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.

First stories tell us how the world was created. In The Truth about Stories, King tells us two creation stories; one about how Charm falls from the sky pregnant with twins and creates the world out of a bit of mud with the help of all the water animals, and another about God creating heaven and earth with his words, and then Adam and Eve and the Garden. King provides us with a neat analysis of how each story reflects a distinct worldview. “The Earth Diver” story reflects a world created through collaboration, the “Genesis” story reflects a world created through a single will and an imposed hierarchical order of things: God, man, animals, plants. The differences all seem to come down to co-operation or competition — a nice clean-cut satisfying dichotomy. However, a choice must be made: you can only believe ONE of the stories is the true story of creation – right? That’s the thing about creation stories; only one can be sacred and the others are just stories. Strangely, this analysis reflects the kind of binary thinking that Chamberlin, and so many others, including King himself, would caution us to stop and examine. So, why does King create dichotomies for us to examine these two creation stories? Why does he emphasize the believability of one story over the other — as he says, he purposefully tells us the “Genesis” story with an authoritative voice, and “The Earth Diver” story with a storyteller’s voice. Why does King give us this analysis that depends on pairing up oppositions into a tidy row of dichotomies? What is he trying to show us?

———

I think what King is trying to do with the two creation stories he shares in The Truth about Stories, is divulge how despite his acknowledgment of the difference in creation stories, ultimately, there is still one that must prevail over the other. In this regard, it is as though he sets up this row of dichotomies for the purpose of showing his readers that while we are meant to exercise our subjectivity to choosing what we we want to believe, we are engrained to believe one story more than the other. There is an inevitability in having to establish one story as ‘more right’ than the other; it is merely unavoidable. In telling us the “Genesis” story in an authoritative voice, it is as though King implies that despite “The Earth Diver” story’s captivating, storyteller’s voice, it holds no place in comparison to the biblical creation story. I interpreted this dichotomy as King acknowledging the beauty and co-operation in the Native creation story, yet cautioning us that, especially to the Western world, it is as though individuals are more inclined to accept the Christian story, for “we are necessarily blind to the world that Charm and the Twins and the animals help create” (25).

I also found King‘s notion that one story must be sacred while the others remain just stories to be quite interesting as well, because as Dr. Paterson has noted, this sort of strict dichotomy is ironically exactly what Chamberlain and King himself have been arguing against; the fact that King presents us with two creation stories yet states that the “Genesis” story is told in an authoritative matter discredits the degree of choice he wants us to exercise in the first place. Just as Chamberlain cautions his readers against focusing on the binaries of reality and imagination, or real and make believe, King’s emphasis of the fact that “if we believe one story to be sacred, we must see the other as secular” (25) is quite perplexing, and throws off all that we have been taught so far.

However, the way I interpreted King’s examination, is that while we are capable of exercising a sort of subjective control in what we want to believe or not believe, the element of rank is always present. This goes with everything – despite claiming that things are of equal importance, rank, truth, desirability, etc. when it comes down to it, I believe that things are always put into a sort of hierarchal order, be it explicitly or implicitly; intentionally or unintentionally. Despite our best efforts to remain neutral and to acknowledge the accuracy and degree of truth in both Christian and Native stories respectively, we will inevitably be influenced to believe that there is one universal creation story that reigns supreme above any others; in this case, King suggests that it is the authoritative “Genesis” story. With this in mind, King essentially tries to show us that while there can be two creation stories and two different conceptions of a single truth, one always prevails over the others when put into a hierarchical order.

Works Cited

Kennedy, Paul. “The 2003 CBC Massey Lectures, “The Truth about Stories: A Native Narrative.” cbc. CBC, 7 November 2003. Web. 19 February 2016.

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

Common assumptions regarding what a home is:

• Home is not necessarily a physical place; rather, it is the people that make you feel comfortable and safe
• Emulating a sense of home in a foreign place is easier said than done; sometimes home isn’t something that can be replicated.
• Home is a feeling of warmth and certainty
• Home is the place where the people you love provide you with assurance, love, and support

While we all have our own definitions of home, what I noticed most is that home is subjective. It isn’t tied down to one specific meaning, person, or place. Home is something that is special to each of us; it is something that pertains to our subjectivity and brings about immense feelings of comfort, safety, contentment, and freedom. What I predominantly took away from the blogs I read is that home is not just a physical place. Oftentimes we automatically associate home with the physical, and we in turn, neglect to recognize that home is more than just a structure. It is more than a room, a house, a building – it is the people we love to spend our time with; it is the people we choose to be surrounded by.

Works Cited

“Edward Sharpe and the Magnetic Zeroes – Home” Youtube. Youtube, 17 May 2010. 15 February 2016.

Write a short story (600 – 1000 words max) that describes your sense of home and the valuesand stories that you use to connect yourself to your home and respond to all comments on your blog.

——-

“Hurry! Come down, quick! You’re missing it!”

“Where are you?! It’s STARTING already!”

“—What?! But I thought it scheduled for 8pm? It’s only 7??”

“Whatever, dude! As if I know what the deal is with these TV broadcasting times. Just hurry up! Come down!”

“—Grab your sister! Tell her they’re starting ‘Summer Nights’!! You know, Luch, I used to be on Broadway—well, I used to do musicals. I starred–”

“You starred in the Royal City Musical’s production of Miss Saigon. And those were the best months of your life; I know, mom. You tell us the story all the time!”

“Neia! Danny Zuko is on the screen… or… the guy playing Danny Zuko is on the screen! Who is that man? I don’t think I’ve ever seen him before… He’s no Travolta! Oh, oh! It’s that Hudgens girl as Rizzo! Neia, hurry!!”

Overwhelmed with continuous callings after my name, I quickly finish reading a chapter of Foucault’s History of Sexuality (admittedly I don’t really understand what the hell I just read). Hurriedly, I make my way down the stairs, almost tripping because of how fast my feet are moving.

“I’m here guys! Jeez, yell louder, will you!”

Gathered on the living room couch, all with bowls of spaghetti and pieces of garlic bread in hand, sits my family attentively watching the beginning sequence of the highly anticipated, “GREASE: Live!”

“Oh, oh! Hush, everyone!” my mom exclaims, as she franticly searches for her phone on the couch. “I need to record this scene!! I need to post it to Facebook!”

“Mom, you do know that there will be videos of this online within minutes after it airs; you don’t need to take a crappy video on your phone. Just wait for the internet to work its magic” suggests my brother.

“No, no, no! I need to show my friends now!” she exclaims while recording the TV with a gigantic black splotch covering Sandy’s head for the whole 3 minutes of filming (the black splotch, if you weren’t quite sure, is her thumb… yes, my mother’s thumb took up half the frame; still don’t know whether that video ever made its way onto Facebook).

She finally finishes what felt like an hour of simultaneous filming and screaming out of excitement – (theatre-obsessed) moms will be moms?

As the three-hour (yes, you did read that correctly) ‘live’ production of GREASE comes to a close, my family gets up from their seats for the moment we have all been waiting for. The main event… The best part of the show…

* Cue Julianne Hough as Sandy coming out in her stellar all-black leather ensemble and Aaron Tveit as Danny coming out in a quintessential 50s preppy outfit to sign ‘You’re The One That I Want’*

“I got chills, they’re multiplying! And I’m losing controllllll……”

Together, my family and I get up from the couch and break out into song and dance. We belt out, “You’re the one that I want, you are the one I want – YOU, YOU, YOU! HONEY!” in unison. Using our forks as microphones, we attempt to emulate that 50s vibe that is emanating from our television screen. We dance so hard that I feel dizzy by the end of the number; my voice is coarse, my head is dizzy, and I immediately regret having just consumed a colossal amount of spaghetti right before dancing my face off, but the repercussions don’t matter one bit to me. My family and I had the time of our lives, even in that small, normalized outburst of theatricality. We were in each other’s company being goofy. Over those three hours, I got to laugh, dance, sing, and enjoy delicious bowls of food in the company of my 5 favourite people in the world, and no threat of a stomach ache was going to stop me from doing that.

Recollected and back on the couch, my mom grabs the remote and looks to all of us: “Okay, kids! What should we watch next?”

———–

My mom and I!

My aim with this story was to show (in an animated way), the sort of dynamic I have with my family. My household is far from bland or quiet; we sing, we dance, we yell (out of excitement, that is) and we have a great time. My mom is the rock of our family; she keeps everything together, and I honestly don’t know who I would be, or where I would be without her. My sense of home is literally being at home with my family. It is the smell of homemade food (preferably lasagna or spaghetti). It is the sound of a blaring musical or movie, and the accompanying sound of voices singing along. It’s the sound of infectious laughter and constant commotion.

My brothers and I when we went to see Hall & Oates at the PNE this past summer.

This short story is a slice of what my home life is like; it’s hectic, loud, but filled with such love and excitement. While we may not necessarily do anything extravagant or particularly interesting, I value the company of my family, wherever that may be. For me, home isn’t necessarily a physical construct; it is the people I choose to surround myself with.

Works Cited

Garcia, Tom. ‘Grease Live!’: Go Behind-the-Scenes in New Promo. Digital image. Billboard. N.p., 8 Jan. 2016. Web. 8 Feb. 2016. <http://www.billboard.com/files/styles/article_main_image/public/media/grease-live-fox-2015-billboard-650.jpg>.

Iyer, Pico. “Where is home?” TED. June 2013. Lecture.

“You’re the One that I Want – Full Performance – Grease: Live!” Youtube. Youtube, 1 February 2016. 8 February 2016.

Your task is to take the story that Kings tells about how evil comes into the world at the witches conference [In “The Truth About Stories” ] — and change the story any way you want — as long as the end remains the same: 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. 

——-

There is a story I know. It is about how evil came into this world. A long, long time ago, a hole in the world opened up and Hell seeped in. No one was aware of this hole or how it even opened up to begin with, but its presence would soon become responsible for the creation of malice, deceit, violence, and corruption. There is some speculation of where the hole originated; some say that there are still remnants of the hole somewhere in Honduras; others believe that the hole originated somewhere in North America, Mexico, Asia… The hole started off small and undetectable, but as more malevolent spirits crept through, the hole began to broaden and deepen. The forces coming from within the Hellmouth began to strengthen. The once utopian world known to mankind soon became overrun with a plethora of varying evil spirits: deception, gluttony, envy, vengeance, defamation – all with the same agenda: to deliberately inflict pain upon an innocent. Having seeped through the hole, these Hell-originating evil spirits began to distribute themselves throughout parts of the world, corrupting each person in their path with an intangible and unescapable degree of evil that would permeate within them. For many centuries, people searched for ways to stop the permeation of evil and close the hole. These people desperately tried to take back the innocence of their world. “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” (King, 10).

Creating stories hasn’t always been a strong point for me; however, I actually found this assignment to be easier than I anticipated. I was able to mesh together ideas in my mind and develop a unique take on an origin story. Upon telling my story to some family members, I found that it was well received. Of course they initially weren’t exactly sure why I was bringing up the origins of evil at the dinner table, they added their own insights and further discussed the fictional tale I presented before them. I recited my story during a dinner at my house with extended relatives present, and it generated quite a bit of conversation on the concept of story-telling, and in particular, the topic at hand: how indeed did evil come into this world? While some family members seemed to have no grasp of where this table conversation was going, others were entirely invested and intrigued by the discussion. “A Hellmouth? Interesting concept, I never thought of evil originating in this manner…” or “I wonder what the world would be like today had a solution for evil been found”. My story about the opening of a Hellmouth and the release of varying evil spirits that traveled throughout the world corrupting innocence catalyzed a rather in-depth, family brainstorming session regarding other potential ways we could imagine how evil came to be.

“The truth about stories is that that’s all we are” (King, 2). This assignment has allowed me to better understand the power of story telling. Stories provoke conversation, wonder, perplexity, and ultimately, they can be retold countless times. To me, one’s individuality is derived from the various stories that make you, you.

Works Cited

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

Zombardo, Philip. “The psychology of evil” TED. Feb. 2008. Lecture.

“Power of Story: Serious Ladies at 2015 Sundance Film Festival.” Youtube. Youtube, 24 January 2015. Web. 28 January 2016.

Figuring out this place called home is a problem (87).  Why? Why is it so problematic to figure out this place we call home: Canada? Consider this question in context with Chamberlin’s discussion on imagination and reality; belief and truth (use the index).Chamberlin says, “the sad fact is, the history of settlement around the world is the history of displacing other people from their lands, of discounting their livelihoods and destroying their languages” (78).  Chamberlin goes on to “put this differently” (Para. 3). Explain that “different way” of looking at this, and discuss what you think of the differences and possible consequences of these “two ways” of understanding the history of settlement in Canada.

——–

“This is the home we all long for, the Jerusalem we are not to forget. It may be the place we came from, five or fifty or give hundred years ago, or the place we are going to when our time is done. It is the place we still haven’t found but are looking for. The place that gives us a sense of our self, and of others” (Chamberlain 87)

Developing a connection with one’s homeland doesn’t come as easy as one would expect. Oftentimes there are contributing factors that we are ourselves aren’t quite sure how to decipher, and I think this is how Chamberlain feels as well. Being from the Americas emphasizes the inner conflict that Chamberlain tries to convey to the reader, that if he’s from this place, why does he find it so difficult to call it home? He continues on by stating, “It is a problem for me… And somebody else calls this place home, somebody who isn’t always happy having me around” (87). The issue of entitlement to a place has persisted until today, and Chamberlain’s feelings of hesitancy and doubt in his ability to call Canada his home is a direct result of this. Coming from an Asian background myself, I too, have encountered a few individuals that feel as though they have more of an entitlement to live here than I do; as if I do not necessarily belong. While encountering these types of self-entitled individuals is an inevitable and unfortunate aspect of Canada’s multiculturalism, Chamberlain makes direct references to the relationship between the settlers and the aboriginals, and how they’re dynamic contributes to one’s struggle to comfortably refer to a place as home.

“We have lost the ability to both surrender to a story and separate ourselves from it, to live in both grief-stricken reality and the grace of the imagination” (Chamberlain 124)

‘Them and Us’—this sort of mentality is prevalent in our everyday lives whether we recognize it or not. Chamberlain discloses the importance of recognizing and accepting, rather than trying to dissipate either side for he discloses, “Dividing the world up into Them and Us is inevitable. But choosing between is like choosing between reality and the imagination, or between being marooned on an island and drowning in the sea. Deadly, and ultimately a delusion” (239). The relationship between Them and Us is similar to that of reality and imagination, for both are best understood when they converge. Chamberlain argues, “the line between the strange and the familiar is so culturally determined” (140), and I couldn’t agree more. Our use of agency in deciding for ourselves between what is real and what is imaginative is hindered because we often believe in something, or perceive something a certain way, strictly because we are influenced to. We become so wrapped up in the arbitrariness of art and life that we neglect to question the supposed truths we are being fed; “we have become addicted to facts” (124). Now, especially, it has become increasingly difficult to freely exercise one’s agency without the threat of outside cultural influences clouding our judgment by means of validating and falsifying our personal beliefs. As Chamberlain notes, the main way to combat the threat of cultural influence and pre-determination is through belief. We must rid ourselves of society’s expectations and narrow set of rules that determine what is fact or fiction and worthy or worthless, in favor of our own beliefs for “this act of believing can provide the common ground across cultures that we long for” (224). Ultimately, I perceive partaking in ceremonies of belief as a communal attempt to find legitimacy in viewing Canada as our home.

The culturally determined and enforced necessity of things needing to be black and white is what hinders one’s ability to establish what a home is. I think this is what Chamberlain’s book focuses on: uncovering and sifting through the blurred lines that push the connection to a home further away. There doesn’t need to be a visible borderline between reality and imagination, belief and truth, Them and Us… all of these differences are better understood when fused together rather than strictly kept apart. If we learn to accept that not everything can or must be made black and white, that our experiences, understandings, and definitions can be blended, confusing, and imperfect, then perhaps figuring out this place called home would be made easier.

“The sad fact is, the history of settlement around the world is the history of displacing other people from their lands, of discounting their livelihoods and destroying their languages” (Chamberlain 78)

Chamberlain argues that the “different way” of looking at the history of many worldly issues is by recognizing that it is filled with the neglect and refusal of cultural differences. There is a history of disapproving individuals simply based on the fact that they may not share the same beliefs, languages, or behaviors that may be familiar to someone else; oftentimes, people of varying cultures are judged based on their malleability and cooperative willingness to assimilate. However, when a culture of people is seen as threatening cultural conventions, they are met with hostility, ridicule, and immense judgment. People are so quick to judge others based on their dissimilarities, finding flaws in what make different cultures unique; the history of many of our world’s conflicts is rooted in an adamant unwillingness to accept the unfamiliar. I think the difference between the former and the latter ways of looking at this is that displacing and discounting livelihoods is not the same as deeming one untrue, which is what the “different way” of looking at this suggests. While I think that both of these ways are more similar than not, the “different way” seems more personal and aware. While the former is ignorance and insensitivity, the latter is condescending and judgmental in that settlers are dismissing cultural beliefs as unbelievable and cultural behaviors as misbehaviors; as a result of this, groups like the aboriginals are wrongfully labeled as barbaric or abnormal.

The dominant consequence of these “two ways” is the loss of home. The inescapable commonality of both ways of understanding the history of settlement in Canada is that the aboriginals were robbed of their home. As Chamberlain comprehends, “we don’t want to get too close to something we fear so deeply” (79), which is a universal fear that moves beyond the conflict between the settlers and the aboriginals. The fear of homelessness is a persisting one within all of us, whether ignited or dormant. Settlement around the world is seeded in the fear of not having a place to stay, a place to call your own; the “gut-wrenching emptiness” (84) that consumes the homeless is one of the greatest burdens to bear and consequences to deal with.

Works Cited

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

Davis, Wade. “Dreams from endangered cultures.” TED. Feb. 2003. Lecture.

Morgan, Vanessa Sloan. “On Being Here to Stay: Treaties and Aboriginal Rights in Canada.” Intercontinental Cry. N.p., 26 Feb. 2015. Web. 19 Jan. 2016.

Hey everyone!

My name is Neia, I’m a 4th year arts student majoring in English Literature and minoring in Sociology. I’m from Richmond, BC and have lived in this city my whole life. Fun fact: I lived on campus for my first year and didn’t really enjoy myself as much as I could’ve because the person in the room next to mine would always blast loud house music at absurd hours (no hate to house music, I just enjoy sleeping is all). Sorry, as that sentence has perfectly shown, I’m pretty new to the whole blogging thing/ blogverse, so random comments may get interspersed throughout this introductory piece. Bear with me!

I spend a lot of my time in the Steveston area, partly because that’s where a lot of my friends live, and partly because I just absolutely love it there. Not sure if any of you are from that area, but I am obsessed with Timothy’s (ice-cream place). Espresso flake ice cream in a waffle cone… It’s all I eat. Not kidding. Oh, and since we’re on the topic of food, it’s worth noting that I am a big fan of pickles too.

While it may be a given since I am a lit major, I am really interested in writing and hope to get into a journalism program in the future. Aside from writing I enjoy reading, traveling (I love visiting New York in particular), binge-watching Netflix series (I am not kidding when I say that I am avid binge-watcher, currently taking suggestions**), and spending time with my family. I’m pretty big on spending time with my family; I have 3 brothers and I’m really close to all of them, along with my mom as well.

I’m excited for this course because I am interested in broadening my knowledge of Canadian authors and Canadian literature in general. I think it would be immensely beneficial to learn more about our country through the perspectives of fellow Canadians as well. I haven’t really done this whole online course thing, so I’m really excited to interact with all of you on here!

Okay, I guess that’s about it! Can’t wait to start learning with you guys!

– Neia

Sources:

Balao, Neia. “7 More Reasons Why Rey is the REAL Miss Universe” Buzzfeed. Buzz Feed, 11 Jan. 2016. Web. 12 Jan. 2016.

Bate, Elizabeth. “Which Show On Netflix Should You Binge-Watch Next?” Buzzfeed. Buzz Feed, 17 Jul. 2015. Web. 12 Jan. 2016.

Gay, Verne. “Best TV shows to stream online via Netflix, Hulu, more” Newsday. Newsday, 26 Dec. 2015. Web. 12 Jan. 2016.