Category Archives: Unit 2

Last week, I mentioned that seeing the questions prior to the readings may lead you to have certain assumptions and expectations. This week, I decided to engage the readings first. I wanted to read without having to “look out” for specific things. For question 1, we were asked to read and approach “Coyote Makes a Deal with the King Of England” in 4 different ways (“silently, read it out loud, read it to a friend, and have a friend read it to you”). 

When I read the the text silently, I immediately noticed the distinct structure of the story. The structure of the sentences and paragraphs had resemblance to free verse poetry. The length of the sentences and the paragraphs influenced sound and speed at how I silently read to myself. The constant use of short sentences made it extremely hard to read silently / in your head (Personally, I read a lot faster when in silence as opposed to reading things aloud). The unique broken English made it hard to visualize and comprehend the story in my mind. I realized I had to slow it down and tell the story to myself silently but as if I were reading it out aloud. Personally, I found the oral syntax of the story discourages and makes it difficult readers to read it in silence. I also found myself asking “Why is he constantly repeating himself !?”. 

Robinson’s use of rhetorical questions in his story suggests that this story should be read aloud to others. He also pre-emptively answers some of the questions for his readers in parts where there is no dialogue between the Coyote and the King. For example, he directly addresses the readers on page 66 several times: 

“But when they can’t see him, what they gonna do? 

…

Do you know what the angel was?

Do you know?

The Angel, God’s angel, you know.”

I also noticed that the choice of diction was  somewhat colloquial. The use of “gonna” and “you know” are phrases we find in everyday dialogue.  As the story continues, the diction follows this trend as Robinson constantly uses “And” and “So” to join his sentences and thoughts. The use of these language tools reminded me of the narrator from the “The Hobbit”, which I vividly remember as being very engaging and somewhat intrusive (perfect in recreating the storytelling performance).

When I read the story aloud to a family member, the story felt more a bit more “natural”. My family actually asked why I was talking in such a funny way. I just said “This story just … wants me to read it this way?”. Some stories are meant to be read out loud (similar to bed time stories), and I found this story to be no different. The sentences and words heavily influence the format of a story. 

References

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.

Paterson, Erika. “Lesson 2:3.” ENGL 470A Canadian Studies Canadian Literary Genres. University of British Columbia Blogs, 2013. Web. 29 June. 2014.

Usually I read all the lesson information and the questions prior to tackling the readings. However, this week’s lesson convinced me to use a different approach in the future. When I read the question, I thought of my previous blog post which sparked a very interesting discussion on Facebook (Similar to Lutz, I assumed my readers belonged to a European tradition).  After reading question 3, I noticed I had a few assumptions and expectations prior to reading  Lutz’s “First Contact as Spiritual Performance” (I honestly questioned the credibility of the article). As I read the quoted parts from Lutz’s text in the question, I found myself agreeing with the points that were pointed out. I thought he definitely assumes that his readers are of European tradition and that it is more difficult for a European to understand Indigenous performances (Lutz, “First Contact” 32).

However, this lead me to question myself… If I had not been asked to look out for Lutz’s assumptions in the text, would I have noticed it? I’m not sure I would have noticed without multiple readings. I think this was a very good example / wake up call at how assumptions can play a large role in how we read and interpret things.

Lutz attempts to highlight the spiritual importance of first contact between the Europeans and the Indigenous in a fair and academic way. Despite his attempt to engage readers about importance of understanding the spiritual component of contact events (45), his text occasionally has an undertone of European identity. For example, in this passage we see Lutz’s assumptions about who the reader is and what they know: “But this difficulty we are at least aware of. The key and usually unremarked problem is that we have insufficient distance from our own and our ancestor’s world view” (32). The use of “we” seems to suggest that the reader identifies as European and that ALL Europeans seem to have difficulty understanding Indigenous performances.  I found that Lutz’s assumptions were definitely not fair. In his defence, when his wording is scrutinized out of context, it comes off as extremely ethnocentric (I’m sure that was not his intent). According to Lesson 2.2, “both parties depended on their own already long told stories to interpret the other’s performance” (Lesson 2.2, Paterson). In a similar way, Lutz’s article had an underlying tone of the European story despite trying to portray both sides in a factual and unbiased way. 

References

Lutz, John. “First Contact as a Spiritual Performance: Aboriginal — Non-Aboriginal Encounters on the North American West Coast.” Myth and Memory: Rethinking Stories of Indigenous-European Contact. Ed. Lutz. Vancouver: U of British Columbia P, 2007. 30-45. Print.

Paterson, Erika. “Lesson 2:2.” ENGL 470A Canadian Studies Canadian Literary Genres. University of British Columbia Blogs, 2013. Web. 21 June. 2014.

Story

I sat at the back of Jason’s car as we cruised past the beautiful Vancouver scenery. I recalled the many times I laughed at the inefficiency and slow paced style of this city. It was always something that annoyed me since I first arrived. Looking back, I couldn’t keep count of the times I’ve said:

“I could never live here…”

Yet, I feel strongly attached.

I look down at my watch and we’re pretty early. My flight wasn’t leaving for another 3 hours. We decided to have one last meal with our group of friends before I left. The tone of dinner was nostalgic and sentimental, most of us realized it would be a LONG while until we will all be sitting together and having a meal. I think we all realized it was something we took for granted. My friends made the rough parts of Vancouver easier to handle and the good parts even better. My friends here became my second family, my home away from home.

As I waited at the gate by myself, it felt bitter sweet to finally go back to see my parents. It has been over four year since I last saw them. For the first time, I felt anxious about going back “home”.

I wonder if I’ll experience reverse culture shock?

Commentary and thoughts

I had difficulty writing this blog assignment!

This assignment evoked a lot of  feelings and reflections as to what I consider home. Over the past few days, my mind had numerous ideas about the values and stories that connect myself to my home. Despite the abundance of ideas, I failed to solidify anything into writing on my blog. I tried several times to describe my sense of home but I found myself deleting what I wrote and starting from scratch.

I realized my difficulty answering this question stems from the fact that I’m about to leave my home.  I have 15 days remaining in Vancouver before I leave back to Hong Kong (where I went to high school and spent the majority of my life). Vancouver became part of my life. Another home. My mind was / is flustered by the bitter-sweet feelings of having to leave one home for another. I channelled some of those feelings into my story and hoped to convey the idea that two entirely different cities can both be your home.  I guess my sense of home doesn’t come from the beauty or lifestyle that accompanies a city (I’d say those are luxuries). I find myself at home when I have people who understand me, and when I have people to share beautiful moments with.

“Where we love is home, home that our feet may leave, but not our hearts.”

– Oliver Wendell Holmes

 

“Home is not where you live but where they understand you” 

– Christian Morgenstern

References

““Where we love is home,Home that the feet may leave,but not our hearts.”.” Goodreads. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 June 2014. <http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/301013-where-we-love-is-home-home-that-the-feet-may>. Web

“Home is not where you live but where they understand you.” Goodreads. N.p., n.d. Web. 12June 2014. <http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/161531-home-is-not-where-you-live-but-where-they-understand>. Web