Through reading Thomas King’s Green Grass, Running Water, The characters of The Four Old Indians play with the concept of mythology. By referencing modern myths in the presentation of ancient ones, King allows for the reader to question not only the placement of the references but also the why.  As king is not only referencing other characters, he is referencing a very specific group of individuals that are culturally recognizable. Their personalities are known, though they too change in behaviour based on the version of their story that is being told. 

Perhaps it is this chameleon like existence that drew king to choose such references in telling his story. As someone who is a large fan of Hawkeye (both M*A*S*H* and Marvels versions) I found the reference quite enticing. As the M*A*S*H* character is a trickster and a comedian in both his portrayal by Alan Alda and Donald Sutherland. It is performance based storytelling based on written text as the original Hawkeye was a character in Richard Hooker and W. C. Heinz books (Though the Marvel character predated the M*A*S*H* character by four years.) Hawkeye was drafted and there for wishes to be anywhere but at the front lines, though that does not stop him from being a good doctor.He is a flawed character who exhibits the best qualities we wish to find in people. He is compassionate, and carrying and when it is time for him to show up, he does. It is perhaps his similarities to Coyote that drew King in using him as a reference. As Both characters stem from sarcasm and chaos, while showing a great deal of care for their people. It perhaps allows for Coyotes background to blend more seamlessly with that of the Old Woman. 

It is the ability to connect the characters found in the story that guid the story forward. These similarities that lead to the connections that are formed between the multicultural identities. Fictional characters serve as modern mythology, and having connected modern knowledge to the ancient ones, perhaps expands the relationship between readers and Kings work. It allows for non-indigenous persons to formulate a deeper understanding with the text, as most connections are based in previous knowledge, and society highlights fictional influences to explain concepts and identities. 

Perhaps it is this notion of identifying our selves through fictional characters that King is pointing to, by camouflaging his characters through pop trivia. It is the ability to understand a new character through the knowledge of a previously introduced one. King humanizes his characters through introducing them by referencing other characters. 

This is fathered when the duality of characters is discovered. It is referencing with in referencing. It is understanding the known identity to understand the new character. 

“What Happens in Your Brain When You €˜lose Yourself’ in Fiction.” Ohio State Univrsity, www.newswise.com/articles/what-happens-in-your-brain-when-you-lose-yourself-in-fiction. Accessed Mar. 2021.

Babrams. “The Psychology of Character Bonding: Why We Feel a Real Connection to Actors | The Credits.” Motion Picture Association, 15 July 2013, www.motionpictures.org/2013/07/the-psychology-of-character-bonding-why-we-feel-a-real-connection-to-actors.

The decision by the colonial authorities to not acknowledge the Metis Nation of Manitoba as a third founding nation in their establishing of the new government of the federation only furthered the removal of Indigenous acknowledgment in Canadian identity. 

The British North American Act of 1867 served to continue the connection between the Provinces of Canada, New Brunswick, and Nova Scotia with the Crown of The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. This desire to be connected with the Crown, strengthened the bond with the colonized and oppressive treatment of Indigenous people, and furthered the removal of their voices from the Canadian narrative. An act that was meant to be seen as nationalism as it was meant to reflect a cultural homogeny. Though this cultural identity was a replication of the one brought by the British, rather than a more inclusive and true reflection of Canada.  

As its mentioned in Introduction to Nationalism, under the Imagined Communities, many of the known ancient national traditions are recent inventions to inspire national loyalty, and by extension, loyalty to state authority. This need to point to England as the furthest point of Canadian history and existence and by including the Metis Nation of Manitoba as a third founding nation the new set government would have gone against the narrative they were creating, and thus undermining their own authority.  

As Laura Moss and Cynthia Sugars agree, that a nation exists when people believe it exists. And the acknowledgment of a nation that predates the one the government wishes to present only goes to contradict that message. 

As the identity found in Canada can be described as a colonial mentality, steaming from the languages and cultures of the French and British. Which does not allow for a third founding nation. As it cannot define that third nation into the presented cultures. As the two primary cultural identities Canada is willing to acknowledge lacks the space for the third identity. Going as far as to remove any semblance of the other. With the Indian Act of 1876, which enforced residential schools and sought to eradicate cultural differences, to enforce both Indigenous and non white immigrants to conform to white civility. 

As it was only in 1982 that the Constitution Act, 1982 set out to officially recognize the contributions made to Canada from many different nations and ethnic backgrounds. As it appears to not matter what the third nation may have been. The governmental identity set froth for Canada has been and continues to be an extension of the British crown and as such it lacks the space and ability to accept any identity that is other than the one that stems from European imperialism. 

The lack of ability to acknowledge the Metis Nation of Manitoba as a third authority, is simply due to the need to preserve a non existent narrative, which was created by the authority the government is willing to acknowledge. 

“Introduction to Nationalism | CanLit Guides.” CanLit Guides, canlitguides.ca/canlit-guides-editorial-team/introduction-to-nationalism. Accessed Mar. 2021.

“Métis Nation – Library and Archives Canada.” Goverment of Canada, www.bac-lac.gc.ca/eng/discover/aboriginal-heritage/metis/Pages/introduction.aspx. Accessed Mar. 2021.

“Nationalism, Late 1800s–1950s: Canadian Immigration and War | CanLit Guides.” CanLit Guides, canlitguides.ca/canlit-guides-editorial-team/nationalism-late-1800s-1950s-canadian-immigration-and-war. Accessed Mar. 2021.

“Part 1 – Part I: British North America Act, 1867 – Enactment No. 1.” Government of Canada, www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/csj-sjc/constitution/lawreg-loireg/p1t11.html. Accessed Mar. 2021.

“The Indian Act.” Indigenous Foundations, 2009, indigenousfoundations.arts.ubc.ca/the_indian_act.

Familial bonds are meant to be seen as unbreakable. Yet the depiction of the two brothers, not only plays with that notion but questions our understanding of the relationship. To view Coyote and the Ancestor of the white people as twins reflects on the foundational connection that is based in our human existence. It shows that two beings who are meant to be viewed as the same can be entirely different. 

The care that the older twin shows for the work that is entrusted to him, is clear. Coyote, is trusting, and careful. Placing a great deal of trust into his brothers descendants, who do not deserve his kindness. Coyote cares about his descendants, as he moves from prehistorical to historical time zones, easily. Coyotes is willing to see the best in people, providing those who have harmed him and his descendants with an infinite number of chances. This is perhaps due to him seeing his twin reflected through the white people. 

There is no explanation for why the younger twin steals the paper, perhaps it is youth and curiosity. Though that does not explain why he would lie. There are no redeemable qualities to be discovered with the younger twin, nor his descendants. They take and destroy simply because they can. There is no explanation for their action. 

The story plays with our understanding of sibling revelries and bonds. It depicts an intermit relationship, that is entirely one-sided. Allowing for us to see the abuse that is being committed outside of the historical lense that is often applied to indigenous existence in Canada and instead to see the evils that are committed without the rose coloured glasses that are applied in our history books. The story is not framed as some ancient experience, as Robinson points out Coyote is able to jump between time periods depicting that the mistreatment is still ongoing. Though several generations have passed since the last king.

The piece of paper, it self does not matter for it can be the thousand and one promises made by the colonizers that were never kept. It is all of the broken promises and lies told by the colonials for their own selfish reasons. The paper is the trauma and abuse that is depicted onto the bodies of Coyote and his descendants. The paper is the stolen lands, and stolen bodies. It is the untold history of this land, and the rewritten narrative we present today.  

Coyotes behaviours are understood through out the story. though different that the image we go into the story with. It is a moment of shock when discovering that Coyote is the elder twin. As Robinson first introduces Coyote as a trickster, the story contradicts this label on a surface level but serves as an origin story for how Coyote changes to fit this label. Coyote adapts, for survival, not pleasure. He is given this label by others, it is not a depiction of self but yet another thing he has lost. by removing his ability to control his narrative he is once again becoming unaware of what is written on the paper. 

Depicting trauma and pain and loss, through universal terms, allows for the story to transcend past individual identity to explain cultural history and experience. It explains colonization plainly without ever having to use the term. It is the story of this land, that is still ongoing. Depicting a never ending commitment to the growth and preservation of existence by Coyote, and the unexplainable destruction caused by his twin.

Robinson, Harry. “Introduction.” Living by Stories: A Journey of Landscape and Memory, edited by Wendy Wickwire, Vancouver, Talon Books, 2005, pp. 1–30.

Krisch, Joshua. “Brother, Sister, Rival, Friend: How Siblings Shape One Another’s Lives.” Fatherly, 5 Mar. 2021, www.fatherly.com/health-science/siblings-how-having-a-brother-sister-changes-kids.

Howe, Nina, and Holly Recchia. “Peer Relations | Sibling Relations and Their Impact on Children’s Development.” Encyclopedia on Early Childhood Development, Department of Education and Centre for Research in Human Development, Concordia University, Canada, Dec. 2014, www.child-encyclopedia.com/peer-relations/according-experts/sibling-relations-and-their-impact-childrens-development.

Wilson, Kory. “Colonization – Pulling Together: Foundations Guide.” Pressbooks, 5 Sept. 2018, opentextbc.ca/indigenizationfoundations/chapter/43.

Clibbon, Jennifer. “The ‘special Relationship’ of Native Peoples and the Crown.” CBC, 22 May 2012, www.cbc.ca/news/canada/the-special-relationship-of-native-peoples-and-the-crown-1.1189032.

How evil came into the world. It was witch people, long before, when witch people were able to fly freely. Witches, were simply witches, they didn’t look like anyone, or sound like us, they were made of pure magic. Witches from all over the world, came together for a witches’ conference, hidden amongst the trees, in the forest, during the warmest of summer nights. Where they were able to dance and sing and change into their favourite creatures freely. When one of the witches suggested a contest, to see who could come up with the scariest thing. Some of them brewed up potions in pots, that bubbled and oozed. Potions that were red, green, and gold and smelled like nightmares, and fears. Some of them jumped in and out of animal skins, changing into lions with elephants bodies and wolfs with shark heads. Some of them thought up charms and spells, that rhymed and took over your mind.

They all laughed in glee as they watched each other. 

Until finally a witch no one had seen before, nor knew where they came from, stepped forward and gathered everyone around and all they had was a story. 

The story this witch told was worse than anything any of the others had done, it was an awful thing full of fear and slaughter, disease and blood. A story of murderous mischief. And when the telling was done, the other witches quickly agreed that this witch had won the prize. 

“You win,” said the witches that had heard the story. “But what you said just now — it isn’t so funny. It doesn’t sound so good. We are doing okay without it. We can get along without that kind of thing. Take it back. Call that story back.”

But, of course, it was too late. For once a story is told, it cannot be called back. Once told, it is loose in the world. 

So you have to be careful with the stories you tell. And you have to watch out for the stories that you are told. 

When I was making the changes to the story, I did so with my two young cousins in mind, who are five and two year old. I think my fear of scarring them too much, or the questions the five year old may have, insured that once I told them the tale, I played more with the “fun” concepts and to be fully honest I left out the “murderous” part of “murderous mischief.”  However the over all experience was one of pure joy. As I tried to move with the story, showing how the witches may have danced and walking like the Frankenstein animals, while interacting with the boys, in hopes of laughter. The story managed to occupy their attention for longer than what is normal for the boys, and that also added to my enthusiasm and energy level. I noticed the change in my voice from the beginning to the end of the story. Specially the moral of the story which was delivered with a softer and even tone, allowing for us all to calm down, and to take a moment to reflect. The primarily reason I chose to tell the boys the story was due to the fact that I believed they could benefit from the moral lesson, though I’m sure the two year old was not fully paying attention to what was happening. The boys impacted the delivery of the story greatly, they made the experience and the story lively. Their interruptions added to the experience, and allowed for me to relax as the strange additions provided by the five year old to the story. Telling the story with the boys in mind changed the over all experience, and felt very similar to theatre. 

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

The decision to define culture as either oral or written, is great generalization. As both categories are branched down into sub categories, that are often contradictory to the other and depend entirely on the societies privileges. Which places the two form of cultures at odds. Courtney MacNeil, in their article “Orality” writes “The framing of orality as a “preference” or “tendency” encourages its place within the paragone of the printed and spoken word, and suggests a single-sensory conception of media – that orality exists in a dialectical relationship with literacy, and that communication is a competition between eye and ear.”  (MacNeil,P.1) 

It is this competitive understanding of culture, that creates what MacNeil, references to as “the notion of orality as a primitive or undeveloped medium.” (MacNeil, P.2) Which leads into a greater social bias, that lack to acknowledge the importance of both cultures, instead of a purely aesthetic viewing of “oral culture” which is seemed from a position of a privileged society. It furthers the academic understanding of trying to define the undefinable, through a rather prejudice lens. 

As orality, is in direct connection with cultural knowledge, it is able to be manifested through out time and to overcome the barriers of media and communication. It provides a voice to those woh have experienced hardships and suppression, to express their stories, and call for reflection onto society. While written culture serves as a means of preserving these stories. The two cultures rely on each other to be able to preserve cultural heritage. As MacNeil point out, civilization began with orality, it serves as the primarily means of communication for humanity.

Perhaps a simpler means of understanding culture is to refer to J. Edward Chamberlin, who explains culture as stories. Which can be defined as either oral or written. Chamberlin, definition of stories as something which “give meaning and value to the places we call home,” and “they bring us close to the world we live in by taking us into the world of words” is not limited to a singular form of communication, and rather than looking for an analytical definition, it relies more so on the human experience. Chamberlin, does not set out to define culture, but rather by explaining stories, they subsequently define culture. As stories are a more flexible means of communication between human beings, they make it possible for a multitude of disciplines to be experienced. 

Stories cross the social boundaries and bias, and allow for both social and individualistic understanding. Much like Chamberlin points out in his introduction, everyone understands stories, even if they do not understand the language that is used to dictate the tale. This is why there are such strong cultural ties to myths and history. These stories are understood, because of their morality, rather than the means they are communicated through.

Cultural preservation depends on both orality and writing, to survive and prosper. Which is perhaps why it is easier to understand culture through stories.

Chamberlin, Edward. If This is Your Land, Where are Your Stories? Finding Common Ground. AA. Knopf. Toronto. 2003. Print.

Courtney MacNeil, “Orality.” The Chicago School of Media Theory. Uchicagoedublogs. 2007. Web. 19 Feb. 2013.http://lucian.uchicago.edu/blogs/mediatheory/keywords/orality/  

Downs, Mary, and Sarah Lepinski. “Preserving the Cultural Heritage of the Ancient Near East and the Mediterranean World.” The National Endowment for the Humanities, 7 July 2015, www.neh.gov/divisions/preservation/featured-project/preserving-the-cultural-heritage-the-ancient-near-east-and-t.

Franchi, Elena. “What Is Cultural Heritage? (Article).” Khan Academy, 2015, www.khanacademy.org/humanities/special-topics-art-history/arches-at-risk-cultural-heritage-education-series/arches-beginners-guide/a/what-is-cultural-heritage.

National Geographic Society. “Storytelling and Cultural Traditions.” National Geographic Society, 24 Jan. 2020, www.nationalgeographic.org/article/storytelling-and-cultural-traditions.

In recent years I have come to discover that not everyone has an internal monologue, which helps with narrating the text that is being read internally, and for me personally allowing to configure a fictional performance and visualized experience of the story. This often comes in handy when reading, for it allows for me to return to the moment, and experience the story over and over again without the primary text close by. Similar to a movie or a recorded performance, when reading the story internally, it allows fro a separation from the text. As it plays out in my mind with a familiar voice, though it is not my own. The story is experienced, with sound effects, and fragments of real life experiences. It is a performance that is more personal in connection than any other, between reader and text. 

While when the story is read out loud, there was a higher level of attention paid to the pronunciation and to the connections formed between each word. There is a strange urge to read the text with a voice that moves, and takes on the personality of the text. The narration is no longer partial to personal experiences, instead, it is a voice that changes and works to build tension and it relies on the energy of all those who are listening. The story comes alive and the images now play before your eyes. As the readers body morphs to depict the images of the story. However in this performance, there are restrictions based solely on the readers abilities and the laws of nature. The story relies on reactions, as validation for what is well received and what is in need of change. By reading the text out loud, it is possible to breath air into the lungs of the story, allowing it to now live in a shared experience, that creates connections between to people and a moment. The story is no longer just alive, but instead it is now living. 

It is the connections we make with each other that allow for us to understand. As we describe ourselves as stories, both to our selves and to others. We surround ourselves with stories of our worse fears and greatest dreams and everything that can possibly fall in-between. King, introducing himself through stories allows for there to be an understanding of his interpretation of the stories he is viewing and further more depicting. By imagining a version of Kings stories they now share intellectual property with the reader, they are now a connection, and a specific personal connections that differ from another reader and King himself. This in itself is a form of assumption, as it relies entirely on the reader. How ever when a story is shared, either with a person or even a space, it is no longer dependent on the assumptions and interpretations of a sole person but rather of all those who are experiencing the story together. Even when alone in a room, the decorations and items that surround the presenter effect the reception and performance of the story.

As everything we experience cant help but be tinted by the colonial thought process. As it is such process that formulates our assumptions, and thoughts. Our only glimpse at perhaps what King describes as pre-colonial literature is when we are told stories through performance and the privlagdge of reading them out loud. That is why even when reading loudly alone, there are connections being formed with the room and everything that is imagined and in view. This was specially true for Coyote Makes a Deal with the King Of England as the story is written more in style with a poem, or a play and it encourages you to speak life into the words loudly and with great care. Writing the story in the same manner we are told stories by loved ones again plays into the pre-colonial structure of storytelling, rather than the conscious and formulated manner we go about storytelling in our colonial existence. 

Stories live with us, we carry them within our bodies, but when we read them, when we perform them, loudly they come alive and are able to breath. It bonds all those who share that moment. Perhaps that is the greatest gift of stories, their ability to bring us together, to move us, make us feel and believe, and that is why we are more willing to look into and search for means of improving our abilities to tell stories. 

From the AGO exhibition in 2018

Citation

English language arts: Oral storytelling. (n.d.). Retrieved March 06, 2021, from https://libguides.sd44.ca/c.php?g=691940&p=5081995

Faye Kirwin. (1970, April 27). The brain on storytelling: Building emotional connections. Retrieved March 06, 2021, from http://www.writerology.net/blog/post/2015/04/the-brain-on-storytelling-building-emotional-connections

Hillerich, K. (2015, December 18). Creating emotional connections: The psychology of emotional stories (a guest post by Faye Kirwin of Writerology). Retrieved March 06, 2021, from http://inkandquills.com/2015/12/18/creating-emotional-stories/

King, T. (n.d.). Godzilla vs. POST‐COLONIAL. Retrieved March 05, 2021, from https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/17449859008589128

Robinson, H. (n.d.). Coyote Makes a Deal with the King Of England. Retrieved March 06, 2021.

Stewart, J. (2020, February 04). People have discovered that not everyone has an inner monologue and it has sparked a dialogue online. Retrieved March 05, 2021, from https://mymodernmet.com/inner-monologue/

Webeck, D. (2016, July 09). The art of oral storytelling – and how you can start it with your kids. Retrieved March 05, 2021, from http://www.essentialbaby.com.au/toddler/education-play/the-forgotten-art-of-oral-storytelling-and-how-you-can-start-it-with-your-kids-20160709-gq23iw

Distillery District, Love locks

It is strange to find commonality based on a topic that is so personal, and yet at our core we define our most sacred and cherished thoughts on the most basic of instincts and notions. Perhaps this is to do with the values of our society, or perhaps it’s kismet. There is a great deal of honour and privilege to be able to glance into the definition others have of home. It is the ability to paint the most vivid of images that allow for others to feel the home in question. To see the emotions and ideals that are invoked at the simple mention of the word, home. 

We have tied the idea of home to our heart and the mind. To love and safety and notions that are often not tangible. We have defined our homes in our memories and the people who have occupied the rooms we have built in our minds and hearts. It is perhaps our bodies that are our homes as they are the places we are able to collect all these most important artifacts. They are the galleries that display and protect our fragments that create our road maps home. 

As we all through our selected stories have defined our homes through memories, a selection of pin pointed events that allow for us all to find our way home. It is the love and relationships we have with the respective people and the ideals we have assigned to the lands that drive us. At every turn we have all chosen our homes from the emotions that are invoked, from the safety and love we have seemed, and the warm embrace the memories spring. 

It is perhaps the love letter that are written to each persons respective home that serve as a reminder that with every bit of laughter and security we associate with home, we all have chipped walls, we hold our homes both as the place of love and compassion while also associating them with memories and emotions less savoury than love. It is the duality of home, it is the ability to create space for clashing ideas and emotions. 

It is the ability to transport and travel back in time at the thought of home while remaining in the present. It is the idea of being far and yet suddenly being reminded of home. We, as a collective all have different upbringings, and backgrounds, we are at different stages of our lives, and yet we share a commonality, all too human. We defined our homes with love and family and friends, with memories and stories. That is the commonality I witnessed within the pieces written by Samantha, and Lenaya, Victoria, Laura, Grace, Magdalena, Cayla and Zac. Though each experience is vastly different, each definition of home has been connected more so to the notion and idea of home than a currently physical location. Though still connected to the land. It is perhaps that foundation of land that allows for the home to be built and nurtured into its present form. They tied their homes to their experiences, memories and emotions. To love and connections and struggles, They created road maps that allowed fro me to travel through their ideas while creating connections of my own. 

That appears to be the power of homes. 

Home.

 A concept, with which I have struggled with for a majority of my life. I have never defined home as a direct address, as that tends to change every three to four years, but rather the feeling of finally being able to exhale. Something that became nearly impossible when I chose to attend school across the country. Home for me became the fragments of memories of Friday night dinners at my Aunts. Of my family sitting around the table, simultaneously holding three separate conversations. Home is the sound of their laughter and clinking glasses. Home became the ability to feel free of being myself without the fear of judgement and commentary. Of no longer worrying about the perception of my actions, and language, because I was fully understood. Home became the place where failure was not the end but rather a set back.  

Home was the ability to stand in the same room with the people I valued the most, and simply breath. Slowly with the changes that are brought on by time and circumstance, my memories slowly became my home, reminding me of the thing I lost, and could never be. My mind became my home, a place I could escape to, that held all of the most precious moments and people I cared for. A collection of every exhale that allowed for the ever lasting weight that resides on my ribcage to be lifted. It is through the photographs I keep stored in my mind, that I am able to return home, to a place that no longer exists, with people long gone. Memories allow for the preservation of the home I was raised in. Not a physical location but rather the collection of every experienced moment in my life, that have allowed for me to find comfort and safety, after a long day. To be able to be as authentic to yourself as you can be. 

However that does not mean disrespecting the location of these memories for that is how, we lose the history that each location holds. As it is that history that has allowed for our existence, and there will always be a connection to the land. As I still feel connected to ancient ruins I have never personally seen, and my heart flutters at the images of the old landscapes of a country I may never see again. I acknowledge that the land and history presented in the grains of that land are a part of my existence. They are the connecting strings that tie my family together and are woven together to create the rug that lays on the foundation of my home.  It is the land from which I am created that has allowed for me to have a home. It is the stories of that land that were often told around the dinner table. It is the food provided by the land that we bonded over and without it, I would have no memories to call home. 

It is in these fragments of the past both ancient and recent that I know what it is I search for, in my pursuit of a future. As without these Identities, I would not know what I valued, what has provided with safety and comfort and what I need to survive. As my home is not a fixed destination but rather a forever changing, evolving series of emotions that require a dependancy on my memories to allow for me to be able to identify if I am truly home, or simply stranded in a room with familiar faces. Home for me has and continues to be the feeling of my lungs expanding while I inhale, before a slow exhausted exhale, that allows for my shoulders to drop and, for my eyes to shut, knowing that I am finally safe.