Write a blog that hyper-links your research on the characters in GGRW according to the pages assigned to you.

PAGES: 107-120, 2007 Edition

I would like to start by saying that it is hard to get past the title Green Grass, Running Water without seeing Thomas King’s first reference to historical events. The title itself is a reference to the language found in many treaties, which promised the Indians that the land would be theirs “as long as the grass is green and the water runs.”

My first section introduces us to Latisha and the Dead Dog Café. Latisha, through the suggestion of her auntie, uses disempowering racialized imagery to make a living by creating a restaurant that claims to serves dog meat. She goes as far as recreating white colonial fantasies through fabricated postcards of “Indians” hunting and hoisting dogs as their catch of the day. She has her employees dress up, “Plains. Southwest, or combination?” trying to resemble the image that tourists would expect an “Indian” to look like. The fact that they use the idea of “combination” suggests that what tourists think an “Indian” should look like has nothing to do with reality and stems from the imagination of original colonizers. Old Agency is a Blackfoot settlement on the Blood Reserve near Lethbridge, Alberta and when turned into a stew, pokes fun at the idea of beef disguised as an authentic indigenous experience. King uses the Dead Dog Café as a way to mock western expectations allowing colonizers to consider it as confirmation that the stories are true; the “Indians” were “uncivilized savages.” I am left wondering if they are really fooled by Latisha’s insistence that they are eating dog meat or are they content with having their expectations filled by a stereotype with no substance? As mentioned in Jane Flick’s reading notes, the café name itself may refer to Nietzsche’s assertion that “God is Dead”, as you may recall earlier in the book when the dog mistakenly thinks he is God.

Next we are introduced to Eli Stands Alone and his standoff with Clifford Sifton and the Grand Baleen Dam. Both characters and the dam itself are historical references made by King. Eli is connected to Elijah Harper, the Oji-Cree politician, consultant, and policy analyst that stalled the Manitoba legislature past the deadline for approval of the Meech Lake Accord. Sifton is a direct reference to Sir Clifford Sifton, a Manitoba businessman who became the Federal minister of the Interior and Superintendent of Indian Affairs under Sir Wilfred Laurier. Sifton’s pro-immigration policies for white Europeans through the “Prairie West” movement was an enormous cost to First Nations peoples, who were displaced in large numbers. The Grand Baleen Dam refers to the Great Whale River Project that destroyed traditional Cree hunting grounds. It is also a close reference to the Oldman River Dam that is located in southern Alberta and intruded on sacred Native land owned by the Blackfoot Nation. In all of these cases, the choice to build a dam did not take into account the opinion of the First Nations or the negative impact they would have on the environment.

Last we meet Charlie Looking Bear who comes across as a materialistic, wannabe white, lawyer. This is reflected in the fact that he lives in Edmonton and King mentions the West Edmonton Mall, one of the world’s largest shopping malls. Although we read about Charlie’s love interest, we also find more historical references surrounding Eli’s battle with the dam. Charlie is employed by Duplessis International Associates as he was hired as a front man for their case against Eli Stands Alone. He is well aware that he was hired solely because he was Blackfoot and Eli was Blackfoot and this would make for good media. The name Duplessis refers to the political corruption of Maurice Duplessis, the once Prime Minister and attorney general of Quebec. He was known as a controversial leader that produced ambitious hydroelectric power schemes, extending electrification throughout rural Québec. After battling with Eli, Duplessis International Associates hires the PR firm Crosby Johns and Sons Inc., playing on the once Minister of Justice, John Crosbie who was involved in a patronage scandal that involved his sons being on the federal payroll.

In just thirteen pages of this fascinating book there are many references made by King that really challenge the reader to explore further into what is being read. With each reading and some research I was able to gain more and more knowledge about our country as well as the discourses we are taught to believe.

Works Cited:

“Cree Legal Struggle Against the Great Whale Project.” Grand Council of the Cree. n.p. n.d. Web. 30 March 2016.

“Elijah Harper.” The Canadian Encyclopedia. Historica Canada. n.d. Web. 30 March 2016.

“God is Dead.” Philosophy Index. Philosophy Index. n.d. Web. 30 March 2016.

“John Crosbie.” The Canadian Encyclopedia. Historica Canada. n.d. Web. 30 March 2016.

“Meech Lake Accord.” The Canadian Encyclopedia. Historica Canada. n.d. Web. 30 March 2016.

“Maurice Le Noblet Duplessis.” The Canadian Encyclopedia. Historica Canada. n.d. Web. 30 March 2016.

“Oldman River Dam.” University of Lethbridge. University of Lethbridge. n.d. Web. 30 March 2016.

“Sir Clifford Sifton.” The Canadian Encyclopedia. Historica Canada. n.d. Web. 30 March 2016.

“Thomas King Native Indian Writer.” 20th Century Native American Literature. n.p. n.d. Web. 30 March 2016.

Find three examples of names that need to be spoken aloud in order to catch the allusion. Discuss the examples as well as the reading technique that requires you to read aloud in order to make connections. Why does King want us to read aloud?

I would like to start by saying that in reading Green Grass Running Water I found myself automatically reading certain parts out loud and certain parts in my head. In reading the parts that are written in a traditionally western style I would read silently following the story of each characters return to Blossom. I found myself reading the rest of the book out loud as I did when reading Robinson’s Living By Stories. That being said, when it came to meeting new characters I found myself repeating their names out loud. This allowed me to make some interesting connections. I’ve always been fascinated with how writers come up with the names of their characters, there seems to be such a need for an amazing imagination. In Thomas King’s case it is so much more than imagination, he uses the characters to weave an underlying connection throughout his story.

The first connection jumped off the page in meeting Dr. Joseph Hovaugh. I was pleased when reading Jane Flick’s Reading Notes as it confirmed my connection with Jehovah as well as the Doctors deep connection with his garden. In the bible, Jehovah is God’s personal name. There is also the use of other biblical names such as Mary and John that work directly with Dr. Hovaugh.

Alberta Frank not only stood out for the fact that Alberta is the province in which most of the story takes place but I found Alberta’s character to be very frank in terms of being direct and straightforward about what she wants, she wanted children but not a husband. What I found interesting is that as much as she knew what she wanted she was not very frank with those involved such as Charlie and Lionel.

Another name that really gave me a strong visual was Eli Stands Alone. Every time I read Eli’s part of the story I could envision this lonely cabin in the shadows of a large dam. To me this was the most straightforward allusion caused by a name; I mean he really was standing alone. His stance against the construction of the dam and holding up any further development leaves him on his own in the woods. He also struggled between two worlds, life on the reserve and life in Toronto. This is a huge contrast to his sister Norma who is resolute in her decision to remain a large part of her family when Eli seems torn and in the end is on his own.

In forcing the reader to read out loud, I believe King encourages us to be a part of the story. By saying the names I felt more connected to the characters almost as if I were meeting them myself. This strategy really helps the reader to be engaged with the book and the lives of its characters. For me it also added great imagery in that it allowed me to make a visual connection.

Works Cited

Ciccarelli, Stephanie. “7 Ways Reading Aloud Improves and Enriches Your Life.” Voices.com. Vox Daily. 6 November 2008. Web. 21 March 2016.

“Does God Have a Name?” JW.org. Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania. 2016. Web. 21 March 2016.

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.

Multiculturalism as a whole has been accepted with some controversy. Pierre Trudeau implemented it through federal government policies in 1971 and Prime Minister Brian Mulroney enacted the Multicultural Act in 1988. It was meant to turn the “melting pot” into more of a cultural “mosaic”. It refers to a society that reflects a number of ethnic and cultural identities and is thought to be an ideal of equality and mutual respect among a population filled with different ethnic and cultural groups (Bissoondath 2002). Multiculturalism has also been thought to confirm the belief that all citizens are equal and can retain their ethnic identities with pride while having a sense of belonging here in Canada through respect that is meant to develop common attitudes.

The need for a multicultural act confirms much of Coleman’s feeling of white civility, in that a white Anglo-Canadian “still occupies the position of normalcy and privilege in Canada” (Coleman 7). Although many support diversity, the Multiculturalism Act can also be seen as a way of designating certain groups as outside the dominant society. One point from the Canlit Guides that stood out to me is the idea that visible minority members or recent immigrants are often welcomed to Canada by white Anglo-Canadians and expected to feel gratitude for the chance to live here, forming a host/guest hierarchy (Contesting Multiculturalism). This ties into Coleman’s argument about the project of white civility in that it still creates a “Them and Us” dichotomy.

The Canlit Guides makes the point that some feel that multiculturalism policy can be easily reduced to token displays of diversity (food, song, and dance) instead of dealing with social injustices (Introduction to Nationalism). It also mentions Neil Bissoondath argument in Selling Illusions that states that multiculturalism leads to ethnic and cultural segregation and the ghettoization of cultural groups rather than to an integrated community (Contesting Multiculturalism). This is something we have seen here in Vancouver as we have seen a large growth in what is called an ethnoburb. Ethnoburbs are suburban ethnic clusters of residential and business districts within large metropolitan areas. They are multiracial/multiethnic, multicultural, multilingual, and often, multinational communities, in which one ethnic group has a significant concentration, but does not, necessarily, comprise the majority (Li 1998). In the Vancouver area, Richmond would be considered an ethnoburb.

I’ve touched on the concept of the ethnoburb as it raises many questions. I’m not sure an ethnoburb reflects the true meaning of multiculturalism as it has created a new community of its own, dominant in one ethnicity. Multiculturalism is meant to create diversity that allows different cultures to accept and respect each other and co-exist in the same space. With the formation of ethnoburbs it could be argued that the diversity no longer exists and there may be more of a chosen segregation defeating the purpose of a multicultural society. New immigrants may be attracted to communities that are dense with the same ethnicity. This allows them to create social networks that can help them navigate their new surroundings in what they perceive to be a safe and comfortable environment. No matter the reasons behind why ethnoburbs exist, it is clear that in many suburb/ethnoburb communities, citizens are not necessarily living a diverse co-existence but rather living separately side-by-side. What are your thoughts on the idea of an ethnoburb? Could they possibly be a new form of segregation and a discourager of multiculturalism?

Works Cited:

Bissoondath, N. (2002). Selling illusions: The cult of multiculturalism in Canada. Toronto, ON: Penguin.

CanLit Guides. “Reading and Writing in Canada, A Classroom Guide to Nationalism.” Canadian Literature. Web. April 4th 2013.

“Canadian Multiculturalism Act.” Justice Laws Website. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 March 2016.

Li, W. (1998). Anatomy of a new ethnic settlement: The Chinese ethnoburb in Los Angeles. Urban Studies, 35(3), 479-501.

“Rise of the Ethnoburbs.” Opinionator. The New York Times. 10 March 2011. Web. 11 March 2016.

Statistics Canada. (2012). Focus on Geography Series, 2011 Census. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 98-310-XWE2011004, Ottawa, Ontario. Analytical products, 2011 Census.

In his article, “Godzilla vs. Post-Colonial,” King discusses Robinson’s collection of stories. King explains that while the stories are written in English, “the patterns, metaphors, structures as well as the themes and characters come primarily from oral literature.” More than this, Robinson, he says “develops what we might want to call an oral syntax that defeats reader’s efforts to read the stories silently to themselves, a syntax that encourages readers to read aloud” and in so doing, “recreating at once the storyteller and the performance” (186). Read “Coyote Makes a Deal with King of England”, in Living by Stories. Read it silently, read it out loud, read it to a friend, and have a friend read it to you. See if you can discover how this oral syntax works to shape meaning for the story by shaping your reading and listening of the story. Write a blog about this reading/listening experience that provides references to the story.

On my first reading of Robinson’s “Coyote Makes a Deal with the King of England”, I found it difficult to follow and a bit choppy. The fragmented sentences made it hard to get into a rhythm while reading the story. The structure of the story with its short sentences appeared like poetry to me so I found myself reading it aloud even before looking at this blog question. Confirming what King mentions in his article, “Godzilla vs. Post-Colonial”, about how Robinson’s creates a “syntax that encourages readers to read aloud” (186). Once I began reading aloud the story began to take shape in more ways than one.

First, the story began to flow because it took on the shape of someone reciting it like a poem. Although it did not rhyme the short lines make the reader slow down and speak in a deliberate tone. Each word and each line has meaning and could not be glanced over.

Second, the natural pauses within some of the lines cause the reader to stop and breath allowing the story to become more of a conversation or a storytelling. What once seemed confusing or inconsistent started to make sense when you imagine someone telling the story.

Third, the pauses and changing of subjects is more natural when a person is speaking. It is as if we are getting a glimpse at their inner thoughts as they jump from one idea to the next.

“His name was TOH-mah.

That’s all the name I know.

I don’t know his second name.

Or, his first name,

Maybe his first name, maybe TOH-mah,

   maybe that was his second name.

Or maybe that was his first name, I don’t know.

Only name I know, that was TOH-mah” (Robinson, 80).

In the example above the storyteller is questioning his own facts in a way and comes to terms with not knowing for sure but making it clear that it is irrelevant to the story as a whole.

Finally, Robinson interacts with the reader (or listener) by making them a participant rather than an observer. This is seen in the use of “you know” in sentences such as the one below.

“But the Indians, they call him, TOH-mat, but they don’t say it right,

you know “ (Robinson, 80).

In all, I enjoyed the story most when it was read to me. I found myself more attentive to the details and engaged in the story. I see this in my children as they would rather I make up a story to tell them than read one from a book. I believe this is due to the interaction that takes place. They can, in a sense, help guide the story by asking questions and giving input making it an interactive experience.

Works Cited

King, Thomas. “Godzilla vs. Post-Colonial.” Unhomely States: Theorizing English-Canadian Postcolonialism. Mississauga, ON: Broadview, 2004. 183- 190.

Robinson, Harry. “Coyote Makes a Deal with the King Of England.” Living by Stories: a Journey of Landscape and Memory. Ed. Wendy Wickwire. Vancouver: Talonbooks, 2005. 64-85.

“Storytelling.” TED. TED conferences, LLC. Web. 2 March 2016.

“The Structure of Poetry.” The Latino Author, 2016. Web. 2 March 2016.

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?  

To answer this question I turn to an essay written by Daniel Clayton titled, “Captain Cook and the Spaces of Contact at ‘Nootka Sound’”. In the essay, writer Daniel Clayton, questions the validity of scientific exploration and the personal journals that depict first encounters with Native peoples. He feels that it is impossible to be certain of the truth and that we can only measure the degree of precision and authenticity of historical texts by comparing them with other documents from the same period. Clayton emphasizes the importance of what perspective the document is being written from and how cultural relations to power often play a role. He does so by comparing and contrasting different primary and secondary sources. Clayton explores the possibility of using a number of different sources to determine the truth the best we can.

He compares and contrasts the “official accounts”, edited by John Douglas, and Cook’s own journal of his third voyage. Cook himself wrote in a more objective manner and Douglas seemed to change Cook’s words and added a few of his own. Clayton notes the inconsistency between Douglas’s account and Cook’s original journal itself. Clayton not only looks at Cook’s personal journal but he also reflects on a number of accounts written by Cook’s crew. He also talks about the differences in the journals of many of the officers and crew from Cook’s ships. Their journals recorded things that were not in Cook’s journal and often their observations contradicted his. They also reflected more of how the Natives tell the story. They speak of the Native’s astonishment at seeing the ship approach their land.

He also explores the encounter from the viewpoint of the Native people. When looking at Native accounts of the same encounter it is very clear that the meeting was interpreted in very different ways. Most of these accounts spoke of their fear of the unknown object that was approaching their land. In both Cook’s journal and the official account this fear was not mentioned. It is very clear that the Native accounts give a whole new perspective on how the first encounters went. Although some of the details of the encounter were similar, it is clear they came from very different points of view. This makes me question if all of this is due to misunderstanding? Or is there a relation to power here?

Clayton states that this is due to the fact that the stories sent back to Europe needed to be of a positive nature while finding information about the land and people for colonization purposes. Cook had an image to uphold and the editing of his journal was done in a way to depict that image. Clayton emphasizes the importance of being aware of the different issues that are raised when looking at different accounts of one encounter. One cannot find the truth by just relying on one person’s recollections. It is also important to ask why some accounts are thought to be true while others are dismissed? And how this relates to power?

Scientific explorers from Europe came to the America’s with a set way of how to depict the land and indigenous people. They attempted to be objective but were not completely successful in doing so. Even though Cook did not pillage or colonize, how he told his story affected how Europeans saw the America’s. When reading historical work one must remember that it is one person’s account of what happened and it is from their perspective. These perspectives can vary drastically depending on ones upbringing or culture. When considering what is historically true it is important to take into consideration the different perspectives that are drawn from the same time. One must look at the relationship with power and how that power influences what we believe as true. By looking at different accounts of the first encounters you can begin to put the pieces together like a puzzle. Allowing one to get as close to the truth as possible or at least finding out what cannot be the truth. We often fall into the mindset of believing that because it was recorded it must be true but we often do not look at the other perspective or consider oral narratives.

Works Cited

Clayton, Daniel Wright. 2000. Islands of truth: The imperial fashioning of Vancouver Island. Vancouver: UBC Press.

“Historic Figures: Captain James Cook (1728-1779).” BBC. BBC, 2014. Web. 2 March 2016.

“Historic Nootka Sound.” Get West Adventure Cruises. 2010-2014. Web. 2 March 2016.