Write a blog that hyper-links your research on the characters in GGRW according to the pages assigned to you. Be sure to make use of Jane Flick’s reference guide on your reading list.

I chose pages 162-165, 191-193, and 320-322 to research the influences of Western media and pop culture icons like John Wayne on characters such as Eli Stands Alone, Lionel Red Dog, and George, and the significance of the attempts to subvert the roles of the hero through John Wayne’s on-screen death.

Mystic Warrior / John Wayne 

An important symbol in GGRW is John Wayne, who most resembles the Mysterious Warrior that Bill Bursum roots for, as he “[clutches] his hands in his lap as if he was praying” (188). It is in this non-Native text that people like Bill Bursum, who only represents the interest of non-Native claims and the hostility of such as well (Flick, 21) treat the Western myth as the only true mythology to believe in, just as Christianity can be interpreted as a usurper of all other religions. Moreover, it is in the background of the Monument Valley where camera scenes of Western victory are played over and over again, where either Indians are regarded as savages or really, the antagonists of heroic cowboys. One good example that also refers to John Wayne is Stagecoach.

As a character reference, John Wayne was an actor who played in multiple roles of films that portray him as the individualistic hero. In pages 320-322, we see the dynamics of this role being reversed, or rather, as an attempt by the 4 Indians to fix the ‘mistake’ of representation, which is further tied to one of Lionel’s biggest past mistake in choosing John Wayne as his childhood idol (241). This decision probably led to further issues of identity, in the general aspect of meeting other people’s expectations through erasure or pretending, at an expense of his own culture or family tradition. Western media like John Wayne furthermore exploits the cultural narratives of First Nations people by imposing assumptions that simplify what it means to be “authentic”. King mentions in The Truth about Stories that for Natives, “this disjunction between reality and imagination is akin to life and death. For to be seen as ‘real,’ for people to ‘imagine’ us as Indians, we must be ‘authentic’” (54). Thus, Western media creates this mythical model of an authentic Indian, but to be seen as authentic they must “either conform to those external Stories or to have their Indian-ness erased entirely” (Bechtel, 212).    

Eli Stands Alone

“Trembling and alone, the woman, whose name was Annabelle, huddled on the ground waiting for death. But instead of being scalped as she had supposed, the Mysterious Warrior picked her up, put her on his horse beside him, and galloped away.

Eli got up and put a pot of water on. The light was beginning to fade. It was junk and he knew it, but he liked Westerns. It was like . . . eating potato chips.” (King, 162-163)

In context of the pages I chose, Eli’s narrative resembles that of a failed romance with Karen. Karen’s projections of him being her Mystic Warrior (King, 164) as well as her overall perceptions of Native American lifestyle is heavily influenced by Western media. When she finally visits Eli’s family and camp (recall that this is Eli remembering all these past details while he is reading a junkie romance), she says: “That’s beautiful. It’s like it’s right out of a movie” (203). Perhaps part of the failure resulted from Karen’s inability to understand Eli’s lonely dynamics as she viewed him like some cultural idol and not as a misrepresented identity. Eli falls into adapting various motivations, as one who refuses for the dam to be built–similar to Elijah Harper’s standout vote against the Manitoba legislature, and as someone caught in between due to his inability to reconcile with his family.

George Morningstar

George walks into Latisha’s home, one day, in a fringed leather jacket. I believe this is the first time we encounter the jacket, which the 4 Indians take later on in order to ‘induce’ some change in Lionel, which doesn’t even fit him comfortably and overall results in a George who is fed up because his film is confiscated during the Sun Dance (King, 387). In this sense, Morningstar’s lack of judgment was similar to George Custer: on the Battle of Bighorn in 1876, Custer dismisses the scout’s claim on the massive force of Indians, does not wait for reinforcements, and meets his own death.

In George’s character reference, Latisha mentions that what she found attractive in George was how his name was “slightly Indian” (King, 131), and how “he did not look like a cowboy or an Indian” (132).

“They belonged to one of my relatives. Now they belong to me.”

“Nice jacket,” Billy had told him.

“Damn right it is,” said George.

“Thought you just liked new things,” said Latisha, wiping down a table.

“It’s history,” said George, rolling his shoulders in the jacket. “Most old things are worthless. This is history.”

“Guess you got to know which is which.” (192).

The way that he shows Latisha the jacket indicates this aggressive need to feel not necessarily respected, but this demand to respect his judgment of materialistic things, despite them just being reflections off of trends as seen in John Wayne wearing such a jacket on the TV screen (193).When Latisha comments on George’s lack of understanding on his obsession with new things and sudden acknowledgment of history (though in his own terms), he ends up punishing her through physical abuse to not “ever do that again” (King, 192).

On TV, we see the patterns of the “cavalry [coming] over the hill and [killing] the Indians” (192), which Latisha deems to be the Western manner of how things are. This can be similar to the parallel experiences she has in dealing with George, in the sense that she and Eli may have been “continually caught up in a series of mistaken, harmful, and externally imposed Stories that literally restrict and control their lives” (Bechtel, 206).

John Wayne: Hero? (cont.)

Throughout the novel, John Wayne’s impact on the characters in GGRW has only shaped the damaging perceptions of not only how Westerners saw the Natives, but also how Natives saw themselves. It is implied that the 4 Indians tried to fix some mistake, but instead, the black and white film turns into color and John Wayne gets shot (King, 321-322). In this imaginary world/TV, the colorful aspects of reality also bleed through in the sense that Western and Native beliefs are contrasted. King does not emphasize the value of heroes, but “the individual narratives of community members,” whom “are more significant than any one narrative” (Gomez-Vega, 4). We see that John Wayne sheds blood in the Western world, to fulfill their myth. But through the 4 Old Indians, their creation stories, although different, still coexist in the sense that there is no one true story to live by, but the subjective truths of every being. While no one is able to challenge George Morningstar nor other supremacist non-Native Americans in the novel, the act of John Wayne’s death is a slight breaking point in literary context.

Works Cited

“25 years since Elijah Harper said ‘no’ to the Meech Lake Accord.” CBC News,  Mar 18, 2016. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/25-years-since-elijah-harper-said-no-to-the-meech-lake-accord-1.3110439.

“Old West.” History, A&E Television Networks, http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/indians-defeat-custer-at-little-big-horn.

Bechtel, Greg. “The Word for World Is Story: Syncretic Fantasy as Healing Ritual in Thomas King’s “Green Grass, Running Water”.” Journal of the Fantastic in the Arts,  Brian Attebery Editor, Vol. 19, No. 2 (73),  (2008), pp. 204-223. Jstor, http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/stable/24352453?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents.

Ebert, Roger. Review of Stagecoach, John Ford. RogerEbert.com, 1 Aug. 2011. http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/great-movie-stagecoach-1939.

Flick, Jane. “Reading Notes for Thomas King’s Green Grass, Running Water.” Canadian Literature 161/162 (1999), 25 October 2016. https://canlit.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/canlit161-162-CoyoteFeeFlick.pdf.

Gómez-Vega, Ibis. “Subverting the ‘Mainstream’ Paradigm through Magical Realism in Thomas King’s ‘Green Grass, Running Water’.” The Journal of the Midwest Modern Language Association, Vol. 33, No. 1 (Winter, 2000), pp. 1-19. Jstor, https://www.jstor.org/stable/1315114?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents.

ICTMN Staff. “12 Movies Shot in Monument Valley on the Navajo Nation.” Indian Country Today Media Network, Indian Country Today Media Network, 28 Aug 2013, http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2013/09/28/12-movies-shot-monument-valley-navajo-nation-151484.

Joseph, Bob. “The Enduring Nature Of First Nation Stereotypes.” Indigenous Corporate Training Inc., 14 Apr. 2015, http://www.ictinc.ca/blog/the-enduring-nature-of-first-nation-stereotypes.

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

Martinez, Mathew and San Juan, Pueblo. “All Indian Pueblo Council and the Bursum Bill.” New Mexico History, New Mexico History, http://newmexicohistory.org/people/all-indian-pueblo-council-and-the-bursum-bill.

Wagamese, Richard. “John Wayne rides again.” Windspeaker, The Aboriginal Multi-Media Society, Volume 8, Issue 11, 1990, http://www.ammsa.com/publications/windspeaker/john-wayne-rides-again.

4) Identify and discuss two of King’s “acts of narrative decolonization.”Please read the following quote to assist you with your answer.The lives of King’s characters are entangled in and informed by both the colonial legacy in the Americas and the narratives that enact and enable colonial domination. King begins to extricate his characters’ lives from the domination of the invader’s discourses by weaving their stories into both Native American oral traditions and into revisions of some of the most damaging narratives of domination and conquest: European American origin stories and national myths, canonical literary texts, and popular culture texts such as John Wayne films. These revisions are acts of narrative decolonization. James Cox. “All This Water Imagery Must Mean Something.” Canadian Literature 161-162 (1999). Web April 04/2013.

“I got back as soon as I could,” says Coyote. “I was busy being a hero.”

“That’s unlikely,” I says.

“No, no,” says Coyote. “It’s the truth.”

“There are no truths, Coyote,” I says. “Only stories.”

“Okay,” says Coyote. “Tell me a story.” (King, 391)

There are many small instances in dialogue that King uses to point out a few things—in this case, the fact that Coyote claims to be playing the role of the hero can be related to the concept of Manifest Destiny and this entitlement that colonizers perceived that they could take matters to their own hands. While pop cultural and political references may have been the only things familiar to a Westernized mindset, we have to maneuver through foreign-like references we do not understand, such as the symbols of the Medicine Wheel, in order to read Green Grass Running Water and understand the plight of the First Nations characters. The idea that there are no truths and only stories is an interesting disclaimer, especially as King combines myth and stories together in an array of characters and worldly issues.

Moreover, “King repopulates their stories with First Nations characters whose presence replots doom as survival of, and resistance to, colonial violence and domination” (Cox, 220). In Green Grass Running Water, these characters (like Lionel and Eli) generally face this pattern of wanting to mask their identity (avoiding family) and yet ultimately are isolated from society as “The Indian who couldn’t go home” (King, 286). However, the audience is also displaced into their reality through intertextual struggles, as well as the stories of Coyote and the 4 Old Indians.

Two Acts of Narrative Decolonization:

1. Water Imagery + 4 Old Indians Trying to Fix Things.

“Where did the water come from?” Alberta, Patrolman Delano, Sergeant Cereno, and Lionel ask (98).

Throughout the novel, there is this constant imagery that all characters come across: water. Water can be seen overall as a spiritual cleansing and seeking of change. Just as the puddles are recognized by characters, so are their stories affected by the water imagery. The water imagery can be related to the 4 Old Indians who have been retelling certain stories in between the narratives of the characters they want to help, but keep making some sort of mistake that creates another layer of issues. The fact that there are walking myths that Dr. Hovaugh perceives as dangerous and something he personally wants to avoid tells a lot about the current narrative of decolonization where progress may feel stagnant. However, in the end, when the dam breaks, Sifton asks: “What the hell are [a Nissan, a Pinto, and a Karmann-Ghia] doing on my lake?” (407). This imagery gives the sense that all the issues addressed and referred to have overflowed and in return, this personified force is an unification of all the things left unaddressed in society, and yet have its own form of power in the book as water.

This aftermath is near the ending of the novel, but because it is implied that they keep trying to fix their mistakes, there is no beginning nor end when it comes to decolonization. Flick refers to Lee Maracle, who explains: “Most of our stories don’t have orthodox ‘conclusions’; that is left to the listeners, who we trust will draw useful lessons from the story—not necessarily the lessons we wish them to draw, but all conclusions are considered valid. The listeners are drawn into the dilemma and are expected at some point in their lives to actively work themselves out of it.” (11-12) Our imagination is supposed to run wild and our perceptions of images are supposed to transform throughout the novel, just as our reality does as we read the stories of these people. Fixing these narratives and preconceptions may take forever just as after you tell a story, it cannot be undone.

“Oops,”said the Lone Ranger. “I thought we fixed this one.”

“Yes,” said Ishmael, “I thought we did, too.”

“A lot of them look the same,” said Hawkeye.

“Boy,” said Robinson Crusoe, “this is sure a lot of work.” (King, 320)

The 4 Women in Native creation stories may resemble a metaphorical form of “walking ghosts” in which the pop cultural references that they represent (ex: First Woman as Lone Ranger) feel responsible for the actions of a past that keeps repeating itself. This mixture of stories and cultural symbols such as the Medicine Wheel, exist without explanation in the novel, and reveal the flaws of what is believed to be true in our settler’s consciousness—where we come across this border of reality and fiction and close the gap between our own perceptions of First Nations people (through television and media) and how we originally see things. One form of misunderstood dialogue between characters can lead to an unraveling story that transforms continuously throughout the book, and it is this overall form of decolonization that King seeks to re-identify in his characters.

2. Myth + Mundane → Noah and Changing Woman

In the end, it is suggested that to fix everything again they “could start in the garden” (428). The constant entanglements with Christian doctrine brings a lot of irony, because the garden is where Adam and Eve became sinners (how evil started in the human world). When Changing Woman meets Noah and the Ark, he constantly repeats how there are “Christian rules” and that if she does not procreate with him, and follow these rules (talking to animals is bestiality apparently) then she will ultimately be kicked out of the ship. Ironically, one interpretation in the link is that it refers to a “wet” holocaust and how God also failed to ‘cleanse’ the world.

Nonetheless, Noah’s character is one of many (God, Dog Dream, and Young Man Walking on Water) who feel that they are entitled to whatever they wish. Moreover, because in the bible story Eve had been blamed for the downfall of humanity, Noah was at first suspicious of the woman appearing on his ship. Cox mentions that “to emphasize the male attempt to dominate European/Euro-pean North American culture, the Noah of King’s novel invokes patriarchal privilege to assign blame to Eve for this destruction, too” (228). He objectifies her body to fulfill his desires, makes his rules an ultimatum and her eventual departure a punishment, and does not understand consent but only procreation as he chases her around. Moreover, all of his actions were declared under being a Christian.

This mindset is also a reference to the entitlement that colonizers originally had, except in King’s novel, God is not the true creator in power and only some “Dog Dream” who claims to be. It is also important to note that the gender roles are subverted and yet despite these women representing Hawkeye, Lone Ranger, Ishmael, and Robinson Crusoe, their true intentions are devalued in the eyes of biblical characters, Hovaugh, etc.

One overarching reference is the phrase “as long as the grass is green and the waters run” (King, 267), which is quoted here (search: second word of bitterness, speech in bold) where President Jackson sent an army major to talk to the Choctaws and Cherokees in moving them to another place, to which they provide a speech. I think that despite land settlements, the depiction of nature imagery and First Nations issues still coexist and is part of our reality (that some may not be willing to face). Ultimately, the book title speaks of the narrative of First Nations people today and in the continuous attempts of decolonization.

Works Cited:

“Noah And The Flood An Ironic Allegory.” 1 In Faith: A Christian Bible Study, Robert Traer, 2000, http://christian-bible.com/Worship/Sermons/noah.flood.htm.

Cox, James. “All This Water Imagery Must Mean Something”: Thomas King’s Revisions of Narratives of Domination and Conquest in “Green Grass, Running Water.” American Indian Quarterly, Vol. 24, No. 2, Spring 2000, pp. 219-246 (28). University of Nebraska Press, http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/stable/1185872.

Fee, Margery and Jane Flick. “Coyote Pedagogy Knowing Where the Borders Are in Thomas King’s Green Grass, Running Water.” Canadian Literature, 161/162, 0008-4360, 1 July 1999, 131, https://canlit.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/canlit161-162-CoyoteFeeFlick.pdf.

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

Michaud, Rony. Pixabay, 28 Dec. 2014, https://pixabay.com/p-578897/?no_redirect.

Zinn, Howard. “Chapter 7: As Long as Grass Grows or Water Runs.” A People’s History Of The United States, New York, HarperCollins, 2003, 259.

In her article, “Green Grass, Running Water: Theorizing the World of the Novel,” Blanca Chester observes that “the conversation that King sets up between oral creation story, biblical story, literary story, and historical story resembles the dialogues that Robinson sets up in his storytelling performances (47). She writes:

Robinson’s literary influence on King was, as King himself says, “inspirational.” When one reads King’s earlier novel, Medicine River, and compares it with Green Grass, Running Water, Robinson’s impact is obvious. Changes in the style of the dialogue, including the way King’s narrator seems to address readers and characters directly (using the first person), in the way traditional characters and stories from Native cultures (particularly Coyote) are adapted, and especially in the way that each of the distinct narrative strands in the novel contains and interconnects with every other, reflect Robinson’s storied impact. (46)

For this blog assignment I would like you to make some comparisons between Harry Robinson’s writing style in “Coyote Makes a Deal with the King Of England” and King’s style in Green Grass, Running Water. What similarities can you find between the two story-telling voices? Coyote and God are present in both texts, how do they compare in character and voice across the stories?

“For a long time, Coyote was there
On the water, sitting on that boat.
And he eat right there.
And then they got a fire.
And the fire, they never go out.
They still burnin’ just like it was when they first set the fire.
It’s that way all the time.
And, been there a long time, just like they put him in jail.
They still there.” (King, 64)

Conceptually and structurally, Robinson and King’s storytelling methods can be considered similar. In the introduction to “Coyote Makes a Deal with the King of England”, King sets the story in motion with this notion that whatever happened is still happening, the fire is burning just like the first time it was set. This image is parallel to the image of the Four Indians in Green Grass and Running Water, who are in the contemporary world and are trying to fix things, but their attempts only cause more issues. That important task that needs to be done, is still ‘being done’. Both King and Robinson have similar purposes on establishing this permanent existence of First Nations issues, whether it be in the form of the Black and White, or the Four Indians.

On the other hand, both writers emphasize different aspects: Robinson continues executing choppy lines and informal dialogue that causes us to slow our thoughts down, while King has Coyote pose questions between traveling through time and situations with characters, almost as part of the reader’s audience. Yet, in similar ways, we are constantly working to understand these stories that are thrown around in present tense. It is this skillful sense of constancy (of how life is never ending nor beginning and how literature mimics such) in oral narratives, that seeks a response from the readers. Both writers create a motion in their words and this echo of past meeting present–Robinson, in repetition of the law/agreement between the King of England and Coyote, and King, in his occasional reference to the image of puddles, and water rising, as Lionel’s past mistakes resurfacing.

Robinson’s character of God is rather simple in which God commands and gives Coyote a power for an important task. God is seen as this all-powerful, all knowing being, yet his own actions don’t show regard for the people on Earth. The dialogue between the King of England and Coyote tells more of a story of distrust and politics, but as this story is not as stretched out, there are not as many plot details to examine here. However, both texts suggest a hint of skepticism toward the Christian God.

On God and Coyote, King further provides more context that satirically deals with Christian influences. He “reverses [the renaming of First Nations individuals with familiar Christian names by] renaming Christ as Young Man Walking on Water” (Flick, 270). Moreover, in King’s interview at the end of the book, he mentions that “there is a certain meanness and arrogance in religion, and in society in general, that prevails… Religion is this way because it is run by humans, created by humans and inhabited by humans” and says that “[he tends] to look for those imperfections” and is “not a person full of faith” (5). While there is this implication that Coyote is supposed to be an impulsive and difficult to understand or interpret “god”, in King’s story, he is not only a trickster but a complex, omniscient time traveler. He tells the ‘wrong’ stories by mentioning soldiers who “have flowers in their hair” (324), seems to call upon a storm (273), and is seen as this “yellow dog dancing in the rain” (279). In the many questions he asks, sometimes he gives the right observation, and sometimes he just gets it all wrong. Not to mention that it was implied he was involved in Alberta’s pregnancy, we don’t know where to start in understanding who he is. Does this bring perspective into King’s opinion on faith and religion especially in the manner which Solnit (who brings a personal account as well) says that “perfect is not only the enemy of the good; it’s also the enemy of the realistic, the possible, and the fun” ? How is Coyote portrayed similarly yet differently from the Christian God?

While there is no explicit Christian God in King’s novel, the concept is contrasted nonetheless. And while King may have been inspired with Robinson’s storytelling voice, he also brings into account many other aspects to the realm of literature and reality. We learn through both writers’ dialogues the projections and influences of complex characters such as that of Coyote and God.

Works Cited

Flick, Jane. “Reading Notes for Thomas King’s Green Grass, Running Water.” Canadian Literature 161/162 (1999). Web. 25 October 2016.

Giffen Sheila, Kathryn Grafton, Laura Moss. “Challenges of Textualizing Orature.” CanLit Guides, The University of British Columbia, 19 Aug. 2016, http://canlitguides.ca/canlit-guides-editorial-team/orature-and-literature/challenges-of-textualizing-orature/.   

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

Mallette, Linnaea. “Beware Of Coyotes Sign.” PublicDomainPictures.net, http://www.publicdomainpictures.net/view-image.php?image=110922&picture=beware-of-coyotes-sign.

Robinson, Harry. “Coyote Makes a Deal with the King Of England.” Living by Stories: a Journey of Landscape and Memory. Ed. Wendy Wickwire. Vancouver: Talonbooks, 2005. 64-85.

In order to address this question you will need to refer to Sparke’s article, “A Map that Roared and an Original Atlas: Canada, Cartography, and the Narration of Nation.” You can easily find this article online. Read the section titled: “Contrapuntal Cartographies” (468 – 470). Write a blog that explains Sparke’s analysis of what Judge McEachern might have meant by this statement: “We’ll call this the map that roared.”

When Chief Justice Allan MacEachern was unfolding the map of Gitxsan and Wet’suwet’en territory, he declared: “We’ll call it the map that roared” (Sparke, 468). Sparke initially mentions other interpretations that branch the meaning of MacEachern’s words to “a derisory scripting of the plaintiffs as a ramshackled, anachronistic nation” (468). One notion he suggests that MacEachern refers to is the paper tiger, “in the immediate context of trying to open up a huge paper reproduction of the First Nations’ map” (468). The paper tiger is a Chinese idiom that is similar to the English meaning of ‘how its bark is bigger than its bite’. In this sense, a roaring map rather belittles the position of the Aboriginal peoples and devalues the Aboriginal title to their land. MacEachern is assuming that even from going into the Supreme Court, his side will be victorious because he ignores and calls the efforts of Gitxsan and Wet’suwet’en as futile.

As is mentioned here (which also gives a nice overview of the case history), from previous cases, the Supreme Court had acknowledged that there was an Aboriginal title, but was still deciding on whether or not such still exists. This was definitely a major pinpoint in history, where instead of using the traditions of oral storytelling, those who fought for the Aboriginal title used a map that represented the land as they know it. A land that ignored “the orientation systems, the trap lines, the property lines, the electricity lines, the pipelines, the logging roads, the clear-cuts, and all the other accoutrements of Canadian colonialism on native land” (468). This map was a statement for decolonizing as well as a means of uniting the reality of both colonizers and the colonized. The case was bringing these aspects together, so perhaps it was natural for MacEachern to retaliate in that manner.

The act of roaring itself can re-establish the concept of noble savage, or the Vanishing Indian, who MacEachern realizes from trials of erasure, has come back not as a ghost (what the American invaders would have wanted) but as a collective effort of rebuilding and reclaiming what is theirs. However, he fails to understand and ultimately dismisses all claims from Gitxsan and Wet’suwet’en because from the way he sees it, Canadian life began at the “establishment of the colony” (470). MacEachern assumes this is a war that, for him, has already been won. His improper, demeaning manner speaks of his ignorance as a colonizer in court, and makes a poor example of the role he takes as Chief Justice.

Grant, who was lead counsel for the Gitxsan and Wet’suwet’en (he describes Delgamuukw’s legacy) refers to Justice Vickers, who mentions that “courts must undergo their own process of de-colonization.” When MacEachern declares the map as one that roars, he is clearly refusing to adjust his eyes to another perspective. At the same time, MacEachern could be acknowledging the potential power of the map and the possibilities it can initiate, if possessed in the right minds and hands. His comment was not only a sign of disapproval, but a reaction from his own discomfort as it suggested a reality where he felt displaced.

Works Cited

Grant, Peter. “The Anniversary of Delgamuukw v The Queen: Two Legacies.” TheCourt.Ca, Osgoode Hall Law School, 10 Dec. 2007, http://www.thecourt.ca/2007/12/the-anniversary-of-delgamuukw-v-the-queen-two-legacies/.

Hanson, Erin. “Aboriginal Title.” indigenousfoundations.arts.ubc.ca, First Nations and Indigenous Studies, accessed 17 Oct. 2016, http://indigenousfoundations.arts.ubc.ca/home/land-rights/aboriginal-title.html

Sparke, Matthew. “A Map That Roared And An Original Atlas: Canada, Cartography, and The Narration Of Nation.” Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 88.3 (1998): 463-495. Web.

Wabiskaoskenzhio. “The Vanishing Indian.” Wabiskaoskenzhio’s Blog, WordPress.com, 17 Oct. 2016, https://wabiskaoskenzhio.wordpress.com/2010/08/02/the-vanishing-indian/.

“If Europeans were not from the land of the dead, or the sky, alternative explanations which were consistent with indigenous cosmologies quickly developed” (“First Contact,” 43). Robinson gives us one of those alternative explanations in his stories about how Coyote’s twin brother stole the “written document” and when he denied stealing the paper, he was “banished to a distant land across a large body of water” (9). We are going to return to this story, but for now – what is your first response to this story? In context with our course theme of investigating intersections where story and literature meet, what do you make of this stolen piece of paper? This is an open-ended question and you should feel free to explore your first thoughts.

What fascinated me about the story of Coyote and the Paper was how it was introduced in different magnitudes of Robinson telling many versions and twists of other stories as well. Wickwire talked about how Robinson “wanted to show the cultural importance of maintaining a full range of stories” (29). And while there are storytellers, there are those who did not represent their stories well because they filtered a certain theme. Robinson included stories involving contemporary political issues as well, stories that showed that “Harry’s forebears were not strictly ‘mythtellers’ locked in their prehistorical past” (25). The story places the ancestor of the colonizers as the trickster who steals the paper, and of Coyote as the obedient twin. This paper would represent how the ‘evil’ twin’s descendants, “true to their original character” (10), would take advantage of their God-given blessing and law in colonizing and claiming the land as theirs.  

“And its message would be clear to all: that whites were a banished people who colonized this country through fraudulence associated with an assigned form of power and knowledge who had been literally alienated from its original inhabitants” (30). While I can understand the purpose of this story in depicting a different narrative for decolonizing the settlers, the lacking characterization in both ancestors of these opposing races were rather concerning. Black, versus white, good versus evil. There is no gray area, nor this contact zone that represents a place for hope, nor any misunderstood communication. It’s clear that one side was mistreated. Wouldn’t portraying this be a misrepresentation that is equally incorrect as to how settlers assumed this Adam and Eve aspect of the native people? If we were able to forget our own cultural preconceptions before understanding another culture, how much of their stories should we believe, and yet still be suspicious of? Is it a matter of what the story tells, or what the story has also assumed?

From this obvious depiction of two black and white characters, how are we able to move beyond these set perspectives of each other? I find it ironic that it is assumed our natures must oppose one another, and that even the descendants can be seen as failing to set things right, even in the power of law. This depiction makes this assumption about innate nature, and such assumptions can imply irreversible issues.

I’m particularly curious about how art serves as this outlet in expressing and paving a movement for certain paths, and how there may also be drawbacks when it comes to a mutual understanding, a reconciliation of sorts. While art can provoke questions and start movements, “when metaphor invades decolonization, it kills the very possibility of decolonization; it recenters whiteness, it resettles theory, it extends innocence to the settler, it entertains a settler future” (Tuck, 3). While Robinson’s metaphor does not entertain any certain future, are there dangers to character implications, and does this do more hurting than helping the situation at hand? Tuck claims that an “easy adoption of decolonization as a metaphor…is a premature attempt at reconciliation” (9). I wonder how much walking on eggshells needs to be properly done to establish similar goals and an equal perspective, without being misleading of details, assumptions, or biases. I think I can understand how metaphors themselves cannot serve as part of the bigger picture, but can only point to specific points. For instance, Robinson’s story overall, points to the establishment of the colonizers as unfair.

Overall, is it our own nature that manipulates and corrupts law to our own purposes? If there was no existence of the written document or no symbol of law, would both sides have been able to live peacefully, and come to a collective conclusion about how to live together? Hypothetical questions, but I think they are worth wondering about especially when it comes to this intersection of myth and historical storytelling, of reality and imagination intertwined.

Works Cited

Robinson, Harry. Living by Stories: a Journey of Landscape and Memory. Compiled and edited by Wendy Wickwire. Vancouver, Talon Books, 2005.

Taylor, Steve. “The Real Meaning of ‘Good’ and ‘Evil’.” Psychology Today, 26 Aug. 2013, https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/out-the-darkness/201308/the-real-meaning-good-and-evil.

TEDx Talks. “Be suspicious of stories | Tyler Cowen | TEDxMidAtlantic.” YouTube, presentation by Cowen Tyler, 8 Nov. 2016, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RoEEDKwzNBw.

Tuck, Eve. Yang, K. “Decolonization: Indigeneity, Education & Society.” Decolonization is not a metaphor, Vol. 1, 1 Nov. 2016, 40, Decolonization, http://decolonization.org/index.php/des/article/view/18630/15554.

“Black and White Game Match Chess.” PEXELS, 16 Feb. 2016, https://www.pexels.com/photo/black-and-white-game-match-chess-2902/ .

Read at least 3 students’ blog short stories about ‘home’ and make a list of the common shared assumptions, values and stories that you find. Post this list on your blog with some commentary about what you discovered.

A couple of years ago, I was writing about this feeling of being foreign in your own skin’s country. I didn’t address this issue directly in my story about my home, but it’s still there, like an empty gap. I am aware of it but in a sense it’s a part of my identity that feels replaced, almost, but not to the extent of a forced assimilation. But when I speak English back to a cashier who spoke Chinese, sometimes, I feel a little ashamed.

My image, from Nayyirah Waheed’s poetry book ‘salt.’

Imagine the rest of your family tree, scattered in another place across the ocean. Imagine sending an email to your maternal grandfather, using Google Translate and the audio button as some sort of way to understand what you are writing. English was my second language as a child, but where I am now, I guess I’m just really bad with cultural integration. Enough about my story, though.

Here were two excerpts I enjoyed and was inspired by from reading others’ blogs:

“The concept of cultural values and a geographical home are just things that I have learned to lose now.  I feel that it is something I will develop in the future, after I have learned my life lessons, and settled into a home I will call my own.  For now, I am happy to be roaming.  I cannot relate to those who have had something they’ve known their whole lives – land, lifestyle, and family – and have it taken away from them by a people they have never seen before.  I can only try my best to empathize and understand.  In all honesty, however, I have nothing to explain how I value a home I never had, or a culture that I am learning.” – Jessica Lee.

“Yet, I then start to wonder if my conception of home in this sense is contributing to the displacement of others, to the myth of terra nullius, and to the ongoing colonialism that underlies much of society. I wonder if I can ever truly belong to a place that my ancestors didn’t belong to, and if my own stories contribute to the erasure of the story and home of others.” – Kaylie Higgs.

A few similarities I’ve found in browsing others’ blogs was that the metaphor “Home is where the Heart is” is mentioned a few times. I suppose it describes how a general shared assumption or learned value is that when it comes to the complex concept of our homes, there aren’t any physical boundaries. What makes us different is how we connect to the places that 1) we’ve lived in for quite a while or 2) our cultural identities make such more complex, and may have us challenge our values quite often in terms of where home is. (In my case and a few others, the struggle is similar in which we are unsure how we can compensate; I can live in my parents’ house, speak Chinglish, but I would not feel at home in China). And sometimes we find solace in another person or significant other, and I would say that the idea of a future with them is like its own sort of home.

On that note, I think it transitions well to add this scene as an opening to my next point. When we think about it, memory serves as a constant re-acknowledgment and re-evaluation of who we are now, based on our current experiences, and how we perceive through them. In the 500 Days of Summer cut-scenes, albeit more extreme, it is Tom’s current relations that change his perspective on Summer. She was initially a woman he idealizes to someone he cannot stand because his expectations didn’t fit the reality of things.

Our memory changes a lot depending on our perspective, which also affects how we think of our home. We are constantly transforming and making our mark on our own stories with each milestone we encounter. Consider Robinson’s book title: “Living by Stories: a Journey of Landscape and Memory.” Even in Robinson’s stories, there were incorporations within all themes that Wickwire found, even those that weren’t recorded (mainly because the recorders weren’t interested in detailing them). “Knowing about large birds that could carry humans, lake creatures that could swallow horses, and grizzly bears that could shelter travelers in distress would show people that the world around them consisted of many different forms and layers of life” (Robinson, 29). Likewise, we are always retelling the narrative of our own identity from discovering future values or from digging in the past. We are always learning, but this learning comes from beginning with a question.

Hall argues that “the very process of identification, through which we project ourselves into our cultural identities, has become more open-ended, variable, and problematic” (277). On a side-note, this last page describes an interesting example of which complicates the politics of cultural identities. Yet, is Canada, as a country that identifies itself as multicultural, serving its people well, and are there any displacements or erasures that have affected some cultures? Have we appreciated culturally diverse customs without our own preconceptions largely disabling us from doing so? In what way can/do we identify as Canadians? Is Canada an open doored home to everyone?

I think about a history bleached and rewritten ‘firmly’ with the universally dominant, ultimate colonized language: English. I think about Coyote meeting the King of England. The ‘Black and White.’ The process of decolonization. Do I despise English? No. I am thankful that I can express myself in words, and that I have others who will listen to what I have to say. I can only say in truth, that I have the intention of relearning my own family’s language, so that I can order confidently in Asian restaurants, for my own good.

Emilang. “500 Days of Summer – I Love the Way She..” Youtube. Youtube, August 7, 2010, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DOrfYQPZF6k.

Hall, Stuart et al. “Chapter 1: Introduction: Identity in Question.” The Question of Cultural Identity, Sage Publications, 1996, pp. 274–280.

Higgs, Kaylie. “Is This Home?” Creating Connections, 27 September 2016, https://blogs.ubc.ca/kaylieandautumn2016/2016/09/27/is-this-home/.

Lee, Jessica. “Assignment 2:2 – My Story.” Blog Lee, 28 September 2016, https://blogs.ubc.ca/bloglee/2016/09/28/assignment-22-my-story/.

Lu, Jenny. “Nayyirah’s Immigrant Poem.” 2016. JPEG file.

Robinson, Harry. Living by Stories: a Journey of Landscape and Memory. Compiled and edited by Wendy Wickwire. Vancouver, Talon Books, 2005.

I can still remember the layout of my childhood home–a safe, fantasy-like castle for my wandering imagination.

A picture of my childhood dining room.

I have a lot of fond memories about this place, some still actually vivid, as if I could re-visit my old house and re-imagine these stories. Here is a typical story of seven year old me with many cavities: When my father started owning some vending machines, I would sneak into the basement where the goods were stored, and inconspicuously run upstairs with my favorite chocolates as I turned off the light. Here are snippets of other stories: pulling on baby buttercup flowers thinking they are weeds, watching my grandfather make cong you bing (step-by-step picture recipe), waiting for Tuesdays to watch Teen Titans, singing made-up songs to my baby sister, reading Goosebumps at night only to end up sleeping in my parents’ bed, etc.

They say that home is where the heart is. I thought that once that was established in my childhood, it would be my home forever. I remember feeling pretty devastated after I moved from Canada to California. I felt like I stood out as the new girl, in the last year of elementary school, where everyone already knew each other. People commented on how my r’s and w’s sounded the same (and I also apparently had a slight British accent). The whole fourth grade class were my friends, back home, but here I was, in a new environment, where they already memorized the 50 states and knew how to use fractions and decimals. I also remember hating the name ‘California.’ It didn’t sound right on my tongue.

Of course, like all growing pains, I managed to adjust with the move by making new friends. I didn’t think too much of who I was in middle school (Grade 6-8), but for a long while, I was unhappy with a lot of things. Aside from family issues and with my father once again moving far away to work at another job, I felt like I was going through so many changes by myself. The home I knew as a naive kid was gone. Yet I held onto these memories and wrote in consideration of my past selves, where I would have self-mottos like “expect the unexpected (childhood),” and “stay a kid at heart”–inspired from the many considerate acts I had done when I was small. After the friends who were negatively influencing me moved away, I was able to start writing again, and reflect a lot on about who I was and what I felt connected to. A never-failing connection to ‘my home’ is through my writing. I loved writing stories about fairy-tales as a kid (when I was practicing ESL in my diary), and I can never forget how many times I have saved myself through it.

I feel that at times more than once, this post I wrote on my personal blog still means a lot to me. “My heart travels too much. And I have no right to stop that.” A lot of it just encompasses the anticipations I had for the future, and how I learned in high school that you can’t grow in your own comfort zone. Home can be anywhere, the moments you feel that you belong, just like my favorite scene in the French film, Amélie. When I first saw the movie, I saw this introverted character coming to terms with herself, what she resolved to be as a person, and finally reaching for that moment: being free.  

Despite the disappointment of a broken promise (I had my parents promise to visit Ottawa to see my friends again, which never happened), and the rebellious stages I had from denying parts of my identity (choosing French over Chinese, and the general aspect of pretending to be someone else–kids, I don’t recommend doing this ever), I still chose to write about the creative warmth of a multicultural environment in one of my French immersion classes as a kid, on one of my college application essays. And, I still ended up choosing Canada, over America.

Throughout the years, my values of home have evolved. Home is not the place I walked back to as a kid. Home is wherever I want it to be, however I make it. Home to me is ultimately being authentic and open to all my hopes and fears in the moment, yet still going in for the ‘kill’. Home is a constant re-acquaintance with who I am: like watching my toddler videos where I lived with my grandparents in China for the first time, a summer ago. It is an adventure I am willing to seek, a discovery of future truths.

“We have to continually be jumping off cliffs and developing our wings on the way down.” – Kurt Vonnegut.

Works Cited

Lu, Jenny. “Kitchen.” 2008. JPEG file.

Lu, Jenny. “Thick-skinned Chameleon.” Tumblr. Web, Dec. 13, 2013, Sept. 28, 2016, http://pulledheartstring.tumblr.com/post/69862628960/with-an-ever-looming-finals-week-that-sporadically.

Mika. “Green Onion Pancake (Chinese Fried Scallion Pancakes a.k.a. Cong You Bing).” The 350 Degree Oven, March 4, 2013, http://www.the350degreeoven.com/2013/03/chinese-taiwanese/green-onion-pancake-chinese-fried-scallion-pancakes-a-k-a-cong-you-bing/.

Movieclips. “Amélie (2/12) Movie Clip – Helping a Blind Man (2001) HD.” YouTube. YouTube, Oct. 1, 2011, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wuntz3KDIAk.