Análisis de la categoría 2: El video y el ambiente de aprendizaje 120

The Innu are what English-speakers call “Algonkian speaking peoples” which includes the Cree (Inninew) of the James Bay and Hudson Bay (Wadden 1991:22), some of whom were discussed in the previous chapter. The Inninew and the Innu regard themselves as separate peoples and although similar, their languages are not easily understood by one another. Wadden (1991) compares this relationship to the French, Spanish, and Italians in Europe whose languages derive from Latin, but who maintain separate national and cultural identities (22). Similarities between the two worldviews and communication styles are logical outcomes of cultures who have developed over millennia as a reflection of the land. The Inninew of the James Bay and the Innu of Nitassinan can be thought of in Western terms as ‘neighbors.’ The people belong to large spaces of land and ecology which exist beside each other, with the Hudson Bay and James Bay bodies of water separating the two peoples. Nitassinan consists of land which expands to the east from the Atlantic coast of what is now called “Labrador”, to the James Bay on the West, the

Hudson Bay to the North and the Saguenay River to the South (Ibid:21). This piece of land is approximately the size of France (Samson and Pretty 2006:529). The language spoken by the Innu is called Innu-aimun and developed as a reflection of Nitassinan. “Its vocabularies are tied to place, landscape, animals, and techniques of survival. It contains words and phrases for which there are no direct translations in English. Many of these are associated with the landscape—the flow of rivers, the solidity of ice, the body parts of animals, and so forth” (Samson 2003a:201).

The worldview of the Innu, as expressed in the formation of their language, is one which reflects the ecology of Nitassinan. Oral history posits the Innu as beings who coexist with other creatures on the land in a system based on equality. The Innu believe that

Pishum—the sun and the moon—have a responsibility to watch over the planet. Humans

and other creatures have a responsibility to look after the ecology where they live, “each relying upon the others for survival” (Wadden 1991:22). From the Innu perspective, humans have no greater importance than any other creature, and of all the entities which exist in Nitassinan, animals in particular are assigned human-like qualities based on thousands of years of observation (Ibid). The Innu’s worldview is based on consensual decision-making, communitarianism, attachment to Nitassinan, the belief in

independence and personal autonomy, as well as their technologies, medicine, spirituality, and their language (Samson 2003a:19-20). The Innu possess no sense of private property or individualism.

Before forced sedentarism, the Innu travelled in small groups made up of varying families, in search of food over the vast expanse of Nitassinan, which scientifically consists of “tundra, lakes, rivers, and forests” (Samson 2003a:27). Within these small traveling groups, the Innu did not have a central “chief” or leader. Rather, temporary leadership roles were sometimes assigned to individuals for particular expeditions, when needed. The temporary leader is known as the utshimau, who anyone could follow but without obligation (Ibid:27). Under Innu social organization, the authority of the

utshimau was open to all and thus, different people were the utshimau at different times (Ibid). Women and men were of equal importance, and all played very important roles especially in regards to the timing of travel (Ibid; Wadden 1991:29). Today, the term

utshimau is sometimes used jokingly to refer to someone who is being bossy or is attempting to influence the decision making of other people (Samson 2013:viii). The Innu way of social organization seeks to minimize internal conflict, as described by sociologist Colin Samson: “The highly fluid patterns of social organization,

communality, and aversion to any type of authority may have helped to ensure survival in sometimes unforgiving territories where any type of open conflict could compromise it” (2003a:27).

5.2.1

Innu traditional spirituality

Though the Innu do not traditionally have fixed roles for leadership, their spiritual and moral authority are exercised by specific people known as kamintushit or kakushapatak, who may be considered a type of shaman or medicine person by European interpretations (Samson 2003:28; Wadden 1991:23-24). The kamintushit is responsible for performing the most sacred ritual, the kushapatshikan or “shaking tent” which in times of need, was used to communicate with the animal gods to ensure the future supply of food, and then to predict where game would be found (Samson 2003:28; Wadden 1991:23-24). The ceremony is called “shaking tent” because the tent would shake from the great powers that entered (Wadden 1991:24). Many Innu elders recount their experiences in the shaking tent as intense and imbued with great meaning, as exemplified by an Innu hunter named Mistanikashan:

When the Kakushapatak [one imbued with great power to contact animal spirits] went into the tent, he wasn’t completely inside when it started shaking…he didn’t touch the ground. He was raised up about a foot off the ground, inside the tent. He was in the air. He danced inside. He danced. Through his song he invoked the spirit, Mishtapeu. He danced and we heard his steps. His steps resonated as though he was dancing on sand. We heard it like that. And when he came out, we did not see his tracks…nothing was broken...the branches were as though they had never been touched when the Kakushapatak came out (Lamothe 1983, quoted by Wadden 1991:23)

Like the Omushkegowuk discussed in the previous chapter, the Innu worldview is composed of spiritual, emotional, physical, intuitive and psychological interpretations of the universe. As such, dreams are an important tool for the Innu as they allow intuition, experience, memory, facts, and emotions to intermingle (Samson 2003a:79). Another

tool for Innu interpretation is the use of burned animal bones as maps. Such a process involves inserting the shoulder blade (scientifically known as the scapula) of a large animal, usually a caribou, into a hot fire. When the bone is withdrawn, the hunter interprets the marks left by the flames as a map which tracks the route of game (Samson 2003a:78). A similar Cree ritual is beautifully described in the novel Three Day Road by Joseph Boyden (2005):

I let the fire die down, then removed the still-hot shoulder blade. I studied the lines for a long time, talking as I did so that you might begin to understand the thinking. This animal had lived all its life in this country, and just like all of us it carried an internal map of its life, where it liked to eat, to rest, to mate. And where this moose had been, others surely would congregate. The job of the diviner was to coax this information from the animal.

“This crack,” I asked, running my finger along it, “does the way it forks into three remind you of any creek you might have been on?”

Immediately you answered, “There is the creek a half-day’s paddle down the river that looks much like that.”

“But there are many creeks that split into three,” I said.

You stared at the bone for a long time. “But the creek I think of runs from another creek that looks just like this one.” You pointed to another crack that ran into the one split into three.

I smiled. “Do you get a good feeling from it?” I asked. You looked at me quizzically. “When you picture walking up this creek, do you get the feeling that you will find a moose here, or do you feel nothing?”

You thought about this, your eyes closed, then finally answered, “I get a good feeling.”

“You will leave tomorrow before first light,” I said. (291-292)

Tragically, colonial invasion, especially from the late nineteenth century onward, has gradually but significantly changed the physical, spiritual, emotional, and psychological lives of the Innu. Like the Omushkegowuk, Christian missionaries barred Innu ways of knowing, shaming them into Christian submission. For example, though it is discussed lovingly and longingly by the Innu, the people claim that they do not possess the

confidence to perform a shaking tent anymore. The result is that the shaking tent has not been performed in what is now called “Labrador” since the 1960s (Samson 2003a:261; Walker 1996). Trappers and traders from the Hudson Bay Company (HBC) attempted for years to strategically convert the Innu from an autonomous people, to exploited labourers, but the Innu resisted.

5.3

Akaneshault influence over the Innu: sedentarization