The controversy about Buffy Sainte-Marie has, at this date, been going on for a month. Yet discussion and argument continue with little end in sighti. As a white guy with over fifty years of work and friendships with Indigenous people (community organization and teaching) and being the father of an Indigenous son, I tend to generally steer clear of commenting on contentious issues within and among Indigenous people, at least in public. However, the fractious issue concerning whether Buffy Sainte-Marie has any right to call herself “Indigenous” has gone well beyond the boundaries of Indigenous communities. Not only was it the CBC program, 5th Estate, which made it a public topic in Canada, but many Whitestream, European diaspora, colonial beneficiaries, like me, have written articles and opined on social media. I still want to be careful, however, I obviously don’t have the frustrating experience of colonial oppression which every single Indigenous person in this country, since it was formed, has endured since birth.
There is much talk of the facts, from “birth certificates” to missing records (see below) to the fact that it seems BSM herself seems uninterested in getting a DNA test that would, in theory, clarify the truth of her lineage. In our society, outside of the worlds of DJ Trump, Doug Ford, Danielle Smith and Piere Pollievre, facts are the holy grail of journalistic and academic discussion (full disclosure I am an academic). So, her lack of being able to produce hard facts are troubling. To me, and others however, the Fifth Estate went hard and loud with the facts they unearthed but less hard and fast with some contextual information that might have somewhat softened the confidence with which they made their conclusions. I will explain why I am concerned with this below.
I believe that I have experience with a few situations that give me some confidence that I can speak from, that can be of use. Part of that experience is with our own Anishnawbe son (adopted in 1970 at three months of age) and the two year fight (yes fight) we had to wage, with the help of our determined, indefatigable CCAS social worker, to get the Department of Indian Affairs (as it was then named) authorities to admit that he had not lost his status because of our adoption. We have subsequently been able to assist him, without the help of authorities, to find his reserve and make contact with his birth family. That was an even longer struggle for our family with its highly educated, middle class status parents. I have seen how even more difficult this is for those without the resources with which we were blessed.
Another bit of experience is from my work with Indigenous kids whose adoptions had “failed” and who had been returned to the “care” of child welfare agencies in southern Ontario. In this I was given another lesson. When the Ontario child welfare agencies in these cases asked for information from the Saskatchewan and Alberta child welfare authorities (the jurisdictions from which the children were taken into “care”) they were told that no documentation was kept by the western child welfare offices once an Indigenous child had been adopted. These kids thus were told that they could know nothing about their origins, other than that they were “Indian”. The idea, or even hope, that these kids, who by now are adults, will ever be able to confidently think or talk about their identities is gone. This was in the 1970-90’s, and those who think that the 40’s and fifties would be different (they doubtlessly were worse) are simply naive. That is a fact, and
a damn tragedy. I would venture to suggest that anyone adopted prior to the 1970’s attempting to find out about their background, like Buffy Sainte-Marie, would have little or no hope to discover much about the “facts” of their Indigenous roots, or in some cases, even if they were Indigenous. Those are the facts of Canada’s and the USA’s treatment of Indigenous people in the attempt to wipe out the their existence in North America. Thus, when someone, like BSM says that it’s hard for her to be sure of her “identity” I think it is irresponsible to dismiss it out of hand.
What we can and do know of BSM is that through her own efforts, she has been an activist for crucial social justice issues like the environmental crisis, the importance of peace and particularly the challenge to the colonial oppression of Indigenous people. However, if she can be proved to be a deliberate “pretendian” (the term coined by Indigenous people to indicate fake Indigenous celebrities, like the legendary Grey Owl who make use of a lie for profit) neither Indigenous nor Whitestream society can of course simply give her a pass on the basis of her good works. My guess, at this point in the controversy, is that her days of public advocacy are done, that her voice will likely never been heard again. That itself is a tragedy because that voice was a strong one and I think authentic in the values she has fought for.
What we also know is that this whole mess has been yet another blow to the Indigenous population of Canada. First, the shock and disappointment that an Indigenous icon could be a fake. Second the pain that they themselves might have been taken in by in by a charlatan (it’s happened before) is palpable. Third, there is the question of how many Indigenous entertainers might have become wealthy and famous without BSM? Of course the counter argument could be made, how many Indigenous artists became know because of her success and fame? Both those questions are moot of course because we are unable to change history to test the theories. The point of these examples is simply to recognize, as many of my friends have told me, that this issue has hurt the community.
So, what do I end with? First it seems clear to me that this event and the manner in which the CBC’s Fifth Estate chose to manage it, has injured and angered many Indigenous people. It has and has led to some splits and discomfort in the community as people wrestle with their own connections to her as an icon and the concern for the pretendian phenomenon which has caused so much frustration and anger. That is one fact that is obvious and is a kind of tragedy.
For me personally, the “truth” of Buffy Sainte-Marie’s origins continues to be opaque and in some ways, I’m not surprised. I have been around a sufficiently long time to have learned that the “truth” can be elusive and “facts”, so treasured in our society, are sometimes not so easy to nail down and do not necessarily lead to simple yes and no answers. Indeed they often lead to more questions. So far, from what I read and hear of this unfortunate mess, I cannot arrive at a yes or no conclusion. And further, I have to say, I don’t think, barring any blockbuster findings, I or anyone else who is able to think with some sense of objectivity and fairness, ever will. That is in itself a tragedy too.
i BSM today, put out a statement regarding the allegations. https://pitchfork.com/news/buffy-sainte-marie-responds-to-cbc-report-in-new-statement/.
Comments
Post a Comment