The Characters of Green Grass Running Water

This blog post will be information and hyper-links to my research on the characters of King’s novel Green Grass, Running water, from pages 90-110. I’m using a digital edition, but the Page starts from the line “Maybe we should call him Little Beaver or Chingachgook or Blue Duck.” (King p.90) And ends on line “There was a bottle in his hand, and he was naked from the waist down, his…” (King p.110).

Characters:

First Women

She is a primary character from North American Indigenous mythology. She features in Earth Diver creation stories, with her falling from the sky and that is generally followed by the creation of Turtle Island. As mentioned by Flick (1994), when trying to start his story, Lone Ranger tries many opening lines which doesn’t ever feel right to him or his companions, until he starts by mentioning the First Woman in Cherokee.

Ahdamn

The First Women’s companion in the novel, his name is a phonetic reference, heard the most clear when read out loud, to Adam from the Genesis story of the creation of man and the Garden of Eden (Flick pg. 147). In this part of the story, it is the First Women who makes the garden in which she meets Ahdamn. Another irony is that they choose to leave the garden and feel rather freed in doing so, leaving GOD behind in the garden. An interesting irony and switch from the traditional Christian story.

Coyote

Is a trickster figure from North American First Nations mythology. He is part of the race of the First People, mythic creatures who lived before humans existed. They’re very powerful creatures that created the world we live in, human life and culture. But they were capable of human emotion and flaws, such as being wise or stupid, brave or cowardly, etc. (Flick p.147). In the story Coyote is curious, a bit lazy, but knowledgeable and mischievous. Much different from the slandered story of the Christian God and the story works hard to highlight these differences in these mythical figures.

http://https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAKHGe6x8n8

Dr. Joseph Hovaugh

His name is a play on the name Jehovah, from Jehovah’s Witnesses, with H making the ‘j’ sound that is found in many Spanish words (Flick p.147). He’s the doctor in charge of running the asylum, Babo’s “Crazy Hospital.” The very hospital the four Indian elders escape from. Though they weren’t a threat to anyone, the four old Indians were locked up in the hospital, but they apparently repeatedly make their escape from their prison. In the novel Dr. Hovaugh main interested is his garden, a light reference to his name and obsession with the Christian religious outlook on life. His role in keeping the elders in a crazy house is also reflective of the actions of Christian missions to educate the North American Indigenous populations. He cares more for his garden, God/religion, than the actual wellbeing of the people he must tend to, one of King’s more solid critiques.

Sergeant Ben Cereno

A character in Melville’s story “Benito Cereño.” In which a mutiny of black slaves occurs on board a ship, led by a black barber Babo, with the Spaniard Cereno being the captain of the ship (pg. 146). We see both characters in King’s story, with Cereno being the police officer investigating the case of the missing Indigenous elders from the hospital. He interrogates Babo, another reference to the story, who asks him if his name is Italian or Spanish, and who he mistreats by referring to her with racial slurs. His mistreatment of Babo causes problems for his investigation that could have been avoided if he had treated her better, a critique found in the original text as well.

Lone Ranger

Is a reference to the fictional character of the same name, who is a Masked hero from the Western Genre of media. He is a heroic Texas ranger, that journeys with Tonto, his faithful Indian companion. He has been in many forms of popular media and is well know. From Western books, a radio serial from1933 by Fran Striker, a 50’s television series, and many movies. The more famous among them being: The Lone Ranger (1938) and (2013), The Lone Ranger Rides Again (1939), and The Legend of the Lone Ranger (1981) (Flick p. 141).

Though this interpretation of the idea of the First Nations people of North America, in the form of Westerns, we find King giving the name of the Texan ranger to his Indigenous character. Who ironically is a character that has been made famous and profited off a certain cliché characterization of Indigenous people. And the 2013 movie of its name is a testament to it’s lasting impact on modern cinema, though its poor ratings on Rotten Tomatoes is less so a good indication of its past history.

Ishmael

A character in the novel Moby Dick by Herman Melville, and is the narrator of the tale. As the sole survivor of the crew after the Moby Dick destroys the Pequod, Ishmael survives by staying afloat on Queequeg’s coffin. His name is also biblical reference, Gen.15.-15.

Robinson Crusoe

The main character and hero of Defoe’s novel, Robinson Crusoe (1719). Which can be argued to be the first English Novel and the most famous desert island narratives. He is a shipwrecked mariner, who survives because of his ingenuity and his story is one of finding strength in spirituality because of adversity. In his story he is also aided by Friday, a “savage” he Christianizes after he rescues him from a group of Cannibals.

In King’s novel Crusoe is one of the four elders and through this name, King once again uses irony to help reclaim the idea of who and what kind of person can be the main character to a story. Using the name of such a famous and well known character

Alberta Frank

Is our main female character in King’s novel and she portrays those of First Nation decent who are still connected to their cultural roots and wish to keep them alive. Her name suggests a reference to the province of Canada, and as Flick mentions, she herself is a frank person. It could also be a reference to the small town Frank, Alberta, which rests on the Turtle River. In 1903 a rockslide hit the town causing a major disaster. The date of 1903 is one mentioned by Dr. Hovaugh, so it has some credit.

Reference:

‘Adam and Eve | Biblical Figures | Britannica’ <https://www.britannica.com/biography/Adam-and-Eve-biblical-literary-figures> [accessed 16 March 2020]

‘Benito Cereno | Short Story by Melville | Britannica’ <https://www.britannica.com/topic/Benito-Cereno> [accessed 16 March 2020]

‘Canlit.ca 161-162-ReadingFlick.Pdf’ <https://canlit.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/canlit161-162-ReadingFlick.pdf> [accessed 16 March 2020]

‘Coyote | Mythology | Britannica’ <https://www.britannica.com/topic/Coyote-mythology> [accessed 16 March 2020]

Coyote and Raven, American Tricksters: Crash Course World Mythology #22<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAKHGe6x8n8> [accessed 16 March 2020]

‘Frank Slide: Canada’s Deadliest Rockslide | The Canadian Encyclopedia’ <https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/frank-slide-feature> [accessed 18 March 2020]

‘Jehovah’s Witness | Religion’, Encyclopedia Britannica<https://www.britannica.com/topic/Jehovahs-Witnesses> [accessed 17 March 2020]

‘Lone Ranger | Fictional Character | Britannica’ <https://www.britannica.com/topic/Lone-Ranger> [accessed 16 March 2020]

‘Robinson Crusoe | Overview of Novel by Daniel Defoe’,Encyclopedia Britannica<https://www.britannica.com/topic/Robinson-Crusoe-novel> [accessed 9 March 2020]

‘The Lone Ranger (1949-1957)’, IMDb<https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0041038/mediaviewer/rm3744535552> [accessed 9 March 2020]

‘The Lone Ranger (2013) – Rotten Tomatoes’ <https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_lone_ranger> [accessed 18 March 2020]

‘Moby Dick | Summary, Interpretation, & Context | Britannica’ <https://www.britannica.com/topic/Moby-Dick-novel> [accessed 18 March 2020]

‘Turtle Island | The Canadian Encyclopedia’ <https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/turtle-island> [accessed 7 February 2020]

Identifying and discuss two of King’s “acts of narrative decolonization

The first act of decolonizing that I’d like to talk about is the general decolonization of stories themselves. In King’s story, the form of the story is decolonized, as it strays from the traditional elements of storytelling that we see in the English language. The storytelling element, we see the initial start to the story being about the beginning, the start of existence. Which is interesting but what stands out are the starts of the story that happen after the first start. We are then treated to another beginning, with Lionel, and then another with the four First Nation fixers and then another, and so on. The four First Nation storytellers also have a conflict on how to start the story and which story they are telling.

The style of writing, the formatting of the story is disorienting and confusing. We have the four First Nation storytellers, who we find out are all variations of the first women. There is a shifting of gender, where she becomes four different males. Names are also disorienting, such as the storytellers are named Hawkeye, Lone Ranger, Ishmael and Robinson Crusoe. These interesting names are King smashing different stories and characters together. Ishmael is a religious figure in the Bible, Abraham’s first son. Robinson Crusoe is the name of a novel and protagonist, who is an explorer/voyager, the book is what some would consider the first English novel. Plus they are all also the First Women in disguise. These characters come together in the story, but also as a single person. They are not separated from the Native American story, they produce a blend of our stories coming together, but after the First Women, not before. Especially with Robinson Crusoe and the Lone Ranger, who owe the existence of their stories to First Nations, as they interact with them heavily in their narratives. But it’s not the colonizer writing about the colonized, but the reverse and this forms an interesting decolonizing narrative, with King reclaiming the story with his iteration.

Then there are the connections of the stories coming together but also being separated from one another, taking place at different times and places. The way that King tells his story diverges from the norm of storytelling that many of us experience and engages in decolonizing, as it deconstructs how we think of forms of stories. How they’re supposed to be written, what should happen, how characters are introduced, their names, etc.  The story itself is disorienting and often leaves you confused.

Then the characters themselves are also odd. In general, stories do not have First Nations characters, they are often marginalized and stereotyped into certain roles if we ever do see them, mainly to serve as carriers of more thematic elements. This can be fine on its own, as the struggles of certain groups of people should be made known, but it forces us to see these characters as part of a larger narrative. Having multiple First Nation characters that have different problems and are just going about their daily lives is the perfect way to normalize them. King does not portray them as the exception to normality but as part of the everyday.

I believe this is a great push, as First Nations should not be made the exotic, only appearing in stories when their struggle and punishment serve to further the story. But can simply exist with their private and public problems without having to be made mysterious and otherworldly. This is important in text because it shows how people are tied together. The stories of Canadians are not separate from First Nations, they might be diverse and different, but their stories and ours are connected.

The second form of decolonizing I found interesting in King’s novel was the decolonization of the origin story of creation and God. At the very beginning, King tells us there were nothing and Coyote. The God in this story becomes subservient to Coyote, he is a creation born from Coyote’s dream, who then becomes the original creator. King rearranges the colonial narrative of the creation story with his own, so rather than the First Nations story being subservient to the colonizers’ we see a reverse. The dream that becomes GOD is created he wants to be Coyote, again showing his hierarchy subversion, where the First Nation’s story becomes the dominating force of power.

There is an interesting element of water seen in the story. Water comes before God and before god turned into GOD. In King’s story, GOD is disturbed by the presence of water, and this demonstrates the real powerlessness of his ego. We see that many creation stories of humans, including the First Native one, start with water. Making sense, as water is key to survival and ancient civilizations are born by the shores. Interestingly enough many civilizations worshiped gods in relation to water, such as the Egyptians and the Mesopotamians. Before civilization and religion, water has to come first. It’s the first thing he mentions and worries over. Since he didn’t create it, it existed before him, like Coyote. It’s very interesting as it reminds me that the Judo-Christian God of the bible only came into our reality after other gods. He wasn’t the first of his kind, a pantheon of different gods existed before him and King’s story reminded me of that fact. It subverts expectations of GOD being the most powerful and creator of all, as things existed before him, a reminder that needs to be said.

Reference:

‘11 Egyptian Gods and Goddesses’, Encyclopedia Britannica<https://www.britannica.com/list/11-egyptian-gods-and-goddesses> [accessed 9 March 2020]

‘Ishmael | Meaning, Facts, & Significance’, Encyclopedia Britannica<https://www.britannica.com/biography/Ishmael-son-of-Abraham> [accessed 9 March 2020]

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

‘Robinson Crusoe | Overview of Novel by Daniel Defoe’,Encyclopedia Britannica<https://www.britannica.com/topic/Robinson-Crusoe-novel> [accessed 9 March 2020]

‘The Lone Ranger (1949-1957)’, IMDb<https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0041038/mediaviewer/rm3744535552> [accessed 9 March 2020]

The Proclamation of 1763 and Europeans Stories

The Proclamation of 1763 is a set of guidelines for the European settlement of the Aboriginal territories in North America. Issued by King George III in 1763, as a way to officially claim North America as British territory after beating France in the Seven Years war[1]. The proclamation established the ownership of all of North America to King George.

Interestingly enough the document states that Aboriginal title had existed and continues to exist and that all land must be considered Aboriginal land until ceded by treaty to others. This recognizes Aboriginal titles and claims to land and that it requires both parties to give consent when land is being exchanged, even though it was written by the British without Aboriginal input. It forbade settlers from claiming Aboriginal land, as it must first be bought by the Crown and then sold to settlers, and only the Crown has the power to buy land from First Nations.

The reason that the British took action in promising First Nations protection under their law was to try and stabilize the western frontier of the Atlantic colonies. In the same year, 1763, there was an emerging of Indigenous confederacy under Odawa, that had seized some British military posts near the Great Lakes[2]. This was mainly because the Aboriginals at the time we’re able to play the British and French off each other to secure themselves, but with the loss of the French, arguably the side the Aboriginals were more inclined towards, they had to establish a stronger hold, which resulted in Pontiac’s War[3].

With the fact that the Seven Years War had been very costly to both the French and the British, economically crippling France and leading to the French Revolution, the British were wary of getting into another conflict[4]. After these incidents of violence, the British wanted to establish an allegiance with the First Nations to avoid further large-scale conflict, as many had been allied with France[5]. This proclamation allowed for a resolution, while avoiding further conflict in the area.

In relation to Daniel Coleman’s, White Civility: The Literary Project of English Canada, I think the Royal Proclamation of 1763 does demonstrate that Coleman’s argument about the project of white civility does hold weight in this situation.

Coleman argues that in the early projects of nation-building there has been an endeavor to present a form of Canadian whiteness based on British civility (5). So the idea of White Canadians is one connected with British civilized society. Imaging Canadians in the 18th and 19th centuries in standard British town clothes and dealing with more ‘intellectual’ or ‘civilized’ aspects, that turn away from narratives of violence. Yet this is only done when one learns to forget the uncivil acts of colonization and nation-building. The Royal Proclamation fits into this narrative, as the document itself does not mention the reason for its existence, but it is because there is violence between colonizers and the Aboriginal people of the land. Colonization and expansion into West of the original Atlantic colonies was a violent act, which Aboriginals resisted with equal force. The reason the document came to be was that now with the French gone, there was no one to stop the colonies from expanding into the ‘new’ territory. The Aboriginals knew that and that is why the tried to resist in Pontiac’s War. But this document doesn’t mention the situation and calls all the people of the land as under the King’s rule, even though no one believed the Aboriginals had any real rights to the land or even considered them people under the same ruler. It tries to hide past violence and struggles to stop new violence that is bound to happen in the situation. And violence does happen, many historians cite this document to be a reason for the American Revolution, people wanted to expand and refused to abide by the decoration, expanding to the West either way[6]. The proclamation asks us to forget the violence that lead up to it and the future violence that is inherent to colonization. To colonize another is to subjugate a society under your rule and to enforce this rule violence is the main tactic. The continuation of colonization rests on violence and subjugation not on the story of civilization that many would like to believe.

[1]‘Royal Proclamation, 1763’ <https://indigenousfoundations.arts.ubc.ca/royal_proclamation_1763/> [accessed 28 February 2020].

[2]‘Royal Proclamation of 1763 | The Canadian Encyclopedia’ <https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/royal-proclamation-of-1763> [accessed 28 February 2020].

[3]History com Editors, ‘Ottawa Chief Pontiac’s Rebellion against the British Begins’, HISTORY<https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/pontiacs-rebellion-begins> [accessed 28 February 2020].

[4]‘Royal Proclamation of 1763 | The Canadian Encyclopedia’.

[5]Editors.

[6]‘Royal Proclamation of 1763 | The Canadian Encyclopedia’.

Reference:

‘A Bi-Polar History of Canada The 18th Century: The Age of Reason (at Least in Europe) – Salem-News.Com’ <http://www.salem-news.com/articles/october072012/bipolar-canuk-ba.php> [accessed 28 February 2020]

COLEMAN, DANIEL, White Civility: The Literary Project of English Canada(University of Toronto Press, 2006), JSTOR <https://doi.org/10.3138/9781442683358>

Editors, History com, ‘Ottawa Chief Pontiac’s Rebellion against the British Begins’, HISTORY<https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/pontiacs-rebellion-begins> [accessed 27 February 2020]

‘First Nations | The Canadian Encyclopedia’ <https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/first-nations> [accessed 26 February 2020]

‘Royal Proclamation, 1763’ <https://indigenousfoundations.arts.ubc.ca/royal_proclamation_1763/> [accessed 26 February 2020]

‘Royal Proclamation of 1763 | The Canadian Encyclopedia’ <https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/royal-proclamation-of-1763> [accessed 26 February 2020]

MIDTERM ASSIGNMENT

My three favourite posts I’ve done so far!

Assignment 2.2

This post was the one I had the most fun with, I stretched by creative writing abilities with this and enjoyed the process. Though I’m not the best writer the act of recounting a day in the life of my family to try and show what I feel and how I value our time together just filled me with warmth!

Assignment 2.4

For this post I was answering Question #1, about King and his view on creation stories. I talked about the meaning and power of dichotomies and how King forces us to consider the value and messages behind these types of stories to determine which we wish to embrace, rather than relying on the idea of what is real and true. So by him making us choose after the way he presents the stories, he wants us to choose based on inherent values and goals we wish to see in our world, to understand the stories before making an inherent choice of what is true or not. I found this topic to be really interesting and the comments I received on this post were some of the most interesting ones I had gotten.

Assignment 2.6

For this post I answered Question #1, about Robinson’s story, “Coyote Makes a Deal with the King of England” in his novel Living by Stories. I talked about how the prose style reminded my of play scripts and their empathizes on performance over reading. Expanding on the different ways that I engaged with the story depending on if I was the reader or the listener.

Robinson’s interfusion Literature

In Robinson’s novel, Living by Stories, the story told in, “Coyote Makes a Deal with the King of England”, is said to be a form of interfusion literature. In “Godzilla vs. Post-Colonial“, King refers to Robinson’s stories as interfusion literature, because this identification describes the part of First Nation literature that blends oral and written literature (186). And as King mentions, the way Robinson’s pose is written forces the reader to read aloud, and thus avoiding the loss of the cultural elements of performance and the storyteller from Aboriginal storytelling (186).

Reading to others: When I was the reader and speaker I found the syntax of the story worked very well as an oral piece. The breaks between the lines gave way to natural pauses and the indents used to demonstrate when a character speaks and when there is a narration voice, indicated when I would need to change the tone, pitch or volume. Another thing I noticed when reading out loud is that the syntax reminds me a bit of how plays are written. With the narrator, and speakers being indicated, though it didn’t have stage direction that plays usually do, the format encourages me to make different voices and move positions when I read it to my friends. I used a lot of exaggerated hand motions and even shifted positions, if two characters were having a conversation I’d look to the side.

Listening to the story: When I was the listener to the story it was a bit strange because I knew how the story went but it sounded a bit different. Since it was told by a different person, the tone and voices that my friend used were different from my own and so were the parts were empathized by her use of breaks and volume. For voices such as the narrator and Coyote, we used different types of voices but breaks and emphasis were generally similar to each other. Another big thing was the telling of the story itself. While I was telling the story to her, I had to work at engaging her and act as the storyteller, as I hadn’t gotten everything such as the style of narration down, I had to work to gather attention. But with her taking the position of the storyteller, I lost the pressure and heard the story in a different way.

Robinson 2013, pg. 82

While I was the listener I felt more distance to the story, it was my job to understand and hear the text. But as the storyteller, my role was to engage and provide performance. As the storyteller, I agree with King, Robinson writes his stories as performance pieces, where it’s easy to turn text into a cohesive, understandable, and engaging oral story. As told by Indigenous foundations, oral traditions is both a dialogue and engagement from, the speaker and the listener are engaging with each other and the story through the dialogue. And I compared it to reading a play, the breaks and labeling of characters that are talking are similar, and both pieces are to be acted out. In the same ways that I find plays are more enjoyable when acted instead of reading, I understand how First Nation stories must have their original elements of performance, as if they are left out it results in a loss of enjoyment and engagement from the reader. Just reading the story as presented, without the oral performance, was less engaging and had less of a memorable impact on me as a story.

Reference:

 King, Thomas, ‘Godzilla vs. Post‐colonial’,World Literature Written in English, 30.2 (1990), 10–16 <https://doi.org/10.1080/17449859008589128>

‘Oral Traditions’ <https://indigenousfoundations.arts.ubc.ca/oral_traditions/> [accessed 16 February 2020]

Robinson, Harry, Living by Stories: A Journey of Landscape and Memory, ed. by Wendy Wickwire, 1 edition (Talonbooks, 2013)

‘Storytelling for All Ages by Cree Elder Phil Umpherville – Aboriginal Tourism BC’ <https://dev.atbc.drivedigital.net/events/storytelling-ages-cree-elder-phil-umpherville/> [accessed 16 February 2020]

KING AND THE INFLUENCE OF CREATION STORIES

In his novel, The Truth about Stories, King re-tells two creation stories, the Christian one with Adam and Eve, and a First Nation one about Charm and her twins. After recounting both stories, King tells us we must choose only one to believe in, as that is the nature of a creation story (King 33). King admits to his hypocrisy, telling us that he understands that dichotomies are rarely true, but they are simple and powerful tools to express the values of a society and the differences of one from the other.

To think of it, societies are groups of people and we are often defined by our cultural norms, these norms showcase the differences between what is ‘mine’ and what is ‘yours’. Korean, Japanese and Chinese history and culture are very intertwined, but the things that are emphasized are generally their differences, the type of traditional robes and headdresses, etc. Though they hold onto these differences, ironically some people would group all three into one.

Like other parts of cultures, creation stories are often used to differentiate the beliefs of societies. The way he emphasizes the believability of the story of “Genesis” with the use of an authoritative voice, over an “The Earth Diver” story with a storyteller’s voice, is a showcase of the values of the individual societies. Distinctions between us as people are created in what we are not in reflection to the other. That is why dichotomies are so powerful, he tells a list of the ordinary ones we believe in, rich/poor, strong/weak, men/women, etc. and these shape the way we live our lives, how we think of the world. If you are not rich, you are poor, if you’re a man you can’t be a woman. If one story is right, the other must be false.

In asking us to choose through use of a dichotomy, he showcases the power that dichotomies have in creating narratives about us, in reflection to others. If you are strong, that means you’ve overcome weakness, it is an oxymoron to describe a person to be strong and weak at the same time because they are antonyms to each other. Similar to how the British used narratives such as this to distinguish people in their vast empire, seen best in an ABC book for children with the line, “C is for colonies. Rightly we boast, that of all the great nations Great Britain has most.” To be a nation is to not be a colony. Politicians use dichotomies for their opposition, such as the phrase “tough on crime and countries do so in war propaganda, such as how America demonized the Japanese in WWII, presenting narratives of good vs. evil, rather than the actual economical and resource driven conflict.

He tells us that we must pick because King believes that the stories that we grow up with shape our view of the world and our values. When King asks us to imagine what kind of world we would live in if God had forgiven Adam and Eve, he believes that stories are those that represent the world views of society (King 34). And in picking a story we choose to believe in something that would fundamentally change how we interact with the world around us. King even admits that if he could tell us to abandon all our stories and gods he would, but knows that is impossible, so he tells us to pick our values first and than our stories (King 34). If we are told that life is filled with good, we start to image it that way. Even if we don’t believe in creation, these stories are the philosophy of our lives and we must pick. It is similar to picking a philosophy, a way of life, vegetarianism. We must commit ourselves to a way to view the world so that we are kinder and more understanding than we are now. He doesn’t want us to fight or stay close minded in the way dichotomies encourage but rather to understand what these stories say about our values and how we look at the world.

The stories we tell ourselves, are all lies, they don’t reflect reality. In truth, no one cares about us as individuals and the world would be a better place if we stopped imagining ourselves specifically to be the center, be-all, end-all of everything, as our creation stories have made us believe.

Reference:

Arbuckle, Alex, ‘This Unsettling British Children’s Alphabet Celebrated Colonialism and Conquest’, Mashable<https://mashable.com/2016/08/27/abc-for-baby-patriots/>

King, Thomas. The Truth about Stories: a Native Narrative. House of Anansi Press Inc., 2010.

‘The Path to Pearl Harbor’, The National WWII Museum | New Orleans<https://www.nationalww2museum.org/war/articles/path-pearl-harbor> [accessed 25 February 2020]

‘Turtle Island | The Canadian Encyclopedia’ <https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/turtle-island>

‘WWII Propaganda: The Influence of Racism’, Artifacts Journal // University of Missouri<https://artifactsjournal.missouri.edu/2012/03/wwii-propaganda-the-influence-of-racism/>

For this assignment I used these 6 posts as the bases for my reflection:

Maya found home in being around loved ones, a place where she felt safe.

Emilia said she was unsure of what is home, but it was family, a childhood house, habits, locations/objects of similarities (she went to Italy and was reminded of the Okanogan beach and mountains) that gave her comfort.

Jade saw home as being a part of history, grandparents, best friend, routines, locations, and familiar objects.

Ari, wrote about finding home in extended family and past culture (she found home in her extended family back in England), finding the place that makes you most comfortable.

Gaby sees home as a place to be yourself, found in friends and people we enjoy being around.

Chino was more interested in the activities/habits that are repeated, and being with friends and family.

Through reading the blog posts by my classmates I found some interesting similarities and a few common differences. The core similarities I found in the blogs I examined was: that home incorporated some form of loved ones, people that we enjoy being around, a few others spoke about societies or cultures they felt connections too and the general ‘feeling’ of acceptance.

The different perspectives are in the specifics, now that’s to be expected, as we don’t all live the same life. But because of this diversity in specifics, we can examine more clearly our common ideas of the meaning of ‘home,’ as these similarities are more obvious when we realize we all see home the same way, but we have never experienced the same type of home.

I’d first like to speak about my assumptions before I started reading these blogs. I assumed that people would mention their family, habits, companionship and such. I assumed that location would be some of the main differences and culture as well. Generally I was right, everyone choose individuals such as their family or friends as a prime core of what it ‘home’ meant to them.

Though I found my assumptions shaken when I came across Jade’s post. She mentions that she’s moved around a lot and that growing up she’s never really felt at ‘home,’ but recently discovered it through going to visit extended family in England. She feels more at home in England with her extended family, which was a big contrast to all others, who though did find home in people, generally found it in the place they were raised or had spent an extended period of time in. In my life, I’ve generally moved around a lot, but found home in Vancouver with my immediate family. To me, my extended family represents family, but doesn’t really represent home, as I’ve been so disconnected from them growing up.

I do find another point Jade made interesting, it’s how she related to the history and culture of England over Canada. Belonging seems to be the best world to describe this and it’s very prevalent in our course, as history is made of the stories that we tell ourselves. Seeing yourself within a society and in extension their story is powerful, because these stories represent complicated feelings of belonging and identification. Because we feel that we belong, we identify with that story.

I also generally thought that location would be less empathized and the responses would be more conceptual. The ideas of family and being around people, such as Maya’s post. But I a few did emphasize the location some people have grown up in the same location all the life in that specific area represents their home. Others travelled and that could be seen in their response. They generally say that it is not the place but the people that they find home in.

Then others mentioned more of the traditions and habit they have at home, which I related a lot, as that was the main core of my own story. These habits and traditions are told in small short stories within the larger post. Gaby and Chino showed this the most, giving short stories of their daily rituals, highlighting the processes of a home, the interactions and the traditions. This gives these everyday actions deeper significant meaning. We all go to class and hang out with friends than go home and to them they recognized these actions of creating space and routine as another part of what a home signifies.

Reference:

ArianneRobbins, ‘Assignment 2:2 The Feeling Of Home | Ari’s Canadian Literature Blog’ <https://blogs.ubc.ca/ariannerobbins/2020/01/28/assignment-22/> [accessed 3 February 2020]

‘Assignment 2:2: Home | ENGL 372: Oh Canada’ <https://blogs.ubc.ca/emiliabrandoli/2020/01/29/assignment-22-home/> [accessed 3 February 2020]

‘Assignment 2.2: Home – English 372: Canadian Literature’ <https://blogs.ubc.ca/crodriguezengl372/2020/01/28/assignment-2-2-home/> [accessed 3 February 2020]

‘Assignment 2.2- Stories, People, and Nature: What Home Means to Me – Canadian Literary Genres’ <https://blogs.ubc.ca/jadegreer/2020/01/29/assignment-2-2/> [accessed 3 February 2020]

Canada!, Ooh, ‘OOH CANADA!’ <https://blogs.ubc.ca/mayasumel/?fbclid=IwAR1w85yXANyUMyo4fZZxkbO_QqLl6mdv6AGe4ubI6mCeX69ajJhS3jE6Iyw> [accessed 3 February 2020]

Humor, Beverly Jenkins Beverly Jenkins is a, pop culture writer She has published three web humor books, Six Calendars, including You Had One Job!, and Photobombed., ‘20 Of The Best Stick-Figure Family Car Window Decals Ever Made’, LiveAbout<https://www.liveabout.com/best-funny-stick-figure-decals-4140773> [accessed 3 February 2020]

‘The Story of Home – Explorer Gaby’s Blog’ <https://blogs.ubc.ca/gabyliteratureexplorer/2020/01/28/the-story-of-home/> [accessed 3 February 2020]

Home: A Short Story

“Nagi!”

“Ya?!”

“Let’s go!” My mother insists from the bottom of the stairs.

My eyes are locked onto the computer screen. I had been working on this assignment for the whole day, and yet I wasn’t even close to finishing. But it’s either sitting here for another hour on my own or going to dinner with my family. I glare at my word doc, as if that would help, and shut my laptop screen. I’ll come back to it later.

I pull a pair of socks from my closet and hop my way out my room and across the hall, trying to walk and dress at the same time. I reach the door at the end of the hall and knock three times. Then, without pause, open the door.

“Zizi, it’s time to go,” I say sticking my head into my brothers’ room. He looks away from the computer and sees me, taking off the large red headphones he reaches for the sweater on his bed and makes his way to me. “What did you say?” He can’t hear anyone through those things, but he knows what’s up. It’s 5:30 on a Saturday, everyone knows what happens on Saturday at 5:30. Well everyone in this family.
“Nothing,” I pull my last sock up, finally. “But don’t forget to take your retainer case.”

“Oh ya, hold on.”

Samsa

I make my way down to the first floor before him, grabbing my coat from the closet, my brother comes down a second later, turning off the house lights, as I check the front door, it’s locked, and the stove is off, Zizi had took out the samsas. My youngest brother is sitting by the garage door putting on his shoes. His cute little 7-year-old hands zipping up his boots.

“Hey sweetie, want some help?” I ask him, giving his ridiculously round, soft, squeezable, cheek a kiss. Zizi follows and copies my actions, we both crowd around our youngest brother and give him kisses he can’t escape from.

“No,” he says making wiping motions with the sleeve of his hand, we are taught a minute early age that there was no escaping from our affection. While other kids had to worry about their aunts that would pinch their cheeks, he had to worry about his vastly older siblings doing the same. Zizi helps him zip up his coat all the way up to under his chin. AHHH he’s so cute! I couldn’t resist and give him another kiss. He squawks like a baby chick and runs to the car.

I follow after quickly and grab the front seat before Zizi. He takes his loss graciously this week, rather strange since last week we had spent a few minutes complaining and trying to taser the other to submission for the spot.

Mom is already buckling the little chick in his booster seat, and Zizi joins them in the back.

The radio is off, it’s always off when we’re all in the car. My dad says it’s ’cause we’re all too noisy enough to be a distraction to him, but I’m pretty sure it’s cause my mother refuses to compete with the radio in volume to be heard.

We drive and make it to the parking lot, with all of us looking around, trying to find an empty spot in the pitch-black night. The sushi place is always crowded on Saturdays, but we always come here every Saturday and have learned to come at 5:30, right before the dinner rush.

When the line is short enough to not gain annoyance from some of the younger members of the family. So me. And Ziz too. We’re a family of five so the staff always gives us the really comfy circular booth seats, and they know where we like to sit.
I spot my friend making her way to us. “Sofia!” I greet, asking about her day, she’s really nice. Not in the boring way, but in the fun way. She makes jokes with my parents about seeing them here again, but she’s not our waitress today. It’s always weird having friends that work where your family eats, but we always make it work. When our waiter comes, we give our orders, while I add on to my mom’s. She always forgets to ask for forks for her and the cute chickie.

Speaking of him, I turn to my left and give his cheek another kiss. He gasps as if he should be surprised! He should always be on guard for my kisses.

“So what happened this week with you?” My dad starts off the weekly complaining session we wait for our food. It’s the usual, mom’s annoyed at one of her friends this week, I find it hilarious. You’d think university students would get into weird situations, but no, it’s the Uzbek mothers that have the wildest lives. So much drama for such a small collection of friends.

“How was your week, cupcake?” Zizi says, and I automatically try to poke him on the side, he twists and grabs my hand, grinning gleefully, he needs to stop making the same joke every week. It’s been eight. months. I never should have let him see that meme. He doesn’t even stutter at using that stupid word anymore. Like lighting, I strike with my left hand and land a poke to his side. He yelps. Releasing my hand in order to defend his venerable sides. That should hold him back for a few minutes. But definitely not until the end of dinner.

It’s during these times together, when we sit for meals, go out to the grocery store, doing ordinary boring things, that we have the most fun. When we try to give each other advice before making fun of each other. Between arguing about which rice brand is the best at costoc or which sashimi to order, it’s the mundane and relaxing times when we’re all together that I value the most.

References:

‘Chick with a Hat Wallpaper – Animal Wallpapers – #24704’, SU Walls, 2013 <https://suwalls.com/animals/chick-with-a-hat> [accessed 27 February 2020]

‘Circular Booth Seating – Google Search’ <https://www.google.com/search?q=circular+booth+seating&tbm=isch&ved=2ahUKEwju6aTa0vPnAhW3BjQIHcY6DcQQ2-cCegQIABAA&oq=circular+booth+seating&gs_l=img.3…0.0..4016…0.0..0.0.0…….0……gws-wiz-img.9A4-KP9_CMw&ei=zLZYXu7TG7eN0PEPxvW0oAw&bih=713&biw=1226&client=safari> [accessed 27 February 2020]

‘Samsa (Food) – Wikipedia’ <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samsa_(food)> [accessed 28 January 2020]

‘Uzbekistan | Geography & History | Britannica’ <https://www.britannica.com/place/Uzbekistan> [accessed 27 February 2020]

I have a great story to tell you, it’s the story of how evil came into the world.

There once was a vast and powerful kingdom that encompassed the entire known world. And in that kingdom lived a young, king and good prince. His entire kingdom was at peace there was no hunger, or killings or envy. There was no need to steal or kill as the world was perfect and the people pure. And it was all thanks to the advice and kindness of the young prince.

On one sunny day, the prince left his castle and went into town. As he was wandering around a young boy came to the prince and asked him for advice.

The boy asked the prince, “my prince, my sister and I have just lost our mother and are afraid to be without her.”

The prince felt pity for this young naive boy, who had lost someone so young. Though his kingdom was good and his people pure, humans exist in a cycle of life and death. He told the boy, that the world gives us many challenges but not to worry, and told him of the story of how through death may take away loved ones, they would be with us in spirit and see them in the next world. The boy thanked the prince for his kind words and soon left.

The next day the prince went into town and tried to find the boy, but when he went into town he found two coffins. He asked the villages what had happened.
The closest one informed him, “the young boy from the last house to the left stabbed his sister and himself to death.”

The prince was shocked, in his grief and naivety the boy had killed them both so that he would not have to be tormented with her loss. The story that the prince had told the young boy in order to bring him some joy had, in the end, resulted in the creation of the evil that is murder.

“Once you have told a story, you can never take it back. So, be careful of the stories you tell, AND the stories you listen to.” (King, 10)

The first time I wrote the story it was all over the place and I didn’t really know what I was trying to say. I went over it and found that I forgot the most important thing, fables are supposed to be short and to the point, which my story was not. So as I told it, again and again, it became more coherent, and as Andrew Stanton advised, the repetition made me able to pick out what was more important for me to say in the moral, what was my character, their goal and what moral lesson can I teach with my characters. The story refined itself through its constant repetition, but it did make itself simpler with each repetition, easier to tell and digest for my listeners.

Reference

King, Thomas. The Truth About Stories: A Native Narrative. House of Anansi, 2003.

Limited, Alamy. “Stock Photo – Good Vs Evil – Two-Way Street Sign.” Alamy, https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-good-vs-evil-two-way-street-sign-114769861.html. Accessed 23 Jan. 2020.

Stanton, Andrew. The Clues to a Great Story. www.ted.com, https://www.ted.com/talks/andrew_stanton_the_clues_to_a_great_story. Accessed 23 Jan. 2020.

All cultures have oral and written language. To say one is either or, is a mistake in understanding how culture operates. The mistake in this train of though is the very distinction between written and oral as to separate entities, with oral usually subservient to written. First deconstructing the idea that cultures can be defined as one or the other, when written cultures have oral traditions is in and of itself confusing. The creation between the duality of the two ignores the interdependent relationship of the two forms of communication. Literature and stories exist on the same level, in order to have literature one must have stories to write about. On the other hand stories must rely on a literary canon, history, culture, etc., to uphold their believability.

In his article Courtney MacNeil goes over the ideas of Walter Ong, who categorizes orality into that of cultures that have no writing and those that use oral language as communicative that derive from writing.But as MacNeil and Chamberlin (75) mentioned this is wrong to delegate the oral to an imaginary position of subjugation under the written. Writing itself is a communication form that can be short sloopy and crude, abbreviations and slang one of the most basic. In this day and age writing can even include pictures such as gifs. Expanding even further on the concept of the oral and the written, both serve different functions of communication. It’s hard and almost impossible for an individual to give up one or the other as a form of communication. Then in the presence of story telling, the order of speech to written can be true, but in the contexts of forms such as movies, recordings and other forms of media, we work backwards from the written to the oral or the seen. In forms of communication through ideas and displays of leadership we value the oral abilities, charisma and debating skills are those that are prized in communicative forms in both business and politics.

In the first chapter of his book, “If This is Your Land, Where are Your Stories?” Chamberlin discuses the distinction and the entwinement of imagination and reality (73). He talks about the ceremonies of belief that we go through as we tell ourselves the stories that we wish to create into reality. Professor Paterson dissects Chamberlin’s ideas on the intersections of ‘land’ and ‘home,’ how both are forms of storytelling that rely on the realities of power to enforce in order to make them real. The real world depends on the ideas that shape it, countries are not things that simply exist, but they are maintained by the power structures that created them and the people that believe in their laws and rule. This is what Chamberlin speaks of when he talks about how stories shape reality. This particular story about the duality of oral and written and the subsequent subjugation of the oral to the written is a story that we create and re-enforce through our everyday actions. Yet as one is hard-pressed to give up one form for the other, this duality serves no larger purpose, both forms work together and to separate one from the other seems counterproductive in terms of simple communication.

Reference:

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/

Lesson 1:2 | English 372 99C Canadian Studies. https://blogs.ubc.ca/engl372-99c-2019wc/unit-1/lesson-12/. Accessed 16 Jan. 2020.