Intergenerational Trauma In Eden Robinson's Queen Of The North

Green argues that the prevalence of violence within Aboriginal women is an example of the residual effects of colonization, where “low valuation of women and women’s work has been laid over Aboriginal values” (Green 333). The violence experienced by Adelaine highlights the effects of colonial attitudes towards Aboriginal woman. The active questioning of this cycle of violence, and eventually her speaking out against it, is textual proof of Adelaine’s ability to fight back against colonial attitudes.
Paragraph: Beyond the “Talking Cure”: The Practical Joke as Testimony for Intergenerational Trauma in Eden Robinson’s “Queen of the North”
Certain literary critics question whether narrating traumatic events serve to transform pathogenic memories

into accessible speech acts that generate relief in those suffering from the intergenerational effects of colonial violence. Some state that the “talking cure,” coined by psychoanalysts Freud and Breuer, demand syntax in which some sense inequitable with the past. There is an absence of this kind of “talking cure” in the short story; as such, Adelaine utilizes an alternative outlet for her traumatic events. This is the argument in Vikki Visvis’ essay, "Beyond the ‘Talking Cure’: The Practical Joke as Testimony for Intergenerational Trauma in Eden Robinson’s ‘Queen of the North.’" Visvis analyzes Adelaine’s use of joking to communicate, and to resist, being sexually abused by her Uncle Josh. Visvis articulates on the question of whether it is reasonable to consider this kind of joking in the story as part of an Aboriginal tradition of communication. She argues against the reading of “Queen of the North” as culturally aboriginal. She argues that the problem of focusing on the “Nativeness” aspect of the story is that Robinson’s writing is influenced by non-Aboriginal society and literature. In her study, Visvis draws a striking parallel between Adelaine’s actions and the protagonist in James Reaney short story. Visvis writes these kinds of influences "disallow a definitively ‘Aboriginal’ understanding of the joke" (Visvis 53). She goes on to situate herself within the "hybridity" approach to Aboriginal literary studies. Moreover, she argues that Robinson depicts Aboriginal culture as "ambivalent" and "ambiguous" (Visvis 53): "The text situates Robinson’s culture at the intersection between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal societies" (Visvis 53).
Her argument points to a broader issue in the study of Aboriginal literature: what role should aboriginal theory have in reading aboriginal literature, considering the heavy influences of colonizing society on aboriginal expression? In her work, “Queen of the North,” Robinson depicts the Haisla culture as interacting with other cultures and her writing indicates a mixed influence on her part. Her writing can be argued as a “hybrid” approach to aboriginal literature. This approach provides an alternative to the dichotomous, binary writing that defines aboriginal peoples as either “traditional” and “pure” or “assimilated.” Subsequently, this approach celebrates the hybridity of cultures to blend and morph, but the problem lies within the reduction of the indigenous identity. Visvis points to Craig Womack, who has explained this process through the “deficit theory” of Aboriginal Culture where “non-Aboriginal influence is seen as constituting a deficit in the Nativeness of the person or text (Womack 608).
Visvis theorizes about the violence that underlines the character’s lives, she states that without proper knowledge of this context, both literary and historical, the novel risks universalizing violence. Visvis writes that Robinson’s work
Encourages the reader to approach the traumatic event in light of historical circumstances
specific to Native culture, and [also] disallows a culturally specific
understanding of traumatic symptoms and cures by promoting, to some degree,
accepted Western perspectives. It is a conflicted cultural stance. . . . (Visvis 47)
Visvis is concerned with the methods of treating violence, while Robinsons is neither right nor wrong for adopting the strategy of simultaneously avoiding while evoking what may be deemed as a more “authentic” representation of aboriginal theory writing. The problem arises when Robinson is seen as an acting representative of her community. Visvis states that Robinson “runs the risk of being criticized for failing to portray her character’s as not being Haisla enough.” This statements about the novel can be reversed, and read as a threat to Aboriginal ways of living in the following context: Rob Appleford suggests that “Robinson recognizes . . . that a hermetic, authentic Aboriginal selfhood is unattainable” (Appleford 96). Hoy also sheds light on this problem in stating that: “As long as race remains anything but neutral and as long as the ‘neutral’ reception of racially unmarked texts can casually subsume diverse narratives and characters under a white or Western rubric, both naming and not naming the racial context of Traplines contain pitfalls” (Hoy 170).
Paragraph: Weesageechak Meets the Weetigo:
Storytelling, Humour, and Trauma in the Fiction of Richard Van Camp, Tomson Highway, and Eden Robinson
Other authors have argued that using Aboriginal theory is problematic because it focuses on notions of Aboriginal traditions, identity, and culture that are not realistic in the hybrid that exists. An example of this, when Adelaine finds a photo of Josh as a boy with a residential-school priest she realizes that her uncle was molested be the priest, Father Archibald. The next time her uncle arrives at her bedroom door, she says, "Father Archibald? ... I’ve said my prayers" (Robinson 212). Reminded of his past, Uncle Josh retreats and Adelaine uses the cycle of abuse, with a twist of irony and humour, as an act of resistance.
Kristina Fagan notes that Adelaine’s desire to speak on her abuse can be seen as “being in tension with her culturally informed desire to maintain her relationships and her community,” as such; Adelaine tries to deal with this dilemma “through the indirect communication of the joke” (Fagan).

Jimmy, her boyfriend, is deeply connected to his family and community and he declares in the novel that he would "never leave the village" (Robinson 153). This representation can be seen as a kind of connectedness that Adelaine longs and does not want to lose. Moreover, she does not want to stay in Vancouver, where she is safe from her uncle’s abuse, she does not want to be away from her boyfriend and home, but neither does she want to stay in a situation where her own mother can not defend and protect her: "I knew that she knew. I thought she’d say something then, but we ate breakfast in silence" (Robinson 154). Fagan states that Adelaine is able to utilize humour as a means to communicate without directly speaking about her abuse and manipulate an impossible

situation.
Her move to Vancouver signifies her growing ability to determine her own life but she never explicitly tells the reader that she is going to Vancouver for an abortion.

The reader comprehends this from learning her symptoms of nausea and heavy vaginal bleeding, When she reaches her aunt’s house, the reception that she receives is very different from the cold, void interactions between herself and her mother. “She [Aunt Erma] stared at me, puzzled. Then she spread opens her arms. ‘Adelaine, baby! I wasn’t expecting you! Hey, come on in and say hi to your cousins. Pepsi! Cola! Look who came by for your birthday!’ She gave me a tight bear hug and I wanted to cry” (Robinson 202). The aunt welcomes Adelaine with open arms representative of a warm familial bond and this physical demonstration of love almost brings Adelaine to tears. Her decision to stay at her aunts forms as a recovery period and serves as an opportunity for her to experience a positive family dynamic. Her aunt and cousins genuine caring demeanor towards Adelaine is a striking contrast to her relationship with her family at home. In this process, she works towards a stronger sense of self, moving closers to breaking her

silence.
Adelaine’s interaction with her boyfriend, Jimmy, is indicative of her inability to vocalize her pain. When Jimmy and Adelaine lay together in a field, she has the perfect opportunity to tell Jimmy about the sexual abuse she has experienced at the hands of her uncle. Adelaine states that she is unable to tell him: “I almost told him then. I wanted to tell him. I wanted someone else to know and not have it locked inside me. I kept starting and then chickening out. What was the point? He’d probably pull away from me in horror, disgusted, revolted” (Robinson 200). Fagan stresses the repetition of “What was the point?” appears in both her exchange with Ronny and Jimmy. It seems that Adelaine perceives sharing her pain with others as futile. Her decision to remain silent is in part formed by her own mother’s silence. This is apparent later in the text when Adelaine’s mother has been aware of the abuse but fails to do something to stop it. The effect of colonization and patriarchy on aboriginal women is illustrated through the silence of the women about the transgression men male. Therefore, Adelaine’s ability to vocalize her pain is diminished.
When read through a Aboriginal theory lens, the story reveals the ways in which colonial attitudes and practices of the past have produced many of problems facing Aboriginal communities in Canada today. These effects are evident throughout most of the narrative, as Adelaine cannot vocalize the pain that she experiences because of her uncle’s continuing sexual abuse. However, once Adelaine overcomes her silence, she is able to refigure her self-identity and find the strength to determine her own life. This final short story best illustrates a character’s ability to progress from speechlessness to a recovery of voice.
This experience of the effects of the colonial notions of patriarchy that transformed the Aboriginal community can be better understood through Greg Young-Ing’s discussion of “Inherited History, International Law, and the UN Declaration.” Young-Ing’s analyzes the “blood memory” and how the experiences of those in the past have embedded themselves in the experience of the physical and psychological realities of the present. Young-Ing recounts a memory of presenting at the Banff Centre for the Arts Publishing Workshop.
I stood up to introduce my book to the booksellers and book sales agents at the pretend book fair—who were actually real publishers, booksellers, and book sales agents and some were of the best in the business—and started to tell them about how “it is time for a book about this dark chapter in Canadian history to be published.” As I continued, trying to impress my high-profile audience, my voice began to crack, and then I was suddenly overcome with tears. I backed away for a few moments to regain my composure. I tried to continue my presentation, but the tears flowed even harder. I tried again, but I just could not do it. In the end, I had to walk away thinking to myself “what is this I just experienced?” (Young-Ing)
Young-Ing articulates on the pain that was channeled through him, this “blood money” symbolizes the experience of his ancestors before him and the effects of the residential school embedded in his physical and psychological being. He says that’s future generations and present generation are in a transitional zone where they carry the responsibilities of honoring their ancestor’ legacy while “safeguarding the rights and well-being of future
generations. Furthermore, he states that this blood memory state is not exclusive to Indigenous people, and for the grand concept of reconciliation to work, Canadians “need to inherit the history of those that have gone before them if they are to forge a better path into the future” (Young-Ing)
Conclusion:
In the end, Adelaine is able to reclaim her power by breaking her silence. She is able to question her situation, and engage in active resistance to fight back against those who are trying to determine their lives. She is able to refigure her identity and untangle herself from the ‘traplines’ enforced on her by the transgressions of her Uncle Josh, the diminishing effects of her mother’s silence, and the gift-giving process utilized to keep her quiet and complacent. Breaking away from the silence enables her to push for a more positive future. I believe that she is most successful at learning to determine her own live by narratives end and breaking away from her oppressor compared to the other characters of Traplines. This essay has focused primarily on Adelaine’s journey of self-identity as she moves from a powerless position of silent resignation to a powerful vocal recrimination of her uncle’s actions. Adelaine is able to “come out of the bushes and stand on the dock” (215), stepping out of her metaphoric shadows and into a space where she has the power to express her true experience, albeit through the utilization of humour.