Month: November 2016

Write a blog that hyper-links your research on the characters in GGRW. Be sure to make use of  Jane Flicks’ GGRW reading notes on your reading list.

I have selected pages 136 – 143 from Green Grass, Running Water (GGRW).

Eli Stand Alone

The beginning of this chapter involves Eli Stand Alone imagining that he could see the “cracks  were developing near the base of the dam, Stress fractures, they call them, common enough in any dam, but troublesome nonetheless, especially given the relatively young age of the concrete” (King 136).  Firstly, Eli Stand Alone refers to Elijah Harper, born at Red Sucker Lake First Nation in Northern Manitoba. Elijah was removed from his family and placed in the residential school system. Upon his return to his community as an adult, “he resolved to enact change for First Nations and at 29 years old, was elected as Chief of Red Sucker Lake First Nation” (Working Effectively with Indigenous Peoples n.p).  Elijah Harper stood alone against the Meech Accord  and won (Schoolworkhelper n.p). This work won him the Stanley Knowles Humanitarian Award, the same that was presented to Nelson Mandela of South Africa (Nation Media n.p).

Eli Stand Alone resisted the dam that would flood his mothers home alone. However, King alludes to more than just standing alone against the corporations for the rights of the Blackfoot, he alludes to the dam not being of the best quality, which was demonstrated by Eli imagining that he could see the cracks forming on the dam, and that the “slumping” that had been discovered was even more of a concern. For Eli, it is about protecting the treaty rights. Elijah Harper was the only member who voted “against a debate that did not allow full consultation with the First Nations and that recognized only the English and the French as founding nations” (Flick 150).

---

Clifford Sifton

The character, Clifford Sifton, who works for the lawyers and corporations wanting the dam, it was demonstrated that these concerns are resented by the rest of non-Indigenous Albertans. This is achieved through the dialogue between Sifton and Eli. For example,

"Treaty rights, Cliff"
"Almost as bad as French rights. Damn sure wish the government would give me some of that."
"Government didn't give us anything, Cliff. We paid for them. Paid for them two or three times."
"And so because the government felt generous back in the last ice age, and made promises it never intended to keep, I have to come by every morning and ask the same stupid question" (King 138)

Clifford Sifton refers to Sir Clifford Sifton (1861-1929) who aggressively promoted the settlement of the West and was a champion of the settlers who displaced the Native population. In addition, Sir Clifford Sifton was deaf throughout his life (Flick 150). The dialogue at the beginning of the chapter mimics this as Sifton doesn’t seem to be hearing Eli discuss the approaching storm. However, the above quoted dialogue also demonstrates two aspects of his character. One, that Cliff is resentful towards the ongoing resistance and continues to deny the treaty rights. And two, that he believes in the rhetoric within Canada relating to treaty rights. When Sifton comments about the promises being made “in the last ice age,” it alludes to the idea that those promises were made a long time ago and shouldn’t be held up any longer. His comments are about reinforcing the notion that the suffering happened many generations ago, and shouldn’t be applied to current generations because times have changed.

The idea that Indigenous Peoples were only affected many generations ago was also referred to again when Sifton said, “Who’d of guessed that there would still be Indians kicking around in the twentieth century.” As well as the comment, “Besides, you guys aren’t real Indians anyway. I mean, you drive cars, watch television, go to hockey games. Look at you. You’re a university professor.”  These comments are juxtaposed between the colonization ideology and the reality of what life is like for modern-day First Nations.

Sifton continues to refer to how Eli, Latisha and Lionel are not traditionalists but of course, even back in the day, non-Indigenous people didn’t watch TV, drive cars or have jobs as university professors as of course, in the nineteenth century, they didn’t exist, for either Indigenous or non-Indigenous peoples. As King eloquently demonstrates through these two characters, it is ridiculous to expect any person living in North America today that they would not access these technologies. Sifton continues to try to downplay the importance of Eli’s family home while just as Sir Clifford Sifton likely did back at the turn of the century, the investors needs were more important. The home was no longer a home but rather a “pile of logs in the middle of a spillway” (King 142).

There were a few other characters in this chapter, Orville, Leroy and a man from Michigan which I won’t go into however, the interspersed story of the Sun Dance which involved ceremonies, play, dancing, and horseback riding, likely was used by King to illustrate that the story of Eli didn’t happen “in the last ice age.” It happened in today’s generation. First Nations continue to participate in their own cultural practices which continue to be drastically different from the non-Indigenous, despite still utilizing modern-day technologies such as cars and televisions.

Works Cited

Flick, Jane. “Reading Notes for Thomas King’s Green Grass Running Water.” Canadian Literature 161-162. (1999). Web.

King, Thomas. Green Grass Running Water. Toronto: Harper Collins, 1993. Print.

http://www.ictinc.ca/blog/elijah-harper-the-man-with-a-feather-who-changed-the-course-of-history

Green Grass, Running Water Character Analysis


http://www.nationmedia.ca/elijahharper/bio.html

Identify and discuss two of King’s “acts of narrative decolonization.”Please read the following quote to assist you with your answer.The lives of King’s characters are entangled in and informed by both the colonial legacy in the Americas and the narratives that enact and enable colonial domination. King begins to extricate his characters’ lives from the domination of the invader’s discourses by weaving their stories into both Native American oral traditions and into revisions of some of the most damaging narratives of domination and conquest: European American origin stories and national myths, canonical literary texts, and popular culture texts such as John Wayne films. These revisions are acts of narrative decolonization. James Cox. “All This Water Imagery Must Mean Something.” Canadian Literature 161-162 (1999). Web April 04/2013.

King challenges the colonial legacy and the narratives that enact and enable colonial domination throughout the novel, Green Grass, Running Water (1993).  This is achieved by describing “acts of narrative decolonization” according to Cox (2013). However, from my own observations before even reading the blog questions or the article by James Cox, I would have described it in much the same way, as a way of using particular experiences, symbols and storytelling to deconstruct the narration of the colonial story, aka the one of European American origin stories and mythology.

It is difficult to choose only two acts out of the many but I feel that the two that moved me most included the experiences that Lionel had from early childhood as well as Eli Standing Alone. The first “act of narrative decolonization” is when Lionel wanted to get his tonsils out but ended up being flown to Toronto and forever being labelled as a person with a heart condition, and secondly, when he attended Wounded Knee and had a misunderstanding with the authority related to possession of a weapon (59-62). These were both “acts of narrative decolonization” as it challenges the rhetoric surrounding ideas about how the system is believed to be unbiased, culturally-universal and that the court system treats all citizens equally regardless of ethnicity, sex, age or socioeconomic status.  It is apparent that if it did, Lionel wouldn’t have had this experience in the first place. In addition, the trouble with getting mixed up with another patient also indicates how this child, even though a child, has already become invisible and not carefully listened to by the medical services due to culturally-insensitive services.

Lionel felt completely helpless in both situations, and essentially because of who he was, he was helpless. As King describes, a child can tell the difference between knowing trouble with the throat versus problems with a heart. Yet, nobody stopped to say, why is this child saying this? Should I perhaps listen to what they are saying? It was discarded as being invalid, inconsequential and as that of well, “a child.” King uses narrative decolonization by redirecting the problem not to Lionel but to the colonizers, making erroneous assumptions despite Lionel appearing to be a relatively good guy.  Not listening when they should have been. As was said various times throughout the story, “listen, pay attention, forget that, listen up!”

The second act of narrative decolonization was the ongoing situation with the dam and the desire of Eli who was fighting the dam. This is going on today with the pipeline that is to be throughout North America. It seems that this is an ongoing colonization practice that hasn’t stopped as despite claims of ties to the land, the corporations feel they have more of a right to the land and the resources than the Indigenous peoples all in the prospect of profit. It was made pretty obvious the effects this has on people living on these lands, such as Eli wanting to save his childhood home and consistently challenging the status quo in relation to Western-European culture such as using what resources are desired, regardless of who may be using them or how they may be valued.

Works Cited

Cox, James. “All This Water Imagery Must Mean Something.” Canadian Literature 161-162 (1999). Web.

King, Thomas. Green Grass Running Water. Toronto: Harper Collins, 1993. Print.