For this assignment, I will be illuminating some of the allusions contained within pages 230 – 241 of the 2007 reprint of Green Grass, Running Water by Thomas King. The characters that figure most prominently in this section are the four “old Indians” (365), as King terms them, and Lionel Red Dog, Dr. Joseph Hovaugh, and Babo Jones. For the purposes of this post, I am going to focus on the four old Indians and Lionel Red Dog so that I can go into detail while making connections between pages 230-241 and the rest of the novel as a whole.

The four old Indians are one of the central mysteries of Green Grass, Running Water, and my understanding of them was limited during my first reading. After being assigned my section, however, I worked through the book again trying to understand the role that they play, and thankfully I gained some clarity.

The character of the Lone Ranger within the world of Green Grass, Running Water is in actuality First Woman from First Nations creation stories (who is also sometimes called Sky Woman), and on page 71 First Woman adopts the identity of the Lone Ranger in order to avoid impending violence at the hands of other rangers. She retains the alter-ego, as it also allows her to escape from the prison for Indians at Fort Marion; and thematically this resonates with other material in the novel that shows aboriginal people oscillating between whitewashed identities and embracing their cultural heritage as they navigate the rough social waters of colonial North America.

The others of the four old Indians are Ishmael, Hawkeye, and Robinson Crusoe. Ishmael is in fact the Navajo deity Changing Woman, and, like First Woman/the Lone Ranger, she becomes Ishmael for the protection that identifying as a male hero of Western literature offers her (King 225). In the same way, Robinson Crusoe is Thought Woman and Hawkeye is Old Woman, while Thought Woman is originally a figure from Navajo creation stories and Old Woman hails from First Nations tales generally (Flick 159, 161).

Throughout Green Grass, Running Water, these four women tell each other their origin stories as they simultaneously try to “fix the world” (King 236). At first I found this very confusing, but then I realized that their actions and their stories are one and the same, and that each time one of them begins a story a landmark in the timeline of their group’s mission to Canada is reached. When the Lone Ranger begins her story with “Gha! Higayv:lige:i” (a saying which shows that this is the beginning of a world-fixing cycle, because repeating it is deemed unnecessary on page 234), the four old Indians arrive in Canada (15, 22). When Ishmael begins her story, the group meets up with Lionel and gets into his car (104, 106, 121). When Robinson Crusoe has her turn, Coyote turns on a light to guide the Indians to the site of their intervention – the dam (231, 233); and when Hawkeye tells what happened to her, the four set out across the prairies to complete their task (327-28, 332-33).

The reason that it works this way is because Thomas King is trying to communicate to his readers that stories are an extremely powerful means of shaping the world. Origin stories, in particular, determine our world views; and in order to change society – to “fix the world,” as it were – stories that have been the root causes of problems must be altered, corrected, or retold in the right way. Also, the corrected stories must be told over and over again in order for them to take effect (hence the four old Indians taking turns and repeating their cycle again and again, as indicated on page 9 and page 430).

Lionel Red Dog personifies the sort of change that the four old Indians are trying to achieve. He is at the centre of their mission to Canada, because his sense of self has been confused by colonizing narratives ever since he was a little boy. As a child, he swallowed the lie that John Wayne is the best role model a kid can have, and as a result he has spent most of his life unable to connect to his cultural heritage, to his family, or to his true self (241-243).

The Indians meet up with Lionel partly to deliver to him a fringed leather jacket (they mention it on p. 234), as this gives him the chance to look and feel like John Wayne for a moment and to realize how ill the image fits him. Then, after noticing that the jacket smells rotten, and finding out that its true owner is George (a wife battering exploiter of First Nations culture, and a reference to General George Custer), Lionel willingly gives up this marker of identity and is able to enjoy a moment at his reservation’s sun dance with Alberta Frank, the woman he loves (382-88). This is something like a rite of passage for him.

As I mentioned, though, I couldn’t possibly cover all of the references between pages 230 and 241 of Green Grass, Running Water in any detail while staying under 1000 words. There are many more interesting allusions to be discovered, and while I hope that I haven’t passed over any of your favourites, please feel free to comment below and expand the discussion! I researched the contents of this section of the text thoroughly and I would be happy to engage in a dialog.

 

---

Works Cited

“Character Analysis: Ishmael.” Cliffs Notes. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. N.d. Web. Mar. 16, 2015. <http://www.cliffsnotes.com/literature/m/mobydick/character-analysis/ishmael>

Flick, Jane. “Reading Notes for Thomas King’s Green Grass Running Water.” Canadian Literature 161-162. (1999). Web. Mar. 16, 2015. <http://canlit.ca/pdfs/articles/canlit161-162-Reading(Flick).pdf>

“John Wayne Biography.” Encyclopedia of World Biography. Advameg. N.d. Web. Mar. 16, 2015. <http://www.notablebiographies.com/Tu-We/Wayne-John.html>

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

Neuhaus, Mareike. “That’s Raven Talk”: Holophrastic Readings of Contemporary Aboriginal Literature. Regina: U of Regina P, 2011. Google Books. Web. Mar. 16, 2015. <http://bit.ly/1Fs4qVm>

Roach, David. “Hawkeye.” Encyclopedia Britannica. Encyclopedia Britannica. Aug. 7, 2013. Web. Mar. 16, 2015. <http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/1938296/Hawkeye>

“Robinson Crusoe.” Encyclopedia Britannica. Encyclopedia Britannica. June 6, 2013. Web. Mar. 16, 2015. <http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/505784/Robinson-Crusoe>

Smith, B. R. “The Lone Ranger.” The Museum of Broadcast Communications – Encyclopedia of Television. Illinois Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunity. N.d. Web. Mar. 16, 2015. <http://www.museum.tv/eotv/loneranger.htm>

United Artists. A John Wayne Jacket from “The Alamo.” 1960. Heritage Auctions, Dallas. Heritage Auctions. Web. Mar. 16, 2015. <http://bit.ly/1bcFu9s>

Urwin, Gregory J. W. “George Armstrong Custer.” Encyclopedia Britannica. Encyclopedia Britannica. July 21, 2014. Web. Mar. 16, 2015. <http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/147393/George-Armstrong-Custer>

“Woman Who Fell From the Sky.” Myths Encyclopedia. Advameg. N.d. Web. Mar. 16, 2015. <http://www.mythencyclopedia.com/Wa-Z/Woman-Who-Fell-From-the-Sky.html>

This blog post is in response to the question, “What are the major differences or similarities between the ethos of the creation story you are familiar with and the story King tells in The Truth About Stories?”

To answer this, I spent a great deal of time studying the Genesis story from the Bible (New International Version, Gen. 1-3) as well as the sky woman story that Thomas King tells in his Massey lecture series (King 10-20), and this is what I found:

Differences

In the sky woman story, humour is important; a woman can be independent; community includes both human and non-human creatures who can make decisions together; all creatures are creative, but humans are creators; humans do not need others of their kind; magic exists and is connected to singing and dancing; there seems to be a limited amount of space on earth; and humans can have as part of their nature a leaning towards disorder and chaos.

In the Genesis story, there is no magic per se, but physical actions and spoken words are extremely powerful. There is a supreme and single (although triune and personal) deity who functions as lawmaker, provider, creator, and orderer; the earth, albeit at the direction of the deity, brings forth much of creation from itself; humans need each other for companionship; love relationships, in particular, are necessary; disharmony and inequality come about between man and woman because of disobedience to God; death becomes a reality, although it is not one to begin with; toil as necessary and discomfort with the self (shame) arise out of disobeying God; humans are god-like and made to be benevolent rulers of creation; and it is communicated that creatures who do evil ought not to live forever (because evil is just that bad).

Another interesting element which I want to point out is that, while the Genesis story is generally seen as being highly gendered, it is different from the sky woman story in that it does not necessarily begin with a person of any distinct sex. The Hebrew word “Adam” is the word for all of humanity, and some people believe it is possible if not probable that the Adam of the Genesis story contained both sexes until God divided them into two persons so that they could have companionship (Gates 1-4). In this interpretation woman does not come second, but is a part of the original singular person.

Similarities

In both stories, human curiosity can lead to big changes in the world; human actions can shape its nature, and people have the capacity to be troublemakers; different beings are shown to have differing abilities; fertility is considered good and foundational; pleasure is also good; the earth provides resources, including food, for the creatures depicted as sentient; pairs are very important and are usually, although not always, complementary (examples from the two stories being twins, men and women, dark and light, two types of food-bearing plants, and good and evil); sentient creatures do not consume one another, and nothing is originally intended to die; every being has free will; creation is essentially good, full of trust and harmony; and evil is not a part of the original picture.

 

---

Works Cited

Gates, Jennifer. Gender and Ontology in Genesis 2. Academia.edu. Academia, n.d. Web. 8 Mar. 2015 <http://www.academia.edu/7965864/Gender_and_Ontology_in_Genesis_2_3>

King, Thomas. The Truth About Stories: A Native Narrative. Toronto: House of Anansi, 2003. Google Books. Web. 8 Mar. 2015 <http://books.google.ca/books?id=yyt5lyvBr18C&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_atb#v=onepage&q&f=false>

New International Version. Colorado Springs: Biblica, 2011. BibleGateway.com. Web. 8 Mar. 2015 <https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+1+-+3&version=NIV>

This blog post is in response to the following question:

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.

The Indian Act of 1876 has been a key document in the history of the Canadian government’s legislative attitude towards First Nations people. After it came into effect, indigenous people living within the boundaries of Canada were considered legal wards (children) of the state and were treated as such. They were no longer permitted to self-govern, and a great many restrictions were placed on their freedom (if one could say that they had any freedom after the Act). According to “The Indian Act of Canada: Origins,” these “restrictions ranged from rules about how they would elect leaders to how their children would be educated and how their estates would be dealt with after death.” The Indian Act was aimed at assimilation, and it considered all the native people of Canada to be minors until such point as they could be considered “white” according to the statues laid out in the policy.

Some key points of Canada’s Indian Act were:

– Indigenous people were restricted to the reserves set aside for them, and could only leave if they were carrying an identity card (which functioned something like a passport).

– They were not permitted to sell or consume alcohol, and could be legally punished if found intoxicated.

– Even the reserve lands on which they lived belonged to the Crown, and the resources found on these lands (like forests) as well as under them (like minerals) belonged to and could be harvested by the Canadian government.

– If an aboriginal woman married a white man, she would lose her status and all that went along with it. If a white woman married a native man, she was considered an Indian and would gain any associated benefits.

– All Metis persons were considered white.

– Representatives of the Canadian government could depose First Nations chiefs and were to be present at all band meetings.

The Indian Act, which was passed without any consultation with First Nations people, is completely congruent with Daniel Coleman’s conception of white civility as outlined in Professor Paterson’s most recent lesson. It is clear that the perspective on First Nations people which led to the Act was that they are not level-headed, capable adult human beings unless/until they conform to the notion of white civility. The government felt that the First Nations had to be “civilized” via assimilation, and that until they were, they needed to be managed by those who “knew what was best” for them (in the same sense in which a parent says they know what is best for their child). Being led by their own decision-makers, then, imbibing alcohol, and even owning their own resources were all things of which aboriginal peoples were legislated incapable; and the consideration of all Metis people as white meant that the government was essentially “breeding” indigenous peoples out of Canada. Finally, requiring native people to stay on their reserves and to carry identity cards if they left them showed that they were being looked on as savage and unpredictable. This perhaps forms the cornerstone of the evidence that the Indian Act of 1876 was all about the idea of native peoples as wild and of British whites as civilized. Unfortunately, racism in Canada has come a very short way in the last 150 years.

 

Works Cited

Canada. The Indian Act, 1876. Canada, 1876. Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada. Web. 26 Feb. 2015. <https://www.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/eng/1100100010252/1100100010254>

Gilmore, Scott. “Canada’s Racism Problem? It’s Even Worse Than America’s.” Maclean’s. Roger’s Media, 22 Jan. 2015. Web. 25 Feb. 2015. <http://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/out-of-sight-out-of-mind-2/>

Paterson, Erika. “Lesson 3.1.” ENGL 470A Canadian Studies: Canadian Literary Genres – 99C Jan 2015. UBC Blogs, n.d. Web. 25 Feb. 2015. <http://bit.ly/1Fzcd1m>

“The Indian Act of Canada: Origins.” Canada’s First Peoples. Goldi Productions Ltd, 2007. Web. 25 Feb. 2015. <http://firstpeoplesofcanada.com/fp_treaties/john_fp33_indianact.html>

In my most recent post, I wrote about the first impressions that I had upon reading Harry Robinson’s creation story regarding two twins whose descendants became the Europeans and the indigenous peoples of North America (Robinson 9-10). In that story, the younger brother steals a written piece of paper and is banished across the ocean as a result. He has stolen literacy, which means that, in the long run, it will be in his children’s power to create the laws that will govern not only his progeny, but also the children of his elder brother (the First Nations).

Since reading Keith Thor Carlson’s article “Orality About Literacy: The ‘Black and White’ of Salish History,” my thoughts about this story have expanded greatly. I’m sure that I don’t understand its significance completely, but I do understand that stories in Salish culture are taken very, very seriously, and that this story would not have been told by Harry Robinson unless it was seen to reflect a deep truth.

Of course, there are different kinds of truth, and it may not be possible to know what the degree of historical accuracy within the twins tale is in relation to the Western way of thinking about this; but – here’s the question – does it matter? This story is much more than one of many stories of creation: it tells about the importance of and the knowledge of literacy among the Salish people throughout history. As such, it is an important piece of thinking which has a great deal to say about a subject surrounding which Westerners have long carried assumptions: Europeans have assumed that literacy was something new to First Nations cultures when they arrived on North American shores. This story assures us it was not (Carlson 45).

Strangely tempting to the Western mind is still the question of whether Robinson’s story is “authentic”; which, in this case, might mean whether it originated long enough ago to reveal that there was actually (“factually”) literacy stolen from the Salish people by whites before contact or whether the story was created post-contact as an imaginative explanation for why things were the way they were at that time. Again, I ask: does it matter? Knowing how important it is in Salish culture to relate stories faithfully (Carlson 59), we can be confident that their stories are not told lightly, and that anything resembling fallacy within them is extremely rare; and so, regardless of whether or not there was something like the stolen piece of paper once, long ago, we can be confident that the twins tale relates a sensibility and an understanding of literature which goes back a very long time among the Salish people and which reflects how they saw the written word as used by Europeans when they first saw us using it.

This brings us back to the question of truth. It’s a funny thing, truth: elusive, nuanced, and frequently contested. What is truth? May we always keep asking, and may we never be satisfied with the answer.

 

---

Works Cited

Carlson, Keith Thor. “Orality and Literacy: The ‘Black and White’ of Salish History.” Orality & Literacy: Reflections Across Disciplines. Ed. Carlson, Kristina Fagna and Natalia Khamemko-Friesen. Toronto: U of Toronto P, 2011. 43-72. U of Victoria. Web. 12 Feb. 2015. <http://web.uvic.ca/vv/stolo/Orailty%20and%20Literacy%20K%20Carlson%20Chapter.pdf>

Cash, Johnny. “What Is Truth?” Columbia, 1970. Online video clip. YouTube. YouTube, 7 Jan. 2010. Web. 12 Feb. 2015. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S0KQWTBljjg>

Hjalmarson, Lauren. “Here’s what I think of that.” Stories & Tellers. UBC Blogs, 6 Feb. 2015. Web. 13 Feb. 2015. <https://blogs.ubc.ca/hjalena/2015/02/06/67/>

Robinson, Harry. Living by Stories: A Journey of Landscape and Memory. Comp. and ed. Wendy Wickwire. Vancouver: Talonbooks, 2005. Print.

This blog post is in response to the following question:

For our most recent assignment in English 470A: Canadian Literary Genres, we were asked to read the home stories of three other people in our class (as posted on their blogs) and to make a list of the shared values, assumptions, and stories that we found there. I read the posts of Rajin Sidhu, Sarah Casorso, and Florence Ng, and this is what I noted:

– Home is hard to pin down. It is a broad and individual experience.

– Home is necessary to survival. This becomes observable in new ways in extreme situations (Peterson 196), but it is also true in everyday life.

– Although it often encompasses multiple physical places, a person may associate home primarily with one of them. This is usually the place in which the person “grew up.” As a result, home can move, but it can also be left behind (Glidden 176-78).

– Home does not “do” borders: it crosses them. Migration leads people to new homes, despite governmental policies that sometimes stand in their way.

– Community is a huge part of home, and it is usually made up of a person’s friends, family and lovers, as well as, potentially, their neighbours, school companions, and spiritual community.

– Home encompasses and is solidified by varying emotional experiences. These range from the joy of new love to the heartbreak that leads to tears on a pillow at night.

– Cozy, rural locales are often cornerstones of one’s experience of home, but these tend to give way through time and/or distance to the bigger, faster, more developed world.

– Home is strangely impermanent, and can disappear and reappear. This often has to do with changes in one’s emotional life as impacted by their community.

– A person must feel comfortable “being themselves” in order for a sense of home to appear. If there are other people in a person’s home, relational warmth must figure in their connections with each other in order for this to happen. This warmth often manifests in the form of physical affection.

– Home is written all over with stories, including personal history, family history, cultural history, worldview, and spiritual perspective.

– Home is a place where a great deal of learning – of both the intellectual and the experiential kind – takes place. Learning to fail (and, hopefully, learning to succeed) is one of the experiences that is integral to home.

– Last, but not least, home is a place of refuge and safety. (And one wonders how anyone can deny a refugee entry to “their” country, this being the case!)

Overall, it was a revealing experience compiling this list of the things that make up home, because, while I suppose I knew that most of these factors would come up, to have them go from foggy connotations of a daily-used word to concrete elements extrapolated from four different narratives of home was nothing short of illuminating. I think that it developed my sense of compassion for others through showing me a new layer on which every human being is alike.

On that note, can we do family next? 😉

---

Works Cited

Casorso, Sarah. “2.1: Home Is Where the Heart Is.” Eng470. UBC Blogs, 29 Jan. 2015. Web. 2 Feb. 2015. <https://blogs.ubc.ca/scasorso/2015/01/29/2-1-home-is-where-the-heart-is/>

De Loyola, Henry. Bayanihan1. N.d. Photobucket. Web. 2 Feb. 2015. <http://i242.photobucket.com/albums/ff193/heinzkieh/bayanihan/bayanihan1.jpg>

Glidden, David. “Commonplaces.” Philosophy and Geography III: Philosophies of Place. Ed. Andrew Light and Jonathan M. Smith. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 1998. 169-190. Google Books. Web. 2 Feb. 2015. <http://bit.ly/1AkAOIP>

Ng, Florence. “2.1 Home Is a Pie Chart and a Couple of Memories.” Maple Trees and Beaver Tails. UBC Blogs, 31 Jan. 2015. Web. 2 Feb. 2015. <https://blogs.ubc.ca/florenceng/2015/01/31/45/>

Peterson, Nadya L. “Dirty Women: Cultural Connotations of Cleanliness in Soviet Russia.” Russia–women–culture. Ed. Helena Goscilo and Beth Holmgren. Bloomington: Indiana UP, 1996. 177-208. Google Books. Web. 2 Feb. 2015. <http://bit.ly/1z779MC>

Sidhu, Rajin. “2.1 The Story About My Home(s).” Canada – Home Sweet Home? UBC Blogs, 30 Jan. 2015. Web. 2 Feb. 2015. <https://blogs.ubc.ca/rajinsidhu/2015/01/30/2-1-the-story-about-my-home/>

Home. Home is a story. May I tell you mine?

My Home began with sunny beaches and the scent of fresh-sliced oranges. My father was doing his Master’s degree and my mother was growing our family in Northern California.

Next, Home became Downing Road, with its willow-treed cul-de-sac, strawberry garden, and small, pig-tailed playmates. Here Mitza the cat – Mitza the patient, Mitza the black-and-white – came Home to join us.

Then Home became woodsy, with deer and adventures and berries for foraging: a place to imagine, to create, and to drift off to sleep hearing tales about the Dog Named Blue. Home was soft cuddles, warm PJs, and prayers; my sister, my mother and father, and my insular bedroom. Home was the space between our house and town, and the books on the shelf and the toys on my bed; the boys from next door and the ranch down the road, the flowers we picked and brought Home to Mom.

 

 

Then, we moved to town ourselves, and home was what we brought with us. In town things were different. In town, home was drawing and watching TV, finding time between lessons to run through the woods and pretend that they were wild, too – that they had not been domesticated.

Soon after that home was Kelowna, and everything changed. Home became growing up, learning… and striving. Home became peace talks and What is this? questions; classes and “time to know What Really Matters.”

But, home was still books and still critters and playing. Home was still parents and sister, quiet evenings and family dinners. Home was still prayers, and there was a farm not too far away.

Home was also a view of the Valley, skies, and mountains. Home was always mountains. The ones that ringed the Okanagan weren’t as high as the ones I was used to, but they still whispered home to me. And, if some of the other things home had been had gone missing, home was still love, and there was still food on the table and a kitten snuggled up in my bed.

Next, home would become a place to retreat from the trials of middle school and the perils of high school; but I could never have imagined as a child that home would become a place to sneak out of at night, a place to hide boyfriends and to put what I was really going to wear in my purse before I walked out the door. Home was where I brought friends for sleepovers, where we dressed up for our cameras, took pictures, and uploaded them to MySpace; and where we laughed together and then – maybe – cried alone later. It was where we learned to cook, learned to focus, and tried to learn to fail. It was where we learned that we could not be perfect, but that we ought to be loved anyways.

Home is still BC, and now home is rest and retreat. It’s a place to belong; to reserve space for what matters most inside. It’s a place where connection is more important than time, and values matter more than practicality.

It is also, however, a place where prudence takes precedence and survival originates. It’s a place to search for when it disappears; a place to wrestle with the confusion that I hide in my day to day life. It’s a place to gather up the scattered pieces of myself and fit them together into a coherent whole; And it’s a place where, no matter what, I can always find help.
Continue reading →

Once upon a time, in a land not far away, there was a kingdom that was ruled by a king who had four children.

The children were all of an age to rule, and in this kingdom the crown was passed when the king chose to give it rather than when he died and to the child who most deserved it rather than to the firstborn. It was a very peaceful kingdom in a peaceful land that had never known fear (though rumours of fearful things were heard of from other lands).

The health of the king was strong, so, while his hair grew white and his fingers gnarled, he showed no signs of dying nor of feeling the need to give his throne to a younger ruler. His children were all even-tempered people with good heads on their shoulders and good hearts in their chests, but they felt their youth and opportunity for doing great deeds as kings or queens slipping away, and so – without desiring to do any harm – they wondered if they might not be able to hurry the process up a bit. To this end, one Sunday afternoon, they gathered in their castle library to talk.

“If only there was some trouble in our land!” The firstborn said from his leather chair. “Trouble that would make us need to go to battle, that would call for a younger ruler to helm the nation and to save our people from disaster!… or something.”

His siblings, two young men and a woman, agreed that it would be nice if there was such a thing (though they had never witnessed it).

The youngest prince piped up. “What if we caused a little trouble?” he said. “Nothing serious, of course, and we would do it secretly; but what if we introduced a little worry to the kingdom so that our father would feel the need to pass on the throne? Surely our goal would be reached, and the new king or queen could stamp out the problem easily enough when they were crowned!”

The others thought this was a great idea, and each suggested a way to bring it about. Because he had had the initial thought, the youngest went first. He suggested that, as Christmas was coming, they could tie a chicken to the tail of each of the postmaster’s horses on Christmas Eve so that the horses would be so worried that they wouldn’t be able to deliver the presents on time. This idea brought about chuckles, but the eldest said it was cruel, and the wings of the thought were clipped before it could take flight. His own idea, however, was similarly useless, as was the young lady’s, so that before they knew it there was only one chance left for the plan to work.

The third son, the second born, simply told a story, and asked his siblings to observe the effect; and it was a terrible tale, full of death and dismemberment. By the time he was finished, the others felt so ill and fearful that they decided that he, undoubtedly, had the key to introducing the trouble that they were seeking. They also noted thankfully that it was just a story, and decided that it could be published anonymously in the kingdom’s newspaper, that everyone would read it, that many of the citizens would feel ill and not show up for work the next day and that the king would receive many postcards expressing concerns about national security and then the matter would be done with.

So they published the story, and it worked like a charm. What they had predicted happened, and the king received so many messages asking that he give his throne up to an heir who, with youthful energy, would be able to handle the things that the story described in case they came true that he selected his daughter for the throne and before the week was out she received her crown. All of the others were happy about this (except the second-born, who was never the same after the session in the library).

The problem was that the people did not forget the story, and it had a much larger effect than anticipated. The new queen and her citizens were so harried by the fears that it had raised that the council of governors felt obliged to craft a new law in an effort to prevent the things which were written of from taking place. They decreed that anyone exhibiting characteristics that were not normative to the people in that land should not be allowed past their borders, whatever their situation may be, since their land had never had any events such as were written about in the story before and so if they were likely to come they were likely to come from without (they thought).

Fear had entered the kingdom, and it came in the form of a story.

Have you ever thought that a story could have so much power?

 

---

 

You’ve just read a tale that was adapted from Leslie Silko’s piece about the witches that brought evil into the world as related by Thomas King in his book The Truth About Stories: A Native Narrative (9-10). The original story can be found in Silko’s Ceremony.

After writing this piece, I told it orally to friends and family and observed what took place. As I told it the first time, I found myself changing the tale to increase the amount of logical sense that it made. This was an interesting discovery. I also began incorporating words and phrases that suited the genre and setting of my story even if I hadn’t had them in the written version. These factors said to me that a story reflects the culture and values of the person from whom it issues, which means that oral literature may change from generation to generation in order to stay relevant to its people.

It seems to me that while there are upsides to the written word, the ability of an (primarily) oral story to change is a great boon to the culture to which it belongs. To illustrate this point, don’t you think it’s strange and probably detrimental to our youth that Western school systems continue to teach classic literature even though many of the values represented by it are no longer relevant in our world? Don’t you think that this must confuse our kids?

Another thing that I noticed as I told my story was that the person to whom I was telling it influenced the telling HUGELY. Like, MUCH more than I had imagined it would. Storytelling is clearly an art unto itself. For example, some audiences made me very nervous, which made me less expressive, and less expressiveness made the story less engaging; some audiences felt better suited to the way that I had crafted the tale, and this made me more comfortable and excited, which made the story more successful; and, no matter who I was speaking to, the parts that I emphasized most were dependent on the personality of the listener and what I thought they would like.

Overall, I feel that telling memorized stories in a skillful way to varying audiences is a thing that takes a lot of practice. Some performers make it look so easy; but it clearly isn’t!

 

---

 

Works Cited

Grimm, Jacob, and Wilhelm Grimm. Trans. Edgar Taylor and Marian Edwardes. Ed. Authorama. “The Robber Bridegroom.” Fairy Tales by the Grimm Brothers. Authorama, n.d. Web. 31 Jan. 2015. <http://www.authorama.com/grimms-fairy-tales-23.html>.

King, Thomas. The Truth about Stories: A Native Narrative. Minneapolis: U of Minnesota, 2005. Print.

Silko, Leslie Marmon. Ceremony. New York, N.Y.: Penguin, 1986. Print.

Expert Village. “Singer Songwriter Performance Tips: Stage Presence Tips: Story Exercise.” Online video clip. YouTube. YouTube, 17 Oct. 2008. Web. 31 Jan. 2015. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xdWdHp7z3xE>.

This post is in response to this question:

At the heart of the intersection between story and literature we will easily find the meeting of native and newcomer, and as Chamberlin says, “I keep returning to the experience of aboriginal peoples because it seems to me to provide a lesson for us all. And for all its [Canada] much-vaunted reputation as an international mediator and peacemaker, it is in this story of natives and newcomers that Canada really has something to offer the world” (228). And, then he goes on to propose: “Why not change underlying title back to aboriginal title?” (229). Explain how Chamberlin justifies this proposal.

I have just now returned from a profound journey through logic and imagination in the form of J. Edward Chamberlin’s book, “If This Is Your Land, Where Are Your Stories?” This book is about the need for “Us’s” and “Them’s” around the world to recognize that we share a borderland of faith which allows us to believe that the stories of our culture are true simply because they originate in our ways of knowing and our cultural histories. It encourages us to forge a new respect for one another by meeting in this borderland; and the book’s final chapter demonstrates the validity of the stories of all cultures by relating the events of a land dispute in which facts from an aboriginal myth were corroborated by scientific inquiry (219-221). In telling about these events, Chamberlin points out that an occidental mindset would be inclined to see scientific evidence as confirming the indigenous myth, which it would view as previously having no legs to stand on, whereas in reality all forms of story are equally valid.

This can be understood in light of the fact that most scientific ideas are actually theories, or “likelihoods” (Chamberlin 125), despite Western culture’s tendency to pretend they are more. Building on this thought, Chamberlin points out that the structure in North America of underlying land title is just another story, and that it, therefore, can, and perhaps should, be changed to reflect a deeper truth about this continent (228).

Currently, underlying land title belongs to the monarchy, or “Crown,” in Canada, and to the republic in the United States – but does that really make sense? Does it reflect truth? Or should it belong to the indigenous peoples?

Chamberlin points out that nothing in our everyday realities would change if we gave underlying land title to aboriginals: it “wouldn’t mean that an Indian chief could come and sit on my doorstep or walk into my house, any more than the Queen or the president could right now”; yet “this new title would constitute a new story and a new society. . . . [It] would finally provide a constitutional ceremony of belief in the humanity of aboriginal peoples in the Americas” (230-31).

The indigenous peoples of Canada and the United States have been displaced since settlers arrived. Changing underlying titles would be a step towards sharing the lands between us. It would provide common ground, which is an absolute necessity if we are to exist together peacefully.

---

Works Cited

Chamberlin, J. Edward. If This Is Your Land, Where Are Your Stories?: Reimagining Home and Sacred Space. Cleveland, Ohio: Pilgrim, 2004. Print.

D’Errico, Peter. “Canadian Court Grapples with Native Lands, Preserves Crown Dominion.” Indian Country Today Media Network.com. Indian Country Today Media Network, 9 July 2014. Web. 16 Jan. 2015.

Welker, Glenn, comp. “Native American Mythology.” Indigenous Peoples’ Literature. N.p. 10 Jan. 2014. Web. 16 Jan. 2015.

Hello, readers!

My name is Lauren Hjalmarson, and I have created this blog to join in on the web of discussion that will take place under the umbrella of the fourth-year UBC English course “Canadian Literary Genres” (or: “Oh, Canada… Our Home and Native Land?”). This online course of studies concerns the complex and contested narratives that make up the diverse field of Canadian literature, and examines why some of these stories are publicly celebrated while others are often ignored.

I am excited to be diving into this field, as I know too little about the stories connected to the land I live on, and I feel that the sort of knowledge that I am about to gain is the kind from which all Canadians could benefit. The injustices that Canada’s indigenous peoples have endured since contact have been atrocious, and I find the ongoing violence against aboriginal women particularly heart-rending.

While I expect English 470A to be a challenging course, I am looking forward to learning about the colonizing narratives in Canadian literature as well as exploring what can be done through stories to assist in the process of decolonization, because I am an artist who is interested in making work about this subject. I have done so now and again while studying in the Interdisciplinary Performance BFA program at UBC’s Okanagan campus, as I was galvanized in my first semester by the story of Helen Betty Osborne as related by Marilyn Dumont’s famous poem. In fact, this past semester I wrote a children’s chapter book with the goal of communicating to young people the need for settlers to develop a greater appreciation for “Canada’s” land and people. The story is about a coyote and a golden retriever puppy that become friends. It will be published as part of a project called Dig Your Neighbourhood in April of 2015, and I am currently in the process of finishing up the illustrations. Below is a photo of a work in progress:

 

I will sign off now for the time being, but I am looking forward to returning to this blog next week to post again. I hope you’ll leave a comment so that we connect!

–  Lauren

 

 

---

 Works Cited

Dumont, Marilyn. “Helen Betty Osborne.” Native Poetry in Canada: A Contemporary Anthology. Ed. Jeannette C. Armstrong and Lally Grauer. Peterborough: Broadview Press, 2001. 258-59. Google Books. Web. 14 Jan. 2015.

Manitoba govt. Aboriginal Justice Implementation Commission. The Death of Helen Betty Osborne. AJIC.MB.ca. Manitoba govt, n.d. Web. 14 Jan. 2015.