logo

54 pages 1 hour read

Amanda Peters

The Berry Pickers

Fiction | Novel | Adult | Published in 2023

A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.

Themes

Assimilationist Policy and the Loss of Culture

Content Warning: The source text contains descriptions of violence, domestic violence, racism, substance use disorder, miscarriage, and outdated terminology for Indigenous and First Nations peoples.

Canada’s history of assimilationist policies toward its Indigenous populations has resulted in the loss of homelands, cultural knowledge and cohesion, language, and traditional ways of interacting with nature and natural food systems. Canada’s residential school system for Indigenous youth is, now that it has been thoroughly investigated and revealed to be systemically abusive, perhaps the most widely talked about pillar of Canadian assimilationist policy, but the bulk of the Canadian government’s dealings with its Indigenous populations have had assimilation as their core goal.

During the introductory chapters of The Berry Pickers, readers learn that two of Ruthie’s siblings were students in a residential school until their father withdrew them. He no doubt objected to the school’s cruel treatment of its students, but the family depicted in this narrative is closely bonded, and part of his objection was to the children growing up so far from their parents and without the ability to participate in their Indigenous culture. Mae, Ben, Charlie, and Joe grow up steeped in Mi’kmaq ways of being in the world, which sharply contrasts with the white assimilation of Ruthie/Norma after she is stolen by Lenore.

Ruthie’s mother is a devout Catholic. To Joe and his siblings, their mother’s religiosity is curious, though easily explainable within the context of Canada’s assimilationist policy, which sought to convert its Indigenous populations to various Christian denominations so that they might fit in to society better. Joe realizes that the drive to convert Indigenous peoples is largely about control, and he notes: “My mother, through no fault of her own, has come to love the church, the elaborate ceremonies replacing the ones torn from her heart during a childhood she rarely mentioned” (11). Based on Joe’s description, it seems likely that his mother was placed into a residential school; by the time she is an adult, she wonders if her own children ought not stay in the residential school, if only to learn religion. She has been so thoroughly stripped of her cultural values that she now sees the religion of the colonial government as a blessing.

Indigenous language has also been a target of Canada’s assimilationist policies, and part of the project of the residential school system was to immerse children in an English-language setting so that they would forget their own languages. Students were often harshly punished for speaking Indigenous languages, and today, although there is a movement to relearn lost tongues, only a portion of the various Indigenous groups that populate Canada still speak their languages. Of this project of linguistic assimilation, Mae tells Ruthie, “White folks been trying to take the Indian out of us for centuries” (294). Mae is interested in learning Mi’kmaq, and at the end of the narrative, the family decides to study together.

The narrative itself is a metaphor for the loss of culture that happens as a result of assimilation. Ruthie’s lost family represents the loss of community, culture, and traditional knowledge that faced young children in the residential school system, and Ruthie’s kidnapping by a white woman who then raises her young Indigenous hostage as Norma, fully immersed in white society, is a metaphor for the terrible rupture that was the boarding school experience for so many children. The findings of the Truth and Reconciliation Committee that investigated abuse in the boarding schools are part of public discourse in Canada, and in creating a protagonist who is a young, Indigenous girl ripped from her family without their permission and taught to exist in a white world, value white culture, and speak English, is a powerful allegory of the damage done by the residential school system. Ruthie is told by her white mother that her dreams are unimportant and imaginary. This is a parallel to the way that Indigenous children were told to dismiss their culture and forget their traditions. It should also be noted that there isn’t much Indigenous culture in this narrative. Readers do not learn about Mi’kmaq language, traditions, foodways, social organization, family structure, or history. This noticeable lack of Indigenous knowledge too is a metaphor for the lack of Indigenous knowledge in Ruthie/Norma’s life.

Indigenous Family Bonds

The strength of Indigenous family bonds is another key theme within this text. This is especially important given the way that genocide, assimilationist governmental policy, and generational trauma have cut through Indigenous families since colonization, and it should be noted that Peters chooses not only to depict the enduring resilience of this particular family of characters, but also to end her narrative on a hopeful note. Part of Peters’s larger point within this text is that cultural knowledge can be regained and Indigenous families can heal from trauma, and both of those processes are possible only within the space of strong families.

One of the first scenes in which the tightly knit nature of Ruthie’s family is on display is the moment when Lewis pulls his children out of their residential school. He recognizes the damage that such places can do, and also understands that the best place for a child is with their family. Later, after Ruthie’s abduction, he threatens the “Indian agent” with a gun when the man informs Lewis that because he “lost” his daughter, he intends to remove the rest of the children from their home. Again, he is certain that the best place for his children is their home. The Indigenous family can thus be observed to be imperiled in multiple places within this narrative: residential schools, the kidnapping of Ruthie, and the intended removal of Ben, Charlie, Joe, and Mae from their home.

In part because she loses Ruthie and then Charlie, the mother, already a loving caregiver, becomes even more devoted to her husband and children as the narrative progresses. Readers never see her in any context other than as a parent, and her entire identity is thus tied to family and caregiving. Although her children do grow up and move out, at various points in time, they also return home, and readers learn that “Mom still treated the coming home of her children as a sacred thing, a holy event” (119-20). When Joe returns home, Mae also moves back in to care for him, and together with their mother and father (until his passing) they re-form the nuclear family of their childhood.

Ruthie, as Norma, grows up removed from her real family, and recalls how often she wished that she had siblings. When she finds out that she does, in fact, have siblings, she too returns home, and the novel ends with Norma/Ruthie seamlessly fitting back into her birth family. The bonds that she shares with them have proven to be unbreakable, for even after a lifetime apart, she finds that she feels more at home with her true family than she ever did with her other mother and father. The conclusion of this narrative focuses so intently on the reconstituted, healing Indigenous family, offering a profound statement of hope, and an argument that it is possible for such families to heal from generational trauma.

The Impact of Anti-Indigenous Racism

Moments of anti-Indigenous racism abound within this narrative, and the bulk of the prejudice depicted is verbal abuse. This is a form of casual, interpersonal racism that the Indigenous characters in The Berry Pickers deal with on a daily basis, and while none of the slurs lead to violence, the language is none the less dehumanizing, and the larger point behind the inclusion of so many moments of casual racism and stereotyping is that it becomes easier, on a societal level, to commit crimes against a particular group of people when they have been successfully dehumanized, and that dehumanization often happens through throwaway comments that the speaker does not put much thought into. The “Indian agent” who first objects to Lewis removing his children from the residential school and later comes to remove the children from their home after Ruthie is stolen writes that the purpose of placing Indigenous children into boarding schools is to turn them into “proper contributing citizens” (10). The implication here is that, on their own, Indigenous peoples are not contributing members of society, and they need to be immersed in white culture (and punished for their missteps) in order to become “real” citizens. Mr. Ellis, the owner of the berry fields, comments on the lightness of Ruthie’s skin in comparison with the rest of her family, and he sees this as a positive attribute, one that will make her life easier as she ages. When Mae gets older, she works at a taxi stand, “selling French-fried potatoes and hamburgers to men who called her ‘squaw’ [which is a deeply offensive word] and laughed” (118). The men in question were not looking to hurt Mae physically or even subject her to a lengthy stream of verbal abuse. Their slur was a comment made in an off-hand way, meant to show that they were on the entitled side of a power imbalance. Yet these small acts of everyday racism become part of a larger, societal project of dehumanization, and that it is so widely accepted to speak disparagingly about Indigenous peoples becomes the basis for a structural racism that, based on the idea of Indigenous inferiority, attempts to subjugate Indigenous populations and limit their access to high-quality healthcare, education, jobs, and housing.

The way that casual racism becomes systemic oppression is also evident in the way that Norma understands race and Indigenous identity. Norma “only knew Indians from middle school textbooks and appearances on television. In my narrow understanding, the entire history and existence of Indians comprised war-hungry savages, medicine men, and Pocahantas” (101). This statement is interesting in part because it models the way that true understanding is masked by racist preconceptions and stereotypes: For many white Canadians who do not personally know Indigenous individuals, their knowledge of Indigenous identity and culture is filtered through institutions like the media and through one another’s ideas about race and identity, many of which are markedly biased. Norma’s lack of knowledge about Indigenous culture is also a metaphor for the way that assimilation strips self-knowledge from Indigenous individuals, particularly stolen children like the myriad Indigenous young people sent to life in boarding schools, and like Ruthie herself.

Grief and Guilt

The interwoven nature of grief and guilt is another key theme within The Berry Pickers, and the complex relationship between the two can be observed in multiple characters. Lenore, although she does not show signs of truly admitting her guilt, even to herself, is stricken by a series of physical maladies that should be read as manifestations of unresolved guilt over kidnapping an Indigenous child. Norma grows up in the shadow of her mother’s tangled emotional turmoil, and feels near-constant guilt over her perception that she is the source of her mother’s headaches and anxiety. She is also plagued by a nameless, unidentifiable grief that will ultimately reveal its origins in her kidnapping. Joe, because he believes himself to be responsible for the disappearance of Ruthie and the death of Charlie, bears a tremendous burden of guilt, and his lifelong battle with substance use disorder and loneliness is a manifestation of the grief he feels at having lost two of his siblings.

Lenore’s complex constellation of physical and mental health issues should be read a sign of her underlying, unresolved guilt over having stolen an Indigenous girl and passed her off as her own child. She lives her life in a state of constant worry that her crime will be discovered and Norma will be taken from her, and this leads to extreme overprotectiveness. Yet, her problems go deeper than that worry, and her headaches, anxiety, agoraphobia, and “nervous” nature are ultimately rooted in the heinous crime that she has committed. She cannot admit to herself that she feels guilty, but her body betrays her, and her various physical ailments are a sign of unresolved guilt and shame.

Her fear, anxiety, and worry become the backdrop for Norma’s childhood and adolescence, and part of Norma’s own set of mental health struggles are rooted in the fear that she is the cause of her mother’s issues. She and her therapist Alice have multiple conversations in which Alice reassures her that it is not her job to feel bad about her parents, and that she bears no guilt for her mother’s headaches and anxiety. Grief becomes an equally powerful force in Norma’s childhood, both because of the dreams which she cannot understand and because there is something in her that longs for a happier family, siblings, and a household with laughter. What Norma is really grieving is the loss of her real family, but being unable to remember them, except in her dreams, she does not fully understand the source of her grief. It is only later in life when she meets her mother and remaining siblings that she understands the unhappiness of her childhood years.

Joe’s sense of both guilt and grief has its origins in the disappearance of Ruthie and the death of Charlie. Because he was the last to see Ruthie alive, he blames himself for her vanishing. Because he witnessed the death of Charlie, he blames himself for his death. Joe does not have the chance to heal until the end of his life, and his youth and adulthood are marked by anger, substance use disorder, and loneliness. He struggles with substance use disorder, and although he does manage several periods of sobriety, he also spends years drinking. His pain, which often rises to the surface as anger, is at the root of the brutal beating which he subjects his wife to, and that act of domestic violence becomes the catalyst for a fresh new mixture of grief and guilt: “Nothing in my life I have ever done, including losing Ruthie and leaving Charlie to the Johnson boys amounts to the regret and distaste for my own self that I feel about what happens next” (168). After punching his wife, he leaves and spends years wandering Canada alone, completely overcome by both sadness and guilt. It is not until he returns home to die that he finds redemption, and like Ruthie, his process of healing happens as the result of time spent with family. There is a way in which the strength of family bonds is the remedy for trauma, grief, and guilt.

blurred text
blurred text
blurred text
blurred text