Hey, everyone! I hope you’re doing great! For this blog post, I decided to write about the first 10 pages from Green Grass Running Water, by Thomas King. I think the first pages of any novel are really important because they set the reader up to either enjoy the novel and be captivated by it or to decide not to read it any further. Because the first ten pages have a gap of blank pages in them, I will be focusing on pages 1-3 and pages 7-13.

Before I begin discussing the first 10 pages, I believe it’s important to first have an understanding of what the title of the novel means. Green Grass Running Water references to the promise of the U.S. government to Indigenous people that they will have rights over their land ‘as long as the water runs and the grass is green’ ( Maithreyi, 3). Just by the title alone, you can see the amount of superiority that the European culture brought with them from Europe and how they dictated Indigenous people so much. The fact that the government had to promise them the rights to their land meant that Indigenous people were not being treated equally, and to this day Indigenous people are oftentimes treated like children who can’t take care of themselves. Rights to their land have often been undermined.

Thomas King starts his novel out with reality intertwined with fantasy. He begins by telling a creation story, just like he does in a lot of his work. The creation story starts out with water, just like the story he often tells of the turtle’s back. This story, however, is about a coyote. In the Reading Notes for Thomas King’s Green Grass, Running Water by Jane Flick, she describes what coyotes can signify. In Indigenous tales, a coyote often represents a “trickster,” and is especially important in the oral tradition of storytelling. Coyotes in this tradition had special “powers” and “created the world,” which is probably why Thomas King decided to use the coyote at the beginning of his novel (Flick, 143). The novel starts off with the coyote dreaming, but then the dream gets loose, and it somewhat becomes its own entity. In Indigenous culture “dreams are also powerfully significant” (Flick, 143). One significant symbol in Indigenous culture about dreams are dreamcatchers.

On page 2, the coyote tells the dream that it can be a dog because initially, the dream wanted to be a coyote. But the coyote wanted to be the only coyote. The dog dream then tells the coyote that it is God. This is a “play on words,” since dog backwards is god. Also, a dog is “a “lesser” form of coyote.” “God is a contrary from a dog’s point of view” (Flick, 143). When the dog dream tells the coyote that they are God, the coyote believes the dream is a contrary and that they have everything backwards. This relates to “The Plains Indians,” who sometimes also “acted in contrary fashion.” “They did things “backwards,”” because “they rode into battle” and sometimes “fired arrows” at their own people, instead of the enemy, according to Jane Flick (Flick, 144). There is a very large fantasy element to these first three pages, but intertwined in this, is the truth, since there are many hidden meanings (King, 1-3).

Then on pages 7 and 8, we get introduced to Lionel and Norma – the first Indigenous characters to be introduced in the novel. Norma is trying to pick out a carpet colour and also wants to paint the house. But Lionel seems to have a negative attitude about it, and tells her “Wouldn’t hold my breath.” Norma tells Lionel that the band council is also talking about paving the road asphalt. And then Lionel replies “What happened? Council run out of dirt and gravel?” I think this question is significant because it signifies the expectations that people often have for Indigenous people. A lot of people think that Indigenous people are ‘one with nature,’ and that they have less money than non-Indigenous people. My favourite paragraph on this page is the last one, as Norma goes on to say “If I didn’t see you born with my own eyes, I would sometimes think you were white. You sound just like those politicians in Edmonton. Always telling us what we can’t do.” I believe this paragraph to be the most significant paragraph on this page. People seem to have expectations for the way Indigenous people and non-Indigenous people should act or should do things, but those are just expectations and stereotypes, nothing more. Indigenous people should be able to do everything that non-Indigenous people can do, and vice versa. After all, we’re all people. Otherwise, it becomes an us versus them dichotomy, which separates one group from the other (King, 7-8).

Then on page 9 and through the rest of the pages I’m looking at, the story turns to four characters – Robinson Crusoe, Ishmael, the Lone Ranger, and Hawkeye, all from the Blackfoot community.  These characters add an interesting element to the novel since they add some humour. On pages 11-13 they begin to tell a creation story, but the story gets cut off a few times since every beginning they start with is not good enough; “Once upon a time,” “A long time ago in a faraway land,” and “Many moons…” Page 13 ends with the Lone ranger telling everyone he knows how to start the story, and they wait for him to begin (King, 9-13).

Thomas King was smart by choosing the names he did for his characters because every one of these names has significance: The name Robinson Crusoe is used as the “Hero of Defoe’s Robinson Crusoe (1719)…A narrative of a shipwrecked mariner, based on the true story of Alexander Selkirk… the most famous of all desert island narratives…the novel contains meticulous details about survival” (Flick,142).

The name Ishmael is a name that is in “Herman Melville’s Moby Dick, who begins the story with one of the most famous opening lines in American fiction: “Call me Ishmael”” The name is also biblical (Flick, 143).

The name Lone Ranger has been used many times, and it can mean a “masked man with a faithful Indian companion.” Lone ranger has also been used as a “hero of Western books,” which is what I first thought of when I read the name. The name was also used on the radio, television, and many movies (Flick, 141).

Hawkeye, as Jane Flick explains, is a name most commonly “famous of the frontier heroes in American literature.” It’s also a nickname for “a white woodsman and guide with knowledge of “Indian ways”” The name Hawkeye is also found “in five major Hollywood films…and two television serials” (Flick, 141-142).

What I noticed to be most significant about all these names is that it seems like they’re all borrowed names from non-Indigenous people, and none of them are traditionally Indigenous names. What I thought of when I noticed this is colonization and non-Indigenous people thinking they’re more superior than Indigenous people, which is also what I noticed when I discussed Lionel and Norma. When norma said what she did about white politicians in Edmonton, it also made me think of non-Indigenous people thinking they are more superior to Indigenous people.

I think one huge goal of Thomas King when writing this novel was to challenge the way many non-Indigenous people have treated Indigenous people since the time of colonization, stemming from colonialism, and the way they make assumptions and stereotypes. Until non-Indigenous people stop making assumptions, there will always be an us versus them dichotomy. I really enjoyed Green Grass, Running Water, by Thomas King, and I suggest every Canadian read this novel.

Works Cited:

Maithreyi, Gollakoti. “Reconstructing Identities Through Intertextuality: A Critical Study Of Thomas King’s Green Grass, Running Water.” The Criterion An International Journal In English 4.5 (2013): 3. The Criterion. The Criterion, Oct. 2013. Web. 18 Nov. 2016.

Flick, Jane. “Reading Notes For Thomas King’s Green Grass, Running Water.” Canadian Literature 161/162 (1999): 141-44. UBC Blogs. UBC. Web. 18 Nov. 2016.

King, Thomas. Green Grass Running Water. 2007 ed. Toronto: HarperCollins, 1999. Print.

Everyone is on the move in this novel, road trips abound and in order to hit the road what do we need? — a road map. At the same time, Lionel, Charlie and Alberta are each seeking direction in life. As Goldman says, “mapping is a central metaphor” (24) of this novel. Maps chart territory and provide directions, they also create borders and boundaries and they help us to find our way. There is more than one way to map, and just as this novel plays with conflicting story traditions, I think King is also playing with conflicting ways to chart territory. What do you think lies at the centre of King’s mapping metaphor?

Hey everyone! I hope you’re doing well! The central metaphor of mapping, a symbol for the protagonists longing to find a place in the world, in Green Grass, Running Water by Thomas King is a recurring theme in his novel.

This “place” can be seen in a very abstract way. While a map usually is a piece of paper with some lines and coloured areas, as a metaphor it is that and so much more. A map can act as a metaphor for your place in life; your goals. It can act as a metaphor for rough times when you have “lost your way” and feel “lost.” Our language is full of map-themed metaphors to symbolize our longing to find the “right” place in our life, and define this place.

And, while maps can provide guidance, the mere existence of a map does not always help you to find your way. Not only do you have to be able to connect the map with the real world, to be able to read it and find directions, you also have to know where you are right now for a map to be useful. And even then, a map is just a tool to help you find your way. If you don’t know where you are headed, a map might help you find places, but you might still feel lost. In the end, it is you who has to find your path, your way in life. A map could protect you and could help you from losing your way, but a map is just a tool, not a solution.

For this blog post, I decided to do some research on what mapping means to Indigenous people. I found this interesting chapter from a book (Lewis). For Indigenous People maps had a different meaning than for most European colonizers. While maps for European colonizers were oftentimes tools to mark territory, to show treaties, and to visualize properties and divide them up for consumption, Indigenous Peoples maps often have other meanings. Indigenous maps “were born of experience and oral tradition, not an ascribed archival history in the Western sense.” Yes, the occasional Indigenous map might be used to visualize boundaries between different tribes, but maps were meant to represent nature, to show where to hunt, where to live, where to bury the dead, etc.

One passage in Marlene Goldman’s (Goldman). article says:

“Native American peoples have repeatedly asserted the legitimacy of their own maps and contested European maps and strategies of mapping, which have played such a central role in conceptualizing, codifying, and regulating the vision of the settler-invader society…”

This passage saddens me, as it reminds me of the brutality that colonization forced onto Indigenous people. The Indigenous people treated the land as their life, but the European colonizers, treated land as something they could consume, destroy, and discard, something which continues to this day. For example, big companies putting oil pipelines right through Indigenous people’s land (McSheffrey).

It’s interesting looking at the difference between Indigenous and European ways of mapping, and seeing how much it has to do with attitude and lifestyle. European colonizers using mapping for controlling, destroying, and discarding, versus Indigenous people using mapping as a way of discovering and documenting while living as one with nature. 

Works cited:

Goldman, Marlene. “Mapping And Dreaming Native Resistance In Green Grass, Running Water.” CanLit. N.p. 2015. 19.  Web. 09 Nov. 2016.

Lewis, G. Malcolm. “Chapter 4 Maps, Mapmaking, and Map Use by Native North Americans.” The History Of Cartography. Vol. 3. Chicago: U Of Chicago, 1998. 52. University Of Chicago Press. Web. 09 Nov. 2016.

McSheffrey, Elizabeth. “First Nations across North America Sign Treaty Alliance against the Oilsands.” National Observer. N.p., 22 Sept. 2016. Web. 09 Nov. 2016.

2] In this lesson I say that it should be clear that the discourse on nationalism is also about ethnicity and ideologies of “race.” If you trace the historical overview of nationalism in Canada in the CanLit guide, you will find many examples of state legislation and policies that excluded and discriminated against certain peoples based on ideas about racial inferiority and capacities to assimilate. – and in turn, state legislation and policies that worked to try to rectify early policies of exclusion and racial discrimination. As the guide points out, the nation is an imagined community, whereas the state is a “governed group of people.” For this blog assignment, I would like you to research and summarize one of the state or governing activities, such as The Royal Proclamation 1763, the Indian Act 1876, Immigration Act 1910, or the Multiculturalism Act 1989 – you choose the legislation or policy or commission you find most interesting. Write a blog about your findings and in your conclusion comment on whether or not your findings support Coleman’s argument about the project of white civility.

Hi everyone!

I hope that your day is going well! I have learned about the “Indian Act” in Canadian History and Sociology classes I took previously. The “Indian Act” began in 1876. This legislation intrigued me for many reasons, propelling me to do further research, which I am happy to share with you in this post!

First off, the “Indian Act” (Government of Canada) is Canadian legislation that governs registered “Indians,”  their bands, and reserves. The first line in the Act reads, “An Act respecting Indians.” However, there is much controversy involved with this Act among Indigenous people and non-Indigenous people. The act was created in 1876, so it’s understandable that it was called the “Indian Act,” but I find it strange that, even though the government has made amendments to the act, they kept the name. Today, it is considered disrespectful to call an Indigenous person an “Indian.” Perhaps this is to keep history in tact, but it doesn’t sit well with me, because it’s a derogatory term.  Why is there an “Indian Act,” but not an act for other ethnicities? (There were many other discriminatory laws in Canadian history (Décoste), which were done away with over time.) Even though Canada has a reputation of being welcoming and accepting to people of a variety of ethnicities, Canada has a dark history and is still not as welcoming as people may believe, including the way in which it has treated its own Indigenous people. It seems to me this act separates Indigenous people from everybody else in Canada, creating an us versus them dichotomy. After all, according to John A MacDonald (Joseph), “The great aim of our legislation has been to do away with the tribal system and assimilate the Indian people in all respects with the other inhabitants of the Dominion as speedily as they are fit to change.”

One of the issues I have with the “Indian Act” is that it dictates who is considered “Indian” and who is not, keeping non-status “Indians” from joining bands. I know I am part English, Swedish, and Russian. What if someone were to tell me that I am not one of those? It would be like stripping away part of my identity. I believe, even if someone is only half Indigenous, that person should be allowed to become a member of a band if they want to be close to their Indigenous roots. Another problem I have with this Act is that it states that bands are governed by Her Majesty and the Governor in Council, but I question why Indigenous people can’t govern their bands themselves.

A very big talking point (Crey and Hanson) with the Act, and one that is considered both prejudice as well as sexist by many people in Canada, is that up until 1985, if a woman with “Indian” status married a non-status man, she and her children, if any, would lose status. However, if a status man married a woman with no Indigenous ancestry, the woman and her children, if any, would gain status. This meant that the woman who lost status would not be allowed to be with her Indigenous community and have access to the same rights as Indigenous people. After 1985, a woman was then able to apply for Indigenous status again, but I believe that the damage had already been done, and it’s hard to take back something that has already been done or said.

Another important talking point (Hanson) is that the “Indian Act” forced every “Indian” child to attend residential school. This was created to assimilate (CanLit Guides) them into the dominant culture of Canada. The children who attended these schools faced much abuse, were forced off their lands, and stripped of their languages and culture. On June 11th 2008, the government of Canada, under Prime Minster Stephen Harper, finally formally apologized. “Two primary objectives of the residential school system were to remove and isolate children from the influence of their homes, families, traditions and cultures, and to assimilate them into the dominant culture. These objectives were based on the assumption Aboriginal cultures and spiritual beliefs were inferior and unequal. Indeed, some sought, as it was infamously said, “to kill the Indian in the child.” Today, we recognize that this policy of assimilation was wrong, has caused great harm, and has no place in our country.”

I believe that my findings support Dan Coleman’s argument about the project of white civility. “The Indian Act” is all about power and control. The British people’s attitude of superiority combined with the belief that they were more civil than Indigenous people resulted in brutality during colonization and beyond. When people have an image in their mind of Canada, they automatically think of white people, because the British constructed a “fictive ethnicity,” which “still occupies the position of normalcy and privilege in Canada,” says Dan Coleman. And in this way the “Indian Act” still dictates onto Indigenous people, treating them in a way that makes them seem like children who can’t take care of themselves. It’s unfortunate our culture is built on British civility. This has been shifting gradually since the 1950’s, but there’s still a long way to go.

Crey, Karmen, and Erin Hanson. “Indian Status.” Indigenous Foundations. The University Of British Columbia, 2009. Web. 28 Oct. 2016.

Décoste, Rachel. “The Most Discriminatory Laws in Canadian History.” The Huffington Post. N.p., 16 Sept. 2013. Web. 28 Oct. 2016.

Hanson, Erin. “The Residential School System.” Indigenous Foundations. The University Of British Columbia, 2009. Web. 28 Oct. 2016.

“Indian Act.” Government of Canada Justice Laws Website. N.p., 02 Apr. 2015. Web. 28 Oct. 2016.

Joseph, Bob. “21 Things You May Not Have Known About The Indian Act.” Indigenous Corporate Training Inc. N.p., 02 June 2015. Web. 28 Oct. 2016.

“Nationalism, Late 1800s–1950s: Canadian Immigration and War.” CanLit Guides. N.p., 4 Oct. 2016. Web. 28 Oct. 2016.

In order to address this question you will need to refer to Sparke’s article, “A Map that Roared and an Original Atlas: Canada, Cartography, and the Narration of Nation.” You can easily find this article online. Read the section titled: “Contrapuntal Cartographies” (468 – 470). Write a blog that explains Sparke’s analysis of what Judge McEachern might have meant by this statement: “We’ll call this the map that roared.”

When Chief Justice Allan McEachern unpacked the map showing the land claims of the Gitxsan and the Wet’suwet’en People he said “We’ll call it the map that roared.” Now that statement could be understood in many ways, but given that the land claims the Gitxsan and the Wet’suwet’en People made were huge and were not taking into account anything brought to British Columbia through the colonization (McCullough) and subsequent undertakings such as boundaries, streets, power lines, towns or any other non-natural things it seems likely to assume that Chief Justice Allan McEachern said what he did, knowing that this map would stir up a lot of friction between the government and the Gitxsan and the Wet’suwet’en People. Not only was the area big, but the total disregard for all things brought to British Columbia through the colonization would make any agreement even harder to achieve because for either side there was a lot to lose.

Chief Justice Allan McEachern later decided that while evidence based upon oral traditions could be presented in court, and the map was just that, a depiction of the oral tradition, oral traditions on their own, without any other form of evidence that could be recognized by the court are not enough to successfully make a claim. Therefore, no decision was made regarding the claimed land. One could argue that seeing the map the Chief Justice already knew, that a decision would be impossible just based on those claims, because the ramifications would be huge and arbitration could easily take decades. His statement could be interpreted in a way that he perfectly understood the huge meaning of this map but that in the end it would be nothing more than a “roar” because nothing would be coming from it. By now the Supreme Court of Canada overturned McEachern’s judgment and has thus opened up the possibility of a new trial (The Supreme Court). But even without a new trial, which could take a very long time given the amount of things that have to be taken into consideration it is now possible again to have talks and find solutions for the problems.  It is my opinion however, that even though it is now easier to litigate the claims of the Gitxsan and the Wet’suwet’en People, in the end they will have to give up big parts of their claims.

As so many times before in history Indigenous People will have to yield to the modern world. And it might not just be pure malevolence doing that, it is just not feasible to move complete settlements or even towns which are now located in areas claimed by Indigenous People. For the future it will be important to see that the claims of the Gitxsan and the Wet’suwet’en People will not be dismissed lightly. Yet they have a hard stand, as their culture and heritage is not shared by most of the people with the power to at some point make these decisions. Getting fair rulings will not be easy when there is this enormous bias.

Works Cited

McCullough, J. J. “Early Canadian History.” JJs Complete Guide to Canada. J. J. McCullough, 2016. Web. 15 Oct. 2016.

The Supreme Court of Canada. “Delgamuukw v. British Columbia.” Supreme Court Judgments. Decisia by Lexum, 11 Dec. 1997. Web. 15 Oct. 2016.

1. We began this unit by discussing assumptions and differences that we carry into our class. In “First Contact as Spiritual Performance,” Lutz makes an assumption about his readers (Lutz, “First Contact” 32). He asks us to begin with the assumption that comprehending the performances of the Indigenous participants is “one of the most obvious difficulties.” He explains that this is so because “one must of necessity enter a world that is distant in time and alien in culture, attempting to perceive indigenous performance through their eyes as well as those of the Europeans.” Here, Lutz is assuming either that his readers belong to the European tradition, or he is assuming that it is more difficult for a European to understand Indigenous performances – than the other way around. What do you make of this reading? Am I being fair when I point to this assumption? If so, is Lutz being fair when he makes this assumption?

Regarding your assumption, I would say Lutz is not assuming that his readers belong to the European tradition, nor is he assuming that it is more difficult for a European to understand Indigenous performances.
What he is trying to say is, that because this first contact took place between the Haida people and Spaniards, the outside observer needs to be able to see the interaction through the eyes of the Indigenous Haida people, as well as through the eyes of the Spanish (European) visitors. A task that, in his opinion, can only be achieved partially (Lutz 32).

That being said, it is my opinion that Lutz is right when saying that cultural differences between the Haida people and Spaniards make it hard for both sides to communicate. Without a shared reference frame, it is hard for the Europeans to understand what the Haida are trying to say with their performances. On the other hand, the Haida would have problems judging the Spaniards reactions to their performance for the same reason.

The cultural background of a person is important for many aspects of communication. Not only is it likely that people will speak different languages, but they might also use different signs, gestures, and idioms; have vastly different social values and standards; and, depending on their culture, a different technological level. A good example of cultural differences is the perception of colours. While Canadian and Japanese people see colours in the same way, they do not always agree on how to call a specific colour. Canadians would say that lawns and leaves are green, but Japanese people would call the colour “Ao” (青), the Japanese word for blue (Backhaus).

There can also be differences in gestures that could lead to possible misunderstandings. Even things like shaking your head to indicate “No” are not as universal as one might assume. In Bulgaria shaking your head indicates “Yes” instead of “No,” and nodding your head indicates “No” instead of “Yes” (Kruschewsky).

So Lutz is right when he is saying that the most obvious difficulty is comprehending the performances of the Indigenous participants.  The Spaniards can never be sure that the way they perceive a gesture is the correct way and is indeed meant to say what they are understanding. It is a process of learning from each other and interpreting each other’s reactions to gestures, signs, and language.

Given that two cultures are far apart, not only different in language and in the way they use gestures, but also in their technological level and social values and standards, that opens up the process of first contacts to a lot of misunderstandings with a possibly bad outcome. Yet with the two groups interacting over time, both parties get to know each other better and communication will slowly get more fluent with less chances for a random destructive misunderstanding. However, since even a slight misunderstanding can possibly have very real and bad consequences, there may always be a chance of misunderstandings, although prolonged contact would hopefully establish trust and cancel out the bad effects of possible misunderstandings.

Works Cited

Backhaus, Peter. “The Japanese Traffic Light Blues: Stop on Red, Go on What?” Japan Times RSS. Japan Times Ltd., 25 Feb. 2013. Web. 08 Oct. 2016.

Kruschewsky, Gabriela. “19 Simple Gestures That Might Be Highly Misunderstood Abroad.” BuzzFeed. BuzzFeed Inc., 15 Oct. 2013. Web. 08 Oct. 2016.

Lutz, John S. “First Contact as a Spiritual Performance.” Myth and Memory: Stories of Indigenous-European Contact. Vancouver: UBC, 2007. 32. Print.

It was interesting to go through many of the assignments. I noticed many of them share a common motive (theme) that appears over and over again, albeit in little variations.

The leitmotif in many stories was the connection of the place perceived as home with experiences and memories (Fish) rooted there. And while the memories were different for everybody, the place called home is mostly connected with happy memories. This connection with happy memories was also true for people who called more than one place their home, making new—and good—memories (Prince) seems to be the initial event that leads to the perception of a new place as home. On the other hand, bad memories can taint a place and make the perception of a place as home impossible.

Once a place is established as home, most people seem to regard it as a safe place, protecting them and rooting them to a specific place (Prince).

Canada itself, more specifically the multi-cultural nature of Canada, played a role for people to feel at home here. They feel accepted, an important factor to feel at home in a place.

Another thing that plays a role in establishing a home are the people around you. Many people mentioned family and friends (Lee) as an important factor of the “home” experience.

Going through the different blogs, it becomes apparent that the basic concept of home is very similar for most people. How different factors are weighed can be different, but, for most people, home is the place they feel safe (Lee) due to the many good memories they connect with the place, how it connects them to the place they are living, and their social bubble of family, friends and co-workers.

Homes can be very different, and people may have different expectations, but, in the end, all those things have a similar core of a safe place that makes one feel comfortable, mostly through good experiences and memories, as well as through the social bubble it provides.

Works Cited:

Fish, Colleen. “What home is….for me. – Assignment 2.2” N.p., n.d. https://blogs.ubc.ca/colleenfish/2016/09/30/what-home-is-for-me-assignment-2-2/. 03 Oct. 2016.

Lee, Chloe. “2.2 Home.” ENGL 470A. N.p., n.d. https://blogs.ubc.ca/470chloe/2016/09/28/2-2-home/. 01 Oct. 2016.

Prince, Hope. “LESSON 2:1 – ASSIGNMENT 2:2.” English 470 Canadian Studies Blog. N.p., n.d. https://blogs.ubc.ca/hopeprinceengl470a/2016/09/28/lesson-21-assignment-22/. 01 Oct. 2016.

While Edward Chamberlin said “stories give meaning and value to the places we call home” (Chamberlin), it was hard for me to pinpoint this to any stories that would have impacted my life in a significant way. Of course there were many stories my mom read to me, as well as stories I read by myself when I was a kid, but those stories do not resonate with me in a way that they affect my connection to “home,” except for one – Love You Forever, written by Robert Munsch. When I was older I read quite a few books by Canadian authors, or books referencing Canada, but never really connected this to my sense of what is home, or what it means to be Canadian. Don’t get me wrong though, I feel distinctively Canadian. I love Canada. It never crossed my mind to live anywhere else, at least not permanently.

When people talk about their home countries, they often connect the national anthem with their country and their sense of home.  It starts with referencing to the anthem as “our” national anthem, already installing a sense of community and home by this very notion. And in “our” national anthem Sir Adolphe-Basile Routhier says, “Ô Canada! Terre de nos aïeux” (“O Canada, land of our ancestors”) (O Canada) in the very first two lines. Although this is not really true for myself and many other Canadians whose ancestors were not born here , it somehow captivates and roots you. So one comes to realize that most Canadian’s ancestors are actually not from Canada. Most people’s family may have been born in Canada, but, going back a few generations, most of them will be of European or Asian ancestry (Ethnic Origins). Ironically the First Nations are the only people who can claim they have true Canadian ancestry, but in today’s world those lines tend to blur. Canada is a melting pot of people from different nations and cultures. It is a miracle that people from so many diverse backgrounds find enough common ground to all call this place home. I also call Canada home, although I have Russian, Swedish and English ancestry.

I can’t find the words to describe the feelings I get when I think about what home really means to me. For me home provides security. That, however, is not universal and refugees might have memories about home, that are vastly different and still they are calling this dangerous place home. So does home equal security? It can, but it doesn’t have to.

On a more basic level, the concept of home is something shared by all the people who live in one place and call it home. One thing that people all over the world have in common about home is their feelings of familiarity. This is what differentiates a foreign place from your home. A familiarity gained through memories gathered at that particular place, which might, or might not, include a feeling of safety and security, but always a sensation of belonging – being rooted to a place. For me, this sensation of belonging to a place, the familiarity, is what it really means to call a place home, like I do with Canada.

There is the saying that “Home is, where your heart is,” and it is true that one can only feel truly at home when one is connected with the place. My connection to Canada comes from a lifetime of memories I made here in Canada. I would say one could argue that memories are a story as well. The most basic form of a story, rooted in factual events that you tell yourself repeatedly when you recall a particular memory.

For most people memories make up the largest part of stories, connecting them with a place. Once you have enough memories, you slowly start to call a place home. Over time, the place you call home might even change when you form new memories, new stories, of a new place. More vivid than the old stories, slowly growing in numbers, changing your perception of what is home.

Looking at it like that, my connection to Canada is indeed rooted in stories. Not stories I have heard or read, but stories I was in which I have committed to memory. Stories that, from their point of creation, will always be a part of me, giving meaning to this place I call home. Canada is a beautiful country, but these stories make it more than that, allowing it to come alive and become my home. My perception of home is a romantic one; other people’s might be pragmatic. However, I believe that everybody who lives in one place for a long time, building up memories will have some kind of connection to this place.

I’m sure many people taking this course also call Canada their home. And, even if two of us are neighbours, our feelings about what is home, although physically next to each other, can differ in many ways, depending on the stories we connect with it. In the end, home is a very abstract concept and not just bound to the place you live at in that particular moment of time. I believe that’s a good thing, as it allows you to make a new home, should you ever want to do so. You are not limited to one place. You are free to make new memories. New stories. New homes.

Chamberlin, J. Edward. If This is Your Land, Where are Your Stories?: Finding Common Ground. Vintage Canada Ed., Vintage Canada, 2004.

“Ethnic origins, 2006 counts, for Canada, provinces and territories – 20% sample data.” Statistics Canada, 6 Oct. 2010, http://www12.statcan.ca/census-recensement/2006/dp-pd/hlt/97-562/pages/page.cfm?Lang=E&Geo=PR&Code=01&Table=2&Data=Count&StartRec=1&Sort=3&Display=All. Accessed 25 Sept. 2016.

“O Canada.” Citizenship and Immigration Canada, www.cic.gc.ca/english/celebrate/pdf/National_Anthem_e.pdf. Accessed256 Sept. 2016.

Your task is to take the story about how evil comes into the world, the story King tells about the Witches’ convention in Chapter One of The Truth about Stories, and change it any way you want, except the ending. You can change to place, the people, the time – anything you want. But, your story must have the same moral – it must tell us how evil came into the world and how once a story is told, it cannot be taken back.

First, learn your story by heart, and then tell the story to your friends and family.

After you have told the story a few times,  post a blog with your version of the story and some commentary on what you discovered about story telling.

Many centuries ago, the forest lay still and quiet – a peaceful time, unknown to most. The sole occupant of the forest was an ancient Goddess named Mephanda.

Mephanda, the Goddess, created this forest. She was born amongst the clouds and travelled down to a river. As Mephanda floated on the cloud right above the river, she realized it was just a river – a river surrounded by nothingness – and that she would not be able to swim in the river, so she created land. Large meadows materialized around the river. Then Mephanda decided that she would need food, so she created plants. And Mephanda created trees so she could sleep in them.

She was very happy with her creation, and she lived very happy and content in this forest she created. There was an abundance of food to eat and many beautiful flowers and trees for her to enjoy.

One day as Mephanda laid in a tree she heard a very loud bang. She wondered where it had come from, as she had never heard a noise like this before. She looked around, but no matter how far she looked she saw nothing.

Then suddenly the sky darkened quickly. The sky was now pitch black with not a hint of colour or light. Mephanda was very frightened. As Mephanda hugged the tree with fear, she noticed the sky was raining down a golden shimmer. Mephanda was mesmerized and couldn’t keep her eyes off it – her fear dissipating. This had never happened before, and she believed it was very beautiful, albeit slightly frightening.

As the golden shimmer rained upon Mephanda, her stomach immediately began to grow. Then she realized that the golden shimmer made her pregnant. After all, she was a Goddess, so she could become pregnant without a man. And now that she thought about it, she was indeed thinking of having a child, as she was lonely. Yes, she had her beautiful forest, full of trees and flowers that she had created, but, as much joy as the forest gave her, she had the feeling that something was missing. This feeling seemed to have materialized in the golden shimmer that got her pregnant.

The sky was blue again – as blue as a sky could be – and the forest looked more beautiful than ever before. But maybe it was just her joy that made everything look more vibrant. Now she was wondering how long it would be until she would give birth. Was it a boy? Was it a girl?

She felt energized and decided to make her world even more beautiful for her child. She created a little lake close to her favourite trees and then a big ocean with a beach of golden sand and countless islands filled with colourful flowers and trees. And then she created green hills which were slowly sloping up into big mountains topped with white hats of snow and ice. Her world became larger and larger.

And after some time the day finally came when she gave birth to a little child she named Typh. Even though he was barely a mere few hours old, Typh was already talking to her.

The day went by and Typh grew faster than she would have ever expected. About two weeks after he was born she saw something strange: parts of her forest were covered in blackness.

As she went to the parts of the forest that were covered in blackness, she found hundreds of dead, burnt trees, most of which were still smoking deep black smoke. Mephanda was sad to see her forest like this and wondered what had happened. She followed the trail of dead trees, moving faster and faster. Then she finally saw what was going on. She was shocked and sad at the same time. Typh was laughing and using his awakening godly powers to set trees on fire.

“What are you doing?” screamed Mephanda.

“Killing them with fire.”

“But why?” She asked with horror in her trembling voice.

“Because I can,” a smiling Typh said. And at that moment Mephanda realized she may have doomed her paradise with her wish for company and more joy than she already had.

It was fun to recreate the essence of Thomas King’s story in my own words and I believe that is a big part of what story-telling is about. It also shows that a story can work in many ways and lots of different forms. Not only did I rewrite the story, but when I told it to relatives and my boyfriend I told the story each time a little bit different. Oral story-telling is a fluid process, each time the story get re-crated a tiny bit different. Stories can change over time, but their essence might still be there told through an entirely new set of words setting the story up in a totally different way.

King, Thomas. “‘You’ll Never Believe What Happened’ is Always a Great Way to Start.” The Truth About Stories: A Native Narrative. House of Anansi Press Inc., 2003.

At the beginning of this lesson I pointed to the idea that technological advances in communication tools have been part of the impetus to rethink the divisive and hierarchical categorizing of literature and orality, and suggested that this is happening for a number of reasons.  I’d like you to consider two aspects of digital literature: 1) social media tools that enable widespread publication, without publishers, and 2) Hypertext, which is the name for the text that lies beyond the text you are reading, until you click. How do you think these capabilities might be impacting literature and story?

Social media tools and the Internet in general made it easier for the reader to gain access to publications of any kind. It is also easier now, than ever, to publish any kind of publication on your own without the need of a publisher.

This ease of publication allows more works to be made public. For example, works that without the Internet would have been denied by a publisher. Because there is no formal publisher, regardless if your work is controversial or not, your work will still be published because you are your own publisher.  Being your own publisher offers you the freedom and responsibility to decide whether you want to publish controversial work. Hence the formal publisher is not put into the position of being afraid of losing their reputation due to the publication of controversial work. There is also no formal publisher filtering out unprofitable work resulting in more works being made public. Because works don’t have to be commercially successful anymore and no one is filtering the writer’s output by any regulations not only more works will be available to the public but they will also cover a wider range of topics.

If you have something to say, you can do it. Nobody is stopping you. No matter whether it is a novel, fiction, non-fiction, a poem, or any other type of text. This ease of publication and the massive user base of social media platforms allow writers to reach a large amount of people, even without having any kind of name recognition. There are many services now, specialized to support people in self-publishing books. So your story will not only be available digital on your blog or social media account but it will also exist as a real book which can be ordered by people. Lulu (Online Self Publishing Book & eBook Company – Lulu), one of these services, uses the slogan “Create, publish and sell your book for free.”

Hypertext, the use of links in story or literature, opens up new possibilities. eWriters can use links to enrich their stories. If they mention the Egyptian pyramids, for example, they are able to link to a picture of those pyramids. Or an explanation of the cultural significance of the pyramids. The possibilities are endless and can be used to enhance the reading experience. Of course these links can also be a distraction, steering the reader away from a writer’s work and interrupting the reading experience, making it harder to follow what is being said. Links even allow for a form of interactive literature. It is possible to write a story and at times – when there is a point in the story where a protagonist is making a decision – give the reader the possibility of making this decision for the protagonist by providing links for different courses of action that lead to different outcomes. This way the story can split up again and again. The reader has an influence on how the story goes on and the storyline doesn’t have to be linear anymore. There are services that support authors in the creation of those interactive stories. Take a look at this example story, “Neighbourhood Predators” by Jon Ingold (Ingold) using inklewriter (inklewriter), one of the services helping you in creating interactive stories, to see how an interactive story can work.

Online Self Publishing Book & eBook Company – Lulu. Lulu Press, Inc., 2002-2016, https://www.lulu.com/. Accessed 17 Sep. 2016.

Ingold, Jon. “Neighbourhood Predators.”https://writer.inklestudios.com/stories/neighbourhoodpredators Accessed 17 Sep. 2016.

inklewriter. inkle Ltd, http://www.inklestudios.com/inklewriter/. Accessed 17 Sep. 2016.

Welcome to my blog! I am a third year student currently living in a small town in the Kootenays. (That’s 10 hours East of Vancouver, or 4 hours East of Kelowna, for those of you who don’t know your BC Geography!) I am majoring in Cultural Studies and English. After graduating with a Bachelor Of Arts degree, I then plan on going to a teacher education program and would like to become an elementary school teacher.

In my free time, when I’m not busy with school work and my job, I enjoy reading, cooking, yoga, tea, cats, travelling, and spending time with my friends, family, and pets!

I am taking this course, because I believe it will be interesting, as I took a previous Canadian Literature course, which I really enjoyed. Plus it’s nice to learn more on topics about your own country. I believe that this course will be useful to me once I become a teacher. I also really like the blogging aspect. I think it’s a really creative idea, because in most online courses there are just discussion posts and there is something about blogging I find that is really fun and allows you to really open up!

I expect that in this Canadian literature course, we will be focusing particular attention to Indigenous people and the effects colonialism had and, in some instances, still has on their lives. In the early times of colonialism in Canada there have been lots of incidents of violence and racism, and it’s good that now much of current Canadian literature covers these topics. I hope we might also cover topics, such as Canadian identity and who we are as a country.

I’ll end this blog post with a cute photo of my new kitten named Twilah, who I adopted from the SPCA on Saturday! 🙂

My own image

I hope to get a lot out of this course, and I am really excited to get to know all of you!

Works cited:

Marc St-Pierre in collaboration with the Aboriginal Perspectives team. Aboriginal Perspectives. National Film Board of Canada. http://www3.nfb.ca/enclasse/doclens/visau/index.php?mode=theme&language=english&theme=30662&film=&excerpt=&submode=about&expmode=2 Accessed 12 Sep. 2016

Molson Brewery. “I am Canadian.” YouTube, uploaded by Vinko, 12 Sep. 2016, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BRI-A3vakVg.