Write a blog that hyper-links your research on the characters in GGRW according to the pages assigned to you. Be sure to make use of Jane Flick’s reference guide on your reading list.

———————————————————————————————-

I was assigned pages 325-333. In the Harper Perennial edition these pages are 390-400. I seek to investigate all the allusions, and investigate deeper into what they could mean.

——————————————————————————————-

“There are no truths, Coyote”, I says. “Only stories.” (391)

-Connected to Thomas King’s idea that stories are created by people and cultures, and are altered. It furthers the idea that what we think of as truth may be irrelevant in the future, like the ‘stories’ of the past (the Earth being flat, or being the center of the universe).

“You remember that big hole and Young Man Walking On Water?” (391)

-The big hole may refer to a possible state of the universe before the Big Bang. Related to the scientific rendition of their creation story. The Young Man is Jesus, but King chooses not to name him. I wonder if it’s because King thinks the tales of Christ walking on water are popular enough that the act alone suffices as a reference? If so, this would be the same matter-of-fact style he used to discuss Genesis within The Truth About Stories.

Glimmerglass (391) is a lake in James Fenimore Cooper’s The Deer Slayer. This novel is the last in a series (Leatherstocking Tales). The main character in these novels is Nathaniel Bumppo, a child to white parents brought up by Indians. He learns how to use weapons, and hunts to survive. Bumppo is referenced as Nasty Bumppo (King, 392, 395). Perhaps King named him Nasty because he promotes racial stereotypes? Much like he does in GGRW(392-393), Nathaniel believes that the races should stick to their inborn “gifts”. This idea promotes stereotypes, and in The Deerslayer it is used as justification to prevent European settlers from scalping others (he claims it to be a Native gift). The character was nicknamed “Hawkeye” (the nickname he gives Old Woman, 395).

“Is that you, Chingachgook says a voice. Is that you, my Indian friend?” (392)

-Chingachgook is Nathaniel Bumppo’s Mohican companion. Nathaniel Bumppo like many other characters (Peterson, Dr. Joe Hovaugh. etc.) is blinded by racism: he doesn’t realize that Old Woman is not his companion, and when she identifies herself he says “I can tell an Indian when I see one. Chingachgook is an Indian. You’re an Indian. Case closed” (392).

-Natty Bumppo (392, 393), and Chingachgook (395) hiding behind trees references the cliché of Indians appearing behind the stealth cover of forest foliage.

“Now I’m going to have to kill something else”…”then I should go ahead and shoot you and get it out of my system” (394).

-This line contrasts Nathaniel’s nature: he only kills to survive. King satirizes his character by implementing beliefs of colonial Americans/cowboys who are seen as being more aggressive, and trigger-happy.

“We have to get you a better killer name than that. How about Daniel Boone?” “How about Harry Truman?”….”Arthur Watkins?” (395).

-Daniel Boone was an American frontiersman, and served in the militia during the Revolutionary War. He fought in Kentucky against the Indians, and repelled an attack by the Indians on Boonesborough, Kentucky (Wikipedia).

-Harry Truman was the president of the United States during World War 2, he succeeded Roosevelt. He is listed as a killer because he served in World War 1 as an artillery-man, and because in WWII he allowed the use of the Atomic Bombs against the Japanese in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

-Arthur Watkins was senator of Utah in 1947-1959, he was a lead figure in trying to terminate recognition of Native tribes. He was a member of the Senate Interior Committee on Indian Affairs, and pushed the Indian Termination policy (an act that sought to assimilate Native Americans into mainstream culture).

“Hawkeye?” Says Coyote. “Is that a good Indian name?”

“No,” I says. “It sounds like a name for a white person who wants to be an Indian.” (395).

-These lines mock the nickname given to Natty, and patronize his heritage (born to white parents, raised by Indians). This joke is furthered when the guards arrest Old Woman when she says she is Hawkeye: the guards arrest her for “trying to impersonate a white man” (396).

“Maybe there was more than one gunman”, says Coyote…”Maybe,” says Coyote, “It was a conspiracy”

-This line references the Kennedy conspiracy theories surrounding the trajectory of “the magic bullet”.

Names? says those soldiers, & they all take out a book from their packs (396).

-The book is The Deerslayer, this is the reason why only Chingachgook’s and Hawkeye’s name are listed.

—————————————————————————————

*I understand Wikipedia isn’t a proper source, but I used it and felt that it should be included for citation purposes.*

Works Cited:

“Arthur Watkins.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation. Web. 10 July 2015.

“Chingachgook.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation. Web. 10 July 2015.

“Daniel Boone.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation. Web. 10 July 2015.

Flick, Jane. “Reading Notes for Thomas King’s Green Grass, Running Water.” Canadian Literature 161/162 (1999). Web. June 24, 2015.

“Harry Truman.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation. Web. 10 July 2015.

“Indian Termination Policy.” The American Indian Movement. Web. 10 July 2015.

“Indian termination policy.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation. Web. 10 July 2015.

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

“Natty Bumppo.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation. Web. 10 July 2015.

“The Deerslayer.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation. Web. 10 July 2015.

6) Find three examples of names that need to be spoken aloud in order to catch the allusion. Discuss the examples as well as the reading technique that requires you to read aloud in order to make connections. Why does King want us to read aloud?

I was drawn to this question due to the tied-in nature of popular figures in culture and their combination with Native story-telling methods. After reading Harry Robinson’s story aloud for a previous question I had the mindset that internalized reading would not be sufficient to grasp the content of this novel. Based on Thomas King’s motivation from Robinson’s oral story method I can see similar aspects for why the stories should be spoken. Green Grass Running Water reads at times like a traditional Western book, it appeases to a silent audience. The difference lies in the interruptions of stories via dialogue, and the inability for stories to reach an end (they combine into the next). King wants us to read aloud because it creates a dialogue; whether or not someone is present to participate as an audience member, the person reading must simultaneously think about what’s being said. In a similar way to Robinson’s style of story-telling, the words are unimportant (the derived message is what is significant). Reading something out loud also makes us more connected to the material; we become a reader, and a presenter.

The first name to strike me was included in Chester Blanca’s report (Blanca, 50): Dr. Joseph Hovaugh (King, 16). I hadn’t understood the nature of the allusion at first, trying to evaluate the last name separately from the first (Joe). Finding out that it was related to Jehovah made me cringe at how oblivious I was (Hoe-voh was how I pronounced it aloud, Joe Hoe-voh). After realizing the name clearly referenced the Israeli god, I connected the employees with biblical figures as well: Mary (Jesus’ mother) and John (one of Jesus’ disciples) work for Dr. Hovaugh (King, 17). Their employment makes sense because from a biblical standpoint Mary served as the vessel for a form of God, and John served as an apostle to learn from Jesus and carry on his teachings.

While not as entertaining from a phonetically comprehended standpoint, Polly Johnson and Sue Moodie (King, 156) were interesting to note because I knew of Pauline Johnson through her poetry (which I read in high school), and Susanna Moodie, whose book we read recently. These didn’t require any special vocalization. Another humorous allusion is that of N. Bates (desk clerk of Blossom Lodge) [King, 153], which I instantly recognized and cringed that he would be assigned that job. His name is related to Norman Bates, the desk clerk/owner of the Bates Motel in the movie Psycho (spoiler: he’s a murderer).

Another interesting name mentioned was Sally Jo Weyha (King, 182), which I knew from “Night at the Museum” (unfortunately). The name alludes to Sacajawea, a Shoshone guide for Lewis and Clark’s expedition in Missouri (served more as a translator). This allusion is noted when the name is read quickly, but requires prior knowledge of her name. Louis, Ray, and Al (Louis Riel) [334] just required knowledge of his name, and was identifiable when read quickly.

—————————————————————————————-

Works cited:

Chester Blanca. “Green Grass Running Water: Theorizing the World of the Novel.” Canadian Literature 161-162. (1999). Web. April 04/2013.

Flick, Jane. “Reading Notes for Thomas King’s Green Grass Running Water.” Canadian Literature 161-162. (1999). Web. 3 July 2015.

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

Night at the Museum. Dir. Shawn Levy. Perf. Ben Stiller and Robin Williams. 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment, 2007. DVD.

MULTICULTURALISM POLICY OF CANADA

Marginal note:Multiculturalism policy

• 3. (1) It is hereby declared to be the policy of the Government of Canada to

  • (a) recognize and promote the understanding that multiculturalism reflects the cultural and racial diversity of Canadian society and acknowledges the freedom of all members of Canadian society to preserve, enhance and share their cultural heritage;

  • (b) recognize and promote the understanding that multiculturalism is a fundamental characteristic of the Canadian heritage and identity and that it provides an invaluable resource in the shaping of Canada’s future;

  • (c) promote the full and equitable participation of individuals and communities of all origins in the continuing evolution and shaping of all aspects of Canadian society and assist them in the elimination of any barrier to that participation;

  • (d) recognize the existence of communities whose members share a common origin and their historic contribution to Canadian society, and enhance their development;

  • (e) ensure that all individuals receive equal treatment and equal protection under the law, while respecting and valuing their diversity;

  • (f) encourage and assist the social, cultural, economic and political institutions of Canada to be both respectful and inclusive of Canada’s multicultural character;

  • (g) promote the understanding and creativity that arise from the interaction between individuals and communities of different origins;

  • (h) foster the recognition and appreciation of the diverse cultures of Canadian society and promote the reflection and the evolving expressions of those cultures;

  • (i) preserve and enhance the use of languages other than English and French, while strengthening the status and use of the official languages of Canada; and

  • (j) advance multiculturalism throughout Canada in harmony with the national commitment to the official languages of Canada.

• Marginal note:Federal institutions

  (2) It is further declared to be the policy of the Government of Canada that all federal institutions shall

  • (a) ensure that Canadians of all origins have an equal opportunity to obtain employment and advancement in those institutions;

  • (b) promote policies, programs and practices that enhance the ability of individuals and communities of all origins to contribute to the continuing evolution of Canada;

  • (c) promote policies, programs and practices that enhance the understanding of and respect for the diversity of the members of Canadian society;

  • (d) collect statistical data in order to enable the development of policies, programs and practices that are sensitive and responsive to the multicultural reality of Canada;

  • (e) make use, as appropriate, of the language skills and cultural understanding of individuals of all origins; and

  • (f) generally, carry on their activities in a manner that is sensitive and responsive to the multicultural reality of Canada.

—————————————————————————————

Question 2) 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.

The Multiculturalism Act of 1988 was an attempt by the Canadian government to protect the heterogeneous/non-European members of the population. It was a response to the growing immigration in Canada during the 70s, and by my interpretation it seems like reconciliation for the previous mistakes made (Indian Act, Chinese Head Tax). The Multiculturalism Act recognized Canada as a multicultural nation, a nation in which no one culture held superiority over another. It sought to unite members of different cultures in understanding one another, and through those means to create an integrated Canadian identity.

This law brought funding to, and encouraged the celebration of, many cultures’ festivals and holidays in Canada (it has given rise to the celebration of Chinese New Year, St. Patrick’s Day, and Vaisakhi Day). The law also reinforced legal equality and treatment of members of every culture and race, so that no one would be discriminated against either by the law or by other citizens on grounds of culture. The Act demands that everyone be granted equal opportunities in terms of employment and career advancement, and legally prevented citizens from being denied these rights on basis of culture. It served to promote the use of multiple languages and not assimilate the population into speaking English or French, while still maintaining English and French as the official languages. It also allocated funding towards schools and institutions in which languages other than English and French could be practiced. The Multiculturalism Act gave citizens the freedom to practice their religions, and prevented the discrimination of individuals based on religious grounds. It also served to recognize the rights of the Aboriginal peoples and grant them freedom to heritage practices and fair treatment.

The Multiculturalism Act is in direct disagreement with Coleman’s white civility, and was Trudeau’s attempt to counter ethnocentric attitudes. This law desired to make everyone equal as a Canadian, and sought to oppose the nationalism that plagued Canada’s past. The point was to promote every ethnicity and culture and put an end to this idealization of the white, European national. The goal was to avoid a distinctly Canadian culture, and instead have society consist of several independent cultures that existed in harmony and unison.

An unfortunate by product of the act is that focusing on the promotion and preservation of culture has indirectly led to the segregation of people of the same culture. This segregation is not caused by the state, but because of populations that tend to flock to different areas, and associate mainly with those of their own culture. Even today certain cities and districts are overrepresented, and portrayed based on certain cultures/races that inhabit them. On a smaller scale those of the same culture would appear to group with one another, and in some cases avoid close association with members of out-groups. This is not in direct relation to the Multiculturalism Act, but instead a consequence of independent groups. An effect of this is that certain groups maintain ethnocentric and culturally ignorant attitudes towards others, and it fosters tolerance instead of acceptance.

——————————————————————————–

Works cited:

Canadian Multiculturalism Act

1] In his article, “Godzilla vs. Post-Colonial,” King discusses Robinson’s collection of stories. King explains that while the stories are written in English, “the patterns, metaphors, structures as well as the themes and characters come primarily from oral literature.” More than this, Robinson, he says “develops what we might want to call an oral syntax that defeats reader’s efforts to read the stories silently to themselves, a syntax that encourages readers to read aloud” and in so doing, “recreating at once the storyteller and the performance” (186). Read “Coyote Makes a Deal with King of England”, in Living by Stories. Read it silently, read it out loud, read it to a friend, and have a friend read it to you. See if you can discover how this oral syntax works to shape meaning for the story by shaping your reading and listening of the story. Write a blog about this reading/listening experience that provides references to the story.

—————————————————————————————

From the beginning of Robinson’s story the syntactic structuring caused my first reaction to be to read it aloud. The word choice, and the flow of the sentences made it feel more like a conversation or personal story than a textual source.

My first read through was done silently. It was a definite struggle because the story wasn’t linear, it was conversational, and Harry Robinson pauses now and again to ask questions: “do you know what the angel was? Do you know?” (Robinson 66). Points were returned to and repeated because of its oral nature, and the trouble involved with recalling what one has already said and remaining true to the story. Certain aspects and details were left out that I expect in text-based stories: characterizations, surroundings, internal thoughts/monologues. The pace was also incredibly quick at some points, it felt like the narration was excited, as if the words were more of a trail than the sight to behold. There were also moments for interpretation within the book, at one point Harry says “So she finish ’em-a book, good & thick. Thicker than this & bigger” (Robinson 78). There were points where Harry loses track of his train of thought “That’s all the name I know. I don’t know his second name. Or, his first name. Maybe his first name, maybe TOH-mah, maybe that was his second name”. This train of thought was difficult to follow silently because it’s a pattern of speech, it’s a confusing process to make sense of silently. The personal references to age, and events “I seen him in Penticton, I seen him twice” generally challenge story perspectives because the narrator is a relatable person, and consistently disconnects from the tenses of the original story. The perspective also alternated from Harry Robinson’s point of view and thoughts on what things occurred and what he saw, to a third-party witnessing the events of Coyote, TOH-ma, the white man, and the king.

My second read through was done out loud. The story was more fluent because it uses informal spoken language. The imagery and metaphors were also much clearer, and my friend and I could picture the events that were unfolding. Speaking this story brought out deeper meaning within the conversations, and context of the characters. I am sure it was my perspective coloring the voices and intention of the character’s words, for instance “Well, what did my children do for your children?” (Robinson 70), almost felt hostile. This felt like the King of England was a child trying to hide his guilt, in this case the guilt was over colonial settlers. In my telling, Coyote was a reasonable, peaceful person who was seeking sympathy and cooperation with the King of England. It did actually feel like I was creating a performance with the story, because no two sentences sounded the same. Meaning and emotion were altered with each sentence because of the words used.

The third reading was done by my friend, and the experience as a listener was similar. The text came alive, and the performance aspects were more visible in seeing someone else recreate the tale. The fluidity was still greater than the silent reading, although I have to admit we both stumbled about Harry Robinson’s grammar and syntax.

In conclusion the oral syntax played a large role in my understanding of the story.

*About “Black & White”/The Indian Act*

———————————————————————————————–

Works cited:

“Indian Act (R.S.C., 1985, C. I-5).” Legislative Services Branch. Web. 20 June 2015.

Joseph, Bob. “21 Things You May Not Have Known About The Indian Act.” Working Effectively With Aboriginal Peoples. 2 June 2015. Web. 20 June 2015.

Robinson, Harry. “Coyote Makes a Deal With the King of England.” Living By Stories: A Journey of Landscape and Memory. Ed. Wendy Wickwire. Vancouver: Talonbooks, 2005. 288. Print.

Robinson, Martin. “Let’s Stop Feeling Guilty about the Empire Because the World Has Moved On, Says Hague.” Mail Online. Associated Newspapers, 31 Aug. 2012. Web. 20 June 2015.

Prompt:

Question 1)

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?

——————————————————————————————

Thomas King uses distinctly separate styles of telling The Bible’s “Genesis”, and the First Nation’s creation story about Charm, “The Earth Diver” because it reflects a Western audiences’ perspective. Stories of identity and stories that explain how things came to be are heavily ingrained in people’s concepts of the world. Also religion, for a large portion of the population, is intertwined with how people define themselves and their environment. For these reasons, Thomas King wanted to illustrate the dichotomy to point out how society’s norms affect our thinking, in that one creation story can be recited as fact and the other as fiction.

People are more familiar with the story of Genesis, and due to the popularity it is seen as sacred. In comparison, stories like “The Earth Diver” are told less and do not hold a similar significance, and thus aren’t commonly believed. King compares these two stories to demonstrate that these dichotomous patterns discerning stories are still common, and that many of us still commit the act of separating stories into opposing categories. It also serves to demonstrate how rooted the need to organize information into categories is. Many people don’t realize that we filter opposing stories into truth and non-truths (not lies, but also not fables). By comparing two stories of creation that wouldn’t normally be evaluated together, King allows the reader to think critically about why they would be considered more different than similar.

I imagine people would humor the tale of Charm and her twins, just as they would mock myths of gods and goddesses from Greece and Nordic countries. These same people would debate endlessly that the story of Adam and Eve is historical and actually occurred eons ago, yet both the myths and the tales of Eden cannot be proven. If these stories are so similar why are people so biased to believe one and dispose of the other? I reason that the point King is trying to allude to is that the stories we are raised hearing are the stories we recite and believe later in life. Claiming that “Genesis” is more authentic or true than any other story is ethnocentrism; it would be using cultural values that are familiar/typical to evaluate one that is foreign.

Another point of comparison for why this particular dichotomy is refuted is due to method of storytelling. Much like the differences between a potlatch and Western courts, universities, theatre, and churches, the key is that “Genesis” is written while “The Earth Diver” is spoken. The written word has traveled further due to the ease of distribution/recital, the translatability, and perfect retention of the story (although how stable The Bible’s translation over the centuries has been is debatable).

Comparing “Genesis” and “The Earth Diver” is an ironic demonstration by King of this binary thinking he urges us to avoid. We can’t fix a problem we can’t recognize, and by pointing to a core belief amongst many Western citizens King is providing recognition. He is pointing out an example of what it is that requires change.

———————————————————————————————-

Works cited:

“Creation Stories.” History World. History World, n.d. Web. 13 June 2015.

Paul, Annie. “Your Brain on Fiction.” The New York Times. The New York Times, 17 Mar. 2012. Web. 13 June 2015.

Read at least 3 students blog short stories about ‘home’ and make a list of the common shared assumptions, values and stories that you find. Post this list on your blog with some commentary about what you discovered.

——————————————————————————————————————————-

The concept of “Home” is one that varies markedly between different people. It was touching and enlightening to see how open people were with their past in the stories they told. I’m grateful that so many classmates shared these intimate details that were vastly similar and dissimilar simultaneously. I’m quite nervous in making generalizations based on my perception because these stories are so vulnerable, and dear to those who tell them.

Many of the ideas connected to home are linked to strong memories, composed around feelings of belonging or safety. Tales of childhood experiences, and interactions with others, or memories of traveling. Some involve past locations, beaches, train stations, and schools in this case. Many stories involved family members and what family meant to those individuals, and this desire or longing to strive for this ‘ideal’ family. It appeared that our ideas of what home and family means are construed by the culture we live in, it colors our expectations and in some cases corrodes reality (understandably so in unfortunate cases). The role and importance of family in one’s concept of home, and who was considered to be family seemed to be quite diverse. Family appeared to be a malleable system wherein members can flow in and out of its nucleus, those who are harmful phase out, and those who weren’t originally members who become important phase in.

|”This path toward figuring out my ‘home’ is one that I am on. It is a never ending, twisting, turning, a constantly evolving journey.” – Hannah Vaartnou|

A connection with one’s home is deeply rooted in identity, where you’re from paints the perception of who you are. When we hear where someone calls home we grab traits from the schema we have about the area and apply what we can to said person (many are stereotypes). Sometimes, lacking a sense of home is experienced as a lack of identity.

|”The nation’s body jellied and primped in the language of neoliberalism, ecological crisis, and silenced histories.” – Laura Avery|

Some connect the idea of home with a geographical location, learning from its past and applying it to their life practices. Knowing the history of a nation is critical to being culturally respectful, and mindful of why norms exist today.

|”Why cling to the steel through-line of story when perhaps ‘home’ is more like an estuary?” – Laura Avery|

|”Being away from home, the idea of home became more abstract to me.” – Evan Franey|

                In many cases, home is seen as a fluid and dynamic concept. It can change depending on where you move to or live, or based on who is important to you and your sense of identity. Despite a comparatively uneventful upbringing I had trouble thinking what home meant to me, it can never be one thing. As sad as it is to think about, the people and places in my life are as temporary as I am. Distance from someone, moving from a beloved house, or loss of a loved one may cause ripples in one’s sense of home, but it somehow withstands. This means that in some instances, home is greater than the sum of its parts.

Thank you again to everyone, and especially Evan, Laura & Hannah for sharing your stories.

-Landon .T

——————————————————————————————————————————————

Works cited:

Avery, Laura. “2.1.” English 470A. ENGL 470A: Querying narratives of ‘home’ and of national identity. 05 June 2015. Web. 07 June 2015.

Franey, Evan. “Home in Transition.” English 470A. Liminal Space Between Story and Literature. 05 June 2015. Web. 07 June 2015.

Vaartnou, Hannah. “Home is in Your Own Heart.” Hannah and Canada. 05 June 2015. Web. 07 June 2015.

Write a short story (600 – 1000 words) that describes your sense of home; write about the values and the stories that you use to connect yourself to, and to identify your sense of home.

—————————————————————————————————————————————-

It’s a dark morning, the sunroof is covered in snow and the light of day can’t break through the clouds. Today is Christmas morning, and I am ten. I run from my bedroom and join my sister in waking up my parents. My dad makes himself tea and grabs the newspaper. My family spends the first few minutes of their morning going about routines. I sit and wait patiently by the tree, more excited about what my family members have given each other than what I will receive. I’m joined by them shortly after, and we start handing gifts to each other. My mom selects the order in which gifts are opened, making sure nobody feels left out. She announces who each gift is for, and who it’s from. We’re always surprised with each gift opened, and show outward expressions of gratitude. After that my mom and sister start making breakfast; it’s always eggs, toast, hash browns and bacon. When that’s over we spent the day watching T.V., going for walks, and just spending time together.

It’s now July, and I am sixteen years-old. My family is waiting in the hot Florida sun at Port Canaveral. We’re waiting for the green light to board the cruise ship. It will be touring around the Caribbean, stopping seven times along the way. My sister and I are joking with each other to pass the time. My parents are patiently waiting, and double-checking that all our luggage is present, and that all the necessary travel documents are accounted for. Eventually we’re allowed on the ship. My sister and I eagerly want to begin exploring every inch, so as to not miss a single thing. My dad reminds us that we should visit our rooms first, then check the dining room so we know where to go. My family travels as a unit, it’s a routine we started since I was born. After traveling the ship for a while we group up for the muster drill (in case the ship begins to capsize). Over the course of the cruise we wander around the ports, dine, and go to various events as a family. When we get to the airport I cannot  wait to be home, somewhere everything makes sense, and things are predictable. A place where the norms don’t feel foreign, and there aren’t flags everywhere reminding me that I’m not home (*cough* America *cough*).

Despite the fact that now my sister has moved away from home, and created one for herself. Even though I spend more time doing homework, and going to school, than I do with my mom and dad. I still feel at home in British Columbia, surrounded by family. The mountains provide me with a sense of security. The familiar streets and bus routes make me feel that I’m not lost. The frequent mixture of cloud-high buildings, and parks with lush trees combining nature and industry gives me a sense of connection to the environment. Being in the house where I’ve lived for all my years, though they may be few, it creates a history for me. Home for me is familiar, though things may change and people with them, I can count on certain things to be constant. My house to remain the same (for now), and my family to stick together despite geographical distance. My home will certainly change in the future, as my life changes, and environments shift. Home for me is, and will be, anywhere I feel welcome, or where I feel like I belong. Anywhere my goals and aspirations lead me, though it will take time to settle in, will become my home. My concept of home isn’t static, it changes with time, and as families grow and shrink. It’s not a place, but a feeling of being loved and loving those who you’re with; not wanting to be anywhere else.

——————————————————————————————————————————————————-

Works cited:

Beck, Julie. “The Psychology of Home: Why Where You Live Means So Much.” The Atlantic. Atlantic Media Company, 30 Dec. 2011. Web. 5 June 2015.

“Greenest City 2020 Action Plan.” Greenest City 2020 Action Plan. Web. 5 June 2015.

Your task is to take the story about how evil comes into the world, from King’s text, and change it to tell it. First, learn the story by heart, and then tell the story to your friends and family. When you are finished, post a blog with your version of the story and some commentary on what you discovered. If you want, you can post a video of you telling the story, in place of text.

———————————————————————————————————-

Everything is a story, from the conversations we have, to the news, to textbooks we read. Stories vary in believability, form, and structure. My story may look different from those you would expect. With that being said, I have a great story to tell you.

The creation of evil doesn’t begin with a time immemorial, it starts with the development of human consciousness. Everything that ever lives is faced with a continuous struggle, the need to survive. Animals consume each other and sacrifice their young to avoid being killed. In some species, the stronger siblings kill their younger relatives to reduce the amount of food required to sustain the family’s life. In primates, when one chimp defeats another in combat and becomes the alpha male it is not unusual for him to hunt down the offspring of the previous alpha and kill them. These activities occurred for millions upon million of years before morality became a question. Until a rogue branch of animals descended from primate lineage developed brains of sufficient mass that were capable of reasoning about their own actions, and the intent of others.

This is called Theory of Mind, the ability to see oneself as a distinct and separate being from everyone else, and being able to adopt the perspective of another creature or person. Theory of Mind doesn’t develop in humans until at least the age of three, from what we understand, and until then people are as self-serving as their animal brethren are.

When humans developed this ability to see through another person’s eyes, they simultaneously won and lost in every competition. They understood that fighting over territory meant that one group would attain greater odds for survival, and the other would have to spend time searching for somewhere to live, risking their lives at the same time. They understood that killing someone held the same loss of life, and potential, and held the same meaning as being killed them self. With this understanding came the pull for morality, what is justified and okay, and what is wrong? As our ancestors began living in groups they evaluated the risks that other members posed to them, and mulled over the best outcome for themselves. In order to succeed as a group, rules would need to be created and their reasoning would have to be justified. These rules became integrated into every group because they enabled cooperation, growth, and survival. Those who chose not to live by these rules were perceived as a threat and were exiled from the community and forced to survive on their own, most did not survive. As time passed and societies that followed these rules prospered, they became ingrained within the developing culture, and their creation was questioned less and less. The rules became morals, and they defined what was deemed decent. “Why must we follow the rules?”, the people started to ask. I imagine earlier people would have said, “because, that’s the way they’ve always been”. The more keen individuals began creating explanations for how things came to be, in order to satiate these questions, and avoid people from trying to destroy these rules, this comfortable living. The explanations began with the divine (they were created by gods), then reinvented within the Old Testament (the ten commandments were the “new” moral code), then secularized (laws of the government). Any act that conflicted with these established morals was considered evil. In truth, “there is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so”.

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.

——————————————————————————————–

The people I had told this story to questioned its viability as a story. It didn’t begin like stories, it wasn’t narrated like prototypical stories, and it seemed more like an amalgamation of information. I think that we have ideas about what stories should be, but don’t realize that everything we communicate conveys a story.

Many disliked it, and thought the differentiation of good and evil were inborn.

Works cited:

Soraya, Lynne. “Empathy, Mindblindness, and Theory of Mind”. Psychology Today. Psychology Today., 19 May. 2008. Web. 29 May 2015.

Castello, Molly. “On the Origins of Morality”. Psychology Today. Psychology Today., 26 Sep. 2013. Web. 29 May 2015.

Question 7) At the beginning of this lesson I pointed to the idea that technological advances in communication tools have been part of the impetus to rethink the divisive and hierarchical categorizing of literature and orality, and suggested that this is happening for a number of reasons.  I’d like you to consider two aspects of digital literature: 1) social media tools that enable widespread publication, without publishers, and 2) Hypertext, which is the name for the text that lies beyond the text you are reading, until you click. How do you think these capabilities might be impacting literature and story?

*This is based on anecdotal evidence (newspapers) & opinion*

Social media tools have enabled an unprecedented growth in both global accessibility to information and in popularity in creating blogs, tweets, status updates to share personal stories. Social media has given rise to a greater freedom in story-telling, because it provides everyone with an opportunity to provide their own narrative within the world. Many websites also allow the listeners to provide feedback, comments, and ask questions as if they were present at the telling of the story. This can be seen as a merge between the divide of orality’s interaction, and literature’s static context. The popularity of video logs, blogs and other forms of social media have given people who normally wouldn’t want to share their lives and perspective a medium to promote sharing. The accessibility of social media allows any person to search and read stories of various topics with free availability, and ease. These tools have created new genres of narrative, and have created types of stories (oral and text) that would be unknown. Any country with access to internet can upload information that is globally accessible so there is no longer a need for people to seek out publishers to print their works. Social media has provided multiple perspectives on issues that go beyond general media and novels, it illuminated problems that most people would not have simply because they don’t exist in the same circumstance.

Both an advantage and disadvantage of social media over published works is that social media is not subject to the censorship that published material are. The text is not scrutinized for being inappropriate, it doesn’t have to be “dumbed down” or altered to please certain audiences. This freedom from censorship allows the shared literature to be thought-provoking, and to elicit emotions. Not to say this is absent from published works, but this uncensored literature can speak about uncomfortable topics and taboos without being hidden from the public. In some cases this freedom from censorship and general opinion is no longer true. Employers check employee social media profiles and hold them to what is said.

The downside to social media’s freedom is that there is no fact-checking of what is being said, so anyone can spread false information. Fortunately the rate of misinformed and well informed eventually equalize, and the checking of facts and sources is becoming more common. In some cases, correcting misinformation can lead to the false facts to become more deeply ingrained and believed. Another downside is that many people choose to spend their time online instead of reading books, which has led to a decrease in their linguistic capabilities.

Hypertext allows for the author to color the perception of the reader before they analyze the text. This alteration occurs through the words chosen to represent the text it links to, and the words that precede it. Hypertext has also provided a quick access to additional information about the story or literature that it’s a part of, giving the reader access to a broader depth of detail that the author could not or chose not to provide. From a general perspective hyptertexting has impacted stories and literature positively by expanding the educational capacities of the text they’re included in, and by providing the avid reader more paths that can lead to further investigation. An unfortunate side effect of hypertext is that the author can also provide misleading websites as citations for detail, or expand the horizons of false information.

What do you think? Is social media a more accessible tool providing a global voice to those who couldn’t previously share their stories? Or are its disadvantages greater than the service it provides?

Works cited:

Elizabeth, Jane. “New fact-checking research: False information floods Twitter; many Americans confidently wrong”. American Press. American Press institute., 29 Apr, 2015. Web. 22 May, 2015. http://www.americanpressinstitute.org/fact-checking-project/new-fact-checking-research-false-information-floods-twitter-many-americans-confidently-wrong/

Kelley, Susanna. “Texting, Twitter, contributing to students’ poor grammar skill, profs say”. The Globe and Mail. The Globe and Mail Inc., 1 Feb 2010. Web. 22 May 2015. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/technology/texting-twitter-contributing-to-students-poor-grammar-skills-profs-say/article4304193/

Paterson, Erika. ENGL 470A: Canadian Studies: Canadian Literary Genres. University of British Columbia, 2015. Web. 12 May 2015.

Snowden, Collette. “Social media sackings risk stifling journalistic expression”. The Conversation.The Conversation. 21 May, 2015. Web. 22 May, 2015. http://theconversation.com/social-media-sackings-risk-stifling-journalistic-expression-41824

Hello and welcome readers,

My name is Landon Tang, and I am a 4th year Psychology major.  This course is one of my final (hopefully) credits at UBC before I finish with a BA.  My focus in Psychology is on the effects of social perspectives and culture on cognitions/thoughts of individuals.

This blog is a part of the English 470A Canadian Literary Genres course.  This course is an exploration into story-telling: the interactions between the First Nations people and the European settlers, and the gradual movement towards what we now consider Canadian culture. There is a critical thinking focus on what stories are being told, which ones we choose to believe and listen to, and how these stories impact our views.

I expect that this course will provide me with important and relevant source material that I can use to form an understanding of how Canadian views have shifted. By reading the novels, and the blogs that other students provide I will be able to compare and contrast current opinions and ones from the past. Utilizing my understanding of Human Psychology I will attempt to analyze the material I read, and combine it to create a semi-linear ‘picture’ of alterations in cultural consciousness. Being that Canada is a multicultural, heterogeneous nation, whose population heavily relies upon immigration to grow, it will be fascinating to understand how other people view this country (especially those who were most affected by colonization). I hope that by the end of English 470 that I will be able to answer three questions: 1) What does it mean to be Canadian? 2) What is Canadian culture? 3) How did we come to develop this idea of Canadian culture, and what struggles were faced in its development?

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2015/05/06/bil-c-51-anti-terrorism-passes-vote_n_7227520.html

This article is a part of the C-51 bill following. It outlines a set of controversial security laws that will impact our freedoms as Canadian citizens as a trade off for national security. It redefines the amount of authority that agencies that previously only gathered information will now have, and allows them to decide what counts as a threat to national security. This bill will alter the course of Canada and its citizens but it’s too early to know how.  It has the potential to be passed within the year, and may not be the first of its kind.

I look forward to your replies,

Landon Tang

Works cited:

Buchot, Emmanuel. Canada Climatic Map. 2008. Photographic book. Web. 12 May. 2015.

Lum, Zi-Ann. “Controversial Anti-Terror Bill Passes House With Liberals’ Help.” The Huffington Post. HuffingtonPost.com, 6 May 2015. Web. 12 May 2015.

Paterson, Erika. ENGL 470A: Canadian Studies: Canadian Literary Genres. University of British Columbia, 2015. Web. 12 May 2015.