MANIFESTING LANGUAGE: NADIA MYRE, …ccca.concordia.ca/academy/papers_PDFs/7-chantale/Chantale1.pdf · MANIFESTING LANGUAGE: NADIA MYRE, RAPHAËLLE DE GROOT, JOHN ... Mémoire X99-Y04.25

ARTH 648B-2 Envisioning Digital and Virtual Forms of Exhibitions: The Curatorial Translation of Theory into Practice, 2012

MANIFESTING LANGUAGE: NADIA MYRE, RAPHAËLLE DE GROOT, JOHN

ARMSTRONG AND PAUL COLLINS

Chantale Potié

As a powerful marker of history, place, and time, language indexes the past while continuing to

determine the future. In Canada particularly, language has been a constant source of conflict beginning

with the colonial cohabitation of Aboriginals, Francophones, and Anglophones in the early seventeenth

century.1 Canadian governmental legislation has historically determined what Canada stands for and who

a Canadian is. With the adoption of laws such as the Indian Act (1876; 1985), the Official Languages

Act (1969), and the Multiculturalism Act (1988), Canada has instigated an ongoing process of carefully

molding the Canadian identity. The political language demonstrated in the aforementioned legislation

works to shape the development of a nation-state, contributing significantly to how Canadians view their

culture and, in turn, self-identify.

Bridging national identities, Manifesting Languages showcases four Canadian artists who question the

language(s) that shape(s) Canada, complicating simple character identification and essentialism. Each of

these artists began with language and words as a foundation, ultimately reframing language to highlight

neglected histories and the ways in which words form realities. First Nations and Québécois artist Nadia

Myre (b.1974) enacts help from various communities to thereby reframe the contested 56-page Indian

Act through beading. Montreal-born Raphaëlle de Groot (b.1974) paints nineteenth century Quebec

newspaper excerpts and excavation reports on the concrete of a parking lot in the Old Port, attempting to

rebuild an oft-forgotten violent past. Communicating between Toronto and Paris, John Armstrong and

Paul Collins create a bilingual list of unremarkable everyday words, interpreting them through

photographing their perceived contextual environment. This exhibition starts wide in scope and proceeds


to narrow in towards a more personal relationship with language. Beginning with Myre’s reframing of

governmental policy text, leading to de Groot’s appropriation of media and archaeological text, and

ending with Armstrong and Collins’ exploration of everyday text, one begins to get a sense of how

expansive federal language directly affects the individual, and, conversely, how quotidian language

indirectly affects the national character.

Nadia Myre

#49-52, from the Indian Act series

2000-2003

Red and white seed beads, stroud cloth, thread, Indian Act (R.C., chapters 1-5, 1985), paper

18.11 x 14.96" each unit

http://exruefrontenac.com/spectacles/artsvisuels/30871-marche-des-arts-visuels


Enacting the help from over 230 volunteers from various First Nations and artistic communities, the

Indian Act manually translates the 56-page annotated Indian Act found on the Canadian government

website. Myre and her volunteers replaced the words of the text with white glass seed beads and filled in

the negative space with red beads, creating a Morse code-like effect—no longer textually legible but still

communicating through the group’s sewn actions. The Indian Act was imposed in 1876, providing

legislation for the federal government to practice their authority over First Nations people and their land.

Undergoing many changes throughout the years, Myre’s work manipulates the version that was amended

by Bill C-31 in 1985 where in attempting to open up the Act, status of an “Indian” continued to be

defined and interpreted by the government.2 Written by the parliament and never translated into a Native

tongue, the Act hegemonically defines who a Native person is. Beading over the text with the colours of

the Canadian flag—i.e. red and white—manages to erase the text from within.3 An Algonquin member

of the Kitigan Zibi Anishnabeg, a Québécois and a Canadian, Myre illustrates an inclusive criticality

towards her state—the legislative text is not only offensive to aboriginals but to every Canadian citizen

who believe they live in a democratic country. With some pages completely overlaid with beads, and

others only partially concealed, Myre points to the ongoing process of redress avoiding a secured,

fastened rendering of the First Nations people.


Artist Nadia Myre with volunteers at Gallery Oboro (Montreal) creating the Indian Act

http://artmur.com/en/artists/nadia-myre/indian-act/


Composed of fine art students, members of Montreal aboriginal community organizations, and

respondents from want ads, the 230 volunteers collected by Myre between 2000 and 2003 played a

significant role in the project. Indian Act functions as a process-based work of art, in that the process is

arguably equally as important as the final product.4 The talking, questioning, and reflecting that

transpired between the volunteers during the beading sessions acts as a pertinent way for Myre to

directly communicate and exchange with her local community. The final works are artefacts of the

intimate discussions surrounding the topic of the 1985 amended Indian Act. Furthermore, these

volunteers were forced to become exhaustively familiar with the text, as hours were spent looking at a

single working page. As the eye watches the needle, thread, and bead sew through the printed Act, the

eye additionally catches the words that the beading erases. Each word demands attention. How does one

perceive a text after scrutinizing it so thoroughly? How does one perceive one’s nation after scrutinizing

it so thoroughly?


Raphaëlle de Groot

Mémoire X99-04.25

1999

Intervention

Parking lot, Place d’Youville, Montreal

Photo: Jean-Pierre Gauthier

http://www.raphaelledegroot.net/eng/dett_travaux.php?id_a=2&id_p=17

An intervention in a seemingly benign parking lot in the Old Port of Montreal, Raphaelle de Groot’s

Mémoire X99-Y04.25 refers to the history of Quebec and its hugely defining role in the formation of

Canada. The title and location of the piece itself indexes the spatial coordinates of the old Canadian

Parliament building in Montreal. Situated at Place d’Youville from 1843-1849, United Canada’s first

Parliament was ultimately set on fire and destroyed by political riots on April 25, 1849, instigated by


linguistic and cultural tensions.5 Painting the outline of a portion of the Parliament ruins, some of which

remains under the asphalt, de Groot also incorporated text from period newspaper and excavation reports

on the pavement of the parking lot referring to the past lives of the site: from its existence as a plot of

land in the countryside, to a part of a developing city, to the site of a burning federal government

building. Specifically, de Groot writes that the text was composed of “archaeological reports [that]

recalled the scenes and events that marked the location, from first siting to the riot and subsequent fire

that destroyed the parliament in 1849.”6

The large applied text on the weathered concrete at once seamlessly integrates itself into the environment

while distinguishing itself as something to be read and considered. Referring to a building that was

destroyed through violent measures, Mémoire seeks to reassess Québecois history and resurrect that

which is no longer. How does the public experience this work, a textual intervention intended on being

walked over and lingered upon? Some may feel transported into a new, unfamiliar historical setting.

Some may find themselves engaged in rethinking their established history. Some may even experience

displacement, as their stable parking lot has been remodelled into an inexact time machine. Leaving the

parking lot painted after the end of a month-long intervention/presentation, de Groot maintained the

work as inclusive to the city—random parking lot users and pedestrians were able to catch glimpses of

the city’s textual past until meteorological conditions slowly effaced the surface.


John Armstrong and Paul Collins

chair / chaise, in Jim --> (Jim, that way par là) series

2002

Selenium-toned gelatin silver print

49 prints: 11 x 14 in.; 27.9 x 35.6 cm each unit

http://ccca.concordia.ca/c/images/screen/a/armstrong.collins/armc007.jpg


John Armstrong and Paul Collins began their collaborative project with the term “Jim -->” referencing

the graffiti in Paris that directs the public to the gravestone of Jim Morrison at the Père-Lachaise

cemetery. With Armstrong in Toronto and Collins in Paris, the artists aimed to document their

surroundings in a bid to uncover the mundane similarities and differences between the two cities.

Photographing forty-nine predetermined words, Armstrong and Collins presented their photographs with

the bilingual words as an index.

Jim →; mustard pot/ pot de moutarde; keys/clefs; cemetery/cimetière; car/voiture; hand/main; chair/chaise;

hammer/marteau; Sorel Etrog; newscast/les infos; flower/fleur; cloth/tissu; draped cloth/tissu drapé; boss/patron;

fish/poisson; art dealer/galeriste; floor/sol; tree/arbre; garbage can/poubelle; bicycle/vélo; Georges Seurat;

clock/horloge; record/enregistrement; editorial cartoon/dessin politique; radiator/radiateur; colleague/collègue;

hat/chapeau; painted sky/ciel peint; musical instrument/instrument de musique; Jean-Paul Riopelle; toilet/w.c.;

telephone/téléphone; air vent/bouche d’aération; character/caractère; word/mot; phrase; curator/commissaire

d’expositions; florist/fleuriste; directional indicator/panneau indicateur; number/numéro; travel

advertisement/publicité de voyage; arts administrator/administrateur d’art; water/eau; Lucy Hogg; poet/poète; sujet

libre; critic/critique; view of France/vue de la France; view of Canada/vue du Canada.7

The piece chair/ chaise displays two chairs that carry with them specific reference points. The plastic

chair on the left reads cheap, suburban, uncomfortable, and disposable. The office chair on the right

reads expensive, elite, welcoming, and timeless. Immediate associations that arise with chair / chaise

involves pairing the plastic chair with Toronto and the office chair with Paris—the cheap chair

“American”, and the stylized chair “European.” However, because these types of stereotypes and

conventions are so easily conjured does not make them accurate. It is unrevealed to the viewers which

photograph was taken by Armstrong and which by Collins. Either chair could be found in either city,

along with most other cities in the world. They are universal, in a sense, while continuing to hold cultural

baggage. Armstrong and Collins zero in on the obvious to make their viewers questions predispositions


and assumptions. When someone in Toronto thinks of the word chair, what image emerges? Is it the

same as someone in Paris who thinks of the word chaise?

John Armstrong and Paul Collins

floor / sol in Jim --> (Jim, that way par là) series

2002

Selenium-toned gelatin silver print

49 prints : 11 x 14 in.; 27.9 x 35.6 cm each unit

http://ccca.concordia.ca/c/images/screen/a/armstrong.collins/armc017.jpg


Throughout the whole series, the viewer is left wondering, which one is done by Paul and which one by

John? Which one identifies Toronto, and which one Paris? Ambiguousness arises as distinguishing the

artist, city, relationship to word, and even the subject matter becomes twisted and gruelling. The artists

represent language and words as precarious and variable, speaking to the broader unreliable attempts of

defining national and cultural identities. With an aspect as minute as the floor of a building, as illustrated

in floor / sol, we can begin to see the overlapping of two cultures and cities. With all the differences that

we perceive between two Western cities, similarities simultaneously exist. Collins and Armstrong argue

that these similarities must not go unnoticed, as there is a common foundation and basis that is necessary

to recognize.


NOTES 1 The first European settlement on Canadian land (then Acadia) occurred 1604-1607 with Samuel de Champlain on the Bay of Fundy. See Stephen J. Hornsby, ed., “Champlain and the Settlement of Acadia 1604-1607,” University of Maine – Canadian-American Center, 2004, accessed October 20, 2012 http://umaine.edu/canam/publications/st-croix/champlain-and-the-settlement-of-acadia-1604-1607. The first English settlement occurred in 1610 with John Guy in Cupers Cove, Newfoundland. See Laura Neilson Bonikowsky, “Canada’s First English Settlement,” The Canadian Encyclopedia, accessed October 20 2012 http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/featured/canadas-first-english-settlement. 2 Department of Justice Canada, Indian Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. I-5) (1985) accessed October 21, 2012 http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/I-5. 3 The colours red and white many also have been chosen as a reference to the Canadian government’s 1969 White Paper, and the Indian Association of Alberta’s 1970 response, “Citizen Plus,” also known as the Red Paper. “In 1969, the [Canadian] federal government released the Statement of the Government of Canada on Indian Policy, otherwise known as the 1969 White Paper. It proposed the elimination of separate legal status for Aboriginal people in Canada and called for their assimilation into mainstream Canadian society. The White Paper also argued that the federal government should not negotiate treaties with the Native peoples because treaties could only be established and signed between sovereign nations. In response to the White Paper, [spokesperson for the Indian Association of Alberta, Harold] Cardinal helped draft the Red Paper titled “Citizens Plus” (1970).” Ian A.L. Getty, “Harold Cardinal,” The Canadian Encyclopedia, Historica-Dominion, accessed December 14, 2012 http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/articles/harold-cardinal. 4 Developed in the United States and Europe in the 1960’s, “process art emphasizes the “process” of making art (rather than any predetermined composition or plan) and the concepts of change and transience. […] Their interest in process and the properties of materials as determining factors has precedents in the Abstract Expressionists’ use of unconventional methods such as dripping and staining.” “Process Art,” Collection Online, Guggenheim New York, accessed October 20, 2012 http://www.guggenheim.org/new-york/collections/collection-online/show-full/movement/?search=Process%20art. 5 At the time, Montreal was the capital city of Lower Canada housing representatives of Upper and Lower Canada. The burning of the parliament building was instigated by the Rebellion Losses Bill, a law meant to compensate those whose property was damaged during the Rebellion of 1837-38 against the Crown. The Tory supporters, by and large Anglophones, felt threatened by the French Canadian influence in the Reformer government. The Rebellion Losses Bill signified a defense or acceptance of the French Canadian Rebellion, which angered the Anglophones. “Denouncing “French domination,” an [Anglophone] mob invaded Parliament and put it to the torch. […] Crowds of English-speaking protester’s had thrown stones and rotten eggs at Lord Elgin’s carriage because the governor general had sanctioned the bill. The riots lasted two days. Subsequently, it was decided that Montreal would no longer be the seat of government.” R. Douglas Francis, Richard Jones, and Donald B. Smith, “The Union of the Canada’s,” Journeys: A History of Canada (Toronto, ON: Nelson Education Ldt., 2005) 147. 6 Raphaëlle de Groot, “Mémoire X99 – Y04.25,” Works, Raphaëlle de Groot, accessed October 21, 2012 http://www.raphaelledegroot.net/eng/dett_travaux.php?id_a=2&id_p=17. 7 John Armstrong and Paul Collins, “Jim -->,” John Armstrong, accessed October 22, 2012 http://www.johnarmstrong.ca/Jim/jim%20texts.html.


BIBLIOGRAPHY

“Process Art.” Collection Online. Guggenheim New York. Accessed October 20, 2012.

http://www.guggenheim.org/new-york/collections/collection-online/show-full/movement/?search=Process%20art.

Armstrong, John, and Paul Collins. “John Armstrong and Paul Collins Collaborative Art: Painting,

Sculpture, Photography.” John and Paul. Accessed October 22, 2012. http://www.johnandpaul.ca.

Bonikowsky, Laura Neilson. “Canada’s First English Settlement.” The Canadian Encyclopedia.

Accessed October 20, 2012. http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/featured/canadas-first-english-settlement.

de Groot, Raphaëlle. “Raphaëlle de Groot – artiste en arts visuels.” Raphaëlle de Groot. Accessed

October 22, 2012. http://www.raphaelledegroot.net. Department of Justice Canada. Indian Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. I-5). 1985. Accessed October 21, 2012.

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/I-5. Foster, Josephine. “The Montreal Riot of 1849.” Canadian Historical Review 32:1 (1951): 61-65. Francis, R. Douglas, Richard Jones, and Donald B. Smith. “The Union of the Canada’s.” Journeys: A

History of Canada. Toronto, ON: Nelson Education Ldt., 2005. 142-166. Getty, Ian A.L. “Harold Cardinal.” The Canadian Encyclopedia. Historica-Dominion. Accessed

December 14, 2012. http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/articles/harold-cardinal. Hornsby, Stephen J., ed. “Champlain and the Settlement of Acadia 1604-1607.” University of Maine –

Canadian-American Center. 2004. Accessed October 20, 2012. http://umaine.edu/canam/publications/st-croix/champlain-and-the-settlement-of-acadia-1604-1607.

Martin, James. “Nadia Myre’s Art project is Already at the McCord.” Concordia’s Thursday Report 6.

June 2002. Accessed October 20, 2012. http://ctr.concordia.ca/2001-02/June_6/08-Myre/index.shtml.

“Nadia Myre.” Nadia Myre. Accessed October 20, 2012.

http://www.nadiamyre.com/Nadia_Myre/home.html.

Documents

MANIFESTING LANGUAGE: NADIA MYRE, …ccca.concordia.ca/academy/papers_PDFs/7-chantale/Chantale1.pdf · MANIFESTING LANGUAGE: NADIA MYRE, RAPHAËLLE DE GROOT, JOHN ... Mémoire X99-Y04.25