POSTCOLONIALISM FROM AN INUK PERSPECTIVE

POSTCOLONIALISM FROM AN INUK PERSPECTIVE

By: LINDA MUGFORD December 2012

ABSTRACT

I will present a very preliminary and general argument that the present-day cultural and

social order of the Labrador Inuit communities may not really a return to the earlier

traditional Inuit society but a mix of residual and emergent practices as is common in

hegemony and colonial influences.

I am interested in exploring the cultural and social world of today’s Labrador Inuit

through a variety of lenses; historical, cultural, social and ideological. I want to do a

literature review that examines these aspects. From a sociological point of view, societal

changes are evolutionary and inevitable, but often face ruptures and foreign elements

influence and exacerbate that evolution. I am suggesting that these elements are evident

in our world today.

I propose that my interdisciplinary approach will be to answer a complex set of

questions. Integration of a number of disciplines and theories will be a key feature of my

research and discussion. The homogenized cultures in many of the Inuit communities

suggest we are returning to the older traditions and cultures are actually blending in

parts of the European ideology and social practices and thus today’s culture is a hybrid

of both.

POSTCOLONIALISM FROM AN INUK PERSPECTIVE – LINDA MUGFORD

2

Introduction

For the purpose of this essay, I want to explore some characteristics of the Inuit life-

world that I feel can be described as postcolonial. I will focus on the social and cultural

facets of the Inuit and Kablanajuit1 in Labrador. As a member of Nunatsiavut2, I am

extremely interested in and by the new world order and societal conditions in the

communities here.

I hope to present a very preliminary and general argument that the present-day cultural

and social order of these communities may not really a return to the earlier traditional

Inuit society but a mix of residual and emergent practices as is common in hegemony

and colonial influences.

My main area of interest; Is there evidence to support the idea that Labrador Inuit culture

and society has absorbed foreign elements which have become normalized as

contemporary Inuit society and is not a return to the traditional “old ways”?

The phenomenon of Inuit social and cultural life today is a really complex issue and field

of inquiry. From a sociological point of view, societal changes are evolutionary and

inevitable, but often ruptures and foreign elements will influence and exacerbate that

1 The work Kablanajuk means “not quite white” as opposed to Kablunak, which is “white person”

Kablanajuit is plural.

2 English translation “Our beautiful land”


3

evolution. As I explore the situation, I continue to look at the “post” conditions, post-

structural, postmodern and of greatest interest, postcolonial as a way to understand the

emerging norms in today’s society. “Post” theories can be useful to identify new social

directions, to provide new theoretical paradigms and yield new cultural capital in these

days of questioning of old paradigms and theories. The topic of indigenous revival and

empowerment can be enormous, but for this purpose I want to look at some aspects that

I feel can be a described as postcolonial movements mainly to focus on the social and

cultural features of the Inuit social structures.

Due to limitations of time and space for this essay, the most useful theories are those

from history, cultural studies, postcolonialism, ideology and especially postmodernism.

My methods will be a critical review of literature to combine works from mainstream as

well as from those writing from the margins. All the work will be done through literature

review and personal experience.

Thomson Klein in Repko et al (2012) states there are several purposes of

interdisciplinarity (286) and I propose that my usage will be to answer a complex set of

questions. Integration, as she proposes is certainly a key feature of my research and

discussion. I want to integrate insights from a number of theories, disciplines and

methods, as noted above.


4

Post Colonialism

Post-Colonialism, as a world condition is still a contested idea, with some suggestions

that parts of the colonized regions are still in a colonial state. I am working from a

presumption that Canada is in a postcolonial state; a condition that I am sure is still a

subject for debate. I am basing that assumption on the emerging presence of Aboriginal

and other diverse groups’ ideas, practices and writings in the public domain. The term

postcolonial has a multiplicity of meanings and usages; and I found Ashcroft’s work to be

very valuable in talking about postcoloniality especially in the idea of transformation.

The politics of postcolonialism is beyond the scope of this paper.

According to Ashcroft (2001) postcoloniality is not only chronological, even though that

definition is extremely important; it also is spatial and political. It is also discursive,

allowing voices of people from different orientations and backgrounds to come forward

and participate in current social discourse from a different perspective. Ashcroft argues

that the concern with regrouping of people, either willingly or not also has an impact on

describing cultural differences and perspectives and the resulting cultural changes and

norms.

By reading history and political discourse, we see decolonization efforts throughout the

world in the last half of the nineteenth century. According to Lemert (1997), great social

upheaval, new structuralist and post-structuralist thinkers, and new social movements of

the modernity age became fractured, power structure were shifting and changing and


5

the old Enlightenment core was questioned in the mid-1900s. People generally had

become disillusioned with modernity and progress. World War I also was a major rupture

in history and created a whole new world with growth of nationalism and new nation-

states. After the First World War and the resulting social and political re-organization and

leading to another world war came more social and cultural change. .After the Second

World War, the formation of the UN and its interest in decolonization was/is a huge

factor in making changes in social structures and relationships. This created an

environment for multi-dimensional thoughts with diverse interaction.

As a part of the decolonization movement, among other new groupings of race and

ethnicity, there has been a renewal of aboriginal identity and cultural practices and a

revival of indigenous societies globally, as is the case in Canada. The bonds and

allegiances to European dominance and control are being severed, or at least frayed

from where they have been for the last few centuries. New identities are emerging.

Some aspects of this change are the land claims processes, self-government in various

iterations and the return to traditional cultural practices and social interaction. I want to

focus on the renewal for Inuit in Labrador and the formation of Nunatsiavut, our

homeland in that context. I believe this revival takes place in the framework of

postmodernism and the decentring of imperialist forces, opening up the door to

postcoloniality. While the post-colonial experience is different in each subjected nation, it

is very complex and ambiguous.

According to the UN Declaration on Indigenous Peoples; indigenous people are those

who inhabited a country or a geographical region at the time when people of different


6

cultures or ethnic origins arrived, the new arrivals later becoming dominant through

conquest, occupation, settlement or other means. Bhabha (1994) states these 'in-

between' spaces, between the unified European subject and the fragmented colonial

one is the terrain for elaborating strategies of selfhood - singular or communal and which

initiate new signs of identity, and innovative sites of collaboration, and contestation, that

occur as we try to regroup and find new collective and individual identities provide in the

act of defining the idea of society itself” (ii). I feel this describes the worldview of Inuit in

Labrador; we are struggling with more autonomy in some important matters in our liefe

and existence as provided in the land claims agreement, but are still unsure of the path.

Bhabha (1994) suggests that in our existence today we are all living on tenuous borders

and boundaries. He states that we have “present and future that is neither a new horizon

nor leaving of the past... We find ourselves in a moment of transit where space and time

cross to produce complex figures of difference and identity, past and present, inside and

outside, inclusion and exclusion” (i).

Radcliffe (2005) points out that there are many different colonial experiences throughout

the world and that “postcolonialism has begun to map out the regional specific nature of

colonialism and highly differentiated postcolonial landscapes” (p.293)


7

Inuit of Labrador

The Inuit of Labrador recently signed a land claims settlement that has a self-

government component. This was accomplished after thirty years of negotiations. It was

only when a large nickel deposit was found on Inuit land that the claim was “fast

tracked”. As Green (1995) states, land claims become important in areas where

economic development is deemed to be necessary, mainly for resource extraction. On

December 2, 2005, Nunatsiavut was born after a long, and sometimes acrimonious with

government agencies. The Agreement sets out details of land ownership, resource

sharing, and self-government and provides for the establishment of the Labrador Inuit

Settlement Area (LISA) which has shared responsibilities for management along with

Federal and Provincial Governments. There is another area defined as Labrador Inuit

Lands (LIL) where Nunatsiavut has more control. This is seen as a major step in self-

government and more autonomy and control.

In earlier colonial times, in the sections of Labrador where Inuit lived, German Moravian

Missionaries established posts to Christianize and civilize Inuit. In the late 1770s, they

started the process of conversion by setting up churches, schools, fur trading posts and

medical services thus starting the process of conversion; leading to communities being

formed as opposed to nomadic camps.

As with other indigenous groups in Canada, much of the Inuit culture and history had

been relayed orally. In colonial days reaching onwards to today, the preoccupation with,


8

and strong reverence for the written text in western cultures has superseded the oral

traditions practiced by most aboriginal societies. During the colonialist period, indigenous

knowledge was dismissed and the aboriginal people were coerced into accepting the

European knowledge as the “right” one. The enforcement of schools and churches as

tools of assimilation and civilization has eroded the oral traditions. In Inuit groups there

were specific roles for “Keepers of the Stories”. According to Moravian journals, the Inuit

were reading German and English as early as the mid-1800s. After generations of

learning the western ways and using mass media, those roles are lost or nearly lost in

many of the aboriginal cultures. Nowadays stories may or may not reflect the same

message as it was intended and preserved prior to contact.

Another example is that of drum dancing in our region, which was traditionally spiritual

and ceremonial. Nowadays in the revival it has become a form of entertainment that is

used to showcase Inuit culture nationally. Young dance troupes from Labrador have

been formed and they travel nationally with great fanfare. It has been a great boost for

youth in building self-esteem and pride in their culture, but in the old ways, drumming

was practiced by spiritual elders in very special ceremonies. This certainly to me

indicates a huge shift in meaning, but it has positive implications and outcomes. This is

an attempt to capture old ways, but the youth and sponsoring agencies have found ways

to make it fit into contemporary society.

Another example of transformation is in the music of northern Labrador communities.

When describing “Inuit” music in the public domain, one most often refers to the

Moravian sheet music from the 1800s and performed by brass bands. This sheet music


9

(in original hand writing) and instruments has been carefully preserved by Inuit and

Inuit/white church elders and musicians in those communities. So now, Moravian church

music originating in Germany is known in the region and nationally as “Labrador Inuit”

music instead of the drumming, chanting and throat singing of the traditional society.

Another aspect is development of language in central and northern Labrador where

Inuktitut, spoken by Inuit has interacted with English speaking settlers and German

missionaries. During the year of “progress” with colonial domination, fiduciary protection

and assimilation we have seen the near extinction of Inuktitut about twenty years ago to

a flourishing language today but with the added factor of new words, syntax and semiotic

messages (personal knowledge). I have observed the anglicising of Inuktitut words and

I see Inuktitut words creeping into the idiomatic preferences of English speakers. Each

has been influenced by the other with some elements changing, then becoming constant

and then breaking into new formation. The morphing is evident as the two languages

intermingle as major and minor languages throughout the communities, now becoming a

hybrid. Through this intermingling and intertwining, this language is still evolving.

Inuit lived through a collective, which shapes values and beliefs. Sharing of resources is

central to communal life and survival. It is not charity as practised by white society; the

well-meaning gifts were given to the poor (perceived) deprived people from those kind

benefactors who pity them. The factors of superiority and inferiority come into play.

The traditional sharing was so important and was one of those taken-for-granted ways of

life. You did not have to say thank you if you took meat from the communal pot, nor were

you expected to. It was there for everyone, no matter who put it there. However, there is


10

an expectation that people contribute what and when they can. In the last couple of

decades, people have been charged in criminal court for “taking” things from others in

the community. Broadly speaking, members of Inuit communities do not understand the

rules of relationship and ownership anymore.

Traditional Inuit society had specific roles, and status was gained by learning skills to

navigate throughout the landscape, learning and understanding the elements of nature

and contributing to the collective well-being of the community. Now young males are

those who have lost purpose and status and are subject to alienation. This is evident in

the court records and suicide numbers. I have studied this phenomenon for many years

and have collaborated on a report on Labrador Inuit offending (unpublished), which saw

that young males make up 80-85% percent of criminal offences.

Along the same line is the focus on restorative justice that has gained prominence in

Canadian courts and justice institutions (personal knowledge). The movement has

defined a certain set of processes that can be lumped into that ideology with such things

as community justice forums, family group conferencing, and sentencing circles. These

processes and ideology do not apply to all First Nations, but community groups and

organizations are using it as an aboriginal practice as if it were inherent to each specific

set of cultural values. But generally, traditional Inuit society was quite punitive as

opposed to restorative, especially for major infractions of societal rules, for example

banishment. But in order to gain some sort of way to take control and try to provide a

more appropriate response to recurring social problem, Labrador Inuit are agreeing to


11

enter into a system that is an “aboriginal approach”. It is also something that has been

mythologized.

Some Investigative Frameworks

Ashcroft (2001) marvels at the resilience of colonized people to be able to take the

imperialist structures and use them for their own purposes. This happens differently for

different people in diverse regions, and that there are multiple experiences and histories.

He borrows the word ambivalence from Bhabha, to describe “the ability of colonized

subjects to appropriate the colonial technology and not get absorbed by it” (23).

Hybridity, as defined by Hall and Bhabha, opens the way to contesting the views of a

single authoritative voice, one “Truth”, singular identity and so on. Prabhu suggest that

postcoloniality has allowed the cessation of binarism as in modernity as well as

destabilizing and reconstruction of power.

While it is way outside the scope of this paper to trace the formation of tensions and

binarisms between the indigenous populations and the imperialist takeover, it is

important to point out that there were racist policies that have created a society that has

layers and classes. Albert Memmi (2004) suggests that colonizing forces have an innate

racism built in to provide a moral justification for their actions. He points out three

ideological components that are meant to demonstrate the superiority of the colonizer

and to induce a new order; to widen the gulf between colonizers and the colonized and


12

to exploit those differences for the benefit of the colonizer. These racisms are inherent

Euro-Canadian institutions.

The journal of Father Paul Le Jeune, a Jesuit priest who came to the St. Lawrence valley

in the 1600s described a plan to “civilize” the Montagnais (now known as Innu).The plan

he proposed to assimilate the savages into the European ways has four parts; getting

people to stay in settlements (to stop wandering lifestyles), put power into an

authoritarian model (away from consensus and out of hands of women), establish

residential schools so that children would not be influenced by their parents and to

convince the people that the patriarchal family, with power in the hands of the men was

the “right way”. There are a number of written sources for this method of French

assimilation, but I am referencing those of Melzer (2011).

Although not as clearly articulated was the German Moravian plan for the Inuit. A

reading of the Moravian journals (unpublished) points to similar attitudes and beliefs, and

there are embedded assimilation processes. In the colonial missionary days, Inuit were

to be indoctrinated with European and Christian values and accept the idea of “freedom”,

with such things as legal institutions, bureaucratic structures, and land exploitation.

Indigenous political power and decision-making was waived in favour of the white

institutions and systems

Schools and especially residential schools were tools of assimilation. In mainstream

history, and what gets into school curriculum (not just the residential type, but all

schools), is that the Euro-Canadian ideas are important and that the indigenous

populations must conform to those ideas and practices. So much of the Inuit history has


13

been lost due to this; then, on the other side, the Inuit image has been romanticized and

moved to the margins as inferior that it too loses its real value. What are we, as Inuit

remembering? Without our stories and folklore we are forgetting and losing things? With

the disruption of the stories we have lost so much history. Does it matter in the long run?

As a part of the re-establishment of Inuit culture and society, people are trying to

remember the traditional ways. Sometimes these remembrances are mythicized. Myths

according to Macridis (1989) are ideas, symbols etc. that move people to action because

they appeal to their emotions. Myths are used in a variety of ways such as racial or racial

superiority and reassertion of tribal bonds. Barthes asserts that a myth is the notion of a

socially constructed reality which is passed off as natural. It is inherent and promoted as

cultural signifiers. Aboriginal societies have mythologized certain aspects of their cultural

foundations. In Platonism terms, myths are the “golden lie” that is used to unite and

control people. If I understand Barthes’ idea correctly it is that a myth is the notion of a

socially constructed reality which is passed off as natural. It is inherent and promoted as

cultural signifiers. Aboriginal societies have mythologized certain aspects of their cultural

foundations and are trying to revive ideas that may or may not be realistic.

According to Hall 1996, ideology is defined as the mental frameworks (language,

concepts, categories, imagery of thought, systems of representation) which different

classes and social groups deploy in order to make sense of, define, figure out and

understand how society works. We now use the word to refer to all organized forms and

social thinking.


14

Gramsci theorizes about hegemony and ideological struggle wherein he states that

hegemony is the attempt to produce uniformity and coherence. He insists that cultural

domination or cultural leadership is not gained by force or coercion but through the

consent of those who it will subordinate. The subordinated groups consent because they

are convinced that will serve their best interests. He insisted on the production of

consent through a complex set of negotiation and an alignment of interests. I look at

that statement and I think I can begin to understand why Inuit had bought into the white

influence without resistance and struggle. The explorers/traders/missionaries brought

goods that were useful and Inuit developed a liking for those things.

Baudrillard claims that the human experience is of a simulation of reality rather than

reality itself. Is this the case – is the concept of being liberated of the colonial power

really an illusion and we believe it to be so because we want to believe it so? Or do we

believe it because the “old ways” have been romanticized and we think it is a reality?

Turner (2003) argues that in the bottom-up version of ideology, it assumes that subjects

have power and subculture groups have power to intervene in the signifying and political

systems and to produce change. Or do we have just enough power to think we are in

control. Either way, people do feel more in control over cultural renewal.

As Durkheim, quoted in Seale (2004) states, “between us and the reality which we seek

to know stands a whole host of assumptions, preconceptions ideologies and beliefs”.

(p.51) He felt that our ideas, as well as our political, religious beliefs along with our

moral and fundamental values are a powerful influence and all those things are socially

structured.


15

Malpas (1999) defines mental states (one’s sense of self and identity) as depending on

one’s experience and how a subject interprets things from the external environment.

These external and internal influences morph into stories and incorporate these stories

into their being. This interpretation and absorption leads to new understanding and

knowledge, acting as a basis for the next set of influences, whether it is external or

internal. These become new stories that allow us to become selves. I find myself

thinking about cultural influences on a person and our ever-evolving sense of self, and

the hybridized society of today.

As Morley (2007) states, the conventional model of cultural imperialism presumes that

pure, authentic, internally homogenous, indigenous cultures exist and they become

corrupted by foreign influence. In reality, though every culture has ingested foreign

elements which become naturalized. Cultural hybridism is increasingly normal.

The cornerstones of Eurocentric cultures after the Enlightenment; individualism and

freedom are in direct conflict with those of the Inuit communal cultural life. In traditional

Inuit societies, it is not proper to promote self or to work only for one’s self but to live

collectively.

Raymond Williams (1991) makes distinctions between residual, dominant and emergent

cultures and we should not speak of stages or variations within cultures but recognize

the internal dynamic relations of any actual process. Williams’ position is that post

modernity is an emergent tendency which is haunted by various forms of residual and

traditional cultures. In this view, we are in a contradictory transitional and borderline


16

situation. It is premature to say that we are in a fully postmodern society. This echoes

the work of Bhabha in the double articulation and the tenuous boundaries in society

today.

Briton (2012), taking guidance from the works of Walter Benjamin suggests that the new

world order is larger than the adoption of a new perspective but is a ‘shift in the

signifying framework” (p. 383). He goes on to say that a person can understand that

there are varying perspectives and interpretations are “possible”, and that ” Once that

interpretation is adopted, every perspective that preceded it is reinterpreted, recoloured,

as an instance in a chain of inevitable events leading up to that interpretation’s

ineluctable emergence” In that context, I am suggesting that, with the emerging forces

of the postmodern thinking, and the rising influence of the Inuit voices, people in the

communities could now begin to appreciate views that originate from the aboriginal

perspective and these had as much validity as those from the Euro-centric mainstream

society. This has moved toward a sense of identity, for some it was to embrace

Inukness, others more “white” and a third combination was to recognize both ways.

Gramsci theorized that the production of consent through a complex set of negotiation

and an alignment of interests. I look at that statement and I think I can begin somewhat

to understand why Inuit had bought into the white influence without resistance and

struggle. The political and social discourse that indoctrinated Inuit minds set up a social

structure with intrinsic institutions and social structures to mould and control behaviour,

ideas and social standards. In the modernity context these new structures were


17

promoted as the “right” path and the dominant society incorporated the inferior society

into the fold.

Conclusion

Through the accounts of history, we can see the path of imperialism through colonization

of the new world as well as the so-called underdeveloped countries. The imperialist and

colonial period of history saw domination of people and tribes thought to be inferior

started to change in the twentieth century. The history and stories of the aboriginal

people “from the margins” along with the chaotic social and ideological struggles before

had been underground and subdued. As the voices of the “Others”, including aboriginal

voices, began to come to the forefront, we see a real shift in the public discourse,

indicative of postmodernism and reflects a postcolonial shift in dynamics. This has led to

a social and cultural change for Inuit.

From a cultural studies perspective, these transformative processes, as defined by

Ashcroft allow today’s cultures of blending and acceptance of “two worlds”. These

processes have empowered the colonial subject to use those knowledge and skills to

overturn the power structures.

Goehring (1993) states it very well “With one foot planted firmly in the traditions of the

past and one foot partly in the present, all indigenous societies today find themselves in

a world that is filled with seemingly irreconcilable differences”. (p.49) He goes on to say


18

that these societies must force a new hybridized society with strength to fight the

dominant society or be assimilated. Inuit communities today are a blend of old traditional

ways and European influence. Coming out of a colonial environment, people are

becoming stronger and have been able to develop a rich and vibrant culture. There are

still some ideological tensions between ethnic groups and a federal government

patriarchal supervision over the legal and administrative frameworks of Nunatsiavut, but

generally people are feeling happier and more in control of their lives. Generally, people

recognize they cannot go back to the old ways and are content with that, and have found

ways to incorporate white and Inuit values.

I think it points to the transformation that Ashcroft describes where the blending has led

to a whole new ideology, culture and lifestyle.

From a Gramscian perspective, the transformed ideological system which has drawn

elements from a variety of sources is a new framework for both dominant and

subordinate groups. This framework passes for the organic and natural expression of

that society. I believe this is apparent in the Inuit communities here for sure. These

homogenized cultures in many of the aboriginal communities, including Inuit who are

returning to the older traditions and cultures are actually blending in parts of the

European ideology and social practices and thus today’s culture is a hybrid of both. Is

this the transformation that Ashcroft describes? I think yes.


19

References

Ashcroft, Bill. (2001) Post-colonial Transformations Florence Routledge Retrieved from

http://site.elibrary.com/library/athabasa

Ashcroft, Bill, Gareth Griffiths, and Helen Tiffin. (2002). The Empire Writes Back: Theory and

practice in post-colonial literatures. London and New York: Routledge.

Bhabha, Homi K. (1994) The Location of Culture London; New York: Routledge, Retrieved from

http://prelectur.stanford.edu/lecturers/bhabha/excerpts.html

Barthes, Roland (2007) “Mythologies” in Rivkin, Judy and Michael Ryan eds. Literary Theory: An

Anthology Oxford, Victoria and Malden Blackwell Publishing

Bates, Thomas R., Antonio Gramsci and Theory of Hegemony, Journal of the History of Ideas

Vol. 36, No. 2 (Apr. - Jun., 1975), pp. 351-366. Published by: University of Pennsylvania Press

Retrieved from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2708933

Brice-Bennett Carol (1977) Our Footprints are Everywhere; Inuit Land Use and Occupancy in

Labrador, Labrador Inuit Association, Nain, NL

Briton, Derek.(2012) “From Integration to Interstitial Studies” Ed. Foshay, Raphael. Valences of

Interdisciplinarity: Theory, Practice, Pedagogy. UBC Press, Retrieved from

http://www.aupress.ca/index.php/books/120202

Foucault Michel.(1969) The Archaeology of Knowledge Routledge, Retrieved from

http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/fr/foucault.htm

http://site.elibrary.com/library/athabasa

http://prelectur.stanford.edu/lecturers/bhabha/excerpts.html

http://www.jstor.org/stable/2708933


http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/fr/foucault.htm


20

Goehring, Brian. (1993) Indigenous People of the World: An Introduction to their Past, Present

and Future, Purich Publishing, Saskatoon

Green, Joyce A. (1995) Towards a Détente with History: Confronting Canada’s Colonial Legacy.

Retrieved from http://sisis.nativeweb.org

Hall, Stuart. (1996) “New Ethnicities”. Stuart Hall: Critical Dialogues in Cultural Studies. Ed. David

Morley and Kuan-Hsing Chen.London: Routledge,

Kellner, Douglas, "Jean Baudrillard", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2009

Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), Retrieved from

http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2009/entries/baudrillard

Lemert, Charles.(1997) Postmodernism Is Not What You Think. Malden, MA and Oxford, UK:

Blackwell Publishers

Macridis, Roy C. (1989) Contemporary Political Ideologies: Movements and Regimes, Fourth

Edition. Scott, Foresman and Company, Illinois and London

Malpas, J E.(1999) Place and Experience: A Philosophical Topography. Cambridge University

Press Cambridge, England

McQuarie, Donald, ed. (1995) Readings in Contemporary Sociological Theory: From Modernity to

Postmodernity. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1995.

Mead, George Herbert. "The Problem of Society -- How we become selves" Movements of

Thought in the Nineteenth Century (Edited by Merritt H. Moore.) Chicago: University of Chicago

http://sisis.nativeweb.org/

http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2009/entries/baudrillard


21

Press (1936): 360-385 Retrieved from

http://www.brocku.ca/MeadProject/Mead/pubs2/movement/Mead_1936_16.html

Melzer, Sara (2011) Colonizer or Colonized: The Hidden Stories of Early Modern French Culture

University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia

Memmi, Albert. (2004) Decolonization and the Decolonized, trans. Robert Bononno University of

Minnesota Press, Minneapolis MN

Mesher, Dorothy. (1995) Kuujjuaq– Memories and Musings. Duncan: Unica Publishing Co.,

Mills, Sara.(1997) Discourse. London, GBR: Routledge,. Retrieved from

http://site.ebrary.com/lib/athabasca/Doc?id=10057269

Morley, David.(1996) EuraAm. Modernity, Reason and Alerity: or Postmodernism, the Highest

Stage of Cultural Imperialism` Critical Dialogues in Cultural Studies. Ed. David Morley and Kuan-

Hsing Chen.London: Routledge,

Nunatsiavut www.nunatsiavut.com

Prabhu, Anjalu, (2007) Hybridity: Limits, Transformations, Prospects SUNY Press, New York 2007

Radcliffe, Sarah A. (2005). “Development and Geography: Towards a Postcolonial Development

Geography?” Progress in Human Geography 29.3 (June 2005): 291–298.

Repko, Allen F. William H. Newell, Rick Szostak, (2012) Case Studies in Interdisciplinary

Research Sage Publications Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA

http://www.brocku.ca/MeadProject/Mead/pubs2/movement/Mead_1936_16.html

http://site.ebrary.com/lib/athabasca/Doc?id=10057269

http://www.nunatsiavut.com/


22

Ritzer, George, ed. (1990) Frontiers of Social Theory: The New Synthesis. New York: Columbia

University Press, 1990.

Royal Commission on Aboriginal People Retrieved from www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/

Saul, John Ralston (2005) The Unconscious Civilization; Tenth Anniversary Edition, Anansi

Seale, Clive (Ed.). Researching Society and Culture, Second Edition Sage Publications: London

2004

Thompson Klein, Julie (2012). “Interdisciplinarity, Humanities, and the Terministic Screens of

Definition” Ed. Foshay, Raphael. Valences of Interdisciplinarity: Theory, Practice, Pedagogy.

UBCPress, Retrieved from http://www.aupress.ca/index.php/books/120202

Turner, Graeme.(2003) British Cultural Studies: An Introduction. 3rd ed. London: Routledge.

Williams, Raymond “Base and Superstructure in Marxist Cultural Theory” Mukerji, Chandra, and

Michael Schudson, eds. Rethinking Popular Culture: Contemporary Perspectives in Cultural

Studies. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991 407-423

United Nations Fact Sheet No.9 (Rev.1), The Rights of Indigenous Peoples Retrieved from

http://www.un.org/Depts/dpi/decolonization/history.htm

file:///C:/Users/Linda/Documents/MAIS/MAIS%20700/MAIS/Local%20Settings/Temporary%20Internet%20Files/OLK109/www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/


http://www.un.org/Depts/dpi/decolonization/history.htm