Canadian Artists from World War II to the Present: A Survey  
     
     
   
     
   
  Introduction  
     
  Canada possesses an immense geographical territory. The many different First Nations cultures that have lived in this territory for millennia (no one knows precisely how long) have produced objects as diverse as the territory in which they have lived. These objects have included rock paintings (petroglyphs), portable sculptures, adorned weapons, clothing, architecture, and household objects, just to name a few. Some objects were made for ritual purposes (e.g., shamans’ rattles, or decorated utilitarian objects); others, so it would seem, were produced simply for pleasure.

Realizing the diversity of objects produced by First Nations in Canada gives one pause when considering them as "art." This term ought to be more narrowly defined to mean simply the deliberate modification of objects and/or the environment for culturally significant purposes.

Issues surrounding the study of First Nations art include the following. What was the purpose of the object? Did the object have a specific symbolic or practical purpose? What can be said about the cultural context in which the object was produced? To what extent are traditional values and techniques merged with those from the mainstream? To what extent do European value systems (e.g., the "primitivist" approach celebrated by Picasso and others during the early 20th century) affect the interpretation of the work? To what extent is a political critique present in the work? Many of these questions are difficult to answer, and students of First Nations art need to be aware of the limitations of their own cultures.





It must be remembered that First Nations peoples in Canada have experienced ambivalent and often negative relationships with the dominant culture. While it is true that Europeans brought new tools and new materials and (to some aboriginal groups at least) wealth through trading, they also brought disease, and, many would say, covert assimilationist political strategies. The general nature of relations between First Nations and the dominant culture in Canada has, however, been different than in the U.S. In Canada, some groups, such as the Mohawk in the Eastern Woodlands, were considered allies of the British crown and enjoyed special status. Similarly, many West Coast First Nations, although beset by disease brought by Europeans, continued to enjoy political relative autonomy. Such exceptions should be noted, but in general, the strategies the mainstream culture pursued were invariably pernicious to native peoples, and ranged from actual genocide (the Beothuk nation in Atlantic Canada) to what many First Nations peoples feel was cultural genocide (residential schools). Thus present-day First Nations art often addresses challenging political and social issues, and the artists do not shy away from criticizing the cultures that have oppressed them. Pride, anger, sorrow, and irony—combined with mordant humour—are all characteristics of present-day First Nations art in Canada.





Finally, a brief word about museums and First Nations materials. In the 19th century, it was common to collect First Nations materials avidly. Everything from skeletons to totem poles were "collected" from First Nations sites. The prevailing view was that these cultures were going to disappear and that museums ought to collect the objects from these cultures before they disappeared. Now it is abundantly clear that First Nations peoples are far from disappearing. Their culture is flourishing, including the arts. Museums have been approached to repatriate human remains, and First Nations leaders have communicated their displeasure that sacred objects, e.g., medicine bundles (from the Plains’ peoples), which are thought to have a living spirit, are still held in museums. So when people visit museums that are full of First Nations materials today, it is appropriate to ask oneself whether the object is being displayed in a respectful and culturally appropriate manner.