New Vancouver Art Gallery | Proposed

[Klazu]

Originally Posted by FarmerHaight

All of Canada is built on traditional lands of various indigenous tribes; land that was taken through force, coercion, or deceptive negotiations. The least we can do is give them a voice in how we treat that land.

Indigenous tribes have centuries of knowledge about the natural world including forest and wildlife management, and also have oral traditions that have preserved history long forgotten or never known by non-indigenous peoples.

That's some sweet job in almost hitting all the words on the bingo card.

Back in reality, I have yet to drive through a reservate that shows deep caring for the land and nature. All I see is rusting backyard junkyards and landscape that has been largely exploited for its resources. It truly makes me sad.

I am also of the mindset that animals are the true owners of this sacred land and have been here tens of thousands of years before any humans step their foot in here and started harvesting the mighty forests of yore for their needs. In my mind we should consult animals like the Stanley Park coyotes on the use of our land and much of Metro Vancouver should be made a nature reserve never to be changed again.

Originally Posted by FarmerHaight

I would think we would find the perspective of someone whose ancestors lived in harmony with nature for centuries valuable when designing the seawall or constructing buildings that are supposed to tell the history of our region.

I wholeheartedly agree and will be seeking such spiritual insight into whether I should serve pork or chicken at the BBQ this summer in the Central Park.

[Marshal]

That's some sophisticated thinking - a point of view that is surely original. I will not engage with Klazu until, like first nation's tidy up their yards, he shows he can change. Is it too much to ask of such a smart guy that he learn English enough to write it properly? What's a "reservate?"

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by Klazu

Back in reality, I have yet to drive through a reservate that shows deep caring for the land and nature. All I see is rusting backyard junkyards and landscape that has been largely exploited for its resources. It truly makes me sad.

I am sure the number of reserves you have driven through are a representative sample of the 3,100 First Nation reserves. And I am sure you had plenty of time to stop and and learn from indigenous peoples when you drove through. Or are you simply stereotyping based on appearances?

[dreambrother808]

Originally Posted by FarmerHaight

I am sure the number of reserves you have driven through are a representative sample of the 3,100 First Nation reserves. And I am sure you had plenty of time to stop and and learn from indigenous peoples when you drove through. Or are you simply stereotyping based on appearances?

Perhaps he's just a metsäläinen, himself.

[trofirhen]

metsäläinen .... That's Finnish for "forest man."

[Vin]

Originally Posted by FarmerHaight

That's the whole point: it isn't supposed to be special. Indigenous consultations acknowledge two things:

1. All of Canada is built on traditional lands of various indigenous tribes; land that was taken through force, coercion, or deceptive negotiations. The least we can do is give them a voice in how we treat that land.
2. Indigenous tribes have centuries of knowledge about the natural world including forest and wildlife management, and also have oral traditions that have preserved history long forgotten or never known by non-indigenous peoples.

Now whether many of these consultations are simply virtue signaling is debatable, but I would think we would find the perspective of someone whose ancestors lived in harmony with nature for centuries valuable when designing the seawall or constructing buildings that are supposed to tell the history of our region.

Are you saying that the first person who crossed over from Siberia to Alaska via the Berring Straits owned all of America even though he may be settling around Anchorage and had never been anywhere else? That is obscene entitlement. Throughout the ages, even stronger native tribes took land by force from other weaker tribes after wars were fought, and I'm sure they would not like to be reminded of that lands were constantly being "stolen".

Your statement that "all of Canada is built on traditional lands of various indigenous tribes; land that was taken through force, coercion, or deceptive negotiations" is therefore highly inaccurate and flawed. Lots of settled native lands were subjected to unfair takeovers, but there were also large tracts of uninhabited lands which were never settled by anyone. Having travelled through or hunted in the areas does not necessarily mean past tribes can stake total claims to those lands today.

Hence my correction: All of Canada is built on land of Earth dwellers, and we should all be sharing public land with every resident of this country. Ownership is subject to the just laws of the day and ownership is granted by a person's ability to earn his or her keep. Anything that sways from this is just nothing but gross entitlement.

Just like you mentioned, virtue signalling should have its limits.

[Marshal]

Originally Posted by Vin

Are you saying that the first person . . .

Let's assume you are correct. You are missing the point. Atonement: lets just say that this is the core of reconciliation. Regardless of their past doings, we have been abusing the indigenous peoples of Canada for hundreds of years. Your point of view needs to be delayed until we fix our cultural misbehaviour. (potable water anyone) The push for native names and art is just symbolic of the times. Get over it. We all will given some time. Surely we can be generous for a decade while we make repairs for many decades of horrible behaviour. After WW2 the Japanese and Germans fared better under us than people who we share our own country with.

[FarmerHaight]

If someone thinks the Indigenous shouldn't be consulted on projects, I really don't think it's worth getting your — in a wad. These consultations are not that expensive and may make a minority group feel valued. From a cost-benefit perspective, there really is no reason not to conduct a performative consultation. Now, if your issue is that these consultations start at lip service and don't go much further, that is a valid concern.

The issue of Indigenous claim over traditional lands is a complicated one, as Vin describes. History is written by the victors, and for much of human history the strong had the right to conquer the weak. But as Dylan sings, the times are a-changin', and developed countries are coming to the realization that treating previously conquered and captured populations as second-class citizens presents ethical and moral dilemmas, and may not be beneficial to the economic and social resiliency of the country.

Are the Indigenous a homogenous group that enjoyed widespread peace and prosperity before Europeans came to their shores? No, but they had their own systems of commerce, made treaties with each other, educated their children, and were more than just a sparse population with some estimates of 60 million people living in the Americas before colonization. The Europeans came and disrupted that way of life, often through lop-sided agreements that the Indigenous did not understand or which Europeans disregarded when they no longer benefitted them.

Democracy and capitalism and industrialization and other European imports have served North America well. They made the USA an economic powerhouse and put Canada in the G7 despite our miniscule population. However, these benefits have not benefitted everyone equally. Minorities have long been shut out of our hallowed western systems by being denied the right to vote or attend our loftiest educational institutions or work in the best paying industries. Canada went a step further with the Indigenous by tearing families apart and dictating where they could live (on reserves which are often built on the poorest land in a given region).

Saying that everyone is subject to the "just laws of the day" assumes those laws are just in the first place. I am not sure that anyone could argue that Chinese laws regarding the Uyghurs are just, yet Canada's systematic killing first of Indigenous people then of Indigenous culture in the last 150 years doesn't look a whole lot different from China's behaviour in the current day.

The question of how to address Indigenous issues such as a lack of education, substance abuse, intimate partner violence, etc. are complex and everyone has a different idea. Even many Indigenous don't agree (see the disagreement between elected officials and hereditary chiefs regarding old growth logging or pipelines). I would also add the disclaimer that there are many Indigenous people who have succeeded despite the obstacles we have put in their path, and that stereotypes are propagated by a very visual minority that we see on the street or in shelters. But if you are angry that an art gallery or property developer or government agency asks Indigenous for their opinions I would ask you again to check your privilege and consider whether this minor inconvenience or whatever is really too big a cross to bear.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Anyway, is the money even still coming in? $240 million is not $400 million; even Kickstarter requires 100% funding.

[Spr0ckets]

Originally Posted by Vin

Are you saying that the first person who crossed over from Siberia to Alaska via the Berring Straits owned all of America even though he may be settling around Anchorage and had never been anywhere else? That is obscene entitlement. Throughout the ages, even stronger native tribes took land by force from other weaker tribes after wars were fought, and I'm sure they would not like to be reminded of that lands were constantly being "stolen".

Your statement that "all of Canada is built on traditional lands of various indigenous tribes; land that was taken through force, coercion, or deceptive negotiations" is therefore highly inaccurate and flawed. Lots of settled native lands were subjected to unfair takeovers, but there were also large tracts of uninhabited lands which were never settled by anyone. Having travelled through or hunted in the areas does not necessarily mean past tribes can stake total claims to those lands today.

Hence my correction: All of Canada is built on land of Earth dwellers, and we should all be sharing public land with every resident of this country. Ownership is subject to the just laws of the day and ownership is granted by a person's ability to earn his or her keep. Anything that sways from this is just nothing but gross entitlement.

Just like you mentioned, virtue signalling should have its limits.

Imagine being the descendant of people who came over in ships and boats and were the beneficiaries of the atrocious treatment of the people who were already settled here, but somehow feeling the need to label THEIR ancestors - the first settlers of this land - as having.....(**checks notes**) ...."obscene entitlement",.....over their claim on land that they got to first, but didn't totally occupy or plant their flag all over.

Imagine also the galactic levels of blinding lack of self-awareness in not seeing one's own sense of entitlement in thinking you can label other people as such.


Also the argument that "well, the land we now live in was once stolen, plundered and pillaged by larger tribes from smaller tribes, therefore it should be okay for us to ignore or diminish the horrors of our own ancestors (and our own) pillaging, theft and plundering",....is almost akin to those racists who try to justify or diminish the horrors and ensuing damage of chattel slavery and the Trans-Atlantic slave trade by claiming that, well, Africans practiced slavery on each other too before Europeans got there, and in fact some of them even sold their fellow Africans as slaves to European slave traders.......as if that somehow makes it all okay.

It's the five year old child's playbook standard boilerplate "Two wrongs make a right"-type level of logic and reasoning.

Sometimes one forgets how obnoxious and odious people on this forum can be.

sheeesh.

[SpongeG]

here is something to add for First Nations within NE BC though takes it off topic but some of the land and treaty issues up there.

How a big win for a First Nation in B.C. could bring change for resource development in Canada

It was similar frustration that led to a lawsuit six years ago — and to what's been called a precedent-setting court decision that could have implications for resource development elsewhere in Canada.

This summer, a B.C. Supreme Court judgment agreed with Blueberry River's 2015 claim that years of extensive industrial development in the region violated the Treaty 8 rights of the Blueberry River First Nations.

The Court said the province failed to maintain the nation's rights to hunt, fish and trap without interference. While no single project had a devastating effect on the community, the court said the cumulative impact of a series of projects limited the nation's ability to maintain its rights.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/blueberry-legal-victory-1.6216915

See also:

Blueberry FN VS Her Majesty the Queen...
https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/1322/index.do

also:
https://www.mandellpinder.com/doig-river...ight-of-canada-2015-sctc-6-case-summary/

also:
https://watershedsentinel.ca/articles/bl...mulative-impacts-lawsuit-full-statement/

[whatnext]

Quite a long and interesting article in the Globe & Mail about Audain and the new gallery:

How a $100-million private donation put the Vancouver Art Gallery’s transformation back on track
MARSHA LEDERMAN
PUBLISHED JANUARY 28, 2022

....Gone is the dramatic entrance procedure: entering from below and having an escalator whisk guests up to the third floor. Instead, visitors will enter from busy Georgia Street into a foyer.

Also gone: an entire floor of underground storage, saving about $12-million.

The restaurant and theatre have been moved down from higher up in the building. That means for off-hour events and meals, there is no need to keep the lights on and station security throughout.

And while the original plan relied mostly on elevators and stairs, with the exception of that grand entrance, the new plan links every floor with escalators. “We don’t want it to look like a Nordstrom department store,” Kiendl says. “We found a really elegant way so it doesn’t.”...

...So why would Audain return now with this Hail Mary donation?

“I think I had to be invited, didn’t I?” he says, noting admiration for Daina Augaitis, who served as interim director after Bartels’s departure.

“When Daina was there, she invited me to come back and offer some views about the design they had and how it might be somewhat improved,” Audain says. “And I hadn’t felt invited to do that before. If indeed I made some comments or suggestions earlier, they didn’t result in any modification to the plans. As someone who has been visiting art museums regularly all my life since the age of 15, I felt I might have something to offer. And I was pleased to find that Daina and subsequently the new director, Anthony, were quite receptive to some of my views.”

When asked whether Bartels had not been receptive, Audain declined to answer directly. “That’s all in the past, so I don’t really want to go back there. So that’s all water under the bridge now.”...

....Among the institutions that have previously expressed an interest in the building is the Museum of Vancouver, which is in a much less central location in Kitsilano.

“I think it would be great for the Museum of Vancouver to be in a historical building in the centre of the city,” says Mauro Vescera, who took over as MOV’s director in 2019, and attended the Nov. 4 funding announcement. But nothing is certain. “There’s a lot of moving parts.”...

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/arts/art...donation-put-the-vancouver-art-gallerys/

I find it somewhat ironic MoV is looking to move into the very colonial courthouse from their current building which has far more First Nations-inspired design with the roof in the form of the Salish woven basket hat.

[Migrant_Coconut]

If, of course, that's what ends up happening - it could end up being an air & space museum for all we know.

[officedweller]

I hear it'll return to courthouse use.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by officedweller

I hear it'll return to courthouse use.

that is what i have heard. we are short on court rooms in Vancouver/Lower mainland.

[trofirhen]

/deleted/

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by officedweller

I hear it'll return to courthouse use.

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

that is what i have heard. we are short on court rooms in Vancouver/Lower mainland.

IMO you're both totally correct, but I would have loved a music school or something higher-profile than law courts.
It is the most elegant and beautiful building in the city at the very centre of Vancouver. It deserves to be honored with a more distinguished role than just law courts, be they as important as they are.

[s211]

Originally Posted by whatnext

And while the original plan relied mostly on elevators and stairs, with the exception of that grand entrance, the new plan links every floor with escalators. “We don’t want it to look like a Nordstrom department store,” Kiendl says.

Umm, what? Nordstrom has one set of escalators. And the art gallery wants to link every floor with escalators? And they — on Nordstrom and its escalators?

[officedweller]

I was wondering about that too - so instead of a central atrium with escalators where wayfinding is obvious, are they going to hide the escalators behind walls (like Brentwood Eaton's had), place them in seemingly random locations like the basement of the Downtown Bay or place them around the periphery to force patrons to walk a prescribed circuit?
The floorplate isn't long enough to place them all in a straight line like on the outside of the Pompidou Centre.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by s211

Umm, what? Nordstrom has one set of escalators. And the art gallery wants to link every floor with escalators? And they — on Nordstrom and its escalators?

Yes, that seemed a bit odd. The difference wasn't really explained.