literature review 

Prior to this doctoral research inquiry, I completed a master’s research study titled Re-storying Métis spirit: honouring lived experiences which was predicated on the narratives of Métis lived experiences with myself and four Métis participants. The research conducted revealed that there are Métis ways of knowing which are nestled in language, kinship systems, relationships to land, experiences of racism, and survival (Bouvier, 2016). Seen as not an exhaustive or hierarchical listing, these themes are only the prominent ones that arose from the participants’ narratives. Each theme is a research topic itself; however, there was one experience in the research that captivated me and provoked this doctoral inquiry.

During one particular interview Art Cunningham, one of the Métis participants, described his experience as transitory, wherein “he was the first generation to grow up and live in an urban environment. He viewed his experience differently than his grandparents and father, because they lived in relationship with the land in rural Alberta, whereas he grew up in urban centres” (Bouvier, 2016, p. 100). I remember being provoked by his story and the influential dynamic of the urban environment on his own self-understandings. My understandings, as a Michif, woman have been situated in relation to the city of Calgary where I have grown up. I have had the opportunity to travel nationally and internationally, but I always return to Calgary, to Mohkinstsis (Blackfoot word for Calgary meaning elbow), as the primary environment for living out the knowledge acquired. Thinking of my own experiences in relation to the discussion I had with Art, I speculated other Métis might also claim this dynamic as influential in forming their identity, especially with large populations of Métis residing in cities (Government of Canada, 2015). I believe experiences with urban environments gives rise to unique identity formations and contribute to the diversity of Métis self-understandings. The formation of self-understandings through relationships and experiences in the urban milieu are needed in Métis studies as to have a fulsome repertoire of Métis cultural ethos.

Evident in my master’s thesis (Bouvier, 2016), the environments that we dwell within impact and shape who we are making the urban environment a key factor in Métis identity formation. Upon completing the masters research, I was left with a broad and lingering question: In what ways do Métis individuals, in urban-born-raised generations, practice their Métis identity? As many Métis living and interacting with the dynamism of an urban system, our self-understandings are constantly becoming and being (re)newed in the process. For my doctoral inquiry, I was curious to explore and understand how other Métis individuals are moving with and through the city, and how their navigations are creating a sense of self and community. This literature review undertakes a preliminary examination of scholarship pertaining to Indigenous urban identity within a North American context and will move from broad understandings to hone in on the discourses that directly relate to Métis urban experiences and how the city is implicated in the process of becoming Métis. Because the scholarship discussed here spans over time and across the Canada and U.S. border, the terms used to represent Indigenous people is remains with the context of how the author presented them in their work. You will experience varying terminology but I will use the term Indigenous or that which is specific to the nation to which one belongs.

Indigenous identity in the city        

The study of Indigenous experiences in urban environments is new to the discursive landscape of Indigenous studies; however, the topic is slowly gaining traction. Since the Royal Commission on Aboriginal peoples was released in 1996, and more specifically, the Aboriginal peoples in urban centres: report of the national round table on Aboriginal urban issues (Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, 1993) research and scholarship in this area has significantly increased. Research however, has focused primarily on the movement of Indigenous people to the cities, and more specifically, on the processes individuals endure while trying to adjust to city life (see for e.g., Newhouse, 2000; and Peters, 2011). Evelyn Peters (2011) stresses to her readers that “while there is a growing amount of material available about Aboriginal experiences and histories generally, there is very little public knowledge about how Aboriginal people define their cultural identities in cities” (p. 80) and further how their identities are formed. Over the last five years the attention to scholarship in this area has increased; however, limited understandings remain in the literature. A need for research, aimed at a fuller understanding of Indigenous urban experiences and how people define themselves within a city context is certainly needed to expand the literary field in the area of Indigenous identity formation and experiences. Moreover, as shown below, there is a profound lack of scholarship in this area pertaining to Métis experiences.

Distinct identity and experience

Scholarships assert that specific Indigenous identities are formed within an urban environment (Andersen, 2013; Lobo, 2001; Straus and Valentino, 2001; Newhouse, 2011). Through her extensive applied work, research, and personal engagement in the San Francisco Bay area American Indian community, Susan Lobo (2001) began to ask a fundamental question, “is urban a place or a person?” (p. 73). Her work determines that urban is indeed a place and not a personal attribute; that is, the city “doesn’t determine self-identity, yet the urban area and urban experiences are contexts that contribute to defining identity” (p. 73). The urban Indigenous community, according to Lobo (2001), does not exist within the static and bounded proximity of reservation borders, “but rather exists within a fluidly defined region with niches of resources and boundaries that respond to needs and activities, perhaps reflecting a reality closer to that of Native homelands prior to the imposition of reservation borders” (p. 76). With respect to identity, Lobo (2001) outlines various factors that contribute to identity formation. She asserts some individuals who arrive in the city already have cultural and kinship relationships which inform how they relate to the city. For others, the city becomes a place where they can re-connect with their heritage and the urban Indigenous community to begin a process of identity formation. Furthermore, she stresses that Indigenous identity in an urban environment is complex, fluid, and negotiable. Lobo (2001) determines Indigenous identity in the urban environment in this way:

1)    Ancestry: Does a person have Indian relatives and ancestors, and function as a member of an Indian extended family?

2)    Appearance: Does a person look “Indian”?

3)    Cultural knowledge: Is the person knowledgeable of the culture of their people and those pan-Indian values and social expectations shared within the urban Indian community?

4)    Indian community participation: Does the person “come out” for Indian events and activities in the Indian community and contribute to the community well-being?

She stresses that these four criteria can be applied situationally and are persistently under assessment by the community. Moreover, Lobo (2001) addresses the aspect of appearance, indicating that there are Indian people that do not have brown skin, yet they meet all the other criteria. As indicated, identity formation in an urban environment is a self-determined process, influenced by the dynamic relationship with the urban community. Lastly, Lobo (2001) warns us that the concepts of community and identity are not as straightforward or unilateral as they seem.

According to Métis scholar, Chris Andersen (2013) “identity as being, essence, or sameness offers a sense of community and a point of solidarity, while offering the dignity of historical grounding. Conversely, identity as the process of becoming acknowledges the discontinuities and fragmentations marking our colonial experiences” (p. 49). Moreover, he stresses that urban Indigeneity is a distinctive identity, and although Indigenous people are living within city communities that resemble their homes beyond the city limits, they are not determined by them (Andersen, 2013). Through his work, Andersen (2013) distinguishes twelve characteristics that contribute to distinct urban Indigenous identity:

economic marginalization, growing professional/middle class, racism/social exclusion, cultural diversity, legal diversity, status blindness, urban Aboriginal institutions, distinctiveness of urban Aboriginal policy ethos, the character of informal networks, attachment to non-Urban communities, and struggles over the political representation of urban Aboriginals, place(s) of Aboriginal women in urban Aboriginal social relations. (p. 51-62)

Andersen (2013) states that this is not an exhaustive list, but does provide a point of reference when conceptualizing distinct Indigenous urban identities. Utilizing this list as a reference point is beneficial to assessing characteristics, but I think caution is needed when scholarship restricts narratives to attributes that frame the urban experience as consisting solely of struggle and plight.

Onondaga scholar David Newhouse (2011) affirms that, “urban has become a distinct framework or perspective through which one sees and experiences the world” (p. 36). Further, Newhouse (2011) does not make any concessions for his urban identity:

at no time did I feel less “Indian” or “Aboriginal” as a result of my desire to live in the city nor did I feel that I had lost something by my move. In fact, I felt that I had gained something….The city has become an essential part of me. I would be lost without it. (p. 24)

He advocates for the discourse to encapsulate positive urban experiences, keeping in mind that not all Indigenous people have a desire to live in the city, nor that all Indigenous people have had positive experiences living or visiting urban centers. He articulates an important aspect of Aboriginal experience and identity formation in the city:

Every day we negotiate the boundaries of our culture and accept what we like, that makes life easier, or reject what doesn’t fit or we don’t understand or doesn’t make sense. As urban Aboriginal residents, we are engaging in a practice that our ancestors have always done: we adapt to the world we find ourselves in. (Newhouse, 2011, p. 31)

All the aforementioned authors have illustrated that there is a specific identity that is formed within urban spaces and places. Straus and Valentino (2001) affirm this notion, “urban is not a kind of Indian. It is a kind of experience, one that most Indian people today have” (p. 86). Through these experiences, a distinct identity is formed and affirmed in relation to city environments.

Rural and Urban Dichotomy

Moving from rural communities to the city was a prevalent topic in the literature. The scholarship frequently addressed the movement of individuals between cities and reserves while paying minimal, if any, attention to those individuals that are not from reserve communities and have either moved from other communities outside of the city or are born and raised within it. Through their research with Inuit individuals living in Ottawa, Patrick and Budach (2014) decipher the notion of mobility as “a multidirectional one, involving movement between Arctic communities, between these communities and southern Canadian cities and other destinations” (p. 247). Furthermore, they articulate that mobility dismantles the urban and rural dichotomy, thus shedding “light on this kind of mobility or the linguistic and cultural intertwining of the ‘urban’ and the ‘rural’” (Patrick & Budach, 2014).

Chris Andersen (2013) affirms the value of dismantling the dichotomy between urban and rural by advising that “Separating urban and non-urban geographical and social spaces often misses on points of what it means to be Aboriginal in a contemporary context” (p. 60). He argues that identity is not static, irregular, or separated from history, but can be envisioned within “new boundaries and homelands over time and space” (p. 49). Moreover, Newhouse (2011) states that, “The idea of community is a powerful one, consistent with the ideas of relatedness and connection taught in traditional teachings. Even as we moved to cities, we used ideas from our own cultures to structure the environment” (p. 33). For Anishinaabe scholar Jean-Paul Restoule (2008), this was evident among the male participants he interviewed for his doctoral research. He indicated that most of the men, all of which lived in the city for most of their lives, were influenced by the teachings of their relatives that were not within the city.  This speaks to the fact that when Indigenous people do move to the city, they do not leave their identity at the city limits, “Crossing the city limits does not transform Aboriginal people into non-Aboriginal people; they go on being the particular kind of person they have always been - Cree, Dene, Mohawk, Haida” (Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, 1996, p. 3)

Cities as exclusionary

In the literature, cities are observed as spaces that are inherently exclusionary to Indigenous people (Bang, et al., 2014; Lobo, 2001; Peters & Lafond, 2013; Peters, et al., 2014; Peters, 1996, 2011; Proulx, 2006). Based on her literature analysis on the compatibility between urban and rural Indigeneity, Evelyn Peters (1996) illustrates the persisting assumption that Indigenous people, upon moving to the city, adapt to the environment to such a degree that they are no longer Indigenous. This bias presumes that cities are a place where Indigenous culture and traditions do not exist, therefore, Indigenous people become less Indigenous when they live in the city.  Furthermore, the urban space is viewed as a place that requires Indigenous people to relinquish their cultural identities to thrive (Peters, 1996).

For the urban Indigenous community that Lobo (2001) worked with, the perception of and relations to place is vital as the participants defined themselves in relationship to the urban environment. The conceptualization of self in relation to the city is wrought with challenges especially when the non-Indigenous community view them as not belonging with the cityscape. Lobo (2001) indicates that other non-Indigenous urban residents assume that the Indigenous urban community is seemingly invisible because they do not fit the stereotypes of the vanishing Indian or that individuals exist solely on reserves. This becomes problematic as it situates identity within an essentialist framework, thus disallowing for the evolution of culture and the demystifying of stereotypical racist notions of Indigeneity.

Bonita Lawrence (2004) conducted a research project on urban identities while trying to gain a more fulsome understanding of “how mixed-blood urban Native people understand and negotiate their own identities in relation to community and how external definitions and controls of Indianness have impacted their identities” (p. 1). The focus of her research included participants that are of mixed ancestry, which includes non-status Indians that have either been disenfranchised or have been disconnected from their community through colonization. Lawrence (2004) warns the reader that it is not worthwhile to use a static lens when understanding identity because it neglects the fluidity, malleability, and transformational capacity of identity formation.

Through his extensive review of scholarship on the identity construction through Indigenous experience in North American cities Métis scholar Craig Proulx (2006) stresses the profound role of racist ideologies on identity formation. Proulx (2006) states, “The process and consequences of the non-Aboriginal power to define still negatively effects the process of Aboriginal identification for both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal peoples in cities” (p. 412). As Aboriginal people encounter racist discourse by non-Aboriginal residents, they internalize those messages which impacts their identity formation. Moreover, as Proulx (2006) points out, if Aboriginal people are visible in the city, they are assumed to be assimilated into mainstream culture and are potentially deemed as no longer Aboriginal.

Cities as Indigenous places

Scholars (Andersen, 2014; Laliberte, 2013; Lobo, 2001; Newhouse, 2011), stress that to understand identity formation within and in relation to cities we must demystify the assumption that Indigenous people and urban environments are incongruent. Their research has revealed that there is a natural ability for Indigenous peoples to adapt to new environments while still carrying and living out their cultural identities and ways of knowing (Andersen, 2014; Bang, et al., 2014; Laliberte, 2013; Lobo, 2001; Newhouse, 2011; Peters, Maaka, & Laliberte, 2014). As seen through the land-based education research of Bang, et al. (2014), the settler-colonial agenda of seemingly eliminating Indigenous people from land frames cities as not Indigenous places therefore, cities cannot be seen as such when teaching children within urban spaces. Bang et al. (2014) situate their research in this way, “a critical dimension of the [research of land-based education] was making visible the impacts of settler colonial constructions of urban lands as ceded and no longer Indigenous and concomitant views of naturalized settler futures” (p. 39). Moreover, the authors affirm, “re-remembering to ‘see’ Chicago as Indigenous lands enabled the development of urban land-based pedagogies” (p. 49) thus prompting a reclamation of land and identity formation based on the already established presence of Indigenous people. Seeing cities as Indigenous lands can dismantle the troupe that Indigenous ways of knowing, being, and doing are incongruent and excluded from the urban environment.

Specific to the place where my inquiry takes place, Whittle and Patterson (2014), stress the important “aspects of the urban Blackfoot experience in Albertan cities as reflected through Blackfoot oral traditions” (p. 98). They assert that the role of oral traditions in the continual shaping of Blackfoot identity and the interpretation of Napi stories in coming to understand life in the city is crucial in understanding the conceptualization of city experiences (Whittles & Patterson, 2014). When thinking about the urbanized areas of Alberta, they claim it is important that, “Siksikaitsitapi transponsive narratives not only claim the city as an Aboriginal place, they reclaim it. They do not create but rather recreate urban spaces as Siksikaitsitapi spaces – as they were originally” (Whittles & Patterson, p. 105). Layering stories of both historical and contemporary nature are quintessential for urbanites to see cities as Indigenous and to understand that Indigeneity needs the past to become in the present.

Cities are interactive environments that yield understandings of ourselves as being in dynamic relationships. Within the urban milieu, Indigenous individuals and families rely on Indigenous organizations for social, economic, medical, and cultural services:

First Nations residents were also able to appropriate some urban spaces in ways that were supportive of their cultures and identities. Aboriginal-run organizations and businesses provided comfortable environments, allowed workers to participate in cultural events, and were seen as communicating a positive message about belonging to the larger urban populations. (Peters & Lafond, 2013, p. 107)

Moreover, individuals and families also depend on their social networks in the cities for support, assistance, and connections in the city  (Laliberte, 2013; Lobo, 2001; Peters & Lafond, 2013; Peters, et al., 2014).

Pan-Indianism

Cities are places where the diversity of Indigeneity co-exists; some may be living far away from their home communities and cultures and others just a short drive away. Individuals often participate in cultural activities that are not from their specific community signalling a potential ethos of a ‘pan-Indian’ identity within cities (Andersen, 2013; Johnson, 2013; Lobo, 2001; Peters & Lafond, 2013; Peters, el al., 2014; Restoule, 2008; Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, 1995). Pan-Indianism suggests that the diversity of Indigenous peoples collapses into one homogenous group where everyone practices the same cultural activities and represents the same understandings. For example, the medicine wheel has become a widely known symbol with teachings associated however, the medicine wheel is very specific to certain communities and even within communities, teachings may differ. Participating in cultural activities can promote relationships in the city, but it can also promote an ungrounded perspective wherein individuals adopt many practices without knowing the lineage of those activities. If one is mindful of this, participating in other nations’ cultural activities does not hinder individuals’ identity formation or renewal but creates a practice enabling individuals to come together and form a shared sense of kinship with others in the city while not succumbing to ‘pan-Indianism’. Peters and Lafond’s (2013) participants found purpose in the shared cultural activities by way of participating in each other’s ceremonies and practices creating a shared cultural space while “accommodating different traditional practices and adapting them to the urban milieu” (p. 101). In this regard, Jay Johnson (2013) identified the importance of powwow in urban environments, “the powwow plays a crucial role for some urban Native communities in providing a widely accepted pan-tribal ceremony in which to gather” (p. 224). Moreover, Johnson (2013) claims that, “By embracing the pan-tribal nature of the powwow, urban Natives are able to become integrated into a movement that not only serves to aid in identity production and/or preservation but also serves to create temporary bounded Native places” (p. 226). Having access to ceremonies and cultural knowledge in the city is important for self-determination and the ability to affirm one’s Indigeneity.

Although some people may access ceremonies through connections in the city, individuals seeking community-based teachings will often return to their home communities to participate in ceremonies or teachings (Laliberte, 2013; Peters, et al.,, 2014; Wilson and Peters, 2005). As noted in the research conducted by Wilson and Peters (2005), “respondent interviews showed that, although Anishinabek can create individual ceremonial spaces for themselves within urban environments, their home reserves and tribal territory remain important for their cultural identities” (p. 405). The challenge however, is for some individuals home is a far away from their city of residence thus making the trip home possible only on occasion. Nonetheless, such individuals are creating spaces within the city to participate in their spiritual practices (Wilson and Peters, 2005).

Métis in the city

Over the last twenty-five years, the literature on Métis peoplehood and history has developed significantly, thus allowing a more fulsome and truthful conceptualization and understanding of Métis scholarship (Adese, 2014; Andersen, 2014; Bouvier, 2016; Iseke, 2010; Legare, 1996; Manitoba Métis Federation Inc., 1997; Poitras Pratt, 2011; Richardson, 2006, Teillet, 2020). My aim here is to not re-explore the literature on Métis experiences from a general point of view, but rather to hone in on Métis experience within urban contexts. Specific to my inquiry, I analyzed the literature for sources that specifically reference Métis experiences of urban born and raised generations.

Métis experience within urban contexts

In 1995, out of a need to gather together and share experiences in an urban environment, a group of Métis women in Ontario formed a women’s circle that focused on uncovering and renewing cultural knowledge (LeClair, et al., 2003). The identity of the women in the group was convoluted as some individuals identified with the political organization - Métis Nation of Ontario - while others knew they had Indigenous heritage but were not connected to their history or community. For membership to the women’s circle they adhered to “three conditions of defining the Métis put forward by RCAP: mixed Aboriginal ancestry, self-declaration as Métis and community acceptance” (LeClair et al., 2003, p. 59). The work of the circle included researching both individual and collective histories, while using narratives to understand their contemporary contexts. Métis scholar, Carole LeClair et al., (2003) emphasize the need to, “refute the notion that we are alive only in history books or ancient records. We are still here, still living on our land, albeit in very different circumstances” (p. 57). As part of reclaiming their identity, the women created the Métis Midwife’s Medicine Planting Project which employed accessing land to learn, plant, and harvest traditional plants while learning and practicing midwifery. The women in the project

believe that this unique approach of blending the physical work of tending to a garden with intellectual work in researching plant medicines and birthing culture will make significant contributions to women’s self-development and to the health and well-being of Métis women and their families generally. (LeClair et al., 2003, p. 64)

The article did not indicate if the women grew up solely in an urban environment but only that they were all living in the city at the time of the research. Nonetheless, this literature reveals how it is possible for women to take up practices that are reviving and reaffirming their identity in the urban environment.

Métis historian Cheryl Troupe’s (2009) thesis examined “the social, economic and political role of women in 19th century Métis families and communities, and to determine the extent these traditional roles were expressed in post-1930 urban development and political organization” (p. ii). Her research did not target individuals or families that were urban-raised however, it did include those who had moved to the city. Her research indicated the important role of traditional women’s kinship systems for political and activist agendas in the urban context of Saskatoon and more specifically, in the adaptation to an urban environment (Troupe, 2009).

Métis professor Ronald Laliberte’s (2013) study in Saskatoon specifically addressed Métis urban identity. His research revealed the limitation of the scholarly literature, “despite the high percentage of Canada’s Métis population residing in cities, there is almost no literature that discusses urban Métis identities” (p. 111). His findings indicate that Métis identity within the urban landscape is influenced by historical, communal, familial and kinship relationships, mixed ancestry heritage, and parental teachings. Moreover, he affirms that it is through accessing local Aboriginal organizations, attending community gatherings that celebrate fiddle music, jigging and language that Métis identity is formed in the urban locale of Saskatoon (Laliberte, 2013). Laliberte (2013) states that, “urban Métis identity is evolving as Métis people adapt and change to the realities of their urban experiences and existences” (p. 129).

The limited sources found through my review indicate that as Métis people continue to be born and raised in urban environments, it is increasingly important that research be conducted by Métis people in the city to better understand the phenomenon of urban experienced Métis identity.

Conclusion

Scholars have provided evidence that there is a distinct Indigenous identity that is held and expressed within urban locales. Processes of reclaiming and re-inscribing cities as Indigenous spaces conducive of practices and traditions that honour Indigenous ways of knowing are occurring. Creating Indigenous spaces in the city does not address the challenges that Indigenous people endure in the city via racism and colonial discursive practices but it appears that there are possibilities that allow for individuals to find solace in individual and communal networks. Peters (2011) stresses that “better information about the nature of contemporary urban Aboriginal identities is an essential facet of understanding how contemporary cities with increasingly large Aboriginal populations work economically and socially” (p. 80). Furthermore, she states that “work on urban Métis and Inuit is under-represented. There are important cultural differences between different Aboriginal peoples, and they have experienced different histories” (Peters, 2011, p. 96) which would create a more comprehensive and nuanced picture of urban experiences.

As demonstrated by this short literary review, Métis urban experiences are extremely under-represented in the scholarly literature. The very limited research pertaining to this area of scholarship is timely, relevant, and imperative as a broader and deeper understanding of Métis identity and identity formation and expression is needed. Evidently, the absence of Métis perspectives, nuanced notions of Métis identity, and identity construction must be addressed for Métis people to live and thrive in cities across Canada.  Moreover, as literature in Métis studies, specific to urban experiences is generated, society in general will have the opportunity to understand Métis people through Métis scholarship thus kindling the building of mutually respectful beneficial relationships.