Assignment 3.3: Write a blog that hyper-links your research on the characters in GGRW according to the pages assigned to you.

Assigned pages 156-171 1993 version (pages 187-206 in 2007 edition)

Note:  I will be referencing page numbers for the 2007 edition of the novel

The complexity of King’s interwoven plot continues to surprise me as I work through this novel. There are so many different elements at work in just the 15 pages I am analyzing and hyper-linking. First I am going to break down the allusions of the major character that appear in these pages, and then I will discuss some of the underlying themes the characters are connected with.

Main Characters:

Buffalo Bill Bursum

This character is an allusion to two historical figures: Holm O. Bursum and Buffalo Bill (Flick 148). Holm O. Bursum was a Senator from New Mexico and is most known for his controversial land bill that would have taken Pueblo land away from these people while concealing that this was the bill’s purpose. The second figure this character alludes to is the famous Buffalo Bill (William F. Cody). Cody exploited ‘Indians’ for entertainment in the 1860s and 70s with his touring Wild West shows (Biography.com Editors).

Changing Woman: 

The Changing woman is a character taken from Navajo mythology. She is a deity and often represents the power of the earth and the ability women have to create and sustain life (Flick 152). She also ages with the seasons in a cycle that never ends(grows old and then young again). One interesting aspect is that in the passage I was assigned Changing woman and Moby-Jane are alluded to as lesbians.

Ahab, Ishmael, and Queequeg:

These three characters are references to fictional characters in the novel Moby-Dick.  Ahab is the captain obsessed with catching the white whale Moby-Dick While Ishmael and Queequeg are part of his crew.  Ishmael has a close friendship with Queequeg who is a stereotypical representation of an indigenous person in Moby-Dick  – cannibalistic tendencies and all (Flick 142). An interesting was to see Ishmael throughout the book is a character who has assumed an identity to overcome societal prejudices (Maithreyi 5). He hides his identity in some way by saying ‘call me Ishmael’ rather than ‘my name is Ishmael. An article by Maithreyi suggests King uses Ishmael’s hidden identity to show the dualities are linked to the dualities in North American land (5).

Coyote:

I don’t need to spend long on Coyote because we have looked at his symbolism throughout this course.  He is a prominent figure in Native storytelling traditions and religion. He is a trickster figure who seems to have no restrictions placed on him as he jumps time periods or changes shape often.  He even will directly influence the other characters.

Eli Stands Alone:

Eli is likely a reference to Elijah Harper who was a Canadian Oji-Cree politician who is most famous for opposing the Meech Lake Accord in 1990 (Marshall). Harper grew up in a residential school, went on to university then began a career in politics.  Upon his death “hundreds lined up to pay their respects to the man who said ‘No'” (Marshall).  Eli Stands alone said says ‘no’ to a project to build a dam that would flood native land.  This fictional dam project alludes to a very real one called the Great Whale Project in Quebec that the Cree spent fighting for many years.

The De Soto:

The rental car Eli Stands Alone drives to the Sun Dance Festival is named after the famous explorer Hernando de Soto. Hernando is famous for his role in the conquest of Peru and he went on to explore the southeastern U.S destroying countless Native tribes along the way.

Underlying Theme:

There are many connections, allusions, and underlying themes throughout these pages in GGRW, but the one I want to focus on is how King shows that the Settlers history dominates Native history every time. Starting on page 187 (2007 edition) Bill Bursum complains how all “Indians [are] the same way”: against progress and overly sensitive. Eli Stands Alone held up the dam on “some legal technicality” and now Bursum’s lakefront property has gone to waste.  These two pages are filled with so much meaning. Bursum criticizes Charlie and Lionel for adapting to Western society saying “they weren’t really Indians anymore” (187). This shows how many First Nations people are criticized by Westerners for adapting to society.  Their First Nations heritage in societies mind stops counting. They can either be white or Indian – not both.  Native people also criticize their people who integrate into Western society. Further along in my assigned section of pages Eli Stands Alone returns home with Karen for the Sun Dance Festival.  His sister Norma does not say anything directly but she does not approve of his adaption to Western society.  She shakes her head at the De Soto rental car which can be seen as a representation of cultural destruction (see description of the De Soto above). Eli doesn’t fit in with his relations anymore and as soon as he leaves “he never looked back” (206). But in the first part of the novel we learn that Eli did come back to his Native culture and “that’s the important part. He came home” (King 63).

The end of Bill Bursum’s pages also mentions how he loves to watch Westerns.  This ties in to pages 189 – 193 where Christian asks Latisha “how come the Indians always get killed” (192).  Latisha answers that it wouldn’t be a Western if Indians didn’t get killed. Taking this statement at face value it is true, but I think it can be analyzed even further.  I think King uses ‘Western’ as a word play.  Westerners invaded and colonized North America and defeated the Native people just like the movies depict. That’s the story of colonization played over and over again.  Bill Bursum loves them because he has no respect for First Nations history or culture. The Westerns retell and reaffirm the Western perspective after all “if the Indians won, it probably wouldn’t be a Western” (King 193).

I could go on and on about all the connections and allusions in these pages, but I will have to save the rest for another blog post.

Works Cited:

Biography.com Editors. “Buffalo Bill Cody.” Bio. A&E Networks Television, n.d. Web. 28 Mar. 2016.

Biography.com Editors. “Hernando De Soto.” Bio.com. A&E Networks Television, n.d. Web. 28 Mar. 2016.

“BURSUM, Holm Olaf.” Biographical Directory of the United States Congress. New Mexico State University, n.d. Web. 27 Mar. 2016.

The Editors of Encyclopædia Britannica. “Pueblo Indians.” Encyclopedia Britannica Online. Encyclopedia Britannica, 5 Nov. 15. Web. 28 Mar. 2016.

Flick, Jane. “Reading Notes for Thomas King’s Green Grass, Running Water.”Canadian Literature 161.162 (1999): 140-72. 1999. Web. 23 Mar. 2016.

“The Grand Council of the Crees.” (Eeyou Istchee) Cree Regional Authority Environment Cree Legal Struggle Against the Great Whale Project. The Grand Council of the Cree, n.d. Web. 28 Mar. 2016.

King, Thomas. Green Grass, Running Water. Toronto, Ont.: Harper Perennial, 2007. Print.

Marshall, Tabitha. “Elijah Harper.” The Canadian Encyclopedia. Historica Canada, 31 July 2013. Web. 28 Mar. 2016.

“Navajo Legend – Changing Woman.” Native American Art. N.p., 2010. Web. 25 Mar. 2016.

Power, Chris. “Baddies in Books: Captain Ahab, the Obsessive, Revenge-driven Nihilist.” The Guardian. Guardian News and Media, 30 Oct. 2014. Web. 28 Mar. 2016.

Welker, Glenn. “Coyote Stories/Poems.” Coyote Stories/Poems. N.p., 19 Nov. 2015. Web. 28 Mar. 2016.

Assignment 3.2

1. What are the major differences or similarities between the ethos of the creation story or stories you are familiar with and the story King tells in The Truth About Stories ?

I want to start this blog off by explaining some of my biases about creation stories.  I was not raised in any particular religion.  My parents do not practice any type of religion at all, but they were raised by their parents to be Christian. After countless years being forced to go to church as children my parents broke the cycle and did not involve religion in my sister and I’s upbringing at all.  

That being said we do celebrate commercialized holidays based on Christianity.  We celebrate Christmas, and Easter but not because of Jesus.  We celebrate Christmas as a time to spend with family and indulge in food and drink, and Easter is much the same.  I have one distinct childhood memory about my Dad telling me what Christmas was based on.  He was concerned I thought it was only about Santa Claus and presents because for our family it was.   

When it comes to creation stories I believe in the Big Bang and evolution.  For me the two creation stories king tells in the first lecture in the Truth About Stories hold the same amount of meaning to me. I have not been raised valuing the Christian story.  This is why I wanted to answer this blog question.  I feel like I can provide a good observation of the ethos King uses because I am not biased when it comes to the creation stories he tells.  Yes I am more familiar with Adam and Eve than Charm but to me they are equally valuable to understanding the cultures that surround me. I do not value one more than the other.

The woman who fell from the Sky (Sundance TV)

First King’s ethos is established before we even begin listening to his lecture.  Thomas King is a renowned Canadian writer.  The reader, even if unfamiliar with his work, knows he is reputable solely based on the fact that he is conducting a CBC Massey Lecture.  When King tells both creation stories in his First Massey lecture he spends much more time on the Woman Who Fell From the Sky.  He admits this is based on his assumption that “most of [us] have heard of Adam and Eve, but few… have ever met Charm” (22).  I think he makes a valid assumption here, most people the Genesis creation story.

King tells both creation stories quite differently and he discusses the ways in which they are different so his listeners/ readers can see how ethos is used.  Genesis has a “sober voice” (23) and is always recited quite formally.  It is a serious story about the beginning of the world.  The story is always trying to establish itself as truth and its serious and formal tone does this.  There is no fun in this story only ‘facts’.  King tells it in this way to stay true to how it is typically told.

On the other hand the Woman Who Fell From the Sky is told quite differently.  King also keeps with tradition when telling this story but he is now following First Nation tradition. He establishes a strong oral storytelling voice.  The conversations way of telling this story often “diminishes its authority” (King 23) and King is very aware of this.  The Ethos in both recitations are very different and in doing this King is pointing out that this suggests “values that may be neither inherent nor warranted” (22).

For someone like me who has no religion, I can see these stories as equals. The talking animals in Charm’s story aren’t a problem for me.  In fact I would tend to have more criticism towards the gender biases perpetuated in Eve’s mistake in Genesis than anything else.  Neither stories play a part in my values or beliefs about the world.  But I can recognize the importance of these stories to those who value them.  King draws our attention to the ethos in these two different tellings because he doesn’t want anyone to “make the mistake of confusing storytelling strategies with the value or sophistication of a story” (23).

Works Cited:

Busby, Brian John. “Thomas King.” The Canadian Encyclopedia. Historica Canada, 04 July 2008. Web. 19 Mar. 2016.

King, Thomas. “I’m not the Indian You had in Mind.” Video. Producer Laura J. Milliken. National Screen Institute. 2007. Web. April 04/2013.

King, Thomas, “The Truth about Stories: A Native Narrative.” CBC Massey Lectures. CBC Ideas. Web. April 04/2013. .

Assignment 3.1 Question 3:

“A much more complicated cultural tension [more than two languages] arises from the impact of the sophisticated on the primitive, and vice a versa. The most dramatic example, and one I have given elsewhere, is that of Duncan Campbell Scott, working in the department of Indian Affairs in Ottawa. He writes of a starving squaw baiting a fish-hook with her own flesh, and he writes of the music of Dubussy and the poetry of Henry Vaughan. In English literature we have to go back to Anglo-Saxon times to encounter so incongruous a collision of cultures (Bush Garden 221).”

It is interesting, and telling of literary criticism at the time, that while Frye lights on this duality in Scott’s work, or tension between “primitive and civilized” representations; however, the fact that Scott wrote poetry romanticizing the “vanishing Indians” and wrote policies aimed at the destruction of Indigenous culture and Indigenous people – as a distinct people, is never brought to light. In 1924, in his role as the most powerful bureaucrat in the department of Indian Affairs, Scott wrote:

The policy of the Dominion has always been to protect Indians, to guard their identity as a race and at the same time to apply methods, which will destroy that identity and lead eventually to their disappearance as a separate division of the population (In Charter, 23).

For this blog assignment, I would like you to explain why it is that Scott’s highly active role in the purposeful destruction of Indigenous people’s cultures is not relevant for Frye in his observations above? You will find your answers in Frye’s discussion on the problem of ‘historical bias’ (216) and in his theory of the forms of literature as closed systems (234 –5).

Duncan Campbell Scott joined the federal department of Indian Affairs in 1879, and became a deputy superintendent in 1913 (Robert L. McDougall).  While there he helped write policies with the intent of destroying First Nations culture:

“I want to get rid of the Indian problem. I do not think as a matter of fact, that the country ought to continuously protect a class of people who are able to stand alone… Our objective is to continue until there is not a single Indian in Canada that has not been absorbed into the body politic and there is no Indian question, and no Indian Department, that is the whole object of this Bill.” (Scott 1918 qtd White)

Yet, this man set on getting “rid of the Indian problem” was also a prolific writer that many literary critics such as Northrop Frye exemplify as an important part of Canadian literature. Frye discusses Scott’s writing in regards to his “complicated cultural tension” (221).  He praises how Scott writes about “a starving squaw baiting a fish-hook with her own flesh, and he writes of the music of Debussy” (221).  One thing Frye does not bring up however is Scott’s active role in the destruction of Indian Culture.  To modern readers this is a huge omission.  How can a Canadian literary critic look upon a man who lead the way “to a final solution of our Indian Problem”( Scott 1918 qtd White) in Canada.

For starters Frye sees Canadian literature as a reflection of Canadian experiences and “it is more significantly studied as a part of Canadian life than as a part of autonomous world of literature” (216). He outlines that Canadian literature is so often tied to the writer’s experiences and often times Canadian literature made stories out of “knowledge and observation but had no particular story to tell” (234).  With this in mind it would seem that Frye could overlook the racism in Scott’s work.  Scott is writing from his experiences of life in Canada.  He was in a position where his job was to “solve the Indian problem” and his writing reflected his situation.  Scott was reflecting on his lived experiences in Canada . Even if that meant he was helping to destroy First Nations culture his writing is still informative of Canada’s literary Canon at the time.  

Furthermore Frye says “literature is conscious mythology” (234).  It develops over time as society develops.  Different places all have different structures of traditional stories and images and a writer of that place is constricted by these closed literary systems. Scott would have been restricted by the conscious mythology of Canada that developed through “cultural tension” (221) between the Settlers and Natives.  As Frye puts is Canadian literature was shaped by “Indians” who “were seen as nineteenth-century literary conventions” (235). Frye can ignore the implications of Scott’s work because he is just reflecting Canada’s literary canon.

On the other hand it is hard for me, as a modern reader, to accept this idea that one could simply overlook writings about culture genocide when they are criticizing them as Frye has.  I think a more likely explanation of Frye’s neglect of Scott’s involvement in the cultural genocide of Canada’s indigenous people is time.  During the 1960s, when Frye’s influence was the strongest, racism was rampant towards First Nations people (Ayre).  Canada’s government was trying to commit cultural genocide and no one questioned the systematic discrimination of the times. Living in an environment like this would have made it easy to overlook the racism in Scott’s writing it is very possible Frye shared the same views as him.

Works Cited:

Ayre, John. “Northrop Frye.” The Canadian Encyclopedia. Historica Canada, 4 Oct. 08. Web. 10 Mar. 2016.

Fine, Sean. “Chief Justice Says Canada Attempted ‘cultural Genocide’ on Aboriginals.” The Globe and Mail. The Globe and Mail, 28 May 2015. Web. 11 Mar. 2016.

Frideres, J.S. “Racism.” The Canadian Encyclopedia. Historica Canada, 2 Jul. 06. Web. 10 Mar. 2016.

McDougall, Robert. “Duncan Campbell Scott.” The Canadian Encyclopedia. Historica Canada, 8 Nov. 08. Web. 10 Mar. 2016.

White, Angela. “Colonialism and Race.” The American Historical Review106.3 (2001): 1-47. UBC Learning Circle. 9 Nov. 2013. Web.

Assignment 2.6:

5) “To raise the question of ‘authenticity’ is to challenge not only the narrative but also the ‘truth’ behind Salish ways of knowing “(Carlson 59). Explain why this is so according to Carlson, and explain why it is important to recognize this point.

Salish Welcoming by Joseph Wilson

In Carlson’s article, Orality and Literacy: the ‘Black and White’ of Salish History, he outlines how Salish histories challenge, dispute and question our Western history and ways of knowing.  When conflicting histories arise between Western and Indigenous groups we tend to question Indigenous histories rather than our own.  We consider ourselves the ultimate fact keepers, and in many ways we are.  Whether it is our history of settlement or an academic paper it is protocol to acknowledge our sources.  We keep meticulous records of events and everything is written down, but much of Canada’s history is skewed in the settlers’ favour. After all “History is written by the victors” (Winston Churchill).    

With the certainty we hold in our own history it leads us to question other accounts.  In the case of Carlson’s article he discusses the consequences of questioning the authenticity of Salish history, and shows how the Salish are meticulous record keepers too. In fact “historical accuracy in the Salish world is a matter of great concern…” (Carlson 57). Since Salish histories were not written down they assessed the accuracy of stories by comparing them to the previous renditions of the same story (Carlson 57). Listeners would have to remember the other versions they had heard of the same story and determine if the storyteller was accurate enough. Carlson also references Wendy Wickwire about the process which she calls “oral footnotes” (57).  Oral footnotes are when a storyteller verbally cites their sources or other forms of authority to establish their legitimacy as a storyteller.  For Salish storytellers oral footnotes are essential to establishing one’s authority as a reliable and good storyteller.  If one did not do this their story, particularly if it was a historical narrative, would have been regarded as poor history (57 Carlson). Tellers of poor history would have faced consequences for their poor storytelling.  They would “acquire reputations as poor historians: their status [in the community would] diminish” (Carlson 57). It would have been horrible for ones social standing if they told an inaccurate account of a story.     

Storytelling is ingrained in Salish culture and truth is essential to their stories. Carlson says “To raise the question of ‘authenticity’ is to challenge not only the narrative but also the ‘truth’ behind Salish ways of knowing” (Carlson 59).  As I outlined above, truth and authenticity when recounting stories is highly valued.  The Salish people do not value authenticity any less than the settlers.  By questioning the authenticity of their narratives we also question their deeply ingrained cultural practices.  It says we don’t recognize that they are capable of keeping reliable records because nothing is written down.  In a culture so concerned with the authenticity in their storytelling this is an insult.  It is Western culture saying over and over again your record keeping is not as valid as ours. So when we do question the authenticity of Salish history we should do so cautiously and respectfully.  We should recognize how they keep historical accuracy in their culture, and why it is important to them.

I think it is important to recognize Carlson’s point because more often than not misunderstanding of culture allows policy makers to create biased laws and regulations which favour the settler. For example, Carlson points out “how a false understanding of Native history allowed American policy makers to… [justify] the physical, social, and economic marginalization of Aboriginal people.” (58). Western culture values our historical accuracy, but I think it is essential to learn our version is not the only version of history.

Works Cited:

Carlson, Keith Thor. “Orality and Literacy: The ‘Black and White’ of Salish History.” Orality & Literacy: Reflections Across Disciplines. 43-72. Print.

Robbins, Michael. “Letter From Military History – January 2013” HistoryNet. History Net, 02 Nov. 2012. Web. 05 Mar. 2016.

Wilson, Joseph. Salish Welcoming. Digital image. Cedar Hill Long House Art Publishing. Cedar Hill Long House, 1 Sept. 2006. Web. 5 Mar. 2016.

Wonders, Dr. Karen. “Coast Salish.” First Nations: Land Rights and Environmentalism in British Columbia. University of Goettingen, 8 Nov. 2008. Web. 05 Mar. 2016.