As is the case throughout much of GGRW, my section (pages 270-286) explored a variety of different characters and story-lines, and in such, a variety of allusions are involved.

Religion/Christianity

The first allusion is religious in nature, and involves Thought Woman and her conversation with A.A. Gabriel. As Flick alludes to, this conversation refers to a section of the New Testament, involving Archangel (A.A.) Gabriel and the Virgin Mary (Thought Woman). The allusion begins with A.A. Gabriel, who refers to himself as ‘Heavenly Host’, and his renaming of Thought Woman as Mary. Flick suggests Gabriel’s ignorance of Thought Woman’s Indian name refers to the re-naming of First Nations people, and the extent to which Christianity was used to facilitate First Nations assimilation.

The religious metaphor continues with the singing of A.A. Gabriel’s card. When Coyote first hears the song (Hosanna da), he incorrectly identifies it as “Hosanna in the Highest”, a passage from the Bible (Mark 11:10). The narrator corrects Coyote, who reveals a play on words on the Canadian national anthem, referring to it “Hosanna da, our home on Natives Land (as opposed to ‘home and native land). This is an obvious allusion to the colonization of Canada by Europeans.

Reality vs. Imagination

The section then switches its focus to the four Old Indians, Coyote, and Lionel, intersecting them all. On the day of his fortieth birthday, Lionel had devised four manageable goals, in order to turn his life around, and it his here that the story presents and intersection in the text, one between imagination an reality. Lionel imagines all of his goals falling perfectly into place, and the conversations that will take place:

• His resignation from Bursum’s will be understood and encouraged by Bursum himself. “After he explained to Bill how he wanted to get on with his life, he was sure that Bill would understand… ‘Good for you, Lionel. Don’t forget us when you’re rich and famous.” (p.277)

• His return to university, the University of Toronto his destination of choice, will go smoothly with the assistance of Eli Stands Alone. Eli: “That’s a good career move, Lionel… I know the president. Would you like me to call him?… Will you need any scholarship money?” (p.278)

• Alberta will be willing to sacrifice her career for Lionel and have children. Alberta: “[My career] can wait. I can always pick it up later… Lionel, I’d love to have your children” (p.278)

In reality, these conversations would never go as planned. Lionel’s allegiance to Bursum was the reason he had never returned to school in the first place and Bursum will be reluctant to let him go. Meanwhile, Eli does not hold Lionel in high regard, and it would be unlikely he would be willing or capable of single handedly admitting Lionel to university. Lastly, as alluded to earlier in the novel, Alberta does not want to have kids with Lionel or Charlie. This section is an obvious intersection of Lionel’s imagination and the reality of the unlikelihood of his aspirations.

Outfits

The section concludes with Alberta revisiting the story of the detained outfits. The story itself alludes to the tumultuous relationship between First Nations people and white/European/colonized society, and does so on several occasions. The first of these allusions is tied to the government’s involvement in the return of the outfits, and the exposure of the story by both the media and the government. The allusion present is the government glorifying their rectification of an issue that should never have occurred in the first place, commending themselves for having fixed it as opposed to apologizing to First Nations people for its occurrence in the first place. The second allusion occurs when Alberta’s father brings home the confiscated outfits. “Two of the outfits were badly tattered, most of the feathers snapped off, the ends missing. Alberta’s mother said the others could be repaired. As she held each one up to the light, Alberta could see the pattern of dirt on the sleek feathers where someone with boots had walked on them”. The dirt on the feathers is a physical metaphor for colonized society having left its footprints all over the land that first belonged to First Nations people, having done so beyond repair. Meanwhile, the outfits represent First Nations culture. Despite returning the outfits, much like some attempts at restoring elements of First Nations culture, the outfits are badly damaged at the hands of colonial society. Though some could be repaired, they would never be the same.

Flick, Jane. “Reading Notes for Thomas King’s Green Grass, Running Water.” Canadian Literature 161/162 (1999). Web. April 4^th 2013.

King, Thomas (June 1, 1994). Green Grass, Running Water. New York: Bantam Books.

Names are one of many mechanisms through which King uses to present allusions and metaphors in Green Grass Running Water. They often sum up a personality trait present in the character they describe, or can be ironic in nature when alluding to historical figures or themes.

Eli Stands Alone

Eli Stands Alone is the black sheep of his family and the community of Blossom, Alberta, and the last name ‘Stands Alone’ alludes to his general aloofness from traditional First Nations culture. Having obtained a PhD from the University of Toronto, and later teaching there, Eli was eager to leave the confines of Blossom and his First Nations past behind him and assimilate into Canadian society. This is alluded to a variety of times throughout the book. One such occurrence is Eli’s initial reluctance to bring Karen to the Sun Dance, his discomfort while there, and his refusal to return with her the following year.

While Eli was eager to leave Blossom behind, he finds himself unable to escape it as his unique background leads to him being equally different in mainstream Canadian society. When Eli returns to Blossom to protect his mother’s cabin from the dam, Eli once again finds himself standing alone, but on a far larger scale, opposite the corporate forces of White Man society. No matter where Eli finds himself, he can never fit in, he will always Stand Alone.

“Buffalo” Bill Bursum

“Buffalo” Bill Bursum is the owner of the home entertainment center where Lionel works. This allusion is more subtle, in that deeper research and historical knowledge of First Nations affairs is required to recognize it. The allusion comes in two parts. The first of which, Bill Bursum, is the reversal of Bursum Bill, a famous 1921 bill that deprived Pueblos Indians of their land and water in the New Mexico region, giving the rights to non-Indians. Fortunately for the Pueblos, the bill received national exposure and was eventually defeated. The second allusion emphasizes the “Buffalo Bill”, alluding to William Frederick Cody, a nineteenth and twentieth century showman known for his Wild West shows that involved the exploitation of First Nations people.

Buffalo Bill, sporting the rarely seen Hoke-Troika (lip sweater/soup-saver combo)

Babo Jones

Babo Jones is the eccentric, African-American cleaner at Fort Marion where the four Indians escaped from, who travels alongside Dr. Joe Hovaugh (Herein lies another allusion, ‘Jehovah’) in his quest to find them. In GGRW, King uses Babo as an element of foreshadowing, alluding to the Herman Melville’s story “Benito Cereno”. In the story, a black slave named Babo leads a slave rebellion over their Master Benito Cereno, by deceiving the captain of the ship, Captain Delano, into thinking its business as usual aboard. In GGRW, we are introduced to Babo as she is being interrogated by two white police officers, a Sergeant Cereno and Jimmy Delano, who are investigating the disappearance of the four Indians. Babo’s race is revealed when Sergeant Cereno, growing frustrated with Babo’s inability to answer his questions, suggests his partner Delano “…finish up with Aunt Jemima” (p. 45). As is revealed in the end, it was in fact Babo who assisted with the escape of the four old Indians.

King, Thomas (June 1, 1994). Green Grass, Running Water. New York: Bantam Books.

The Indian Act of 1876 was a statute enacted by the government of Canada that gave the government control over many aspects of First Nations life, whether it be their land, status as and Indian, education, and so on. The goal of the act was to help assimilate First Nations people into mainstream Canadian society, via controlling and subsequently eliminating may original aspects of their culture.

At a deeper and more fundamental level, the Indian Act sought to eliminate First Nations culture at its roots. Under the mantra of aggressive assimilation, the Indian Act implemented the use of residential schools, boarding schools for First Nations people designed to eliminate any education of their culture, while inundating them with Christian beliefs and forcing them to speak English or French. Indigenous traditions and language were discouraged and harsh punishment awaited those who participated in their use. Abusive and harsh conditions characterized residential schools, while the children were left with no escape, boarded there for at least ten months a year with little to no contact with their families.

The Indian Act has maintained two main goals throughout its existence that affect all First Nations people in Canada. It determines who is, or is not considered an Indian, via their Indian status. This was done through a variety of different mechanisms. First Nations people who obtained an education, or were married to someone who were not of First Nations background, would subsequently lose their status as an Indian. The second goal the Indian Act has achieved is determining the governance of Indian reserves and bands, leaving final say and ultimate control to the government as opposed to the bandleaders.

While there is no doubt the main goal of the Indian Act was to assimilate First Nations people through the elimination of their culture, several of its provisions were in place to protect the First Nations population. The most significant and noticeable of these is the appropriation of reserved lands, protected from the forces of colonization. Moreover, the Indian Act receives a mixed response from much of the First Nations population, as while they denounce its destruction of their culture, they are unwilling to let go of the benefits the Act provides them, such as tax exemptions.

The Indian Act does support Coleman’s findings… to some extent. The use of residential schools to erode First Nations culture via its replacement with Christian beliefs would support Coleman’s notion that colonials asserted their way of life, a “white civility” as he refers to it, as superior to that of First Nations people, and indoctrinated it upon them. But this is hardly a revelation. It could be argued that through use of tax exemptions and land reservations, a project of white civility was accomplished more subtly, as it was done under the guise that it would allow First Nations to keep their culture, though in an isolated manner. However, this is far from a reality, and as was discussed in my 2:3 blog, it has only served to further assert the dominance of white civility.

“The Indian Act.” The Indian Act. Indigenous Foundations: UBC, n.d. Web. 15 Apr. 2014.

Question 4

As I expressed in my 2:2 blog, my initial reaction to Robinson’s story of the stolen scripture was one of frustration and confusion. I felt as though the story conveyed somewhat of a paradoxical message: The Europeans were not Gods chosen people and it was wrong for them to assume so (totally agree)… We (First Nations) are thus morally superior to them (wait… what?). Amid the frustration of writing my 2:2 blog, and in my usual considerate fashion, I took it upon myself to include those closest to me in my suffering. I voiced my displeasure with the story to my parents at dinner, and ignoring history as the greatest indicator of future outcomes, hoped they would tell me how right I was. Predictably, they told me quite the opposite.

The conversation quickly veered away from Robinson’s stories and started pinballing around a variety of issues First Nations peoples face. It was here that I subconsciously found myself relying on stereotypes to prove my point. My father provided me with the most convincing counter. He stated that growing up in a small town, he witnessed many First Nations people fulfill the stereotypes they are often labeled with, and at my age, he was skeptical of what role many of them play in society and the taboo that surrounded the question. However, through experiences dealing with First Nations people in his industry, in addition to his own continued learning on the subject, his perspective changed.

He then asked me how many of the jobs I had worked, especially my newly started career path, were the result of a personal connection to someone. Truthfully, all of them were to some degree. “First Nations people don’t have the benefit of that connection,” he suggested. In a world that favours who you know rather than what you know, it becomes increasingly difficult for those less connected to succeed. That is exactly what has happened to many First Nations people living on reserves, they have become increasingly disconnected from mainstream “Canadian” society. By no control of their own, it becomes increasingly difficult for them to assimilate themselves, or to at least assert themselves in “Canadian” society. As my Dad concluded, this is chiefly the result of the inadequacy of outdated treaties that should never have been signed in the first place, however, the First Nations people at the time really had no choice but do so.

My Dad’s explanation exposed myself to unchartered territory in my thought process surrounding the issue. Moreover, Robinson’s second story Coyote meets the King of England served to contextualize a background to my father’s point. Coyote goes to England to make a law for “white and Indian people… so then our children they can be good”. What ensues is an ultimatum, war or no war, and the resolution there will be no war. What follows is a treaty, but not the one Coyote initially had in mind. A treaty that fell through the hands of several Kings over a long period of time. By the time the treaty is finally enacted by the Queen, Canada is likely a far different place, and European dominance is far more prevalent. Moreover, as Coyote alludes to, the law is to be written in a book, and to be given to the First Nations once they are educated. “They can get good education so they can read that book to understand”. Of course that education would be none other than a European education.  This ties into the story of the stolen scripture, and the loss of stories and literature. The law itself was written by the Europeans, and to be given to First Nations only upon them being “educated” (ie. Having things explained to them by Europeans).

The message the story tries to convey is that despite the early efforts of Coyote to create a society for both the First Nations and Whites, the treaty that emerged was a bastardized version of the original agreement between the two kings, heavily tilted towards European interests. What has ensued in the several hundred years since is exactly what would be expected, a society built on imperial pillars, wherein First Nations beliefs and culture are far from the forefront. Consequently, First Nations generations have, through no control of their own, been engulfed by another society, and forced to adapt from a culture and way of life far different from their own.

Robinson, Harry. Living by Stories: a Journey of Landscape and Memory. Ed. Wendy Wickwire. Vancouver: Talonbooks, 2005. Print.