Inuit Studies Conference extends call for submissions
Organizers now accepting proposals until March 15
Maatalii Okalik, then president of the National Inuit Youth Council, gave a key note address at the 2016 Inuit Studies Conference in St. John’s, Newfoundland. (Photo by Sarah Rogers)
This year’s Inuit Studies Conference, to be held in Montreal this October, has extended its call for submissions to March 15.
This year’s theme is Tukisiqattautiniq, or “Understanding Each Other.” The theme could mean understandings between generations, peoples or us and the natural world, but other interpretations are welcome.
A written statement on the conference website invites “elders, knowledge-bearers, community advocates, teachers, researchers, artists, policy-makers, students and others to submit proposals.”
Organizers are interested in ideas for presentation proposals, workshops, seminars, panel discussions, roundtables and thematic sessions.
Chosen submissions will be announced April 7.
The Inuit Studies Conference is an international meeting that showcases both Inuit traditional knowledge and academic research on a broad range of topics.
For a long time, the event was controversial, as its attendees were almost entirely non-Inuit researchers meeting to speak on Inuit-related subjects.
But Inuit representation has improved over the last few years. And the last conference, held in St. John’s, Newfoundland, in 2016, saw the Nunatsiavut government co-host the event and many of the 200 speakers were Inuit.
I wonder why non-Inuit studies of Inuit should be controversial? Or am I just biting at a faux issue, fomented by the media?
I understand the popular notion that individuals are considered experts of their own experience but, this does not mean an individual is an expert, by virtue of their identity, on the broader issues of their society.
If an Inuk wanted to do a comparative sociological study of religious education in Ireland vs the United States for example, should that be considered off grounds for cultural reasons? Maybe there’s a better analogy? Maybe an Inuk would like to do a study of mid-wifery in Greenland, or of the Sami? Acceptable, useful?
We shouldn’t restrict or prohibit the production of knowledge based on criteria that are not relevant to it. An outsiders perspective can offer fresh and important insights. That said, I agree that an Inuit perspective might yield insights that would be nearly impossible for an outsider to gleen. Both can be valuable for different reasons. Works should be judged on their own merit, either way.
All that said, I think it is important to have more Inuit involved in homegrown research. In fact this is essential to the maturing of Nunavut society, politically, economically and socially.