mug of chocolate drink on a tray filled with leaves, next to an open book and beside fringed plaid shawl.

Because, let’s face it – who has time to catch up on all the journal articles published in Canadian history?

 

Welcome back to the Best New Articles series, where each month, I post a list of my favourite new articles! Don’t forget to also check out my favourites from previous months, which you can access by clicking here.

This month I read articles from:

 

Here are my favourites:

Whitney Wood, “’Put Right Under:’ Obstetric Violence in Post-war Canada,” Social History of Medicine, First Look, (August 2018): 1-22.

Author’s Twitter: @whitneylwood

Link: https://academic.oup.com/shm/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/shm/hky057/5087808?redirectedFrom=fulltext 

What it’s about:This article is based on a deep analysis of sixty letters written by Canadians to Dr. Grantly Dick-Read, a obstetrician who advocated for drug-free births (among other things), as well as archival research to study obstetric violence, or violence against women* who are pregnant, labouring, or have just given birth in the postwar period. Recorded in these letters are horrific instances of violence perpetuated on expectant and labouring mothers, including drugging, using physical restraints, and refusing to allow women in labour to push until the doctor arrived. This article is a revealing look at the relationship between gender and power in maternity wards in this period. But it also emphasizes how this period saw a growing number of women who actively resisted these trends in maternity care to the extent that they could.

What I loved: Ok, first of all, massive content warning. This article is fantastic, but it does contain graphic descriptions of violence against women, specifically in the context of pregnancy and childbirth. That said, this article is a superb example of fine-grained analysis, and an excellent example of how to properly contextualize a limited collection with additional archival research, while avoiding the problem of instancing. This is also an extremely under-studied, but vitally important area of research. Many of the descriptions of violence are consistent with contemporary experiences of pregnancy and childbirth, particularly for Indigenous peoples, Black people, and people of colour. Rates of C-sections are rising in Canada and around the world, largely to due to decisions made by doctors, not parents. A better understanding of this history can help us to address some of these issues, and rebalance the power relationship between doctors and patients.

Favourite quote: “By remaining aware of their comportment in the birthing room, and conducting themselves in a ‘respectable’ manner, women might hope to head off undesired medical interventions. In other cases, such as when the doctor had yet to be called to the delivery room despite the fact that birth was imminent, women vocally demanded medical attention. Laurel Rice, for example, told Dick-Read that her best advice to other women was to ‘YELL LIKE HELL!’ in order to ensure that they received the treatment they desired.” P. 19

Suggested uses: I think that this article is something that all obstetric doctors should read, at the very least. Probably all doctors. But this article will be of particular interest to historians of medicine, gender, women’s experiences, and childbirth. I don’t know if I would recommend it for a course unless it was for a graduate-level examination of one of these subjects, and only if it is accompanied by a content warning and/or alternative reading.

 

Karine R. Duhamel, “Kanata/Canada: Re-Storying Canada 150 at the Canadian Museum for Human Rights,” Journal of the Canadian Historical Association28, no. 1 (2017): 217-247.

Author’s Twitter: @Karineduhamel1

Link: https://www.erudit.org/en/journals/jcha/2017-v28-n1-jcha03928/1050900ar/

What it’s about: This article is a detailed look at the creation of the of the Rights of Passage: Canada at 150 exhibit. It is based on the personal experiences of Duhamel, who is Anishinaabe Metis, with roots in northwestern Ontario and Manitoba, and the Curator for Indigenous Rights at the Canadian Museum for Human Rights. In it, she argues that with proper re-consideration of their mandates and purposes, meaningful relationships with Indigenous communities, and an emphasis on re-storying the narrative of Canadian history, museums can be decolonizing spaces. Planning for the exhibit began in 2009, with consultation with Indigenous communities and advisory boards (like the Indigenous Advisory Council). These relationships, which were an essential part of the development of Rights of Passage, helped to keep the museum accountable. Duhamel notes that the Museum learned two important lessons through this process: 1) True collaboration and relationships with Indigenous communities take time, and should reflect the needs of the community and 2) Engagement must be based on a model that is flexible with respect to time, perspective, and content.

What I loved: ::insert all the gushing here:: While this article was written particularly for other museum professionals, I think that there are extremely important lessons here for any settler Canadian that works in history, from curators, to archivists, to historians. While Duhamel reflects specifically upon the creation of a museum exhibit, the lessons learned are equally applicable for historical research and writing. Colonial institutions from museums, to archives, to universities, have so much potential as decolonizing spaces. But a lot of work needs to happen first. This is also related to the article by Gaudry and Lorenz listed above. I also really appreciated Duhamel’s sophisticated analysis of Canada 150.

Favourite quote: “To ensure integrity and accountability in content, Museum curators remain committed to its mandate to promote reflection and dialogue while not adjudicating human and Indigenous rights issues. At the same time, curators acknowledge that the process through which we work can and should reflect the values that are important to the communities and individuals who trust the institution to share their stories. Curatorial staff emphasize the idea that these approaches are “decolonizing” but not necessary[sic] decolonial in the sense that they view their work as a process that will necessarily evolve and change in dialogue with Indigenous individuals, communities, and nations. P. 223.

And

“Museums do not have the right to demand collaboration from Indigenous communities and individuals – many wounds are still too fresh for that – rather they must understand that they can be sites of power for Indigenous people, but only if they dare to challenge the very processes of oppression and erasure which they have supported in the past, have been part of, and may do so still.” P. 240

Suggested uses: I think that this is essential reading for anyone involved in public history and museum studies/curation. I also think that it is essential reading for all settlers working (or who want to work) with Indigenous individuals, communities, and nations.

 

Mary Anne Poutanen and Jason Gilliland, “Mapping Work in Early Twentieth-Century Montreal: A Rabbi, a Neighbourhood, and a Community,” Urban History Review 45, no. 2 (Spring 2017): 7-24.

Author’s Twitter: @westernprof

Link: https://www.erudit.org/en/journals/uhr/2017-v45-n2-uhr03969/1051383ar/ 

What it’s about: In this article, Poutanen and Gillilland use the 1909 journal of Rabbi Simon Glazer, chief rabbi of five orthodox city synagogues in the St. Lawrence Boulevard corridor of Montréal, and HGIS to study his daily life and the social geography of the Jewish community. The data for the HGIS was drawn from the Montréal l’avenir du passé project, based on census returns, annual directories, and tax rolls. The result is a rich portrait of the community-level and political work done by Glazer and other rabbis in the city, including their involvement in settling family, marital, and business disputes. As part of their analysis, Poutanen and Gillilland also provide a window into the earliest years of the “Downtowner” Jewish community, primarily Eastern-European immigrants who were establishing themselves in city that they would profoundly shape.

What I loved: Ok, again, this article ticked a lot of boxes for me. But most notably, I really enjoyed this article because my great-grandmother was a shopkeeper in the St. Lawrence Boulevard corridor around this period. She died when I was still a baby, but this article gave me a window into her world. I also really appreciated how the authors used qualitative analysis and HGIS to study the daily lives of people in the Jewish community in this period. It opens up so many possibilities for future work, not just on the Jewish community of Montréal, but on other ethnic communities in cities across the world. Finally, I found their discussion of the get to be particularly fascinating. While divorce was out of reach for Christians in this period in Quebec, Jewish couples could obtain a religious divorce sanctioned by a rabbi. This divorce is called a get. While gets can only be given by the husband of a couple, rabbis did often counsel couples and, if the divorce went ahead, would perform a religious ceremony. Very little information exists on these times of domestic conflicts in Jewish households, so this was really exciting.

Favourite quote: “On 3 January 1909, Rabbi Simon Glazer spent a busy and long although not an unusual day in Montreal. He conducted three marriages, each held in a different location, wrote a letter to Rabbi Grossman of Philadelphia to inform him about a future son-in-law, adjudicated the case of Markson versus Wagner, and counselled the Sosins, who had asked him to grant them a divorce. […] Seemingly, it was Mrs. Rosenberg Sosin, a singer at the Starland Theatre, who had requested the divorce. As he described the couple, “She was a woman about town when he married her. He became a gambler after their marriage. Both claimed to belong to the set of ‘progressists.’ I refused to grant divorce or right of.” Four days later, Glazer had a change of heart and performed the get; they were young and “not going in the right path,” at least together. He charged the Sosins $9 for his efforts.” P. 7, 17-18.

Suggested uses: Obviously this is a must-read for anyone who does the history of the Jewish community of Montréal. But I think that it will also be of interest to anyone who is interested in using HGIS in social history or anyone who studies the formation of ethnic communities in urban environments.

 

Also Recommended:

 

I’m finally all caught up! Yay! Thank you for being so patient with me as I struggled to catch up to the present month with the Best New Articles series. The next edition will only cover one month. Thank goodness. However, please feel free to let me know if you have any articles coming out next month! I regularly check the Canadian peer-reviewed journals, but it’s much harder for me to keep track of the articles published in American periodicals. You can send them to me at unwrittenhistories[at]gmail[dot]com or on Twitter at @andreaeidinger.

I hope you enjoyed this week’s blog post! If you did, please consider sharing it on the social media platform of your choice! And don’t forget to check back on Sunday for a brand new Canadian History Roundup! See you then!

Liked this post? Please take a second to support Unwritten Histories on Patreon!