Your blog assignment is to hyper-link your research on the characters and symbols in GGRW  — according to the pages assigned to you on our Student Blog page.

——–

Pages 38-53 (1993 Edition) / 46-64 (2007 Edition)

Upon reading my assigned pages of King’s Green Grass Running Water more closely, the significance of these characters and the ways in which they relate to one another became all the more apparent to me. While that’s not to say I didn’t have some difficulty deciphering particular allusions or interconnections between these characters, this hyperlinking assignment was quite interesting to do.

Dr. Joseph Hovaugh and Dr. John Eliot

Dr. Joseph Hovaugh sounds like a play on the name Jehovah, which suggests that there is a Christian allegory in this context. In the section I was assigned, the beginning pages tell of a dialogue between Dr. John Eliot and Dr. Hovaugh, as they discuss the case of the four missing Indians in depth. As Dr. John Eliot appears to be an allusion to a missionary, it therefore makes sense that he would be fixated on further uncovering the truth behind their disappearance: “What I can’t understand is how did they escape. And where did they go? Have you ever thought about that, Joe? And why, in God’s name, would they want to leave?” (King, 48). Given that John Eliot was highly opposed to the enslavement of Indians, the fact that he is determined to uncover the truth seems to be fitting as well. For Dr. Hovaugh, on the other hand, has a job at the asylum where he is actually keeping the four Indians. In this regard, Hovaugh’s involvement strikes me as an allusion to one of the dominant issues we have discussed throughout the course thus far: the issue of the colonizers vs. the colonized. In this case, it would appear as though Dr Hovaugh, an authoritative figure, is the colonizer, while the Indians (historically as well) are the colonized. Put into this context, Dr. John Eliot can thus be depicted as a man advocating for the rights of the colonized, wanting to bring them justice.

The Four Indians: Lone Ranger, Ishmael, Robinson Crusoe, and Hawkeye

These four characters are representative of the European and Western depictions of colonization and white superiority. Lone Ranger and Hawkeye are depicted in American literature as heroes. They are prominent Indian figures that symbolize Old West lawmen responsible for taking upon leadership roles within native communities. Of the four Indians, Lone Ranger and Hawkeye appear to be the main two in charge. Ishmael and Robinson Crusoe on the other hand, are representative of the weakened result of successful colonization; they are loyal companions but do not enforce or protect their kin like Lone Ranger and Hawkeye. Robinson Crusoe, referred to, as a “savage” is also a direct allusion to Defoe’s hero, Robinson Crusoe: a shipwrecked sailor that “survives through ingenuity and finds spiritual strength through adversity” (Flick, 142). Defoe’s Robinson Crusoe’s tenacity and unwillingness to succumb to his misfortune can perhaps be interpreted as an allusion to the state of the colonized Indians, for despite the dire circumstances they appear to be confined within, their perseverance and desire for freedom will prevail. Ishmael, the “soothing savage” is another variation of the faithful “Indian” companion.

Babo Jones and Sergeant Cereno

Babo’s character is a reference to Melville’s, “Benito Cereno”, in which Babo is a black slave that is both the barber and leader of the slave revolt aboard the San Dominick. He is described in this story as being deceptive, which King’s Babo also proves to be as well. This is made most evident when Sergeant Cereno is questioning her, as she refuses to divulge a straight answer and has difficulty staying focused on their conversation. Rather than being cooperative with the police, she comes off as shifty, neurotic, and even mentally unstable. Her failure to provide sufficient information to Sergeant Cereno and constant undermining of authority makes evident the duplicitous and manipulative persona that is derived from her allegorical import.

Norma and Lionel

“Music to my old ears to hear you talking traditional, nephew” – Norma

Norma is Lionel, a Canadian-Aboriginal young man’s aunt. In the section I am analyzing, it is apparent that Norma feels as though her nephew is purposely abandoning his Indian roots by taking on Western ideals and standards of living. For instance, she comments on his job selling TVs, and reminds him to come and visit them on the reserve more frequently. She is reminiscent of that traditional figure that we all have encountered at one point or another in our lives; the one person that is steadfast against assimilating or adopting Westernized standards. She serves as a constant reminder of the livelihood of Indian tradition and culture, and quite frankly, this seems to be a role that she enjoys playing.

“Get your life together. With your record, you’re running out of options”

Lionel, on the other hand, seems to have been getting along fine with his job as a TV salesman, despite his aunt’s continuous urges to adopt a more Aboriginal profession or way of life. There is a sense of irony that emerges in this section, for Lionel submits to his aunt’s request to hang out with Cecil, only to get wrapped up in a life-altering debacle. The irony lies in the fact that when he tries to reconnect with his Indian roots he encounters immense havoc. Contrary to Norma’s incessant impositions to better acquaint her nephew with his Indian heritage, it seems as though he was far better of living the Canadianized lifestyle he opted for. Poignantly, for Lionel, one day proves to have changed it all.

Latisha and Alberta Frank

Norma uses Latisha and Alberta as examples of Aboriginal people who have not abandoned their roots to Lionel. Alberta’s name is an immediate allusion to the Canadian province and home of Thomas King, as he is originally from Lethbridge, Alberta. She is the “principal female character in the realist story” (Flick, 144) and Flick notes that it is also quite possible that her name is derived from Frank, Alberta on the Turtle River; the town was the site of a major disaster and it was buried by the recognized Frank Slide of 1903.

Works Cited

“Differences between traditional Aboriginal cultures and mainstream Western culture.” Aboriginal Human Resource Council. Web. 30 March 2016.

Flick, Jane. “Reading Notes for Thomas King’s Green Grass, Running Water.”Canadian Literature 161.162 (1999): 140-72. 1999. Web. 23 Mar. 2016.

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

Grandin, Greg. “Obama, Melville and the Tea Party.” New York Times. New York Times, January 2014. Web. 30 March 2016.

Lloyd, Monica. “Hawk-Eye and the Crisis of American Masculinity in The Last of the Mohicans.” International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Vol. 4 No. 2. January 2014, pp. 126-135. Web.

“Lone Ranger”. Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Encyclopædia Britannica Inc., 2016. Web. 30 March 2016 <http://www.britannica.com/topic/Lone-Ranger>.

What are the major differences or similarities between the ethos of the creation story or stories you are familiar with and the story King tells in The Truth About Stories ?

———

“So here are our choices: a world in which creation is a solitary, individual act or a world in which creation is a shared activity; a world marked by competition or a world marked by co-operation” – Thomas King

When comparing the ethos in the Earth Diver creation story that King tells us to the ethos in the Story of Adam and Eve, I do notice some prominent similarities and differences. I think one of the first major differences I noticed between the two creation stories is that in the Earth Diver story there is an emphasis on the collective; a united effort in creating the world. There is a sort of shared humanity, and a shared sense of helping one another to achieve something that is greater than them. In the Story of Adam and Eve, however, a collective effort does not seem to be put forth. While all of the animals and Charm treat each other as equals, the reader immediately becomes aware of the fact that God is the controlling entity; God is the sole creator.

While the Earth Diver story focuses on the positives of creation and working together, the Story of Adam of Eve seems to root itself in teaching individuals how not to act; it serves as more of parable than an idealized, upbeat story of how the world came about. There isn’t a cheerful or hopeful vibe throughout this story, and it is rather somber in comparison. Of course, at its core it aims to get across the same message as the Earth Diver story, but it isn’t conveyed in a way that celebrates commonality or balance. In my opinion, the Story of Adam and Eve acts as more of a parable than the Earth Diver story because Adam and Eve are made examples of; they are reprimanded for their failure to listen to authority and their betrayal of God.

Moreover, the progression of these two stories is also a distinguishing factor in my opinion; we see the Earth Diver story progress from disorder to harmony, while the Story of Adam and Eve progresses from harmony to disorder. Another interesting difference I came across is the varying degree of credit the animals in the Aboriginal story are given in comparison to Adam and Eve in the Christian story. It seems as though the animals are given credit for their knowledge and capabilities – i.e. the Ducks with great eye sight and the beavers that exceled in physics and math – whereas Adam and Eve were warned against acquiring knowledge from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. Of course this point is merely a suggestion, however I think it’s quite fascinating to point out the difference in the degree of agency that these characters are given, and within what parameters they are allowed to exercise it.

Having gone to a Catholic elementary and high school for all 12 years of education prior to university, my religion has played quite a prominent role in my upbringing. I think that my religion conditions me to believe that Eve had to take the apple and betray God’s trust in order to establish good and evil in the world. While a perfect story of how our world came to be is preferred and arguably more pleasing to hear, I do think that learning about the first sin is quite imperative as well. Perhaps it is because of my Catholic upbringing, or perhaps it is because I am a realist, but I do think that in comparison to the Earth Diver creation story, the Story of Adam and Eve shines more light on the consequences of one’s actions and the inevitable emergence of dualities – of good and evil, compassion and malignance, right and wrong.

In comparison, I think that the most significant similarity between these creation stories is how they both end with some sort of resolution. While the Earth Diver story ends on a more happily ever after kind of note, and the Story of Adam an Eve ends on a less lighthearted note, we aren’t left wondering how either story ends — we aren’t left on some anxiety-inducing cliffhanger; loose ends are tied and both stories are brought to a close. I also think the way in which King positions them against each other is brilliant. I initially failed to notice how, when positioning them side by side, there is a lot that can be learned from both of them. Respectively, they tell the story of creation in both diverse and similar ways.

Works Cited

Busby, Brian John. “Thomas King.” The Canadian Encyclopedia. Historica Canada, 4 July 2008. Web. 20 Mar. 2016.

Kennedy, Paul. “The 2003 CBC Massey Lectures, “The Truth about Stories: A Native Narrative.” Cbc. CBC, 7 November 2003. Web. 20 March 2016.

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

In this lesson I say that it should be clear that the discourse on nationalism is also about ethnicity and ideologies of “race.” If you trace the historical overview of nationalism in Canada in the CanLit guide, you will find many examples of state legislation and policies that excluded and discriminated against certain peoples based on ideas about racial inferiority and capacities to assimilate. – and in turn, state legislation and policies that worked to try to rectify early policies of exclusion and racial discrimination. As the guide points out, the nation is an imagined community, whereas the state is a “governed group of people.” For this blog assignment, I would like you to research and summarize one of the state or governing activities, such as The Royal Proclamation 1763, the Indian Act 1876, Immigration Act 1910, or the Multiculturalism Act 1989 – you choose the legislation or policy or commission you find most interesting. Write a blog about your findings and in your conclusion comment on whether or not your findings support Coleman’s argument about the project of white civility.

———

“White Canadian culture is obsessed and organized by its obsession, with the problem of its own civility” – Daniel Coleman

The Immigration Act 1910 was an act that enhanced the discretionary powers of the Canadian government to control and further regulate the admittance of immigrants into Canada. The act outlined an expanded list of immigrants that were prohibited from entering, and the cabinet was also given an increased degree of authority to make nonselective decisions regarding permissibility and deportation when necessary. With the modifications made to the act of 1910, the governor-in-council was allowed to prohibit the landing of an immigrant based on arbitrary and insubstantial reasons; for example, it could be argued that the individual merely was not suitable for the requirements or type of climate in Canada. Furthermore, the Immigration Act 1910 introduced the notion of permanent residency, which meant that immigrants were eligible to live in Canada after three years; however, until this status was granted, at any given point they were susceptible to deportation if deemed undesirable or ineffectual to Canada. As a means of ensuring that their authoritative control over immigration remained uncompromised, the act barred courts and judges from interfering in the decisions-making process of the executive branch of the Canadian government; the power over immigration was concentrated and tirelessly protected by this exclusive division. In addition, the act also made mandatory that immigrants of Asiatic race were required to possess $200 before being permitted to enter Canada. In comparison, however, regardless of being male or female, or of a different race, so long as you were not of Asiatic origin, you were only required to possess $25 upon arrival to be permitted entry.

“I am given no chance. I am overdetermined from without. I am the slave of the “idea” that others have of me but of my own appearance” – Frantz Fanon

I believe that the above summary of the Immigration Act 1910 validates Coleman’s argument regarding Canada’s projection of white civility. Coleman states that the purpose of his study is to analyze the “construction of White English Canadian privilege” (Coleman, 3) over other races, and upon doing research about the act, it unquestionably seems as though the regulations were incorporated entirely to serve the interests of the ‘superior’ White race in Canada. Potential Canadian Immigrants were susceptible to unfounded abuse and discrimination merely because those that possessed power in the Canadian government were manipulating circumstances in favor of Whites – this notion of discriminating based on race instantly reminded me of sociologist, Franz Fanon’s essay entitled, “The Fact of Blackness”. In his essay he discusses the discrimination that Blacks in America had to undergo, and the extent to which they were severely disadvantaged and ‘othered’ simply because of their darker skin; Fanon comprehends, “Not only must the black man be black; he must be Black in relation to the white man” (Fanon, 82-83). I think this quote perfectly encapsulates the struggles of immigrants attempting to gain entry into Canada. While the Immigration Act does not selectively discriminate against Blacks alone, Fanon’s discussion can still be attributed to the discussion about white civility. Those that are scrutinized, threatened, and expected to possess a certain amount of money prior to entry are all treated in the same racialized way because they are always compared to the idealized White man. In this regard, Fanon’s assertion that as a Black man, he was “told to stay within bounds, to go back where I belonged” (86), relates to Coleman’s concept of white civility, for immigrants that did not live up to the standard of “whiteness” that Canada desired were victims of extensive dehumanization. Therefore, I think that my findings about the Immigration Act 1910 are clear examples of Canada’s undoubted imposition of white civility during this time.

Works Cited

CanLit Guides. “Reading and Writing in Canada, A Classroom Guide to Nationalism.” Canadian Literature. Web. March 10^th 2016.

Coleman, David. “Masculine Migrations: Reading the Postcolonial Male in New Canadian Narratives.” Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1998. Print.

Fanon, Frantz. “The Fact of Blackness” From Black Skin, White Masks. New York: Grove Press, 1967. Print.

“An Introduction to Frantz Fanon’s Black Skin White Masks – A Macat Sociology Analysis.” Youtube. Youtube, 2 September 2015. 12 March 2016.

“What If You Were An Immigrant?: Ben Huh at TEDxPortland” Youtube. Youtube, 2 June 2013. 12 March 2016.

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

——-

Sparke notes that the use of cartographic tools was a pertinent component of the Wet’suwet’en and Gitxsan people’s efforts to disclose their sovereignty in a way that the Canadian court could comprehend and acknowledge. He reveals that there was a map that was cultivated for this exact purpose, and was given to Chief Justice Allan McEachern to unfold. In the process of unfolding the map McEachern avowed, “We’ll call this the map that roared” (Sparke, 468).

Sparke made a connection to the 1959 Peter Sellers movie entitled, “The Mouse that Roared”, which was known for its satirical depiction of the geopolitics during the Cold War. He suggests that the comment could have been interpreted as “a derisory scripting of the plaintiffs as a ramshackled, anachronistic nation” (468). However, Sparke also makes reference to Don Monet, a cartoonist working for the Gitxsan and Wet’suwet’en. Monet perceived McEachern’s reference to a roaring map as an evocation of the Canadian court’s resistance to the First Nation’s remapping of the land. It was suggested that McEachern’s remark was in response to “the cartography’s roaring refusal of the orientation systems, the trap lines, the property lines, the electricity lines, the pipelines, the logging roads, the clear-cuts, and all other accouterments of Canadian colonialism on native land” (468).

Despite McEachern’s dismissal of the Gitxsan and Wet’swuet’en’s claims “to ownership, jurisdiction, and damages for the loss of lands and resources since the establishment of the colony” (470), the Supreme Court overturned his decision and opened up the opportunity of a new trial. As a result, this event has gained recognition for its immense turnaround in Canadian native rights litigation.

Personally, I think that by calling it “the map that roared” (468), McEachern wasn’t merely describing the map; he was speaking to the Gitxsan and Wet’swuet’en people themselves. The word, ‘roared’, made me think of other words like: ferocious, impassioned, intense, and fervent. I got the sense that the map was seen as something that frightened and unsettled McEachern— given that the Gitxsan and Wet’swuet’en people physically outlined their remapping of the land, it symbolized the serious threat of the detribalization and fragmentation of all that was familiar to him and within his control. Similarly, I think this sort of fearful reaction to a piece of paper serves as evidence of the power that cartography has over people. The map he was presented with was something that was unknown to him, “a genre of cartography in which Judge McEachern, on his own admission, was illiterate” (Paterson). While this is of course just my opinion, I do think that McEachern’s reference to the map as having ‘roared’ speaks to his recognition of the First Nation people’s impassioned fight for their claims, as well as his own surmounting fear of losing control over the division of land that could result. ‘Roar’ is a powerful, chaotic, and even fear-inducing word, so I think its usage here fits quite perfectly. By calling it “the map that roared” (468), McEachern acknowledges its power in facilitating a change he does not desire and demonstrates his dread of the Gitxsan and Wet’swuet’en people. In this regard, the word ‘roar’ serves two purposes here: it addresses both the First Nations people and Chief Justice Allan McEachern, too.

Works Cited

Paterson, Erika. “Lesson 2.3.” ENGL 470A Canadian Studies: Canadian Literary Genres. University of British Columbia, 2016. Web. 29 Feb. 2016.

Sparke, Mathew. “A Map that Roared and an Original Atlas: Canada, Cartography, and the Narration of Nation.” Annals of the Association of American Geographers 88.3 (1998): 468-470. Web. 29 February 2016.

Venetikidis, Aris. “Making sense of maps” TED. September 2012. Lecture.

“Wet’suwet’en First Nation: Rebuilding the Four Pillars of Our Community” Youtube. Youtube, 23 September 2013. 29 February 2016.