11-The Neglected Nation

The People of Kanehsatake: 270 Years of Resistance, The Invisible Nation, and The People of the Kattawapiskak River

By Leigh, Justin and Christopher

Marking Their Territory

        Imagine a life in which your rights, property, and freedoms are interminably taken from you.  For the Mohawk community, this life is a reality. Kanehsatake: 270 Years of Resistance, a Canadian documentary film made by Alanis Obomsawin in 1993, illuminates the land issues that this community has long struggled with. Ms. Obomsawin, a notorious documentary filmmaker at the National Film Board for over four decades, uses her status to inform people on the history and discrimination of Native tribes. The 120 minute film focuses on the seventy eight day Oka crisis that began on July 11, 1990 and lasted until September 26, 1990.  Obomsawin introduces the film with a brief history about the people of Kanehsatake, a Mohawk settlement on the shore of the Lake of Two Mountains at the Ottawa River. In 1990, the town of Oka, next to Kanehsatake, had planned to develop an extra nine hole expansion to their private golf course, along with new luxury housing. Their intentions were to build the expansion on the “Pine”, a Mohawk burial ground in a white pine tree forest bordering the town. A few years before these events occurred, the Mohawks had lost a federal lawsuit claim for the land. With the knowledge that these people were illiterate and unable to properly defend themselves, the court rejected the argument that the Mohawks had been deceived by the Sulpician order. In technicality, building upon the land was not illegal; however, from an ethical standpoint, it was certainly wrong. 

  The “Pine” had long been used by the Mohawks; their ancestors' tombstones still stand in the cemetery. Evidently, this is why they chose not to tolerate the expansion, and thus barricaded the dirt road leading to it. For them, this value of this ground extends far beyond what profit could bring. It is considered place of spiritual strength and communal identity where they practice the Mohawk traditions. By example, the importance of these traditions is displayed when Loran Thomsan, a Mohawk native, is teaching her children the Iroquois language upon this sacred ground. It suggests that who they are depends on who they have been for centuries.

      Further, the town of Oka requested support from the Sûreté du Québec (SQ) and asked for the removal of the barricade. Despite this request, the relationship between the SQ and the Aboriginals was not strong, and a fight was anticipated. On July 11th, 1990, the SQ attacked with tear gas and flash grenades. Gunfire from the Mohawks broke out and SQ Corporal Marcel Lemay was killed from a bullet wound. Moreover, the Mohawks of Kahnawake joined forces and blocked the Mercier Bridge, in order to impede entry into their territory. The blockade caused significant traffic, consequentially angering drivers from other communities. The federal government then took action, sending in military troops to control the situation. Arriving by helicopters, they attempted to negotiate for the re-opening of the Mercier bridge. However, this particularity was ironic, because the helicopters landed right behind the Sulpician church: the place at which these land issues began 270 years prior. 

      While all media sources are restricted from entering the scene, Ms. Obomsawin gives an insider look at the violence that ensues during this crisis. The Mohawk people, knowing and trusting her, open up with honest emotions as she interviews warriors and other Natives about their experiences on the reserve. Amongst these interviewees, Ellen Gabriel passionately represents the struggles of her people. She explains that the role of the women in the Mohawk community is to protect nature, and the men, in turn, have a covenant to protect the people. Nature is at the centre of their way of life, and they believe it is essential for the continuity of the First Nations people. Ultimately, the film concludes with the Mayor of Oka retracting his golf course expansion plans, and the burial ground, along with nature, are left to stand. The determination of the Mohawks to fight for their rights was successful, and today, the triumph of such oppression remains a testament in our history.

Click here to view an interview with Chicky, a native of the Mohawk community.

Isolating the Invisible

      Recognition, for the Natives, has always been a central concern. The documentary film Le peuple invisible, a 93 minute film directed by Richard Desjardins and Robert Monderie in 2007, highlights the history in which these people have long been disregarded. The Algonquin nation of 9,000 is now divided in Quebec into 10 communities, and yet, to the whites, they remain invisible and prejudiced. Located north of Montreal and Ottawa, their land lies along both sides of the Ottawa river. Their history, dating back to the century long war between the English and French for control of the fur trade, has continuously presented difficulties. In 1763, with the English King’s establishment of the Royal Proclamation, the Algonquins were hopeful, as it represented a symbol of newfound political autonomy. However, this proclamation was not truly intended to protect the people; rather, it was intended to protect the beavers for the fur trade. Their land was quickly populated by Europeans, thereby pushing the Natives deeper into the territory. In 1850, authorities removed the Indians from the woods and placed them in refugee camps situated in the Maniwaki and Tamiskamingue areas. Moreover, missionaries were sent to soften the Indians. As the film states, these people probably did not know that their territory now belonged to the province of Quebec, or that they, themselves, belonged to the federal government. In essence, while they were dubbed an inferior people to the white, it became clear that the only thing needed of them was their territory. 

      The government believed that within a decade, the Algonquin people could be assimilated. They stripped them of their language, identity, and names, making them each a mere number in a registry. Today, a similar situation still holds true. Algonquin children, aged seven and up, were forced to attend religious schools and conform to the French ways of life. From learning the language quickly to understanding new rules, the government made every effort to integrate them into life by their standards. When they failed to comply with this, the children were punished, whipped and humiliated. Beyond this, for hundreds of years, the Algonquins have been gradually losing their land. To many, they were viewed as a nuisance; in particular, Father Moreau, whose parish in Nedelec was in proximity to where the Indians resided, attempted to have them moved out. When the Canadians began to conquer the West after confederation, and the railway system was implemented, Indians were forced to give over their territory. A dozen treaties were signed from the Ottawa River to the foot of the Rockies, yet in Quebec, none were signed. Despite this, these treaties were not respected, and the government reclaimed everything they had promised to compensate them with. The Algonquin people have infinitely been told that they have no rights over their land, and have even been denied ownership of a power plant in Long Point that could stimulate an economy for them. 

      Furthermore, there has rarely been a genuine effort to help these people on the government’s part. “We’re prisoners in our own community,” states a native male in an interview. “We live in a dump called a reserve.” For example, in Winneway, some Algonquins did not have proper access to water or electricity, and were forced to make due with a generator. On weekends, their children were sent to foster care in Val-d’Or. Those living near Parc de la Verendrye, as well, faced many difficulties when logging companies began exploiting their forest. In consequence, these people, a hunting society, lost an essential source of food, as fauna and flora could no longer survive in the area. What’s more, they have no legal recourse because any lawyer who tried to represent them would be fined $200. Le peuple invisible shows that they are truly powerless, voiceless, and helpless, and by the end, it very clearly suggested that the Algonquins have always the victims of isolation. 

Click here to view an interview with filmmaker Richard Desjardins.

Out of Sight, Out of Mind

        For people living in the western world, it is difficult to imagine a life in which the basic necessities of life are not easily obtained. We have long been provided with the resources required for our survival, and with such, have the fortune of living comfortably. In her documentary The People of the Kattawapiskak River, Alanis Obomsawin, through multiple interviews, exhibits the struggles of people who, in contrast, have a substantially more difficult way of life. Throughout the 50 minutes, the Canadian film, released in 2012, sheds light on the housing issues that the people of Kattawapiskak endure. Kattawapiskak, directly translated to “the space between two rocks”, is home to the Cree nation in the James Bay region. With over 17,000 people living on the reserve, 1,000 of them lack homes, and are forced to live in tents, sheds or overcrowded environments. Having endlessly been disregarded by the government, the Natives struggle to provide for their families in subarctic conditions, and often turn to hunting as a source of food. Further, the impoverished community must cope with life at 50 degrees below zero, as they do not have access to a lumber store or electricity. Despite all these challenges, these First Nations people uphold a strong sense of pride for their community, and ultimately, they  choose to stay in Kattawapiskak because of the importance attached to their people’s history on the territory. 

      With a democratic government, people have the right to voice their opinions freely. However, Ms. Obomsawin’s documentary makes one matter unquestionably clear: the government and the Natives have conflicting opinions about freedom. Those in power choose to disregard the demands of the First Nations people, as they believe them to be incapable of handling the housing and budget issues themselves. Comparatively, they treat them like children with no entitlement. They venture to control much of the reserve, and while these people remain out of sight, they also remain out of mind. The Natives, taking a peaceful approach, attempt to negotiate for change. More specifically, their demands encompass the access to essential resources, and in particular, the obtainment of improved housing conditions. To their misfortune, the mobiles in which many of them are living have little water, no heating, and communal bathrooms. In addition to this housing crisis, the Cree community experiences numerous suicides, chiefly within the younger generation. For those affected by this tragedy, a healing center is established with the goal of aiding them in handling their own emotional state. Furthermore, to alleviate the stress caused by a life of hardship and to allow young people to develop a sense of belonging, a hockey arena is built and a Zamboni is purchased. While many conservative whites criticize the community for acquiring a nonessential $75,000 machine during a period of poverty, the people of Kattawapiskak recognize the indirect impact it will have on the lives of the future generation. In their view, the arena represents the light at the end of a very dark tunnel, and in the long run, it will likely save the lives of those they hold close to their hearts. 

Click here to view an interview with filmmaker Alanis Obomsawin.

A Quest for Control

      In a world consumed by the pursuit of power, there is no question that once it is achieved, it is often abused. With this in mind, the government’s attempt at control over the lives and territories of First Nations people has left them frustrated, overlooked, and most certainly, abused. The documentaries presented above are very closely connected to three fundamental concepts: a differentiation in ideologies, ethnocentrism, and hegemony. An ideology can be define as “a set of beliefs, values, habits and ways of seeing that shape our understanding of the world.” Moreover, it is an essential tool for the interpretation of institutions and practices. For the government, the perception that the Natives are uncivilized is the truth they hold as an ideology. They see them as undomesticated and believe them to be incapable of resolving their own affairs. For the Natives, the truth they understand of themselves varies considerably. They view their people as cultured and appreciative of an important history. Upheld traditions shape who they are, and in practice, distinguish them as a nation. Nevertheless, the whites recognize this nation as one that is inferior, and thus, ethnocentrism and hegemony play a role. 

      Throughout all three films, the government is projected as the dominant, ruling group. Their power enables them to manage the lives of others according to their viewpoints, thereby establishing the norms for all. Ethnocentrism, the evaluation of other people’s cultures according to one’s own standard, permits the government to judge the Natives as savages. With this judgement, they condescend and patronize them. Not only do they hold them as a secondary people, but they also attempt to change them and their customs. For example, they endlessly strip away their land, and endeavor to assimilate the children into conforming to modern white culture. In essence, for members of the government, their ways are the only ways, and while the Natives remain different, they also remain lesser. Despite this, the First Nations people are proud of their ways of life, and although they have faced abundant discrimination, those in power have still been unsuccessful in molding them into their ideals. 

      As Ms. Obomsawin and Mr. Desjardins use the medium of filmmaking to shed light on the issues of First Nations peoples, they also teach a universal message: people must be accepted as people. Differences give people individuality, and as individuals, respect is vital. These people have endured much suffering throughout their history, and if there is one thing to be learned, it is that the fight for their rights keeps them strong. For us, sitting by a computer in the comfort of our homes, it is difficult to completely relate to these sentiments; however, compassion allows us to empathize with others, and after examining the hardships of three different tribes, it is a sentiment that distinctively resonates. Some might respond to the film in a similar matter, yet others might believe that the First Nations people are consumed by their traditions and are opposed to progression with the rest of society. With either response to the film, it is clear that our vision of the world is not always black and white. The films challenge this vision, as we see that often, the government does not expose the full truth of a situation. With this, we must learn to think critically before we accept answers, and vary our sources of information, including through documentary films. Similarly to the the First Nations people, we must know to fight for our rights before accepting the answers of those in power because otherwise, we will succumb to control. As Ms. Obomsawin stated, “The government makes you feel like it is a privilege if you have your rights.” Nevertheless, she is faithful that the First Nations people are headed in a positive direction, and at the end of the day, without many demands met, they still have one of the most fundamental necessities to life: family. 

10 - Myths and Utopia: Imagining a Different World

Myths and Utopia : Imagining a Different World

No Impact Man and Surviving Progress

By : Fiona , Kenneth, Cynthia and Joshua

Mankind's Hero  

        The environment is something that generally everyone has some sort of concern for, but in all truth, not many people do enough to try to actually help it. It is taken advantage of, as people use their automobiles as much as possible, litter too often, use excessive amounts of electricity, and so on. How can we live in a safe and environmentally friendly atmosphere if no one is willing to take care of it? If only people knew that just one effort can make a large difference. People might feel influenced, and would perhaps attempt to make eco-friendly changes in their lives as well. There definitely is hope, and no one should give up, considering what one person’s efforts can actually do. This environment that we all share and live upon, needs taking care of, and it is up to mankind to do so.

       The film discussed in class this week was a documentary about a drastic attempt to save, and influence others to make an effort to preserve the environment. This 93 minute film, directed by Laura Gabbert and Justin Schein and released September 11 2009 in the USA, is called “No Impact Man”. Colin Beavan, a middle aged man, took on an extremely difficult and unbelievable task of attempting to live entirely environmentally friendly. A lot of people make minor changes in their lives to try and help our planet, but Colin had decided to go way past that. He went to all extremes to prevent even the slightest bit of non-eco friendly behavior. This included restrictions on what food to buy, as it all had to come from within a 250 mile radius, taking a bicycle to work instead of an automobile or public transport, living 6 months without electricity, no new purchases, no toilet paper, removing the television, and much more. The Beavan family received a lot of criticism for their actions, as people thought they were taking this experiment too far, but that did not stop them. With will and determination, this family was never ready to back down. 

       Living in New York City is not really the ideal place to attempt such a daring and difficult task, and the location itself really added a whole new level of difficulty. The city thrives on industry, shopping, and restaurants, and this was pretty much what the Beavan family had to avoid. This experiment introduced a whole new way to look at and experience life, and it had changed the way the Beavans will continue to live. A lot of people can look at such a family and realize that if they were able to accomplish such a thing, then maybe it would not be so hard to make some minor adjustments in their lives as well to help the environment. If more and more people think this way, the Beavans can conclude that their experiment is successful, as this is the main reason for what they had done.

What We Bring to the Table 

       In class we discussed Myths and Utopia, as well as imagining a different world. The concept of “One vs. The Collectivity” was emphasized, and this relates greatly to No Impact Man. This idea suggests, “The totality (the fullness) of man is not in the separate member, but in the body of society as a whole”. This is perhaps what Colin Beavan was trying to get through to everyone who watched his film. He was trying to say that every individual is important, and even one person can have an effect on our society. If one man makes an environmentally friendly change in his daily life, this can greatly affect the society as a whole, as others may look at him and want to do the same. Every single being on this planet is very important. This idea also related to the fact that “the individual is an organ of society, the society (humanity) is an organ of the cosmos”. We all play a very important part in society, and it cannot function without each and every one of us. When put together, we create what we are and what we live in today.

       The film No Impact Man takes a look at how one can help the environment, not himself. This is the beauty of the screening, and this is why Colin is a hero in his own way. Another concept discussed in class, was how the creative hero is to guide and save society. Colin attempted to do so by reaching out to the individual, and he hoped that this would help and guide others make changes to their daily lives.

Progressing or Receding ? 

No Impact Man can be related to Surviving Progress, a Canadian documentary film made in 2011, its length is: 83 minutes and 36 seconds. The film was written and directed by Mathieu Roy and Harold Crooks, and also produced by Daniel Louis, Denise Robert and Gerry Flahive. Surviving Progress focuses on our society’s reality of having a consumer culture, and the impacts of this on our world. The significance of this film is that our current way of living has no useful benefit to the real world, and in fact it is harming our only home. There are numerous people interviewed in this documentary, such as authors, a biologist, behavioural scientist, and CEO of Synthetic Genomics, economists, environmentalist such as David Suzuki, primatologist Jane Goodall and interestingly enough, Colin Beavan. There is an obvious connection one can make between the two films. Both of the films shed light on the direct line you can draw between our societies over consuming of products, the earth’s continual diminishing of natural resources for the consumers, and by extension the overall decrease in the level of wellbeing of the Earth. 

       Surviving Progress opens the path for change and improvement in our world. In this documentary it asks an important underlying question: “what is progress, and if it is what most of us believe it to be, then will this progress in the end bring us to our downfall?” This is an important question, as well as a very interesting one. In today’s society we would classify progress as, say a new form of technology or say a new type of lighter material used to build a certain type of structure. However, the reality is that while we may be increasing our amount of available consumer products, we are in fact decreasing our amount of natural resources available on our Earth. This is the very interesting fact that this film brings up; our believed “progression” is in a way also our receding back to the world we used to know, where in the future, we will not have anything left to exploit. Should we continue doing what we are currently doing now? Another aspect of progress which is displayed in this documentary is the difference between chimpanzee and human brains. The behavioural scientist stated that the fundamental different of our brains is that human has the ability to ask “why”. Human beings are on a quest for answer and while they try to find answer it is counter-productive to kill our own home. Humans are on a quest to also see beyond our race, social status, and religion : Who are we ? What is our reason for being on this particular earth? Today, man himself is a mystery : meaning that every human being is unpredictable, you never know what they might do next. Since the industrial revolution, 200 years ago, we are bound to the mass production of machinery, technology and other aspect that leads to increase the economy. We are stuck in a circle, which in this documentary is referred as progress trap. If we don’t break the record, than we will destroy the Earth. We as a civilized society need to take action and preserve our natural resources and our home.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=u5IV4fkZR68

       This clip from Surviving Progress shows Robert Wright explaining that now people have a sort of “unified social brain” which keeps us thinking all the same way, and that we will need a different education on our current global situation. Wright explains that we must keep our moral perspective in mind should we want to better our environmental situation.   

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzYnogzaTjw

       This link is the director Mathieu Roy, giving us an insight on the documentary Surviving Process as well as telling us thee theme that are displayed in the documentary.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6IAs3tMZneM

       This is the trailer of Surviving Progress. 

Nature Is Not Mute; It Is Man Who Is Deaf 

       As one awakens to perceive the inner foundation of one’s own being, our psyches can thus unravel into a higher cognitive space and understand the fundamentals of Oneness, therefore commencing the process of a grand scale earthly change. We all hold the keys to the inner change of oneself; it is the choice of the individual to decide if they wish to open the doors to the grandness of All. Change is not painful; solely the resistance to change is painful, thus underlying the reason why our society today is living in such an inharmonious way. The format of a culture in which we currently inhabit is subject to monetary indoctrination and ongoing reiteration all deliberately set in place by tarnished governments and corrupted institutes to dumb down the population in order to obtain full control of power. Our minds are sorrowfully being transformed for the worst, absorbing misleading information and intoxicating our psyches with endless negativity to become accustomed to this reality we live in. The slow eradication of all forms of inner awareness and spiritual guidance towards Oneness is the unique goal of these malefactors. With the key to being able to manipulate the mentality of its society through the control of the monetary world, we remain puppets to these highly besmirched individuals, here uniquely to serve their needs at all extensive costs. Our wholesomeness, and the one of our marvelous mother earth is subdued and eliminated from their wealth and power frenzy psyches, thus endangering our very existence. Our ignorance has made us gullible, and perfect subjects to these experiments conducted by our so-called elite. 

       By relighting our spiritual connections, our minds can therefore be the source of outstanding creations and brilliant innovations. Our acts as an aware being have much more profound and rewarding repercussions to all and to ourselves. This occurrence is what is being demonstrated to us, through the enlightenment of this family. Colin Beavan becomes engrossed with a profound curiosity that strikes the most overwhelming senses within his being, and he consequently decides to raise the awareness to all about our societies wrongdoings regarding our destructive consuming habits. With the aid of his wife and child, he engages in a yearlong experimental project that entices them to become conscious through the reduction of earthly harmful emissions, the destructive impact an individual can have upon our earth. Many become aware of his actions, some become perplexed and disturbed and others take a stance of admiration and begin to participate in their own way in taking positive measures for the environment. His actions are the beginning of a new mind-awareness revolution; one that ignites a further understanding of what one can truly do if change is what we, as a society and as an individual, desire. 

       The earth is our mother, and as we allow our ignorance to take over, we give permission to our devastating corporate leaders to demolish our mother. She’s One that we must care for grandly, and grasp a deeper aware conscious of, for if we do not stand for ourselves and the respect of our earth, we will fade away with time, simply labeled as an experiment that was unsuccessful. Progress is through the spiritual awakening of a being, not the monetary advancement of a perishing system. This is vividly expressed in the eye opening documentary of "surviving progress", underlining what our society should be aware of in our everyday actions. 

I AM

       We have geographically mapped the depths of the ocean and analyzed the heart of the atom, we have been to the moon and travel across the world, but we have a fear of looking inward to ourselves because we sense that is where all the contradictions stream together. The universe is always speaking to us, sending us little messages, causing flukes and coincidences, reminding us to breathe, to stop, to look around and inside of our beings, to believe in something else, something more. 

9- Our World Today

Our World Today

By: Audrey, Daniel and Sébastien

INTRODUCTION

This week, our team was assigned to talk about the film screened in class If a Tree Falls and a complementary screening, L'erreur Boreale. These two films raise awareness of environmental issues which affect us all, by focusing on the deforestation here in Quebec and showing how people react to deforestation similar to what we have here in If a Tree Falls. Both help us perceive our world better and be more informed about social issues which impact the world as a whole.

IF A TREE FALLS

If a Tree Falls: A Story of the Earth Liberation Front is an American documentary that was released in 2011. The film is 85 minutes long and is directed by Marshall Curry, an academy award nominated filmmaker, and Sam Cullman. The film was nominated for an Academy Award for best documentary feature (2012) and won the Sundance Film Festival award for documentary editing (2011) as well as many other awards. As the title suggests, the film sheds light upon the Earth Liberation Front (ELF), a radical environmentalist group in the United States considered by the US senate to be the nation's number one domestic terrorist threat. The film is focused around Daniel McGowan, an ELF activist convicted of domestic terrorism due to his implication is two cases of arson resulting in property damage to two lumber companies in Oregon. Daniel was imprisoned in 2005 and is now in a half-way house in New York City, he is to be released on probation in a few months.
What makes this film very interesting is that it is trying to be as objective as possible. The filmmakers interview multiple members of the ELF, the state and federal police responsible for the investigations into the timber arsons as well as the mill owners who were the victims of the arsons. Also, these interviews are generally very open and seem less scripted than some are in other films. This is really important because it grants the viewer a wider opinion (unlike in Michael Moore's films as we have seen), which lets them formulate their own. However, most viewers and the filmmakers are sympathetic towards the environmental cause because the activists are portrayed as heroes who are standing up for a cause and only destroying property. The former ELF members point out multiple times that the goal of the arsons was property destruction and that the conservation of life was of the utmost importance to the arsonists; there were no injuries or deaths across hundreds of fires.

The weekly topic for the class in relation to If a Tree Falls was that of ideologies. Ideologies can be defined as "the body of doctrine, myth, belief, etc., that guides an individual, social movement, institution, class, or large group." Ideologies can be local or widespread as well as partial or comprehensive. When an ideology is comprehensive (contextualizes the world) it can be defined as a worldview.  The film indirectly presents many ideologies which are in conflict within America, and our, society. The three primary ideologies examined are those of environmentalism (the activists), capitalism (the business owners) as well as law and order (the investigators). If a Tree Falls also presents how these three ideologies are seen under the scopes of democracy and neo-liberalism. For instance, from the activist's point of view, the government is not respecting their opinion (as seen in the parking-lot incident). In the owners' point of view, the law should protect them from acts such as arson and let them continue to expand their profits; often, legislation favors corporate interest in capitalist countries. As for the investigators, they believe that their sole responsibility as government agents is to uphold the law, regardless of their personal feelings. In this weeks' lecture, we also learned about how the media is needed to render service to the public by informing them and giving them nuanced opinions, the whole scope of the issue. Documentaries such as If a Tree Falls try to do this by presenting, with the least bias possible, the multiple opinions around social issues in order to make us more informed citizens.

For additional information about Daniel McGowan, visit: http://supportdaniel.org/

L'ERREUR BORÉALE

L’erreure Boréale a 1999 film made by Richard Desjardin, an author-compositor and interpret, along with co-director Robert Mondrie, runs for 70 minutes and shows us a shockingly new perspective on the deforestation industries and their impacts on Quebec and its wildlife. This documentary, gives us an inside look into this devastating industry. The director, Desjardin, takes the creative decision to shower us with scene after scene of forests that where completely clear-cut with only a desert of muck and tree stumps left behind. These images being shocking and maybe never before seen by the public, bring up feelings of sadness, frustration and helplessness that nothing can be done to stop these things from happening to our home. The deforestation industry being a major export for Quebec also plays a big part in its economy and keeps entire cities alive because of the amount of revenue that comes in by deforestation. The community being so money hungry, in a way fuels the fire that keeps these companies growing and expanding, to them deforestation equals money and money equals a good quality of life, but how much further can we push our natural resources? And how far are we willing to go until we realize that it is too late to turn back? L’erreure Boréale raises many of these questions and tries to answer them as best as it can. This documentary takes us on a journey through the north of Quebec showing us at what speed these operations are growing and expanding throughout our country and the vicious circles that are created because of it (the vicious circle: the impact of deforestation on wildlife: aquatics, animals, etc ). We also learn through various interviews with ecologists, owners of deforestation businesses, and people working for the government that the public is not well informed on this topic and that we should have the right to know more about what is occurring around us and to deny these greedy businessmen the right to abuse our natural resources.

This Documentary also raises different theories of ideology, as mentioned in the response If a tree falls an ideology is “the body of doctrine, myth, belief, etc ,. that guides and individual, social movement, institution, class, or large group”. Last week we where introduced to many types of ideologies, that of the environmentalist, capitalist, law and order, participative democracy, and more. One ideology that becomes apparent throughout the duration of L’erreure Boréale is the capitalist. This capitalist, essentially “has his own economic system; a system of producing, distributing and consuming goods and services based on the private ownership; the ownership of property by non-governmental legal entities of capital goods and the means of production, with the creation of goods and services for profit”. Since these capitalists are using one of Quebec’s most profitable natural resources, therefore influencing the course of our economy they have great influence and control over the government. The government is therefore not leading a democratic party that of which involves all eligible citizens to have an equal say in the decisions that affect their lives, because it shelters the population from these problems to not risk having the people revolt against “the law that could not be effectively exercised and the threatening circumstances of threatening harm”.

For more information, here is an article about the movie (French only): http://www.ledevoir.com/environnement/actualites-sur-l-environnement/254636/l-erreur-boreale-dix-ans-plus-tard-1-de-la-sortie-du-film-a-la-commission-coulombe-1999-2004

ANALYSIS

 Both of these films seek to transform the way we perceive the world around us. They both relate to environmental causes that are very similar. These films take us out of our comfort zones in the sense that they show us ugly decrepit landscapes caused by big companies who clear-cut the forests in return for lots of money. In L’erreure Boréale he shows the viewer that things really are not the way we see them. By taking the camera in a helicopter Richard Desjardin is able to give us aerial views of the cuts that can’t be seen from the road because the foresters cleverly leave a 100m strip so that the general public will only see the magnificent trees that are left. If a Tree Falls: A Story of the Earth Liberation Front furthers this message by showing the viewer where the wood gets processed and the amounts of timber they go through in any given day as well as a few scenes of slaughterhouses.

Both films also show the political side of activism. Marshall Curry and Sam Cullman show us the front lines of the movements and protests where police brutality is a normal occurrence. L’erreure Boréale demonstrates the inner workings of politics by going to assemblies and meeting with government representatives who are the ones making the decisions and selling the land to the companies who cut the trees down.

Both of these films seem to provoke the viewer who can see that these people are really just trying to protect the environment because obviously a tree has little defense from a chainsaw. It only shows how really it is the citizens that have no voice when faced with something they don't like, and if they don't run away and be quiet, that's where the pepper spray is brought in. These films are able to demonstrate the different sides of democracy and politics, each in their own way. Something that makes the general public feel helpless and uneasy about our modern society. It goes to show that even if you elect a representative who vows to be working for you and your causes he is often working for a greater power and that is usually money or big companies. Things like this don't just happen on screen and in other countries, just look at the people who are running our city.

These films are very good at relating to their audiences because they show something that everyone has felt at one point or another: not being heard. At least once in your life you must have had something to say or an opinion about something, maybe a restaurant or where you’d like to spend your vacation, etc. but the person your trying to communicate with just wont listen. It’s this frustration that can make people act irrationally. You might simply cry or pout or maybe go off into your room and not come out for a few hours. It is also this frustration of not having a voice and not being acknowledged that makes people go out and protest. In our society protests and manifestations are normal occurrences because people have no other option. Just like L’erreure Boréale these things aren’t only happening in other parts of the world but literally in our very own city there have been multiple protests, manifestations and inevitably riots. These events should make you question the society you live in and question your government, go out and talk to your city council, email the representatives if you have concerns with something or would like to further inquire on a certain topic in your community. Mainly, be active and play your part by not sitting there and letting other people make choices.

ConclusionThese two films show how the democratic society we live in today is still not perfect; there I always room for improvements. The governing system does not always govern for the greater good like they should, but rather they make the rich richer and take advantage of those with no voice. Both of the films presented demonstrate different sides of the political world and can be interpreted as a call to action. In the famous words of John F. Kennedy: “ask not what your country can do for you – ask what you can do for your country.”