The Role of the Coyote.
“Green Grass Running Water” by Thomas King attempts to create a balance between depicting the real struggles of Aboriginals today and their cultural heritage and storytelling. Similar to a Sundance ceremony where various speakers and voices tell and pass along their stories, “Green Grass Running Water” uses many supporting characters that each have their own story and struggle as Blackfoot’s in Canada. An outside narrative manages all the different perspectives and stories, and brings them together in the end just like the main announcer in a traditional Sundance ceremony. The theme of interconnectedness becomes more prominent throughout the book, as the stories of each of the individuals become more intertwined. In this way, I had the chance to understand each character and their issues separately before realizing they are all part of the bigger picture – a community and as a society.
In King’s story, the presence of the Coyote is quite prominent and important. The Coyote’s identity influences the narrative in a significant way. We are reminded that the Coyote in “Green Grass Running Water” is a trickster with a dual function: as a healer, but also as a hero that resists colonial representations. In fact, the Coyote helps to bridge King’s story between two worlds, the mythological world and the reality world. King stresses the fact that if humans and different cultures continue to separate themselves based on beliefs and ethnic characteristics, then there will always be outside sources who will try to re-unite them, just like the Coyote does. The Coyote, who tries to ‘fix’ the gap, is seen misunderstanding many of the customs of the different cultures. In this way, the character of the Coyote is seen as a trickster because he challenges the view of western myths. By retelling the myths and making silly jokes around them, the myths are seen in a different point of view. By keeping this in mind, I’ve come to the realization that challenging the myths and making jokes around them is a way that the Coyote attempts to fix the world. For instance, when Bill Bursum was trying to play a movie in his TV shop, it didn’t work. Rather, a different version started to play. In this version, the Aboriginals are the winners. This new depiction changes the entire story, and represents how myths can in fact change. By changing the myth, we have a chance to fix the derogatory and destructive stereotypes that are affecting everyday society with racism, sexism, and violence towards each other.
References:
“The Context of Oral Tradition and Contemporary Native Storytelling” Powershow. http://www.powershow.com/view1/2440b2-ZDc1Z/The_Context_Oral_Tradition_and_Contemporary_Native_powerpoint_ppt_presentation2014. Web. 20. Mar. 2014.
“Colonial Representation of Native Americans, Savages” Gutenberg. http://www.gutenberg.org/files/42410/42410-h/images/illus-115.jpg. Web 20 March 2014.
Hi Anna, by “changing the myths” – I assume you are talking about “changing” Western myths, and this makes me think about how identifying Coyote as a “trickster” is also a western perspective on the nature of Coyote. As you say: ” Coyote is seen as a trickster because he challenges the view of western myths.” But of course, this is how Coyote is seen by western literary criticism.
When I follow the link to the power point, I read through the slides and found myself wondering who authored these slides; the approach and language at times is a bit disturbing. For example, the first slide begins by defining storytelling by Aristotle’s terms, which makes me immediately suspicious of the source in so much as the title indicates the discussion is about “contemporary Native literature” — so why begin with a Western definition of terms?
Then I came across this slide:
Storytelling is imaginative and creative in
nature. It is an act by which man strives to
realize his capacity for wonder, meaning, and
delight. It is also a process in which man
invests and preserves himself in the context of
ideas. Man tells stories in order to understand
his experience, whatever it may be. The
possibilities of storytelling are precisely those
of understanding the human experience.
Wow – what a lot of gender specific (sexist) language …… !
Your second link is not working – says you can not “ping it” – thanks.
“King stresses the fact that if humans and different cultures continue to separate themselves based on beliefs and ethnic characteristics, then there will always be outside sources who will try to re-unite them, just like the Coyote does. The Coyote, who tries to ‘fix’ the gap, is seen misunderstanding many of the customs of the different cultures.”
Hi Anna,
Your post was very well done. The part above stood out the most to me, as I think it raises issues that are very important in Canada. In societies where there are fairly large groups characterized by different identities, practices, or beliefs, there is often tension between the groups based on these differences, an obvious example being the cleavages between First Nations, Anglophones, and French Canadians in this country.
In an attempt to reduce this tension, there are several strategies that are regularly employed. One of them is for groups, particularly dominant groups, to try to weaken the others and reduce the attachments people have to those groups, with the result being less identity based opposition and more readily achieved assimilation . We had this in Canada through the oppressive provisions of the Indian Act that separated First Nations from their cultures to build Anglo cultural dominance, and to a much lesser degree it was apparent in laws enacted in Quebec that prohibited signs from being in English.
Not all attempts to bring the groups together may involve oppressive measures such as those in the Indian Act. However, I think it is important to keep in mind that if one group is significantly more powerful and if their beliefs, institutions, and values form most of the basis for mainstream society, even seemingly well-intentioned and reasonable attempts to “re-unite” the groups could insidiously lead to a fusing of cultures such that the more powerful one is progressively grafted onto the less powerful ones.
To avoid that, I believe that reconciliation efforts must actively make a point of showing respect for and acknowledging the differences between cultures. This can facilitate the development of closer relations between groups while recognizing and respecting diversity. I think the Canadian government attempted to do this when they recognized the Quebecois as a nation within a nation, but the existence of a tripartite cleavage in Canada, with one dominant group and two subordinated groups, makes things complicated. Acknowledging one party in this way without doing so to the other can actually increase tensions, just as the endorsement of official multiculturalism—an affirmation of respect and acknowledgment of a range of cultures—was opposed by many French Canadians who thought it was inimical to their status as a distinct nation within Canada.
So, I think your post on King’s work and Coyote’s attempts at reunification is relevant to issues that are related to but go beyond the focus of his book. Attempting to assimilate various groups into a dominant identity regularly entails oppression, and even less extreme attempts to combat cleavages can be counterproductive. Reconciliation is a balancing act, and it can be difficult when there are three major groups with different interests who must be accounted for.