Inuksuk debate a bit of a laugh

My dad and I had a bit of a laugh over this “raging” debate over the unveiling of the Inuksuk logo for the Vancouver 2010 Winter Olympics.

It is with not a little bemusement that I write this opinion regarding the traditionalist view versus the stylized and modern interpretation of the venerable inuksuk.

I do not see any need to decry global recognition of Canadian Inuit through this symbol. Certainly no one that I know of is attempting to attack or encroach upon cultural integrity when they, whoever they may be, recognize and flatter Inuit heritage and culture by a universal application of an Inuk concept, however symbolic or interpretive that application may be.

Purists may not see it that way. After all, purists moaned and groaned over the fact that Bob Dylan went to electric music from acoustic folk music. Dylan still created great music afterwards in the electric genre.

As in music or dance, there may be the “classics,” but the art forms evolve, even though the classics are never lost, and in fact are revered and practiced. Similarly, there is much to be said for some understanding of what inuksuit or inuksugait did for and meant to Inuit of eras past. It would take years of study for any student today to fully appreciate the culture and language surrounding all those inuksuit across the north, and certainly those fields of study in anthropology and language should be developed and encouraged.

In today’s world, recognition means marketing. If it is as positive as the Vancouver attempt at utilizing the inuksuk for a world class event, let’s take advantage of it, rather than misconstruing it as an encroachment on our culture.

Hmm, as a bit of an aside, interesting that the Creationists take the “evolution” side in this particular case.

Peter Ittinuar
Brantford, Ontario