Best New Articles from October 2018

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:

• Canadian Journal of History 53, no. 2 (Autumn 2018) 
• Canadian Historical Review 99, no. 3 (September 2018)
• Revue d’histoire de l’Amérique française 72, no. 1 (Summer 2018)
• Ontario History 110, no. 1 (Spring 2018)
• Manitoba History 87 (Summer 2018)
• Canadian Bulletin of Medical History 35, no. 2 (Fall 2018)
• Mens 17 no. 1-2 (Fall 2016)
• Recherches amerindiennes au Québec 47, no. 2-3 (2017)
• Historical Studies in Education 30 no. 2 (Fall 2018)
• British Journal of Canadian Studies 31 no. 1 (2018)
• International Journal of Canadian Studies 56 (2017)
• Journal of Canadian Studies 52, no. 1 (Winter 2018)
• Canadian Military History 27, no. 2 (2018)
• Individual articles:
  • Rachel Bryant, “Kinshipwrecking: John Smith’s Adoption and the Pocahontas Myth in Settler Ontologies,” AlterNative, First Look (2018): 1-9.
  • Ellen Power and Arn Keeling, “Cleaning Up Cosmos: Satellite Debris, Radioactive Risk, and the Politics of Knowledge in Operation Morning Light,” The Northern Review 48 (2018): 81-109.
  • Alex Arsenault Morin, Vincent Geloso, Vadim Kufenko, “Monopsony and Industrial Development in Nineteenth Century Quebec: The Impact of Seigneurial Tenure,” SSRN Electronic Journal (2016): 1-20. 

Here are my favourites:

Rachel Bryant, “Kinshipwrecking: John Smith’s Adoption and the Pocahontas Myth in Settler Ontologies,” AlterNative, First Look (2018): 1-9.

Author’s Twitter: @rachelmbryant

Link: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1177180118804279

What it’s about: In this piece, Bryant analyses kinship in John Smith’s Generall Historie of Virginia, New-England, and the Summer Isles, through a comparison with Mattaponi oral tradition (Powhatan being one of the six core peoples of the Mattaponi Nation), with a particular focus on Mattaponi kindship and adoption protocols. Bryant shows how Wahunsenaca (Pocahontas’ father) was a brilliant strategist who chose to adopt John Smith, and thereby bring the English settlers within his sphere of influence, both to teach them how to survive in Turtle Island (in a reciprocal capacity) and to mitigate their potential threat. What’s clear from Bryant’s analysis is that not only did Smith fully understand what this adoption entailed, he used it to his advantage when interacting with other Indigenous communities in the area, at least until Wahunsenaca put an end to his charade.

What I loved: Imagine if everything you thought you knew about the story of Pocahontas was a lie. Then times that by ten, and you’ve got this article. I learned so much. I was particularly impressed to see how Bryant approached a Western text from an Indigenous perspective and using Mattaponi oral tradition. In her analysis Bryant relies in large part on the book The True Story of Pocahontas: The Other Side of History, co-authored by Dr. Linwood “Little Bear” Custalow (who grew up on the Mattaponi Reservation and was given the responsibility of learning the oral traditions of the Mattaponi peoples and the Powhatan nation) and the designated anthropologist for the Mattaponi people, Angela L. Daniel. I think Bryant’s point that Smith knew exactly what he was doing the entire time is key here, especially given the popular image that he failed to properly understand Indigenous political and kinship structures, and was therefore “innocent.”

Favourite quote: “In their final meeting, Wahunsenaca famously asked John Smith for the last time to lay down his guns and to finally learn to live in peace among his adoptive family. “What will it availe you to take that by force you quickly have by love? he entreated. This powerful question, which both reflects and grieves the Settlers’ historic and ongoing rejections of Indigenous kinship bonds, continues to resonate across Turtle Island – where we settlers still take what we want by force, where we have never learned to reciprocate the loves of our Indigenous neighbours, and where we continue to interrupt and deny the abilities of Indigenous nations to view and organize themselves as they see fit.” p. 8

Suggested uses: I think this would be a great text for a course on Indigenous-settler relations, and of course it will be of interest to anyone who studies the time period in question. And, obviously, anyone who has ever seen that damn Disney movie.

Donica Belisle and Kiera Mitchell, “Mary Quayle Innis: Faculty Wives’ Contributions and the Making of Academic Celebrity,” Canadian Historical Review  99, no. 3 (September 2018): 456-486.

Author’s Twitter: @DonicaLBelisle and @kierapzmitchell ‏

Link: https://muse.jhu.edu/article/706884

What it’s about: By combining a detailed portrait of Mary Quayle Innis’s life and work as well as the wives of other prominent Canadian academics, Belisle and Mitchell demonstrate the central role that the wives of male faculty members played in establishing their careers as well as their academic celebrity. For those who were not aware of this, Quayle was Harold Innis’ wife, and a noted scholar and writer in her own right. She was instrumental in Innis’ work, whether she was transcribing notes, conducting research, providing feedback and commentary, or editing his posthumous publications. But what’s more, Quayle and other faculty wives hosted gatherings of elites and academics, providing invaluable networking opportunities, all the while also being responsible for the bulk of the household labour. Belisle and Mitchell demonstrate that the careers of many of our most distinguished predecessors were made possible through the invisible work of their spouses, and the time has come for this work to be recognized.

What I loved: If you’ve spent any time on Twitter in the last month, you saw that there was a lot of excitement about this piece. I can tell you that the hype is real. It was fantastic. I applaud Belisle and Mitchell for drawing attention to such an important subject, as well as the fact that, even today, no historian works in isolation. What’s more, we, as a profession, need to make this work visible. While the authors don’t explicitly acknowledge this, it also points to some of the ongoing issues around inequities in our profession, particularly with respect to spousal support and social networks. Also, full credit to Mr. Unwritten Histories, who does all the copy editing on the blog (because I am hopeless).

Favourite quote: “By marrying Quayle, then, Innis brought a brilliant thinker, typist, editor, networker, caregiver, and housekeeper into his life. It was perhaps the best decision he made as an academic, and one that made his illustrious career possible.” p. 475-476.

Suggested uses:If you are a Canadian historian, you need to read this piece. All Canadian academics are also strongly advised to read this piece.

Alex Tremblay Lamarche, “La transformation des capitaux culturel et social en region au xix^e siècle dans un contexte de renouvellement des élites: l’example de Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu,” Mens 17, no. 1-2 (Fall 2016): 41-77.

Link: https://www-erudit-org.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/fr/revues/mens/2016-v17-n1-2-mens03921/1050783ar/

What it’s about: This piece traces the history of Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu from its establishment as Dorchester in the 1790s until 1916, when the town officially became a city. By focusing on two generations of local elites, with a particular emphasis on the Marchand family, Tremblay Lamarche is able to show how Anglo-Protestants established and dominated the upper echelons of the area. French Canadians who sought entrée to these ranks often deliberately Anglicized, through marriage, religion, and language. However, by the middle of the nineteenth century, most of the Anglo-Protestants left the area, so the trend reversed itself. This shift was brought about in large part due to the reorientation of the economy (from a Montreal-Quebec axis to a regional one), and locals adapted their social networks and cultural practices appropriately.

What I loved: I liked this article for a number of reasons. First of all, I think it’s a fascinating and nuanced look at the idea of social capital, social mobility, and social networks. Second, it contributes to the Anglophone history of the province, particularly the ways in which Anglo-Protestant elites dominated the economic and political world in this period. But most of all, I think this article does a fantastic job of complicating the narrative of Quebec history with respect to ethnic diversity, showing that the idea of “Quebecois de souche” just doesn’t hold up when one considers the real history. Finally, I think that this piece helps to complicate our understanding of the fallout from the Conquest, particularly with respect to the “decapitation thesis,” as well as the “reconquest.” In both cases, Tremblay Lamarche demonstrates that neither case was simply a matter of one group replacing the other, but a much slower and more dynamic process.

Favourite quote: “Il faut dire qu’il est alors de bon ton d’adopter différents usages de la bourgeoisie anglaise au sein des élites canadiennes-françaises de l’ensemble de la vallée du Saint-Laurent. Les bonnes familles se dotent ainsi d’élégants services à thé et de fontaines à eau chaude pour pouvoir exécuter le rituel du thé dans les règles de l’art et, de fil en aiguille, cette habitude s’enracine dans les mœurs des classes dirigeantes. Les jeunes filles se coiffent de longues boucles verticales et roulées en spirale comme cela est à la mode en Angleterre.”  p. 56

“Fashionable French-Canadians in the St. Lawrence Valley adopted a number of different customs from the English bourgeoisie. Inspired by the English elite, the very best French-Canadian families also had elegant tea services and hot water dispensers, enabling them to perform the ritual of tea serving with exacting precision. Young girls even wore their hair in long curls and wound into a spiral, in accordance with the latest fashions out of England.”

Suggested uses: I think that this piece would be of interest to anyone studying Quebec history in the nineteenth century, particularly those with a focus on social and cultural history.

Karen Flynn, “’Hotel Refuses Negro Nurse’: Gloria Clarke Baylis and the Queen Elizabeth Hotel,” Canadian Bulletin of Medical History 35, no. 2 (2018): 278-308.

Author’s Twitter: @KarenFlynnPhD

Link: https://www.utpjournals.press/doi/abs/10.3138/cbmh.256-042018

What it’s about: This piece focuses on Gloria Clarke Baylis, a British-trained Caribbean migrant nurse, who applied for a part-time nursing position at the Queen Elizabeth Hotel in Montreal in 1964. She was told at the time that the position was filled, though she was able to verify that this was not actually the case afterwards. As a result, Baylis logged a complaint with the Negro Citizenship Association, which resulted in a court case (Her Majesty v. Hilton) over whether or not the hotel’s treatment of Baylis violated the recently passed Act Respecting Discrimination in Employment. As Flynn argues, Baylis’ experience with the hotel must be understood within the context of Black women’s historical relationship to nursing, and that her decision to proceed with the lawsuit stemmed in large part from her childhood experiences in Barbados.

What I loved: This article worked for me on a number of levels. First of all, I am so grateful that Flynn has helped to draw attention to this case, and make Baylis’ contribution to the expansion of civil rights in Canada in the 1960s visible for everyone to see. The history of Black women in Canada remains critically understudied, and the civil rights movement in Canada even more so. I also really appreciated how Flynn makes clear that Baylis’ experiences demonstrate the systemic nature of racism in Canada, as well as the long history of Black civil rights activists in this country. But most of all, I loved the sophisticated intersectional analysis in this article. This article is a wonderful example the possibilities of intersectional analysis, and how the addition of other markers of difference (like nation and language) can help us to better understand the past.

Favourite quote:  “As I have argued elsewhere, one cannot uncritically bring theories and perspectives to bear on Black Canadian women’s lives without interrogating the usefulness of those theories, or attending to the historical, spatial, and temporal context. This means acknowledging Canada’s evolution “as a white settler society, myths of it being a haven for escaped slaves, exclusionary immigration and citizenship policies, gendered and racialized labour workforce, and an official multi-cultural policy.” This epistemological project also requires cognizance of the multiple and varied ways that Black Canadian women respond to and resist inequality in whatever manifestation. Thus, a key aspect of intersectional studies is to unpack and center subjects such as Gloria. Intersectionality is also useful to make visible how gender intersects with whiteness to reinforce a conveniently normative nursing identity.” p. 282

Suggested uses: I think that this article will be of interest to anyone who studies the 1960s, Black history, civil rights, nursing history, and legal history in Canada. I think that this article would also be of interest to anyone doing gender history in Canada, particularly with respect to intersectional analysis. On that note, I think that this would be a great addition to a course on any of those topics, but also in a historiographical course.

Laura J. Murray, “Settler and Indigenous Stories of Kingston/Ka’tarohkwi: A Study in Critical Heritage Pedagogy,” Journal of Canadian Studies 52, no. 1 (Winter 2018): 249-279.

Link:  https://www.utpjournals.press/doi/abs/10.3138/jcs.2017-0052.r2 

What it’s about: In this piece, Murray reflects on her experience teaching two iterations of one course, ENGL 467: Words in Place: Settler and Indigenous Studies of Kingston/Ka’tarohkwi. She argues that critical heritage studies offers a great deal to educators. As she notes, unlike memorials and museums, classrooms offer an opportunity for extended engagement with young people, and therefore have greater potential to reach hearts and minds and facilitate lasting change. To make her point, Murray explains how she organized the course, course activities, student assignments, and grading, as well as her five fundamental principles (look around you; look to your ancestors; be responsible; be eclectic; don’t finish.), ending with some descriptions of student projects from the course.

What I loved: If you’ve been reading this blog for any length of time, then you know that I really love reading pedagogical pieces. I think it’s so important that we talk about pedagogy at the university level, and believe that sharing these experiences is worthwhile. So it’s probably not surprising that I loved this piece. I was particularly impressed by Murray’s positionality, including a genealogical reflection, as well as the inclusion of extended descriptions of some of the projects from the course. The local nature of the course was also fantastic, and I think every university would benefit from having some kind of local history course.

However, while I did love this piece, I have to admit that I did hesitate to include it here, for a couple of reasons. First, the course itself is taught as part of the English department, rather than in History. However, I do feel that many of the lessons here could apply equally to a History course. Second, this course was possible in large part due to the particular support from Murray’s institution as well as her professional network. Queen’s provided a grant for the course (the Principal’s Dream Courses).The course itself featured a number of walking tours and field trips, as well as well as collaboration with various centres, including the Four Directions Aboriginal Student Centre, the Queen’s International Centre, and the Centre for Teaching and Learning. What’s more, as Murray notes in her piece, this course relied heavily on visiting experts, including Elders and Indigenous Knowledge Keepers. I think that this is fantastic, but I also recognize that this is beyond the scope of many educators, particularly those who are precariously employed. Many of us lack the institutional support or resources necessary to organize a course like this. I know from experience how hard it is to organize a field trip for an undergraduate class. Murray also did not discuss what kind of compensation (if any) was provided to the visiting speakers, which I think is an important issue to address. But nonetheless, I still think that this piece is worth reading.

Favourite quote:  “Indigenous critical pedagogy scholarship informs the course […] and Indigenous writing, visiting experts, and community audiences are central to the student experience. However, treaty pedagogy would be different practiced by an Indigenous instructor, and I don’t myself attempt Indigenous pedagogy. Rather, I try to model for students an integrity of settler positionality, reaching toward Indigenous knowledge but not putting it in my own pocket. My brief family reflection at the opening of this paper stands, as it does at the beginning of the course, as an attempt at a critical accounting with heritage, love, family, and history. It appears here in a fairly dispassionate and condensed form, but this short reflection represents years of avoidance and only a relatively short period of engagement on my part. Although I have researched and taught Indigenous histories and literatures for years, it occurred to me only recently to ask questions about the treaty status of my own family’s land, or of the land on which I now live.” p. 252-253

Suggested uses:I think that this article will be of interest to anyone who is interested in decolonizing their pedagogy, particularly settler instructors.

Also Recommended:

• Ellen Power and Arn Keeling, “Cleaning Up Cosmos: Satellite Debris, Radioactive Risk, and the Politics of Knowledge in Operation Morning Light,” The Northern Review 48 (2018): 81-109.
  • Just a fascinating story.
• Alex Arsenault Morin, Vincent Geloso, Vadim Kufenko, “Monopsony and Industrial Development in Nineteenth Century Quebec: The Impact of Seigneurial Tenure,” SSRN Electronic Journal (2016): 1-20.
  • This article uses data from the 1831 and 1851 Lower Canada censuses in an attempt to resolve a longstanding debate in the historiography: what slowed down Quebec’s economic growth in the nineteenth century? The article points to the persistence of the seigneurial system, by comparing labour on both seigneurial estates and British freehold tenure in the province. This is extremely promising research, though more work is needed.
• Jean-Michel Turcotte, “Collaborer avec le Commonwealth? Les relations canado-britanniques et la detention de guerre au Canada, 1940-1945,” Canadian Historical Review 99, no. 3 (September 2008): 428-455.
  • This piece examines conflict between the Canadian and British governments over the German POWs that were sent to Canada. Such an important area, and complements Dennis Molinaro’s work on the Igor Gouzenko affair regarding the relationship between Canada and the United Kingdom.
• Melissa Micu and Catherine Carstairs, “From Improving Egos to Perfecting Smiles: Orthodontics and Psychology, 1945-2000,” Canadian Bulletin of Medical History 35, no. 2  (2008): 309–336.
  • This was just a delight to read. It’s a fascinating look at the medicalization of teeth and jaw alignment in Canada. Also, as a former braces wearer myself, this one hit close to home.
• Nadia Kurd, “The Mosque as Heritage Site: The Al-Rashid at Fort Edmonton Park and the Politics of Location,” Journal of Canadian Studies 52, no. 1 (Winter 2018): 176-192.
  • This is a fascinating look at race as a category of analysis in critical heritage studies. It considers why non-Western style buildings are not considered part of the built heritage of Canadian cities, particularly with response to the first purpose-built mosque, and only Islamic heritage building in Canada, the Al-Rashid Mosque.

This is the Best New Articles that almost broke me. And it was so hard to decide! But I hope you enjoyed this blog post nonetheless! If you did, please consider sharing it on the social media platform of your choice! And don’t forget to check back on Friday for Stephanie’s look at upcoming publications in Canadian history! See you then!

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