image by: Gallo Images/Thinkstock
Robinson gives us one of those alternative explanations in his stories about how Coyote’s twin brother stole the “written document” and when he denied stealing the paper, he was “banished to a distant land across a large body of water” (9). What is your first response to this story? In context with our course theme of investigating intersections where story and literature meet, what do you make of this stolen piece of paper? This is an open-ended question and you should feel free to explore your first thoughts.
On the surface, the story of how Coyote’s twin brother stole the “written document” seems to resemble the dichotomous narratives so common in European/Christian stories, but I think there is an interweaving of holistic ideas, of “one-ness,” in it as well.
I was first struck by the binary imagery of the black and white twins which seems to echo the “this or that,” “us or them” dichotomy that we’ve been struggling against, though the nature of the brothers being twins introduces another dynamic. While their behaviour and their colours—Coyote as “goodness” and his brother as a “liar and a thief” (Robinson 11)—reflect a divisive stand-off in terms of imagery (they become geographically divided as well, when the younger brother is banished) the fact that they are twins implies they are also the same. In my first draft of this post, I used the phrase “two sides of the same coin,” which feels fitting but I’m also wary it might not be quite what I’m trying to say. I found it interesting that Coyote is given a name, while his twin is only referred to as “the younger twin” (9). Perhaps another instance of dichotomy. I wonder if there is a significance in not naming the younger brother.
Despite the separation of the twins, the story does connect them in that it concedes that both brothers, black and white, and their descendants originated from the same land. Thinking back to our previous discussions on the concept of home, I noticed that origin doesn’t equate with “homeland” (Robinson 10). This link and disconnect between original land and homeland seems similar to the twins’ dichotomous existence. A common thread buried beneath a mountain of differences? Something to that effect.
Then we come to the written document. I’d first like to mention that the story does not place literature as an evolutionary end point but as having existed in the beginning alongside oral culture, implying an equality in the two cultures. It’s interesting then that the laws Coyote and the king create are written down rather than distributed orally. It does reflect the greater importance placed upon written documents in law today. The written document is seemingly dangerous, or “bad,” since the twins are first warned not to touch it, and then it is stolen away by the twin who represents the “bad.” Furthermore, the younger twin’s descendants, who are culturally literary return, in a blaze of violence. Yet the contents of the document were to be revealed upon the younger twin’s return to the land. Was literary and oral culture meant to coexist? What are the contents?
“Another of Harry’s acquaintances, Edward Bent, had gained access to the book. Having attended residential school, he could read English. But he died before he could reveal its contents to his colleagues.” (Robinson 10)
This may be a bit of a tangent, but I had the feeling this passage implies that the written form is more restrictive than oral culture. The skill to read and access to the document are gatekeepers to the content and knowledge of the document. The collaboration of the king and Coyote is a movement towards cooperation and away from divisiveness, but if there is a rejection of binaries and a holistic narrative of sorts, I feel as though I’m being made to work very hard to find it!
In this course, I often struggle with keeping my Christian framework out of my readings, and this story was no different. I couldn’t help but find parallels in this story and the story of Eve and Original Sin. Just as Eve takes a bite of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil that she was warned against, the younger twin steals the “paper…he had been warned not to touch” (Robinson 9). Subsequently, the younger twin is banished from the land he was born in, as Eve is banished from the Garden of Eden. Even the descendants of the younger twin killing the descendants of the older twin automatically triggered my mind into seeing a parallel to Cain committing fratricide. This difficulty of reading with a blank slate might be why I obviously stumbled rather than walked through my thoughts on this story, but I suppose I can only keep struggling.
References:
Message in a bottle in water. Digital image. Times Live. Times Live, 08 Apr. 2014. Web. 29 June 2014.
Robinson, Harry. Living by Stories: a Journey of Landscape and Memory. Compiled and edited by Wendy Wickwire. Vancouver: Talon Books2005. (1-30)