As I was looking for a page range to choose for this assignment I struck by just how much allusion is in Green Grass Running Water. I am so amazed by how much reference to outside stories, characters, sources and concepts King manages to compact in this text; I feel his writing style is analogous to hyperlinking.  After much consideration, I finally decided to investigate pages 229 to 238. And here is what I found…

Naming – “This according to Robinson Crusoe” (King 231).

As I discussed in one of my earlier assignments, King uses the naming of his characters to support in his novels endeavor to unite First Nations story traditions and Western literature. Jane Flicks, “Reading Notes for Thomas King’s Green Grass, Running Water”, highlights the abundance of characters throughout the novel whose names directly and indirectly connect them to characters, concepts and stories of western literature; for example, Robinson Crusoe, Lone Ranger, and Ishmael. Through the naming of his characters King provides allows the western listener/reader an opportunity to experience, connect and better understand Indigenous characters and storytelling. The characters’ names are a way for King to allude to ideas and concepts that help develop a deeper understanding of the character and their position in the novel. This technique is very similar to hyperlinking; in that it allows the reader an opportunity to delve deeper into the characters and uncover the multitude connection and meanings behind the name.

Personification – “the day rolled over and took a breath” (King 233).

Personification of nonhumans and objects can be found throughout Green Grass Running Water. Near the beginning of my selected pages, I was not surprised by King’s personification of the River, the Rocks, and the Trees while telling the story of Thought Woman and the River. But, as I read through these 10 pages I noticed that he goes on to personify so many other nonhumans and objects; including, the sun, the sky, the day, light, a border building, a flag pole. I perceived that King’s use of personification is very deliberate, as Mareike Neuhaus explains, King consciously uses personification as a way to “reinforce Indigenous worldviews by reflecting the Indigenous notion that humans and non-humans are equal to one another”(171). Using personification is a way for King to allude to deep values and morals without expressly discussing them. Thought this constant personification he promotes an atmosphere of respect, responsibility and equality not just between human and the earth, or human and living things, but between human and ALL things.

Thought Women and the River – “Hee-hee, says that River. Hee-hee” (King 232).

While researching the allusions embodied by Thought Woman, I came across many different explanations of her significance; such as, Thought Woman as a representation of Mary, or Thought Woman “a figure from Navajo mythology” and creator of the world (Flick). But, I was stuck by a very different impression of the story of Thought Woman and the River when I reread it on its own, excluded from the rest of the pages. I saw Thought Woman as a representation of our (all peoples) inner dialogue; our ability for critical thinking, imagination, judgement and acceptance.  And I saw that tricky River as the western culture; the societal norms, standards, rule and stereotypes, that demand we fit in, “swim to the middle” (King 231) and follow the current.

Babo – “ ‘What do you think?’ said Babo. ‘Omen or miracle?’ ” (King 238).

Perhaps the most obvious, and discussed, allusion accompanying Babo is the reference to Melville’s Benito Cereno. King’s Babo mirrors Melville’s Babo who is the leader of a slave rebellion that convinces the Captain of the ship into thinking everything is fine. This direct reflection can be seen in these pages as Babo travels along with Dr.Hovaugh in his search for the four Indians, when she is the one who assisted the four Indians with their escape.

However, in these pages the character of Babo is also used to offer a deeper reference. On page 237 the border guard refers to Babo as Dr.Hovaugh’s property saying, “‘All personal property has to be registered.’” This situation alludes to the obvious racial hierarchy of western society, and in this moment Babo’s character is used to provide a commentary on the systemic racism active in Canada and the US.

Use of Coyote – “ ‘Is it time to be helpful?’ says Coyote” (King 229).

Finally, one cannot read Green Grass, Running Water without evaluating King’s use of Coyote. Throughout the novel Coyote is used as the embodiment of the connection between reality and the spiritual. This use of Coyote helps is one of the ways in which King’s writing style and characters are used to mimic the novels intention to blur the distinction between the ‘mythical’ and ‘realistic.’ But, in these pages it seems as though King uses Coyote to substitute for the reader as a participant in the text; he provides a reactive commentary, is used to ask questions, and is provoked to think deeper in response to the story of Thought woman, and much like the reader, Coyote is eager to contribute to the story but it is not his turn share (King 230).

Throughout this assignment I was amazed at how much can be found in just 10 pages of King’s novel. In just 10 pages King was able to encourage the reader to actively participate in the stories by not only providing allusions to outside ideas, text and characters, but by offering a deeper commentary on western culture and Indigenous worldviews.

Works Cited

Clack, Lucian. “The Power of Conformity.” GenderTerror. N.p., 2016. Web.

15 Nov. 2016.

Cliffs Notes. “Benito Cereno -Story Summary.” CliffsNotes. N.p., n.d. Web.

16 Nov. 2016.

Flick, Jane. “Reading Notes for Thomas King’s Green Grass Running Water.”

 Canadian Literature 161-162. (1999). Web. 9 Nov. 2016.

Galabuzi, Grace. “The Contemporary Struggle against Racism in Canada.”

Canadian Dimensions. N.p., 2004. Web. 15 Nov. 2016.

Garlikov, Rick. “Uses and Importance of Hyperlinks.” Writing Linearly

and With Hyperlinks. N.p., n.d. Web. 15 Nov. 2016.

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

1993. Print.

Neuhaus, Mareike. “That’s Ravens Talk”: Holophrastic Readings of

Contemporary Indigenous Literature. Regina: Canada Plains Research Center,

2011. Print.

Nicole, Courtney. “Green Grass, Running Water.” Green Grass, Running Water.

Blogspot, 2009. Web. 16 Nov. 2016.

“Native Languages of the Americas: Navajo Legends, Myths, and Stories.” Native-

Languages.org. Native Languages of the Americas Website, n.d. Web.

16 Nov. 2016.

Petkova, Veneta Georgieva. How Thomas King Uses Coyote in His Novel Green

Grass, Running Water. N.p.: Háskóli Íslands Hugvísindasvið – Canadian Literature,

2011. PDF.

Wagner, Hannah. “ASSIGNMENT 3.5 – IT’S ALL IN THE NAME.” A Look at

Canada. UBC Blogs, 2016. Web.

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?

In his novel Green Grass Running Water, King blends together the significance of form, content and characters. King’s writing style mimics the novels intention to blur the distinction between the ‘mythical’ and ‘realistic,’ and demonstrate the often-unexplored compatibility of tradition and modernity.  King provides a stage that allows the western listener/reader an opportunity to experience, and better understand Indigenous storytelling.

One of the ways that King unites First Nations story traditions and Western literary practice is through the naming of his characters. Throughout the novel there are characters whose names directly connect them to the hero’s and characters of western stories, for example Robinson Crusoe, Hawkeye, or Lone Ranger.  However, King also uses names, and their oral pronunciation, to allude to figures, interpretations, and beliefs within western literature; three characters with such names are Sally Jo Weyha, Polly Hantos, and of course Dr. Joseph Hovaugh.

Sally Jo Weyha and Polly Hantos are allusions to Sacajawea and Pocahontas. With these allusions King is referencing the patronizing categorization and demeaning sexualization of these women in western literature and media. Sacajawea, who was an important guide and interpreter for Meriwether Lewis and William Clark, is often depreciated in fiction and western film to a love interest for Lewis or Clark, for example in the film The Far Horizon. Pocahontas, the young daughter of Chief Powhatan and a successful mediator between the Powhatan communities and western settlers, is most famously misrepresented in Disney’s 1995 rendition Pocahontas, where she is portrayed as the ‘free-spirited’ love interest of John Smith.  In both situations the significance of these strong Native women, who played vital roles in interpretation and mediation between colonizers and Indigenous peoples, is depreciated to being the love interest for a white man. The parallel  to this sexualization and deprecation of these women is directly seen in Kings characters, who are actresses who have been pigeonholed by Hollywood into playing the western stereotypical ‘Indian’.

Dr. Joseph Hovaugh (aka Joe Hovaugh), is a clear allusion “Jehovah” or God. King is using this character to embody a range of associations and relationships between the western God and Indigenous peoples. The name brings with it the association with missionaries and their need to ‘save’ Native peoples through forced acceptance of their ideals, principles and religion. These missionaries assumed an authoritative role and granted themselves the right to impose their “revelations” onto Native communities, while they strongly opposed any opposition to their belief or opinions. This concept of imposed revelations and forcing conflicting ideals and principles on Native peoples parallels Dr.Hovaugh’s character and position in the novel; he is  an authority figure who hates having his opinion or authority challenged.

All three of these characters’ names allude to ideas and concepts that help develop a deeper understanding of the character and their position in the novel. Something I enjoy about King’s use of these names is that when they are written on a page the allusion is not overtly obvious, but when they are read aloud the intended allusion is very clear. This technique creates a deeper relationship between the author and the reader as the reader uncovers the multiple facets of connection and understanding. This technique allows the reader to engage in the text beyond the simple silent reading; it encourages the reader to, not only listen to the stories, but to engage in a type of performance with the words. While reading, and looking to find these areas of connection I found myself reading all the names aloud; often repeating them, merging sounds and mushing pronunciation in an almost performative manner, looking for ways to uncover the allusions. 

Works Cited

“Common Portrayals of Aboriginal People.” MediaSmarts. N.p., n.d. Web.

6 Nov. 2016.

Flick, Jane. “Reading Notes for Thomas King’s Green Grass Running

Water.” Canadian Literature 161-162. (1999). Web. 9 Nov. 2016.

Grant, John Webster. “Missions and Missionaries.” The Canadian Encyclopedia.

N.p., n.d. Web. 6 Nov. 2016.

History.com Staff. “Sacagawea.” History.com. A&E Television Networks, 2010.

Web. 6 Nov. 2016.

Kaye, Frances W. Hiding the Audience: Viewing Arts & Arts Institutions on the

Prairies. Edmonton, Alta., Canada: U of Alberta, 2003.

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

United States. National Park Service. “Pocahontas: Her Life and Legend.” National

Parks Service. U.S. Department of the Interior, n.d. Web. 6 Nov. 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.

While reading through the  CanLit guide on nationalism I was very interested in the assimilationist perspective the Canadian government took in the 19^th century. I feel that much of Canada’s societal, institutional and systemic oppression of marginalized groups comes from its early history of settlers with racialized ideals of the necessity of assimilation and the grandeur of ‘white civility’. An example of how this white ideation functioned in the construction of Canadian society is through exclusionary or assimilation driven laws, such as the Indian Act of 1876; which is the act that I have chosen to research and discuss for this assignment.

The Indian Act was a consolidation of a variety of acts and statues governing the relationship between settlers and Indigenous peoples, their land and their rights. This Act essentially allowed the Canadian government to take control of Native people and their communities. Section 2 states:

“The Minister of the Interior shall be Superintendent-General of Indian Affairs, and shall be governed in the supervision of the said affairs, and in the control and management of the reserves, lands, moneys and property of Indians in Canada by the provisions of this Act” (The Indian Act).

The Indian Act not only gave the “Superintendent-General” the power to strip Native peoples of their land, moneys and property, it also allowed him to rob them of their culture, their traditions, their children and even their ethnic identity. An example is in section 3 – where the act defines who is and is not an “Indian” – subsection C denies Native women their “Indian” status if they marry anyone “other than an Indian or a non-treaty Indian” (The Indian Act). This Act set out to assimilate Indigenous people by controlling, marginalizing, and robbing them of their sovereignty. The Act, despite the diversity, treaty rights and interests of Indigenous peoples, granted the Canadian government devastating authority and control over First Nations communities. I think Eric Hanson, from the First Nations and Indigenous Studies Department of UBC, accurately summarizes this Act, as a “homogenizing and paternalistic” act that “effectively treated Aboriginal people as children” by “making them legally wards of the state” (Hanson).

This Act reinforces Coleman argument, that “beginning with the colonials and early nation-builders there has been a ‘literary endeavor’ to ‘formulate and elaborate a specific form of [Canadian] whiteness based on the British model of civility’ (5)” (Colman qtd. in Patterson),  through demonstrating the early Canadian government’s concern and drive to assimilate and/or eradicate Native peoples, culture and traditions. The provisions of the Act demonstrate the entrenched preference that the Canadian government had for white British culture and society.

I think one of worse things I learned about this act is that it still exists, which also corroborates Coleman’s argument that the ideation of whiteness “‘still occupies the position of normalcy and privilege in Canada’ (7)” (Colman qtd. in Patterson). In my research I found that rather than correct the segregating and discriminatory consequences of this Act, the Canadian government has simply been adding provisions and amendments, and have left the onus on Indigenous peoples to attempt to correct the wrongdoings of this Act by challenging them through the Canadian judicial system (Hurley 8).

I think it is high time that all Canadians band together to assist Indigenous peoples in their fight against oppressive legislation that denies them their fundamental right to “active[ly] [participate] in defining and establishing” their own governance (Hanson).

Works Cited

Canada. Indigenous and Northern Affairs. The Indian Act 1876. N.p.: House of Commons of Canada, 1876. Web.

CanLit. “Nationalism, Late 1800s–1950s: Canadian Immigration and War.” CanLit Guides. N.p., 9 Aug. 2013. Web.

Hanson, Erin. “The Indian Act.” Indigenous Foundations. First Nations and Indigenous Studies Department UBC, n.d. Web.

Hurley, Mary. The Indian Act. N.p.: Library of Parliament, 23 Nov. 2009. PDF.

Patterson, Erica. “Instructors Blog.”  English 470 Course Website. 2016. Web

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 both King’s article and Robinson’s story.

---

To answer this question my husband and I read the story multiple times; to ourselves silently and out loud to each other. And while the story “Coyote Makes a Deal with the King of England” is written, it maintains a very oral construction. King indicates in his article, “Godzilla vs. Post-Colonial,” that the oral nature of this story encourages reading aloud, yet I would suggest that it necessitates a verbal reading.

Through the exercise of reading and listening to this story my husband and I realized that we tended to listen to the story more like a song than an account of events. And much like reading the lyrics to a song, reading this story silently did not have the same effect as listening to it aloud. I found that reading the story silently was difficult. I kept looking for a straightforward presentation of the facts and purpose. However, listening to the story aloud I was able to stop focusing on the words and structure of the story, and I found myself absorbed in the feelings the story created. In listening to the story aloud I was not only able to grasp the purpose much better, but I was also able to appreciate the melody of the story.

Because this story is written more how one might speak rather than write, it preserves its spoken character. And I found the story was not just preserving its oral construction, but also preserving its voice; the voice of Harry Robinson. The voice of Robinson is very distinct and clear throughout the story, and an oral reading allows him to tell the story through others. The “oral syntax,” as King calls it, not only creates the storytelling experience, but it also reanimates the storyteller himself.

The conversational tone and structure of the writing create a storytelling experience that requires the reader hear the story aloud to truly hear the story. Through the exercise of reading and listening to this story I have come to the conclusion that this type of “oral syntax” – which is rare in conventional written storytelling – shapes the meaning of the story by creating a much more personal relationship between the storyteller, the reader and story. I think that comparing the experience of stories with this type of “oral syntax” to the experience of a conventional written story is like comparing a dream to a movie.

Works Cited

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

Robinson, Harry. Living by Stories: a Journey of Landscape and Memory. Ed. Wendy Wickwire. Vancouver: Talonbooks, 2005. Print.

My first reaction to this story is sadness. It makes me sad because it so strongly demonstrates how the white settlers treated the Native People of Canada. There is no surprise that the story shows white men as descendants of  “a liar and a thief” (Robinson 12) because that is what they did – lied and stole. My sadness at this story comes from two places. The first from the reality of the horrific and devastating atrocities committed against Native Peoples’ for so many years. Though I had never heard this story before I quite readily recognize it as truth, because everything in life is based on our perspective. This story it is true to those who were brought up with it, and to those who experienced situations that demonstrated the truth within it for many years. The second part of my sadness comes from the truth in this story – the idea that I have descended from a lying thief. I began to wonder, how can I combat this identity? What can I do to make up for the errors of my ancestors?

The “written document” is such a an interesting dynamic of this story. What does the document represent? I was wondering right away – what was written on that paper? But I realized, it doesn’t matter what was written on it because the significance of the document is not what it said but what it represents; writing and literature. This led me to thoughts of the intersection between orality and literature and the way they are often viewed as conflicting. I began to wonder what part did this idea of conflict play in the relationship between settlers and Natives?

Instead of sharing the contents of the “paper” as prescribed, white men came brutally enforced their interpretation of those contents. Natives seem to highly value and respect the art of storytelling, but White culture attributes a significant amount of validity and authority to literature over orature. In white culture it is a comparison, in which literature is deemed “better.” This white culture perceived  contradiction in values is a very saddening outlook. It not only encourage white settlers to try to annihilate Native history, language and culture through assimilation – but it is still a major barrier to widespread societal acceptance and recognition of Native rights, history and knowledge.

White settlers did not have to act “true to their original character” (Robinson 10); they did not have to kill and steal. But they did. And this reality is devastating and painful. However, while this story demonstrates the truth of that history, it also offers hope for a more cooperative future. Though it may be too late to share the contents of the “paper” in an honouring and reciprocal way. Maybe we (a new generation) can repair the damage that has been done. Perhaps there is still an opportunity to return to the original plan, perhaps we can uphold our part of deal struck upon our ancestor’s banishment; perhaps together we can all create a new and happier end to this story.

Works Cited

Mitchell, Terry. UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples: Monitoring and

Realizing Indigenous Rights in Canada. Centre for International Governance Innovation, 2014. Web.

Robinson, Harry. Living by Stories: A Journey of Landscape and Memory. Ed. Wendy

C. Wickwire. Vancouver: Talon, 2005. Print.

Trigger, Bruce G., and Bruce G. Trigger. The Contested Past : Reading Canada’s

History : Selections from the Canadian Historical Review: The Historians’ Indian: Native Americans in Canadian Historical Writing from Charlevoix to the Present (1986). University of Toronto Press, 01/01/2016. Web.

After reading the blogs and picking out similarity after similarity I realized it was actually going to be much harder to find the differences. While the stories were very unique and diverse, the themes and values within them were very similar. Since the similarities seemed to be more noticeable to me I am going to start with the top similarities I observed:

1. The value of experience
2. The idea that home is not a physical place but a feeling
   1. Also the ability of physical place to affect the way feel, through providing stability, security and comfort.
3. The role houses play in our perceptions of home
4. The importance of stories to our understanding of home
5. The importance of the people you surround yourself with
6. The idea that our sense of home changes and grows with us

While each blogger presented a very different story to define their individual perception of home, most blogs seemed to suggest that the concept of home is personal. This recurrent theme was not only that home is personal, but also that it is more of a feeling than a physical place. We define home as feelings such as, stability, acceptance and connection. Also many of us seem to highly value the relationships and people in our lives that allow us to feel at home.

As I mentioned earlier I thought finding differences was a much harder task. One blog that provided a very different interpretation of home was Kathryn Fraser’s blog. Her outlook on home was unique because instead of exploring the concept of home from an individual perspective she looked at the national perspective. In her blog Kathryn examines peoples’ perceptions versus the reality of their home country. Where many blogs shared thoughts on the personal concept of home, Kathryn made me think about the importance of the national understanding of home. She stresses the importance of “bring together our differing understandings of home,” so we can create a nation in which all citizens feel the security, acceptance and connection of home. How we as a group define our country has substantial influence on an individual’s ability to relate to it as home.

Defining home is a very difficult task because it is a complex idea made up of both macro (national) and micro (individual) components. And while a home might be shared by many people, it can also differ from person to person, and even change for each person through time. I feel that the differences in people’s stories define the individual component of home and the shared themes and values within these stories give us a glimpse of the national component of home.

Works Cited

Fraser, Kathryn. “Question 4, Blog Post 2.” Kathryn Fraser’s Blog. Web.

I grew up in a large family – eight siblings to be exact. We lived in a big blue house. We loved the blue house. It had carpeted stairs that were perfect for sliding down in sleeping bags and boxes. It had a huge yard with a pool which was ideal for games of Roobinhood and Marko Polo. On Sunday nights we would have all our friends from church come over to play kick-the-can and cop-and-robbers in the dark. Sunday mornings, however, were not quite as fun. I always knew I was going to end up with a few burns on the ears if one of my older sisters was curling my hair. As a kid I only understood the inconvenience of having to wear those silly dresses and keep my Sunday socks white, it was not until I was an adult that I realized the painstaking organization and methodical preparation my mother would go through on Saturday nights to ensure they she had all nine kids washed, dressed and out the door for church at 9 am. Many of the years in the big blue house were focused around church. My childhood was captivated by the magical (although magic was strictly forbidden) stories of the bible.

I moved into small square white house. It was my first time living on my own … well with four other people – I guess, away from my family home would be a better way to put it. My life was captivated by the stories of all the interesting people I was meeting. In the white house I was able to deconstruct my family home – I made my own rules, I discovered my own boundaries and molded my own morality. The white house is where I came to realize that the big blue house was my parents’ home but it was just my house. It was the place they built (metaphorically they didn’t actually build it), where they raised their children, and where they shared their lives together. The blue house laid the foundation, but the white house is where I started to create the blueprint for my home.

As the years past I did many different things; I traveled, I worked a variety of jobs, I went to school, and I met the love of my life. After some amount of time we moved into our first house, the polka-dot house. It was named this because when we were fixing it up I made some stencils and painted one large living room wall brown with big blue polka-dots! This house had a huge backyard and we planted a massive garden. We loved to entertain, we threw dinner parties galore. This was a lively house, filled with music from the record player and many people laughing and dancing. While we were fixing and brightening up this house we were also building what would become the frame of our home.

The next house was the red house – Boy! Those were a busy few years. I managed a busy restaurant, we eloped to Mexico and got married, my restaurant burned down, I went back to university, years after our elopement we planned and had a huge wedding. Throughout these years we were building away on our home.; slowly adding walls, floors, a roof and more.

After red house moved into a tent. We packed up a motorcycle and traveled from Germany to Egypt. Our house on wheels. This is when I truly realized that our home was complete. The year of travel allowed me to see quite clearly that the home we built is wherever we are together; it is the place where we are sharing our lives.

My home is not in a place but in time; it is in the time it took to grow and learn, it is in the time spent discovering myself, it is the time spent with the ones I love.

My home is in my story.

Work Cited

Beach Front Blue House. N.d. Pixabay. PIxabay. Web.

You’ll never believe what happened early one morning when Socrates, Cephalus, Polemarchus,Thrasymachus and Bob sat arguing in a cold marble gazebo on the top of a mountain.

First a little back story. These five men are the Guardians of a sacred state. A state where all citizens were kind, loving and moral – in all their actions and all their words. The Guardians are charged with protecting the state and they do this by deciphering what should be accepted into the world and what should not.

That morning, exposed to the crisp morning air, the Guardians exchanged tales of piety and philosophies for their idyllic state. As they exchanged viewpoints on statehood, virtue and existence, they began to debate the power of literature.

Socrates explained, “stories are used to shape character and therefore it is best to be strict on what stories are allowed to be told in our perfect republic.”

“hear, hear, how true,” agreed Thrasymachus. “please, Socrates enlighten us more.”

“Stories which contain any immorality ‘must not be admitted into our state, whether they be allegorical or not’ (Plato 6)” continued Socrates…

“I disagree completely!” said Bob, “stories are educational and should be used to allow citizens to decipher between right and wrong.”

“No, no, no” Socrates replied, “we must be weary of corrupt language, because language begets actions.”

Bob shook his head, “oh, old Socrates you are talking nonsense again, let me show you…” at this moment Bob began to tell a tale of such ugliness and depravity that the words will not be repeated here. “You see old Soc, we are just fine.”

“AAh, take it back. That awful tale must never be repeated. Take it back I say!” shouted Cephalus.

As Cephalus spoke clouds began to form in the sky, they blackened the sun and the Guardians were confronted by a bitter emotionless rain.

“Alas, it is too late” wept Socrates, “for once a story is told it cannot be called back. Once told, it is loose in the world.”

I was very inspired by the second book of Plato’s Republic; so, I decided to use his characters, well… and Bob, in my story for how evil came into the world.  In the second book Socrates is examining literature and its utility. And while Plato may be a bit extreme in his idea that stories should never contain anything but positive and “moral” ideas, I do agree with him that stories are a fundamental aspect of education. Stories help us learn and understand experiences and views that we otherwise may never get to connect with.

However, stories can also be devastating and deconstructing. Stories can allow people to distort, to misunderstand and to hate one another. I think it is important to be aware of the stories you hear, as well as to observe storyteller. Examining the originator of a story allows you to determine how much power the story will have for you. For this reason, I wanted to experiment with telling my story through different mediums; in-person, on the phone, and over Skype. Each medium provides the listener with a different level of visual interpretation of my body language and expression.

The first thing I noticed was that I was much more enthusiastic telling the story in person. I was more engaged and could alter my telling of the story a bit more to suit the non-verbal reactions of my listener. Skype was similar to telling the story in person (more similar then it was to over the phone), but there was still a degree of distance and I was less motivated to be as passionate. Over the phone I found the story was hard for the listener to follow and it required me to repeat or retell it a bit. I was also much less engaged in the telling of the story.

I told the story multiple time in person as well and found that my story changed a little each time, usually in the dialogue (and the pronunciation of the names). I also noticed that I altered the pace and tone of my story based on the specific listener. While my story varied in timing and exactness of the dialogue, the order of my story stayed the same: guys on mountain > perfect world > power of literature > argument > evil story > cloud and rain > too late!

Works Cited

King, Thomas. The Truth About Stories: A Native Narrative. Peterbough:Anansi Press. 2003. Print.

Plato. “Republic – Book II.” Ed. Dominic M. Lopes. Philosophy of Literature: Contemporary and Classic Readings. Ed. Eleen John. Oxford: Blackwell, 2004. 5-14. Print.

“When to Use Face to Face Meetings and When to Hold Virtual Meetings.” The Meeting King. Paracas Solutions, 9 Feb. 2012. Web.

Previous categorizing of literature and orality by some poststructuralists, and the Toronto School, has led to a single-sensory conception of media (Macneil), presenting ideas about the validity of literacy opposed to the tribal nature of orality. As Courtney Macneil states classifications, such as Ong’s, that suppose “orality exists either in isolation from literacy, or as subservient to it” disallows recognition of the interdependency between these two communicatory medias. The restrictedness of this type of thought does not acknowledge the complex and blurred relationship between orality and literature, which is only being heightened through the use of the www and digital media. Has Macneil stated, “the advent of contemporary internet culture has encouraged the recognition that oral and textual need not be viewed from a hierarchical perspective.”

The idea that orality and literacy are in hierarchical competition with one another is a fading notion as technological advances have led to an age of digital media that incorporates many forms of communication: textual, visual, oral and aural. Digtal media has challenged the existing, and more binary, perspectives of the relationship between orature and literature; in the world of digital media text may be evanescent (eg. snapchat) and orality may be permanent (eg. audio files). The digital age has encouraged a blurring between literacy and orality in many ways, such as enabling widespread self-publication and the use of hyperlinks.

There is a social media medium available to share any and all facets of one’s life, perspective and outlook, this technological availability has enabled widespread self-publication on a massive scale.  Where in the past people would share their daily lives (thoughts, achievements etc.) to one person or possibly a small group of people, social media outlets, such as facebook, have enabled individuals to share their stories with a mass audience. This ability to display one’s life simultaneously through oral, visual and textual medias has led to aspects of life which, perhaps previous to technology, would have been aural to become literature.  Another significant way self-publication has changed the examination of literacy and orality is through apps, such as twitter, which allow people to read stories from many different perspectives in bite size pieces and in real time; this style of information is much more similar to a story being orally told then a physical publication, yet it is written an technically literature. Much of what is available in text format through social media is not what one would consider “literature” when using the previous categorization of literature and orality.

Yet, perhaps the most interesting way that digital media has changed categorizations is through the use of hyperlinks. As discussed in the lesson this week there is a distinction between a listener and a reader. And that distinction allows that a listener often has far more power over a story than someone who is reading text. However, hyperlinks change the relationship between reader and text, because they provide the reader the opportunity to uncover more information and to supplement the ideas in the text in front of them. Through hyperlinks the reader gains more power over the story. This change in relationship between reader and text begins to blur that distinction between listener and reader, further muddying the division between literature and orality.

Works Cited
MacNeil, Courtney. “The Chicago School of Media Theory Theorizing Media since 2003.” The Chicago School of Media Theory RSS. Chicago University, n.d. Web. 18 Sept. 2016.

Shade, L. R., and L. R. Shade. Social Media Society: My so-Called Social Media Life. 1 Vol. , 05/11/2015. Web.

Williams, James. “Introduction: What Is Poststructuralism?” Understanding Poststructuralism. Chesham, Bucks: Acumen Pub., 2005. 1-24. Print.