Although we were asked to point out salient differences between the movie and the novel, I can’t help but be jarred by the similarities, considering the time gap between the production of the novel and movie respectively.

To clarify, I couldn’t help but notice that the story lines in both the novel and movie were arguably politically charged. That is, that each text dichotomizes the ‘east’ and ‘west’, suggesting some sort of cultural and civil superiority.

Both texts make continual references to the ‘far east’ as though it is some twisted, exoticized location that no ‘easterner’ ought to visit. Perhaps it is a stretch when I say that this rhetoric speaks to the ways in which the ‘Global North’ creates ‘otherness’ based on culture, national and international boundaries. As such, and although I cannot speak to the political climate at the time the movie and the novel were created, I can only imagine that the storyline is underpinned in some sort of orientalization and dehumanization of different cultures.

Kate Doe, a young single girl, was enjoying a casual evening with her partner, as they often did. Kate notes that about an hour into the evening, her partner began speaking of marriage, something that is typical of couples their age. Kate, who stated that she “loved her partner dearly”, noted that she would “do anything for him to ask her to marry him”. Given this declaration, Kate’s partner asked her to retrieve his cane from the grave of a recently perished man, and as such, he would ask her to marry him.

Kate, a self-proclaimed “devoted partner”, happily went to the grave on account of her partner’s proposal. It was while she was at the grave site that something out of the ordinary happened

“I was just about the grab the cane and the ghost of a man appeared”, said Kate.

“He made me carry him on my back to the house of 3 sick boys. Once we were there, he told me to eat this strange blood-oatmeal concoction. Luckily I had my handkerchief handy and was able to spit it out and hide it in a hole in the wall.”

Kate then proceeded to tell reporters that the ghost informed her of the riches buried in the 3 boy’s lawn, as well as the life-giving properties that his blood-oatmeal concoction contained.

The next morning, Kate was informed that the 3 sick boys whom she visited were dead. Kate, remembering her handkerchief containing the life-giving remnants of the blood-oatmeal concoction went back to the 3 boy’s house to see if it would bring them back to life.

“I was amazed when the boys came back to life after feeding them the oatmeal”! Exclaimed Kate.

As a reward, the boy’s father offered Kate access to the riches buried on their property.

“The boys are alive and well, and I can finally have my dream wedding!” Kate told the media excitedly.

“I am glad everyone benefited from this strange occurrence.”

For this week’s assignment I would like to compare the ‘spaces’ and themes in Clements’ “The Unnatural and Accidental Women” and Tailfeathers’ “A Red Girls Reasoning”. Although I was not able to find the Tailfeathers’ video in its entirety, I was able to watch the trailer and do a bit of reading on the film, so I do apologize if I leave out bits and pieces.

A strong spatial (or geographical) similarity between the two texts is that they both take place (primarily) in cities. In the trailer for “A Red Girls reasoning” the main character brings up how absurd the story of Pocahontas is. This got me thinking about the Colonial lens, and how Colonial thoughts and/or images of Indigenous communities are relegated to the past, highly romanticised, and reduced to a simple pre-occupation or connection with the environment. This romanticised reduction, however, completely ignores the everyday experience of Indigenous communities, as many Indigenous Individuals increasingly re-locate to urban centres.

Similarly, Clements’ “The Unnatural and Accidental Women” also takes place in a city. Clements unveils the harsh reality of life in an urban centre, where many Indigenous women have gone missing as the law turns a blind eye.

Each author’s illumination of Indigenous city life reveal the dangers of re-inscribing the ‘Pocahontas-like’ Indigenous stereo-types mentioned above. In so far as it could be these very stereo-types that perpetuate violence against Indigenous women in urban centres, while the privileged class, clinging to false ideas of indigeneity, remain unaware of, and insensitive to, such violence.