Prompt: Each student will be assigned a section of the novel Green Grass Running Water (pages will be divided by the number of students). The task at hand is to first discover as many allusions as you can to historical references (people and events), literary references (characters and authors), mythical references (symbols and metaphors).

In my first blog, I said, “I expect that naming will become important [in relation to this course], as names have different associations, meanings, and symbolic value to different peoples”; and that is something King really hits on in GGRW.

I was assigned the section from when “Lionel pulled his foot out of the puddle” (121), to when Bursum says, ” That’s right” (129). Or, in other words, from when Lionel sees the Indians for the first time, to when Bursum shows Minnie The Map.

The four old Indians–Lone Ranger, Ishmael, Robinson Crusoe, and Hawkeye–are called by names of famous Western fictional figures, which may vaguely, in a satirical way, sound ‘Indian’; but their ‘real’ names according to Dr. Hovaugh’s file are Mr. Red, Mr. White, Mr. Black, and Mr. Blue, which correspond with The Medicine Wheel (Paterson 3.2), but may also be references to the film Resevoir Dogs (Flick 148). As you can see, King is already drawing connections, including one between the seemingly arbitrary names, or colour codes, of the four Indians, and the seemingly arbitrary lines drawn on a map.

I think this section is the beginning part of creating a parallel between the four old Indians, and The Map; one that shows them being introduced in the beginning of back to back segments–to Lionel and Minnie respectively.

Lionel first notices “the Indian with the mask,” and then “the Indian in the Hawaiian shirt with the red palm trees” (121). The mask is that of the Lone Ranger, who is based a hero in western books, radio serials, and movies that brings along a faithful Indian companion named Tonto. The character of Tonto is often seen as degrading to Native Americans, as he speaks in broken English, and while the writers claim his name means ‘wild one’ in Potowatomi, it definitely means ‘stupid’ in Spanish, so the name was changed to Toro (meaning ‘bull’) or Ponto for Spanish audiences. As King puts it, “That’s a stupid name” (71). Interestingly, Kemosabe–the name Tonto gives his boss–also has controversy surrounding it, with theories ranging from ‘white man’ to ‘a horse’s rear end.’

On the other hand, the Hawaiian shirt with the palm trees is a reference to the desert island Robinson Crusoe is stranded on. Robinson Crusoe is the eponymous character of Daniel Defoe’s most famous novel, and in it’s first edition, it was credited to him–leading many to believe he was a real person. However, he is based on the true story of Alexander Selkirk. Aided most of all by the Bible giving him spiritual strength needed to survive, he is also helped by Man Friday, a “savage” he saves from cannibals, and then converts to Christianity.

I think you’re seeing a pattern here. The original Lone Ranger, Robinson Crusoe, Ishmael, and Hawkeye all had “noble savages” as companions. Hawkeye had Chingachgook–an Indian converted to Christinity–and Ishmael had Queequeg–who’s coffin serves as his flotation device when the whale Moby Dick destroys the Pequod (Flick 141-43).

By making  Hawkeye, Ishmael, Lone Ranger, and Robinson Crusoe (non-Christian) Indians, King is “fixing” the worldview of the novel in the same way they want to–step by step.

“Start small and work your way up” (125).

Immediately following Lionel asking, “So [haha], where are you going to start?” we see Bill Bursum.

Bursum is based on two men famous for being hostile to Indians. Holm O. Bursum (1867-1953) was a senator who proposed the infamous 1922 Bursum Bill, which allowed any non-Indians to retain land they squatted on prior to 1902, at the expense of Pueblos in the area of New Mexico. Bursum Bill; Bill Bursum – get it? King takes that further by also connecting Bursum’s nickname Buffalo Bill to William F. Cody (1846-1917), whose Buffalo Bill Cody’s Wild West Show exploited Indians for entertainment (Flick 148). FYI, this is also the inspiration for Jame Gumb’s alias in Silence of the Lambs.

Bill Bursum’s Map has a connection to Fort Marian ledger art. According to Margary Fee, they represent different concepts of maps taken from different cultures, and since maps are a form of writing, that dismantles the distinction between orality and literacy (10). She says that while “The ledger art records the Plains Indians’ use of a horse as a military technology as well as the foundation for a whole way of life… Bursum’s map symbolizes the connections between television, advertising, media and conquest, and a way of life built on communications technology” (10). Therefore, it is telling that all of the westerns playing on the television screens assorted to look like a map of Canada and the United States end with the Cowboys winning and the Indians losing; and all of the stories told by Lone Ranger, Ishmael, Robinson Crusoe, and Hawkeye end with a Woman being sent to Fort Marion.

On judging his masterpiece, Bursum says, “It has no value. It is beyond value,” no doubt evoking “It’s priceless” from Mastercard ads (128). Then, he name drops The Prince by Machiavelli, saying “It’s all about advertising. If you’re going to succeed in this business, you better read it” (128). It’s clear that he likes its central axiom: “Power and control” (128).

Perhaps most tellingly, in response to Minnie saying, “I suppose its advertising value compensates for its lack of subtlety,” he says, “That’s right. It’s like being in church. Or at the movies” (129).

Works Cited:

Adams, Cecil. “In the old Lone Ranger series, what did ‘kemosabe’ mean?” The Straight Dope. 18 July 1997. Web. 10 July 2015.

Fee, Margary. “Introduction.” Canadian Literature 161/162 (1999): 9-11. Web. 3 July 2015.

Flick, Jane. “Reading Notes for Thomas King’s Green Grass Running Water.” Canadian Literature 161/162 (1999): 140-172. Web. 3 July 2015.

Franey, Evan. “Introduction.” Liminal Space between Story and Literature. UBC Blogs, 15 May 2015. Web. 10 July 2015.

Johnson, Carla. “The Bursum Bill.” History Blog. 6 Mar. 2011. Web. 10 July 2015.

Paterson, Erika. “Lesson 3.2.” ENGL 470A: Canadian Studies. UBC Blogs, May 2015. Web. 3 July 2015.

“Keeping History: Plains Indian Ledger Drawings.” American History. Smithsonian Institute, 2009. Web. 10 July 2015.

“Robinson Crusoe 1719 1st edition [image].” Wikipedia. 28 Jan. 2006. Web. 10 July 2015.

“The Prince.” Cliff’s Notes. N.d. Web. 10 July 2015.

“Tonto: Stupid or Wild One?” Truncated thoughts. 14 Aug. 2011. Web. 10 July 2015.

“Two Extraordinary Travellers.” BBC. BBC, 19 Sept. 2014. Web. 10 July 2015.

Prompt: Coyote Pedagogy is a term sometimes used to describe King’s writing strategies (Margery Fee and Jane Flick). Discuss your understanding of the role of Coyote in the novel.

To me, Coyote is ever-changing.

Therefore, he is almost like the center of the Medicine Wheel, what makes it spin.

In Green Grass Running Water, Thomas King uses the Medicine Wheel as a metaphor and organizing structure that kind of colours the narrative. Each section of the book represents one of four directions of the wheel: North is Blue, East is Red, South is White, and West is Black; with each direction corresponding with four states of the life cycle: birth, youth, parents, and elders; four seasons: spring, summer, fall, and winter; four elements: water, air, fire, and Mother Earth; and so forth. The cyclical nature of the Wheel is history repeating itself, stories being retold, life itself starting over (Paterson 3.2).

When something ends, something begins, and there is always transition. There is perpetual change even when some things stay the same.

In-betweenness is correlative of a cycle, and that’s exactly what Coyote is. The transience of his dancing in and out of stories is uncanny.

So even before I understood the symbol of the Medicine Wheel, my understanding of Coyote was that he presents the need for metacognition— the need for understanding or at least considering the abstract. Maybe that is an overly psychological way of viewing things, and it’s admittedly hard to define; but so is Coyote. Although “metacognition is often defined simply as ‘thinking about thinking,’ it actually denotes higher order thinking needed to engage in a task and actively learn while going through the process.

Not so daunting if you think about it – we do that every day.

“Meta” is an abstract concept, meaning “beyond,” and it may seem intimidating attached to just about anything, but it’s really just a four letter word. That’s kind of like Coyote–not really intimidating or anything just… tricky.

Hmm…

Coyote is like an animal that seems to be trying to tell you something, and you don’t really know what it is. So much of King’s storytelling is dialogic in nature, so you are participating as an audience, and may misunderstand–until you start making connections. By creating this intersection between orality and literacy, King forms many dialogues, and the reader needs to pick up the pieces spilling off the margins. Symbols aren’t overt, but appear obvious with certain knowledge. The challenge of understanding Coyote is an opportunity to learn something–but you may get tricked. The knowledge that Coyote is based on a Trickster divinity in Aboriginal storytelling kind of distinguishes it from a pet.

Yet, honestly, that’s what she reminded me of. When Lionel sees “a yellow dog” dancing outside Bursum’s (279), I thought of Jackie:

Oh so cute…

AHH, OMG!!!

Later, Lionel’s uncle Eli watches as a “scraggly dog dashed back and forth, chasing its tail, spinning in the rain, as if it were trying to dance” (289). This not only alters the perception that she may be an anthropomorphic being, not unlike Robinson’s Coyote, but adds a second piece of detail–scraggly vs yellow–which may change your image of Coyote for the second time in ten pages. Personally, I liked smooth and yellow more, because scraggly reminded me of a terrier that bit me.

Coyote is fluid, like water in the beginning when there was nothing.

Noteworthy is how she’s seen differently by Eli, who is Lionel’s elder–evoking the Medicine Wheel. Also, the four Indians can understand her, while the other’s cannot.

In a way, the four Indians are extensions of the Medicine Wheel, and Coyote is the crux. They are kind of fringe characters that are central to understanding the plot, establishing an inbetweenness, as well as being interconnected. In the beginning, Coyote dreams about a dog that wants to be named Coyote, settles for dog, before getting “everything mixed up… everything backward” and calling himself god (2).

“Looks like trouble to me,”
“Hmmm,” says Coyote. “You could be right.”
“That doesn’t look like a dog.”
“Hmmm,” says Coyote. “You could be right.”

Then, the weird looking dog insists on not being a “little god,” but a “big one!” and turns into GOD.

“Now you’ve done it.”
“Everything’s under control,” says Coyote. “Don’t panic… Sit down. Relax.
Watch some television” (2-3)

Upon reading that retrospectively, you think about the TVs around Bursum’s store, that Western playing on the map. You think about how the four Indians tell creation myths, and Coyote seemingly / dreamingly brings them to life. You also think about how the four Indians elude Dr. Joseph Hovaugh, who is “playing God” with a “garrison mentality,” representing both Jehovah, which his name sounds like phonetically, and Northrop Frye. In The Bush Garden, Frye writes that there is a “garrison mentality” existing within Canada that excludes settlers from being one with Nature, as the Natives are. Hovaugh plots maps of where they may have been, even crossing the Canadian border, and thinks he’s getting closer.

But he cannot see the “pattern”–escape from the closed-system of his cognition (Blanca 52-53).

“Coyote pedagogy requires training in illegal border-crossing,” as Jane Fleck and Margary Fee put it (131).

The four stories as told by the four Indians evoke four Eves–turns of the season of The Medicine Wheel–First Woman, Changing Woman, Thought Woman, and
Old Woman, but strictly show that they are not Christian stories. If you accept Coyote as a female, and include Babo, you got at least six women concerned with getting the story right. But I think everybody is trying to get life right.

I look at Coyote as being the threshold between reality and myth, story and literature. I look at the title of my blog site and think that’s about right.

I think of him or her as being the reality and pleasure principle. The creator saying, “Good comes with bad, but you just have to dance,” and the baby staring right back.

Works Cited

Blanca, Chester. “Green Grass, Running Water: Theorizing the World of the Novel.” Canadian Literature 161/162 (1999): 44-61. Web. 3 July 2015.

Fee, Margary and Flick, Jane. “Coyote Pedagogy: Knowing Where the Borders Are in Thomas King’s Green Grass, Running Water.” Canadian Literature 161/162 (1999): 131-139. Web. 3 July 2015.

Franey, Evan. “Angel Pic of Jackie.” Facebook. Evan Franey, 8 May 2007. Web. 3 July 2015.

Franey, Evan. “Devil Pic of Jackie.” Facebook. Evan Franey, 8 May 2007. Web. 3 July 2015.

Hug, Linda. “Coyote the Trickster [image]” trickster coyote’s daughter. Pinterest, n.d. Web. 3 July 2015.

Livingston, Jennifer A. “Metacognition: An Overview.” Cognitive Psychology. University at Buffalo, 1997. Web. 3 July 2015.

Paterson, Erika. “Lesson 3.2.” ENGL 470A: Canadian Studies. UBC Blogs, May 2015. Web. 3 July 2015.

Petkova, Veneta Georgieva. “How Thomas King Uses Coyote in his Novel Green Grass, Running Water.” Canadian Literature. Haskoli Islands, May 2011. Web. 1 July 2015.