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 Historical Review 99, no. 1 (March 2018)
- Historical Studies in Education 30, no. 1 (Spring 2018)
- Bulletin d’histoire politique 26, no. 2 (Winter 2018)
- Mens: Revue d’histoire intellectuelle et culturelle 16, no. 2 (Spring 2016)
- Individual articles:
- Kristin Burnett, Travis Hay, and Lori Chambers, “Settling the Table: Northern Food Subsidy Programs and the (Re) Colonization of Indigenous Bodies, Critical Race and Whiteness Studies, 11, no. 1 (2015): 1-18.
- Elise Chenier, “Love-Politics: Lesbian Wedding Practices in Canada and the United States from the 1920s to the 1970s,” Journal of the History of Sexuality, 27, no. 2 (May 2018): 294-321.
- Asa McKercher and Timothy Andrews Sayle, “Skyhawk, Skyshield, and the Soviets: Revisiting Canada’s Cold War,” The Historical Journal, First View.
Here are my favourites:
Laurie K. Bertram, “’Eskimo’ Immigrants and Colonial Soldiers: Icelandic Immigrants and the North-West Resistance, 1885,” Canadian Historical Review 99, no. 1 (March 2018): 63-97.
Link: https://muse.jhu.edu/article/688884
What it’s about: Centring around Icelandic immigrants in and around Winnipeg, particularly with respect to those who enlisted in the Canadian militia in 1885, Bertram argues that the history of non-Anglo-American immigrants cannot be considered separately from that of Indigenous suppression. Rather, these groups actively participated in the settler colonial project, despite experiencing discrimination and marginalization themselves. What’s more, some leaders even encouraged these actions due to the precarious status of Icelandic immigrants, operating under the belief that these “contributions” would make Anglo-Canadians more accepting and welcoming. Finally, she demonstrates that participation of Icelandic immigrants in the settler colonial project was neither uniform nor inevitable, but the result of specific historical forces and circumstances.
What I loved: I am so happy to see an article that make such an important, and deliberate, connection between the history of non-Anglo-American immigrants and the settler colonial project. As I was reading this piece, I just kept thinking YES! Also, who knew that Icelandic immigrants fought on the side of the Canadian militia in the 1885 Resistance? Well, I’m sure some of you did, but I didn’t! My only quibble here is Bertram’s use of the term “ethnic” to describe Icelandic (and other) immigrants. While I take her meaning, and I have certainly used this terminology before, I think that it risks creating a dichotomy between Anglo-Americans and immigrants from other places, implying that Anglo-Americans as “normal” and that immigrants from other places are “other.” British and American groups are just as much ethnic groups as are Icelanders or Jews. The only difference is that some ethnicities has been normalized, while the others have not. Do I have a better word? Not really, though I think we should definitely have a conversation about this. But this is a really minor thing.
Favourite quote: “In Canada, a larger sense of ethnic detachment from colonial legacies can foster popular amnesia, ambiguity, and even antagonism toward Indigenous claims, status, and populations. […] Ethnic colonial amnesia not only attempts to erase colonial legacies; it also implicitly assumes that ethnic allegiances to white Anglo Canada in the colonial project were uniform, inevitable, and even natural.” P. 72.
Suggested uses: Anyone who studies the history of immigration and the history of settler colonialism will want to read this article. That goes double for individuals interested in the 1885 Resistance and the history of Icelandic immigrants. I think this would also be a fantastic addition to any course on the history of race and ethnicity.
Rose Fine-Myer and Kristina Llewellyn, “Women Rarely Worthy of Study: A History of Curriculum Reform in Ontario Education,” Historical Studies in Education 30, no. 1 (Spring 2018): 54-68.
Author’s Twitter: @HerstoriesCafe and @krllewellyn
Link: http://historicalstudiesineducation.ca/index.php/edu_hse-rhe/article/view/4541
What it’s about: Last week I ended up live-tweeting my reading of this piece, so I won’t spend too much time here (check out the live-reading here). But, essentially, this article is a case study of the history of curriculum reform in Ontario from the 1960s to the present, focusing on the integration (or lack thereof) of women’s history. I’m sure it will shock you that results have been dismal. While there have been gains in some areas, most textbooks that include women’s history almost exclusively focus on notable women, women’s accomplishments, or include women as an alternative experience. The result is that the history taught in Ontario high schools remains extremely andro-centric.
What I loved: I know I say all the things a lot, but all the things! In particular, I really loved the practical applications of this kind of research, research that is sorely needed. I am still shocked by how little knowledge of women’s historical experiences my students learn in high school. But what’s more, I think this article points to a fundamental disconnect between academic research and the material that makes it into history textbooks. I think we need to start having conversations about why this is the case. Finally, I really loved how this article highlighted the fantastic work being done by Indigenous scholars, educators, and activists, who are, as always, leading the way.
Favourite quote: “We conclude that to support a new wave of feminist consciousness among girls and boys—young people who will march against misogyny—women’s issues must be a mandatory and integral part of education.” P. 55
Suggested uses: Anyone who teaches Canadian history should read this article. Anyone who studies history education should read this article. Everyone should read this article.
Elise Chenier, “Love-Politics: Lesbian Wedding Practices in Canada and the United States from the 1920s to the 1970s,” Journal of the History of Sexuality, 27, no. 2 (May 2018): 294-321.
Author’s Twitter: @elisechenier
Link: https://www.utexaspressjournals.org/doi/abs/10.7560/JHS27204?journalCode=jhs
What it’s about: In this article, Chenier explores why the enactment of conventional wedding practices by same-sex couples, particularly lesbian couples, should be considered a form of love-politics in action. Drawing on the work of Black feminist scholars, she argues that romantic love was, in this particular respect, a form of political rebellion, resisting the stigma against same-sex desire while also affirming their relationship and love. Chenier is largely responding to current critiques about the rise of same-sex marriages (and heterosexuality) as oppressive as well as the historiographical focus on identity-politics by arguing that such marriages were both definitive political statements as well as radical acts of love. She makes this point by focusing mostly on lesbian weddings in Canada and the US, among white, Black, and Latinx women, in two periods: the 1950s to 1960s, and the 1970s.
What I loved: This article really worked for me on a number of levels. First, I sincerely appreciated that Chenier so deliberately cites the work of Black women scholars with respect to her analysis. I also love that she considered white, Black, and Latinx women in one piece, exploring the intersections of sexual orientation, gender, and race. But most of all, I really appreciated the explorative and speculative nature of this article. Since I am not a queer historian or a historian of sexuality, I am not really qualified to comment on the argument itself. I just don’t know enough. But I think it does push boundaries and start conversations. We need more brave scholarship.
Favourite quote: “Indeed, the weddings were entirely conventional affairs conducted according to the customs of the time and shaped by the same constraints faced by any other couple; money and resources determined the scope and size of the event, but the wedding involved many of the standard trappings: invitations, rings, bridesmaids, a certificate of marriage, a cake complete with topper, and lots of drinking and dancing. Ivy, a Toronto femme and sex worker, described a wedding she attended in the mid-1950s as “a real wing-ding” complete with fancy clothes, a limousine, and a hired band, all extravagant luxuries for her social group. Some weddings were so big, she explained, that “even the cops would go.” She meant as guests, of course. “ p. 7*
And
“Wedding practices reinscribed lesbians as capa- ciously loving and in so doing created—even if only for a brief moment—a radical conception of the public sphere based in a public feeling of love.” P. 27*
*Page numbers are from an uncorrected proof, since I was not able to get the published article through my institution.
Suggested uses: This should be a must-read for anyone who studies queer history in North America, particularly those with a focus on lesbian experience. This would also be a great article to use in a grad course on the history of gender and sexuality!
Also recommended:
- Mairi Cowan, “Education, Francisation, and Shifting Colonial Priorities at the Ursuline Convent in Seventeenth-Century Québec,” Canadian Historical Review 99, no. 1 (March 2018): 1-29.
- This is a fascinating look at the shifting attitudes of French colonial officials with respect to the “frenchification” of Indigenous students, with a particular focus on Marie de L’Incarnation.
- Marie-Hélène Brunet, “Combien ou comment ? Les femmes canadiennes dans les récits scolaires et dans la mémoire collective, rétrospective des recherches depuis 1980,” Historical Studies in Education 30, no. 1 (Spring 2018): 42-53.
- Raises many of the same issues as Fine-Meyer and Llewellyn, but approaches the problem from a interdisciplinary perspective, drawing together research on female historical figures in our collective memory, past and present history textbooks, as well as research on what students and their teachers learn and know about women’s history.
- Kristin Burnett, Travis Hay, and Lori Chambers, “Settling the Table: Northern Food Subsidy Programs and the (Re) Colonization of Indigenous Bodies, Critical Race and Whiteness Studies, 11, no. 1 (2015): 1-18.
- Really fantastic policy-oriented piece, exploring how the federal government has used the idea of benevolence as a weapon of settler colonialism in the North.
- Daniel Poitras, “Tout le reste viendra par surcroît.’ L’horizon et la pratique du bilinguisme chez les étudiants canadien et québécois (1948-1965),” Bulletin d’histoire politique 26, no. 2 (Winter 2018): 67-90.
- This is a great comparison of what bilingualism meant to different groups of young people in the 1950s and 1960s.
So, this one is a little late. It was supposed to go up last week, but if you read the roundup, you know that my husband was in the hospital, so I couldn’t really concentrate enough to read scholarly articles. This means that the next Best New Articles (April 2018), will be in out in two weeks, and will include all the new publications! 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!
Leave a Reply