On my initial read of the story about Coyote, his twin brother, and the written document I was immediately reminded of the concept of a MacGuffin, a trope found commonly in film. A MacGuffin is an object that seems important at the beginning of a story, but by the end serves virtually no purpose. Like a MacGuffin, this piece of paper puts the story in motion and sets up the main conflict. As I was reading Wendy Wickwire’s compressed version of the story in Living By Stories, I (like assumably most readers) was curious as to what was written on the document. When the contents of this paper are not revealed by the end of the story it feels as if the paper was meaningless, just a representation of power rather than the definition of it. I feel as if this can be taken as an allegory for the weakness of the written word, how it acts as something that (white) people are willing to covet and manipulate to garner dominance. The influence of this document took me back to Chamberlin discussing the power stories hold as long as people believe in them: “Stories are like currency or lines of credit… Currency, like a story or a song, is worthless unless we believe in it – give it a line of credit, as it were” (Chamberlin 198, emphasis added). Like the paper in this Coyote creation story, it is worthless – it’s just paper. But the whites believe in its power, and through this belief lies their vindication for occupation and violence.
By withholding the paper from the Indigenous people, the colonizers are intentionally withholding power to create an imbalance between the two groups of people. To me, the story is expressing how oral storytelling is more authentic and inviting, while written storytelling is coveted and exclusive; there seems to be a vein of resentment towards the written word for most of the story. It isn’t until Coyote and the king of the other land work together that the written word is used for the good of Coyote’s descendants. The king shares the knowledge of the written word with Coyote, and a chance at unity between the two peoples is founded (I think it’s important to note that it was a “speech to the king” (Wickwire 10, emphasis added), not a written letter, that led to common ground). The story further highlights the hope to make peace between the two groups of people. It’s honouring the differences with a set of “Black and White” laws (Wickwire 10) while delivering a cohesive message to both groups; their cultures are different, opposite even, while simultaneously complimentary. By sharing this literature, the stories of both peoples can be honoured, and both groups can be unified as their forefathers were at the beginning of Time.
Works Cited
Chamberlin, Edward. If This is Your Land, Where are Your Stories? Finding Common Ground. AA. Knopf. Toronto. 2003. Print.
de Ryk, Carolina. “Press freedom challenges, more arrests expected in day two of RCMP enforcement of court injunction against Wet’suwet’en Hereditary Chiefs,” CBC: Daybreak North, 6 February 2020, https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/programs/daybreaknorth/press-freedom-challenges-more-arrests-expected-in-day-two-of-rcmp-enforcement-of-court-injunction-against-wet-suwet-en-hereditary-chiefs-1.5456047. Accessed 7 February 2020.
“Hitchcock Presents: The MacGuffin.” YouTube, uploaded by The Take, 22 September 2016, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g4h1Gpq_wWk. Accessed 7 February 2020.
Robinson, Harry. Living by Stories: a Journey of Landscape and Memory. Compiled and edited by Wendy Wickwire. Vancouver: Talon Books, 2005. Print.
Hi Jacob,
I found your comparison to the film concept of the MacGuffin to be an interesting way to connect the story, particularly in the way that the MacGuffin is not by itself an important item, but the assigned meaning of it to the characters is what grants its importance. The lack of documentation and written language has been one of the ways that colonizers have justified the taking of and Indigenous land and the mistreatment of Indigenous Peoples. My question is, considering the history and ongoing treatment of Indigenous Peoples in Canada, do you think that this story could be representative of paths forward for settlers to address their continued mistreatment of First Nations and other Indigenous Peoples?
Hi Sophie,
Thank you for your comment! “Canada” can keep on existing because of endless MacGuffins that we choose to attribute meaning to. We accept their significance, but what is it do these objects actually mean?
I think this Coyote story is exactly how many conflicts between Indigenous communities and “Canada” are intended to be remedied, but it is repeatedly the side of the colonizers that do not meet halfway. A contemporary example, the Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs have been calling for a meeting with John Horgan and Justin Trudeau for weeks so they can discuss terms, but the Premier and Prime Minister refuse to meet. Indigenous people are historically ready to meet colonizers in the middle, but the colonizers are the ones who find roundabout ways to address issues between the two parties.
Hi Jacob! I quite enjoyed reading your blog, the video on what a MacGuffin is was very entertaining 🙂
While reading your blog, I couldn’t help but start to think about other times in history that the written word was used to exert power and control over a group, or class, of people. For example, did you know that during the reign of King Henry the 8th in Europe (before he made his own religion to be able to divorce his wife) that the bible was only available in Latin, so the only people able to read it were the clergy and very high scholars? The “common people” had no access to be able to read it, so they were left to rely on the information they were given by those who could, which as you could imagine was incredibly biased and aimed at maintaining the classist structure that kept the church in power. (Sorry for the mini history lesson, but as they say if one doesn’t learn from the past they’re bound to repeat it, and there seems to be stories like these all-throughout history.) I would be interested in hearing your thoughts about how or why literature could be used as a way to leverage power. Other than a possible language barrier, do you think that oral storytelling could also be used in the same way that the written word to create an imbalance?
Hi Nicole,
Thank you for your comment! I appreciate your history lesson as I don’t believe I’ve ever learned that fact about King Henry VIII. Using literacy as a tool of dominance is something that unfortunately permeates within our society at many turns. Something we are all familiar with is academia; gatekeeping scholarly research and articles from the general public who do not pay a set price is elitist and a form of control. The introduction of the search engine into society has been fundamental in leveling the playing field for access to information, but even then one must possess certain qualifications to access this tool. I do not believe oral storytelling can be used the same way to elicit the same aspect of imbalance that possession over the written word does. Oral storytelling is used to portray information to specific people whether that is an individual or a cultural group, therefore I do not believe it is discriminating against others with its exclusivity. Thank you for your questions – they were thought-provoking and fun to think about.