New approach to working with Indigenous authors
In wake of controversy over anthology publisher vows ‘better, smarter’ operation
Trying to move forward from the controversy that made national headlines over an upcoming Indigenous publication, the University of Regina Press is looking at changes.
The publishing house plans to meet next week with senior Indigenous university scholars to get their perspective about setting up an Indigenous editorial board.
“It would look at all of the Indigenous material that we publish to help us navigate any problems that we may encounter in the future,” Bruce Walsh, director and publisher of the U of R Press, said in an interview this week.
He can’t recall rejecting an Indigenous manuscript in the past.
“We’ve actually invested a lot of money in taking manuscripts and making them much stronger,” Walsh said. “But with this board in place, that may in fact change because it will be going through an Indigenous lens as opposed to mine or the rest of my team.”
The move comes in the wake of a dispute that arose over an anthology of Indigenous writing to be published in May by the Press.
Six female authors removed their writings from the book, titled kisiskâciwan: Indigenous Voices from Where the River Flows Swiftly, when the publisher refused to remove a contribution by poet Neal McLeod, who pleaded guilty to domestic violence in 2014.
In a recent open letter to the U of R Press, the women wrote: “Much of our writing is an expression of our experiences with the ongoing, violent impacts of colonization. We know the intricacies of this violence: racism has deep roots here, entangled with misogyny and patriarchy.”
McLeod responded this week with his own open letter in which he expressed regret for the pain he’s caused.
“I am truly sorry that my presence in kisiskâciwan anthology has caused such divisions in both Indigenous and writing communities I hold dear ... I do not want to put either this important work or U of R Press in jeopardy,” he wrote. “As such, I am respectfully withdrawing my work from this anthology.”
The Press will release the authors from their contracts.
Walsh said the controversy has been difficult for everyone, including his staff.
“Whatever we did, we were going to alienate someone, so we stuck to the principle of academic freedom,” he said.
“We also offered more space to the women, both in terms of their having their own anthology or adding more material to the anthology as it exists.”
Walsh said the experience has brought many lessons, including the notion of accountability.
“There’s debates within every community about what is the right thing to do and what is accountability and how is accountability shown and demonstrated versus the notion of freedom of expression,” Walsh said.
As an academic institution, it’s key to protect the freedom of expression of scholars, he said.
“Yet these issues are much more complicated and there are other paradigms at play that we really need to be aware of,” Walsh said. “I think that this editorial board will really be helpful in terms of that.”
The problem will be finding people to sit on the board.
“People are extremely busy, especially Indigenous scholars because everybody wants them to be a part of everything,” Walsh said. “We’ve always reached out to elders and others regarding things — perhaps I haven’t listened as well I should have ... I think this is an opportunity for us to become a better, smarter publishing company.”
The anthology at issue includes Indigenous writings from the 1760s to present and includes speeches from chiefs that go back to the signing of the treaties.
“Its historical and cultural resonance is profound,” Walsh said.
Despite the emotional and financial toll, the recent controversy has been important for the development of the Press.
“Going forward, we may lose books over this,” Walsh said. “But ultimately, getting this Indigenous editorial board set up will make us a better Press and that’s exciting and hopefully we can be useful in terms of reconciliation around gender violence and the frustrations of women.”