3:5 King’s Acts of Narrative Decolonization

1. Identify and discuss two of King’s “acts of narrative decolonization.”Please read the following quote to assist you with your answer.The lives of King’s characters are entangled in and informed by both the colonial legacy in the Americas and the narratives that enact and enable colonial domination. King begins to extricate his characters’ lives from the domination of the invader’s discourses by weaving their stories into both Native American oral traditions and into revisions of some of the most damaging narratives of domination and conquest: European American origin stories and national myths, canonical literary texts, and popular culture texts such as John Wayne films. These revisions are acts of narrative decolonization. James Cox. “All This Water Imagery Must Mean Something.”Canadian Literature 161-162 (1999). Web April 04/2013.

——————————

I would like to focus on the stories involving Changing woman and Old Woman. When it comes to “some of the most damaging narratives of domination and conquest” these two characters take on particularly heavy-hitting aspects of European American origin stories.

Changing Woman and King’s revision of the Christian-European origin character of Noah and his ark:

First, King uses several elements of humor to begin this act of narrative decolonization.  He is prompting his audience to re-examine a story that has been told for centuries, by poking fun at it. King highlights elements of the story that are not normally included in its original form, like the acknowledgement that the boat would most likely have been covered in poop (King 144). We then meet Noah, a character traditionally revered as a hero of the Christian faith: “a little man with a filthy beard [who] jumps out of the poop at the front of the canoe” (King 145). The imagery King creates challenges the seriousness and respect I imagine is expected to be given to Noah within the Christian tradition.  King forces his audience to question how they’ve traditionally viewed Noah. This questioning can then lead to additional reflection on how we view the entire story he belongs to originally. King continues to shock his audience into re-thinking this European origin story with accusations of farting amongst the boat’s animals, Noah’s demand to see Changing Woman’s breasts, along with a hope that God remembered he likes big ones (145).

Next, King uses this same story to highlight differences between European and indigenous views on the appropriate way to interact with animals. Noah reprimands Changing Woman for talking to the ship’s animals, stating “This is a Christian ship. Animals don’t talk. We got rules.” (145). The topic of “Christian rules” is reiterated throughout Changing Woman’s interaction with Noah (King 148). King uses Coyote’s interpretation of these rules to help communicate what it might be like to be learning them from a position outside of the tradition within which they were created, taught and unquestionably followed. He does this while still using humor to derail the traditional mindset around such rules, like, for example, when Old Coyote explains that Noah’s first rule is “Thou Shalt Have Big Breasts” (King 147). The narrative around Christian rules continues in the story of Old Woman.

Old Woman and King’s revision of the Biblical story of Christ walking on water:

In Old Woman’s interaction with Young Man Walking on Water, (Jesus Christ with an “indian sounding” name as Jane Flick puts it (161)), King again tries to upset the traditional Christian-European idea of rules. Here he is more subtle, however, as he attempts to expose a very deep-rooted rule within European storytelling: that a story cannot be changed. He highlights this difference with one line spoken by Young Man Walking on Water. After Old Woman falls into what appears to be the story of Jesus Christ walking on water to save a boatload of his disciples, she finds him looking for the boat he is ‘supposed’ to save. Old Woman, spotting a boat, asks him if that is the one he is looking for. Young Man Walking on Water responds: “Not if you saw it first” (King 349). I interpret this as King’s way of communicating the assumption that elements within a European origin story cannot change. Within that tradition, stories accepted as fact leave no room for change. Change presents a need to re-evaluate which version is ‘true’ and can lead to doubt or uncertainty about the validity of the original story. By highlighting this inability to accept change, within a novel comprised of stories that are continually changing and being retold, King is able to expose one more difference between European and Indigenous narrative styles. With the awareness of this difference, we as readers move one step closer to being able to view each tradition on their own, to slip out from under the dominant legacy of colonial narratives.

King’s representation of women in his many acts of narrative decolonization is one topic I have not touched on. He provides so much to think about in regards to how women are portrayed in traditional European narratives and origin stories. However, I’m curious, what did you learn from how Changing Woman and Old Woman were treated by the familiar European literary characters they encountered?

Sierra Gale

Thoughts on Assignment 3:5

Works Cited:

Flick, Jane. “Reading Notes for Thomas King’s Green Grass Running Water.” Canadian Literature 140-172. 1999. 04 April 2013. Web. 21 March 2016.

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

“Matthew 14:22 – 33 – Jesus Walks on the Water.” Holy Bible, New International Version. BibleGateway. 2011. Web. 21 March 2016.

Deem, Rich. “Who Was Noah?” Evidence for God. godandscience.org. 16 Dec. 2014. Web. 21 March 2016.