13 - Survivors of the Plague

By: Jean-Cedrick, Nick and Stephanie

What can you do when everyone around is dying and no one will listen? This issue was addressed in the two films we watched this week, How to Survive a Plague directed by David France and We Were Here directed by David Weissman. These films followed the struggle of gay men in New York and San Francisco living through the rise of AIDS. They opened our eyes to a new way of getting your voice heard and taught us love can easily surpass violence.

How to survive a plague

When you hear the word plague your head is instantly swarmed with images of death and destruction. People that fall victim to a plague often feel helpless and may even want to give up their fight. Although it is true that no individual could ever combat a plague alone, if people would join together and use their minds they would be able to accomplish a lot more.

How to Survive a Plague is a 2012 documentary film directed by David France, portraying the struggles of AIDS activists like Larry Kramer, Gregg Bordowitz and Peter Staley. The movie takes place in New York City at the rise of a pandemic no one could have predicted. The story is about the rise of the soon to be global crisis of AIDS. The main focus of the movie is on the gay community that was forming in New York and the organisations like Act Up were creating. France demonstrates what these men went through with modern interviews, videos of the protests and old news clips.

Homosexuality and AIDS were very taboo subjects in the 80s. It wasn’t uncommon that an infected man would keep his secret to himself. To make matters worse, at first nobody wanted to talk about it so nobody was well informed. The media spread lies about the disease, saying that it was possible to transmit it through touching a doorknob. The U.S. government wasn’t much help either. Because the subject of AIDS was so taboo, many senators and even presidents denied its existence for years! It is not until 1984 that Ronald Reagan even speaks publically about AIDS. Yet another enemy of Act Up is the Catholic Church. The Catholic are extremely against contraception and condoms are the best way to slow the spreading of AIDS. The Catholic are also against homosexuality in general so there was a lot of hate coming from them.

Gays have always been the victim of discrimination, but it was certainly at a high point during the AIDS epidemic. Victims of the plague would often be fired from their job or not be admitted into a hospital. People that were infected lived in fear that every day could be their last and there were no drugs to treat them. Another movement to come out of Act Up is TAG (Treatment Action Group). It was TAG’s job to get the government to put safe drugs on the shelves. The plague was also very emotional for those not infected. Every other day a friend or lover would be killed by AIDS and nobody was doing anything about it. It definitely takes a toll on someone when they need to go to four funerals in the same week. People were actually afraid of the gays and though that they were trying to spread the disease to others. They nicknamed it gay cancer, gay plague and gay related Immunodeficiency.

Many blamed the action of the gays for the spread of AIDS and some even thought they deserved what they were going through. Senator Jesse Helms, senator of North Carolina for thirty years, said “AIDS is God’s judgment on a society that does not live by its rules”. Everyone had abandoned them and the only way they could conquer the plague is by joining together.

After being shut down and silenced for a few years, they decided to stand up for themselves and began protesting. They accused the government and drug producers of being murderers, because they were doing nothing to advance the creation of AIDS curing drugs and the process was way too slow. They also protested against the Church by lying in the aisles to try to show how narrow minded their thinking was. But basically, what they were doing was trying to prove that they are just as human as anyone else and should be treated with equality. Their unique approach to protesting is what ultimately got people to listen and gave them a victory.

They adopted harmless strategies to inform people about what was really going on. They made their own “gay media” that told the truth, opposite what the popular media was doing. They also made pamphlets that explained the disease and made agendas to give the government to help with the drug production. They also tried to educate people about gay sex, like Peter Staley did when he got some air time on Crossfire.

http://youtu.be/uUq9gSNil2A

While trying to take control of the situation, they made very diplomatic events to get their points across such as kiss-ins and die-ins. A kiss-in involves going to a public place like a hospital lobby and openly kissing people around you. Similarly, a die-in is where people lie in a public place pretending to be dead, to raise that point that that will be a reality if no actions are taken.

The people talking over the story are all survivors of the plague so we get a genuine sense of what happened in those years. It is heartwarming to see these people telling their story because people got the impression few would make it out alive. Having the testimony and opinions of survivors really gives the film a sense of authenticity.

We Were Here

We Were Here is an American documentary that was produced and directed by David Weissman. It’s a 90 minute film that was released in 2011. The documentary is about the AIDS crisis, also named pejorative names such as the ‘’Gay Plague’’, that took place in San Francisco during the early 1980’s. It is the first documentary that dared to look back at the arrival and the impact of the crisis in San Francisco. The whole documentary is told by five people that had a role during the epidemic, whether their friends had AIDS and passed away or they suffered and almost died themselves. The documentary received a lot of good review because of its initiative and its ability to extend beyond San Francisco and the AIDS crisis; ‘’It speaks to our capacity as individuals to rise to the occasion, and to the incredible power of a community coming together with love, compassion, and determination.’’1

http://youtu.be/oCxqJgpejbs

Hard times

The fact that the documentary is told by people who have been there and who have lived with it makes the movie very real and powerful. We can really feel the emotions portrayed through the movie by the people involved. It shows us how difficult it was to be gay during that time and how hard it was to live while being different. People suffered a lot during the epidemic, but not only the ones infected. We Were Here is very similar to Surviving a Plague because New York and San Francisco had very similar situations. For this reason, it was also very hard for men in San Francisco to have their good friends and lovers dying around them. Because they had to attend so many funerals, they often could not even afford flowers. So one of the men being interviewed, Guy, would donate some flowers from his flower shop to the unfortunate mourners. Guy was also witnessing the destruction around him and wanted to do his part to help. The help of woman was greatly appreciated in this time of need. Whether it came from nurses that did not discriminate or from lesbians who were fighting with their gay brothers. The reason that the participation of the woman was so important is that it was the first time that the gays felt that they were not alone, that someone else cared for them.

The AIDS crisis came as a huge shock to the gay community. They were so used to living their lives freely and having casual sex whenever they wanted. When AIDS started appearing, it was like a restraint to them and they didn’t like it. They had to limit the number of sexual relations they had and had to live in constant fear that they or someone they love could be next to go. This once open and vibrant community had to hold back for once and live in the shadows for a while because no one listened to their problem. However, by being strong and rising up together, they were able to defeat, or at least subdue, the spread of AIDS in America.

 

One among many others

Fighting for our lives: Facing AIDS in San Francisco is a short documentary that has been co-produced and co-directed by Ellen Seidler and Patrick DuNah. It shows us the San Francisco gay community’s response to the AIDS crisis. This documentary is one among many others that have been made to inform about the AIDS crisis, not only domestically but globally as well.

http://youtu.be/IEAY03ZsiSs

Our Thoughts on the Film

Both films were very similar but their main differences are that they took place in two different cities. The distance between New York and San Francisco, the two cities focused on, is approximately 4 680 kilometers. This proves that it is a disease that could affect any place at any time and nowhere is safe, no matter how well developed they are. For these reasons, AIDS must be treated as a global issue and requires the participation of the entire world to treat it for good. The areas most affected by AIDS today are poor part of Africa. Unfortunately, these Africans do not have the luxury to demonstrate and have their government listen to them, so we must speak up for them.

Although the global issue of AIDS is an incredibly difficult concern to tackle, the directors of the two films we watched did an excellent job portraying the “local” history of AIDS.  With the mix of modern interviews and old footage, we really got the sense of how life was living through those hardships while at the same time getting the raw emotion that comes with recounting the terrible events that took place.

Before watching the movies, we thought that the best way to getting your way was being disruptive and even violent. However, in contrast to actions taken out in films like If a Tree Falls and This is What Democracy Looks Like the way the Act Up got their way was with peaceful protests and discussions. Even when riot police abused and arrested them, they were able to keep their cool and keep their dignity. Compassion and empathy are really the key tactics they use to get their way and it pays off. The movies also taught us that nothing can get done by lying around hoping for change.

The way the gays were treated and how the disease wasn’t recognized before it had taken thousands of lives speaks volumes about our society. The discrimination that these men need to face is absolutely disgusting and we think it is inhumane that the gays had to suffer discrimination on top of the widespread disease they were already trying to fight alone. Coming out of the closet is one of the hardest things a gay person will experience in their lives because there are few physical signs to suggest it and it usually comes as a shock to everyone. The fact that gays are still bullied and looked down upon makes it even more difficult. The music video for Make it Stop by Rise Against deals with this topic.

http://youtu.be/XP4clbHc4Xg

Although people can be hated by individuals and feel the pain of discrimination, it is also possible to feel hate coming from a whole group of people. This is case with the Westboro Baptist Church, led by pastor Fred Phelps. This organization is a disgusting, hateful church that pickets funerals of gays, soldiers and even children that were victims of elementary school shootings! That’s their kids holding the signs, who have been taught hate from a young age. Although it is common knowledge that Christianity is against homosexuality, we are not trying to say that all Christians are hateful. The values of the religion are actually very honorable, but as long as we have one group of people like the    WBC tainting the name for everyone, progress is achieved much slower.

What these films are trying to convey is that under no circumstances, should we abandon our fellow man and leave him to die. Whether they are a different race, sexuality, social status or gender they deserve the right to fight for their struggle and possibly survival and no one can take that right away from them. Everyone needs to have a chance to be heard and we must help give a voice to the ones who are being ignored.

After having viewed the film, we have learned many valuable lessons. First of all, even an obstacle as big as AIDS can be overcome if people stick together and don’t give up. The power of many people joined together is much greater than that of the individual. We also learned that violence is not always a good way to react to a situation and usually much more can get done through demonstrations of peace and love.

1: http://wewereherefilm.com

12 - Portraits of The Self

Portraits of The Self

By: Dieustella, Jasmine and Skylar

Introduction

Every family has their own story. These stories make up how we became, how we were brought to life. These stories are the story of our lives. Losing her mother Dianne at a young age, Sarah Polley wanted to discover her mother through the people who have known her. Through her quest for the “truth” about who her mother was, Sarah finds out about her mother’s personality, marriages, the people she fell in love with, her life, her death, and in between those anecdotes she finds out that her father Michael Polley is not her biological father.  Sarah Polley interviews her father Michael, her brothers and sisters, Dianne’s friends and coworkers.  Sarah uses techniques to make us feel like we were there with them, to make us feel like we are part of the story, part of the family. Self portrait documentary like this one or Silverlake Life are very personal stories to which anyone could relate to. They show you what has happened to them and make us understand that this could be our story. However, to bring such a story to life you need tools and techniques to trick your way to the truth.

Stories We Tell

This week we watched the 109 minute documentary, Stories We Tell, which was made in Canada in 2012. The documentary was about the director, Sarah Polley trying to piece together her mother’s life story. The movie was constructed from stories of family members, friends, co-workers and lovers of Sarah’s mother Dianne, which gave everyone a chance to tell their side of the story and help Sarah learn the many truths about her mother. Telling the truth is the biggest issue in this documentary. In everyone’s eyes, Dianne was very joyful, outgoing and loved to party, but some people thought she was hiding something behind her smile. We find out that Dianne was hiding the truth about Sarah’s real father from her husband Michael. Sarah only discovers her biological father, Harry in the process of creating this documentary. When Sarah made this documentary, how does she know that everyone interviewed was telling the truth? For all we know they could have altered their stories to not make Dianne look bad. Sarah ended the film with Geoff mentioning “but I did sleep with your mother once”, but throughout his interview, he did not recall much about Dianne, so is he telling all of the truth?  Another issue raised by this film is Authorship. Who deserves to tell the story of Dianne? In Harry’s eyes, he thought he did, but Sarah got over fifty people to tell the story of her mother. This is why the film is called Stories We Tell, because it involved nearly everyone Dianne knew.

Director's Creativity

Sarah Polley herself made this film really special. In the video below she describes how hard it was to make this film and that she had to step away from it because it became too overwhelming.  Michael tells her that she is “a vicious director” because she is deceiving the viewer with her directorial tricks and is relentless with her questions during her interviews. We are oblivious to the fact that she made up half of the footage with actors. We were able to picture what her mother was like through these made up scenes, but in reality they are fake. She also mentions in the video below that the movie is a cacophony of images. Michael’s narration of the film makes it a story by helping us piece together all of the images thrown at us.

Our weekly topic was portraits of the self, where we discussed how it is important to have witnesses to life, how there are obstacles in receiving the truth and how imagination shapes reality. To reconstruct Dianne’s story, Sarah had to rely heavily on everyone who was a witness to her mother’s life. It took Sarah five years to create this documentary because she had to gather and interview all the witnesses to achieve the truth about her mother. There are three obstacles in receiving the truth of Dianne’s story. The first obstacle is faultiness of memory. Some people just so happen to forget things, especially if it's going back a long time ago. The second obstacle is reluctance to tell the truth. We are not sure if anything is being hidden to protect Dianne’s image. Geoff is an example of this because he is very quiet throughout the interview and it seems like he is hiding the truth. The third obstacle  is difference in perspectives.  Everyone has a different relationship with Dianne and it makes everyone’s individual story different. Harry and Michael are two examples of difference in perspectives. Since Dianne had a very different relationships with both of these men, they both had different views of her. Michael knew Dianne as his wife and mother of his children and he remembers the struggles they went through in their relationship. Harry on the other hand was her secret boyfriend in Montreal and was not much more than that. He feels like he knows Dianne, but in reality he doesn't actually know everything about  her life. Once all these obstacles are faced, it is up to Sarah construct the story from her view. When we talk about using imagination to shape reality, Sarah uses her imagination to create past memories with actors to recreate a realistic image. This helps the viewer visualize the story along with the help  interviews and narration.

Another look at Self-Portrait: Silverlake Life

The 99 minute documentary, Silverlake Life: The View From Here, directed by Peter Friedman and released in 1993 in the US, is the story of longtime partners Tom Joslin and Mark Massi living each day as if it were their last one. The film is a personal diary of the couple’s simultaneous downward spiral of dealing with the AIDS epidemic. The couple lives in Silverlake, California, and the second part of the film’s title “The View From Here”, refers to the point of view. The film began as a personal diary for Tom in which he filmed mostly his partner, Mark and described their day to day life. The film was a distraction for Tom while at the same time forced him as well as Mark to confront the issue of death directly. The film was originally Tom’s project. He had created a movie many years back when he was growing up and dealing with his sexuality. Tom’s first film was about his life growing up being gay, how he hid it from everyone he knew for a long time. The film was in Tom’s point of view. Silverlake Life was a sort of second act to his first film. Tom wanted to capture the effects of AIDS on everyday life and his and Mark’s personal journey of coping with their illness. About halfway through the film, Tom’s health suddenly plummets and the focus turns to Tom. Suddenly Mark is responsible for filming and taking care of Tom. The film is the journey towards Tom’s heartbreaking but expected death. The film is very personal, and almost feels as if the audience is watching old home videos. We experience everything with Mark and Tom from daily doctor’s appointments to death.

The film is different from other documentaries and is unique in its own way. The first reason that this film is special is because most of the filming was done by Tom. When Tom suddenly got worse, Mark had to take over the filming because he promised Tom that he would finish the film for him if Tom didn’t live to finish it. When Tom dies, Mark is left with the unbearable task of trying to finish Tom’s film, though he is in no place to even begin. Mark’s condition is worsening and he is mentally and physically exhausted. Peter Friedman, the “director” of the film appears in it when he is interviewing the couple. Because Mark could not bear to finish the film, it being too emotional for him, Peter, a close friend and former student of Tom’s, finished the film, as he says in an autobiography that he did not complete the film as a personal tribute to Tom. Friedman finished the film to show the fatality of AIDS and the depth of a gay relationship. The film is very informal. Shown as a personal diary, most of the footage is from Tom’s point of view from a small camera. The film also interviews Tom’s family and friends, though it is mostly captured footage of Tom and Mark’s life. The film is very intimate at many moments, such as visits to the doctor’s office, or Tom’s death, where we see Mark filming minutes after Tom has passed, and is behind the camera, intensely crying, while we see Tom zipped up into a body bag and taken away. The intensity of the film is built up but is also expected by the audience.

  http://www.newvideo.com/filmmakers/peter-friedman-biography/

Although this film seems like a documentary about the effects of AIDS on homosexual couples, it is far more than that. Beneath the surface, Silverlake Life is a love story about commitment and how far love can keep us together. The film also deals with the issue of homosexuals being dissociated and invisible to society. Society fails to recognize the love that exists between gay partners. In another interview, Peter Friedman says

"Sundance was great, but I found it strange that the description of the film in the festival catalogue didn't mention the fact that Tom and Mark were lovers for over 20 years. They were just described as being 'two men.' That misses the whole point of the film really, because 'Silverlake Life' is a love story.”

The film Silverlake Life is a self-portrait filmed from Tom and Mark’s point of view. But who’s story is it really? In class this week we studied Stories We Tell, a documentary where the story is reconstructed from the memories of tens of people. The issue of who the story “belonged” to was an issue in that film. In this film we can ask the same. Is it Mark’s story of dealing with Tom’s death? Is it Tom’s story of his final days? Or is it larger than this; how our society deals with homosexual relationships and AIDS.

Our society shuns anything that we don’t want to see. Death and illness are already on that list, but homosexuality is making it’s way there as well. We shut out anything that is different, or not in the norm. At one part in the film Mark is swimming in a public pool, and the owner, politely asks him to cover up his body to not “scare off the other swimmers” due to his large quantity of dark lesions on his skin. This offends Mark and he says that he doesn't want to cover up his body because it’s “ugly” for others. He is proud that he is still alive from AIDS. We would rather cover up what is different or disturbing than confront our fears. Homosexuals are isolated from society and are given minimal attention. Tom says at one point that he feels isolated and separated from the rest of society. AIDS forces the couple to see how deep their love is for each other and how committed they are to their relationship. 

Personal Reflection

Both movies, to bring their stories across, have used techniques such as getting to know the person who passed away through archival footages and by interviewing people who have known the deceased. For instance, Sarah interviews her family, people who have knew her mother, in order to fulfill her quest to know about her mother. To trick her way into making us understand the story, or sympathize with it, she has setup actors to act certain events of the past.  Similarly, Tom Josling, interviewed people who knew him such has his family members, and friends who knew him well. He setup is movie into ‘video diaries’ of him life before he dies and in order for us to know him better he has provided archival footages of him younger. His movie could be also seen as a memoir, just like Sarah Polley’s movie that plays with different genres.

Silverlake Life unlike Stories We Tell does not have any problem with authorship. Tom Josling is a producer who has willingly decided to make the story of his life before the AIDS disease takes him away. It’s the story of his struggle. In contrast, Sarah Polley makes up the story of her “Mum” through the stories of people involves, witnesses, and hearsay. Dianne, alias Mum, is the only one who could have retold her story. It is the movie of recollection; recollection of Tom Josling’s video diaries and interviews and a recollection of people’s memory of Dianne Polley.

 They have also made this movie in such a way that we experience life with them, as if we were there with them in their kitchen, in their hospital rooms, as if we were them. They, Sarah Polley and Tom Josling and Peter Friedman, producers of Stories We Tell and Silverlake Life, have communicated their ideas about life through films of themselves, of people around them, of people they have lived with and love. It is a very personal movie, a self portrait.

They made a film of people’s feelings and emotions and what makes us human. Both Stories We Tell and Silverlake Life: The view from here, teaches us about life, the people in it and about ourselves. Like Tom Josling said in the movie before he died that strike me and taught me a lesson we should all consider was that life was “shorter than we thought it’d be but then again that’s life.” Their story could have easily been yours or mine. Last year one of my family members was forced to go to the hospital often and I really understand the frustration and the powerlessness of Tom and Mark in Silverlake Life. You can’t do anything but be there and sometimes being there, only, makes you feel like it is not enough. There are a lot of people dying in the world and it is a public issue. Science is still trying to find a cure to this disease but the dying rate of AIDS or cancer is high. We should learn to enjoy life because it is too short. Diseases do not choice people according to their social class, race, ethnicity, or gender it affects everyone, anyone. We should learn to appreciate life the best we can and not take our health for granted.

Conclusion

In conclusion, through those two documentary films, we are face to two different views of self portrait. One film talks about life and the other about death. In the movie screened in class Dianne dies of cancer while the hero of Silverlake Life dies of aids. In Stories We Tell we don’t ponder about Dianne’s death but about her life and the people who have been impacted by her. In contrast Silverlake Life is all about how the disease killed the life out of Tom. Both screening have used similar techniques to tell us their stories. In both movies we are face to question our own self on who we are? Who are the people who have impacted our lives? Who or what has made our lives worth living for? Both screening have evoked the question of truth and the value of life. 

11- 270 Years of Resistance - The Aboriginal People

11- 270 Years of Resistance - The Aboriginal People 

by Audrey, Daniella and Lindsay

This week screening was Kanehsatake: 270 Years of Resistance and as an additional film we watched Le Peuple Invisible; the Invisible Nation. Both films represent the life of Indigenous people and how they are being treated differently than others. Seeing this happen, makes us think about how the world can be unfair at times.  Indigenous peoples are peoples defined in international or national legislation as having a set of specific rights based on their historical ties to a particular territory, and their cultural or historical distinctiveness from other populations that are often politically dominant. Watching these two films we get to see how they try there hardest and still manage to struggle to defend their origins.                  

The Oka Crisis                                                                                                          

On July 11, 1990, a crisis began between Mohawks, the Quebec police and the Canadian army and lasted 78 nerve-wracking days. This crisis was caused because the mayor of Oka wanted to expand the golf course as well as sixty luxury condominiums were planned to be built on Native land. Against that project, Mohawks did everything they could to stop it; they protected their land as their ancestors did for so long before them. This documentary shows how Natives defended their rights against racial and cultural act. 

Kanehsatake: 270 Years of Resistance

In this 119 minutes documentary, released in 1993, directed by Alanis Obomsawin, we discovered what happened during the Oka crisis in 1990, and the struggles the Mohawks faced to protect their land. Through the movie, Obamsawin interviewed many of these Indigenous people, on their thoughts, and many of them were ready to fight to their death to keep their land . When the Mohawk nation heard about the project to destroy their sacred land for a golf course, they knew they had to do something; they didn’t spend 270 years protecting that land for it to be torn apart for a golf course.  Barricades were built on both sides, the Quebec police where not allowing anyone to enter the village. Oka citizens Mohawks, Iroquois couldn’t get to their homes or their families because of the barricades, they were really mad. They are living in Canada, in a free country, and couldn’t go home, the Mohawks were physically and verbally assaulted by the police. Some were even arrested just for saying what is on their mind, or didn’t want to obey the police. All the arrest were illegal, every Native who got arrested got out of prison with no charges, expect 3 men. All these arrest, because they were protecting their land, their roots, their family. The Canadian army was there too, they were inspecting each bag, packet, box of food before passing it over the barbed wire fence to the Mohawks. They inspected everything that got in our out, making sure no weapons or illegal items were passing through.  The Natives fought together, as a nation, as a community, they protected their land, just like their ancestor did before them.

This week topic was all about Nations and Communities, how a nation can come together and achieve so much. Just like the Natives did, they became one; one strong, connected, helpful community. Together, they protected their land, their rights, and their traditions, everything they were thought as young children by their ancestor. We also learn about Gaia, goddess of earth, mother of all gods,as well as Pachamana, Aztec Goddess of the Earth, and about The Venus of Willendorf. They were able to protect the children, to protect their home, their land. Just like we saw in Kanehsatake: 270 Years of Resistance, the women protected their land, fought for their land, they were truly warriors.

Colonialism and Racism were both presented in the film. Colonialism is defined by denying a people’s culture, erasing it, assimilating it.  The natives were fighting because they didn’t want to lose their land, where their ancestors lived, where they made history. By losing their land, they would have lost more than just their homes, they would have lost their culture. Racism is defined by; the hatred of a people based on differences of race and culture, has two effects when it is exposed: empathy for the victims of racism and shame for the perpetrators of racism. The people from Quebec didn’t like how they looked in the film, they were ashamed and it is why it took some time before Alanis Obomsawin was able to show her movie in Quebec, because the Quebecois didn’t wanted to be reminded of what they did in 1990.

If you want to learn more about the Oka crisis, here is articles were Bill Sears, Skaghenhate’, War Chief tells his story.  Click down below to read this article:

                                                                                                              http://warriorpublications.wordpress.com/2013/11/01/mohawk-warriors-society-revival-campaign-notification/

Le Peuple Invisible; the Invisible Nation                                  

“The Invisible Nation” “You have to know your history. You have to know what is behind you in order to know where you are going. If you do not understand that history, you cannot ever have any vision about where it is you want to go.”

Many years ago, before all of us were here; many different powerful people walked this land; the natives. Three common names we usually think of when we hear the word “native tribes” are the Algonquin, Mohawk and Iroquois. It’s them vs. us; we live in two parallel worlds. Being side by side, but not being able to connect and have peace between each other.  They are the people we don’t often think about, and that we rarely hear about anymore. Although these people have lived on this earth for years and they deliver a huge impact in our world.

The invisible nation that we speak of now is the Algonquin’s. The documentary “The invisible Nation” we viewed is 93 minutes and was written by Richard Desjardins and Robert Monderie in the year 2007. The Algonquin’s were harmonious people, owning and occupying a vast , widespread land spanning several territories .The Algonquin’s are located north of Ottawa, along both sides of the Ottawa River, QC Ontario. Living in what they call the “kingdom of blackflies” was were their families rested and where they felt safe and well protected from invaders. The Algonquin’s call themselves the “Anishinaabe” meaning ‘first’ or ‘original peoples’. The “original people”, are the ones who have their own unique path, the ones who celebrate their many traditional values.

As the sixteenth century came along with the European settlers, this caused a huge shift in the Algonquin way of life. Trading and doing business with the French was a great way for receiving new stock and being able to expand. In 1763 the Royal proclamation came rolling around, and the Algonquin lands soon began to populate with the Europeans. Seeing this happen, the Algonquin’s soon realized that this wasn’t intended to protect them, but for their beavers. With the Europeans taking over, destruction began very rapidly. As the years progressed the white men no longer needed the Indians, they only needed there land. In 1850 the authorities decided to take the Indians out of the woods and isolate them, turning the Indian lands into refugee camps. The devilish plan was to throw them out of the woods for thousands of years.

In 1875, Indians were living in the country now called Canada in the province Quebec. Being ruled under the federal government was no happiness for them. Indians were being treated like minors and all the children were being neglected. Being treated unpleasantly, however and whenever the government felt like it. Being treated like an Inferior race, their languages, and their identities were taken away. Stripping off their names, and labelling each person by a number. The land was not given to them the same way; they now received a small 3rd of a territory set with many boundaries. They did not want to give up the land they had stolen, because it was now said to be the land of the loggers and whites.

An evil man by the name of Father Moreau was one of the many major destructionists during this time. Moreau did not like the idea that the Indians still had a standing forest right next to his Parrish. For twenty five long hard years Moreau worked relentlessly to create winning conditions, in order to force the Algonquin’s to leave the forest. Moreau would do referendum after referendums just until the response turned yes and abused his power and harassed people constantly. People were being treated like animals “We got thrown a piece of steak and would have to fight for it, and you would be losing your friends, the government liked that" said by Gloria Nault. Their privileges started to be taken away, their land, food, legal consents weren’t allowed to vote or even get a lawyer. This was becoming a huge problem across Canada and remained un-resolved.

The Canadian government founded the “Amos Indian residential school”in 1955. Kids ages 7-12 had to start school. Having no clue what was happening, they had to follow the rules. Leaving their community and heading towards the unknown. This school was hell for the children. Being separated from their families and loved ones for ten months at a time, and not being able to go home on holidays. Kids were forced to learn new languages, and if they spoke Algonquin they would be punished. Having to learn new rules, and if they did not follow, the children were physical and sexually abused.  All these children were completely disconnected from where they came from and were destroyed within their community.

A quote from Lylas Polson that powerfully caught my attention: “They will never apologize; never accept what they did wrong. Think of the hours they spent trying to separate us, nowadays they want to give us money, but in reality you can’t replace what was done, you can’t buy the wrong they did. You can’t buy anything to take away the memories.”

Sixty years after this very unpleasant journey, the Indian Nedelec reserve is trying to attract back over thousands of forced out Algonquin’s to come back. People don’t want to have to re-live the punishment and harassment that they lived years ago; it’s a huge fear in their eyes. People think that they have great lives on the reserve, but in reality it’s different. They are prisoners in their own community; they have nothing left. No longer do they have access to their traditional lands, the language or stories. They are feeling like ghosts on their own land. Today there are about nine thousand Algonquin’s left. Living but also struggling with human rights and trying to keep their traditional values.

The Colonization of aboriginal peoples is a huge part of the Canadian history. The aboriginal including the Algonquin lost almost 98% of their original lands through legal means such as treaties and the Indian Act. Assimilation is a form of racism. In the film the narrator explains how the aboriginal children were put into boarding school where they would be punished to practice their culture and language, and they were forced to be away from their families and learn the ways of the Europeans.

If you want to learn more about the early history of the Algonquin nation, their background and how they had to live there live through grief, click below:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TN-I2Ce6hVw

 Linking the two films:                                                                                       

Much can be learned through these two films; Kanehsatake: 270 Years of Resistance and The Invisible Nation. The struggle of being an aboriginal in a country where your basic rights to property and many other things are stripped in the governments need for money and power is evident in these two films. With films such as these we see the past of these nations and the suffering they endured and still endure for the past several hundred years. One begins to think that perhaps all citizens of society can easily be stripped of their basic rights as the aboriginals did in both of these films.

In Kanehsatake: 270 Years of Resistance, the director, Alanis Obomsawin goes behind the barriers of the Oka Crisis thus giving us the insiders view. The footage is raw and real, you see how those behind the barrier are living and you also see the brutality of those in authority toward these people that are just trying to protect land that is theirs. The only downfall to think technique is that it can be considered bias. This is because she almost never shows the perspective of those in authority which can be considered one sided. Here is a link of Alanis Obomsawin speaking about her time behind the barrier (starting at 2:00): http://www.cbc.ca/archives/categories/society/native-issues/general-21/alanis-obomsawin-behind-mohawk-lines.html. 

The Invisible Nation is a film about the struggles of the Algonquin people starting when the European settlers marked their territory on Canadian soil. The directors Richard Desjardins and Robert Monderie explain in great detail the history of these people and what they had and still have to endure. Their most predominant technique is the use of factual material. They thoroughly explained the history of these people and how they suffered at the hands of those who believed they were nothing but savages and had to be assimilated. Here is the trailer of the film so you can see a preview of what my group watched:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SGKJe84lWY0.

In both of these films the directors openly state that not only the citizens of the world but also the citizens of Canada have no idea what kind of life an aboriginal person lives. These film makers proved to us that not everyone is free in a free country. The films put a mirror in front of our Canadian society to show us that inequality and the mistreatment of people, especially minorities does not only happen in third world countries or any other country but that hits home. That it happens every day in Canada that the aboriginal people are seen as a minority and have their land and their rights stripped from them in their daily lives. If you ask any Canadian about how they view us as a society they would most likely respond by saying that they see us as one of the best and most free countries in the world. But ask an aboriginal that lives on a reserve this question and their answer would be extremely different. These films and many others like it are just trying to show us that the Canadian government is not equal to all and that it is time to give the aboriginal people the same treatment as the rest of society, to face the reality of it.

To conclude, the aboriginal people have been struggling to keep their values and culture since 1608 when the Europeans settled in Canada and took their land and culture away slowly but surely. Needless to say, it’s hard to say that Canada is a “free” country seeing how they treat the first people. Regardless of the argument that the aboriginal people were here first, they still live in Canada, a country of fairness. The racism and unequal treatment they receive is just intolerable and we believe Canada is in denial of these acts. It is time to get educated about the first nation people and understand their suffering and make a difference by helping end the racism. But is it possible to undo 270 years of repression?