Perspectives on the North
By Mary Frank Ehrlander
What criteria do we use to define
the north?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Geographic
Ecological
Climatic
Political
Demographic
Economic
Cultural
Psychological
Human perspectives vary,
depending on whether we’re
• Insiders or outsiders
• Newcomers or old-timers
• Indigenous or non
indigenous
• Here by our choice or
someone else’s
Louis-Edmond Hamelin
(Canadian Nordicity: It’s Your North Too)
Discusses the complex and conflicting
images of the north
– Differences in perceptions of northerners and
southerners (insiders v. outsiders)
– Mythical / positive images v. negative images
Says Canadians seem to be unaware of their
northernness
– After all – 90% live within 100 miles of US
border!
“The north is more than an area, it is a
passion.”
Hamelin’s Nordicity index considers 10 criteria and measures
the polar values of each to determine any location’s “nordicity.”
Hamelin’s criteria:
*latitude
*summer warmth
*annual cold
*ice
*precipitation
*vegetation
*surface accessibility
*air services
*population
*economic activity
Less than 200 VAPOs = not northern
•Fairbanks = 337 vapos, but many Alaskan locations are
not northern
•He notes that nordicity changes over time
Hamelin acknowledges that this system isn’t perfect.
What would be your criteria for identifying / defining
the north or northernness?
How would you
Latitude?
prioritize them?
Treeline?
Climate?
Ecosystem?
Hinterland / resource extraction economy?
Boom – bust economy?
Core v. periphery? (distance from decision makers)
Province v. territory (Canada)?
Aboriginal population?
Sparse population?
Resourcefulness of inhabitants?
Other social or psychological criteria or descriptors?
Gurston Dacks: “How far north is north?” in A
Choice of Futures: Politics in the Canadian North
• Points out that both animals and vegetation grow more slowly in the north.
– With fewer species, there’s a greater
impact on the ecosystem if one becomes
extinct.
– Recovery from damage to environment is
slower; organisms that break down
pollutants grow slowly.
• Notes the political importance of the
60th parallel in Canada.
– Provinces have greater sovereignty than
territories.
Gurston Dacks
Prof of PoliSci
U of Alberta
Dacks also discusses the importance of rivers in
the north.
•They serve as a transportation medium (winter and summer).
•They enrich soils along them.
•They provide water and food for people and animals.
•They hold kinetic energy that can be harnessed.
•People settle along them.
•They have strong aesthetic, emotional and intellectual appeal.
In the Canadian north, especially, rivers have
romantic appeal.
•Canadians love canoeing as a way of being at one with nature.
•There’s the mythology of the coureurs des bois.
•Much Canadian music and poetry focuses on river themes.
Do rivers have special significance elsewhere in the
north? in the world?
Competing visions:
The rich mineral resources, vast
wilderness expanses, indigenous
populations with traditional land
use patterns, and frontier
mythology in the north, especially
Alaska, result in conflicting visions
of what it offers.
Peter Coates: The Trans Alaska Pipeline Controversy
Coates argues that the frontier myth played prominently in the
minds of both the boosters of the trans Alaska pipeline and the
conservationists who fought against it.
•He says boosters viewed Alaska as an extension of the West.
•Frederick Jackson Turner had said that American society
and culture were based on the concept of perennial individual
and collective rebirth.
•The frontier offered people a chance to be reborn or start
anew.
•Conservationists said Alaska was different / unique and
shouldn’t be destroyed in the way the West was.
•Some said technology increased the threat.
Italian Luigi Barzini
wrote:
“official mythologies
are common to all
countries. All countries
cherish one or two
particular periods of
their histories, which
they ennoble and
embellish, to justify
and give meaning to
their present and to
give a purpose to their
future” (Coates, 27)
Richard Slotkin said “The Myth of the Frontier is arguably the
longest- lived of American myths . . . and a powerful continuing
presence in contemporary culture” (Coates, 27).
TR’s brand of utilitarian conservation
included Alaska.
Purpose was to “curb the
traditional practice of shortterm exploitation of natural
resources for private profit
and to promote their
efficient and scientific
management by experts
and their wise use on a
sustained yield basis in the
long-term public interest.”
TR and John Muir in Yosemite 1903
• John Muir’s and the
Sierra Club’s brand of
conservationism came
to be known as
preservationism.
– It drew on romanticism
and transcendentalism
and sought to protect
nature for its intrinsic
value.
• Both strands were
present in Alaska.
In the decades following Alaska’s purchase, renewable and nonrenewable resources were taken by temporary residents who
tried their luck, earned a few bucks and returned to civilization.
In the 1930s, conservationists began taking notice of Alaska.
Coates says boosters and conservationists tended to use the
terms frontier and wilderness interchangeably in referring to Alaska.
• Yet their views on
economic development in
Alaska differed.
• After WWII, Alaska’s
population increased
dramatically, but during
the pipeline controversy,
and even today,
competing visions of
Alaska’s future divide
Alaskans.
Sherry Simpson
• Found that nature offered
opportunities for “wayfinding.”
• Challenges the notion of wilderness
as “territory untrammeled by man.”
– Argues that concept of wilderness is
complex with many implications
• In “The Undiscovered Place” she
explores preservation concepts.
– Should there be places on earth where
almost no one should be allowed?
– “Are you content to be a listener or must
you be a storyteller, too?”
Judith Kleinfeld: Frontier Romance:
Environment, Culture and Alaska Identity
Explores meaning of the frontier
in Alaska to:
• “mountain men”
• pioneer women
• misfits / imposters / criminals
• a spiritual community
How do such “narratives” give meaning to
people’s lives?
• Can a notion of a frontier give us the
courage to enact our dreams?
What are positive and negative aspects of this frontier concept
of the north?
Are the frontier concept and the notion of a homeland for
indigenous peoples contradictory, or can they complement one
another?
If you think that the north is a frontier and that it stretches people,
why do you think this is so?
Ken Coates proposes a new conceptual
framework for northern / remote regions
• He says there is plenty of
descriptive writing on the north, but
no one so far (by 1993) has
established a conceptual
framework for analyzing the north.
• Most studies tend to use
frameworks developed elsewhere
and / or compare the north to
elsewhere.
• Coates says we need a regionallycentered framework.
Kenneth S. Coates
Sea to Sky University
British Columbia
Such a framework allows:
• for meaningful comparative analysis of northern
and other remote regions;
• northerners and others in remote regions to lead
the discussion on the challenges in their
region(s);
• for progress toward solutions to those
challenges;
• for northern scholarship to offer useful analysis
to those outside the region.
He suggests thinking of the north / remote
regions in terms of a series of struggles . . .
• against climate and distance
• between indigenous and non-indigenous peoples
• between transients and permanent residents
• between region and nation
• between source of resources and global markets
• between popular culture and reality.
Coates says a “culture of opposition” defines
and has stunted our development.
From the earliest times northerners have “maintained
and internalized a culture of antagonism and struggle
•It divides us from within
•Intense localism
•Conflicting visions of transients and old-timers
•“Excessive individualism” can hinder finding
common cause.
• An exaggerated sense of our relevance  leads
to shrill demands for attention / support.
What do you think?
Does a “culture of opposition” describe the north?
How so?
Why not?
Do we have an us-versus-them mentality?
Are we so individualistic that we can’t form
communities?
Which of Coates’ definitions best fit the north?
Which apply to other regions just as well?
Do you think Alaskans, Scandinavians, Canadians,
and Russians define the north differently?