The Métis are an aboriginal grouping of people who can self-identify as such, and because of this the classification of Métis is culturally diverse within Canada. Métis has come to have an ambiguous meaning because of those who can self identify as Métis and also to those who do and do not qualify to be an Indian under the Indian Act.  The concept of what is race and what is nation helps to understand ambiguous nature of Métis; because the Métis have an unclear definition, ambiguity within the group relies on where the characterization of Métis culture evolved regionally. The Métis cultural evolution resulted in unification of the regional group based on Métis group commonalities to form a nation. These ambiguous Métis nations will have their own interpretation of who they are and how they reproduce the core of their Métis cultural society.   To understand race and nation is to understand the ambiguity that plagues the elusive catch-all definition for the Métis.

This paper, within the context of race and nation, will discuss the various definitions of Métis. How the classification of being Métis holds various meanings within Canada; how Métis self-identification relates to the ambiguity created by the Canadian Constitution Act of 1982; and of how aboriginal rights that the Métis have, or are perceived to have, relates to Canada’s need to define the Métis as the “other” and why it is important for the Métis to define themselves within the context of race and nation. 

The definition that evolved from the historic Métis, from the prairie region, that is used under the Métis National Council will be examined; as will the reasons why the Métis National Council felt the need to define who is a Métis; and how Métis self-identification has remained in historic and present day definitions, which maintains the ambiguity that surrounds the regionally variant Métis groups that identify as Métis under the Canadian Constitution Act of 1982.

Lastly discussion on what roles race and nation has played in defining the Métis and of how the Métis definition in the Constitution reflects the evolving plurality of the Métis in Canada. Also, to be examined  is how Métis aboriginal rights are defined and transferred to modern day treaties through the evolution of the regionally varying Métis definitions. How the Canadian government through its policy ensures that the Métis are treated as the “other” through what scholar Nancy Wingfield calls “symbolic exclusion”, not only by ensuring that the Métis are separate from other aboriginal groups in definition but that Métis aboriginal rights are separated as well. Finally, discussion on the reasoning of why the Métis must not be defined by the state but rather why they must define themselves in such a way that ensures their distinct continued existence and of how in doing so, the Métis themselves must create an “other”.

                To understand race and how it relates to the Métis, race itself must be defined. In an article called Race as a Social Construct, found on the website Anthropology.net, cited Dr. Ronald Takaki, an expert in ethnic relations, from his book entitled A Different Mirror: A History of Multicultural America, Dr. Takaki defined race in the following way; “race is a social construct produced by the dominant group in society and their power to define. In other words, the dominant group in society imposed the boundaries of group membership by defining race in terms of biology.” (Anthropology.net, 2008). By creating the boundaries of membership the Canadian government created the Indian by excluding the Métis, who became the “other”, identifying the “Other” is based on whether they were “transitional and traditionally non territorially based peoples” (Wingfield, 2003) as they were seen as aboriginal but not enough to be considered Indian, even though they have lineage from Indian ancestors that tie them to the land, the Métis fell into this category.

The Canadian government still uses race as a tool to define membership in to a group, this ensures that there is always an “other” that adds to the ambiguity of defining a people because there can always be more than one “other” in any given group. Statistics Canada uses race commonly to define membership and has even given examples of how mixed races can evolve; “Race is based primarily upon genetically imparted physiognomical features among which skin colour is a dominant, but not the sole, attribute. Nevertheless, it is possible for a person to be of mixed races, some of which, such as the mestiso of Latin America, have become recognized as evolved races in their own right. Furthermore, terminology may be ambiguous.” (Statistics Canada 2008). Referrals to physiognomical features, evolved mixed races and ambiguous terminology all seem allow the Métis of Canada to be their own race, however self identification as a Métis seems to take away some merit of being an evolved race, as“… Self-identifying Métis are not a homogenous group that lend themselves to easy definition.” (Hill, 2000). 

The Métis are seemingly indefinable because they have taken on ambiguous characteristics under the race membership boundaries, however even when a definition is developed Métis characterization maintains its ambiguity with references like mixed blood that uphold ambiguous meanings; “…in the Alberta Métis Population Betterment Act …(1938) ‘Métis meant’ a person of mixed white and Indian blood but does not include either and Indian or a non-treaty Indian as defined in the Indian Act… (Sawchuk et al,. 1981:258.)…In 1940, the qualification was added that a Métis must have a no less than one-quarter Indian blood (Sawchuk et al,. 1981:198)” (Flanagan, 1983).

As Dr. Takaki referred to, race membership boundaries are usually created by the dominant group in society, ambiguity develops when people who identify as a member take on similar characteristics to other races and mixes the racial identities within the boundaries to create something sustainable that becomes new, they then become the “other” that is used to differentiate between us versus them, from which commonalities form and nationhood develops.  

                The theory of nation and how it relates to the Métis stems from its definition; as “Nations … are constantly evolving and changing – they are “imagined communities”, and they are constantly re-imagining themselves. New nations are eternally coming into being and declining. In our time, we have seen numerous “subcultures”, really artefacts of modern communications technology, come into being – and every one of these had the potential to evolve into an actual nation.”  (Rasmussen, 2001), from this definition the Métis are a nation, however the ambiguous classification of who the Métis are, under the Canadian Constitution Act, hinders a catch all characterization of one nation of Métis. For that reason the Métis definition that is used in the Constitution must reflect the plurality of Métis nations like that of the First Nations whose definition in the Constitution shows plurality.

The Métis National Council has adopted a definition of Métis that has been adopted by most Métis groups in Canada such as; Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Ontario Métis Nations  have all adopted the Métis National Councils definition that reads; ““HISTORIC MÉTIS NATION HOMELAND” means the area of land in West Central North America used and occupied as the traditional territory of the Métis or Half-Breeds who as they were then known: “MÉTIS NATION” means the aboriginal people descended from the Historic Métis Nation, which is now comprised of all Métis Nation citizens and is one of the “aboriginal peoples of Canada” within S.35 of the Constitution Act of 1982; “Distinct from other Aboriginal Peoples” means distinct for cultural and nationhood purposes.” (Métis National Council 2002). The Métis National Council’s definition reflects an evolved racial nature that has created an “other” and in doing so has solidified the historically connected Métis nation.   

However if one clear Métis definition is adopted by Canada some Métis groups/nations may have to re-classify themselves as a sub group of Métis Nation who may not have constitutional protection. The Métis National Council in adopting a definition relating to the Historic Métis which has subsequently been adopted by the majority of Métis Nations creating one Nation of Métis in Canada, may eventually cause other Métis who have chosen not to identify with the Historic Métis to become the other “other” Métis.  Some “other” Métis may have ties to the Historic Métis, but for whatever reason may choose not to identify with the Historic Métis Nation.  This may become reality in the future, however today the Métis are a recognized aboriginal group with aboriginal rights under the Canadian Constitution Act of 1982 regardless of regional definitions.         

As discussed above many of the Métis within Canada have adopted the Métis National Councils definition of Métis and this reflects how in Canada “… the historical roots leading to the reified of Métis today have been manipulated and distorted to reflect one group – the Red River Métis- above all others. Many groups of “Métis”-or mixed blood groups –existed. Not all of them acted as distinct political units, however, nor were they necessarily seen as separate from the Indian populations that surrounded them. But this complex history does not alter the fact that today the Métis are recognized by the Canadian constitution as a single holistic aboriginal group.” (Sawchuk, 2001).

Today Métis aboriginal rights are always under debate. The Métis for years have been the “other” aboriginal group whose rights have not been thoroughly recognized by Canada, because of this aboriginal groups dispute the Métis having aboriginal rights, resulting in court decisions’ that continue to define Métis rights within Canada; “Notwithstanding the many arguments and debates, the greatest barrier to a Métis policy initiative is “…whether or not Métis fall within federal jurisdiction for ‘Indians’, and lands reserved for the Indians” or, alternatively, are completely outside s.91 (24). All of the provinces except Alberta and Quebec hold that the Métis are a federal jurisdictional and financial responsibility.” (Barkwell, 2003).  Even though the Métis, as an aboriginal nation, have inherent aboriginal rights, and where the Métis are recognized under the Canadian Constitution Act of 1982 which states “(2) In this Act, “aboriginal peoples of Canada” includes the Indian, Inuit and Métis peoples of Canada.”  (Canadian Legal Information Institute, 2009). “The Métis seek rights under two categories, land and resource rights and self-governing rights. The Métis do not advocate sovereignty or separation from Canada. Instead… desire greater control over our lives within Canada, the same objectives that motivated the 1869 and 1885 resistance struggles.” (Métis Nation of Alberta, 2009).

The Constitution of Canada defines the Métis as being “People of both Aboriginal and European descent” (Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, 2009) and that the “Métis live in all areas of Canada and may speak French, English or an Aboriginal language.” (Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, 2009). This definition stills relies on the mixed blood notion and does not reflect how the Métis in Canada relate to and define themselves nor does it recognize the Métis as one distinct nation within Canada.

                Today, the evolution of the Métis definition has narrowed with the adoption of the Métis National Councils definition. However, even with The Métis Councils definition, “The perception of who is, or who is not, a Métis-be it self-perception or public perception- seems to vary with time, place and circumstances. What is certain is that there is no one exclusive Métis people in Canada. Today Métis appears to have a well-accepted general meaning, reflecting the social aspect of Métis identity and a reality that cannot be denied (Frideres 1998, 38). We may have to wait until a paradigm change is pervasive enough to transform the centres of Métis self-identification to public perception and full acceptance of the changing face of the Métis Nation.” (Gibbs, 2000). The evolution of the definition of Métis from being mixed to the inclusion of self identity, the evolved state of coming from a historic community shows that the Métis have created a valid aboriginal nation that differs from the variant Métis groups that have developed since the Canadian Constitution Act of 1982.

Métis definitional variance is evident in northern Canada where the Métis are identified regionally such as the Sahtu Métis who have chosen to exclude identification of belonging to a Métis Nation from their land claim. Instead the Sahtu Metis have chosen to identify with a First Nation from the claim area before a specific date for eligibility in the Sahtu Dene Métis Land Claim. As per the Sahtu Dene Métis Claim; “”Sahtu Dene”, “Sahtu Dene and Métis”, “Sahtu Dene or Métis” or “Sahtu Métis” means a person or persons: (a) of Slavey, Hare or Mountain ancestry who resided in, or used and occupied the settlement area on or before December 31, 1921, or a descendant of such person…” (Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, 1994). 

Whereas the Sahtu Métis alluded to defining themselves as Metis the DehCho Métis speak of two groups of Métis in their region.  A book entitled Since 1921: The Relationship between DehCho Métis and Canada contributes to the DehCho First Nations/Metis website’s discussion on the DehCho Métis saying that “There are two distinct Métis populations in the Dehcho region. In the southern parts of Mackenzie Valley the cultural heritage of the mixed-blood people has been drawn from the French-Indian fur trade culture of the southern Prairies. It can, therefore, properly be called “Métis.” In the northern part of the valley, however, a distinctive Métis society did not take root even though there were many people of mixed blood in the region.” (DehCho First Nations, 2009). This variety in the DehCho Métis showcases how mixed cultural heritage dominates Métis identity and also highlights the issue of how some DehCho Métis refer to themselves as the “The People of Mixed Blood”, which does not relate to Métis but rather to the non-status Indian.  Because they can self identify they choose not to call themselves Métis.  The ambiguous Métis in the DehCho and other parts of Canada can be Métis if they choose to be, but at the same time they can be a First Nation member or a non status Indian and still call themselves a Métis without ever being able to belong to a Métis Nation; “the problem of Métis identity is inextricably linked to this misconception of Race by Canadian political figures, who have, at times, denied the unique cultural orientations of those people who identify with a Métis Nation.” (Hill, 2000) Defining who the Métis are is based more on mixed ancestry, rather than how a Métis Nation is formed.    

In Southern Canada Métis variance was apparent in Treaty Three negotiations under the Half-Breed adhesion, “The “Adhesion by Half-breeds of Rainy River and Lake” was taken in 1875, two years after Treaty Three had been negotiated. It is unique in that half-breeds were included in the treaty under that name. It should be noted that in 1875 when this adhesion was taken, the Government had not yet recognized Métis title beyond Manitoba.” (Taylor, 1983) This inclusion of the half-breeds in Treaty Three draws attention to self identity, later the Half-breeds of Treaty Three became Métis by being mixed.  It might be said that he half-breeds of Treaty Three were not Métis but under the Constitution of Canada Act of 1982 they became classified as Métis without belonging to any Métis Nation.

Scholars like Thomas Flanagan who believe that the Métis had rights as aboriginals because of racial inheritance in his article entitled The Case Against Métis Rights, he wrote; “Ritchot insisted that the Métis, in claiming the same rights as other Canadians, had no intention ‘of losing the rights which they can have as descendants of Indians’. Here arose for the first time the idea… that aboriginal title could be transmitted through racial inheritance, even though the descendants’ way of life might differ radically from that of their ancestors.” (Flanagan, 1983).  Because of the inclusion of mixed being Métis in Canada, scholars like Flanagan can write on Métis rights based on race and lifestyle rather than on how the Métis Nation was formed and on what nation membership is based.

Historically both the Métis and the Indians were not distinguished from when it comes to Aboriginal Title as Driben discusses; “The first is that the Royal Proclamation of 1763 is a constitutional document, and is therefore much more closely related to the British North America Act than to the Indian Act. This means that the definition of an Indian in the Indian Act, which excludes the Métis, cannot be used to define the undefined Indians mentioned in the Proclamation (cf. Lysyk, 1975:515). If anything, the broad legal definitions of an Indian which were in vogue until just after Confederation would apply, and these definitions drew no distinction between Métis and Indians (Chartier, 1978). They were included in the same legal category, and under these conditions their aboriginal rights would clearly be the same, including their right to claim an interest in the land they occupied. Secondly, when the federal government made scrip available to the Métis in western Canada, it was a de facto admission that they held an aboriginal title. This was made explicit in the Manitoba Act of 1870, which candidly stated that the allocation of one million four hundred thousand acres to Métis children was “expedient towards the extinguishment of the Indian Title to the lands in the Province. ”4 Last, but by no means less important, is the fact that Métis were included in treaties which were specifically designed to extinguish aboriginal title. Treaty #3 is a case in point. In sum, there appears to be little doubt that the Métis do have aboriginal rights, and if it can be proven that their title to certain areas was never extinguished or was extinguished through illegal means, the matter could certainly be pursued through the courts, although here the focus would be on legal as opposed to other interpretations of claims.” (Driben, 1983). 

When negotiating the numbered treaties the Canadian government divided the aboriginal people based on them being either white or an Indian, there was no in between; this way of thinking is evident in the negotiation of Treaty three, where the half-breeds are discussed; “They said there were some ten to twenty families of half-breeds who were recognized as Indians, and lived with them, and they wished them included. I said the treaty was not for whites, but I would recommend that those families should be permitted the option of taking either status as Indians or whites, but that they could not take both.” (Taylor, 1983), this historic view of no in between of rights still resonates within the federal policy on Métis as Métis rights have yet to be properly recognized; “Although the two groups were dealt with separately and in different ways, they were again dealt with at the same time and for the same purpose. This procedure did emphasize Government recognition of aboriginal title in the soil to both Indians and Métis.” (Taylor, 1983). The Métis of today differ greatly than the Historic Métis, for one, they were the only Métis and had one definition, unlike today when non status Indians, half-breeds and mixed people are categorized as Métis without an identifiable Métis Nation.

                Today, because mixed equates Métis, the historic Métis face a large obstacle in asserting aboriginal rights under the Métis Nation because of the politics that enshrouds who the Métis are.  Political leaders are weary of allowing the Métis to much because federal policy has created second class citizens out of the Métis by making them the “other” and through the Indian Act has created other “others” who are displaced Indians who can self identify as Métis but who don’t belong to the Métis Nation, which is an integral part of being Métis.

Politics aside, “Métis people themselves are increasingly setting out their own concepts of their history and identities.” (Brown, 1993) it only makes sense that they also have a plural definition of who they are, as even the displaced Indians can develop a new nation that can be called either Métis or something else.

The way in which race and nation contributes to the ambiguity that plagues the elusive catch-all definition for the Métis under the Canadian Constitution Act of 1982 has to do with the Act and government policy.  The government’s initial creation of an “other” aboriginal group has resulted in many displaced Métis who came to be through the Indian Act.  The Historic Métis were at one point in time the only Métis, but over time the displaced Indians who could no longer be called Indian came to self identify as Métis even though they did not have any ties to the Métis Nation. Because of this the Historic Métis Nation has now united and defined themselves, however the mixed people who were historically made to be the “other” aboriginal group are now the maintainers of the ambiguity of the Canadian Constitution Act’s definition of Métis, creating political problems for the Historic Métis Nation who are the real Métis. 

In finishing, the term Métis has come to have an ambiguous meaning through those who can self identify as Métis without belonging to a Nation under the Canadian Constitution, and of how these displaced Métis are usually those who do not qualify to be an Indian under the Indian Act by being mixed.  The concepts of what are race and nation adds to the understanding of the historic Métis and how they are a valid nation. The variety of who is Métis relies on whether valid nations were formed.  If plural nations were formed these Métis nations will have their own interpretation of who they are and how they reproduce the core of their Métis cultural society, regardless of whether or not they have ties to the Historic Métis Nation, they may choose to call themselves Métis or something else. Being mixed does not equate Métis but does equal an “other” in the Métis category, which is problematic and causes ambiguity which create political obstacles in asserting Métis rights.   

Bibliography

Anthropology.net. (2008) Race as a Social Construct. http://anthropology.net/2008/10/01/race-as-a-    social-construct/.  Site Created on October 1, 2008. Site visited on November, 5, 2009.

Barkwell, Lawrence. (2002) Métis Rights and Land Claims An Annotated Bibliography.                 http://www.mmf.mb.ca/publications/Metis.Rights.and.Land.Claims.pdf  Site created 2002.  Site                              Visited on October 27, 2002.

Brown, Jennifer, S.H., (1993). Métis, Half-Breeds and Other Real People; Challenging Cultures and                           Categories. The History Teacher: Volume 27, Number 1. Society for History Education.

Canadian Legal Information Institute. (2009)  The Constitution Act, 1982, being Schedule B to the Canada             Act 1982 (U.K.), 1982, c. 11  http://www.canlii.org/en/ca/const/const1982.html Site Creation                        Unknown. Site Visited on October 30, 2009.

Deh Cho First Nations, (2004). Fort Simpson Métis.                 http://www.dehchofirstnations.com/members/fort_simpson_metis.htm; Site Created on                         2004. Site Visited on October 3, 2009.

Driben, Paul. (1983) The Nature of Métis Claims. http://www2.brandonu.ca/Library/cjns/3.1/driben.pdf                               Site Creation Unknown. Site Visited on November 5, 2009.

Dunn, Martin F., (2001). Métis 101: Understanding Métis in Canada Today.                                                                          http://www.othermetis.net/Papers/Dunn/Understanding/Metis%20102/Metis102%20-              %20History4.html  , Site Created in 2001. Site visited on September 23, 2009.

Flanagan, Thomas, (1983). The Case Against Métis Aboriginal Rights. Canadian Public Policy: Volume 9,  Number 3. University of Toronto Press.

Gibbs, Ellen A. (2000) The Changing Face of the Métis Nation.                                                                                                    http://www.uleth.ca/dspace/bitstream/10133/117/3/MQ61040.pdf  Site Created 2000.  Site                      Visited on October 30, 2009.

Government of Canada, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, (2009).  Glossary.  http://www.ainc-                inac.gc.ca/ai/scr/nt/edu/bzz/gls/index-eng.asp; Site Modified on June 29, 2009.  Site Visited                              on September 23, 2009.

Government of Canada, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, (1993). Sahtu Dene and Métis                                        Comprehensive Land Claim Agreement: Volume 1.   http://www.ainc-    inac.gc.ca/al/ldc/ccl/fagr/sahtu/sahmet/sahmet-eng.pdf ;  September 6, 1993.  No Date. Site                        Visited on October 3, 2009.

Hill, Samantha, (1999). Race and Nation Building: A Comparison of Canadian Métis and Mexican                                              Mestizos.https://circle.ubc.ca/bitstream/2429/11311/1/ubc_2001-0039.pdf. Site Visited on                         October 5, 2009.

Métis Nation of Alberta. (2009) Métis Rights and Self Government.                  http://www.albertametis.com/MNAHome/MNA2/MNA-RightsGovernment.aspx Site Created                                2009. Sited Visited on October 27, 2009.

Métis National Council, (2009). National Definition of Métis.        http://www.metisnation.ca/who/definition.html. No Date. Site Visited on September 27,                    2009.

Rasmussen, Peter R. (2001).  “Nations or States and attempt at Definition”. Global Policy Forum. 

http://www.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/172/30341.html Site Created on July 20, 2001. Site Visited on October 27, 2009.

Sawchuk, Joe. (2001). Negotiating an Identity: Métis Political Organizations, the Canadian                                             Government, and Competing Concepts of Aboriginality. American Indian Quarterly: Volume                      35, Number 1. University of Nebraska Press.

Statistics Canada, Government of Canada. (2008). Statistics Canada: Definitions, Data, Sources and         Methods.  http://www.statcan.gc.ca/concepts/definitions/ethnicity-ethnicite-eng.htm

                Site Created on July 25, 2008. Site visited on October 29, 2009.

Taylor, John L. (1983) An Historical Introduction to Métis Claims in Canada.                                                                           http://www2.brandonu.ca/Library/cjns/3.1/taylor.pdf  Site Creation Unknown. Site Visited        November 5, 2009.

Wingfield, Nancy. (2003) Creating the Other: Ethnic Conflict and Nationalism in Habsburg Central             Europe.                                Berghahn Books: New York. 

Lees het artikel in de Economist en loop hier in Nederland eens binnen bij een van de vele galeries.
Metis_NL waar wij afgelopen dinsdag mochten genieten van een diner temidden van de zeer internationale expositie is daar een mooi voorbeeld van!

Voor mij waren er twee eye-openers:
1. We kijken niet meer tegenwoordig. Kunst is er om je in te verdiepen en om de waarom vraag bij te stellen. Kunst is niet wat je ziet op het eerste gezicht. Er is meer. Je leert weer kijken als je daar maar de tijd voor neemt!
2. Galeries zijn helemaal niet zo hoogdrempelig en besloten als ik dacht. Galeriehouders die echt van de kunst houden willen dit ook graag delen met ‘kunst analfabeten’.

Ben je echt oprecht geïnteresseerd om meer over kunst te weten en er echt naar te kijken dan is een goed voornemen – zoals het mijne – om niet alleen naar musea te gaan maar gewoon eens in je eigen stad naar een galerie te gaan. 

Neem als voorbeeld www.metis_nl.com te Amsterdam

Mary Ann (Ross) Lascelles' Prayer Book

The prayer book of Mary Ann (Ross) Lascelles is in the Archives at the Church of Our Lord (Victoria BC), where she was raised by the Reverend and Mrs. Cridge as their ward in the 1850-60s.

Mary Ann was the daughter of Henri Isaac Bastian*, and Rose, a Nisqually woman of the Muck Creek First People in Washington.

Mary Ann survived the decimation of the tribe, the hanging of the Chief Leschi and her mother’s death.  She was taken in and raised by the Cridges until she met and married Alexander Ross.

Their marriage ceremony was performed by the Reverend Cridge at Christ Church Cathedral (Victoria BC) on December 28, 1868.  Bishop Cridge remained her family minister as he had been to Isabella.  He continued to be the family minister to Mary Ann’s only surviving daughter, Flora Victoria Ross, and was Godfather to her daughter, Flora Victoria Ottaway, until his death in 1913.

Bishop Cridge was a faithful minster to four generations of Ross family members from 1854-1913.  He was also an important source of oral family history, passed down to the present day Ross family descendants.

*also referred to as Bastien or Sebastien in some historical records

Frederik van Simaey @ Tegenboschvanvreden

Sara van der Heide @ Diana Stigter

Christian Friedrich in opbouw @ Fons Welters

Pepo Salazar @ Upstream Gallery

l

Akiko & Masako Takada en Femke Schaap @ Metis

Ground control to Major Tom…

Yesterday I discovered a new reading room at the Fraserview Golf  course on Vivian Drive…

and an altered concept of time…

If you’ve been reading along with me we all know by now that Golf has its own purpose and its own set of rules… 

After reading a few pages about Nadia Myre and her disruption of the Indian Act, and a bowl of cream of mushroom and zucchini soup, I went outside to take some photos of the day…

Haven't you always wanted a monkey...

When I returned to my table three seniors asked me, “Are you trying to clear things up for us out there???”

I said, “Are you asking me to do a sundance???”

They said, “Yes… something like that… we want to get onto the green in time for sunset…”

On Monday, November 9, 2009 sunset was at 1:30… pacific daylight time…

I told them that it was a little short notice since the request was coming in at 12:45…

but I would see what I could do… for next week…

We lau alelo…

Early this morning I had a dream that I was floating in a cloud of chiffon while being bench pressed by someone who looked like Claude Lemieux…

But maybe that was a fantasy…

And then a friend called to say, “Philosophydoll!!! Claude is going to be on the Q on CBC Radio One in a few minutes… Didn’t you watch Battle of Blades???!!! When you see it you’re going to die…”

So just now, on my old couch with the springs popping out of it, Little Gem and I watched both the Sunday and Monday night episodes, commercial free…

What a show!!!

I wasn’t watching it Sunday night because I was holding a two day old baby… and that isn’t a gift one gets everyday…

And I’m discovering that there are more and more things worth waiting for…

Like I wonder who had the foresight to bring Katarina Witt on as a judge…

Holy smokes…

I liked how she dismissed Sandra Bezic’s critiques with a soft middle finger… and flossed her peaches with a gold link chain while she propositioned Claude for a foursome… or was that the night before… it’s all become such a blur now…

And Katarina made it quite clear that she wasn’t talking about Golf…

Oh… I’m up here melting into my chair… and it isn’t my heart that’s melting…

Little Gem said, “I don’t really know what she’s talking about but it sounds like TOO much information…”

I don’t remember Sunday night television ever being like this when I was a kid… CBC is starting to sound somewhat like the Playboy channel… and it’s about time Canada saw some creative seduction on its national network…

I was on Coogee Beach in Sydney, Australia in a bikini the day the wall started to come down around West Berlin… and nine months after that I walked the sand in No Man’s Land, drinking Pepsi under a watch tower…

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again… Battle of the Blades IS quintessentially Canadian… Shae-Lynn and Claude are ice-dancing out a new French-English anthem for this country… and the temperature is rising…

But in John Ralston Saul’s book, A Fair Country: Telling Truths About Canada the opening line reads…

Canada is a Métis nation…

Everything is always about completion, and despite the success of this morphing of sport making new history, some major events are still hanging in the air… and they are wanting some resolution…

Baby, you ain't seen nothing yet...

Specifically, the National Museum of the American Indian.  Fascinating, maddening, enlightening, racist and anti-racist, historical and anti-historical discussion among the Comments, too!

Here’s the exhibit’s website.

Speaking as a controverted Nanticoke (who doesn’t qualify for Indian Assn. membership at this time AFAIK) who also likes his Irish background too, the U.S. Metis Identity movement looks more and more appealing….

http://people.premiere.fr/Videos-Embed/AurelieKonate

Mandala, April 24, 1998

As you can see, this is another mandala from April of 1998.  This one is built on the first one though at the time I never knew this.  The first one had a fleur-de-lys at the centre, a symbol of my French Canadian roots.  The half fletched arrows speak to more roots, aboriginal roots.  The two together are called Métis.

This mandala honours the four directions, four forces – air, earth, fire and water, the sense of wholeness embodied with the inclusion of the unconscious.  At the centre, yin and yang.

The weather is quite cool, hanging around the freezing mark under dark skies.  A light snowfall during the night has now melted leaving everything damp and slippery.  It feels colder than it really is – a good day to do some work on the computer, a good day to write, my way of getting to know myself better.

Most people confuse self-knowledge of their conscious ego-personalities.  Those with any ego-consciousness at all take it for granted that they know themselves.  But the real psychic facts are for the most part hidden.  The ego knows only its own contents, which are largely dependent on social factors.  Without some knowledge of the unconscious and its contents one cannot claim to know oneself. (Sharp, Jungian Psychology Unplugged, 1998, p. 133)

Mandala - April 21, 1998

Okay, so this isn’t a photo.  This is one of my “works” that I scanned two days ago along with three other images that will find their way here.  Two of the images are of mandalas and two of the images are taken from dreams.  Before I drew this image, I had felt it building within me (I kept a journal which was updated periodically during the day with brief notes) and decided to let it “brew” within me before I actually sat down to let the image emerge.  In reading my notes from that time, I saw that even when the image was completed, I still didn’t “know” what it was all about.  It simply was something that happened.

Of course, it didn’t take much thought after the fact to see that the mandala was mostly about providing clues to the question, “Who am I?”  The answer isn’t often very clear.  What is clear though, is that it is in moments where there is tension, where there is conflict, that the inner aspects of self take on a bit more shape.  Such was the situation when this image emerged.  At that time, the very foundations of who I was was being assaulted, a fortunate occurrence as it unlocked me from my self-imposed straight jacket in which I forced anything that would disturb the status quo of my presence in the outer world into the darkness.

This image told me I was more than the outer collection of personae.  It talked to me of hidden, denied roots.  And in doing so, I began to feel again.

Caveat: I’ve never been a girl to dream about my wedding, or my wedding gown. Also, I’ve rarely played with dolls – only Barbies when I was around 7-8 yrs old – as I preferred running around, playing Police or doctor-related games, punching my friends as opposed to kissing, you get the gist

Originally, I wanted a Medieval themed wedding. The reasons being I’ve always been a tomboy (therefore I didn’t want a gown with corsets, garters, etc), I wanted to be comfortable, and I’ve always been in loved with Pre-Raphaelite paintings such as this one

Needless to say, the venue matches the Medieval theme very well. On top of that, I look like one of these Pre-Raphaelite ladies…

So I started hunting dresses down… I was after something like this:

If I were to keep it short and simple I would define it: long, ivory, bateau neck, dropped waist, comfortable.

At this point, a lot of sinchronicity happened… I sent emails to two ladies doing bespoke gowns, none of them replied. One replied after some weeks, just to say she would write again but never did. At this point I was frantic as I was running out of time. In fact, the wedding was originally scheduled for Jan 11th 2010.

So I start browsing the net over and over to see if I could find a dress I could fall in love with, or at least be comfortable buying as is.

My final choices for the Medieval gown were either Lindsay Fleming and Rivendell Bridal. However, I still was feeling something holding me back, and was wondering what it was…

At this point, in order to understand me and what I was going through, you need to understand how my brain works. I mean, as far as I’ve figured it out LOL

Sleeping is a very important part of my life, in that it’s when I sleep that feelings coalesce and express themselves through imagery. So when I speak of a “dream wedding” I don’t mean something that has been carefully crafted by my rational mind, but something that has emerged from my emotional brain, when I was sleeping in the darkness and allowing free associations to get done and undone.

This being said, I have a kind of emotional traffic light in my head. There is the “don’t go” (red light),  the “it’s it” (green light) and the “not yet” (yellow/orange light). Most of the time I’m in yellow light mode and – when and if I do – I stay away from taking decisions. So — back to the wedding dress — I was in “yellow light mode” and I couldn’t understand why. Being a neuroscientist in the making I thought I had something unresolved about the wedding  but the emotional traffic light was set on “green”. I only had problems with the dress!

Now that I think back about it, I realize what it was. To put it simply, I wasn’t in love with any dress, so I was having a hard time following through with the order, pushing the vendors to get a reply, you name it.

I kept on browsing till I found a dress — a dress that gave me that skipped heartbeat once again, this beauty:

Valentino for Pronovias -- Metis

I was totally, and absolutely, taken.

I started googling its name around, so that I could find more pictures, and here they are:

No wonder I was so taken!

But then, the disbelief… could it be my dress? I mean, could I wear it? I had a little bit of a shock thinking about me in an Alencon lace gown. For one, my mom would be happy to see me in lace, and that’s a very good reason to boot the idea *grin* For two, I didn’t know how comfortable I would feel wearing something like this. But that little voice inside kept on saying “this, this, THIS is the one”.

It happened the same thing when I met Pat… I didn’t allow the logistics deter me 7 years ago (we met online, he was living in NYC I was living in Pisa Italy), should I allow it to happen now? No way!

So I firmly decide for this dress and ordered it from Denise. I’ve browsed a lot of sites, even just finished watching the Bridal Fashion Show on Brides.com but no other gown has told me “I’m yours” the way this one has, so I’m happy.

Metis-Chameleon

Little Dragon-Thunder Love

“Facing the judge, Dieudonné pleads the “humoristic attack”. Here’s how the French newspaper Le Monde headlined. According to the daily newspaper, humorist Dieudonné hadn’t still digested his appearance at the magistrate’s court of Paris on September 23rd. “I don’t understand why I am here”, he said. He is confronting once more serious charges : racial slurs and challenging the existence of one or many crimes against humanity. Dieudonné is under penalty of a year in prison and may be entitled to a 10 000 euros fine.

After all the turmoil, you may expect him to tone it down. You obviously don’t know him. Remembering the same very media that acclaimed him a couple of years ago, he told the judges:

I will keep doing what I am doing on stage. […] It was a show, a humoristic showpiece, there is a game with the media, I gave them a humoristic attack of my own. […] Their hysteria of seeing anti-Semitism everywhere sounds suspect and obscene to me. […] I am the barometer of freedom of speech.

Freedom of speech: how far can you go?

His appearance in court is due to a sketch he played at the Zenith, in Paris. On the 26th of December 2008, Dieudonné invites onto the stage Holocaust-denying historian Robert Faurisson to whom he presented a prize for “unrespectability and insolence”. Faurisson has been denying the holocaust for 30 years. As for Dieudonné, he has been accused of racism and launching the Party Anti-Sionist did not discredit him. Since then, even the province of Quebec – who had once received him warmly – is now more concerned with his political views off the stage than his humor.

Despite all, the humorist promises to take a rain check for the 26th of December 2009 by inviting the Iraqi journalist Muntadhar al-Zeidi, who donated his shoes to Bush.

Black or white?

Dieudonné, the son of a black Cameroonian father and white French mother, once told the french magazine France Soir :

The future is the Internet. The Beke (the “Big White”) is over… Survival relies on mixed races only. And I observe, with a smile, his decline (of the White).

With the métis humorist all the communities are ribbled with bullets:  Asian, Muslim, African and more. When it comes to shooting down French people in flames, he imitates surprisingly well the Cameroonian accent but quickly goes back to his Breton side when he parodies African people. With no hesitation, he portrays Africans as backward people whose “toxic emanations” are inconvenient to others. That of course is to the delight of the public…

“Face au juge, Dieudonné plaide l’attentat humoristique”. Ainsi titrait Le Monde. Selon le quotidien français, l’humoriste Dieudonné n’avait toujours pas digéré son apparition au tribunal correctionnel de Paris le 23 septembre. “Je ne comprends pas pourquoi je suis là”, a-t-il déclaré. Il fait de nouveau face à de lourds chefs d’accusation : injures raciales et contestation de l’existence d’un ou plusieurs crimes contre l’humanité. Dieudonné encourt maintenant une peine d’un an de prison et 10 000 euros d’amende. Après tous ces remous, on s’attendrait à ce que Dieudonné baisse le ton. Se serait trop mal le connaître. Il aurait déclaré aux juges :

Je continuerai à faire ce que je fais sur scène. […] C’était un spectacle, une œuvre humoristique, il y a un jeu avec les médias, je leur ai servi un attentat humoristique à ma sauce. […]Leur hystérie à voir de l’antisémitisme partout me paraît suspecte et obscène. […] Je suis le baromètre de la liberté d’expression.

Liberté d’expression: mais jusqu’où peut-on aller?

À l’origine de cette comparution au tribunal, un sketch au Zénith, à Paris. Le 26 décembre dernier, Dieudonné invite sur scène le négationniste Robert Faurisson à qui il a décerne le “prix de l’infréquentabilité et de l’insolence”. Depuis 30 ans, Faurisson nie l’existence de l’Holocauste. Quant à Dieudonné, il a déjà été taxé d’antisionisme dans le passé et le fait de créer un parti anti-sioniste n’a rien fait pour le discréditer. Même le Québec – qui l’a autrefois bien reçu – se sent maintenant plus concerné par ses vues politiques hors scène que par son humour.

Malgré tout, l’humoriste promet de remettre ça le 26 décembre en invitant le journaliste irakien Muntadhar al-Zeidi, qui avait fait don de ses chaussures à Bush.

Blanc ou noir?
Dieudonné qui est né de père noir (Camerounais) et de mère blanche (française) avait déclaré à France Soir :

L’avenir, c’est Internet. Le Béké (le “Gros Blanc”) est fini… La survie ne tient que dans le métissage. Et moi, j’observe, avec le sourire, sa déchéance.

Avec l’humoriste métis toutes les communautés sont passées au crible: asiatique, musulmane, africaine et autres. Lorsqu’il s’agit de descendre les français, il imite étonnamment bien l’accent camerounais mais il incarne vite son côté breton lorsqu’il faut parodier les africains. Il n’hésite pas à se moquer des africains qu’il présente souvent comme primitifs et dont les “émanations toxqiues” incommodent les autres. Biensûr, ce genre d’humour fait le bonheur du public…

FIDDLESTIX is a Canadian fiddle music duo based in Vancouver BC. Comprised of West Coast award-winning fiddler Cary Grigg and East Coast musician, writer, and visual artist Janet Noade, they weave a wild mix of high energy music that blends the roots of Celtic, Métis, Acadian, Bluegrass, Pop and Swing fiddle magic. Get ready for flying fiddle fingers, gutsy guitar, boisterous bones, syncopated spoons and daring drum. Paired with Janet’s original songs as well as some classic covers, this mix takes you on an emotional musical tour of living history. Both members share Celtic and First Nations’ roots; the resulting musical offering is rhythmic, celebratory and often deeply moving.

We challenge you to sit still through this!

Disiz la Peste a récemment été aperçu sur le plateau de l’émission “On n’est pas couché” pour la promotion de son livre “Les derniers de la rue Ponty”. Au lieu de parler de son livre, Disiz finit par se disputer avec les animateurs de l’émission. Malheureusement, l’ambiance sur le plateau a été gâché lorsque la conversation débouche sur des sujets tabous: l’identité raciale et les banlieues françaises. Sur son blog, le rappeur français justifie ses prises de positions lors de l’émission mais il s’excuse également auprès des personnes qu’il aurait peut-être déçues.

Alors ok, je le reconnais ce n’était pas le lieu pour parler de ça et je n’aurais pas dû. Mon livre n’est pas partial, je ne glorifie pas l’Afrique au détriment de la France. Ma belle soeur Médina, au contraire, aurait tendance à y trouver l’inverse, pendant qu’Eric Zemmour semble voir que je le fais….

Et pourtant, le rappeur franco-sénégalais peut se vanter d’avoir pu tenir une conversation avec les présentateurs de l’émission contrairement à un certain Doc Gynéco, un autre rappeur métis qui a eu du mal à expliquer pourquoi il a changé d’opinions sur les banlieues. Peut-on reprocher à Disiz de s’être engagé dans un débat inutile car perdu d’avance alors qu’il était censé faire la promotion de son livre? Zemmour, chroniqueur pour l’émission “On n’est pas couché”, est réputé pour soulever les passions. Le thème des banlieues et du rap étant très sensible en France, il n’est pas étonnant qu’il se soit déjà attiré les foudres d’autres invités banlieusards tel que l’humoriste Ramzi. Avec le présentateur de l’émission Laurent Ruquier à ses côtés, on a l’impression d’assister à un numéro de bon flic, mauvais flic… sauf qu’à force de répéter le même numéro, personne ne s’y fait plus prendre. Même si Laurent a très souvent l’air choqué par l’audace de ses chroniqueurs, beaucoup le  soupçonne de jubiler intérieurement lorsqu’il songe à la montée en flèche de sa côte d’écoute.

Le malaise qu’éprouvent les banlieues par rapport au reste de la France réside dans le fait qu’ils se sentent incompris et méprisés. Ils reprochent notamment aux français leur refus de reconnaître qu’il existe une politique de deux poids, deux mesures dans leur pays.

Disiz: C’est creux. Je le vis cet idéal de “on est tous les mêmes”, “Liberté, égalité, fraternité”. Pour moi c’est un slogan et une publicité mensongère. Depuis tout petit on me le met dans la tête, sauf que depuis tout petit on ne me montre pas que je suis à l’égal des autres. Déjà je suis métis Franco-Sénégalais. .

Zemmour (fils d’immigrants algériens) refuse de croire à une séparation des classes mais surtout des races.  Selon lui, les banlieusards, non contents de se réfugier dans un carcan de victimisation, aiment diaboliser la France.

Zemmour[En parlant du livre]: Je trouve qu’il y a un moralisme en permanence qui est vraiment exaspérant. Oui c’est bien de faire le bien, c’est mal de faire le mal. Il y a un côté manichéen en général. L’Afrique c’est bien, la France c’est mal [...]
Disiz La Peste: J’ai essayé, justement, en tant que métis franco-sénégalais de ne pas prendre de partie et de critiquer les deux cotés.

Malgré son énorme bagage intellectuel, Zemmour ne semble pas saisir la subtilité du métissage. Il a fait une dissertation poignante mais surtout inappropriée sur l’abdication des origines de tout un chacun.
Disiz illustre si bien la complexité du métissage. Né et élevé en France, il n’a connu le Sénégal que beaucoup plus tard. Impossible de nier la culture et le sang français qui coulent dans ses veines malgré les vigoureux efforts qu’il fait pour épouser son côté sénégalais. Sur son blog il explique:

On me dit que la France n’est pas communautaire. Je n’ai pas par mes origines diverses, mon statut bancal de banlieusard/provincial, je n’ai jamais fait partie d’aucune communauté. [...] “Les miens” c’est mes enfants, pour qui je m’inquiète, car ils sont noirs avec des prénoms musulmans. Que cette discrimination que l’on tente d’atténuer et bel et bien là, qu’elle soit ethnique, sociale ou culturelle et que ce n’est pas moi qui m’attache à mes origines, car j’en ai deux, je suis picard et rufisquois. [...] Les miens” c’est ce type au Sénégal qui m’a dit à la fin d’un concert: “toi Disiz, tu parles de l’Afrique, mais tu fais rien pour l’Afrique, t’es qu’un blanc qui défend sa banlieue, c’est ici le vrai ghetto…”

Paradoxal? On retiendra surtout qu’il est fier d’être métis… Et qu’il a publié un livre.

Visualisez le clash

Disiz la Peste, a métis rapper, recently appeared on the French show “On n’est pas couché” (We didn’t go to bed) to promote his book “Les derniers de la rue Ponty”. Instead of talking about his first book, the rapper found himself arguing with the show’s hosts. Unfortunately, the atmosphere on the set got spoiled when the conversation lead to taboo subjects: French suburbs and race identity. On his blog, the French rapper justified his opinions during the show but he also apologized to the ones he might have disappointed.

Ok then, I admit it was not the right place to talk about it and I shouldn’t have. My book is not partial; I do not glorify Africa over France. My sister-in-law, on the contrary, seems to think I do the opposite, while Zemmour seems to think I do [glorify Africa over France] ….

And yet, the Franco-Senegalese rapper can brag about being able to hold a full conversation with the extra-zealous hosts of the show as opposed to a certain Doc Gynéco, another métis rapper who had a hard time explaining his turn-around of opinion against the suburbs. Should we blame Disiz for voicing his opinion on a never-ending discussion with a foregone conclusion? Especially because he was supposed to be promoting his book instead. Zemmour, a commentator on the “On n’est pas couché” show, has the reputation of arousing the fiercest passions. The theme of suburbs and rap being very sensitive in France, it is not surprising that Zemmour brought down wrath from some Suburban artists like Ramzi on other shows as well. With the show host Laurent Ruquier by his sides, it feels like witnessing a good cop, bad cop act… except that they have been doing it for so long that no one can get fooled again. Even when Ruquier seems to be shocked by the audacity of his commentators, many suspect he feels jubilant inside because the ratings will skyrocket.

The social unrest that the suburbs experience compared with the rest of France lies in the fact that they feel misunderstood and despised. They reproach notably to other French people their refusal to acknowledge a double standards policy in their country.

Disiz: It’s empty. I live it, this ideal of we-are-all-the-same. Liberty, equality, fraternity. To me it’s a slogan, a misleading advertising. Ever since I was a kid, they put that in my head. Except that ever since I was kid, no one showed me that I was equal to others. First things first, I am a Franco-Senegalese métis.

Zemmour (born to Algerian immigrants) refused to admit there is a separation of classes, but mostly of races. To him, the suburban who generally find refuge behind a straightjacket of victimization, enjoy demonizing France.

Zemmour: [about the book] I find that there is an infuriating, permanent moralism. Yes, it’s a good thing to do well and a bad thing to do bad. There is a general, manichean side to it. Africa is good, France is bad [...]
Disiz La Peste: I have tried – precisely – as a franco-senegalese métis not to take sides but criticize both parts”.

Despite his intellectual baggage, Zemmour seemed unfamiliar with the nuance of the métis status. He gave a poignant, yet, inappropriate essay about breaking free from your origins.
Disiz exemplifies so well the complexity of mixed heritage (racially and/or culturally). Being born and raised in France,  he discovered Africa when he was much older. It’s impossible to ignore the French culture and blood both run through his veins even though he tries his best to embrace his Senegalese side. On his blog, he explains:

I am told France is not a country of communities. Because of my diverse origins – of my rickety status of suburban/provincial – I have never been part of any community. [...] “Those who are mine” are my children because they are black and they have Muslim names. This discrimination some try to lessen is well and truly there, whether it is ethnic, social or cultural. I am not tied to my origins because I have two [origins], I am from Picardie and Rufisque. [...]  “Those who are mine” is this guy in Senegal who told me at the end of a show: “you talk about Africa but you don’t do anything for Africa. You are just a white dude who stands up for his suburb, the real ghetto is here…”

Paradoxical? What needs to be remembered is that he’s proud to be a métis… And also that he published a book.

Watch his appearance here (video in French only).

Le merveilleux monde du hip hop est en deuil: depuis ce week end, les rappeurs un temps connus sous les noms de Disiz la Peste et Kanye West sont morts, après s’être suicidés en direct sur nos écrans de télé. Et comme le temps passe trop vite de nos jours, l’hommage et la minute de silence que je vais leur consacrer seront regroupés. Parce que dans le fond, ça ne vaut pas la peine de s’étendre plus.

Le week end meurtrier a d’abord commencé avec la disparition fulgurante mais prévisible de Disiz lors de l’émission “On n’est pas couché” de Laurent Ruquier sur France 2. Tout avait été prévu pour honorer comme il se doit le MC qui nous a fait bouger la tête avec le récent “Alors tu veux rapper“: l’artiste avait sorti sa plus belle moustache digne du héros de V pour Vendetta et un T-Shirt sexy qui moulait son corps enflé par un séjour trop long aux Etats-Unis (rendant au passage ses seins presque excitants), et la production avait programmé sa mise à mort en toute fin d’émission, prédisant l’apothéose après un passage flamboyant d’une Lady Gaga à la répartie exceptionnellement cainrie.

Invité pour parler de son premier roman “Les derniers de la Rue Ponty“, chance inestimable que très peu d’auteurs se voient offrir, Disiz a préféré se donner la mort en direct, se plantant le couteau du ridicule dans le ventre à la manière d’un employé de France Télécom au bord de la crise de nerfs. Et plutôt que de prouver qu’il est plus intelligent et cultivé que la moyenne des rappeurs (enfin, peut être pas au final) en utilisant cette tribune, et ce quelque soit la raison pour laquelle il en bénéficie, le rappeur défunt a revêtu la froide couverture de la honte en racontant sa vie et des anecdotes sur le chèque perçu pour Taxi 2 tellement insipides que les monteurs ont fait la blague de les conserver, et en se victimisant à la manière d’un policier qui porte plainte pour Outrage à agent.

Je ne reviendrai pas sur le fait que celui se serait fait appeler Peter Punk s’il était encore en vie (quoique Don Disiz de la Vega aurait été plus de circonstance vu son style) aurait pu décliner l’invitation dès le départ s’il ne sentait pas suffisamment préparé et s’il avait estimé que passer en dernière position était un véritable manque de respect et une stigmatisation intolérable, qu’Eric Naulleau a été sévère mais juste en disant que le roman était bien “les 5 premières pages” parce que trop scolaire (d’autant plus décevant pour le critique a affirmé apprécier réellement les morceaux et l’énergie du rappeur), que lorsque même Laurent Ruquier et ses vannes préécrites qui tombent à l’eau dans 95% des cas remettent en place sèchement un invité, le fond est dépassé depuis bien longtemps, et encore moins sur la série d’applaudissements encourageant pour la première fois depuis la naissance de ce programme le pourtant unaniment détesté Eric Zemmour.

Je n’essaierai pas non plus d’expliquer ni d’excuser la réaction de Disiz, tout simplement parce que je pense qu’à l’instar d’Abd Al Malik, le rappeur s’est senti investi d’une mission politico-sociale de représentation de toute une jeunesse hip hop (ce qui accessoirement, ne veut absolument rien dire), et a mélangé le racisme à la sectarisation d’une culture musicale, et son histoire personnelle de métis qui cherche ses racines identitaires à une critique littéraire de son style.

Et qu’au final, en voulant imiter la marque de lessive qui lave plus blanc que blanc, Disiz a voulu parler plus noir que noir au nom d’une génération qui ne se reconnaît plus en lui. J’imagine que comble du comble, lorsque son éditeur l’a appelé dans la nuit pour le virer sur le champ (et c’est ce que j’aurai fait sans aucune hésitation), il a dû se dire que ça ne serait pas arrivé s’il avait été blanc.

En ce qui concerne Kanye West, le suicide public et télévisé aura eu lieu, comme toujours lorsqu’il s’agit du rappeur égocentrique, en grandes pompes, lors des MTV Video Music Awards qui se sont déroulés dimanche 13 septembre à New-York.

Sûrement très expressif à cause de la bouteille de cognac Hennessy qu’il a siropté toute la soirée avec une Amber Rose au look cosmique (et Keri Hilson si j’en crois le Twitter de la chanteuse), Kanye a encore une fois renouvellé son exploit en passant au travers des cordons de sécurité et en montant sur scène lors du discours de la jeune Taylor Swift (qui remplace le groupe Justice lors de la version 2009 du pétage de plomb de Mister West) pour arracher un micro et clamer que c’est sa belle mère Beyoncé (visiblement très embarassée et pas du tout solidaire de l’action) qui aurait dû obtenir le prix, parce qu’elle a réalisé “l’une des meilleures vidéos de tous les temps”.

En guise de mot d’adieu, Kanye a demandé plus tard dans la nuit à ses blogeurs fantômes de poster un billet d’excuse, dont le ridicule alcoolisé et narcissique sonne comme un baroud d’honneur. Un post qui passera sûrement inaperçu dans la tourmente d’insultes qui s’est formée autour du rappeur / producteur, et que je m’abstiendrai d’alimenter plus encore. Parce que la minute de silence est déjà écoulée.

UPDATE: depuis quelques heures, le blog de Kanye est inaccessible parce qu’en “maintenance”. Enfin, je dis ça comme ça.

“Adalah suatu kehancuran karena mengatakan bahwa Tuhan dapat melakukan sesuatu yang bukan dari sifat ketuhanan (perlakuan yang merendahkan tuhan). Using the word ‘Elohim’ to fool yourselves into thinking Jesus was God” – Gary Miller (Mathematician)

Gary Miller (Abdul Ahad Omar) membuktikan bagaimana dirinya menemukan kebenaran sejati hanya dengan “Kebenaran yang Standard”. Dia mengilustrasikan metode sederhana dalam menemukan arah yang benar dalam mencari Kebenaran.

“Pada Tuhan tiada sesuatu yang mustahil”

Disini ia berkesimpulan “sebagian cara dari injil adalah cara yang mengambil dari sesuatu pemikiran bukan dari kalimat Tuhan (Yesus)“. Hal ini seharusnya dan yang sebenarnya melawan kepercayaan kristen. Ini adalah suatu kehancuran karena mengatakan bahwa Tuhan dapat melakukan sesuatu yang bukan dari sifat ketuhanan (perlakuan yang merendahkan). Dimana seharusnya argumentasi ini adalah hal yang menghancurkan.

Orang1 : “ Sifat Tuhan adalah Trinity.”
Orang2 : “ Bagaimana mungkin 1+1+1=1? “
Orang1 : “Pada Tuhan tidak ada sesuatu yg. tak mungkin…”
Orang2 : “Kalau begitu TRINITY adalah bukan sifat-Nya, bagaimana seharusnya Dia. Ini kemungkinan ada beberapa pilihan. Mungkin Ia adalah 3,5,9 atau banyak kemungkinan.”

Kalau kita sejenak melihat sejarah kebelakang, sebenarnya trinitas sudah muncul sejak era sebelum masehi. Kemudian trinitas ini diangkat kembali oleh paulus jauh2 hari setelah Nabi Isa AS. (Yesus) hadir di bumi dan tentunya bukan berasal dari Nabi Isa AS (Yesus) itu sendiri dengan tujuan utamanya untuk mempermudah penyebaran agama kristen di tanah eropa sebab trinitas ini sudah berkembang sejak zaman kuno sehingga bisa lebih diterima oleh masyarakat saat itu. Berbagai macam jenis trinitas tersebut diantaranya adalah :

1. India maka akan kita kenal Trimurti (Siwa, Wishnu, Brahma)
2. Persia maka akan kita kenal Trinitas (HOROMAZDES= tuhan bapak, MITRA= anak, AREMANIUS= roh suci)
3. Mesir maka akan kita kenal Trinitas (OSIRIS – HORUS – TYPHON)
4. Mexico maka akan kita kenal Trinitas (YZONA – BACAB – ECHIAH)
5. Yunani maka akan kita kenal Trinitas ( ORPHIC PHANES –ERICAPEUS – METIS) Dan lain sebagainya.

Mereka berkeyakinan ketiganya adalah satu bahkan di zaman Romawi kuno maka akan kita dapati yaitu anak dewa mata hari yang lahir tanggal 25 Desember, dan ditanah jawapun tidak ketinggalan akan hal itu yang kita kenal yang kita kenal dengan kepercayaan- kepercayaan Aninisme dan dinamisme dan sampai sekarang masih banyak yang menganutnya.

Karena kejahiliyahan itulah maka Allah SWT mengutus para Rasul-Rasulnya untuk membenarkan dan meluruskan akidah mereka dari penyembahan terhadap mahluk atau berhala kepada penyembahan Tuhan yang sesungguhnya, namun sudah menjadi sunattullah maka ada orang yang mau mengikuti ajaran yang benar yaitu ajaran yang disampaikan oleh Rasul-rasul Allah dan ada yang tidak mau bahkan justru malah ada yang memutar balikan ajaran yang dibawa oleh oleh rasul itu sendiri yaitu dengan cara Menuhankan para Rasul-rasul tersebut.

AL QUR’AN
==============================
Katakanlah: “Dia-lah Allah, Yang Maha Esa,
Allah adalah Tuhan yang bergantung kepada-Nya segala sesuatu.
Dia tiada beranak dan tiada pula diperanakkan,
dan tidak ada seorang pun yang setara dengan Dia”
==============================
(QS.Al-Ikhlas 1-4)

——————————————————————————————————————————————–

Gary Miller adalah seorang ahli Matematika. Tinggal di Toronto, Kanada. Sebelum memeluk islam, beliau adalah seorang yang bekerja pada sebuah gereja di Kanada. Seorang penyiar di radio dan televisi siaran di Kanada sebagai pencermah agama. Selain itu juga beliau adalah aktivis gereja dalam urusan pencarian kebenaran sesuai misinya sebagai pendeta. Belakangan beliau banyak menemukan Ketidak Konsistenan didalam injil. Semua pekerjaannya ini berhubungan langsung dengan Gereja.

Pada tahun 1978, beliau membaca Al-qur‘an. Dengan perasaan yang antusias dengan setengah tak meyakini bahwasanya isinya adalah dari percampuran antara kebenaran dan kepalsuan. Ternyata beliau menemukan banyak hal yang dicarinya tentang kebenaran itu, pesan pesan didalam Al Quran banyak persamaannya dengan inti kebenaran yang disaringnya dari Injil.

Akhirnya beliau menjadi Muslim dan sejak itulah beliau selalu aktif dalam banyak negara di setiap kesempatan yaitu memberikan penerangan tentang Islam pada masyarakat disana termasuk di media Radio dan Televisi. Beliau juga mengarang berbagai Artikel dan Buku mengenai Kebenaran Islam, salah satunya adalah The Amazing Qur’an. Dakwah islamnya kebanyakan dalam masalah penyelesaian, perdebatan dengan Non muslim (kristen) dan tanya jawab tentang. Islam di radio dan televisi, khususnya di Kanada.

Mengejar Cahaya Kebenaran Part  I >>