Reclaiming Tom Longboat: Indigenous Self-Determination in Canadian Sport
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Janice Forsyth's Reclaiming Tom Longboat is an enlightening exploration of Canadian sport told through the lens of a national award, including a critical study of colonization through physical activity, all the while not discounting the self-determination of Indigenous peoples. As others have previously noted, Forsyth is a leader in the study of the Indigenous sport history of Canada, and this work should be the canon when discussing books on Indigenous athletics or any type of sport award.The book begins with a foreword by Willie Littlechild, a recipient of the Tom Longboat award in 1965, providing a meaningful context of what is to come in the comprehensive investigation undertaken by Forsyth. Investigation is the most appropriate term for this volume because of the great extent of research done. Forsyth not only presents the research she has done but uncovers new relationships between stakeholders, from the Canadian government to the Indigenous community.As expected, Forsyth begins with an introduction to Tom Longboat and his notable athletic success. In this introduction, she also briefly explains the establishment of the Tom Longboat awards, a recognition based on race. As she explains, “The awards were given only to athletes defined as ‘Indian’ by the federal government through the Indian Act, a powerful piece of legislation that regulates nearly every aspect of Indigenous life, from property ownership to child welfare” (9). This is just a brief taste of her analysis of the dynamics of race, gender, class, and nationhood, themes that underlie the entire book.After the introduction, Forsyth explains how Canadian authorities used sport to try to assimilate the Canadian Indigenous community before diving into chapters that cover important time periods in the Tom Longboat awards. The fifth and final chapter highlights the voices of seven Canadian athletes and Tom Longboat award recipients.Forsyth masters the ability to present the facts without inflicting blame in the chapters that cover the history and timeline of the award. At the same time, she implies the responsible forces that continually place Indigenous people in positions of despair and deficit. Self-determination is another major theme Forsyth weaves throughout that is often overlooked and misunderstood. She provides the example of paternalism by highlighting a letter by Arthur Laing, the minister in charge of Indian Affairs. Laing expressed his concern about the government relinquishing its control and responsibility of Indigenous people to the Canadian provinces, stating the progress of Indigenous people “must be the development by themselves of a desire for the goals which we think they should want” (86).This book is about much more than an award; it is about education, control, power, and politics. Forsyth is a master at highlighting the hypocrisy and idiosyncrasies within the different players—for instance, reminding the reader that the idea for an individual award is automatically misaligned with the beliefs of Indigenous people, where community is valued above the individual. It is that sense of community that has allowed so many Indigenous people to find their individual success.If there is any critique of the volume, it is that the fifth chapter, which centers on the athlete's voice, is not longer. By highlighting the award winners, not the dominant narrative, the meaning of the awards is completely transformed. While it may be expected to hear about barriers to elite athletics for Indigenous people, it is not as common to understand the intersectional dynamics that impacted so much of these athletes’ lives. Forsyth highlights the deeper meaning of race by award recipients, writing: “Each was well aware of the racial politics of skin color and how it created opportunities and tensions in their lives, privileging them in some situations while marginalizing and stigmatizing them in others” (160). Ultimately, by hearing from these athletes, we see the changing idea of sport success in their lives and the ongoing objectification and otherness they experience.Just as sport is a microcosm of society, sport awards reflect what society values. Forsyth shows that we must critically examine who administers, controls, and awards honorifics such as the Tom Longboat awards. By doing so, we can ensure these awards do more than check a box and actually promote sport for sustained success. As Willie Littlechild stated, “Sport has the power to change and save lives of Indigenous people” (x). Through this book, Forsyth expertly shows how systems of power must allow that power to be fully realized.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».