In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

HUMANITIES 299 sidered grazing secondary to agriculture as a means of advancing Indian assimilation and encouraging self-support on the plains, but the tradition stuck there as well. The third, and longest, section discusses Native involvement in Wild West shows and in rodeo and other forms of 'playing cowboy.' Indians made good cowboys, the authors contend, because they had experience driving herds ofbuffalo, were excellentequestrians with an intimate knowledge of horses and horsebreeding, and were familiar with the land on which the cattle grazed. These propositions are offered by Morgan Baillargeon and Leslie Tepper, respectively the curators of Plains and Plateau Ethnology at the Canadian Museum of Civilization, in a straightforward manner free of academic jargon Of, for that matter, much emotion. Occasionallyone wishes their text would rise to the artistry of some of the objects shown - an 1842 decorated horse robe, a 1994 Ruth Edmonds Western style shirt, a Thomas Pierre inlay silver mounted ring bit, a gorgeously beaded Kutenai baby board, a Jackson Sundown horsehair bridle - or convey the giddy pleasure captured in the photograph of Keith and Lorna Shuter on their wedding day, Lornain Keith's arms kicking up a cowboy-booted heel and letting out a yippee-yi from all appearances. Ifthe text is earnest rather than inspired, it is enlivened with a sprinkling of short testimonials by Native ranchers and rodeo cowboys and a selection of readings at the end ofeach section by mostly modern storytellers, songwriters, and poets. Some of these stray afield, concentrating on the American rather than the Canadian experience, but, like the objects illustrated and the preponderance of photographs, they effectively give pride of place to a Native ranching tradition that lives on in the West. (BRIAN w. DIPPlE) The Grand Council of the Crees. Never Wit1lOut Consent: James Bay Crees' Stand against Forcible Inclusion into an Independent Quebec ECW Press. 280. $21.95 We are in an inter-referendum period. Canadians, at least outside Quebec, are not paying much attention to referendum politics. Attitudes may change when another referendum is called. But, after so many false starts and close calls, many of us will likely remain blase until such a referendum obtains a majority. Even then, there are those who, after asking rhetorically for so long 'What does Quebec want?' will advocate a simple separation; bloodless and peacefuL In Never without Consent, the Grand Council of the James Bay Cree confront us with a story that will make all, except the mostcomplacent, take immediate notice. In their telling, separation will not be clean, easy, or orderly. No. Separation will engender great ctisruptions and deep acrimony , particularly for the Cree of James Bay (or Eeyouch) who have 300 LETTERS IN CANADA 1998 declared they will never accede to the jurisdiction of an independent Quebec without their consent. The Grand Council presents two arguments to support their right to remain in Canada even if a majority in Quebec vote in favour of independence . The first flows from their rights as an indigenous nation. At heart, this argument rests on the application of international norms respecting the rights of indigenous and colonized peoples as expressed in resolutions of such bodies as the European Parliament and the United Nations. These norms clearly state that indigenous peoples have 'the right to determine their own destiny by choosing their institutions, their political status and the status of their territory' (1994 Resolution of the European Parliament). It is a right which the Cree expect Canada to honour. The second argument is that Quebec does not have a right, recognized in international law, to separate from Canada unilaterally. In words that echo those of the Supreme Court in the Quebec reference case, the Grand Council asserts that Quebec is not a colonized population and therefore cannot appeal to international law or norms for recognition of a right to self-determinationthat includes unilateral separationfrom Canada. In fact, the PQ government, having recognized this reality, now bases justification for separation on the popular will of the people of Quebec as expressed in a referendum. But, the Grand Council asserts, this process, too, has no legitimacy for the Cree and their territory. They caMot be forcibly included as a component of...


Additional Information

Print ISSN
pp. 299-301
Launched on MUSE
Open Access
Back To Top

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.