“If This is Your Land, Where are Your Stories?” by J Edward Chamberlin has become one of my favorite books just after the first read. It was undeniably a challenge to understand the technical constructions of such abstract ideas that surround stories. But, I really took my time with the book as it was – at the same time – so enticing in how abstract and philosophical structures can govern concrete realities in communities. Three points that Chamberlin made in the last chapter of the book, “Ceremonies” that  stood out to me were:

1. It takes active participation and surrendering to particular realities to truly feel the intended effect of stories. That mental space is what Chamberline calls “the border”. This active component of the listener/reader is a factor I’ve never thought of previously. And it’s redefined my perspective on stories as an entity that only exists if the receiver allows it to. If we overstep the line, the illusion becomes too clear and it leaks into our reality.  Step too far away from the border and we  all too much become absorbed into the stories. Positioning ourselves on the sweet spot as listeners/readers creates “strangeness and contradiction” (223) which should be cherished but we end up often avoiding.

2. Chamberlin describes the purpose of stories as being to create a “common ground” between people. Whether if it’s a brief moment where we sing the same lyrics together at a concert or a lasting treaty between countries, having shared stories means having shared realities, having shared realities means having shared rules and boundaries, and that creates structure, thus creating what we call community. Chamberlin also suggests that while we may not celebrate every story, it’s at least imperative to know that it’s fruitless to compare stories to one another; it’s the easiest way to create misunderstanding. “We may not eat together at the end of the day, but at least we can show some respect for each other’s table manners” (227).

This idea reminded me of the Dakota access pipelines story that I’ve been following in recent news, where the indigenous people of Dakota and new-comers have very different stories about the narrative of the land and it’s future purpose. And I can’t help but feel disheartened as the two parties fight literally and metaphorically for the “common ground” that Chamberlin speaks of.

3. Chamberlin brought an interesting perspective to the word “names” in regards to it’s usage and functionality in community. We use agreed-upon names to describe ideas, things, people, and places because words and language, guide and limit the way we think. So, when we use the same words, we’re subconsciously signing an unsaid contract that we’re speaking about of the same version of the same idea or thing. In the event when we use different names to describe the same reality, the context of that idea could be astronomically different as the words used to describe were overwhelmingly distant. Chamberlin illustrates this with his example of Gitskan people’s story of the rock slide that occured in Temlaxam in comparison with the scientific approach that explained the exact same happening.

A logical idea that stems from this point is the ever-changing definitions of words and language, the usage of them and their position in language. One particular case of this phenomenon is the concept of “bad words“. What makes a word bad by nature? How do these “bad words” change over time? These questions are all imperative to learning how we instinctively create language as a community and how they shape our thinking.

__

Works Cited

Chamberlin, J. Edward. If This Is Your Land, Where Are Your Stories? Toronto: Vintage Canada,              2004. Print.

Dakota Access Pipeline Company Attacks Native American Protesters with Dogs & Pepper Spray.
Youtube, 3 Sept. 2016. Web. 15 Sept. 2016.

Why Are Bad Words Bad? Youtube, 28 Nov. 2013. Web. 15 Sept. 2016.