Ken George peers through the bighouse wall at Q’Puthet Unwinus S’ulsalewh/Elders singing welcome songs they heard as children, at the official opening of the Sway A’ Lana with Bear and Eagle carving by James Johnny Sr. (Snuneymuxw), July 30, 1985. At the ceremony Anderson Tommy, wearing vest, recalled being told by his elders, “You will hear our teachings and songs echo, long after we are gone.” Left to right: Ken George, Kay George (Q’Puthet Unwinus Cultural Co-Ordinator) with Sulsalewh/Elders Eva Thomas, Margaret James, Emily Manson, Anderson Tommy, Mamie Frenchy, Hazel Good. hay ’ul’ ’i’y mut st’ i lums/it was the most beautiful singing! (Composite image created by William A. White)

An excerpt from the Summer 2023 issue of British Columbia History.

By William A. White

In 1998, I wrote a very brief paper that compared and contrasted the very small display case accorded the Coast Salish People at the Royal British Columbia Museum and the display cases of its neighbours, identified as the Nuu-chah-nulth, Ts’msyen, and Haida Peoples. The Coast Salish case used to sit just to the right of the Mungo Martin longhouse [1] in the First Peoples Gallery, after eight or ten major display cases housing Kwakwaka’wakw and Haida materials. Immediately in front of the display case were a number of full-size totem poles and at least five or six display areas dedicated to northern cultures.

The Royal British Columbia Museum sits right in the middle of territories and principal villages of the Central Coast Salish consisting of the Island Hul’q’umi’num’, Northern Straits, Klallam, Nooksack, Upriver Halq’eméylem, Downriver Halq’eméylem, Skwxwú7mesh Úxwumixw. e territory and people of the Central Coast Salish and the Puget Sound Salish—in fact, those people who established villages and undertook a rich ceremonial life prior to and after the arrival of the Europeans on this very stretch of the coast—seemed non-existent. At least, that was the impression given upon viewing the content of the Salish case and comparing it to its immediate neighbours.

A closer examination of the writings of RBCM officials may reveal why this was the case. Peter Macnair, Alan Hoover, and Kevin Neary described Coast Salish art as conservative, “changing not at all from the point of European contact through to the 1890s when the last significant examples were probably produced.” [2]

It is unfortunate that RBCM offcials were not able to appreciate the significance of the fact that the art form had not changed and unfortunate that this significant cultural institution perpetuated this belief through the use of several ritual pieces. [3]

The anthropologist Wayne Suttles, on the other hand, summarized the social and cultural context of the Hul’q’umi’num’ Sxwayxwey by saying, “The artists who made and assembled these masks and costumes may have drawn from various sources and experimented over the generations to impress and mystify those people who came to the potlatch.” [4] He concluded that “they would be pleased to know that they are still impressing and mystifying.” [5]

In this display, the context, continuity, and antiquity of the art form was clearly lost to offcials from the Royal British Columbia Museum. The exhibit contained approximately sixteen pieces reflective of a very complex ritual and ceremonial world, [6] yet teachers conducting school tours, tourists, and perhaps our own young people would not have any idea of the connectedness of any of the sixteen pieces and would not learn about the complex world of the people who created them.

A child, in particular, would not learn anything about the territory, ancestry, antiquity, or value of the people who produced the pieces displayed in this very small display case. e people, the land in which they operated, the environment available to them, and the various personalities are nowhere to be found within the display case.

Second-class status

The Coast Salish represent the largest cultural group in the province, the group whose homeland is now the most heavily populated. e Coast Salish are also the most conservative on the coast and have retained many of their traditional spiritual activities, unlike their immediate neighbours to the north and south. [9] In fairness, perhaps the stark display represented consistent requests from representatives of the Traditional Coast Salish community to refrain from displaying or discussing sacred objects. If this is the case, the museum curators took the request too far and, in fact, used little imagination with the materials collected and available for display.

I suspect, however, there was much more at work here than respecting the wishes of traditional community members. Immediately preceding the Salish exhibit were display cases for the Nuu-chah-nulth, Ts’msyen, and Haida Peoples. Viewed in the context of their immediate neighbours, the Nuu-chah-nulth and Coast Salish displays were minimal, unimaginative, and stark.

The manner in which both the Nuu-chah-nulth and Coast Salish objects were displayed served as yet one more vehicle that relegates First Nations people/culture/material world to a status less than others.

The major problem, of course, is when a young museum visitor views the simplistic display and contrasts it to other cases in the immediate vicinity. What impression is made when a young Indigenous student from the Coast Salish or Nuu-chah-nulth notes the cultural complexity clearly displayed of other coastal groups, such as the extensive Haida village, [10] or at the other end of the floor, the reproduced Mungo Martin house, or the cave of masks? What happens when a child from any of the fourteen First Nations [11] on Vancouver Island—from Snaw’naw’as in the north to any of the WSÁNEĆ—views the Haida Village, the Mungo Martin bighouse and looks for anything representative of their own people?

What impression does a First Nation student form about their place in the world and, more importantly, about their place in history? The answer is simple and destructive. The exhibit denigrates and assigns the people to a second-class status against Kwakwaka’wakw and Haida art from the Northwest Coast, which has been enshrined in academia as the nest art and the art that is truly representative of the coast even as the museum is surrounded by the ancestral owners who have inhabited this area from time immemorial. These ancestral owners consist of the Esquimalt, Malahat, Pauquachin, Songhees, Tsartlip, Tsawout, Tseycum, T’sou-ke, Sc’ianew (Beecher Bay), Stz’uminus, Quw’utsun, Snaw’naw’as, Snuneymuxw, and Penelakut.

Salish Bear Pole in Qualicum, circa 1960, by Hwunumetse’ Simon Charlie (1919–2005) from Cowichan First Nation. Hwunumetse’ Simon Charlie was an internationally renowned master carver, esteemed by Coast Salish artists for his significant role in the revitalization of Coast Salish art. (Photo: City of Vancouver Archives AM1052-: AM1052 P-1944)

In 1944, Alice Ravenhill complimented “the very high standard of perfection” used by Coast Salish artists who produced spindle whorls. She added, “the men did not possess the outstanding skill in the bold sculpturing of wood or in the fine carving of bone, ivory and horn so highly developed among the Haida and Ts’msyen.” [12] The historian Robin Fisher describes the same impression.

“Coast Salish art was quite different from that of the northern coast. In the eyes of many European beholders, it was also less impressive than Haida art.” [13] The manner in which the museum chose to introduce and to label its exhibits further reinforced this unfortunate classification and further inscribed this hierarchy of coastal art, accelerating the academically driven mythical image of “true” Northwest coast art. The label for Nuu-chah-nulth art suggests their “sculpture is easily distinguished” and contains a brief reference to the Tloquana (wolf ritual).

Meanwhile, the Ts’msyen exhibit drew attention to such phenomena as spirit names, frontlets, and further described their sculpture as the “most refined and sensitive of all Northwest coast carving.” In contrast to these two labels, the label introducing the Haida display case discusses their concave orbit, crest figures, and further suggests their at design materials reached an “intellectualized perfection.”

In light of the horrendous period of oppression by both church and state regarding traditional culture and traditional cultural practices—which in effect helped destroy social interactions and material representations of the sacred—the RBCM exhibit continues the process of reminding all British Columbians and especially Coast Salish people that their culture was simple and perhaps even non-existent. In fact, our culture is rich with oral history, vibrant, and on several fronts unchanged even with the arrival of the Europeans to the coast. The Coast Salish as a group, however, like their neighbours to the north and south, is under severe stress.

This work suggested a clear flaw in the way museum professionals receive training about the northwest coast. This is problematic for many reasons. The museum as arbiter of culture does not have a moral or social right to continue the oppression of any culture. The Royal British Columbia Provincial Museum sits in the heart of Coast Salish territory and clearly operates with little understanding of this fact.

The manner in which Coast Salish materials were displayed, and the simplistic language used to label the belongings, served to denigrate the cultural knowledge of the old people, particularly those with traditional training, and served to remind the very young there is little purpose to know anything about their own people, their own past, and—perhaps the most damaging of all—the value of their own old people.

Students may have left the exhibit area believing the Coast Salish did not inhabit the area immediately surrounding the capital city. This would be particularly damaging for young Coast Salish students who have to explain why so little is contained in the museum about their own people. Worse still, museum visitors would learn that the Coast Salish could not build structures or carve images as impressive as those of its immediate neighbours. Without a substantial shift from the academic fascination and categorization of their world and others, impressionable young artists may take on the ethnocentric viewpoint of the Euro-Canadian that leads one to worship the intellectual perfection of Haida forms over Coast Salish artforms.

Traditionally trained Elders continue to reinforce behaviours that provide a sense of belonging, a strong sense of family, a strong sense of responsibility to each other. The Royal British Columbia Museum is a world-class museum that has denigrated Coast Salish Culture and denied their right to announce the future. Significant changes have to be made in the manner the Coast Salish exhibits are planned and implemented, and changes have to be made now.

Endnotes

1. This location information is based on the position of cases in 1998. My overall observations have remained true over time even as the specific position of belongings and cases has been adjusted.

2. Peter L. Macnair, Alan L. Hoover, and Kevin Neary. The Legacy: Continuing Traditions of Canadian Northwest Coast Indian Art. Victoria: British Columbia Provincial Museum, 1980: 39.

3. Wayne Suttles. “The Halkomelem Sxwayxwey” in American Indian Art (Winter 1980): 56 – 65.

4. Suttles, 64.

5. Suttles, 64.

6. Thee sixteen Coast Salish cultural belongings included highly significant belongings used in ritual cleansing, weaving instruments, baskets, and utilitarian items.

7. Pamela Amoss. Coast Salish Spirit Dancing: The Survival of an Ancestral Religion. Seattle: University of Washington Press,1978: 35

8. See “First Nations Traditional Values” Floy C. Pepper and William A. White, 1995. Prepared for “A First Nations Sensitivity Curriculum Review and Recommendations” by Philip Cook, Chair Cross Cultural Portfolio. School of Child and Youth Care, 1996.

9. Barbara S. Lane. “A Comparative and Analytic Study of Some Aspects of Northwest Coast Religion” Unpublished PhD Dissertation, University of Washington, 1953: 1, 6.

10. The Royal British Columbia Museum is surrounded by the ancestral owners who have inhabited this area from time immemorial. These Nations consist of the Esquimalt, Malahat, Pauquachin, Songhees, Tsartlip, Tsawout, Tseycum and T’sou-ke.

11. These Nations are the Esquimalt, Malahat, Pauquachin, Songhees, Tsartlip, Tsawout, Tseycum, T’sou-ke, Beecher Bay, Chemainus, Cowichan Tribes, Nanoose, Nanaimo and Penelakut.

12. Alice Ravenhill. A Corner Stone of Canadian Culture: An Outline of the Arts and Crafts of the Indian Tribes of British Columbia. Victoria: Occasional Papers of the British Columbia Provincial Museum. Number 5, 1944: 74.

13. Robin Fisher. “The Northwest from the Beginning of Trade with Europeans to the 1880s” in The Cambridge History of the Native Peoples of the Americas. Ed. Bruce G. Trigger and Wilcomb E. Washburn. Cambridge: University of Cambridge Press, 1996: 121.

William A. White, B.A. (University of Victoria), is a Cultural Historian, traditionally trained Snuneymuxw Elder, and a cultural teacher. He recently weighed in at the public engagement session in Nanaimo for the Royal British Columbia Museum (RBCM), a process designed to gather input from across BC to plan the museum’s future. The representation of Coast Salish People in this provincial institution has been on his mind for many years—since the opening of the First Peoples galleries, on January 18, 1977. Since then, millions of people have visited this “world-class” facility, and hundreds of thousands of students have learned about Indigenous Peoples through its displays. White worries about the ongoing and legacy impacts of their teachings about Coast Salish People in terms of their relative worth as Indigenous People on the west coast, and he urges action as new RBCM experiences are created in the coming years.