23-21-12-6

[23-21-12-6]

Think of the Wind

I enjoy physics and it's an odd attraction. Some might call it love but I don't know. Anyway, at the least, I enjoy physics. The same goes for math.

What I fear is that some people view this as somewhat inhuman, as an a-emotional pursuit only taken by those disconnected from "real life," that ever-elusive construct that always seems to be defined by whatever the speaker's interests are. However, I believe everyone agrees that there are two necessary components to "real life": birth and death.

Everyone must experience birth and death in one way or another, not only their own beginning and end but also the inception and/or demise of opportunities, homes, pets, and those they love. It seems the critics of those people who spend their time on quantitative activities are suggesting they are ignoring, or simply don't care about, these fundamental aspects. Indeed, some are, but I believe every demographic has those individuals and I don't think STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math) has a disproportionate amount.

I will say this: if something or someone I loved dies, or the ol' depression takes its turn, I don't fiddle about with projectile motion or read an article about group theory to address it. No, I'll draw, carve, go swimming, read some stories or meditations, play music, listen to music, cry, stare into a flame, talk to someone, or write in my journal, nothing related to STEM.

This seems to be a point to the idea that STEM is lifeless and is only relevant to what can be measured, but while I don't do anything STEM-related, it is critically relevant to my healing process.

On a dark Friday night this past spring I had the worst panic attack of my life. Nowhere felt safe. Even reflecting on it now with a healthier mind I still feel that dread. Nowhere felt safe, but the forest was the least threatening. I struck out at 11pm and walked the fields and swamps surrounding my home.

It was dark. The only thing to look at was dark. It was less than helpful.

I could hear the wind. It swept across the barren fields waiting for the first crop and struck the birch, maple, spruce, and the white pine of the woods. It pushed against my body and roared through my ears as I stood aimlessly on the edge of empty space.

I thought about the wind.

Van Gogh painted the wind in his iconic piece The Starry Night. It's a magnificent painting but it isn't what came to my mind as I was throttled by the sky crashing down on me that night.

No, what came to mind was inertia, reaction, Reynold's number, gravity, warmth, expansion, the cold, contraction, pressure, waves, and resonance.

As I thought about the wind, the whip that was apparently attempting to draw the warmth out of my lungs became less volatile and recognizable. In time it began to flow, morphing from a choke to an embrace. Not a warm, soft embrace, but the squeezing hug a grandmother receives from a grandchild proving their strength and promising that they would move mountains to keep her safe.

At a loss to who had just promised to keep me safe, I walked back home and was asleep by 3am.

I'm aware there is also a crowd that claims those engaged in art are the ones ignoring the "real world." I hope I am not mistaken for a member of that group. I do not prescribe to that line of thinking in the slightest.

It is not hard to see that neither framework for understanding our experiences, art or science, is a complete description and that a sculpture or model can never be a substitute for what it represents. If a child had never experienced wind, I would show them The Starry Night or some other art piece, but neither The Starry Night nor fluid dynamics perfectly describe the wind as we perceive it.

If art and science are different approaches to making sense of what we see in "real life" and neither is complete on its own, we can only assume that we can only approach an understanding if we are influenced by both. Mary the scientist must have appreciated seeing colour more because of her rigorous academic study and I can only imagine her joy at seeing a Monet.

Physics and math aren't an escape from reality, but perspectives that can be used to see ever more beauty in the exact same way that art can be used to see more beauty. All are beautiful and the beauty is compounded when they are combined.

Q.E.D. P.S. And if someone does deal with their struggles by solving math problems, don't fuck with them. They are dealing with their struggles in a way that works for them and that is good. Period. Don't become their next problem.

[23-21-12-6]

An Analysis on the History of “Legal Indians“ in ‘The Inconvenient Indian‘

While many wouldn’t think of legality while discussing archetypes, this included myself before reading this book. However, in many ways King found legal archetypes to be more paramount than cultural or narrative archetypes. King writes “while the relationship that Native people have with Canada and the United States contains both historical and social aspects, the primary relationship is legal... Remember our earlier chat about Legal Indians?” (222).

“Legal Indians” is a reference to a subject that is discussed earlier in the book. This term refers to Native Americans which are recognized by either the Canadian or American government as being Native (King 68). Without much surprise, it turns out there are some issues with how governments decide who is Native and this is apparent in that ~40% of Native Americans are recognized as such by Canada or the U.S. (King 69). Again, unsurprisingly, there are issues with how the Canadian and U.S. governments (who I will refer to as the “European governments” from now on) use this classification.

 It matters to the European governments because of what various groups of Native Americans are owed as a result of past treaties signed. Many of these treaties indicated a precursor to a theme of applying part-to-whole that would define later regulations. These treaties in question were signed by members of a tribe who weren’t representative of the whole tribe but the government would pretend they were to suppose the treaty was a sound agreement (King 87). Many of these treaties were also signed rather flippantly which King explains is the result of another archetype that was pushed on the Native Americans, that being they were doomed to dissipate into nothing. The assumption was that since the Native Americans were to be non-existent in some 100-years, whatever resource was promised could be retaken in 100-years (King 84).

 King explains that the part-to-whole would come into full force after three key court cases in the U.S. (81) and passage of the Indian Act in Canada (82). These removed any recognition of any Native American tribe’s sovereignty by the European governments, which in turn removed any recognized distinction between the tribes and lumped them all together to create what King calls “The Indian” (82). This hypothetical/legal singular Native American could then chipped away through enfranchisement who a friend of King said was French for getting “screwed” (71). Really, “enfranchisement” means that the European government no longer recognizes the subject as Native. This could either occur individually in Canada through choosing to vote, serving in the military, getting a university degree (King 71), through Bill C-31 (King 167), or in the U.S. which simply enfranchised whole tribes at a time (King 72).

 There have been disturbingly recent calls and attempts to execute mass enfranchisement, disregard existing treaties, and/or do away with the idea of any tribe’s sovereignty (King 198). It doesn’t matter which, they all have the same end result, a result which I’m sure Duncan Campbell Scott, head of the Canadian Department of Indian Affairs from 1913-1932 (King 72) would approve of. Scott helpfully stated the goal of such actions plainly saying “Our objective is to continue until there is not a single Indian in Canada that has not been absorbed into the body politic and there is no Indian question, and no Indian Department…” (King 72)

 Many assume that Native Americans would be pleased to do away with this legal archetype, be enfranchised, and Native restrictive legislation be struck down (King 197). And indeed, Natives are not big fans of the Indian Act and the like pushing the legal archetype upon them, but the legislation also offers some protection which removed would leave Native Americans with little to leverage in the European governments. King cites these ideas in the form of a quote from Harold Cardinal who closes by writing “Anytime the government wants to honour its obligations to us we are more than ready to help devise new Indian legislation” (King 200).

 Frankly, I don’t think it is too surprising for Native Americans not to agree with proposals similar to Scott’s who, in addition to the misdirected and aggressive quote already mentioned, referred to Native Americans as a “problem” (King 72).

[23-21-12-6]

Future Analysis of ‘The Inconvenient Indian‘ Layout and Expectations

I have decided to do a full analysis of The Inconvenient Indian with a focus on archetypes. While I believe that the book lends itself more towards post-colonial or reader-response theories, I found myself thinking of archetypes rather often. I became particularly interested in how the archetypes projected onto Native Americans, which were rarely consistent, affected policy and trade and vice versa.

 To analyze some of these inconsistencies I think the concept map is a good tool. This way the media portrayal archetypes that King lays out can be put alongside the cultural perceptions and resulting legal classification in order to draw some direct contrasts and similarities.

 Given the more quantifiable nature of policy and trade, I think it is best that these are covered in an argument essay. The clear structure will be useful for noting how archetypes affected policy and trade, how policy and trade affected archetypes, and the few cases that contain both simultaneously.

 The visual aspect of Native American portrayal is stressed by King and as such, I believe that putting an analysis of Native American portrayals in website form will be effective. This will allow me to place image and video examples directly in line with the points which will provide clarity to the audience which text-only communication may be unable to.

 Lastly, while the legal aspect of archetypes is just as, if not more, quantifiable than policy and trade, it can benefit from being discussed in looser terms. For this reason, I will be using a blog post to discuss this topic. Images aren’t particularly useful in this but the available use of links will provide some extra information that could aid the audience.

 Trying to cover one subject in approximately four different mediums will be challenging. However, I have worked with each of these mediums independently and thus have some confidence that this project can be completed with effectiveness.

[23-21-12-6]

How Should Readers Approach ‘The Inconvenient Indian‘?

After reading The Inconvenient India by Thomas King, it hard to say what I would advise others as to how they read this book. Given it is it is an account, and an account of a full continent's entire population past 500+ years at that, it is not surprising that the book is multi-faceted. The odd mixture of story, history, lose language, and commentary, aids to King’s covering public policy, public perception, legal perception, economics, culture, and history with a bird’s-eye view and ease. Whether or not a reader should approach this as a story of colonialism, a story of perception versus reality, or with not they should attempt to use a particular approach at all is near indeterminable.

 Of course, I could say that the post-colonial perspective provided the most insight, but that was too easy. Everything was already at the surface, only “sight ” was required, not much insight. There was insight, particularly in the chapter titled “Forget About It” in which he directly challenges the idea that colonialism is no longer being perpetrated against Native Americans, though again, this was a bit obvious. What was less obvious was finding colonialism while King wrote about movie portrayal. While King writes “The United States has been slow to shift its focus from the 1800s” (50) in reference to the settings of films that portray Native Americans, this could also be indicative of America’s reluctance to let go of old colonial habits.

 Speaking Native American portrayal. I think that the archetype literary theory is what drew the most surprising revelation out of the text for me, that being the legal archetypes being used as a method of control as discussed in a previous blog. However, I also very much appreciated King’s approach to the myth that Native Americans were/are a dying race writing “they were supposed to, but they didn’t” (61). It is a perfect example of wishful thinking flying in the face of reality.

 However, I believe that overall, while readers shouldn’t disregard the other two perspectives, readers should approach this book as themselves. This book felt more … human than many others. King writes from his own perspective and that makes it personable, or perhaps more antagonistic at times. King’s humour is sharp, very sharp and backed by wit. For instance, when describing a conversation he had with a government employee, he says “I felt as though I were talking to a bowl of jello” (King 229), a comment which I will keep in my personal arsenal. He is especially sarcastic in his satire writing that “The idea that Native people had something resembling… independence was just too much to bear… [and] was antithetical to the American ideas of democracy, fair play, and free enterprise” (King 177).

 I think that King wrote this book to tell a story, be conversational about it, but be passionate and be potent to any reader. I think he accomplished this. So, it is likely better for any reader to approach the book as themselves but in an open-minded and self-aware manner.

[23-21-12-6]

Post-Colonialism in ‘The Inconvenient Indian‘ (Maybe)

Trying to read The Inconvenient Indian by Thomas King without thinking about the effects of colonialism would be rather difficult. The title alone alludes to this as the key groups, the indigenous populations of North America, are described as being “inconvenient” to the colonial powers both in the past and present. However, given that the effects of colonialism are such a key aspect of the book, it should not be relegated to a passing mention. So, let’s take a close look at some approaches to colonialism and its effects in (and on) The Inconvenient Indian.

 Given that this assessment is focusing on the final third of the book, well after the times of fur trade, smallpox, and mass European immigration have been discussed, one might assume that what is left to cover is the aftermath of colonization. It is understandable, I used to think that the destruction had stopped and what was next was reparations. King does cover the effects to be certain, however, he also makes it clear that colonization has neither ceased long ago nor in recent years.

 The clearest assault on native identity that King brings up is Bill C-31. The Canadian government recognizes citizens as being Status or non-Status, essentially Native or non-Native. However, whether or not the citizen is Native does not determine their legal Status and this allows for the outright fuckery that is Bill C-31. The bill dictates that should there be two generations of Status—non-Status marriages the third generation is non-Status even if the non-Status spouses are full-blooded Natives (King 168). Since there is no way to regain Status once lost in this way, as time goes on there will eventually be no government-recognized Natives but still many Natives who will be unable to utilize the reparations provided or property owned by those with Status (who don’t exist) (169). Thus, in this convolution, the government is enacting a legal genocide after the traditional genocide wasn’t total.

 Another significant matter, which King says “feels too much like Colonialism: Part Two” (210) is the disregard for pollution on reserves (209). This pollution often occurs from coal or uranium mining or straight-up landfills. The reserves do generate revenue from these projects and King is glad for that (210). However, he has concerns as these projects are far from healthy or sustainable. Not to mention the reserves are often pushed into these projects because they are pushed out of other industries such as fishing (King 239). I believe this coercion is why King calls it Colonialism: Part Two.

  These are just two examples but they show that colonialism isn’t over. Land disputes, over-policing, and a host of other issues are continually perpetrated and are not leftovers from times past.

[23-21-12-6]

Alternative Perspectives of Archetypes in ‘The Inconvenient Indian‘

Given that The Inconvenient Indian by Thomas King is about one demographic, Indians (or as they are also known, Native Americans, or Aboriginals, or First Nations, or Indigenous Peoples, or specific nation/tribe names, or unfortunately, a few slurs), it was not unlikely that the topic of archetypes would be covered in some form within the book. Indeed the book does, and as the long list of terminology indicates, it has much to cover. However, what surprised me about how this book covers the issue of Native archetypes is that instead of delving into the archetypes themselves, King assumes the reader already knows the stereotypes, gives a quick refresher and uses those to describe historical narratives and how they formed. In King’s style, he chooses not to view it as a rigid cause and effect but tells it in a loose, satirical story.

 Perhaps the most important aspect of archetypes that King covers is the transformation by European states of hundreds of inconvenient distinct native tribes, bands, and nations into one, oversimplified yet still inconvenient, group dubbed “Indians.” He acknowledges the cultural perception transformation that needed to occur to simplify the complex groups into a single set with one element, but his main focus is upon the more legal aspect that also needed to occur.

 King touches on two legal actions in the U.S., the U.S. Articles of Confederation and the 1790 Trade and Intercourse Act (81). The first gave the federal government exclusive power over interactions with any of the various indigenous nations, the second stipulated that exchange of any land belonging to the native populations would be regulated by the federal government thus ensuring that no native nation would have equal legal grounds as any state (81). King describes how these, in addition to three key court cases, led to the reduction of indigenous nations’ autonomy, reducing any meaningful legal distinction between the nations, and allowing colonial powers to lump them together as “The Indian” (82). King states that after this,  the policies regarding indigenous populations of both the U.S. and Canada became “All for one. One for all” (83) but in a more unify-and-conquer sense. Perhaps the Removal Act, signed in 1830, is the most egregious example as the legislators didn’t even bother pre-affixing the term “Indian” (87).

  Keeping this forced unification in mind while reading later sections proved to be insightful for me. Later in the book, King discusses the American Indian Movement (AIM). AIM was one of the most influential groups advocating for indigenous people but its effectiveness has been depleted through attrition from government forces (King 157). King describes other organizations which either preceded AIM or tried to emulate their potency. However, many of these organizations faltered and often at the heart of this trouble was that they had to act as a conglomerate of very different groups and often split (King 156). Splitting was ineffective though because of the legal archetype that was already established.

 And so I realized, with a great deal of assistance, that it is not only cultural archetypes that matter. I knew that systemic problems existed for many groups, but I had never thought of how legally lumping together several demographics into one could be so destructive and it is something that I will think of while looking at other systemic issues.

[23-21-12-6]

Personal Hopes and Expectations of ‘The Inconvenient Indian‘

The first third of The Inconvenient Indian by Thomas King indicates that this will be an enjoyable read for me to an extent. I enjoy history told as stories that have yet to conclude, I like learning in abstract forms, and I like humour this book is rife with it. The opening paragraph includes a plea from King’s partner to “just don’t start with Columbus” (King 2). The topic following paragraph is Christopher Columbus. However, I add “to an extent” because at play is a certain amount of… guilt? No, not “guilt,” “displacement” is better. My lineage does not stray beyond the British isles and my father is a recent addition to North America. I’m assuming that as I read further I will experience a growing outrage towards my location and/or wishing the events that led to my placement had occurred differently.

 Anyways, I believe that this book in full will fill some gaps in my knowledge in addition to expanding it. I have studied Native American history under the guidance of public education, my parents, and my own interest. However, this studying has largely fallen into academic or artistic nature, but this book is a mixture of the two.

 Perhaps it is by hope that I assume that this book will encompass a full narrative and thus will serve as a key to a deeper understanding of Native Americans on my part. This in turn may have led me to assume that narrative is the key of this book, but it is at least an aspect. I can say with confidence that the book is written in a conversational storytelling manner. King often paragraphs off dry-witted comments such as noting “Lucky guy” after reflecting on John Smith’s tendency to tell stories of being rescued by some maiden of the land (8).  King also explicitly notes that he is not someone who enjoys facts and footnotes (9) but he does give them their place in the narrative. The book is historical, but not a history book, it tells stories but there is nothing fictional about it.

 In a meta-analysis fashion, this blending of history and story into legends is very much a focus in the book's opening. King compares events (or non-events) and characters of the past and tries to determine why some became legends, and thus occupied textbooks, while others fell into obscurity. King shifts from Columbus (2), to the “Almo, Idaho Massacre” (which didn’t happen) (4), to Pocahontas (8), to Louis Riel (10), to George Custer (10), describing how these have been fabricated into becoming more than the sum of their parts in cultural perception while noting similar parts of history are rarely mentioned.

 All in all, while I still believe this book may not be all that I hope that is, after reading the first few chapters I believe that it has much to offer me in terms of using storytelling to give a wide perspective to me: a stiff minded product of colonization.

[23-21-12-6]

Creativity and Copyright in Music

No other industry has had a more complex and tumultuous relationship with copyright than the music industry. It is a highly creative work and new rhythms, chord progressions, melodies, and lyrics are being created every hour. However, despite each having a first creator, many of these elements become standard and even defining aspects for genres. This repurposing of elements itself has come to be a defining aspect of genres such as hip-hop and electronica. This nuance can be difficult to navigate, especially for new musicians who may not have the equipment to create all of their tracks, and I hope this write-up will summarize the important qualities.

 There are generally four metrics by which content use is assessed to determine whether or not it is fair use or copyright infringement. These are why the content being used, how creative is the content, how much of the content was used, and does the use of the content fiscally competes with the content owner(s).

 The first, why the content is being used, has to do with the motives of the person using the content. This largely relies on whether or not I am using the content for personal enjoyment in the form of a parody or to make a profit. I can play “Shark Fin Blues” on guitar for family and friends (if I could play guitar) without violating copyright, but I wouldn’t be allowed to perform it at a large paid concert.

 Whether or not the original content was creative is likely the most contentious issue as it asks whether the content used was especially creative. If the section of content used has little creativity, then it is likely ok to sample, though possibly to the dismay of the first user. A good example of this would be “Do I Wanna Know”. The 1-2-1-2 rhythm could be used without qualms because of its simplicity and established prevalence in music. However, the use of the guitar lick would be difficult to justify, even with significant transformation, because of its unique melody and rhythm.

 How much of the content was used is the most intuitive aspect. Most people understand that using a full song or some key part such as the chorus or bridge is unlikely to be considered fair use. But a remixed melody or using a few lyrics is likely fine. For instance, in his song “LUST.”, Kendrick Lamar used only a few lines of Rat Boy’s song “Knock Knock Knock”. Lamar also pitched and sped up the sample and has faced no backlash for the usage.

 The final aspect has to do with the original reason copyright was created: to allow innovators to gather profits from their creative work. If the content use is not transformative enough and thus allows audiences to view the repurposed work instead of the original, that is directly drawing profits away from the original creator. This is the summation of the previous three points. Playing a song for your family will not be competitive, using a common rhythm is not competitive, and using a sliver of content is not competitive. This also has the added aspect of transformative work. If the new piece of media no longer resembles the original, then that is considered fair use and original work.

 These fulfill a secondary goal of copyright which is to entice creativity and innovation. Creators should be aware of these guidelines, but all in all, I believe that creators of any kind, music or otherwise, will not need to worry about these rules too much if they create intending to create not profit.

[23-21-12-6]

Reflection on the First Episode of “Serial“ and Journalism Podcasts

“Alibi”, the first installment of the podcast “Serial”, is a captivating and enjoyable episode. Not only is it enjoyable, the subjects and questions it poses; is memory a reliable source? what is considered sufficient proof? what are the responsibilities of prosecutors? are all questions I hold as valuable and believe should have a greater prevalence in public discourse.

 I believe that podcasts can be a fantastic way to deliver the products of investigative journalism. While some issues such as DuPont's pollution history whose sources are more reliant on paper than people do well with text coverage, allowing the audience to listen to a story’s characters can yield valuable information and enrichen the context. Hearing the shuffling properties of Jay’s speech contrasted with the confidence of Adnan’s voice is telling; of what I cannot be sure as it is only the first episode, but I believe that dichotomy will be a key point in the story ahead. Podcasts can also make well-done investigative journalism more accessible. As not everyone has either the money to buy a subscription to a reputable news organization or the time to sit down to read it. I believe this is a necessary step to keeping journalism a sustainable industry.

 That said, I am cautious about podcast’s advantages in storytelling may cause some podcasts which portray themselves as journalism, especially the “true-crime” genre, to instead be leaning closer to drama. It is unlikely that any would approach something close to The War of the Worlds, but I can imagine some resembling reality tv. From what I have heard of this podcast, it has not into that trap. I was comforted as the host used the first 15 minutes to explore how memory isn’t a stable source and carried that caution forward. The fact that all evidence except cell-tracking is also kept apparent. However, since a lot of the information is presented in interviews, I am also confident that a skilled editor could dramatically affect the narrative. Again, I don’t think that is what this podcast did. It was interesting without being sensational. Though I think both producers and audiences should be cautious about what stories should be given attention to and how they should be presented. In this instance, I think it could have been beneficial to have had some of the interviews be video recorded for additional transparency.

[23-21-12-6]

The Error of Prioritizing Grade 12 English

As of right now, any student wishing to transition from high school to university requires a grade 12, university-level English credit. This is the standard practice, but I argue that it should either go under some reforms or be removed altogether. Many people, including myself, would agree that communication is important, especially for education and the following careers. However, I believe the forms of communication that English courses focus on and encourage do not serve to benefit the majority of students.

 This requirement of a grade 12 university-level English credit could be intended to serve two purposes. I’m not sure which the powers that be were aiming for, so for the sake of depth, I’ll be considering both. The first purpose is that the English course will foster beneficial skills in the students such as critical analysis and effective sharing of ideas. The second is that the English course will be directly applicable to the student’s academics as writing will be an integral part of their chosen subject. These are both worthwhile goals, yet under the current system neither are being fulfilled.

 When it comes to encouraging beneficial studious traits, my current understanding is that English class should be increasing understanding. This can be done by helping people explain their thoughts and understand the thoughts and motivations of others by ‘reading between the lines.’ But I have found that I and many of my peers have greater success in English class when disregarding the development of ideas to instead focus on checking boxes for using a particular literary device, ample amounts of adverbs, or applying a certain stanza structure. Similarly, when instructed to conduct a literary analysis on another person’s work, my focus has been directed towards how they have checked certain boxes rather than looking at their perspective and ideas.

 This goal of students maintaining understanding can be easily met with some small changes; some changes in marking techniques so the goal and measure align and changes a few things in the curriculum would suffice. However, English courses will need some major changes to be directly applicable to all students academically. This because STEM subjects and their students have little to no accommodation in the current English curriculum.

 English is already given priority over STEM in education plans. As of now, the two other subjects of study that require multiple credits for an OSSD, math and science, have similar issues of encouraging the checking of boxes, but I would argue that they both have the same potential benefits of critical analysis as English. Right now the material taught for science is much more applicable than math, but both can be improved. But despite dealing with the same issues of analysis, each is given a lower priority relative to English; math requires 3 credits while science requires only 2, and that’s only for the OSSD. Many university programs do not require additional credits for either of these subjects. So, why are math and science not given equal consideration as English for beneficial knowledge? I have no good answer for that.

 If math, science, and English were to have their credit requirements swapped around, I would probably prefer for science to have 4, English to have 3, and math to have 2. This pains me to say it as I have a special place in my heart for math, but we have seen in the past year during the pandemic that many people’s scientific and logistical thinking has been severely lacking while few have had trouble sharing their (disproportionately incorrect) thoughts. Those that have likely had the greatest trouble sharing their information these days are likely the researchers themselves.

 Science and math have a long history of struggling to communicate their knowledge, that is what makes people like Richard Feynman who were both good at research and communicating it so significant. But just because good science communicators are rare, doesn’t mean they can’t be developed. The universities have realized this. During my Grade 12 physics class, my teacher explained how the universities requested that the science classes spend some time on learning how to write a scientific paper. In my opinion, knowing how to write a scientific paper is a very low bar to clear, not to mention how difficult it is to teach authoring a paper in addition to 200 to 2,000 years worth of knowledge.

 This is why if the current system where a grade 12 university-level English credit is required while science and math are disregarded is going to remain, English can’t only apply to the humanities and arts. STEM subjects and some of the social sciences such as economics require communication skills contrary to what is commonly thought. There currently cannot be enough time allotted to communication in STEM classes so the required English courses must pick up the slack they create.

[23-21-12-6]

Analysis

On October 23, 1966, Chanie Wenjack, a boy taken from his family because of who he was and who they are, died trying to return home. His is a story that deserves to be told and should be told, certainly by one more skilled than me, his among many others. But can these stories be told accurately? And if so, what obstacles might stand in the way?

Within Philosophical Investigations, philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein suggests that individual words, or even sentences, only have meaning because of what he called “language-games” because, similar to “normal” games, language-games have a set of rules. It is from the application of these rules that words obtain a meaning. A meaning, singular, because rules and their resulting meanings for a particular word can change between games due to communication’s constant evolution. As an example, Wittgenstein uses the word “water”. Even used in isolation from any other words, “water” could be a command to be brought some for drinking, an alert to a leak or spill, or even as a code word. Meanings aren’t even fixed within a particular language-game; they can be fluid in use, like water.

Wittgenstein didn’t limit the idea of language-games to only word-based communication by using the example of a builder instructing where their assistant should place stones via pointing. Though he applied this to only objective communication, I believe he could have with good reason.

Human communication can be split into two groups: cross-cultural and intercultural. Cross-cultural communications are methods that everyone should be able to recognize, a set of universal rules for every language-game such as weeping being recognized as emotional distress regardless of the audience.  These sorts of indicators are instinctual and vague, unlike intercultural communication which is taught and precise. Intercultural communication is everything else: rules that are not seen in every culture, community, or scenario. These rules can range from widely recognized gestures such as pointing to natural languages such as English or French, to regional dialects, to slang, or to location-specific references.

This is the first problem with telling the story of Wenjack: particularly to a wide audience, using intercultural communication isn’t intrinsically more precise. Using words or interpretations that are too specific to a demographic will leave many unaccommodated. Generally, the broadest and most widely understood yet precise game is a natural language which dictionaries attempt to define and upon mediums such as encyclopedias rely. The Canadian Encyclopedia’s article for Wenjack uses no local slang and only terms that could be easily found in a dictionary. If there was any ambiguity, as for the term “Residential School”, or for a local term such as the place-name “Kenora”, then there is a link provided leading to an exposition. Though all word-based communication is intercultural, not all intercultural communication is word-based. Many cultures, including construction, have some form of “pointing”, but there can be important variations, sometimes within a single system, each form possessing its own meaning.

Wittgenstein only mentioned Intercultural communication but didn’t include all forms within: abstract symbolism was omitted. Some symbolism does only represent words, such as the octagonal “stop” sign, some also objective indicators: “x marks the spot”. The digital information particularly has worked best with icons, such as the reload, save, like, and go-back symbols that have become intuitive without being fixed to a natural language. However, abstract symbols have abstract meanings. Ravens are a popular animal for symbolism. Their scavenging habits have led many cultures to see them as representing death, not “death”, but the idea of death. Native cultures in North America instead saw their resourcefulness and intelligence as the signs of a prolific trickster; a character rather than a trait. In both the lyrical and illustrational aspects of Secret Path, a project directed by Gord Downie to tell Wenjack’s story, a raven accompanies Wenjack. As the story nears its end and Wenjack his death, the raven becomes more prominent. In the third last track of the album, the raven begins to speak to Wenjack saying “I know a way that I can help you.” Whether what follows are honest proposals with honest intentions I am still not sure.

The bases of all communication can be described by a model derived by C.E. Simmons which includes 8 steps through which information passes. In order, the steps are Inspiration, composition, encoding, transmission, noise, reception, decoding, then interpretation. However, for our purposes, we can boil it down to just encoding and decoding. As with any game (except maybe hunting and fishing) all participants should understand what game is being played and what the rules are. The presenter, the one who is encoding, needs to understand which “game”, or set of rules, the context calls for and how to effectively use those rules. The audience, those who are decoding, should also understand the set of rules that should be used and reverse engineer the meaning effectively. For anything that can be observed by both speaker and audience, perfect encoding and decoding can result in exact communication for the subject. However, this is only true for what is observable by both parties.

Language games were not Wittgenstein’s only contribution to language theory. To describe subjectivity and limitations in language, he proposed a thought experiment. Suppose everyone each had a box hovering above their head which contains… something. Importantly, only the person to whom the box belongs knows what is inside and everyone calls what is in their box a “beetle”. Wittgenstein uses this idea to show individual perceptions aren’t verifiable and how language can fail to communicate these experiences. We all experience something called pain, but we fail to know and communicate exactly how everyone else experiences pain. We all just call it “pain”. While we don’t know how others feel pain, we can still recognize the signs of cursing, crying, and holding the injured part using empathy. The reaction to pain is instinctual, while pain isn’t cross-culturally or interculturally, the reaction is.

We don’t know how Wenjack felt when he was home, confined to the school, or on the run. However, we can use empathy to make a strong guess as to what he felt. This is his story and he is at the centre of it. His perspective is integral.

              The question then becomes, which reactions, similar to grasping a stubbed toe, are rooted deeply enough in the human psyche that the subjective experiences of Wenjack or anyone else can be communicated, or even better, felt. Intuition is key, shared intuition is better. The methods of communication that result are generally labelled as art. Artists hone their craft, gain and enhance their intuition as a result, and apply it to various degrees of success. I referenced Secret Path earlier. Secret Path is certainly an art project meant to convey more than objective information; whether it be through phonetic lyrics and musical key choices on the album, or through the colour scheme and movement in the graphic novel and animation. I think the colour choice for the illustrations was particularly fantastic.

              What fascinates me is that while this use of colour is largely a form of cross-cultural communication it is still easy to see how it applies to the theory of language-game because right from the beginning it breaks a rule: if it isn’t only black and white, colour is to be used accurately. Secret Path uses only blue in addition to black and white; panning from the sky down to a forest without any green or brown. This breaking of the rule sets up a new rule: only blue, black, and white are used. This sets up a question; why blue?

Blue occurs relatively rarely in nature,  in the sky and in large bodies of water that mostly just reflect the sky, to see blue and only blue on land is a bit disconcerting. People also usually associate blue with sadness or cold, possibly due to blues prominence during winter. This new rule of blue, black, and white also gets broken when Wenjack is remembering his home: portrayed using the full visible colour spectrum but focusing on the warmer colours of yellow and red. The final set of rules relating to colour is that blue represents foreignness, but warm colouring indicates home and security.

              Downie stated that he wanted to get across “the idea of trying to get home.” Given that verbal key, it becomes easier to find that theme in the telling of the story. The last shot of the film is Wenjack’s consciousness walking away from the blue landscape towards a vibrant homestead. However, this is not what I was thinking of when I first heard Wenjack’s story. Though it has been a while since the first reception, I believe my initial thoughts are the same as my current: Wenjack’s forced choice between losing his life or personhood. I do not think that I got the wrong impression, nor do I think Downie failed. There is a dichotomy in communication: that objective encoding and decoding can be accurate, but no matter how some concepts are encoded they will never result in a message unaffected by the audience save by chance. Downie and I could have both had a beetle in our box (trying to get home), but I happen to call mine an apple (forced choice). For cases such as this, I believe there is no right answer because the answer is unknowable.  Works Cited

Carley, Georgia. "Chanie Wenjack". The Canadian Encyclopedia, 01 November 2016, Historica Canada. https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/charlie-wenjack. Accessed 02 January 2021.

Cherry, Kendra. “The Color Psychology of Blue.” Verywell Mind, Verywellmind, 24 Nov. 2005, www.verywellmind.com/the-color-psychology-of-blue-2795815.

“Gord Downie’s The Secret Path - YouTube.” Www.Youtube.com, 23 Oct. 2016, www.youtube.com/watch?v=yGd764YU9yc&t=2357s. Accessed 2 Jan.

2021.Ludwig Wittgenstein, and G  E  M Anscombe. Philosophical Investigations : The English Text of the Third Edition. Englewood Cliffs, N.J. Prentice Hall [Ca, 2000.