a t i c , and c o r p o r a t e -w h e r e o n l y the v o i c e s of the p o w e r f u l are heard. The 'national interest' is not a w e l l - d e f i n e d or p r e c i s e n o t i o n ( M e n n o Boldt, 1993, p. 67). A s I am c o n n e c t i n g this o b s e r v a t i o n of 'national' (i.e. C anadian) interest w i t h s c h o o l i n g -a c c u l t u r a t i o n - for P F N A , I am q u e s t i n g and u n d e r s t a n d i n g - a p p r e c i a t i n g the serious nature of c o u n t e r - h e g e m o n i c efforts r e q u i r e d and made by P F N A to u t i l i z e e d u c a t i o n as the means to k e e p future P F N A c i t i z e n s aware-awake as to the nature of the pervasiveness of n a t i o n a l interests as related to P FNA. I see the w h o l e t h i n g - his/her/ourstory b u i l t in language and I b e g i n c o n s i d e r i n g h o w to u n b u i l d that language - or, at least, for me, l o o k t h r o u g h that language. T h i s l anguage house, or fort, is s o c i a l l y - b e l i e v e d and very s o l i d . I see s c h o o l i n g for P F N A as more than c u l t u r a l l y - s e n s i t i v e c u r r i c u l a r e x p e r i e n c e s ; it is a l l v e r y p o l i t i c a l - and s p i r i t u a l . C o u n t e r - h e g e m o n i c w o r k is the subtext to the grand narrative w h e r e c u l t u r a l - c o m m u n i t i e s attempt to s u r v i v e as D e w e y o b s e r v e d that it is "the v e r y nature of l i f e to strive to c o n t i n u e in b e i n g " (Dewey, 1966[1915], p. 9). The A s s e m b l y of First N a t i o n s (herein: A F N ) (1988) stated that F N p e o p l e have begun to v i e w e d u c a t i o n as a v e h i c l e for a d d r e s s i n g major s o c i a l , e c o n o m i c and p o l i t i c a l p r o b l e m s that affect t h e i r c o m m u n i t i e s " (Ch a r l e s t o n , p. 10). The d i f f i c u l t y for P F N A is that the immigrants understand the s u r v i v a l 66 i n s t i n c t , but s o m e h o w rather than r e s p e c t i n g - r e v e r e n c i n g a l l l i f e f o r m s , there is n e e d to d e v i s e means to ensure that forms of l i f e not 'strive to c o n t i n u e in being'. Interviewer: So yo u r r e a d i n g of text b e c o m e s co n f u s i n g ? Or, y o u r l o c a t i o n a l s u b j e c t i v i t y d e m a n d s in t e r r o g a t i o n of text? Interviewee: Yes, s o m e t h i n g l i k e that. Some event or p rompt or i n s t i n c t or s o m e t h i n g i n s i d e of me motivates me to g i v e c u r i o u s d o u b l e / t r i p l e / q u a d r u p l e readings to e d u c a t i o n a l theorists, l i k e D ewey, because w h e n I t h r o w my baggage on D e w e y the statements c o n t a i n an u n i n t e n d e d h y p o c r i s y . A l t h o u g h I w o n d e r that D e w e y never a c k n o w l e d g e s the First P e o p l e s of his area. So, what I am l e a r n i n g as a n o v i c e c o n c e p t u a l analyst (or, w h a t e v e r I am) and about the o r i e s of s o c i o c u l t u r a l (re)production and/or d e s t r u c t i o n , I am t u r n i n g these insights-thoughts-feelings towards other constructs and the d a i l y r e a l i t y of my li f e past-present-future and the l i v e s of The People. A n d , er, I am f e e l i n g l i k e e v e r y t h i n g is not m a k i n g sense and m a k i n g h o r r i f i c sense. I f i n d it's O.K. to (de)construct, to r e a l l y interrogate accep(ted)(able) (percep)(proposi)tions in o r d e r to e x p l o r e the nature of core-periphery or centered-decentered et cetera. I turn that o n t o the events a n d c o n d i t i o n s of "Indians" and I resist the horror as I c o m p r e h e n d the m a g n i t u d e of the horror. M y u n g u i d e d studies i n t r o d u c e me to t o o m a n y c o n t r a d i c t i o n s a n d I beg i n to a c c e p t u s i n g the term genocide. And, genocide is not only physical death [Interviewee's definite emphasis]. [Interviewer d u t i f u l l y checks tape recording. Observes that tape seems to be tu r n i n g i n a c l o c k w i s e d i r e c t i o n and is duly satisfied.] Interviewer: So y o u r EuroWestern l o g i c a c c u l t u r a t i o n grounds this study? Language Arts: Language & Thought 67 Interviewee: M a y b e . A m I t h i n k i n g l i k e a ' W h i t e ' p e r s o n ? I start a s k i n g that of myself. Is there a 'white' w a y to think-feel-idea? C a n I t h i n k l i k e a Mohawk/Cree/Stoney/Sioux/French/English person? D o es the mix of b l o o d d e t e r m i n e the type, q u a l i t y , er, f o r m of t h i n k i n g ? That's t o o b i o g e n e t i c a l l y d e t e r m i n i s t i c , isn't it? B l o o d = t h i n k i n g pattern. E v e n t u a l l y , I just k n o w I think-feel-sense l i k e m yself - l i k e S h a r i l y n . A n d S h a r i l y n is a w h o l e c o n s t e l l a t i o n of i n t e r c o n n e c t e d moments, some I a m not e v en aware of yet and may never be. Interviewer: But this post-secondary self-study adds to y o u r awareness of e x t e r n a l i n t e r c o n n e c t i o n s ? E s p e c i a l l y in r e a d i n g the language about c o l o n i z a t i o n ? Interviewee: Yes, u n e x p e c t e d research o p p o r t u n i t y to ask the q u e s t i o n , "Just h o w c o l o n i z e d a m I?" If I am c o l o n i s e d b e y o n d s a l v a t i o n , then I a m ru e f u l , regretful, a bout b e i n g so c o l o n i s e d w i t h aspects of this form of t h i n k i n g - a n a l y s i n g . H o w e v e r , the e m o t i o n a l ante is u p p e d for me here because the l o g i c of c o n c e p t u a l a n a l y s i s itself is (over)turned. A n O n e i d a s c h o l a r , R o l a n d C h r i s j o h n , is a l w a y s on about language. C u r i o u s , I v i s i t w i t h h i m a n d ask, "What's the b i g d e a l about language?" I, some(how)(time)(where), i n t e r n a l i z e d that w o r d s are not rea l i t y ; just (re)presentations; H o w e v e r , it seems others v i e w w o r d s as IT. I've yet to r e a l l y c o n n e c t that language has material force. For e xample, if y o u are w o r d e d as "Indian," then w a t c h out b e c a u s e that word-noun-designation appears to s a n c t i o n a w h o l e n u m b e r of a c t i o n s , e m o t i o n s , b e l i e f s , o p i n i o n s and thoughts. A n y w a y , R o l a n d sics W i t t g e n s t e i n o n me and I d e l i g h t f u l l y c o n t i n u e my d e l i g h t in(with)(in) words. W i t t g e n s t e i n (1990), w r i t i n g in 1922, c o n f i r m s my un d e r s t a n d i n g that O b j e c t s I c a n o n l y name. Signs represent them. I can o n l y speak of them. I can n o t assert them. A p r o p o s i t i o n can o n l y say h o w a t h i n g is, not w h at it is (Line 3.221, p. 49). 68 W i t t g e n s t e i n uses the personal p r o n o u n in his work. For me, that's s i g n i f i c a n t . H e writes as L u d w i g , not as a V i e n n e s e . Y o u don't f i n d his books in the V i e n n e s e or in the C a t h o l i c - he was bap t i s e d - sec t i o n s of the library. A n d , this c o n n e c t s to my u n d e r s t a n d i n g of bias a n d w i l l be e v i d e n t i n the w o r d s I c h o o s e for W i t t g e n s t e i n c a u t i o n s that "language d i s g u i s e s the thought" (p. 63, 4.002). T h e po t e n t i a l of (mis)using w o r d s reminds me of the need to th i n k - f e e l b e f o r e I speak a n d to be honest. I may state facts, but I might not be s p e a k i n g the truth. T h ere is, for me, su c h an e n o r m o u s r e m i n d e r of the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of i n t r o d u c i n g a n y o n e to a c o n c e p t , or construct, t h r o u g h words. A n d a w h o l e lotta w o r d s are used to construct p r o p o s i t i o n s ; to get c l e a r i n a l o g i c a l f o r m u l a t i o n - l i k e a s y l l o g i s m w i t h the a c c o m p a n y i n g truth tables. A n d , I get q u i t e startled b e c a u s e l o g i c is o n l y l o g i c after a l l . P r o p o s i t i o n s are but m o d e l s or pictures of 'reality', a r t i c u l a t e d p e r c e p t i o n s - (percep)(proposi)tions e m b e d d e d w i t h i n other (percep)(proposi)tions (see, for e x a m p l e s , W i t t g e n s t e i n , 1990, p. 63, L i n e 4.01; p. 67, Line 4.021; 1969, p. 30e, L i n e 225). H e states, What I hold fast to is not one proposition, but a web of propositions. A n d , some of the C a n a d i a n c i t i z e n s are h o l d i n g o n to a n u m b e r of d i s e m p o w e r i n g (percep)(proposi)tions, as are we. In l o g i c , v a l i d i t y is not to be e q u i v o c a t e d w i t h 'truth'. W i t t g e n s t e i n (1990) d i s t i n g u i s h e s often what is (un)known(able) f r o m what is b e l i e v e d ; and, ah, often w h at is b e l i e v e d to be k n o w n is based more on faith or f o r c e of reason than c e r t a i n t y (see, for e x a m p l e , W i t t g e n s t e i n , 1969, pp. 32e-33e, Lines 240-255). A n d , s o m e h o w c o n t e m p l a t i n g his o b s e r v a t i o n c o n f i r m s my sense that this is a s o c i a l l y - b e l i e v e d - u n d e r s t o o d w o r l d ; w h i c h , for me, possesses more i m p a c t than just t a l k i n g about a s o c i a l l y - c o n s t r u c t e d w o r l d - r e a l i t y . So, in this think-tank-of-one-non-scientific-investigation, I get d o w n to basics - w o r d s as b u i l d i n g b l o c k s ; w o r d s (re)presenting constructs a n d p r o p o s i t i o n s a n d it's a s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c a l l y - c o n s t r u c t e d reality w i t h mighty material force. A n d , there are r e m i n d e r s that w e be c a r e f u l what/how w e speak because W O R D S H A V E POWER!. RA TTLE-RA TTLE-RA TTLE-RA TTLE N o t Language Arts, But Language W a r r i n g Interviewer: So the M.A. is more about getting c l e a r about a construct, that is, c o m m u n i t y - b a s e d c u r r i c u l u m a n d further post-secondary studies m o t i v a t e y o u to c o n s i d e r more d e e p l y the i n f l u e n c e , ah, inte r c o n n e c t e d n e s s of language a n d reality? Interviewee: Hhhmmm. . . yes. I guess that if I had been a c q u a i n t e d w i t h s o m e of these ideas (m a t e r i a l i t y , i d e o l o g i c a l r e p r o d u c t i o n , etc.), the 1992 M.A. might have been in t e r e s t i n g , if not, scary stuff. A n d , these are places c o m m u n i t y educators n e e d to start l o o k i n g . But I wasn't there yet, so I con s t r u c t this seven or eight-step i n d u c t i v e argument frame. Interviewer: A n d , in the process y o u p r o d u c e a nd d e f e n d the thesis based on the " f o r m u l a t i o n of the i n d u c t i v e argument to hypothesis f r a m e d for c o m m u n i t y e d u c a t i o n a n d c u r r i c u l u m in c o m m u n i t y e d u c a t i o n " ( C a l l i o u , 1992, July, pp. 26-28)? Interviewee: O h , Yes! Yes, I d e f e n d & d e f e n d for 3.5 hours. I a m grateful my c o u s i n a n d J. S. are there in the r o o m as witnesses. You've read it?! Interviewer: A v i d l y . Interviewee: [ M o r e laughter.] Y o u r q u o t a t i o n a l o n e illustrates the e m o t i o n a l - s p i r i t u a l v i o l e n c e that o c c u r r e d against my style of w r i t i n g . I'm not s a y i n g I'm a perfect writer. I thin k - f e e l that some e a r l i e r drafts of my thesis d i d have some c o l o u r f u l (if not p a s s i o n a t e l y purple) a n d c o n v o l u t e d stretches; however, the v i o l e n c e of r e m o v a l of "me" fro m my o w n pages is s t i l l a sou r c e of w o n d e r a nd horror. A s a teacher of ten years, p r i m a r i l y language arts or language-across t h e - c u r r i c u l u m f o c u s e d , I never savaged student c r e a t i o n s the w a y I w i t n e s s e d m i n e v i o l a t e d . Thesis r e v i s i o n s and rewrites w e r e a very d e m o r a l i z i n g process, I d e s c r i b e thusly. 70 Meanwhile . . . and I were locked in some sort of unnamed struggle in ... office about the revisions to my thesis. The mtgs. were few; but seemed strewn with subtext that even the most skilled directoress would have had difficulty unweaving. The plot was becoming nonsensical. I reverted to old, old patterns of withdraw, withdraw, withdraw . . . until I was locked into drawing boxes of faceless people with tears stuffed inside the head. . . . was abusive - who knows what buttons ... I pushed? ( C a l l i o u to Flaherty, p e r s o n a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n , D e c e m b e r 28, 1992, p. 1). The w o m a n I h i r e d as typist a n d editor, b a r e l y manages to stomach the r e q u i r e d r e v i s i o n s . I'd hear her shr i e k f r o m the other o f f i c e , I'd s m i l e a n d shout back at her to just make the changes as suggested. H o w e v e r , w h e n I e x a m i n e the f i n a l product, I marvel at the c l i n i c a l s a n i t a t i o n of the pages. A c o m p a r i s o n of this Ph.D. disser t a t i o n w i t h that M.A. thesis t e l l s a l l . Yet, I s u r v i v e . I f o u n d an a u d i e n c e ; an i n d u l g e n t a u d i e n c e ; a l t h o u g h I s t i l l retreat i n t o that neat, s c h o l a r l y style at times. I t h i n k I lost s ome trust in myself, in my un o r t h o d o x f o r m of (re)presentation(s), lost s ome se l f - c o n f i d e n c e in the p l a y f u l d e l i g h t I have w i t h language, c o m p o s i n g , w r i t i n g , m u l l i n g & m u s i n g . In a letter I d e s c r i b e w r i t i n g an e a r l i e r paper for a r e q u i r e d Ph.D. seminar. I had cleared the skids and researched-composed a paper for Dr. W~'s class . . . The assignment was to select a doctoral dissertation and deconstruct (analyze, thoughtfully consider, examine) the research methodology and expose underlying assumptions. This felt like a fancy book review. This was the first assignment since the Masters' thesis work which I wrote to order for the committee I had then. The writing, with its violence to my form of expression, wherein all metaphor and colour were drained and the work became an acceptable research project.... In EDCI601.C. we are into a new Euro-generated form of thought called postmodernism (which I can't quite yet define). The writing style does emphasize pastiche, strung-together quotations (sensibly, although demanding of the reader because you must know the contexts) and the language of metaphor is O.K. Such a difference between departments. However, I was almost paralyzed as I had to write again; take that risk; expose myself to unending criticisms which was not criticism to make me a better writer but to make me write in ways I do not conceptualise or put words together. Thus, I was engaged in this piece because I could write from my position as a thirty-something Mohawk-Cree woman and use those powers of metaphor + logic + word play (punning and playing although the intention is a quirky balance between seriousness and irony). I enjoyed the piece but I did experience a sense of dread and panic because I thought about doing it wrong again! I think that -- will be accepting ( C a l l i o u to Tebbitt, personal c o m m u n i c a t i o n , February 26, 1993, pp. 2-3). Interviewer: P a r a d o x i c a l l y , y o u d i d not c o m e to u n i v e r s i t y to f i n d a v o i c e as w o m a n , le m i c of wo r k i n g - c l a s s b a c k g r o u n d , as "Indian", as a cr e a t i v e , n o n - f i c t i o n w r i t e r , as archer? 72 Interviewee: No. Yet, up here, I r e a l i z e there is i n v i g o r a t e d interest in s p e c i f y i n g w h o is p r o d u c i n g w r i t t e n e n c o d i n g for whom, p a r t i c u l a r l y o n an e t h n o c u l t u r a l basis - i.e. W h o is speak-write(ing) for the H a i d a , the Dene, the Cree, the M e t i s of Red River, et cetera. L i t C r i t is o n e area w h e r e this t u n n e l l i n g through text for v o i c e is emergent. W. H. N e w (1990), i n his e d i t o r i a l preface to N a t i v e W r i t e r s and C a n a d i a n W r i t i n g , tracks the C a n a d i a n N a t i v e (i.e., not the B e l g i u m or French Native) as more often a " c o n v e n t i o n a l f i g u r e " or c u r i o s i t y or r o m a n t i c i s m (p. 4). N e w (1990) c o n t i n u e s that P F N A are not often a " v o i c e " in C a n L i t , w i t h a t r e n d e s t a b l i s h e d to "deny N a t i v e c o m m u n i t i e s respect for t h e i r o w n history, to make th e i r o w n histor y c o n t i n g e n t upon European perspectives, to d i s p l a c e o n e language of s e l f - p e r c e p t i o n w i t h a s e l f - j u s t i f y i n g substitute" (p. 5). I c a m e here w i t h a v o i c e not p r e d i c a t e d s o l e l y o n the basis of b e i n g a P F N A , but in the process of conducting research [Interviewee's emphasis] I c o m e to r e c o g n i z e this is an important v o i c e to be heard-read. I just get shy about s h a r i n g mine. M.A. W a l k A c r o s s A Stage Interviewer: Y o u d o get the M.A.? Interviewee: [ T r a i n loads o f laughter precede this answer.] Yes. Interviewer: A n d , s o m e t h i n g else is g o i n g on? In the photograph, y o u w a l k across that stage w e a r i n g a blue-print treaty dress, w i t h ribbons and a sm a l l p i e c e of rabbit fur at the left knee. You're not w e a r i n g a, ah, b l a c k robe. W h a t about graduation? Interviewee: E m o t i o n a l l y ? That sm i l e s says paragraphs. I a m al s o a T s " k e l grad f r o m the N a t i v e Indian T e a c h e r E d u c a t i o n Program. I am re a l l y happy. H a p p y to be w e a r i n g that dress, s e w n by P i m i n a Y e l l o w b i r d , V e r e n a Cootes, a n d others, o n the l o n g week-end in M a y of 1993. Ecstatic. What's been h a p p e n i n g in a d d i t i o n to g r i n d i n g out a th e o r e t i c a l study is a 73 s e l f - e d u c a t i o n c u r r i c u l a f l u n g my w a y w i t h assignment to t e a c h i n g E D U C 4 4 1 a nd E D U C 4 4 2 at this u n i v e r s i t y . what we can't face looks for us anyway ( T r u d e l l , 1994, n.p.) rattle-RATTLE-rattle-RATTLE RATTLE-rattle-RATTLE-rattle Interviewer: So, this j o u r n e y to that stage is o n e fraught w i t h an e m o t i o n a l l i f e , w h i c h both w e a r i e s a n d provokes. Y o u emerge w i t h a s m i l e of paragraphs. The e m o t i o n a l r e a l m does not take a backseat, er, sit in a b e y a n c e w h i l e y o u are t h i n k i n g the deep thoughts y o u c a m e here to t h i n k , er, t h i n k - f e e l . T he e x e m p l a r y researcher is not just a m a c h i n e of w h i r r i n g r a t i o n a l i t y ? S o m e h ow, if I extrapolate, then y o u seem to suggest that there is e m o t i o n , must be an a c k n o w l e d g m e n t of the e m o t i o n in learning. I t h i n k w e a l l might a d m i t to some e m o t i o n in r e a d i n g a text. H o w e x a c t l y does e m o t i o n a d d to or u n d e r m i n e this p e r s o n a l j o u r n e y ? More Learner Than Teacher Interviewee: Let's see... W h i l e in pursuit of a M.A., I a m al s o t e a c h i n g . I have n o fo r m a l b a c k g r o u n d in N a t i v e A b o r i g i n a l " l n d i a n " F i r s t N a t i o n s studies. D u e to the u n a v a i l a b i l i t y of an instructor, my c o u s i n , M., i n v i t e d me to be a Sessional Lecturer. A s the r e v i s i o n s t o the thesis are b e i n g (re)constructed, I taste of t e a c h i n g at the post-secondary l e v e l . In the Fall of 1992, I start w i t h E D U C 4 4 1 , a nd I am reading'my brains out i n , yet, another f i e l d . M y i n t e l l i g e n c e 74 about this s c h o o l i n g is f o r m e d f r o m my mother's t e a c h i n g me about her stint in r e s i d e n t i a l s c h o o l , my e x p e r i e n c e w i t h integrated s c h o o l i n g and r a n d o m reading. T h i s c o m m u n i c a t i o n is s u d d e n l y a m p l i f y i n g ; m a g n i f i e d e n o r m o u s l y as m i l i t a r y , p o l i t i c a l , l e g a l , l e g i s l a t i v e , e c o n o m i c and educational [Interviewee's emphasis] events and c o n d i t i o n s are l o c k e d in this c o m p l e x i n t e r p l a y of u n i v e r s a l o p p r e s s i o n . R e a d i n g to prepare my lectures and other c l a s s r o o m a c t i v i t i e s p r o v o k e s a n y n u m b e r of emotions. I don't t h i n k I can e x p l a i n how, but I c a n d e s c r i b e w h at is h a p p e n i n g , w h at I r e m e m b e r happening. For e x a m p l e , I go through this p e r i o d of s c a t h i n g anger, righteous anger, self-righteous anger, i n d u l g e n t anger, scary anger, anger w h i c h I manage to restrain in c l a s s r o o m s ; H o w e v e r , is e v i d e n t in my sr u g g l i n g a r t i c u l a t i o n s in print. I rant. I weep. I express my c o n f u s i o n . By 1994, a sense of w hat the phrase b i c u l t u r a l i s m suggests to me emerges. O n l y I f i n d that b i c u l t u r a l i s m is s c h i z o p h r e n i c - i n d u c i n g , in that I have to be these m u l t i p l e p e r s o n a l i t i e s almost; s o m e h o w get i n s i d e t h e p u b l i s h e d E u r o i m p r e s s i o n s and Europerceptions w h i l e k e e p i n g w h a t e v e r c o r e I possess. Interviewer: D o y o u rec a l l what you're reading? Interviewee: A t the moment, no s p e c i f i c tit l e s . I'm r e a d i n g to lecture a n d I'm r e a d i n g for d o c t o r a l seminars and courses. Every page i n h a l e d means I read (that is, react, r e s pond, d e c o d e , interrogate, deconstruct) t h r o u g h t h i c k e r , lenses, w h i c h I c a n n o t d i s c a r d . I a m l e a r n i n g to read against and t h r o u g h the grain of text a nd f i n d the (re)Presentations inadequate. I r e a l l y b e g i n to sweat, s q u i r m and struggle as I process e d u c a t i o n a l texts. The o m i s s i o n s and c o n t r a d i c t i o n s arefor me, an om n i p r e s e n t subtext. M y ancestors w e r e s u b j e c t e d to a c c u l t u r a t i v e c u r r i c u l a r e x p e r i e n c e s , based on racist rationales, to d i v o r c e and d i s l o c a t e learners a nd s u b s e q u e n t ge n e r a t i o n s f r o m the l i f e of t h e i r c u l t u r a l - c o m m u n i t y , the l o v e of t h e i r f a m i l i e s (see, for e x a m p l e s , B u l l , 1991; Ing, 1991,; t h e i r sense of land as home and M o t h e r , t h e i r u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the c o l l e c t i v e i n t e r d e p e n d e n t and m u t u a l l y d e p e n d e n t of spiritus. 75 I b e c o m e an i r o n i c reader. I b e c o m e a sa r d o n i c reader. I become, at times, a h o s t i l e reader. I rage at the i n t e r l o c k i n g , s a n c t i m o n i o u s c o m p l e x i t y of i n s t i t u t i o n a l i s e d o p p r e s s i o n . I a l s o pray for the gift of forgiveness because, by 1993, I am i n f l u e n c e d by Elde r L o u i s S u n c h i l d in W a l t e r Lightning's 1992 a r t i c l e "Compassionate-mind: I m p l i c a t i o n s of a Text W r i t t e n b y Elder L o u i s S u n c h i l d . " I am al s o w r i t i n g , r e a l l y t r y i n g to w r i t e a paper about m u l t i c u l t u r a l i s m , r a c i s m , a n t i - r a c i s m a n d p e a c e k e e p i n g for an anti-racist p e dagogy c o u r s e ( C a l l i o u , 1995). I am resi s t i n g , c o n f r o n t i n g a n d t r y i n g to make peace w i t h e n o r m o u s l y h o r r i f i c a l l y g e n o c i d a l r e a l i s a t i o n s , w h i c h c o n t r a d i c t my in n a t e l y pa c i f i s t b eliefs. Race means, p o t e n t i a l l y , death; death of the body, death of the emotions, death of the mind, death of the spirit. H a r m i n g s o m e o n e is h a r m i n g one's self. T r y i n g T o Temper A n g e r Interviewer: Y o u often j o k e about y o u r s e l f as a graduate of John L e n n o n H i g h S c h o o l ? Interviewer: Yes. I have this p a c i f i s t streak; that's not to i m p l y I never get angry or resentful or d o w n r i g h t mean-spirited. I just b e l i e v e that p e a c e f u l n e s s is a m u c h more se n s i b l e - r e v e r e n t i a l w a y to l i v e . I'm less r o m a n t i c about this i d e a l than I o n c e was, but - I guess I am that d r e a m e r (see Lennon, 1988). I mean John's s o n g is a m u c h more s u c c i n c t u n d e r s t a n d i n g of M i c h a e l Young's (1971) sense-insight that c e r t a i n c o d e s p r e d o m i n a t e a nd that s u c h p r e d o m i n a n c e t h e r e b y e m p o w e r s some and not others. Lennon's seen that - and, ah, maybe, t o t a l l y 'grokked' - that these structuralist i n s t i t u t i o n s are f i c t i o n s c a u s i n g needless two-legged de(rision)(rogation)(vision)(ath). T h e angry i r r i t a t i o n I a l s o feel is an i m p a t i e n c e w i t h two-leggeds' s e e m i n g i n a b i l i t y to tr a n s c e n d r e p r o d u c t i v e paradigms of v i o l e n c e based on li t t l e more than s k i n c o l o u r . 76 T h e s o c i a l c o n s t r u c t i o n of k n o w l e d g e metaphor I've e n c o u n t e r e d by M a r c h 2, 1992, in EDST507. I forget, the name of that course. These metaphors, s o c i a l C O N S T R U C T I O N of, R E P R O D U C T I O N of, are such images of ar c h i t e c t u r e and e n g i n e e r i n g , e m b e d d e d there is the s e n s i b i l i t y of e r e c t i o n or manufacture. C o n s t r u c t i o n w i t h o u t reference to nurturance, l o v i n g n e s s . A n y w a y , I'm e x c i t e d about s o c i o l o g i c a l s l e u t h i n g for, " e x p o s i n g [those] premises, c o n s e q u e n c e s and a l t e r n a t i v e s " t o " i m p r o v e our understanding of e d u c a t i o n a l contexts a n d the p r o b l e m s they generate," w h i c h S c h e f f l e r (1967, p. 5) and others d e s c r i b e as doing [Interviewee's emphasis] p h i l o s o p h y of e d u c a t i o n . I'm game. I don't f i n d p h i l o s o p h y as d o g m a t i c as s o c i o l o g y . P h i l o s o p h y is e x p o s u r e w i t h o u t - I again guess that some w o u l d c r i t i c i z e - be n e f i t of measurement. Yet h o w does one measure such a f l u i d w o r l d in movement? A n y w a y , I'm a p p r o a c h i n g E D U C 4 4 1 a nd E D U C 4 4 2 w i t h some of these (de)(re)constructionist - not yet, c o n s c i o u s l y D e r r i d e a n - understandings. A n d , w i t h these insights or understandings I turn t hem on the his/herstory a n d the e m o t i o n a l a c c o m p a n i m e n t to my re a l i s a t i o n s is q u i t e strong because I w o n d e r at our two-legged a b i l i t y to keep r e p r o d u c i n g these s i t u a t i o n s of v i o l e n c e , i n j u s t i c e , hurtfulness. I t h i n k about this c o n c e p t i o n of c u l t u r a l r e p r o d u c t i o n a n d w o n d e r what we, as teachers of F N A must do, to d i s a b l e these h e g e m o n i c , t i g h t l y w o v e n a n d t i g h t l y c o n c e a l e d forms of a s s i m i l a t i v e s c h o o l i n g as w e l l as h e l p i n g to heal the i n h e r i t a n c e of v i o l e n c e , w h i c h is a l s o an i n h e r i t a n c e of courage a nd strength a n d resistance. Interviewer: For example? Interviewee: W e l l , there's W h i t t y (1985). In a letter I w r i t e that o n e of his statements (p. 19), really echoes my direction for schooling in that traditionally "pupils have been taught a particular world view with no examination of the underlying assumptions/presuppositions or social processes of how such a 77 view developed; and "pupils accept as "immutable" fact what was but one ideological version of the world ( C a l l i o u to A l e x a n d e r , M a r c h 2, 1991, n.p.). I'm not t e a c h i n g yet at 1991, but this w i l l feed into h o w I later think-feel a bout my l e c t u r i n g . Interviewer: A n d , y o u enc o u n t e r more D.O.M.? Interviewee: Yes, of course. Whitty's (1985) not the o n l y one. There's M i c h a e l Young's (1971) c o l l e c t i o n of n i n e essays in K n o w l e d g e a n d C o n t r o l , f e a t u r i n g the 'big' guys, l i k e P i e r r e B o u r d i e u , B a s i l B e rnstein, A l a n B lum, N e l l K e d d i e and, of course, M i c h a e l Y o u n g himself. Even w h i l e I'm s i l e n t l y a s k i n g , 'Where are the w o m y n in a l l this?', these ideas are s t i m u l a t i n g e x p l o r a t i o n s for me and these ideas i n f l u e n c e h o w I v i e w my ro l e as a lect u r e r a n d h o w I h a n d l e the c u r r i c u l a r c o n t e n t a n d exp e r i e n c e s . I c o n t i n u e to use C r a m s c i ' s c o n s t r u c t of 'hegemony' a n d Apple's (1990) c o n s t r u c t e d u n d e r s t a n d i n g of 'cultural r e p r o d u c t i o n ' v i a e d u c a t i o n a n d the l o n g i n g to e x c a v a t e the " p o s i t i v e and negative moments of power" (p. xv). Interviewer: So the ideas of 'men' have value? Interviewee: G e n d e r s h o u l d not, I t h i n k - b e l i e v e , be e n o u g h of a basis to d i s m i s s an idea. H o w e v e r , w h y ce r t a i n i n d i v i d u a l s (gender, e t h n i c i t y , r e l i g i o n , et ceteras) have b e e n g i v e n the p r i v i l e g e of being the author(ity) [Interviewee's emphasis.] is v e r y t r o u b l i n g to me - an d in my case, I a m jar r e d as I d i s c o v e r just h o w often I don't hear the v o i c e s of The P e o p l e here. O t h e r V o i c e s Exist? Interviewer: C a n y o u e ven g i v e an e x a m p l e of an alternate v o i c e to i l l u s t r a t e , say, ah, c u l t u r a l r e p r o d u c t i o n ? 78 Interviewee: Sure, glad you asked that. Again my emotions catapult me into this provoked zone where I go looking for our words. We do not use the concepts, but there are examples. In Armstrong's 1971 collection of quotations, Daykauray, a Winnebago chief, replies to Kinzie's plan to educate-acculturate a group of the Winnebago children. He states that the Great Spirit made the white man and the Indian. H e did not make them alike. H e gave the white man a heart to love peace, and the arts of the quiet life. H e taught h i m to live i n towns, to build houses, to make books, to learn all the things that would make h i m happy and prosperous i n the way of life appointed h i m . T o the red man the Great Spirit gave a different character. H e gave h i m love of the woods, of a free life of hunting and fishing, of making war w i t h his enemies . . . The white man does not l ike to live like the Indian - it is not his nature. Neither does the Indian love to live like the white man - the Great Spirit did not make h i m so. We do not wish to do anything contrary to the w i l l of the Great Spirit. If he had made us w i t h white skins and characters l ike the white man, then we w o u l d send our children to this school to be taught like white children. We th ink if the Great Spirit had wished us to be like the whites, he w o u l d have made us so. W e believe he would be displeased w i t h us to try and make ourselves different from what he thought good. I have nothing more to say. This is what we think. If we change our minds we w i l l let y o u k n o w (in Armstrong, 1971, p. 56, #110). 79 Don't y o u l o v e that l i n e , "If w e change our minds, w e w i l l let y o u know."? D a y k a u r a y (1829) does not use the words c u l t u r a l r e p r o d u c t i o n , but the s e n s i b i l i t y is f i r m l y there, i m b u e d a l s o w i t h the u n d e r s t a n d i n g of a c c u l t u r a t i o n , c u l t u r a l g e n o c i d e . These m oments of (re)disc o v e r y a n i m a t e me to q u e s t i o n & q u e s t i o n w h y I am to c i t e M i k e A p p l e or Pierre B o u r d i e u . W i t h regard to B o u r d i e u , D a y k a u r a y speaks al s o of h o n o u r i n g the 'cultural c a p i t a l ' g i v e n by the Creator [Interviewee's emphasis.] I d o get a n n o y e d that A p p l e - and others - d o not qu o t e these 'voices' as au t h o r i t i e s nor a c k n o w l e d g e the his/her/ourstory beneath his feet as he te l l s his story of c u r r i c u l a as i d e o l o g y . There's so m u c h h a p p e n i n g i n t e l l e c t u a l l y . O f course, the j u x t a p o s i t i o n of t e a c h i n g a n d these ideas e v e n t u a l l y get turned o nto myself. That is, h o w I am b e i n g c u l t u r a l l y (re)produced, m a r g i n a l i s e d or e x c l u d e d f r o m p a r t i c u l a r m o b i l i t y in this v a s t l y i n t e r c o n n e c t e d two-legged w e b of p o w e r and k n o w l e d g e . H o w e v e r , for me I don't w o r r y about p o w e r as m u c h as I d o about autonomy. I mean I see a c o n n e c t i o n about h o w abuse of one's a u t o n o m y - p o w e r - can d i s a b l e the a u t o n o m y of another b e i n g and that disturbs me. But, I a l s o don't see any d i s c u s s i o n a bout reverence. Interviewer: Ah, and the b a c k g r o u n d r e a d i n g for t e a c h i n g helps to see y o u r s e l f l o c a t e d in this t e x t u a l , ah, battle z o n e ? Interviewee: Yes, the l e c t u r i n g in E D U C 4 4 1 and E D U C 4 4 2 r e a l l y does assist me to sh a r p l y a r t i c u l a t e , b e g i n to c o n t e x t u a l i s e , myself as p o s i t i o n e d and/or l o c a t e d w i t h i n , h i s / h e r s t o r i c a l l y a n d c o n t e m p o r a n e o u s l y , a p a r a d o x i c a l l y - l o a d e d , h i g h l y c o n t r a d i c t o r y , i n s t i t u t i o n a l i s e d system of e d u c a t i o n - w h i c h is both (in)(ex)clusionary, (en)(ac)culturating a n d (em)(disem)powering. So, it's l i k e , " H e l l o , the lights go on s i m u l t a n e o u s l y f u l l f o r c e on a 20 0 foot h i g h C h r i s t m a s tree.' M y i n t u i t i o n s get some e n u n c i a t i o n a l t h o u g h I be g i n to suspect my use of Brit./U.S./.French t h e o r i s i n g to try to explain to myself, ah, for myself, [Interviewee's emphasis] 80 s o m e of this business of r e p r o d u c t i o n . I be g i n to l o o k for the P F N A theorists. I f i n d m y s e l f b o r e d w i t h c o u r s e r e a d i n g lists, b ecause the same s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c r e d u n d a n c y of auth(or)(itie)s is omni p r e s e n t . I start l o o k i n g for courses that this program doesn't offer. I r o n i c a l l y , the o n l y c o u r s e o p p o r t u n i t i e s I have are ones I teach. The First N a t i o n s graduate students are m e e t i n g at a t i m e w h i c h c o n f l i c t s w i t h my d o c t o r a l seminar. Squeak-Squawk: W h o s e V o i c e D o I Use? A n d , I a g o n i z e , w h i l e t e a c h i n g , about the 'power' I have to use " e d u c a t i o n a l k n o w l e d g e [as] a major regulator of the structure of e x p e r i e n c e " (Young, 1971, p. 47) because this is e x a c t l y what's been g o i n g on w i t h P F N A s i n c e the c e l e b r a t e d h e r o i s m of the Jesuits, w h e r e the "[f]he ti r e l e s s z e a l , s e l f - s a c r i f i c e and h e r o i s m of the French [ C a t h o l i c Jesuit] m i s s i o n a r i e s a m o n g the Indians of C a n a d a " is "too i m p r e s s i v e to be forgotten" ( P h i l l i p s , 1957, p. 4). I can, as Ba s i l B e r n s t e i n (1971) observes, m a n i p u l a t e or (re)produce the p r i n c i p l e s of an " e d u c a t i o n a l k n o w l e d g e c o d e " to "shape c u r r i c u l u m , pedagogy and e v a l u a t i o n " (p. 47). I b e c o m e a c u t e l y a ware that H o w a s o c i e t y selects, c l a s s i f i e s , d istributes, transmits a n d evaluates the e d u c a t i o n a l k n o w l e d g e it c o n s i d e r s to be p u b l i c , reflects both the d i s t r i b u t i o n of p o w e r and the p r i n c i p l e s of s o c i a l c o n t r o l (Bernstein, 1971, p. 47). Now-here I am rueful that I am u s i n g a Bri t i s h male s o c i o l o g i s t , l i n g u i s t , e d u c a t o r to e x p l a i n my se l f - c o m p r e h e n s i o n , but that's what I am b e i n g fed. These author(itie)s c o u n t B I G U P HERE. That's w h y I w a n t e d to move on w i t h the diss e r t a t i o n as an a n a l y s i s of h o w s c h o o l i n g for P F N A is b e i n g c o n s t r u c t e d as a s p e c i a l i z e d f i e l d or discourse. The e m e r g e n c e of s p e c i a l i z e d f i e l d s p r o v i d e apertures for textual d e c o n s t r u c t i o n w h e r e i n the c o n t i n u i t y of a c o n s t r u c t e d d i s c o u r s e is 81 o p p o r t u n i t y not m e r e l y for outright r e j e c t i o n , but for d i s j u n c t u r e to d i s t u r b the t r a n q u i l l i t y w i t h w h i c h they are a c c e p t e d (see Foucault, 1972, pp. 3-11). I am d i s t u r b e d , so I a c c e p t Foucault's i n v i t a t i o n to disturb. T h ere is often in this (re)constituted 'alien(ating)' history of s c h o o l i n g for P F N A an e m ergent p e r i o d i z a t i o n w h i c h , for me, camouflages, p a r t i c u l a r l y , the c r i m e s c o m m i t t e d against h umanity. The d i s c u r s i v e signs and styles used to n a r r a t i v e l y (des)(in)scribe s o m e of the events a n d c o n d i t i o n s of this s c h o o l i n g - my s c h o o l i n g - afford leverage to assess w h at is ( u n ) k n o w n a n d h o w the (un)known is t o l d . I've learned to b e c o m e a v e r y s k i l l e d reader here, as d e s c r i b e d b y F o u c a u l t (1972; O r i g . 1969) as " 'hearing' of an 'alread' s a i d ' that is at the same t i m e a 'not s a i d ' " (p. 25). A n d , I am aware of P F N A theorists' and p h i l o s o p h e r s w h o p r o v o k e the d i s j u n c t u r e of the a l r e a d y said and not said. But in m a k i n g this a n a l y s i s , I feel that I must c i t e Foucault. For me this feels e x t r e m e l y u n c o m f o r t a b l e , unsettling, as, ah, no one seems to m o n i t o r that I can(not) c i t e an a u t h o r i t y f r o m a P F N A perspective. I speculate, perhaps u n f a i r l y , that to q u o t e a P F N A w o u l d be met w i t h a blatant, "Huh? D o y o u k n o w of Foucault? D e r r i d a ? G r a m s c i ? " I mean, C a r d i n a l (1969) remarks on this said/notsaid business as related to the treaties s i g n e d b e t w e e n the n a t i o n of C a n a d a and pre-existent nations. H e states, that T hese pl e d g e s are t y p i c a l , if not a l l - i n c l u s i v e , of the p r o m i s e s that w e r e made to the Indians by the government, a l t h o u g h the c a u t i o n a r y phrase, 'Her M a j e s t y reserves the right to deal w i t h . . . ," a p p e a r i n g c o m m o n l y t h r o u g h o u t the treaty, w o u l d have al e r t e d a more s o p h i s t i c a t e d p e o p l e to p o s s i b l e l o o p h o l e s a n d p i t f a l l s . T h e r e are many other aspects of the w r i t t e n treaties that are q u e s t i o n a b l e . G e n e r a l l y , the treaties are o u t s t a n d i n g for what they d o not say rather than w hat they d o say. [His italics] ( C a r d i n a l , 1969, p. 34). 82 Car d i n a l ' s e x a m p l e of said/not said is concrete. D o I take my d i r e c t i o n f r o m H a r o l d a n d ig n o r e Foucault? U P HERE I t h i n k my teachers w o u l d des i r e I speak k n o w l e d g e a b l y of Foucault. I am not d e n i g r a t i n g Foucault. W h o s e School(ing)? W h o s e Language Said/Not /Said? Interviewer: So fro m this sense of d e e p d i s t u r b a n c e y o u d e c i d e to disturb. Y o u b e g i n to re-examine these aims of e d u c a t i o n for P F N A , w h i c h range f r o m r e l i g i o u s - t o subject- to v o c a t i o n a l - to genocide-centered. Interviewee: For me, these labels, these d e s i g n a t i o n s of s c h o o l b u i l d i n g s a n d f a c i l i t i e s c l a s h a n d c o l l i d e w i t h i d e a l i s e d h o r i z o n s of e d u c a t i o n as b e i n g more than i n d o c t r i n a t i o n (see, for e x a m p l e , Peters & Hirst, 1970, pp. 25-28, or, 84-87). Yet, i n d o c t r i n a t i o n is p r e c i s e l y o n e of the ai m s of s c h o o l i n g for PFNA. For example, Sarah Carter (1991) e x a m i n e s an i n d o c t r i n a t i o n c a m p for p r a i r i e s - l o c a t e d P F N A by i n t r o d u c i n g her a r t i c l e w i t h p ost-Confederation (1867) g o v e r n m e n t a l a c t i o n to c o n s o l i d a t e a "variety of precedent, p o l i c i e s , a n d attitudes" i n t o a f o r e i g n l e g i s l a t e d A c t , The Indian Act (1876) (p. 57). This is l e g i s l a t i o n to manage those determined to be designated as Others [Interviewee's very e x p l i c i t emphasis]. This is a legal p o l i c y . T h i s is a language code. Th i s is not a joke. Further, Carter (1991) e m p h a s i z e s that what is s i g n i f i c a n t about The Act is the i n h e r e n t p o w e r of the text to de(clare)(fine) w h o is e l i g i b l e , e n t i t l e d , for registered " I n d i a n " status a n d w h o is not e l i g i b l e f o r this q u a l i f i c a t i o n (Ibid., p. 157). Said/Not Said. T h i s d e t e r m i n a t i o n d e c i d e s w h o is to be (incarcera)(educa)(accultura)ted at The F i l e H i l l s C o l o n y , p r o c l a i m e d as a m o d e l " a g r i c u l t u r a l c o l o n y " in 1901 (Ibid., p. 157). The pastoral phrase - a g r i c u l t u r a l c o l o n y - gives the game of t h e C a n a d i a n s ' away, because they b l o o d y w e l l script the pl o t of the c o l o n i a l i s t s c e n a r i o as not to tea c h a f e w n o m a d i c "Indians" h o w to p l o u g h , but h o w to c o m p l e t e l y a n d 83 l e g a l l y e n f r a n c h i s e a u t h o c t h o n o u s c i t i z e n s f r o m b e i n g themselves. B e i n g " I n d i a n " seems to be just not enough; not a su f f i c i e n t c o n d i t i o n for b e i n g a de s i g n a t e d C a n a d i a n . A n d , I'm bugged that most often the v o i c e s s p e a k i n g about these events and c o n d i t i o n s are not P F N A . F o u c a u l t asks in p r i n t in 1969, "First questions: w h o is speaking?" (1972, p. 50). W h o is e n t i t l e d a n d q u a l i f i e d to speak for others? "Who der i v e s from it his o w n sp e c i a l q u a l i t y , his prestige, and f r o m w h o m , in return, does he re c e i v e if not some assurance, at least the p r e s u m p t i o n that w h at he says is true?" (Foucault, 1972, p. 50). Interviewer: So, w i t h the g aze r e t u r n i n g to y o u r s e l f in the best sense of Socrates' e n c o u r a g e m e n t 'To K n o w Thyself,' y o u are c o n f r o n t e d w i t h t e a c h i n g about a 'Canadian' his/herstory to not, ever, never fathom yourself? This feels a l i e n a t i n g ? A c c u l t u r a t i n g ? Interviewee: A n d , s i l e n c i n g . I get more p u b l i c l y "Indian" up here; and I'm angry again. A n g r y l i k e I was at 18 w h e n I v o w e d to run a w a y and j o i n the A m e r i c a n Indian M o v e m e n t . A n g r y l i k e I've been f r o m t i m e to time, w i s h i n g THEY'D a l l go home! Thi s anger is e x p r e s s e d s t r o n g l y in j o u r n a l entries f r o m t i m e to time. A s I gain an a p p r e c i a t i o n of s u r v i v a n c e , I am unsettled, angry and, regretfully, mean-spirited. This is from a 1992 j o u r n a l entry. Survive. Be strong. Survive. Be strong. That's all there is. Survive some more. Be strong some more. If it is this much trouble to keep this flame alive [Reference to Archibald, 1993], I don't see the point. . . I am sickened by this whole business of living like a political prisoner in this land. If the White people had not been allowed to live, I would have land, not be forced to live in this stupid urbanized mentality where compassion is spoken and brutality practiced. My people raped by church members; my people stolen from; my people lied to and stalled and stonewalled by people who dare to write about justice; my people shamed for being who they are; my people whipped by humanists for speaking their own language; and the behaviour continues . . . I am just another member in the sequence. Is there a reason for White People? ( C a l l i o u , Journal entry, N o v e m b e r 21, 1992). A s 'data' the a b o v e entry doesn't need m u c h interpretation. M u c h of the b a c k g r o u n d preparation for l e c t u r i n g that first t erm (FALL'92) is q u i t e t o x i c a nd I've been s i c k often, t w i c e q u i t e s e r i o u s l y , s i n c e I a r r i v e d here i n that s n o w s t o r m i n 1991. I get n o i s i e r in c l a s s r o o m s here, but I t o o often f i n d myself h a v i n g to be the "Indian." I f e e l l i k e no o n e seems to care r e a l l y that I am a w o m a n or c o m m u n i t y e d u c a t i o n th e o r i s t or a f l e d g l i n g p h i l o s o p h e r of e d u c a t i o n . A n d , that's strenuous, strenuous to be this c o m b i n a t i o n learner a n d tea c h e r a n d p u b l i c r e l a t i o n s person, w i t h a forefront sense of a c t i v e c o m p a s s i o n . I c a n n o t stay s i l e n t however. / cannot make silent adjustments. I am losing the ability to make silent adjustments. Rattle-RA Ttle-RA Ttle-RA Ttle. I understand they're not going home. B i c u l t u r a l E m o t i o n a l R o l l e r C o a s t e r i n g Interviewer: So, e m o t i o n a l l y you're c o n f l i c t e d o n c e y o u r e c o g n i s e you're i n s i d e s o m e giant paradox? 85 Interviewee: [Interrupting.] Yes, n o w wouldn't that be a great name for an i n t e l l e c t u a l mid-way ride, The G i a n t Paradox. [Laughter. Sounds o f a match s t r i k i n g a small black box.] Interviewer: The e x p l o r a t i o n s into c u l t u r a l (re)production and the h i s t o r i c a l s i t u a t i o n s of (ac)(en)culturation et cetera s i m u l t a n e o u s l y p r ovoke, or, at least, h e l p to e x p l a i n the sense of a l m o s t d i a s p o r i c dis(juncture)(location) y o u are f e e l i n g . In effect, y o u have t w o p a r a l l e l degrees underway. There is the M.A. in c o m m u n i t y e d u c a t i o n to e x p l o r e y o u r i n t r i g u e w i t h c o m m u n i t y - b a s e d or c o m m u n i t y - i m m e r s e d t e a c h i n g and l e a r n i n g . There's an o t h e r u n o f f i c i a l M.A. in N a t i v e " l n d i a n " A b o r i g i n a l F I R S T N a t i o n s studies, as related p a r t i c u l a r l y to s c h o o l i n g . A l l of this c o n v e x i t y focuses on yo u r b e c o m i n g more o v e r t l y "Indian" - and f r o m the sounds of y o u r (re)telling, angry. Interviewee: A n d , the anger is t e m p e r e d w i t h a l i f e l o n g sense of p a c i f i s m ; an i n t u i t i o n to be c o m p a s s i o n a t e l y l o v i n g . I mean more than a li t t l e , w e l l - b e h a v e d C a t h o l i c g i r l . I fee l d e e p l y the n e e d not to get s w a l l o w e d up, c o n s u m e d by anger. L i v i n g in h u r t f u l , m ean-spirited anger is h a r m f u l to sp i r i t u s at micro- and macro-levels. Interviewer: So y o u wear the treaty, ribbon-dress - ? [Pause on tape. Sounds of orange shag rug absorbing the silence.] Interviewee: C o n s c i o u s l y . R e m e m b e r I'm w i d e a w a k e now. [E x p l o s i o n of laughter as interviewee mimes doing a long-distance haul across the prairies.] O f course, not so w i d e a w a k e that I want to p u l l a T h e l m a & L o u i s e into the G r a n d C a n y o n . [ M o r e laughter.] B e c a u s e by graduation (May, 1993), I have r e d i s c o v e r e d a teenage c o n s c i o u s n e s s that I am not 'Canadian' a l t h o u g h there's a l l sorts of m e chanisms to make a P F N A b e l i e v e they are 86 'Canadian' - l i k e S.I.N.s and passports, 'Canadian' c i t i z e n s h i p a n d v o t i n g rights. For e x a m p l e , M i t c h e l l (in R i c h a r d s o n , 1990), observes that the i n s i s t e n c e that w e (PFNA-Mohawk) s h o u l d vote in Canada's e l e c t i o n s , a n d the f o r m a l refusal to ratify our supranational border-crossing rights[ at the b o r d e r b e t w e e n the U n i t e d States a n d Canada], are but part of a c o n t i n u i n g effort to p r o v e to our p e o p l e - and, i n d e e d , a b o r i g i n a l p e o p l e e v e r y w h e r e i n the c o u n t r y that w e are Cana d i a n s , subject to C a n a d i a n laws (p. 115). M i t c h e l l c o n t i n u e s that in 1869, The N e w c o m e r s d e c i d e d that M o h a w k s (c)(sh)ould not be in 'l a w f u l ' p o s s e s s i o n of lands w i t h o u t express p e r m i s s i o n of the C a n a d i a n s ' g o v e r n m e n t (p. 115). The M o h a w k at A k w e s a s n e c o n t i n u e to resist f o r e i g n , n a t i o n a l g o v e r n m e n t i n t r u s i o n , a s s e r t i n g that the c o m m u n i t y has e x i s t e d s i n c e "time i m m e m o r i a l , w i t h its o w n laws a nd government," w i t h o u t i n t e n t i o n of b e c o m i n g l i k e other C a n a d i a n s (Ibid., p. 107). U n l i k e THEM, I can't go hom e again because, apparently, I've been here s i n c e t i m e i m m e m o r i a l . Interviewer: So y o u stay angry? Interviewee: O h , yes, c e r t a i n l y . [Makes a bear-like g r o w l somewhere i n the throat area. F r o w n s w h i l e watching interviewer p r i n t a tidy note.] W a t c h it now. I am teasing. I ca n n o t l i v e in this resurrected anger. I r e c o g n i s e that at heart, the p s y c h o s p i r i t u a l energy I feed into the w e b of r e l a t i o n s h i p s is the p s y c h o s p i r i t u a l energy w h i c h w i l l f e e d me, w i l l f eed into my th i n k i n g - f e e l i n g . I am c o n t e m p l a t i n g the c o n s t r u c t of c o m p a s s i o n a t e m i n d m u c h those - and these - days. A m i n d f i l l e d c o m p a s s i o n , that is, w i t h heart a n d m i n d c o n n e c t e d , is for me an ideal of r a t i o n a l i t y I w i s h to pursue. I am not eager to b e c o m e an a n e m o t i o n a l c o g n i t i o n e r . So as I'm sit t i n g a n d w a t c h i n g the w o r d s go 'round'n'round, I am w o n d e r i n g w h o I am. I am se e i n g the yes and no of this d i c h o t o m y of C a n a d i a n s a n d Indians. I c o n t i n u o u s l y c o n c l u d e that this his/herstory I am r e a d i n g is a r t i f i c i a l l y , 8 7 f o o l i s h l y , n e e d l e s s l y d i c h o t o m i z e d ; and that, at best, the w a y his/herstory is t o l d is half-truth -w i t h t h e i r half-truth there and our half-truth here. This segments events and c o n d i t i o n s i n t o separate, at times, p a r a l l e l stories. For e x ample, in Brown's (1987), "Forward" to T h e Illustrated H i s t o r y of C anada, this his/herstorical gloss shines. H e states that this is a h i s t o r y of h o w C a n a d i a n s have l i v e d a nd w o r k e d . . . [and] r e a l i z e d t h e i r a m b i t i o n s in t h e i r several c o m m u n i t i e s , across generations of huge c o l o n i a l e m p i r e s a n d more re c e n t l y as c i t i z e n s in the i n t e r n a t i o n a l w o r l d (Brown, 1987, p. v). T h e text's c h r o n o l o g i c a l s e q u e n c e plays out as: contact, c o l o n i z a t i o n and c o n f l i c t (1600-1760), settlement (1760-1840), i n d e p e n d e n c e and nation b u i l d i n g (1840-1900), i n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n (1900-1945), and post-war c o n s t r u c t i o n (1945-1987). N o n e of these c h a p t e r tit l e s w o u l d prepare an y reader for what G e o r g e Erasmus has to say. G e o r g e Erasmus, Former G r a n d C h i e f of the A s s e m b l y of First N a t i o n s , d e l i v e r s this r e m i n d e r at a self-government s y m p o s i u m in 1990, in T o r o n t o , O n t a r i o . H e is one of many v o i c e s v i g i l a n t l y asserting that l e g i t i m a t e , a l t e r n a t i v e v e r s i o n s of his/herstory (ex)(per)sist. H e states that for i n d i g e n o u s p e o p l e s of the A m e r i c a s and in p a r t i c u l a r N o r t h A m e r i c a , o u r answers lay in the r e l a t i o n s h i p s that w e created w i t h the European p e o p l e s that c a m e here. W e [FNA] rel y on our v e r s i o n of what happened, w h i c h is s t i l l kept a l i v e in e v e r y i n d i g e n o u s c o m m u n i t y across C a n a d a and N o r t h A m e r i c a . O u r v e r s i o n of w h at h a p p e n e d is that w e had an agreement that w e w o u l d a l l o w the Europeans to c o m e to this part of the w o r l d . T h e y w o u l d set up in s t i t u t i o n s . T h e y w o u l d l i v e a mongst us. T h e y w o u l d not have to l i v e under our i n s t i t u t i o n s (Erasmus in C a s s i d y , 1991, p. 22). H e c h a l l e n g e s the l e g i t i m a c y of The N e w c o m e r s ' self-assertion, ah, s e l f - l e g i t i m a t i o n that c o n q u e s t o c c u r r e d and that T h e P e o p le, in this case The Dene, a c q u i e s c e d to the r u l e of a "few m i s s i o n a r i e s " or a "few bureaucrats" (Ibid., p. 23). 88 Interviewer: By The N e w c o m e r s , y o u mean the i m m i g r a n t c o l o n i s t s w h o settle as o u t s i d e r s in the A m e r i c a s ? Interviewee: Yes. Y o u s h o u l d c h e c k that w o r d - n e w c o m e r s - reference in the O x f o r d Thesaurus, A m e r i c a n E d i t i o n , (Urdang, Ed., 1992) sometime. Interviewer: O h ? Interviewee: Besides the s y n o n y m s p r o v i d e d , there is this e x p l a n a t o r y sentence. I won't qu o t e w i t h the i t a l i c s . "The n e w c o m e r s q u i c k l y e s t a b l i s h e d t h e m s e l v e s and b e c a m e se l f - s u f f i c i e n t " (Urdang, 1992, p. 307). O n c e I w a k e up I b e g i n to feel-see these l i t t l e bits of e v i d e n c e a l l o v e r s u b s t a n t i a t i n g this rather s k e w e d p i c t u r e of the events of c o n t a c t a n d after. M i t c h e l l (1990, q u o t e d earlier) or Erasmus (1991, q u o t e d above) may be p e r c e i v e d as c r a z y , u n a b l e to a c c e p t that a co n q u e s t o c c u r r e d ; H o w e v e r , th e i r 'voices' contest the b e l i e f system p o r t r a y e d in Urdang's thesaurus. H o w e v e r , the l o c a t i o n a l p e r s p e c t i v e erects a sense of U S [ P F N A ] - T H E M [ E u r o C a n a d i a n immigrants] w h i c h b e c o m e s for me a p u z z l e to c o l l a p s e . H o w d o s o m e c o l o n i a l C a n a d i a n s and P F N A "Indians" c o m e to b e l i e v e in the separation? T h e text I am r e a d i n g for lecture preparation is strewn w i t h p u b l i s h e d statements about the "Indians." W i l l i a m G r a h a m , w h o j o i n e d the D e partment of Indian Affairs in 1885 as c l e r k , is s o o n an Indian A g e n t by 1887. This is a p o w e r f u l p o s i t i o n and he earns a repu t a t i o n as s o m e o n e w h o shared the b e l i e f of many of his c o n t e m p o r a r i e s that the g o v e r n m e n t k n e w what was best for the Indians. If the Indians t h e m s e l v e s h a p p e n e d to disagree, it was regrettable, but hard grounds in itself for c o m p r o m i s e . As mere wards of the state, the native p e o p l e c o u l d not r e a s o n a b l y expect t h e i r o p i n i o n s to be c o n s i d e r e d (in T i t l e y , 1983, p. 40). Fortunately, T i t l e y (1983) states those a c t i n g on behalf of the "Indians" are s h a r i n g b e l i e f s a nd not s c i e n t i f i c k n o w l e d g e . [Laughter. Pause. M o r e laughter.] 89 Interviewer: G r a h a m is r e s p o n s i b l e for the F i l e H i l l s Farm C o l o n y (see Brass, 1953; Carter, 1991)? O t h e r i s a t i o n Interviewee: Yes, but in r e a d i n g about F i l e H i l l s , this illustrates to me how, o n the basis of 'Otherisation', the C a n a d i a n government s a n c t i o n e d a project to " p r o d u c e a gro u p of Indians w h o had i n t e r n a l i z e d the whiteman's r e l i g i o n and c u l t u r e and w h o were se l f - s u f f i c i e n t farmers" (Titley, 1983, p. 27). D i c h o t o m y is more separation; and often two-legged d i c h o t o m i e s . A n o t h e r e x a m p l e is the d e s i g n a t i o n (homo)(hetero)sexual) w h i c h p o s i t i o n s 'Other' o n the basis of i d e n t i f y i n g s o m e s e e m i n g l y s i g n i f i c a n t feature and p o s i ( t i o n ) t i n g 'One' as not the 'Other'. T h i s c o u l d be no b i g deal. H owever, in the case of s e x u a l i t y d e s i g n a t i o n , q u e s t i o n s a bout rights to e n t i t l e m e n t s (pensions, spousal status, etc.) are affected by the language c o d e of that d e s i g n a t i o n . For me, O t h e r i s a t i o n often seems to i n v o k e forms of v i o l e n c e , d e s p i t e w h at S e c t i o n 15(1) of the 1982 C a n a d i a n Charter of Rights and Freedoms states, w h e r e i n Every i n d i v i d u a l is equal before and under the l a w and has the right to the e q u a l p r o t e c t i o n and equal benefit of the l a w w i t h o u t d i s c r i m i n a t i o n , and, in p a r t i c u l a r , w i t h o u t d i s c r i m i n a t i o n based on race, n a t i o n a l or e t h n i c o r i g i n , c o l o u r , r e l i g i o n , sex, age or mental or p h y s i c a l a b i l i t y (Canada, 1982, Sect. 15.). Y o u don't have to be a human rights lawyer/ess to a r c h i v e the d a i l y v i o l a t i o n s of this ideal [Interviewee's emphasis] that o c c u r d a i l y in Canada, or the i d e a l s of the C a n a d i a n B i l l of H u m a n Rights, p r o c l a i m e d by John D i e f e n b a k e r in 1960. That C a n a d i a n B i l l of H u m a n Rights g uaranteed the rights of i n d i v i d u a l s to l i f e , l iberty, personal s e c u r i t y and e n j o y m e n t [not posession] of property. [Laughter.] That pr o p e r t y e n j o y m e n t business c a n be quite a knee-slapper for "Indians." [ M o r e laughter.] T h i s C h a r t e r is an a d d i t i o n to the repatriated C a n a d i a n c o n s t i t u t i o n (seeThe C o n s t i t u t i o n A c t , 1867-1982 ), w h i c h separates C a n a d i a n s and A b o r i g i n a l " l n d i a n s " N a t i v e s ; in fact, g u a r a n t e e i n g N a t i v e s F i r s t P e o p l e s " l n d i a n s " an "inherent right to self-government" in S e c t i o n 35(1). T h e s e p a r a t i o n c o n t i n u e s use of a C o w b o y s & l n d i a n s trope, w i t h C o w b o y s and Indians c o n s i d e r e d separate species. W h e n w i l l w e adjust to a (re)understanding that w e are a l l two-leggeds? W h a t w i l l o ur p h i l o s o p h i s i n g sounds l i k e then? H o w to understand that c r e a t i o n - f i c t i o n a l i s a t i o n - of Others on a page does not make this the reality? A n d , the separation is both (un)necessary a n d m a d d e n i n g a n d oh-so, pervasive. Interviewer: A h , but s o m e t imes necessary? Interviewee: Yes, as related to reparation. H o w e v e r , w e can make reparations a d v e r s a r i a l l y or in a c o m p a s s i o n a t e l y c o m m u n i t y - l i k e w a y as a l l two-leggeds w h o w i s h to repair the harmful v i o l e n c e d o n e to a species. H a l f story Interviewee: A n y w a y , in my o w n f i e l d - ah, I guess, that w o u l d be e d u c a t i o n - I have been i n t e r r o g a t i n g P h i l l i p s ' (1957), The D e v e l o p m e n t of Ed u c a t i o n in Canada. For e x a m p l e , P h i l l i p s c e l e b r a t e s the h e r o i s m of the Jesuits. The ins c r i b e r s of the Oxford English Dictionary, s u p p l y this d e f i n i t i o n of heroism: " h e r o i c c o n d u c t " (p. 666). H e r o is d e f i n e d as "1.a. a man note d or a d m i r e d for n o b i l i t y , courage, o u t s t a n d i n g a c h i e v e m e n t , etc." (Ibid., p. 666). I suspect the d i c t i o n a r y ' s "etc." c o v e r s a w i d e l y ranging territory of e t h i c a l a n d necessary E u r o C a n a d i a n i n s t r u c t i o n a l b e h a v i o u r s towards "Indians." The C a t h o l i c m i s s i o n a r y invaders, u n i n v i t e d by the Iroquois, e n c o u n t e r "great d i f f i c u l t i e s in t e a c h i n g the Indians," i n c l u d i n g the n o m a d i c w a n d e r i n g 91 at w i l l , resistant "shamen," "strange languages to master," and " a n i m i s t i c r e l i g i o n " ( P h i l l i p s , 1957, p. 5). These are presented as s y m p a t h e t i c reasons to e x p l a i n the h e r o i c " i n s t r u c t i o n of the Indians [which] must have been a l a b o r i o u s and d i s c o u r a g i n g task" to "convert Indian c h i l d r e n " i n o r d e r to "absorb t h e m into the French c u l t u r e " (Ibid., pp. 5,6). H e c o n t i n u e s that the e d u c a t i o n of " white c h i l d r e n " (p. 7) begins after this story of 'heroism'. P h i l l i p s ' (1957) u n q u e s t i o n i n g a c c e p t a n c e of this two-legged d i c h o t o m y and the p e r s p e c t i v e of his sources l e g i t i m a t e s f a i r l y c o m p l i c a t e d h uman rights c r imes, w h i c h he fa i l s to mention. The (r e ) t e l l i n g d e f l e c t s q u e s t i o n s and reifie s this d i s t i n c t i o n b etween "Indians" and "Whites." 'Discouraging!?!' For w h o m ? The v o i c e s of the p u p i l s are absent; the v o i c e s of the c o m m u n i t y , a l s o absent. S o m e t i m e s I w r i t e these i m a g i n a r y passages to i l l u s t r a t e the forgotten part, or the u n k n o w n part, of C a n a d i a n his/herstory. For e x a m p l e , Hard fun-work, but we managed t o e l u d e our t e a c h e r - p r i e s t - m a n today; had t o s t e a l t h a lmost t e n m i l e s t h r o u g h the t h i c k l y 'animate' f o r e s t t o one o f t h e t o b a c c o f i e l d s , l a i n f a l l o w i n a c o m p l i c a t e d system of c r o p r o t a t i o n p r a c t i c e i n d i c a t i v e o f s o p h i s t i c a t e d , s u s t a i n a b l e a g r i c u l t u r a l development. However, a day of calming-freedom. Not l i k e y e s t e r d a y , when F a t h e r B-- made us s p e a k - r e p e a t nonsense words f o r no r e a s o n ( s ) and s u g g e s t e d we might want t o d r e s s as t h e y do, speak as t h e y do, eat as t h e y do and k n e e l as t h e y do when t h e y t a l k - p l e a d w i t h t h e i r 'God'. W e l l , I guess we c o u l d make a few p r i e - d i e u s out o f some of t h o s e b i r c h t r e e s c u r i n g . We thought we were p r e t t y r e a s o n a b l e i n t r e a t i n g h i s e n t r e a t i e s as a p r e t t y funny j o k e (Ha-Ha); however, F a t h e r B -- d i d n ' t seem t o be 92 l a u g h i n g t o o much. They c e r t a i n l y a r e keen t o t e a c h . I wonder what t h e i r t r o p h o l o g i c a l images a r e " w i t h i n [ t h e i r ] e x p e r i e n c e s , embodied i n . [them] as p e r s o n s and e x p r e s s e d and e n a c t e d i n [ t h e i r ] p r a c t i c e s and a c t i o n s ( C o n n e l l y & C l a n d i n i n , 1988, p. 60)? However, when we ask them t o t e a c h us a n y t h i n g s e n s i b l e , l i k e answers t o t h e s e q u e s t i o n s : 'How l o n g a re you p l a n n i n g t o s t a y i n Hochelega?'; o r , ' J u s t p a s s i n g t h r o u g h ? ' ; t h e y don't seem t o have t o o many e r u d i t e answers. I must r u n . I hear p r a y e r beads r a t t l i n g , so I ' l l r e b u r y t h i s j o u r n a l ( C a l l i o u f o r e m o t h e r j o u r n a l entry, 1607 (?), n.p.). Th i s passage does not exist; but oh h o w I l o n g to read such because they w o u l d t e a c h me about counter-hegemony, resistance a n d survivance - v e r y m u c h ingredients of 'Canadian' his/herstory. T h e his/herstory t o l d in C a n a d a is this h is/herlndianstory a n d this h is/herEuroCanadianstory. A n d , this separation c o n t i n u e s here at this u n i v e r s i t y , l o c a t e d o n the t r a d i t i o n a l t e r r i t o r y of the M u s q u e a m , w i t h 'mainstream' e d u c a t i o n courses a n d then t w o undergraduate a n d one graduate courses d i r e c t l y related to this h i s / h e r " l n d i a n " s t o r y of t h e i r s c h o o l i n g . The events - lessons - of this h is/herlndianstory are 'de-streamed', therefore, l a w f u l o n l y so far, m a r g i n a l i s e d in s p e c i a l A b o r i g i n a l N a t i v e " l n d i a n " s t u d i e s courses and/or departments. Thi s a r t i f i c i a l d i c h o t o m o u s treatment of his/her"lndian"story HERE and his/ h e r E u r o C a n a d i a n s t o r y T H E R E eludes the c o n f r o n t a t i o n w i t h unpleasant r e c o g n i t i o n of the g l o b a l patient c a l l e d humanity. W e inherit an i n c r e d i b l e history of v i o l e n c e as teachers. N o one can be 'inside' or 'outside' a w e b of relations so t i g h t l y w o v e n ; i n t e r c o n n e c t e d . Interviewer: So y o u see this his/herstory as fi r s t l y , o n l y half of his, er, herstory a n d a l s o a his/he r s t o r i c a l narrative as one of inte r c o n n e c t e d n e s s w h i c h w e have not learnt h o w to w r i t e yet? 93 O n e Species-ism, C o l l e c t i v e Interdependence Interviewee: W e are i n t i m a t e l y interrelated as a species. S o m e o n e cuts d o w n trees a n d creates e n e r g y for me to use my computer. I am i n h a l i n g s o m e o n e else's e x h a l a t i o n . Hhhmmm... I guess, it's here that I p u l l out al l my quotes to buttress my b e l i e f a bout i n t e r c o n n e c t e d n e s s . Let's see w h o w i l l I use? I guess the q u o t a t i o n I return to is B l a c k Elk Jr. in C h u r c h i l l ' s (1982) text, M a r x i s m a nd Lakota T r a d i t i o n ; [Interviewee grabs a book f r o m one the shelves. Access is easy. The books are arranged alphabetically. Interviewee reads. The quotation seems rea d i l y available as pages f r o m the book are loose and f a l l i n g out. A n in d i c a t i o n o f how often she has been to this place inside this book?] The Lakota . . . c l o s e , open, and often punctuate their prayers w i t h the w o r d M e t a k u y e a y a s i , a ge n e r a l l y a c c e p t e d t r a n s l a t i o n of w h i c h is 'all relations.' A n d a n y o n e t h i n k i n g 'all r e l ations' is referring s i m p l y to fathers, mothers, c o u s i n s a n d brothers, is less than ignorant of the Lakota. These human rel a t i o n s are, of course, i n c l u d e d . But, in the same sense, so are the four legged a n i m a l s , the a n i m a l s w h i c h c r a w l a n d s w i m and f l y , the plants, the mountains, lakes, p l a i n s , rivers, the sky a n d sun, stars, moon, the four d i r e c t i o n s ... in short, e v e r y t h i n g . E v e r y t h i n g in the u n i v e r s e is related w i t h i n the t r a d i t i o n of Lakota s p i r i t u a l i t y ; e v e r y t h i n g is r e l a t i o n a l , a n d c a n o n l y be understood in that w a y (Black Elk in C h u r c h i l l , 1982 (?), p. 148). This passage is a very e l a t i o n a l passage for me; also, v e r y c o m f o r t i n g . T h i s passage is an e a r l y e n c o u n t e r at one of those times w h e n I felt s u f f o c a t i n g l y b u r i e d in text. B l a c k Elk r e m i n d s me to e s c h e w the redundant a n t h r o p o c e n t r i c p e r s p e c t i v e of my graduate studies. T h i s is a stop p i n g - p l a c e in text I d o not resist. I'm not a l w a y s as t h o r o u g h a sc h o l a r as I might be. I have not researched B l a c k Elk to a u t h e n t i c a t e his e t h n o c u l t u r a l l e g i t i m a c y . The p o w e r of the w o r d s t h o u g h is the e m p h a s i s on re l a t i o n a l i t y , the space-energy-between-among-all-beings - perhaps, s p i r i t - to be un d e r s t o o d as shared and, thus, n e e d i n g our respectful caretaking. Interviewer: W h e n I r e a l l y p o n d e r this aspect of r e l a t i o n a l i t y , the more d i f f i c u l t it is to a c c e p t — Interviewee: any two-legged d i c h o t o m i e s ? Yes, I agree. H a r d to see h o w a sp e c i e s b e c a m e to segmented. Thus, I begin to t h i n k about this c o n struct I a m d r a w n to construct. I c o i n the term - ourstory. For me, contac t is not over; attempts of c o l o n i z a t i o n are not ceased; resistance is not abated or o v e r w h e l m e d . S u r v i v a n c e endures. T h i s is a story about ourselves: the two-leggeds. The e m o t i o n a l tensions of pique&fury-sadness-grieving-compassion m o t i v a t e c o l l a p s e of the d i c h o t o m y of US-THEM. In that first t e a c h i n g term, I w r i t e in my j o u r n a l , I still stew about the threat I was feeling in that classroom yesterday. I am not certain what it was a threat 'about' or 'to' in terms of my personal safety. This was difficult. I know I need to work on myself in some unknown area so I don't feel that threat so much . Yesterday, as I talked to M -- about this I was trying to tell him that it is all well and good to discuss the theoretical side of oppression and such, but I experience daily in terms of what some people say to me or how they treat me. I feel I could strengthen my compassionate presentation of material and not let the class become an emotional morass . . . This is not to say that I become an emotionless automaton, just that I feel/sense that these emotional responses [not mar the class]. I need to work more on my compassion center -95 making the feelings of love, peace, happiness and compassion stronger. I know I can do this because it was this loving acceptance I learnt in classrooms at L -- which made me such an effective teacher. This quality of lovingness can sure get buried in the cognitive world of the university. I know I was resisting yesterday and creating feelings of separation which do not create those close links needed for teaching - especially teaching about this difficult and complex nest of issues. Well, I try again Thursday ( C a l l i o u , Journal Entry, N o v e m b e r 4, 1992, n.p.). Thus, I d e s i r e a c o m p a s s i o n a t e l y t o l d ourstory, w h i c h u n f l i n c h i n g l y informs us e q u a l l y about E u r o C a n a d i a n i m m i g r a n t r e s i d e n t s in conta c t w i t h N a t i v e A b o r i g i n a l l n d i g e n o u s " l n d i a n s . " Interviewer: So his/herstory as a k i n d of l o v e story? Interviewee: Freire (1989; O r i g . 1967) reminds that if l o v e is absent, then an a u t h e n t i c d i a l o g u e c a n n o t emerge-nurture (p. 77). As a d i c h o t o m y , U S-THEM c o u l d b e c o m e a c o n t i n u a n c e of the brutal ir r a t i o n a l v i o l e n c e of an US-THEM - this seems a f e a r f i l l i n g d i c h o t o m y . Fearful heart-minds, angry heart-minds, d o u b t f u l heart-minds just don't t h i n k r a t i o n a l l y , c a r e f u l l y , c o n s t r u c t i v e l y , c a r i n g l y . US-THEM, or inside-outside, p r i v i l e g e s the erroneous p o s s i b i l i t y of b e i n g e l s e w h e r e , u n t o u c h e d by this his/herstory of v i o l e n c e a n d false c o n s c i o u s n e s s l e g i t i m a t i o n "where C a n a d i a n legislators a n d courts p r o c e e d e d in the name of the C r o w n to e n f o r c e C a n a d i a n s o v e r e i g n t y over" P F N A (Boldt, 1993, p. 87). W e al l w a l k this Land-Mother together; She ge n e r o u s l y feeds us a l l . S eparation is not p o s s i b l e in an i n t e r w o v e n net of r e l a t i o n s h i p s , p o s s i b l y l e a d i n g o n l y to a lengthy print war w h e r e w e wr i t e back-and-forth to e a c h other but never (re)connect. I b e l i e v e no one is inside/outside the s h a m i n g of v i o l e n c e ; nor i n s i d e / o u t s i d e the c e l e b r a t i o n of h e a l i n g ; nor inside/outside the reparations r e q u i r e d to restore 96 balance-harmony-beauty-spirit-power. "Indians" are not a footn o t e to his/herstory, this is the his/herstory of Canada/Kanata. W e are a l l two-leggeds, h o w to construct ourstory? Freire (1989) r e m i n d s that there is no p r i v i l e g e , no pl a c e of safety, in relations of v i o l e n c e ( o p p r e s s i o n , g e n o c i d e et cetera) for the d e h u m a n i z a t i o n e q u a l l y affects those l a b e l l e d 'oppressors' a n d those l a b e l l e d 'oppressed' (p. 32). H o w e v e r , Friere (1989) observes that as a l l of the e n e r gy of the oppressors is c h a n n e l e d into d e h u m a n i z a t i o n , then the 'oppressed' are those w h o might l e a d a pe d a g o g i c a l l i b e r a t o r y struggle to (re)humanize (p. 32). Thus, in light of Freire's r e c o m m e n d a t i o n , my de s i r e for a comp a s s i o n a t e , s e l f - c r i t i c a l l y - c o m p a s s i o n a t e , ourstory to (en)(un)fold us together might be a tad u n ( r e a l i s t i c ) & i d e a l i s t i c , in fact -Interviewer: [ O b v i o u s l y excited, cannot restrain an interruption.] But y o u s t i l l w a l k across that stage, in W a r M e m o r i a l Gym, in M a y of 1993, dressed in y o u r s t o r y c l o t h e s ; not, an oursto r y outfit. A n d y o u seem re a s o n a b l y happy, self-satisfied to d o so? Interviewee: O h , yes. A n d , that s m i l e says e v e r y t h i n g . 9 7 PART II: BRIEF WALK: THEN I NEED SOME NEW MOCCASINS, THE SOCIOSPIRITUEMOECOPOLITICOCULTURAL & OTHER WHITE NOISE OF RESEARCH [Sounds o f books being snapped shut, the smooshing o f chairs on orange shag carpet and random vocalizations, l i k e , "Oh, you're back?"; " B r i n g enough fresh tapes?"; I "I honestly didn't think you'd return. A h , w e l l . " ; "Fresh coffee i n that thermos?." F o r the second day of the interview, the interviewee is wearing a bl a c k turtle neck top w i t h b l a c k stretch pants, green ankle socks and black, leather slipper-shoes. H e r hair is scraped back into the semblance o f a pony t a i l . ] False Start(ling) Interviewer: So, y o u w a l k e d off that stage and into a Ph.D.? Interviewee: A h , yes; ah, yes, stage w a l k i n g . Sorry I may need s o m e t i m e to c a t c h up w i t h y o u. Before y o u a r r i v e d , I was w o r k i n g on generating that ( r e ) p e r i o d i z a t i o n of s c h o o l i n g for P F N A ( C a l l i o u , 1995, unfinished). That's the project I m e n t i o n e d yesterday. R e a l l y e x c i t i n g stuff, b e c a u s e I t h i n k I'm b e g i n n i n g to see h o w to w r i t e an ourstory. A n d , I am t o t a l l y i m m e r s e d in the l a b e l s of language used to d e s c r i b e a n d narrate this his/herstory. Perhaps, w e c o u l d s k i p the b o r i n g (re)hashing of the mocca-shoes paper a nd have a lo o k at here-now? [Interviewee waits for assent. Interviewer provides none.] 98 A n y w a y , in t e a c h i n g E D U C 4 4 1 and E D U C 4 4 2 , I have moment to (re)examine the p e r i o d i z a t i o n structuration - again the infrastructure is q u a l i t y d e f l e c t i o n . Interviewer: A h , d e f l e c t i o n ? Interviewer: P r e c i s e l y . D e f l e c t i o n , we're i n v i t e d to l o o k e l s e w h e r e , not here but there w h e n w e e x a m i n e this his/herstory. The basi c p e r i o d i z a t i o n of this l i n e a r ( r e ) t e l l i n g is b e c o m i n g s t u l t i f i e d as: pre-contact, d ay schools, b o a r d i n g schools (residential schools a n d then i n d u s t r i a l schools, s u r v i v a l schools and then band-operated schools (see, for e x a m p l e s , H a w t h o r n , H.B. (1967) [pp. 19-41]; Barman, Hebert & M c C a s k i l l (1986), [pp. 1-22]; L a w r e n c e (1987) [pp. 7-20]; Ki r k n e s s & S e l k i r k - B o w m a n (1992) [pp. 5-19] or N o r i e g a in Jaimes (1992) [pp. 371-402]). The emp h a s i s here-now is o n nouns w h i c h p o t e n t i a l l y subdue the actions, u s u a l l y r epresented t h r o u g h verbs in English, of u n d e r l y i n g e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l - a f f e c t i v e - l i n g u i s t i c - p o l i t i c a l et ce t e r a v i o l e n c e to o b s c u r e the purposeful reasons for p h y s i c a l a n d segregation of a P F N A a n d ena c t m e n t of segregationist p o l i c i e s and attitudes. N o w w h y w o u l d that be? T h e noun-terms r e d u c e the t e r r o r i s t i c f o u n d a t i o n s of a d e l i b e r a t e l y g e n o c i d a l p o l i c y p u b l i c l y c a l l e d ' s c h o o l i n g ' (see C h r i s j o h n & Yo u n g , 1994). I mean the i m p -[Interviewer interrupts w i t h a full-throated cough. Interviewer is r e v i e w i n g laminated, y e l l o w note cards regarding the role o f the interviewer. She rereads one q u i c k l y and si l e n t l y to herself.] The role of the interviewer in non-directive interviewing appears to be passive. This is misleading though. The interviewer must be an active listener, he or she must listen to what is being said in order to assess how it relates to the research focus and how it may reflect the circumstances of the interview. Moreover, this is done with a view to how the future course of the interview might be shaped. While the aim is to minimize the influence of the researcher on what the 99 interviewee says, some structuring is necessary in terms of what is and is not relevant (Hammersley & Atkinson, 1991, pp. 113-114). Interviewee: Y o u a l l right? C o u g h d u e to c o l d ? Interviewer: No, I'm fine . N o cough. I thought, we [Interviewer ' s emphasis] might [Interviewer ' s emphasis], perhaps [Interviewer's emphasis w i t h heart pounding], as p l a n n e d , m o v e to the western realm. I mean I am sure y o u r recent w o r k is f a s c i n a t i n g a n d of interest; yet w e are neglecting this interview [more Interviewer ' s emphasis]. A n d , w e l l [Said w i t h g e n u i n e tone of a p o l o g y ] this is s u p p o s e d to be about -[and Interviewer is interrupted.] Interviewee: Yes, not about the latest h o b b y horse I'm r i d i n g a r o u n d in s o m e n e w l y d i s c o v e r e d c o r r a l . Interviewer: I was h o p i n g today, w e c o u l d strive for, or rather attempt for t o d a y the d e v e l o p m e n t of a ce r t a i n " u n i t y of purpose" as "one of the central o r g a n i z i n g features of, ah, this c o l l a b o r a t i o n " ( K i r b y & M c K e n n a , 1989, p. 74). Interviewee: Hhhmmm...l c o n s i d e r that y o u r role then is s u p p o s e d to be rather l i k e that of c o a c h , f a c i l i t a t o r , c o - i n q u i s i t o r , e m p a t h e t i c co-researcher et cetera. I c a n read y o u r l a m i n a t e d , y e l l o w note cards u p s i d e down; I was a c l a s s r o o m teacher for ten years. I c a n read s i d e w a y s too. Let's see, w hat are y o u l o o k i n g at now? Ah , yes, O a k l e y (1984), the i n t e r v i e w e r is "more than an instrument of data c o l l e c t i o n " (p. 48) such that interview(er)(ee) e q u a l l y c o n t r i b u t e ideas, e x p e r i e n c e s , k n o w l e d g e and such to the "research process" (Ibid., p. 48). A w l - r i g h t ? H o w about I ask y o u q u e s t i o n s today? Interviewer: W e l l , if you'd rather not c o n t i n u e , that's O.K. too. I mean w e are both a b l e to t e r m i n a t e at any p o i n t in this research process, on anyone's say-so. Interviewee: I didn't say-feel-think-imply-intimate-co-facilitatethat suggestion. 100 Interviewer: No, but I can t e l l y o u are, perhaps, u n c o m f o r t a b l e ; or, erh, ah; not f e e l i n g e n o u g h trust to c o n t i n u e . Maybe. I just feel -Interviewee: [Interrupting] N o w don't get a l l ( a p o l o g e ) ( a n t h r o p o l o g e ) t i c a l l y frustrated w i t h me. Let's salvage some data c o l l e c t i o n here for y o u. I e m p a t h i s e w i t h the d i f f i c u l t y , g e t t i n g participants-subjects-co-respondents to co(oper)(ollabor)ate; p a r t i c u l a r l y in a case w h e r e the su b a l t e r n is asked to speak-write. Try to remember, though, research is b i g business; p a r t i c u l a r l y , w h e n it c o m e s to "Indians." Interviewer: I hope you're not just j u d g i n g this as my in t e r v i e w . I mean I r e a l l y h o p e y o u are not j u d g i n g this as some sort of 'Rolling-Stone-Magazine-cum-interview' t u r n e d on itself as research w h e r e I take "the data a n d run" and get p u b l i s h e d ? I mean I'd rather h o p e d that o u r research " i s based on the c o m m i t m e n t to a d v a n c i n g k n o w l e d g e thr o u g h research g r o u n d e d i n the e x p e r i e n c e of l i v i n g o n the margins" (Kirby & M c K e n n a , 1989, p. 64). Interviewee: Huh? Rat-tle/Rat-tle/Rat-tle/Rat-tle Interviewee: D i d y o u hear-listen-(re)read a n y t h i n g I t o l d y o u yester d a y about the a r t i f i c i a l f a l s e c o n s c i o u s n e s s of inside-outside; core-periphery? That's a hoax. Look at the c i r c l e again. W h o c a n stand o u t s i d e a c i r c l e ? W h o stands o u t s i d e i n t e r c o n n e c t i o n i n that B l a c k E l k i a n c o s m o e c o m o r p h i c - t r a n s c e n d e n t - s e n s e (in C h u r c h i l l , 1982 (?), p. 47)? Interviewer: W e l l , yes, of course. I'm sure we're a l l c o n n e c t e d , related somehow. I didn't mean it that [Interviewer's emphasis] way. I - w e l l , y o u are m a r g i n a l i s e d , that is at the margins, w h i c h is "the co n t e x t in w h i c h those w h o suffer i n j u s t i c e , i n e q u a l i t y a n d e x p l o i t a t i o n l i v e t h e i r l i v e s " ( K i r b y & M c K e n n a , 1989, p. 33). I mean y o u are "on the margins not o n l y in terms of the i n e q u a l i t y in the d i s t r i b u t i o n of material resources, but a l s o m e c h a n i s m s of k n o w l e d g e o r i g i n a t i o n are o r g a n i z e d so that the v i e w s of a sm a l l group of p e o p l e p r e v a i l as the 'Truth' " (K i r b y & M c K e n n a , 1989, p. 33). "Truth" w h i c h is "a system of o r d e r e d p r o c e d u r e s for 101 the p r o d u c t i o n , r e g u l a t i o n , d i s t r i b u t i o n , c i r c u l a t i o n , and o p e r a t i o n of statements; . . . l i n k e d i n t o a ci r c u l a r r e l a t i o n w i t h [self-sustaining] systems of power" (Fontana & Pa s q u i n o in i n t e r v i e w w i t h F o u c a u l t in R a b i n o w , 1984, p. 74). I a m p e r c e i v i n g this i n t e r v i e w collaboration as a mo m e n t to create that d i s r u p t u r e and get at some truth [Interviewer's emphasis]. Interviewee: O h , I thought y o u wer e here to ask me some questions. C o l l e c t s ome data, ah, answers. Truth? That might be fun. T o u g h - but fun. R e m e m b e r Rosenau's (1992) o b s e r v a t i o n that "language p r o d u c e s a nd reproduces its o w n w o r l d w i t h o u t reference to r e a l i t y " (p. 79) un t i l the p o s s i b i l i t y to say a n y t h i n g for sure b e c o m e s i m p o s s i b l e - i m p r o b a b l e - "because language is p u r e l y an a r t i f i c i a l sign system a nd ca n n o t assure t r u t h " (p. 79)? Interviewer: [Looks h o p e f u l l y at the door. Makes mental note to ask committee members about the ideal interview situation versus this interview situation.] The Serious Play of Questions and Answers [ M i c h e l F o u c a u l t (May, 1984) intones offstage, u s i n g a gend e r e d m a l e p r o n o u n only] In the serious p l a y of questions a n d answers, in the w o r k of r e c i p r o c a l e l u c i d a t i o n , the rights of each person are in some sense i m m a n e n t i n the d i s c u s s i o n . T h e y d e p e n d o n l y on the d i a l o g u e s i t u a t i o n . The person a s k i n g the qu e s t i o n s is m e r e l y e x e r c i s i n g the right that has been g i v e n to him: to re m a i n u n c o n v i n c e d to p e r c e i v e a c o n t r a d i c t i o n , to require more i n f o r m a t i o n , to e m p h a s i z e diff e r e n t postulates, to po i n t out fa u l t y reasoning, etc. A s for the person a n s w e r i n g the que s t i o n s , he t o o ex e r c i s e s a right that does not go b e y o n d the d i s c u s s i o n itself; b y the l o g i c of his o w n 102 d i s c o u r s e he is t i e d to the q u e s t i o n i n g of the other. Q u e s t i o n s a n d answers d e p e n d on a game - a game that is at o n c e pleasant and d i f f i c u l t - in w h i c h e a c h of the t w o partners takes pains to use o n l y the rights g i v e n h i m by the other a n d by the ac c e p t e d f o r m of the d i a l o g u e . ( R a b i n o w in i n t e r v i e w w i t h Foucault, 1984; i n Rabin o w , 1984, pp. 381-382). Interviewer: Yes, I am a s k i n g some questions a n d then y o u answer. There are s o m e ce r t a i n r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s here - don't y o u think? A n d , y o u are on the margins. [Continues to pursue the marginalised thesis.] I mean y o u even said yesterday [Relocates L i n e 'x' o f typed transcript] that: e s p e c i a l l y , if o n e is not to the U n i v e r s i t y born. I a m an "Ind i a n " (see, for e x a m p l e , A), Sect. 20(1) of Canada's Indian A c t ), "a person w h o pursuant to this A c t is registered as an Indian or is e n t i t l e d to be registered as an India n " (R.C.S., 1970, c.l-6, s.5.). In fact, 120 year ago, I c o u l d not be at a C a n a d i a n u n i v e r s i t y as an "I n d i a n " (Ibid ., (R.C.S., 1970, c.l-6, s.5.). ( C a l l i o u , Day: 001 Interview, L i n e 'x' of tran s c r i p t Tape #ll(b)(i)). Y o u then c i t e Canada's Indian Act (1876), S e c t i o n 86(1) r e g a r d i n g e n f r a n c h i s e m e n t . N o t o n l y that, there is e v i d e n c e to 'locate' you. Economically You Are Interviewer: For e x a m p l e , M a r c h a k (1975; 1988). M a r c h a k (1975) marshals st a t i s t i c a l a n d other e v i d e n c e to c h a l l e n g e a per v a s i v e "classless image of Canada," w h i c h is r e i n f o r c e d a n d 103 " r e n e w e d w i t h the d a i l y r e a d i n g of the newspaper, the v i e w i n g of t e l e v i s i o n , the study of literature, o r history, or s o c i a l s c i e n c e s " (Marchak, 1975, p. 31). D e s p i t e the a m o u n t of c u r r i c u l a r e x p e r i e n c e s d e v i s e d a nd the amount of m o n e y in v e s t e d in c l a s s r o o m s a nd c o m m u n i t i e s , i n e q u i t y persists. [Interviewer's hurried note: Except the interviewee is here. Still unequal?] M a r c h a k (1975) c o m p e l l i n g l y argues that, in Canada, e d u c a t i o n does not e l i m i n a t e the i n e q u a l i t i e s a n d i n e q u i t i e s of our s e e m i n g l y seamless society. Instead, she presents statis t i c a l i n f o r m a t i o n , w h i c h l o c a t e d from Information Canada, to illus t r a t e that those in the upper e c h e l o n s of s o c i e t y , that is, upper i n c ome, higher status o c c u p a t i o n s , are those w h o send t h e i r C a n a d i a n c h i l d r e n to post-secondary institutions to a c q u i r e the s k i l l s a n d c r e d e n t i a l s to m a i n t a i n a s o c i o e c o n o m i c s i t u a t i o n c o n d u c i v e to i m p r o v e d access to and e n j o y m e n t of p a r t i c u l a r f i n a n c i a l , m e d i c a l , o c c u p a t i o n a l a nd other p r i v i l e g e s . She cites that "Indians" c o n t i n u e to be o n e of the groups e d u c a t i o n a l l y d i s a d v a n t a g e d (Marchak, 1988, p. 39). A l t h o u g h M a r c h a k (1988) notes there are i n d i v i d u a l e x c e p t i o n s , the o v e r a l l "process of inter-generational m o b i l i t y v i a the e d u c a t i o n a l c h a n n e l s is less e f f e c t i v e for the l o w e r i n c o m e groups than for the m i d d l e - i n c o m e groups (p. 36). There Are Margins They Taught Me That In School Interviewer: There are margins. I t h i n k my "methods [are] a p p r o p r i a t e for r e s e a r c h i n g f r o m the margins" a nd "grounded in a p o l i t i c a l awareness of the need for change" ( K i r b y & M c K e n n a , 1989, p. 63). I r e a l l y d o b e l i e v e -104 Interviewee: in the existence of margins? Hogwash! Codswaddle! Squashshit! [Interviewee smiles broadly.] Great! I always wanted to use those words. I didn't manage to sneak them into any of the dissertation proposals I penned. I'm sorry I don't believe I live (o)(i)n any margins. Interviewer: Yes, I'm beginning to see that. You are attempting to conceptualize some sort of spiritus-connected ourstory - a new version of world history. But there is the reality here that you are marginalised. And, I've come out here to these margins to -Interviewee: I come here to this campus, located on the traditional territory of the Musqueam, and find out I supposedly reside somewhere in the margins. My mother didn't raise me to think of myself like this. My mother and father did tell me I was a Mohawk-Cree + member of the Michel Band. They did not raise me to call myself marginalised or minority. I don't live ~ [Interviewee's voice rising, almost with a Martin Luther King like tenor.] [Interviewer's note to self: I guess when I write something like that King business I am editorializing. She actually has quite a soft, delicate voice ~ the kind that extremely shy people possess.] - beyond the borderlands; where, occasionally, border workers will ride out in their Jeep Cherokees to meet with me. However, I'd have to say that with the exceptions of a few treaties we signed with Les Canadiennes, that someone might well be inhabiting the margins (&the borders&the periphery&thesuburbs), but maybe iit ain't us PFNA. Interviewer: I appreciate your frankness; particularly, not translating your experiences and perceptions into the "concepts and language of the status quo" (Kirby & McKenna warning to those researching in the margins, 1989, pp. 64-65). I could leave the construct - 'hogwash' - in the final transcription if you like. I understand that the actual words people use can be of considerable analytic importance. The 'situated vocabularies' employed provide us with valuable -105 Interviewee: [Interrupts. Sounds of an impatient frown. Rubs right temple vigorously. Finishes quotation.] - i n f o r m a t i o n about the w a y in w h i c h members of a pa r t i c u l a r c u l t u r e o r g a n i z e t h e i r p e r c e p t i o n s of the w o r l d , and so engage in the 'social c o n s t r u c t i o n of r e a l i t y ' ( H a m m e r s l e y & A t k i n s o n , 1989, p. 153). O h , boy! Ave!0-vey! and Hoor-rah!. If y o u l i k e I c o u l d adopt an e v e n more c o l o u r f u l v o c a b u l a r y ? I p i c k e d up some r i c h l y textured p h r a s e o l o g y w h i l e w o r k i n g s e i s m i c in A l b e r t a . What Is Under Construction Here? Interviewee: Try not t h i n k of me as representative of any p a r t i c u l a r s u b - p o p u l a t i o n -et h n o c u l t u r a l or otherwise. T h i s margins business. N o w w h o designates the margins? I a d m i t there are n u merous s t a t i s t i c a l l y s u p p o rted d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n a m o n g Canadians. V i s i t the f i f t h f l o o r of the M a i n L i b r a r y and y o u c a n spend a life's t i m e s t u d y i n g the numbers. T h e bott o m l i n e is I can't put a n y b o d y in a margin anymore. The more I l o o k at U S - T H E M equ a t i o n s , I can't see the d i s t i n c t i o n . Besides, I thought if w e were r e s e a r c h i n g f r o m the margins, then w e w o u l d a l l have to be m a r g i n a l i s e d to get at that g e n u i n e " i n t e r s u b j e c t i v i t y : an au t h e n t i c d i a l o g u e b e t w e e n a l l p a r t i c i p a n t s in the research process in w h i c h a l l are respected as e q u a l l y k n o w i n g su b j e c t s " ( K i r b y & M c K e n n a , 1989, p. 129). [Longish pause on tape.] I mean, doesn't s o m e o n e have to be m a r g i n a l i s e d here if we'regonna 'do' research f r o m the margins? 106 [Pause on tape.] W e c o u l d take turns? Procedural Requirements Interviewer: W e l l , this is getting off to a rather bad start. W e seem to be t a l k i n g at cross-purposes here; but that's a c c e p t a b l e ? I mean I understand y o u to be m a r g i n a l i s e d a n d y o u t h i n k you're not. Q u i t e a c o n t r a d i c t i o n , eh? We've f o u n d o n e of those pesky paradoxes. I guess w e have a di f f e r e n c e of o p i n i o n . [ A k i n d a eardrum sp l i t t i n g squeaky laugh.] I'm not sure h o w I'll c o d e these " b i b b i t s " ( Kirby & M c K e n n a , 1989, pp. 137-140) w h e n I start a n a l y s i s of the dada, I d o mean, data, w h i c h " i n v o l v e s l i v i n g w i t h a n d m a k i n g sense of the large a m o u n t of data a v a i l a b l e through the method of r e s e a r c h i n g f r o m the margins" ( K i r b y & M c K e n n a , 1989, p. 134). I'm cer t a i n I'll be l i v i n g w i t h these i n t e r v i e w s for a long, long, time; h owever, f i n d i n g the u m b r e l l a terms, w e l l , ah, that's my w o r r y isn't it? Interviewee: [ O b v i o u s l y lost i n thought, asks cautiously.] B i b b i t ? Interviewer: Yes, that's K i r b y and McKenna's (1989) term for a passage f r o m a transcript, a p i e c e of i n f o r m a t i o n f r o m f i e l d notes, a s e c t i o n of the d o c u m e n t or sn i p p e t of c o n v e r s a t i o n r e c o r d e d o n a scrap of paper that c a n stand on its o w n but, w h e n necessary, can be re l o c a t e d in its o r i g i n a l c o n t e x t (p. 135). Interviewee: A h , yes, the bi b b i t . I thought y o u were, perhaps, r e f e r r i n g to a g r a n d c h i l d of F r a n k l i n Bobbit. H o w about that? Learn s o m e t h i n g everyday. I think-crave I w i l l run o v e r to the store a n d get some cigarettes. D o y o u want anything? Besides an i n t e r v i e w ? W h e n I return, w e ' l l try again; because, perhaps, mocca-shoes might be w o r t h a (re)visit. W h i l e I a m away, w h y don't y o u w r i t e up some f i e l d notes. 107 Interviewer's field notes D a y 002/hr. 0947/Same l o c a t i o n as D a y 0 0 1 A M . Tape at 06:42. Any ethnographer worth her/his salt keeps field notes. Field notes are documentation of context, site, and the non-verbal realm of the interviewee, a traditional method, in ethnography, for "recording observational data" (Hammersley & Atkinson, 1991, p. 145). The subject-client, ah, co-respondent, seems unnecessarily edgy today; resistant, if not, rude. (Well, that's how I feel!!) From reading her earlier works, I suspected and now confirm that 'x' is uneasy about the research process. I feel enormously slighted that she appears to be unbelieving of my sincere desire to research in a politically sensitive manner. I mean it's not like I am unaware of the subaltern's challenge (Spivak, 1988) and the limitation of Western humanistic critique in that the Subject may still merely be a (publici)(historici)zed subject, reduced to a sawdust bag of dehumanized subjectivity (p. 75). I have read Kirkness and Barnhardt (1991) and understand that First Nations students face the disrespectfulness of the University to The People and that university can represent "an impersonal, intimidating and often hostile environment" where there is emphasis on a "literate world in which only decontextualized literate knowledge counts, and that knowledge must be displayed in highly specialized literate forms" (p. 8). I am trying to be polite with this interview. I mean look at yesterday. My questions yesterday were sparse and I even abandoned about 45 of them as she rambled on and on about ourstory, and course requirements and her emotional roller coaster ride through here. That will be some mess to code and analyse. I already feel challenged about managing this data, locating what 108 Carney (1983) describes as seeing the "larger, more holistic understanding" contained within patterns which emerge (p. 58). Just how are these patterns supposed to emerge? What cues do I use? How do you when you've found the right 'code' to fit the 'pattern'? Is it really all so arbitrary? I feel she is making 'fun' of me. Must remember to locate this Franklin Bobbit she mentioned. A relative? I am uncertain about trying to convince her that my intentions are honourable and that in reading I have tried to sensitise myself to researching with those historically uninitiated into the inheritance of a particular canon. I mean what am I supposed to do with the image of a snowstorm? How do I get this interview back on track? Darn! I feel like starting to smoke again. Where is she? How far away can a corner store be? What am I supposed to do with that obviously fake journal entry she concocted for 1607? Must note that. Interviewee obviously very capable of spieling (hhmm, 'ie' or 'ei'?); significant of a rich fantasy life? I think I'll omit these as they don't seem to speak directly to anything about the four major topic areas identified. I guess I should describe the research setting and try to incorporate Hammersley and Atkinson's (1989) sensibility that the "preservation of concreteness is an important consideration in fieldnote writing" (p. 151). Today we are in a corner of her bedroom, which doubles as a study. The bed is unmade. Who sleeps with four pillows? Should I mention that there is obviously a homemade quilt and sheepskin on the bed? Does that matter? How about a calendar on the wall from the T.V. program, The Young and the Restless} There are about 8.4 metres of book shelves, with books packed solidly along the south and west walls of the area. The carpet in here is nauseatingly orange. There is no phone. Abort. Abandon. 109 Oh doesn't this just meet the requirements of rich scene sketch where the reader will be "struck by a vivid sensory impression, describe[d] primarily through detailed imagery" (Emerson, Fretz & Shaw, 1995, p. 85)? There are stacks of papers everywhere. O.K., what kind of papers? I wonder if I should touch anything in here. They are obviously academic papers. Well, no, there's a phone bill. And, there's an open journal. Wow, she draws in her journal too. She didn't show me any of these. Yesterday we met here, but she quickly transported me to the F-C on West Broadway. I noted the throwback '60s interior decor. Lives in past? She did mention living in a commune on L- Street in the neighbourhood of K - in the early 1970s; with brief mention of going to a B-In in S-P-. What is a B-In? Should I ask one of 'counter-culture' aunts? Interviewee stuck in a time warp? A radio plays pop-schlock constantly. There's nothing really "Indian" in here. No buckskins dresses or drums. Well, wait. There is her moccasin lighter case, a gift from J - S- (Haisla), a stretched neck turtle rattle, a gift from R--C- (Oneida) and a fair amount of literature related to PFNA. Otherwise, what to document? There are a bewildering number of details I could record, but which are the significant ones? Which really identify this interviewee in her situated situatedness? [ O F F S T A G E ( B a s i c a l l y a c h e a p tr i c k to s l i d e in a footnote, w h i c h is not a l l o w e d in A.P.A.): V o i c e of W e n d y Rose (in Jaimes, 1992) s o m e w h e r e in the b a c k g r o u n d . As a poet, I am continually frustrated by the restrictions placed on my work by the same people who insist that poets should not be restricted. It is expected - indeed, demanded — that I do a little "Indian-dance," a shuffle and scrape to please the tourists [as well as the 110 anthropologists]. Organizers of readings continually ask me to wear beadwork and turquoise, to dress in buckskin (my people didn't wear much buckskin; we've cultivated cotton for thousands of years), and to read poems conveying pastoral or "natural" images. I am often asked to "tell a story" and "place things in a spiritual framework." Simply being Indian — a real, live, breathing up-to-date Indian person — is not enough. In fact, other than my genetics, this is the precise opposite of what is desired. The expectation is that I adopt, and thereby validate, the 'persona' of some mythic 'Indian being'[Her italics](p. 413).] [Sound o f a squeaky, brown-painted door opening, f o l l o w e d by the sound o f the door being f i r m l y shut.] W e l l , that interrupts these brief notes. Back to sparring, I mean, d i a l o g i c i n t e r s u b j e c t i v i t y . Interviewee: [Gestures at interviewer's f i e l d note pad.] D i d y o u note that turtle rattle? [Interviewer begins speaking q u i c k l y , o b v i o u s l y w i s h i n g to guide the interview back to o r i g i n a l focus. F i d d l e s w i t h S- compact cassette recorder. Checks tape counter and records numeric reading. L o o k s up and sees Interviewee w r i t i n g f i e l d notes.] Interviewee's field notes: Day/date? C h e c k c a l e n d a r later. Time? M u s t s t i l l be morning. T w o days past n e w moon. I am w o n d e r i n g at my brashness to w r i t e a dis s e r t a t i o n this way. N o w w h y d i d I c o d e that as 8IBRASH!; that is, 'brashness'? H o w about 'temerarious'? Perhaps, 111 tendentious'? No, that sounds t o o m a n i p u l a t i v e . Hhhmmm..., perhaps, retiarius? W h a t ever. I am ve r y c o m f o r t a b l e w r i t i n g in this p l a y l e t form; Pla t o (1973, G r u b e tr a n s l a t i o n ; O r i g . 385-380 B.C.) manged. B a s i c a l l y , this e x t e n d e d t r a n s c r i p t i o n , rather l i k e a di s s e r t a t i o n in drag, is a r e c o r d i n g of the v o i c e s in my 'head-heart'. O h , great, n o w the y ' l l t h i n k "I H E A R rattles and V o i c e s . " I can just see some a v i d c o d e r s t r i k i n g that passage as JARC*S; or rather, Joan of A r c Syndrome; or MLR*S, that b e i n g M e t i s L o u i s R i e l Syndrome. H o w e v e r , does self-transcription of 'voice' a u t h e n t i c a t e me as an au t h o r i t a t i v e s u p p l i e r of k n o w l e d g e to c o m m e n c e a " d e c a n o n i s a t i o n " (re. d e c a n o n i s a t i o n , see: Hassan, 1987; in Jencks, 1992, p. 196) of Eurowestern everythingness? That is, if I a d m i t to b e i n g m a r g i n a l i s e d . There is n o v e l t y here as I bypass the ' t r a d i t i o n a l ' s k e l e t a l i n t e r n a l structure of the di s s e r t a t i o n as genre; but the value? V a l u e to w h o m ? Is this an adequate (re)presentation of an "Indian" female's post-secondary s c h o o l i n g e x p e r i e n c e as that " k n o w i n g subject" Freire (1989) invites me to be. Is my h e s i t a n c y i n d i c a t i v e of Freire's (1989) o b s e r v a t i o n that " s e l f - d e p r e c i a t i o n is another c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of the oppressed, w h i c h d e r i v e s f r o m t h e i r i n t e r n a l i z a t i o n of the o p i n i o n the oppressors h o l d of them" (p. 49). Yes, I am hesitant to c h a l l e n g e and be a l i b e r a t o r y (re)creator of the w o r l d (Freire, 1989, pp. 54-56)? I d i d not c o m e here to this u n i v e r s i t y to d o this at a l l . Interviewer: [Full-throated cough.] Interviewee: Sorry, Yes, the W e s t e r n Realm. [Interviewee dons a cowboy hat and begins.] M e a n w h i l e , back at the ranch, after the C o n v o c a t i o n Ceremony... Actually, I made the part up, about the cowboy hat, it's out at the trailer. But I did put it on imaginarily. The Western Realm 112 Interviewee: I'd t h r o w on my moccas s i n s for effect; but I need some n e w moccassins. Yes, you're a b s o l u t e l y right. I w a l k across that stage at C o n v o c a t i o n right back i n t o the e m o t i o n a l l y c h a r g e d atmosphere of 'the research process'. In the January of 1993 ED C I 6 0 1 d o c t o r a l seminar, the f o c u s is on research. [Interviewer's Note: Subject makes a very h i s t r i o n i c gesture of s e l f - s t r a n g u l a t i o n , followed with miming of a self-hanging. Hah! The research texts t a l k about making the research environment a 'safe' environment f o r the interviewee; but I do not r e c a l l mention of researcher safety. Help! I might be wise to terminate t h i s interview here. I could rework the proposal a b i t and maybe j u s t survey the experiences of PFNA at post-secondary EuroCanadian settings and watch f o r ( d i s ) s i m i l a r i t i e s and (dis)simulations of experiences. The (dis)simulation s t u f f could get i n t e r e s t i n g because then I could use Gerald Vizenor (1994).] Interviewee: D o y o u have a question? Interviewer: [ Q u i c k l y recovering.] Yes, perhaps, this w o u l d be an ap p r o p r i a t e t i m e to l i n k the w h i t e n o i s e of research w i t h the W e s t e r n R ealm y o u suggested? Interviewee: As I r e c a l l , y o u d e c i d e d that the four areas of my ex i s t e n t i a l nauseau i d e n t i f i e d seem to fit. Y o u state, "I just felt the four areas of 'existential nausea' y o u m e n t i o n e a r l i e r , a p p e ar to 'fit i n to' the Four Directions/Realms. For example: (1) A n e m o t i o n a l C ( o g n i ) ( o n d i ) t i o n i n g ; (2) The s o c i o s p i r i t u e m o e c o p o l i t i c o c u l t u r a l 'White' N o i s e of Res e a r c h i n g ; 113 (3) C a n o n o n i c i t y : E u r o h e r i t a g e i z a t i o n i n g ; and (4) A c c u l t u r a t i v e S e c u l a r i z i n g . (Tape l l l ( i ) ( c ) ) . Interviewer: Yes, but y o u s a i d , "Yes, a l m o s t to o neatly" (Tape t r a n s c r i p t i o n segment lll(i)(c». Interviewee: Yes, that's one of my uneasy queasies about the research process; that is, the f i n a l p r o d u c t a l w a y s seems to 'hang together' almost to o a g i l e l y a nd then, w i t h p h o t o c o p i e r p r e c i s i o n , the f i n d i n g s are 'written up' and 'sanctioned' and p e o p l e b e g i n to l e g i t i m a t e l y b e l i e v e them. B e l i e f s g i r d a c t i o n . In this case, research o c c u r s and is p u b l i c i s e d . T h e n a l l m a nner of events are in play. P e o p le, even P F N A , start b e l i e v i n g "Indians" have a l e a r n i n g style (More, 1984), er, l a t e l y preference. 'Too bad if you're an "Indian" w i t h a h i g h l y abstract p r i n t s t y l e b e c a u s e you're gunnaget e x p e r i e n t i a l , hands-on c u r r i c u l a r e x p e r i e n c e s - e v e n if it k i l l s you.' A t least, that part's h i s t o r i c a l l y consistent, s c h o o l i n g for "Indians" has a l w a y s i n t e n d e d g e n o c i d e more than a c a d e m i c e x c e l l e n c e (see, for examples, C h r i s j o h n & Y o u n g , 1994; N o r i e g a in Jaimes, 1992). Strewn W i t h A b s u r d i t y The "Indian research" f i e l d is strewn w i t h absurdity. Try h a c k i n g y o u r w a y th r o u g h M c S h a n e and his c o l l a b o r a t o r s ' (for examples, M c S h a n e and W i l l e n s b r i n g , 1984) s c i e n t i f i c attempts to "show that the brain of the A m e r i c a n Indian differs f r o m the b r a i n of the C a u c a s i a n " in terms of left-right a s y m m e t r y (see, C h r i s j o h n & Peters, 1986, p. 63), w h i c h might e x p l a i n the E N G L I S H language i m p a i r m e n t of "Indian" c h i l d r e n learners. Impairment? T h e s e "In d i a n " c h i l d r e n learners are not left-ear-brain-impaired; they are i m p e r i a l i s t i c a l l y i m p a i r e d - E N G L I S H is not a l w a y s the heritage language of the "Indian" c h i l d r e n learner (See, for e x a m p l e , Battiste, 1986, for an e a r l i e r v i e w of l i n g u i s t i c i m p e r i a l i s m ) . W h a t Is A n A s s u m p t i o n of This Research? 114 Interviewer: W e l l , there can be different interpretations here. Interviewee: Exactly. For me, it's Chrisjohn's (1986) paper, The M y t h o l o g y of Indian E d u c a t i o n Research, that makes me look at the racist c o d i f i c a t i o n of research f i n d i n g s w h e n the s a m p l e p o p u l a t i o n c h o s e n is based p r i m a r i l y o n the c r i t e r i o n that T H E Y be N a t i v e A m e r l n d i a n A b o r i g i n a l " l n d i a n s . " The inherent nature of s u c h research d e s i g n is racist; so, h o w v a l i d are the fin d i n g s ? I mean h o w to d o y o u f i n d an "Indian" brain? If they t o o k out my bra i n a n d measured it, w o u l d they be meas u r i n g an "Indian" brain? Sorry, " I n d i a n " f e m a l e brain? D i d I miss s o m e t h i n g w h i l e r e a d i n g the research here? M o r e R.R.P. Interviewer: Perhaps, we'll just leave e x p l i c a t i o n of the western realm's l i n k a g e w i t h the p h y s i c a l i t y , the er, m a t e r i a l i t y , of the research process? B e i n g in a Ph.D. program means y o u are again c o n f r o n t e d , c h a l l e n g e d w i t h r e v i s i t i n g the research process.? Interviewee: Yes, more R.R.P.; an un i n t e n d e d obsession. Research is f r o m the French, r e c h e r c h e , m e a n i n g to f i n d again. M y interest in research is i r o n i c . I b a r e l y s u r v i v e d 508. Yet, I a m s p e n d i n g a great deal of t i m e t h i n k i n g about what research has been, is a n d might be in re l a t i o n to myself; as a First P e o p l e, as a womyn, as a P.O.W., as, p i c k a l a b e l . I a m a s k i n g w h at this a l l means to i n t e r c u l t u r a l research? I am rea d i n g to lecture prep for E D U C 4 4 1 & E D U C 4 4 2 m u c h research about myself a n d my brothers a n d sisters. M u c h of that research was of that e t h n o g r a p h i c q u a l i t y w h i c h seems to c o n s i d e r humans as objects of study - as c u r i o s i t i e s or o d d i t i e s w h i c h c o u l d be understood and c a t e g o r i z e d by c o l l e c t i n g a n d c a t e g o r i z i n g stories, artifacts, languages, methods of f o o d preparation, be l i e f s , c r e a t i o n stories, etc. W h a t is e x o t i c is attractive. Now, often marketable. O f t e n the p u b l i s h e d research f a i l s , f o r me, to i l l u m i n a t e . Instead static p i c tures emerge about p e o p l e p r e d i c a t e d o n a d i c h o t o m y b e t w e e n researcher a n d researched, w i t h the researcher p r i v i l e g e d to 'code' and 'interpret' the 'data' - and more often p u b l i s h e d than the researched. Interviewer: But that's c h a n g i n g , right? Interviewee: W e l l , there is more research f r o m PFNA. H o w e v e r , the hist o r y of this r e s e a r c h e d i n v e s t i g a t i o n w i t h regard to P F N A is so makeshift as to be u n b e l i e v a b l e . Lane (1972) exposes the p o v e r t y a n d p a u c i t y of the research extant in the 1970s and I don't see m u c h im p r o v e m e n t . H e states that w e have not i d e n t i f i e d e n o u g h of the p s y c h o l o g i c a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of pa r t i c u l a r Indian p o p u l a t i o n s . W e d o not k n o w w h e t h e r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s stem f r o m a b o r i g i n a l b a c k g r o u n d s or fr o m recent times. W e k n o w n o t h i n g about the r i g i d i t y of or the persistence of p s y c h o l o g i c a l traits or pe r s o n a l i t y types w i t h i n groups. W e are st i l l at the stage in w h i c h p u r p o r t e d l y s e r i o u s researchers can study Indian c h i l d r e n in one s c h o o l c l a s s r o o m o n the W e s t coast a n d then w r i t e about the cha r a c t e r i s t i c s of C a n a d i a n Indian c h i l d r e n (pp. 352-353). A n d , I see this eagerness to learn about "Indians" (even if they d o say First Nations) in students w h o c o m e into E D U C 4 4 2 , C r i t i c a l Issues In First N a t i o n s Pedagogy. W h a t a co u r s e t i t l e - what isn't c r i t i c a l o n c e y o u start d e c o n s t r u c t i n g the my t h o l o g y ? A n y w a y , they're l o o k i n g for The Way. Rattle-rattle-rattle-rattle In 1972, Lane observes that there are t w o c o n s e q u e n c e s of this r e d u c t i o n i s t g e n e r a l i s a t i o n , . H e states b e c a u s e 116 so l i t t l e is k n o w n about the p s y c h o l o g i c a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Indian s c h o o l p o p u l a t i o n s , there is a t e n d e n c y to g e n e r a l i z e w h a t e v e r is d e s c r i b e d for a g i v e n group. O n e must note the c o n c l u s i o n s about US Indians b o r r o w e d to f i l l the la c u n a e in the C a n a d i a n scene. S i m i l a r l y , c o n c l u s i o n s are b o r r o w e d f r o m studies on the US urban p o o r - W h i t e , B l a c k a n d Puerto Rican. S ome of the f i n d i n g s have r e l e v a n c e for the e d u c a t i o n of C a n a d i a n Indian c h i l d r e n but the p r o c e d u r e is unc e r t a i n to say the least. There may w e l l be c u l t u r a l attributes in Indian s c h o o l c h i l d r e n w h i c h i n f l u e n c e t h e i r p e r f o r m a n c e and th e i r o p p o r t u n i t i e s but o u r k n o w l e d g e of t hem is sketchy, s u b j e c t i v e a n d i m p r e s s i o n i s t i c (Lane, 1972, p. 353). W h e n I started b a c k g r o u n d r e a d i n g for E D U C 4 4 2 , my first r e a c t i o n was d i s b e l i e f , u n t i l I r e a l i s e d that there are i n d i v i d u a l s w h o c o n s i d e r it f e a s i b l e to study "Indian" or a b o r i g i n a l or N a t i v e students as a s p e c i a l i z e d group of learners. There are some t e a c h i n g students w h o are s e r i o u s l y l o o k i n g for researched f i n d i n g s or recipes to ha n d l e the t e a c h i n g - l e a r n i n g e n c o u n t e r w i t h 'me' as "Indian." T h e y don't seem to grasp a need to k n o w about the love, trust, care, d e v o t i o n , respect, laughter r e q u i s i t e to e n a b l e that w h e e l of t e a c h i n g - l e a r n i n g to start to s p i n . T h e y f o c u s on t e c h n i q u e - w e l l , more r e c i p e or craft. A n d , the language of the research process seems, to me, to be one w h i c h at times attempts to erect a shiny, false, a c r y c l i c s h i e l d b e t w e e n the research(er)(ee)s. I suspect this language use - that is, w o r d c h o i c e , sentence set-up, et c e t e r a - attempts to e n a b l e some sort of o b j e c t i v i t y . The research process begins w i t h this attempt to p u l l b a c k or p u l l out of a h i g h l y i n t e r c o n n e c t e d , shared w o r l d . As I am sure y o u are t r y i n g to d o throughout these i n t e r v i e w s ? That is, l i s t e n to my story d i s p a s s i o n a t e l y , w i t h o u t j u d g e m e n t or sympathy? See y o u r s e l f as not part of this? Sympathetic, But M u s t U n d e r s t a n d Who's Inside, Who's O u t s i d e 117 Interviewer: W e l l , ah yes. I mean I d o feel t w i n g e s of s y m p a t h y for y o u r s i t u a t i o n here; but that shouldn't p r e j u d i c e my fin d i n g s . G e e r t z (1979) s u m m a r i z e s the p o l a r i z e d stances in his d i s c u s s i o n of the anthropologist's s e e m i n g d o u b l e - b i n d to speak for and about i n d i v i d u a l s f r o m d i f f e r e n t c u l t u r a l c o m m u n i t i e s (p. 226). G e e r t z (1979) d e s c r i b e s the research(er)(ee) t h u s l y , T h e f o r m u l a t i o n s have been various: 'inside' versus 'outside' or 'first person' versus 'third person' d e s c r i p t i o n s ; ' p h e n o m e n o l o g i c a l ' versus 'obj e c t i v i s t ' or 'cogn i t i v e ' versus 'behavioural' theories; or, perhaps, most c o m m o n l y , 'emic' versus 'etic' (p. 227). Interviewee: I f i n d it d i f f i c u l t to share this d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n c o r e a n d p e r i p h e r y , etc., a l t h o u g h I t h i n k I understand some of the r a t i o n a l e for the necessity, but the attempt to p o s i t i o n one's self as a non-resident of the si t u a t i o n (of a h i g h l y i n t e r c o n n e c t e d c o s m o u n i v e r s e ) seems to me to be a d i f f i c u l t p o s i t i o n to attain because I am a re l a t i o n a l b e i n g in a l l events a n d c o n d i t i o n s ( w h i c h r e s p o n s i b i l i t y is just r e a l l y b e g i n n i n g to sink into another l e v e l in me); and, s e c o n d l y , e m o t i o n a l l y , I a m dr a w n in w h e n p e o p l e speak. From a p o s i t i o n of i n t e r c o n n e c t e d n e s s w h i c h v i e w s relations or relationships as the o r g a n i z i n g feature, rather than objects or events[read: units of a n a l y s i s ] , then the attempt to d i s t a n c e b e c o m e s i m p o s s i b l e (for me). I a m not a l w a y s c o n s c i o u s of h o w I am in relationship, s o m e t i m e s I d o get s l o p p y and c a r e l e s s a n d d i s r e s p e c t f u l l y o b l i v i o u s to my poten t i a l in r e l a t i o n s h i p s t h r o u g h o u t time; but this b o r r o w i n g f r o m a l l manner of theory and metaphor, as in the case of p h o n e t i c s a n d p h o n e m i c s to d e s i g n a t e in t e r n a l f u n c t i o n or a c o u s t i c properties of sounds in language, seems to p l a c e h e a v y v a l u e o n i n d i v i d u a t i o n ; perhaps, at the expense of o v e r l o o k i n g the i n t e r c o n n e c t e d n e s s of a l l b e i n gs - not just the two-leggeds. Those at the core, or those at the p e r i p h e r y or those w h o study up or those w h o study d o w n seem to o v e r l o o k that p l a c e m e n t is, at heart, o n e w h e r e 118 i n d i v i d u a l s are d i s t i n c t i v e in a c o l l e c t i v i t y of rel a t i o n s h i p s . There may be c i r c u m s t a n c e s w h i c h s eem to i m p e d e i n d i v i d u a l s f r o m a c t i n g on or from w i t h i n t h e i r o w n v o l i t i o n , but u l t i m a t e l y I b e l i e v e that w e l i v e in r e l a t i o n s h i p . It's just that our r e l a t i o n s h i p s are not a l w a y s in c o m m u n i t y . Inside/Outside: W h a t is The P o s s i b i l i t y Really? Interviewer: W e l l , G e e r t z (1979) furthers his d i s c u s s i o n of the d i s t i n c t p o s i t i o n s of researcher a n d researchees u s i n g t w o terms d e v e l o p e d by H e i n z Kohut (as c i t e d in G e e r t z ) . K o h u t used the terms experience-near and experience-distant to designate this o b j e c t i v e stance, w i t h near r e f e r r i n g to a c o n c e p t w h i c h informants can speak n a t u r a l l y for t h e m s e l v e s a b o u t w hat is seen, felt, thought, i m a g i n e d a n d so on, distant referring to those c o n c e p t s w h i c h i n v o l v e s p e c i a l i s t s , l i k e e x p e r i m e n t e r s or ethnographers, to a d v a n c e t h e i r o w n pa r t i c u l a r p h i l o s o p h i c a l , i d e o l o g i c a l , s c i e n t i f i c or p r a c t i c a l a ims (cited by G e e r t z , 1979, p. 228). Kohut used 'love' a n d 'l o n e l i n e s s ' as e x a m p l e s of experience-near concepts, w h i l e 'religious system' or 'social s t r a t i f i c a t i o n ' are e x a m p l e s of experience-distant concepts. H o w e v e r , these may be c o l o u r e d by the c o l l e c t i v e ' s c u l t u r a l p e r s p e c t i v e , for, as G e e r t z points out, c o n c e p t s l i k e 'caste' a n d 'nirvana' c a n be experi e n c e - n e a r concepts, "at least for H i n d u s a nd Bu d d h i s t s " (p. 228) w h i l e , for me, these may be experience-distant concepts. Interviewee: Yes, but we're here in the same room - o n the same planet. H o w ca n it be that the researcher is so independent, not interdependent? The researcher is m a k i n g k n o w l e d g e off the k n o w l e d g e s o m e o n e else has al r e a d y made? W h a t is the p u r p o s e of that? W h o is s p e a k i n g for w h o m here? G e e r t z (1979), in a n t h r o p o l o g y , w h i c h is a f i e l d w h i c h e d u c a t i o n a l research b o r r o w s h e a v i l y from in terms of s t u d y i n g the c u l t u r e of teachers, or e t h n o g r a p h i c n a r r a t o l o g y (or other f i e l d w o r k methods), is the issue of one's a b i l i t y to speak for, 119 a bout or w i t h i n d i v i d u a l s about t h e i r e x periences. L i k e Stanley Diamond's (1974) o b s e r v a t i o n that a n t h r o p o l o g i c a l f i e l d w o r k is l i k e s p y w o r k as a n t h r o p o l o g i s t s - and, p o t e n t i a l l y , e d u c a t i o n a l researchers - are f r e q u e n t l y taken as spies because of the i n q u i s i t i v e nature of t h e i r work; t h e i r c o n c e r n w i t h l o c a l affairs in the remote places to w h i c h they go, t h e i r t e n d e n c y to fade into the b a c k g r o u n d of l o c a l c u s t o m in l i v i n g up to the c a n o n s of p a r t i c i p a n t o b s e r v a t i o n (p. 89). T h i s i n i t i a l search to d e f i n e the research s a m p l e has been in q u e s t i o n , by more e n l i g h t e n e d a n t h r o p o l o g i s t s and e d u c a t i o n a l researchers, in that this researcher a n d researchee d e s i g n a t i o n creates o n l y the i l l u s i o n that the o b j e c t i f i c a t i o n s o m e h o w frees the researcher for " i n o r d e r to o b j e c t i f y the other, one is, at the same time, c o m p e l l e d to o b j e c t i f y the self" (p. 93). For me, in a r e l a t i o n a l w o r l d , this is i l l u s i o n a l ; a n d o b j e c t i f i c a t i o n static a nd d e h u m a n i z i n g . Interviewer: [ V o i c e r i s i n g a little.] Yes, but in 1979, G e e r t z d i s p l a y s an a c u t e awareness of the issue of, erh, g o i n g , Native. Er, First Nations? H e a c k n o w l e d g e s this by stating that c e r t a i n l y n o one k n o w s this better than they [anthropologists] d o themselves; h e n c e the p a s s i o n to s w i m in the stream of their e x p e r i e n c e , and the i l l u s i o n a f t erward that o n e s o m e h o w has (p. 228). Interviewee: H o w e v e r , he does not p r o v i d e a s o l u t i o n to the fact that w e c a n n o t get i n t o another's s k i n or c o n s c i o u s n e s s for the ethnographer "does not" and " l a r g e l y c a n n o t p e r c e i v e w h a t his informants p e r c e i v e " (Geertz, 1979, pp. 228-229). Just what will you do with these interviews? [Interviewee's emphatic question.] You're g o i n g to read me and my w o r d s o v e r & o v e r a g a i n u n t i l y o u get it right a nd then write-construct-interpretive textual interplay. I won't be d o i n g the w r i t i n g - t h i n k i n g - f e e l i n g - c o m p o s i n g . 120 Interviewer: Yes, but G e e r t z (1979) c o n t i n u e s that, aware that one is a l w a y s spectator, then i n v e s t i g a t i o n to understand h o w i n d i v i d u a l s p e r c e i v e t h e m s e l v e s as a person, i n this case Javenese, B a l i n e s e or M o r r o c a n , not by p r e s u m i n g to b e c o m e n a t i v i e - i z e d , but, perhaps, instead to seek and a n a l y t i c a l l y e x a m i n e and interpret for t h em th e i r (the Javanese, the B a l i n e s e , etc.) s y m b o l i c forms in order to e x a m i n e the "words, images, inst i t u t i o n s a nd b e h a v i o u r s " of these i n d i v i d u a l s under study by setting aside his c o n c e p t i o n s of what s e l f h o o d is (p. 229). H e doesn't a c t u a l l y g i v e i n s t r u c t i o n s for h o w to set aside one's self, but, ah, there is that t r u i s m about the p o s s i b i l i t y of o b j e c t i v i t y again. I mean what d o y o u i n t e n d to d o here? I n t e r v i e w y o u r s e l f ? [Sounds o f laughter] Interviewee: I [more laughter], ah, that's r e a l l y r i c h . Interviewer: [Annoyance emanating f r o m within.] I can h e l p y o u get y o u r v o i c e heard. J u l i e C r u i k s h a n k (1990), a n t h r o p o l o g y professor at the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , grapples w i t h this issue of s p e a k i n g for or w i t h her 'research sample' in her i n t r o d u c t i o n to Life L i v e d L i k e a Story. A w a r e of the debates related to c h a l l e n g i n g c u l t u r a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n -s u m m a r i s e d in the q u e s t i o n : W h o Is S p e a k i n g for W h o m A b o u t W h a t ? - C r u i k s h a n k (1990) a d o p t e d li f e - h i s t o r y research because the m o d e l attempts to r e d u c e the d i c h o t o m i e s , d e s c r i b e d by G e e r t z (1979) above, because, she states, instead of r e s e a r c h i n g f r o m a c o n v e n t i o n a l f o r m u l a in w h i c h an ou t s i d e i n v e s t i g a t i o n in i t i a t e s a n d c o n t r o l s the research, this m o d e l depends on o n g o i n g c o l l a b o r a t i o n b e t w e e n the i n t e r v i e w e r a n d i n t e r v i e w e e . S u c h a mo d e l begins by t a k i n g s e r i o u s l y what p e o p l e say a b o u t t h e i r l i v e s rather than tr e a t i n g t h e i r w o r d s s i m p l y as an i l l u s t r a t i o n of s o m e other process (Cruikshank, 1990, p. 1). Interviewee: Yes, see(k)ing c o l l a b o r a t o r s seems, somehow, more human to me than i d e n t i f y i n g a research p o p u l a t i o n or sample; and the c o l l a b o r a t i v e nature seems m o r e r e l a t i o n a l 121 w i t h an e m p h a s i s on being research rather than doing research o n those hapless s p e c i m e n s p l a c e d , f i g u r a t i v e l y , under Euro-tinted researcher lenses. I a m al s o u n c o m f o r t a b l e that C r u i k s h a n k (1990) must a d d the w o r d s that in this m ethod peoples' stories be taken s e r i o u s l y , for it raises this q u e s t i o n to me: W e r e the stories of w o m y n of First N a t i o n s ancestry not t a k e n s e r i o u s l y before? Interviewer: I, this is, ah, w h y I thought K i r b y a n d McKenna's (1989) h o pe to f o c u s o n the " w o r l d f r o m the p e r s p e c t i v e of the margins a l l o w s a different a n d a u t h e n t i c p e r c e p t i o n of the w o r l d " (p. 33). T h e y a l s o raise these questions about the lack of " f i t " b e t w e e n t h e m s e l v e s a n d the sense of " b e i n g t r a i n e d / s o c i a l i z e d to c o m m u n i c a t e w i t h / in the terms of the d o m i n a n t i n s t i t u t i o n " (Kate M c K e n n a , 1989, p. 18). In fact, they r e c o m m e n d that the f l e d g l i n g researcher, f o l l o w i n g a d v i c e f r o m Judy G o l e c (cited by Sandy Kirby, K i r b y & M c K e n n a , 1989) c o n d u c t a sel f - i n t e r v i e w to i d e n t i f y one's c o n c e p t u a l baggage about the research q u e s t i o n (p. 21, & see ftnt. #3) a n d the research process (p. 32). Interviewee: Yes, I am just starting to sift that book. In order for y o u r p r e s u m p t i o n to operate s o m e o n e here has to a d m i t to b e i n g in-from the margins; a n d that, won't w o r k for me in my b e l i e f in i n t e r c o n n e c t e d n e s s . Interconnectedness as more than just a u t h e n t i c i n t e r s u b j e c t i v i t y of t w o beings d i a l o g u i n g . There's the aspect of this e v e r a c t i v e r e l a t i o n s h i p a n d h o n o u r i n g that r e l a t i o n s h i p . Interviewer: So back to y o u r desire for ourstory, not p o rno p l u r a l i s t rupture? Interviewee: Yes, a way fr o m separation to integration: for h u m a n i t y to b e c o m e w h o l e again. Interviewer: So, o b j e c t i v i t y w o u l d never be p o s s i b l e for you? For me? 122 Interviewee: [Sits w i t h a l o o k of stern concentration on her face. E x t r e m e l y long pause on tape. The silence heightens the intensity of the moment. S u r p r i s i n g l y she does not reach f o r a cigarette.] Sorry. I was e x p e r i m e n t i n g w i t h b e i n g as o b j e c t i v e as I p o s s i b l y c o u l d . I don't k n o w if I c a n access that z o n e ? D i d I l o o k any different to you? S o m e h o w for me, o b j e c t i v i t y means to desist b e i n g S h a r i l y n . C a n I d o that? W h y w o u l d I w ant to d o that? E t h n o g r a p h i c assumptions have been c h a l l e n g e d s i n c e G e e r t z . For e x a m p l e , Pratt (1986) r e m i n d s i n t e r v i e w e r s that e t h n o g r a p h i c p r a c t i c e s are "often i n h e r i t e d f r o m " other genres, i n c l u d i n g travel books and j o u r n a l s , personal memoirs, j o u r n a l i s m , and w r i t t e n a c c o u n t s f r o m settlers, m i s s i o n a r i e s , c o l o n i a l o f f i c i a l s and bureaucrats, and others (p. 26). She c a u t i o n s that e t h n o g r a p h y is not a "neutral, tropeless d i s c o u r s e " w i t h p o s s i b i l t y to render 'reality' in a fai t h f u l m anner "not r e n d e r e d ] through our o w n valu e s and i n t e r p r e t i v e schemes" (Pratt, 1986, p. 26). Interviewer: [Internal muttering: Gree-aat! Just what is my role supposed to be here? I need to tal k to those committee members.] G e n e s i s in the Library Interviewee: So the questions are back and y o u R.R.P.? Interviewee: Yes, I return to a l l of those textual p l a c e s and v i s i t those o l d , f a m i l i a r faces. I go right b ack to the b e g i n n i n g . E d u c a t i o n a l research - blah-blah - ori g i n a t e s f r o m a v a r i e t y of sources, w h i c h i n c l u d e personal o b s e r v a t i o n of a ph e n o m e n o n , i n v e s t i g a t i o n a n d c o n s i d e r a t i o n of t h e o r y or the related literature, e x a m i n a t i o n of s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l - blah-blah - issues, 123 r e f l e c t i o n a bout situations of p r a c t i c e and personal e x p e r i e n c e a n d insights ( M c M i l l a n & Schu m a c h e r , 1989, pp. 75-77). The literature itself may be a "useful p o i n t for resea r c h " ( H a m m e r s l e y & A t k i n s o n , 1991, p. 30). I don't k n o w if H and A meant I take t h e m q u i t e so li t e r a l l y e v e n t u a l l y . I d e n t i f i a b l e places to seek out p r o b l e m s seems to be a f a i r l y standard l i t a n y t h r o u g h the e d u c a t i o n a l research texts scanned. In other words, leave no stone u n t u r n e d b e c a u s e y o u just might f i n d the O.R.P. - that's o v e r l o o k e d research p r o b l e m . Interviewer: A n d , you're t e a c h i n g E D U C 4 4 2 again w h i l e a t t e n d i n g this d o c t o r a l s e m i n a r in research? Interviewee: Yes. A n d , I've read the Chrisjohn's (1988) argument that research is fable s q u e . I b e c o m e ve r y i n t r i g u e d w i t h the actualit(y)(ies) of his p r o p o s i t i o n s . I a p p r o a c h E D U C 4 4 2 (Jan. to M a r c h , 1993) dif f e r e n t l y . I des i r e that students, i n t e n d i n g teachers a.k.a. c r i t i c a l pedagogues, d e c o n s t r u c t the nature, substance and structure of the research base extant a bout N a t i v e A b o r i g i n a l A m e r l n d i a n " l n d i a n s . " In E D U C 4 4 2 I ca n n o t s a n c t i o n a n y o n e h u n t i n g for re c i p e s about h o w to teach "Indians" or c h i l d r e n of First N a t i o n s ancestry. I b e l i e v e that before a n y o n e l o o k s at the research, o n e has to loo k at the s o c i o p o l i t i c a l or racist or other c o n n o t a t i o n s of the c o d e s e m p l o y e d to i d e n t i f y this p o p u l a t i o n of research sample(s). In a letter, I w r i t e of my attempt to try a diffe r e n t a p proach. The course is partially lecture and partially student-research team work. I am trying to set up a course where we actively share our readings and our research. I have the students on Contract Work where signed up for a grade (9,8,7,6) and this correlates with a required number of readings plus an additional assignment. There is so much written about FN education in terms of issues, characteristics, principles and practice. Some of the statements are based on research . . . and some based on opinion and visioning ( C a l l i o u to Tebbitt, personal c o m m u n i c a t i o n , January 24, 1993, n.p.). 124 But the E D U C 4 4 2 class isn't e x a c t l y prepared for this. Further in the letter, I w r i t e , that I d o not want this to be a course where I come in and lecture about SO-and-SO said THIS and SO-and-SO said THA T. The class has started uneasily because I don't think I was exactly clear about what I wanted or how the course would run - collaborative teaching and learning - and for another reason. I think that students are very used to being spoon fed items. I think they want the information in a predigested fashion and I just feel this is dishonest and not intellectual. . . . I felt today that the class was beginning to get the idea about critical thinking as we worked through a very simple example ( C a l l i o u to Tebbitt, personal c o m m u n i c a t i o n , January 24, 1993, n.p.). A s I am l e a r n i n g h o w to l o o k hard at, ah, deconstruct the w h i t e n o i s e of research, w h i c h is a l w a y s this presense u n t i l I f i n d myself w o n d e r i n g if I w o u l d r e c o g n i s e and a p p r e c i a t e an a l t e r n a t i v e if it f e l l I on me. I feel rather l i k e I am w a l k i n g head thrust f o r w a r d i n t o a b l i z z a r d . I am a l s o e n j o y i n g the p u z z l e m e n t . I am a l m o s t s h o u t i n g A T O T H E R S T O D O T H E S A M E ! That is not suggest, or have y o u infer, that I am b e l i e v i n g I am T H E O N L Y O N E IN P O S S E S S I O N O F T R U T H ! M o r e , I am s h o u t i n g HEY, T A K E A L O O K HERE B E C A U S E THIS IS I N T E R E S T I N G ! [ A l l Interviewee's emphasis.] Just put me on a Soap Bo x in H y d e Park. Y o u b e e n there? D o y o u k n o w they a c t u a l l y d o that? Stand on boxes and things a n d p o n t i f i c a t e ? I 125 was there in '87 w i t h my M o m and there was a man l i t e r a l l y r a i l i n g against the e l i t i s t , b o u r g e o i s c a p i t a l i s t s ! L o v e d it! V e r y e x c i t i n g . Perhaps, I s h o u l d d o my d o c t o r a l d e fense there. A r e y o u n e r vous about yours? Interviewer: [Ignoring question, b u s i l y w r i t i n g i n f i e l d notebook: 'Been to L o n d o n , E n g l a n d , 1987, H y d e Park, finds free speechifying stimulating'. H o w does this affect her classroom c u r r i c u l u m presentation? F i n d out. Maybe, interview some former students - at least, t r y to f i n d some who w i l l talk openly.] So y o u become, c h o o s e to become, a c u r r i c u l u m provokcator? Interviewee: Er, I t h i n k that's spelt: provocateur? French, I think. [Continues, sounding hurt, but maybe, she's teasing.] W e l l , gee, that's what Dr. W. is d o i n g in EDCI601(c). Interviewer: O n l y he's a Canad i a n ? That is, ah, 'White'. Interviewee: Y o u have this real f i x a t i o n on race, don't you? L i k e "Indians" (can)(not) say this a n d 'Whites' (can)(not) say that? Think, two-leggeds. [Pause on tape. Interviewee toys w i t h a piece o f cigarette package f o i l . Starts to f o l d a complicated o r i g a m i r e p l i c a o f the Statue of Liberty.] D i d y o u ever c o n s i d e r that 'race' is just a construct? That it's s o m e t h i n g w e made up? That this is a s o c i a l l y - b e l i e v e d w o r l d ? Feels L i k e Starting O v e r & O v e r & O v e r & O v e r Interviewer: Right. So, y o u begin again to (re)examine research by r e t u r n i n g to the texts a bout research? Y o u return right to c o n s i d e r a t i o n of source? Interviewee: Yes, l o o k i n g for that stimulus. I a p p r e c i a t e Crawl's (1993) c a u t i o n that the n o v i c e researcher c o n s i d e r that research originates from the "[f]irst, a n d by far the most impo r t a n t 126 c r i t e r i o n " for research " w h i c h is the degree of interest" possessed about a t o p i c b e c a u s e the n o v i c e researcher w i l l be s p e n d i n g lengthy t i m e w i t h the c h o i c e made (p. 6). Yes, I a m l o o k i n g for that s t i m u l u s , "a s u r p r i s i n g fact or set of facts" w h i c h alter p r e v i o u s c o n s c i o u s n e s s or c o n c l u s i o n s about events and c o n d i t i o n s as they seem ( H a m m e r s l e y & A t k i n s o n , 1991, p. 30). H a m m e r s l e y a n d A t k i n s o n p r o v i d e this o n e e x a m p l e w h e r e a researcher observes that g e n d e r seems to suggest s ome sort of c o r r e l a t i o n w i t h a c h i e v e m e n t on s c i e n c e exams (p. 30). Here, they suggest that the i m p o r t of the p r o b l e m may be more of a pragm a t i c or p o l i t i c a l s u r prise than t h e o r e t i c a l . H o w e v e r , the d u o stress that "even w h e r e the starting p o i n t is not current s o c i a l theory," that t h e o r y is soon a necessary c o m p o n e n t of p r o b l e m e l a b o r a t i o n " ( H a m m e r s l e y & A t k i n s o n , 1991, p. 31). So, I think-feel w e must have t h e o r y to interpret f i n d i n g s ; that's cool. I lov e to t h e o r i z e . I a c t u a l l y get e x c i t e d about the o p p o r t u n i t y . Then, to illu s t r a t e , the t w o ethnographers i n t r o d u c e this e x t e n d e d q u o t a t i o n f r o m a researcher's 1 9 7 0 study, t i t l e d Mohawk Heroes and Jrinidadian Peasants (See: F r e l i c k , 1970). O f course, I'm gagging' - N.B. p h y s i c a l realm. The d e l i b e r a t e i n c l u s i o n of this e x a m p l e draws on a g l a m o r i z e d fantasy h e i g h t e n e d through non-First Nations-authored s o c i a l p s y c h e t h e o r y to e x p l a i n a M o h a w k 'love' of heights a n d steelwork. The e x a m p l e d i s c r e d i t s the 'goodness' of H a m m e r s l e y a nd Atkinson's (1991) intent t o argue that e thnography be v a l u e d as a sou r c e of the o r y d e v e l o p m e n t d u e to the method's " c a p a c i t y to d e p i c t the a c t i v i t i e s a n d p e r s p e c t i v e s of actors in ways that c h a l l e n g e the d a n g e r o u s l y m i s l e a d i n g p r e c o n c e p t i o n s that s o c i a l s c i e n t i s t s often b r i n g to research" (p. 23). W h i l e H a m m e r s l e y and A t k i n s o n (1991) are a r g u i n g that " s o c i a l p h e n o m e n a that are o t h e r w i s e taken-for-granted b e c o m e v i s i b l y p r o b l e m a t i c " (p. 32), the Mo h a w k - t h e s i s is f o u n d e d in sheer c o l o n i a l f a c t i t i o u s n e s s w h i c h they ( H & A) o m i t to deconstruct. Interviewer: A l l c o n t r i v e d ? Interviewee: N o t a l l ; however, there are e n o u g h fac t o i d s a b o u n d i n g that k n o w l e d g e rel a t e d to "Indians" b e c o m e "[m]anifest manners," " s i m u l a t i o n s of d o m i n a n c e ; the no t i o n s a n d 127 m i s n o m e r s that are read as a u t h e n t i c and sustained as representations of N a t i v e A m e r i c a n Indians" ( V i z e n o r , 1994, p. 6). Part of that m a n n e r l i n e s s is to c o d e "Indians" as a g l o b a l set of p r o b l e m s to be stud i e d . The 'Other' is a p r o b l e m , not a brother or a sister. That strikes me as just odd, l i k e is it p o s s i b l e to b e l i e v e 'Other' is not a member of the exact same species? Perhaps, 'Topic', N o t P roblem? Interviewer: E v e n t u a l l y y o u get to C r o w l (1993) w h o begins his research s e q u e n c e w i t h s e l e c t i o n of a research topic, f o l l o w e d w i t h f o r m u l a t i o n of research q u e s t i o n s (p. 17). Interviewee: Yes. A l t h o u g h he pr o v i d e s no d i s c u s s i o n of the t e r m i n o l o g y 'problem' nor reasons for his s w i t c h to use of the term to 'topic', the useage seems less p r o b l e m a t i c for me. C r o w l (1993) def i n e s t o p i c as " d i f f i c u l t to define," but, g e n e r a l l y , this is "an area of interest d i s t i n c t f r o m other areas of interest" (p. 23). I f i n d I can l i v e w i t h this language e x p r e s s i o n of a starting point. H o w e v e r , I am t r o u b l e d by the irony, and o n l y m i l d l y amused, at the a b s u r d i t y (not to m e n t i o n chagrin), I feel that I (again) i n t r o d u c e the w o r d s of a W h i t e m a l e to buttress my chan g e in d i r e c t i o n . A m I g u i l t y of c u l t u r a l or patriarchal a p p r o p r i a t i o n ? Or, is this an e x p e d i e n t s o l u t i o n ? Interviewer: Y o u b e c o m e re p u l s e d by the "taken for granted i c y surface of E u r o d e r i v a t i v e e p i s t e m o l o g y " a n d y o u "are f o r c e d to s w i m deeper to l o c a t e currents of resistance to further i n t e l l e c t u a l c o l o n i z a t i o n " ( C a l l i o u , 1994, February, p. 4)? That feels dangerous? Interviewee: Yes, dangerous. S e l f - c o l o n i z a t i o n is dangerous; and s t u p i d if I let the h o m o g e n i z a t i o n process happen to me w h i l e I'm awake. D o I r e a l l y w i s h to go there? H o w m u c h of this p u b l i c , s y s t e m i z a t i o n of f i n d i n g out through research tactics d o I have to accept? [Interviewee looks up and sees that Interviewer is NOT l i s t e n i n g — A d v i s o r please N.B. - but is s c r i b b l i n g a f i e l d note.] 128 Interviewer: [ S c r i b b l i n g a f i e l d note. 'Perhaps, leave anecdotal j o u r n a l entry re. snowstorm [Tape segment 111(a)] in . ' R e v i s i t C o n n e l l y and C l a n d i n i n (1988) wherein "The image reaches into the past, gathering up experiential threads meaningfully connected to the present. A n d it reaches intentionally into the future and creates new meani n g f u l l y connected threads as situations are experienced" et cetera, (p. 60). S nowstorm may be useful.] Interviewee: W h a t am I? T a l k i n g to myself here? A Lit t l e R e a d e r l y S u m m a t i o n Interviewer: Thus, the texts e x p l i c a t e that the researcher b e g i n w i t h an area of interest in orde r to ( r e ) c o n c e p t u a l i z e a n d make ((un)known)(old) k n o w l e d g e (i l ) l e g i t i m a t e . So, you're in search of a pr o b l e m ? Y o u beg i n to search for a pr o b l e m , or, er, area of interest, a n d then d e c i d e to turn y o u r a t t e n t i o n c o m p l e t e l y a way fr o m c o m m u n i t y e d u c a t i o n a n d in t o First N a t i o n s teachers, t h e i r l i v e s . S i n c e 1972, the watershed year of the release a nd b i l a t e r a l a c c e p t a n c e of the then Federal L i b e r a l g o v e rnment and the N a t i o n a l Indian B(r)otherhood ( e s t a b l i s h e d 1968; now, the A s s e m b l y of First N a t i o n s s i n c e 1988) of the p o l i c y paper, Indian Control of Indian Education (See: C a l l i o u , 1994, February, (pp. 1, 2, 11, 12, 14, 29-31, 32). Y o u p e r c e i v e a n d are " i n t r i g u e d by the o b v i o u s lacunae in the literature about the li v e s of p r o f e s s i o n a l a n d lay a n d [other] educators w h o have served for the past t w e n t y years as Elders, language instructors, v o l u n t e e r s , c u r r i c u l a r i s t s , home-school c o o r d i n a t o r s , aides, administrators, a n d c l a s s r o o m teachers in this a l t e r n a t i v e , c ommunity-based, e d u c a t i o n a l movement" ( C a l l i o u , February, 1994, p. 12). Y o u d e c i d e y o u r research interest is teachers of FNA, that is, c l a s s r o o m ( p r o f e s s i o n a l a n d lay) as b e i n g in p i v o t a l p o s i t i o n s in the e s c a l a t i o n of l o c a l c o n t r o l of First N a t i o n s e d u c a t i o n , a n d 129 i m p l i c i t l y , other s o v e r e i g n i s t o b j e c t i v e s to assert self-determination. W i t h b a c k g r o u n d study y o u note the g r o w t h of 24 First N a t i o n s teacher e d u c a t i o n programs in o p e r a t i o n by 1989 as testament to c o m m u n i t y support of this s p e c i a l i z a t i o n (Nyce, 1990, pp. 39, 42). K i r k n e s s ' (1986) o b s e r v a t i o n that teachers of F N A are "keys to progress," c r i t i c a l to the a c h i e v e m e n t of First N a t i o n s e d u c a t i o n a l o b j e c t i v e s "for a number of reasons," unsubstantied w i t h "reports of inv e s t i g a t i o n s of t h e i r e f f e c t i v e n e s s " (p. 47). M u c h text is a v a i l a b l e re. the struggle to s e i z e c o n t r o l of education's f o r m a l a n d in f o r m a l structures to reassert s o v e r e i g n t y a n d d e c o n s t r u c t the grand narrative of E u r o c o l o n i a l e m p i r e b u i l d i n g a n d e x p l o i t a t i o n of i n d i v i d u a l s c o n s i d e r e d 'Other' a n d 'lesser', d e e m e d not w o r t h y of self-determined l i v e d e x p e r i e n c e as w h o they are-might-be f r o m w i t h i n their c u l t u r a l / e t h n i c / s o v e r e i g n context. The ro l e of the teacher, y o u rea l i s e is a key leverage p o i n t of r e s p o n s i b l e po t e n t i a l i n t e r v e n t i o n for o v e r t u r n i n g s c h o o l i n g processes f r o m those of a c c u l t u r a t i o n to one of e n c u l t u r a t i o n . For you, this is further c o m p l i c a t e d in situat i o n s of p l u r a l i s m w h e r e e d u c a t i o n has been a one-way system of int e g r a t i o n . For e x a m p l e , Emerson (1987) states that c u r r i c u l a r e x p e r i e n c e s c a n be seen t h r o u g h c u l t u r a l contexts or f r a m e w o r k s w h i c h p r o v i d e educators a n d parents w i t h r e n e w e d support, v i t a l i t y a n d a d v o c a c y for c u r r i c u l u m s a n d programs d e s i g n e d to l i n k the native past w i t h the present so that the future of native p e o p l e s c a n be that of adaptations to assure the best c u l t u r a l c o n t i n u i t y a n d c h a n g e (p. 41). Thus, y o u de s i r e that these teachers of F N A can be c o a x e d , I guess, i n t o s e l f - r e f l e x i v e l y d e s c r i b i n g h o w they are "using the N a t i o n a l Indian Brotherhood's p o l i c y of Indian Control of Indian Education (1972) to d e s i g n a n d d e l i v e r c u r r i c u l a r e x p e r i e n c e s " ( C a l l i o u , 1994, p. 31) -a s s u m i n g they've read the p o l i c y . In short, y o u desir e to p r o v i d e o p p o r t u n i t y for these teachers to self-appraise t h e i r effectiveness as e d u c a t i o n a l activists - p o l i t i c a l a n d et cetera? [The novice researcher learns to recover quickly.] 130 Interviewee: Ugh, d i d I w r i t e that? Put that way, I s o u n d v e r y earnest and v e r y m u c h in search of my o w n agenda. I am d o i n g the if 'X' is an "Indian", then 'Y' may, or may not, occur. H o w sturdy is this as a starting p o i n t for any research? I mean getting out of that if-then s c e n a r i o is my part of my agenda. H o w ? En c u l t u r a t i o n may seem an o b v i o u s c o n d i t i o n . Dewey, w r i t i n g in D e m o c r a c y and E d u c a t i o n , o r i g i n a l l y w r i t t e n in 1915, stated that "So o b v i o u s i n d e e d is the n e c e s s i t y of t e a c h i n g a n d l e a r n i n g for the c o n t i n u e d e x i s t e n c e of a s o c i e t y that w e may seem to be d w e l l i n g u n d u l y on a t r u i s m " (p. 4). H o w e v e r , in light of the attempted g e n o c i d a l d e v a s t a t i o n of P F N A , w h i c h s y s t e m i c m a g n i t u d e is r e a l l y p h y s i c a l l y a s s a u l t i n g me. As I read, I am o n c e more c h e e r i n g the efforts of o u r ancestors just to survive. That a p p r e c i a t i o n b e c o m e s a sense of p r o f o u n d r e v e r e n c e and I feel v e r y h u m b l e d to be a l i v e because of what they s u r v i v e d for me to be a l i v e . Dewey's statement has n e w u rgency for me as engaged in c o u n t e r h e g e m o n i c c u l t u r a l - p o l i t i c a l work/struggle/joy/survivance. I a m awestruck w i t h P F N A absense in e d u c a t i o n a l t h e o r i z i n g . A s I read so many v o i c e s of e x p e r i e n c e are missing. As a teacher, I read so m u c h up here w h i c h isn't f r o m the p u r v i e w of the t e a c h e r herself. W i t h the teachers of FNA, I guess, I f i n d a h o b b y horse. W e l l , not just a ho b b y horse, this is f a s c i n a t i n g r e a d i n g to c o n t i n u e b a c k g r o u n d i n g for t e a c h i n g , as s e s s i o n a l lecturer, f or E D U C 4 4 1 and for 442. The o p p o r t u n i t y , and p r i v i l e g e , of t e a c h i n g these t w o courses b e c o m e graduate-level self-study courses. A n y w a y , I r e a l l y a d m i r e that the N.I.B. was so v o c a l i n t e r n a l l y a nd i n t e r n a t i o n a l l y in the 1960s and 1970s. That's a major p o l i t i c a l a c c o m p l i s h m e n t w i t h the f o r m u l a t i o n and a c c e p t a n c e of an e d u c a t i o n a l reform p o l i c y k n o w n as Indian C o n t r o l of Indian E d u c a t i o n (1972-1973). So I l i n k this to Freire (1989), a B r a z i l i a n steeped in the c u l t u r a l t h e o l o g i e s of l i b e r a t i o n of the 1970s, w h o r e l e a s e d P edagogy of the O p p r e s s e d in 1969. In r e a d i n g t h r o u g h his c o n c e p t i o n , er, p h i l o s o p h y I c o n s i d e r h o w d e c o l o n i z a t i o n is for the c u l t u r e s of s i l e n c e , c u r r i c u l a r o b j e c t i v e s 131 w h i c h stress learner-centered e m p o w e r m e n t (that is, c o n s c i e n t i z a t i o n ) to p o l i t i c i z e the i n t e r w o v e n c o m p l e x i t i e s of o p p r e s s i o n , li t e r a c y , power, c u l t u r e and k n o w l e d g e . Indian C o n t r o l of Indian E d u c a t i o n was f r a m e d to "end the p r e v a i l i n g s i t u a t i o n of e d u c a t i o n as an a l i e n a t i n g a nd often c o u n t e r - p r o d u c t i v e e x p e r i e n c e " (Ponting & G i b b i n s , 1980, p. 205). I mean, you're right, I w o n d e r e d what stories our teachers had to share about t h e i r u n d e r s t a n d i n g of t h e i r r o l e in terms of Four Realms lead e r s h i p . A n d , of course, I am r e a n a l y s i n g myself in ligh t of this p o l i c y a nd w o n d e r i n g w hat n o r m a t i v e nonsense s h o u l d b a s e l i n e my t e a c h i n g as a teach e r of FNA. Interviewer: Further, y o u state, W h o are these First N a t i o n s teachers? W h a t have been t h e i r e x p e r i e n c e s as rev e a l e d t h r o u g h t h e i r self-told stories? W h a t c o m m o n , or d i s s i m i l a r , f e e l i n g s m i ght be r e v e a l e d through t h e i r r e t o l d e x p e r i e n c e s ( e m o t i o n a l realm)? W h a t c o m m o n , or d i s s i m i l a r , b e h a v i o u r s (for examples, i n s t r u c t i o n a l , interpersonal) might be e v i d e n t (phy s i c a l realm)? W h a t lessons might these teachers have f o u n d w h i c h c a n be shared w i t h other i n t e n d i n g teachers and the w i d e r p u b l i c of educators about e d u c a t i o n a l a c t i v i s m and s o c i a l c h a n g e ( c o g n i t i v e realm)? W h a t insights have they g a i n e d about the process of t e a c h i n g in o r d e r to l o c a t e a n d sustain respect for First N a t i o n s i d e n t i t y and sovereignty, c u l t u r a l t e a c h i n g s and a u t o n o m y (spiritual realm)? ( C a l l i o u , 1994, February, p. 31). I thought-felt y o u s a i d y o u didn't c o m e here to be "Indian" (Tape segment ll(b)(i))? S u d d e n l y , y o u are w o n d e r i n g , "Where are our stories?" ( C a l l i o u , 1994, February, p. 14). Interviewee: Gee, I w o n d e r what I was l o o k i n g for then? M a y b e , n o w I'd just go a n d i n t e r v i e w teachers w h o self-i d e n t i f y as b e i n g i n v o l v e d w i t h c o u n t e r - h e g e m o n i c struggle? Or, eve n more interesting, i n t e r v i e w teachers i n v o l v e d w i t h s u s t a i n i n g the p r e v a i l i n g c a p i t a l i s t h e g emony? 132 O h , The Story(ing) Business Interviewer: W e l l , w h o m e v e r w e in t e r v i e w , it's O.K. to get those stories heard. Y o u r m o v e i n research seems to progress f r o m i n v e s t i g a t i o n to storying? Interviewee: The story(ing) business. I t h i n k I r e c o n c i l e d my hesitations a n d doubts by d e c i d i n g to c o l l a b o r a t i v e l y nurture stories in this (co)(self)reflexivity. S e e k i n g c o l l a b o r a t o r s seems, somehow, more e t h i c a l , or, the s t o r y i n g business q u e l l s s ome of my uneasiness. Hhhmmm...of course, I c o u l d e n d up getting together w i t h a w h o l e b u n c h of u n e t h i c a l st o r y t e l l e r s . A s p r e p w o r k to e x p l o r e this d i s s e r t a t i o n p o s s i b i l i t y , I f i n d myself b e l i e v i n g that I f i n a l l y see an a c c e p t a b l e role for myself as a researcher. I t h i n k of myse l f a p p r o a c h i n g First N a t i o n s teachers a n d s i m p l y stating: "So, what's t e a c h i n g l i k e for you?" R e a d i n g M i l b u r n ' s (1992) q u e s t i o n i n g of C l a n d i n i n ' s w o r k has me a g r e e i n g that the term "teachers' sto r i e s " may not di f f e r m u c h from that of 'life history' or the p l a i n o l d term 'autobiography'. Then, I c o n v i n c e myself that as P F N A t e l l stories, t hen s t o r y i n g might be a -not the - [Interviewee's emphasis] method to research w i t h P FNA. Fortunately, I have read V i z e n o r ' s p i e c e r e g a r d i n g s i m u l a t i o n . B e y o n d storying, however, I d o c o n s i d e r it l e g i t i m a t e to f i n d a w a y for teachers to w r i t e a n d hear or read about each others' e x p e r i e n c e s i n t r y i n g to enact s e l f - d e t e r m i n a t i o n through e d u c a t i o n . In some ways, this is w h e r e I c a n say that I saw m u c h of this m u l t i g e n e r a t i o n a l interpenetration o c c u r r i n g at Rae-Edzo. For e x a m p l e , I s a w the t w o first-year D o g r i b teachers r e a l l y X 1 0 1 0 l i s t e n i n g as those w i t h more e x p e r i e n c e spoke. I was al s o i n v o l v e d w i t h stuff w i t h the C a l g a r y W r i t i n g Project a n d c o l l a b o r a t i o n a n d su c h is just a bias I i n h e r i t f r o m r e l a t i o n s h i p s a n d projects I e n j o y e d as a c l a s s r o o m teacher. D e v e l o p i n g a sense of c o m m u n i t y is important to me. C o m m u n i t y seems a n t i t h e t i c a l to an i n g r a i n e d i mage of the researcher as i n d i v i d u a l - as p i o n e e r b r e a k i n g the e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l barrier. 133 A n y w a y , I end up b e l i e v i n g that this is the role of the researcher for me in that I d o not w r i t e to b r i n g m y s e l f to light for an a u d i e n c e but to b r i n g the p o w e r of the insights a n d d e l i g h t s of t h e i r stories to light/to press. I k n o w th e i r stories w i l l emerge thr o u g h structural t e c h n i q u e s I use a n d t h r o u g h the categories a nd resultant codes I d e s i g n a nd d e p l o y . I am c u r i o u s about the e x p e r i e n c e s of teachers of FNA. Here I am recr e a t i n g the s a m p l i n g c r i t e r i a t e c h n i q u e I loathe. Ugh. A n d , I can't escape the fact that stories are f o r m e d and shaped by the m e d i a in w h i c h they are . . . interpreted by the researcher. W h e n stories are wr i t t e n (recorded, video-taped, f i l m e d ) a nd then p u b l i s h e d (shaped, revised, edited) by another person, then that the person i n e v i t a b l y leaves his or her mark on the content, structure, a n d f o r m ... I am not suggesting that this is a fault in the process that s h o u l d be rooted out - I s i m p l y note here that it is an i n e v i t a b l e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of the task of p r e p a r i n g a story for another's r e a d i n g (or v i e w i n g ) ( M i l b u r n , 1992, p. 63) L i k e I'm g o i n g to w r i t e stories e v e n as I resist shaped stories s h a p i n g me. Interviewer: So y o u m u d d l e a r o u n d in there for a w h i l e about the e t h i c a l i m p l i c a t i o n s of story r e c o r d i n g a nd (re)presentation? Interviewee: Yes, for q u i t e a w h i l e . I might s t i l l be in there. [Pause o n tape.] Just k i d d i n g . The i n e v i t a b i l i t y M i l b u r n (1992) refers to has me re a l l y s tewing. I am wa r y of (re)presentation a n d the (re)presentation business is o m n i p r e s e n t for me. This ' c r i s i s ' of rep r e s e n t a t i o n seems omnipresent. W h a t right d o I have to go and get someone's story? W h a t right d o I have to represent, a nd reconstruct? W h a t purpose is served by r u n n i n g off-campus to get s o m e o n e else's story? W h o s e ? et cetera. A n d , there's the e t h i c a l l e g i t i m a t i o n n o n s e n s e of the researcher h a v i n g to es t a b l i s h they've f o u n d real "Indians" or P F N A to i n t e r v i e w . Interviewer: So, in the end, y o u never leave the campus? Y o u don't i n t e r v i e w a te a c h e r of F N A ? 134 Interviewee: No, not a si n g l e s o l i t a r y sole. I don't b l o o d t y p e any teachers a n d f i n d out h o w th e i r c l a s s r o o m e d u c a i o n a l a c t i v i s m is going? I a m t o o p a r a l y s e d w i t h doubt, to ask a n y o n e a n y t h i n g . [[Laughter.] [ M o r e laughter.] [ M o r e laughter after that.] Dear Anthropologists, & Educational Researchers: I Am Not a Problem Interviewee: Yes, w h e r e are our stories? The pr o b l e m ; ah, yes, the p r o b l e m w i t h the p r o b l e m . Interviewer: I guess, "New M o c c a s s i n s " ( C a l l i o u , 1994, February) is just the start of m a ny w e l l - i n t e n d e d disse r t a t i o n research proposal drafts. G i v e n the slightest impetus, y o u just c h u r n t h e m out a s s e m b l y - l i n e fashion. H o w d i d y o u ever get to the d e l i n e a t i o n of a research focus-interest area? Interviewee: T w o c o m m i t t e e members threatened to quit. Interviewer: So, this first a r t i c u l a t i o n of a p r o b l e m b e c o m e s y o u r o p p o r t u n i t y to d o some research on "Indians" as teachers? [Interviewee mimes a finger-down-the-throat-vomit-motion.] Interviewee: Ugh, asked that way, is r e a l l y u n c o m f o r t a b l e . I mean h o w does it s o u n d if I d e c i d e to study W h i t e teachers, r e a l l y hear their stories about t e a c h i n g W h i t e c h i l d r e n , p a r t i c u l a r l y in r e l a t i o n t o th e i r left h e m i s p h e r i c pronouncement. W H I T E is a c o l o u r ; a l t h o u g h , 135 s o m e h o w that's b e c o m e r e i f i e d as p r i v i l e g e . I see lots of W H I T E p e o p l e on W e s t B r o a d w a y b e g g i n g for f o o d m o n e y in 1995. W h i t e is a h o r r i f i c a l l y d i f f i c u l t s a m p l e p o p u l a t i o n for me to ev e n d e s c r i b e . A c t u a l l y , I never d i d the new-moccashoes study. A t that time, I t h i n k - f e e l - b e l i e v e I had ho n o u r a b l e , that is e t h i c a l l y worthy, inte n t i o n s of d o i n g a t e a & b a n n o c k i n t e r v i e w n u m b e r w i t h teachers of FNA. W e l l , k i n d a ; because as I am w r i t i n g this study-cum-proposal, I am again f e e l i n g l i k e I am g o i n g crazy. I am so leery of (re)producing the " I n d i a n " research business. E s p e c i a l l y , if my e m p i r i c a l or e t h n o g r a p h i c i n v e s t i g a t i o n s e x p o s e us to mass c o n s u m p t i o n of more E u r o i d e o l o g y a n d p o s s i b l y p r o v o k e s a spate of b u r e a u c r a t i c a l l y - f u n d e d studies (akin to M o h a w k steelworkers) to d o c u m e n t the narrative and/or c u l t u r a l and/or other metaphors of teachers of FNA. This has me f e e l i n g (qu)(un)easy. I mean, there's this v e r y p u b l i c aspect to researching, a n d I am c h a l l e n g i n g my i n t e n t i o n to research, p a r t i c u l a r l y , if an (un)intended result is to expose teachers of F N A a n d then have su c h exposure(s) r e i f i e d - l e a d i n g to G o d knows what? Hhhmmm...leading to C o y o t e k n o w s what? Be c a u s e I p e r c e i v e that there is a l w a y s a ve r y serious p o s s i b i l i t y that p u b l i s h e d research, left l a y i n g a r o u n d o p e n l y , p u b l i c l y , on shelves, can feed back into that n i g h t m a r i s h : W h a t d o "Indians" want?; or, T h i s is h o w to teach "Indians." N o w I am not q u e s t i o n i n g the g e n e t i c c o d e s of k n o w l e d g e - p r o d u c t i o n so m u c h as the c o n s e q u e n c e - p r o d u c t i o n : t w o e n t i r e l y d i f f e r e n t species. A l t h o u g h w e talk a bout some aspects of this in 601, my d o c t o r a l seminar, t h r o u g h assignments l i k e q u e s t i o n i n g the (pre)(as)sumptions of the researcher, I don't hear t o o often: No, don't d o that study - That is racist, sexist, genderist, ageist, etc. W h e n I began to d e s c r i b e my i n t e n d e d research area, I began to q u e s t i o n the b e g i n n i n g , m i d d l e and e n d of the t r a d i t i o n a l f o r m of research taught to graduate students. I had this i n t u i t i o n that s h o u l d I w h o l e h e a r t e d l y a dopt a n d use this p r o d u c t of the W.W.S. that I might w e l l c o n t i n u e a s e l f - c o l o n i z a t i o n process. Even the 136 b e g i n n i n g , that is, the d e f i n i t i o n of the p r o b l e m , may seem non-threatening to some; but I have reservations. Interviewer: Yes, I see, the p r o b l e m w i t h the p r o b l e m . W h e t h e r of a q u a n t i t a t i v e or q u a l i t a t i v e nature or d e s i g n , one is to b e g i n w i t h the d e f i n i t i o n of the p r o b l e m . Best a n d Kahn (1989) s y m p a t h e t i c a l l y alert the student that "one of the most d i f f i c u l t phases of the graduate research p r o j e c t is the c h o i c e of a sui t a b l e p r o b l e m " w h e r e i n "beginners are l i k e l y to s e l e c t a pr o b l e m that is m u c h too broad in scope" (p. 28). Interviewee: Yes, it's so prevalent. B o rg and G a l l (1983) e x p l a i n that the research process begins w i t h a c o n v e x focus on an "e d u c a t i o n a l p h e n o m e n o n " w h i c h the n o v i c e researcher may de s i r e to d e s c r i b e , or an ob s e r v e d event w h i c h needs e x p l a n a t i o n or a p r o b l e m n e e d i n g a s o l u t i o n . These author(itie)s are not as d o g m a t i c in t h e i r e m p h a s i s on p r o b l e m s and s o l u t i o n s as s o m e of the e a r l i e r writers such as, for example, G a y (1976), w h o w h o l e h e a r t e d l y adopts the W.W.S. gospel a c c o r d i n g to B a c o n (1561-1626). R e m e m b e r B a c o n d e s c r i e s the i n a d e q u a c i e s of d e d u c t i v e l o g i c , w i t h its p overty of s c i e n t i f i c e x p e r i m e n t a l methods (Re. Bacon, see: C o h e n , 1984, pp. 147-151; 500-505). Interviewer: So, there's s o m e t h i n g i n h e r e n t l y distasteful to y o u about the w o r d 'problem'? Interviewee: Yes. I am asked to b e g i n w i t h a 'problem'. G a y (1976) d e s c r i b e s p r o b l e m f o r m u l a t i o n as "a refinement process w h i c h begins w i t h the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of a p r o b l e m area and terminates w i t h o n e or more testable hypotheses or a n s w e r a b l e q u e s t i o n s " (p. 19). I a m pe r p l e x e d that I c a n be e x p e c t e d to p r e d e t e r m i n e the p o s s i b i l i t y of an a n swer to a qu e s t i o n , unless G a y (1976) is m e r e l y a l l u d i n g to an o p t i m i s t i c a f f i r m a t i v e to a qu e s t i o n l i k e , "Is there a cu r e for cancer?". H e does not e x p l a i n h o w some p r o b l e m s are a n s w e r a b l e a n d s o m e are not. 137 Further, G a y (1976) stresses that a l l p r o b l e m s must be '"researchable," w h i c h i n c l u d e s those " w h i c h c a n be investigated through the c o l l e c t i o n and an a l y s i s of data;" but those p r o b l e m s " w h i c h d e a l w i t h p h i l o s o p h i c a l or e t h i c a l issues are not researchable" (p. 23). Interviewer: Oh! Oh! So, you're right back to - this d i c h o t o m y y o u protest: s c i e n c e a n d p h i l o s o p h y ? Or, s c i e n c e and ethics? Interviewee: O r s o m e t h i n g and something? Yes, more d i r e c t i o n , i n s t r u c t i o n to ignore the i n e f f a b i l i t y of just t r y i n g to be a g o o d [Interviewee's emphasis] two-legged. That s o m e h o w e d u c a t i o n a l research a v o i d issues w h i c h cannot be e x a m i n e d w i t h o u t e m p i r i c data. There's a real sense, to me, that data must have this s o l i d n e s s , this p h y s i c a l i t y , if p r oof is to be really real [Interviewee's emphasis]. I f a i l to see w h i c h p r o b l e m c o u l d not c o n t a i n e i t h e r p h i l o s o p h i c a l or et h i c a l f o u n d a t i o n s or nuances or canyons. N o n e of the texts I r e v i e w seem to q u e s t i o n this z e r o p o i n t start to research a l t h o u g h several m e n t i o n the current a n t i - p o s i t i v i s t a r g u m e n t a t i o n (see, for e x a m p l e , C o h e n & M a n i o n , 1989, pp. 23-27). A l w a y s , though, there is that relentless d i r e c t i o n to f i n d the problem, l o c a t e the subjects, c o l l e c t the data, use the method, and so on [Interviewee's emphasis]. A l l these m e c h a n i s t i c elements of a v e r y two-legged a c t i v i t y b e c o m e v a l o r i z e d , l a b l i k e monotony. A l l of the v e r y interesting stuff is struck out. I sense, also, the h o p e f u l b e l i e f that s e l e c t i o n of the p r o b l e m is i n t e n d e d to reduce the f e e l i n g of b e i n g out of co n t r o l a n d that p r e c i s i o n can g u i d e m ethodology. T o u g h to d o in a h i g h l y c o n t i n g e n t universe. Interviewer: So y o u rebel against the luggage of the language? Y o u a d m i t " p r o b l e m s a b o u n d " but " f i n d the term 'problem' leaden w i t h c o l o n i a l i s t s c i e n t i f i c m e t h o d o l o g y a n d i d e o l o g i c a l m e n t a l i t y w h i c h denies the shared legacy of p r o b l e m f o r m u l a t i o n " ( C a l l i o u , 1994, February, p. 21). A g l i m m e r of w a n t i n g ourstory? Further, y o u state, "The c h o i c e of the w o r d problem [Interviewer's emphasis] i m p l i e s a set of v a l u e s I just c a n n o t r a t i o n a l i z e a nd a c c e p t " ( C a l l i o u , 1992, February, p. 23). Y o u are r e a d i n g against and t h r o u g h the grain of text again (see tape segment lll(b)(ix)(b) )? 138 Interviewee: Yes. Yes. A n d , yes. A c t u a l l y this 'fake' p r o p o s a l - H o w many of these have I w r i t t e n now? - is a literary d e v i c e to make a poi n t about s o m e t h i n g else e n t i r e l y . A n d , that is about research, e u r o c e n t r i c s y s t e m i c m o n o p o l i z a t i o n of e p i s t e m e a n d language, language, language. In r e a d i n g research from anthro, e d u c a t i o n a n d research, I f i n d m y s e l f s h o u t i n g , u n