Unit 3
3:2 Immigration Act of 1910 & White Civility
(Response to Question 2)
According to Coleman, state legislation is based on nationalist ideology which in turn excludes certain groups of people who do not fit into that frame work. This would mean assimilation or else be excluded from the national dialogue. Coleman argues that this legislation excludes people of colour, or else purposefully works to exclude these individuals from a passage to full citizenship.
However, is this always the case? I have analysed the Immigration Act of 1910 and it specifies certain requirements in order to immigrate into Canada for that period. Priority immigrants are listed, particularly those from Northern and Western European heritage. Refugees do not exist in this act, in fact, a person is forbidden from entering Canada on sponsorship from a charity or church, and government funded programs do not yet exist.
Alright, so clearly the majority of the immigrants during this period from Western and Northern Europe had fair skin, and ascribed to a more Imperialist ideology. This is not the whole package of ‘white civility’. Men are considered primary property owners during this era, and truly the only ones considered to have an independent income. Women could immigrate if they were sponsored (hmm… despite the fact that sponsorship was considered illegal) it was okay if they spoke English and had an arranged marriage (this is actually the case with my ancestor, Lucy Pannell, see below).
This dowry entertained a specific gender role that aligns with the values of white civility that Coleman claims exists in state legislation. Additionally, women who are considered prostitutes (though more likely victims of sex traffickers) do not have a place in Canada either, and there is also no legislation that exists to protect these individuals (once again, how refugee status would be useful here) instead, they are barred from entering Canada, criminalized much like how the ‘pimps’ and traffickers are. Essentially, enforcing the gender role of women as being docile and obedient is written into the 1910 Immigration Act, which furthers Coleman’s points about white civility.
By the time 1910 had rolled around, the UK was beginning to retreat from its former colonies, declaring them independent nations, which were now deeply indebted to their formed colonizers. This process of globalization, which continues today, is well summarized by Maracle,
“Grinding poverty and dependence build inside the colonized, cumulatively, the longer colonialism lasts.” (Maracle, 86).
It makes sense that by refusing refugees, and stating that immigrants require a certain sum of monies in order to immigrate to Canada, this excludes individuals with lower economic earnings, which have lower earnings as a result of colonization. In turn, this helped purport a nation that ascribes to an Imperialist, white civility viewpoint.
References
Coleman, Daniel. White Civility: The Literary Project of English Canada. Toronto: U of Toronto P, 2006. Print.
Image. Ancestry Records Parkinson Family.
“Immigration Act, 1910”. Pier 21. Web.
Maracle, Lee. “Toward a National Literature: A Body of Writing.” Across Cultures/Across Borders: Canadian Aboriginal and Native American Literature. Ed. Paul DePasquale, Renate Eigenbrod, and Emma LaRocque. Toronto: Broadview, 2010. Print.
3:5 Questioning the Start: Motif of Water and Defining Reality
(Response to Question 1)
Each story connects to the foundational creation story, which involves the First Woman, Ahdamn, Coyote and ‘God’. King uses a circular way of storytelling, where the last statement from one storyline (section) connects to the following section. For example,
“‘What else would you like to know?’ said the Lone Ranger” (King 49).
“‘What else would you like to know?’ said Babo” (King 50).
Multiple perspectives are used for the dialogue of the creation story, where Lone Ranger, Ishmael, Hawkeye, and Robinson Crusoe are wondering about the entirety of the story being told. The dialogue with ‘God’ addresses the audience directly, but is not knowledgeable of the other parts of the story from King, while the individual characters such as Lionel, Alberta, and Eli are all figuring out their individual lives, while the author parallels their experiences to the circumstances starting with ‘creation’ that made it so ‘Indians’ were more likely to experience systemic disadvantages created from Imperialist British-Canadian society.
King’s motif of water throughout the novel is present in each storyline. However, water first began to emerge when Changing Woman leaned too far forward into the water and then landed on Noah’s Ark. This imagery of water is present in the interview with Babo (how the novel begins, her car is being washed away by yellow water). It is also present with Eli Stands Alone, it is green-gray water that is seeping through the cracks in the damn, that if operational, would wash through his mother’s log house that she built.
Perhaps most notable is the use and definition of colour. ‘God’ says the water is blue, and coyote questions why, but the only response is ‘because’ (King ). However, Eli describes the water coming out of the dam as gray-green, and Babo says the water around the car is yellow. The significance of the colours mentioned within the text cannot be assumed, and perhaps changes for each subplot within the novel and the culture being represented in each section. King borrows traditions and customs from several First Nations communities in the text, as is the case where each of the old ‘Indian’ women are from different cultures (Chester 52). Although Siksika (Blackfoot) culture is commonly represented due to the setting of many of the characters in the novel, it cannot be assumed that the use of the colours for describing the water would always be related to one culture or another. I think this may be intentional on King’s part.
As there are four women, each representing traditions from different Indigenous mythology, this is why it is often necessary to trace back to the creation story, to see what colour and water represents within various sections of the novel. For example, with our first introduction to Eli, he describes the water coming through the dam as gray-green (King 110). Colour is also used to describe the dam itself – white – where Sifton says it is like a shell, and Eli says it reminds him of a toilet (King 136). Sefton also says his favorite part is the evening, when the sun gets behind the dam (King 136). This section may be alluding to the treaty signed by Siksika Chief Crowfoot on September 22, 1877; “as long as the sun shines, the grass grows, and the water flows” (Siksika Nation). In this passage, the water is slow, but should be building up as the dam is cracking. The sun has limited ways of shining through the dam, something the white worker (Sifton) admires about it. Eli also senses change on the horizon though, which is alluding to an impending event regarding the dam (King 112). The government did not keep its promise to the Siksika (and many other Indigenous groups for that matter), and the foundations it structures were built upon (quite literally in the case of the dam) are starting to crumble.
Of course, in the end the whole story connects, it began with the Indians at Fort Marion and ends at Fort Marion. We are never certain who was responsible for the dam collapsing outside of Blossom (King 415). But we do know that the water is running strongly again.
This is unrelated to the novel, but I find the opposition to the Site C dam in BC to be a relevant example of water rights and Indigenous land. There are parallels to the Grand Balleen dam.
Chester Blanca. “Green Grass Running Water: Theorizing the World of the Novel.”Canadian Literature 161-162. (1999). Web. April 04/2013.
King, Thomas. Green Grass Running Water. Toronto: Harper Collins, 1993. Print.
“About | Siksika Nation | Siksika Nation Tribal Administration Website”. Siksikanation.com. N.p., 2014. Web.
3:7 Alberta and Partnership, Contrasting with Queen Victoria’s Family
53, 65-67, 85-90, 124-125, 171-172, 367-369, 377, 412-413, 422-423
One of the great narratives present in Green Grass Running Water is Alberta’s story and perspective on domestic partnership, pregnancy, and parenting. Women are central to the origin story, each of the four ‘Indians’ are female, all women who fell from the sky and were ‘discovered’ by white men (Flick). Of course, each of these women are given male names according to recorded history (King 53). As we continue on Alberta’s journey, we encounter Alberta’s own complicated reminiscence of her childhood and her parents, as well as her marriage that did not really feel like a partnership. By examining her past, as with many stories in this novel, her present choices make more sense. This is but one sliver into Alberta’s story, many contrasting details create her character.
Alberta Frank
The central theme of this post is Alberta’s relationship with marriage and partners, and by extension what she learns about other notable women in the novel and their partnerships.
That being said, I would first like to address Alberta’s namesake in GGRW. Flick suggests that Alberta is named after the town Frank, AB which experienced a devastating landslide when a mine collapsed:
Flick also comments on Alberta’s ‘nature’ being frank, or to the point. I do not agree with this statement completely – she will state her opinion, but King never fully allows a conversation about Alberta’s pregnancy to occur with Lionel or Charlie. In fact, we are never told by Alberta directly that she is in fact pregnant, it is assumed by other characters (Norma and Latisha) that she is (King 377). Alberta is asked by Charlie if she is pregnant, but she denies it. The reader could allude that this is a possibility, as she is in tears. In my experience, people who are throwing up generally have activated their tear ducts too. All in all, it is up to the reader, but many characters suggest that Alberta is pregnant. Isn’t this what she wanted?
“There was the matter of children. Alberta wanted at least one, perhaps two.” (King 65)
Alberta was married. She didn’t see this as an option again, considering her options of Charlie and Lionel. Her first marriage was with Bob. Nondescript Bob, who seems to symbolize the 1950’s college ‘sweetheart’ who wants a wife but not a partner. An interesting antithesis is Princess Louise Alberta’s partner, a man of a thousand names, but who went by the name of Marquis of Lorne. According to the Parliament of Canada website’s history on the Marquis, as Governor General to Prime Minister Macdonald, he recommended, “…call for greater respect for Métis and Indian treaties.” Perhaps it is propaganda from the parliament website, as most individuals in positions of power in the Canadian government did not really follow through with their beliefs of good will towards the Indigenous population, but it seems as if Alberta is seeking a partner who truly does respect all that she is and intends to be. A tall order, according to the women in this novel.
“And all the time, that faceless, nameless man sat in the nose of the plane… completely oblivious to impending disasters. Marriage was like that… But there were those driving expectations that hemmed her in and herded her toward the same cliffs over which her mother, her brothers, sisters, cousins, and friends had disappeared.” (King 85)
Alberta’s mother and Amos
Another relationship that Alberta is basing her idea of what marriage becomes, is from an early time in her life, watching her parents. As readers we are introduced to Amos as the man with his pants around his ankle in the snow, but in reality, he always stood up for his rights. Two instances, one with an American border guard, and the other, with the ‘missing’ truck (which was actually stolen and sold to a car dealership). Eventually he took to drinking (King 88).
Amos is a Hebrew name, originating from an 8th century Old Testament prophet. It means strong and brave. Although the namesake is not there, Amos shares a similar struggle to Queen Victoria’s husband, Albert (parents of Princess Alberta), who felt as if he was never quite in a position of power that would allow enough change. Arguably, Amos held a position of power as a police officer on the reserve, and was seen as a leader in his community. Though he never really had the amount of power that the white male border guards had over him.
Alberta’s mother, is referred to as ‘Ada’ by Amos (King 89). Sources indicate that the name means nobility (Behind the Name). Queen Victoria was renowned for her parenting ability, and in a time coinciding with the end of the first Industrial era and the dawn of a more consumerist ideology, children were beginning to be seen as a prize, to be cherished, unlike previously when they were considered additional labour (though I do not think this theory could be fully true).
Campbell, Mike. “User Comments For The Name Ada”. Behind the Name. Web.
Flick Jane. “Reading Notes for Thomas King’s Green Grass, Running Water.” Canadian Literature 161/162 (1999). Web. April 4th 2013.
“Heraldic Symbols In The Speaker’s Chambers – Senate Of Canada”. Parl.gc.ca. Web.
King, Thomas. Green Grass Running Water. Toronto: Harper Collins, 1993. Print.
Senior, Jennifer. For Parents, Happiness Is A Very High Bar. 2014. Web.