Abstract: Background: People in recovery from substance use face unique challenges that can threaten the sustainability of their progress. These issues are often compounded in rural areas, where economic and geographic barriers limit access to recovery services. Indigenous Peoples face ongoing structural inequities that further challenge sustained recovery. More information about experiences in recovery in rural Indigenous settings is needed in order to design effective programs. Methods: We conducted a qualitative Community-Based Participatory Research study with semi-structured interviews from n=24 adults in recovery from illicit substance use who self-identified as Indigenous in a rural reservation setting in the Northern Midwest United States. We asked about factors that supported their recovery, challenges faced, and what support they would like to see in their community. The interviews were thematically analyzed informed by the Indigenous Connectedness Framework (ICF). Results: People in recovery in this rural reservation setting drew strength from each of the ICF domains of connectedness: peer support networks, family, elders, and friends, facilitated by connection and reconnection with spiritual practices. Many described feeling isolated, especially if they experienced transportation barriers or their social networks used drugs. Participants identified the need for improved access to substance use-free cultural events and assistance with transportation. Conclusion: Our findings highlight the importance of social connectedness to recovery in this reservation setting, tying in with Indigenous conceptualizations of individual wellbeing as interrelated with intergenerational, family, community, spiritual, and environmental connectedness. These findings support the potential for peer-recovery support programs and expanded access to cultural practices and events.






Description: From the earliest days of its founding, the United States set its sights on Native territory. Amid better-known “Indian wars,” the federal government quietly built an empire by treaty, offering payments to Native peoples for their land. Routinely inadequate, these payments were nonetheless pivotal because federal officials chose not to deliver them as a lump sum. Instead, the government kept the bulk of payments owed to Native nations under its own control as a trustee, and made access to future installments contingent on Native compliance. In Vested Interests, Emilie Connolly describes how a system of “fiduciary colonialism” seized a continent from its original inhabitants—and, ironically, furnished Native peoples with financial resources that sustained their nations. Connolly documents two centuries of dispossession in the guise of fiduciary benevolence. Acting as both dispossessor and trustee, the federal government invested Native wealth in state bonds that financed banks, canals, and other infrastructural projects that enabled the country to expand further westward. Meanwhile, Native peoples protected the money they did receive for future generations, investing it in their own institutions and mounting legal challenges to hold their trustees accountable. Still, federal trusteeship placed tight constraints on Native economies with the aim of containing Native power, forcing nations to endure through sheer resilience and ingenuity. By chronicling the long history of Native land dispossession through financial paternalism, Vested Interests reveals the unequal dividends of colonialism in the United States.


Abstract: While concepts of remoteness have long conditioned the fabulation of alterity, remoteness is not a quality ascribable to distant places and strange peoples “out there”. No one is by nature “remote”. Building from this proposition, this article argues that a heritage of European aestheticization of the “far” north grew out of European ways of imagining the world and contributed to settler social imaginaries of remoteness. Through historical analysis of travelling accounts, colonial exhibitions, and the settler art theorical work of Francis Sparshott about the “cold and remote art” of “far” northerly Inuit peoples, the concept of an aesthetics of remoteness—modes of appreciation and taste that produce a “darkness” not inherent to the Arctic itself but projected by the settler-colonial milieu, which maintains control through the creation of distance. The study shows how Indigenous Arctic art becomes aestheticized through settler sensoria of faraway and incomprehensible forms of beauty that mask histories of colonial extraction and dispossession. The article further contextualises a close, critical reading of Sparshott into relation with the wider history of trade and colonisation, to consider how colonial markets for art objects interface with both European narration of remote peoples and European markets for art from remote parts of the world. The work ultimately argues for a reorientation that refuses this projection of an aesthetics of remoteness and proposes an ethics of recognition that confronts the colonial histories embedded in art circulation and appreciation within Canada and beyond.






Archives

stats for wordpress