random-hw

[random-hw]

Electricity of Manitoba: The Beginning

Before electrification, people in the 19th century used coal for heating, oil for their lighting, and steam to power their machinery. They had many ways to power their way of life, but it wasn’t as sustainable as it is now in the 21st century. The history of Manitoba’s integration of electricity was not well documented. But with what is documented, historians are able to put the small pieces together to get the bigger picture. Newspapers of the time revealed how electricity came and impacted the people of Manitoba. Once Manitoba switched to electric, every aspect of life changed.

On March 8, 1873, the Winnipeg Gas Company came into existence. It provided the entire city of Winnipeg with gas lighting, which was hard, because gas had to be refilled often. Seven years later, the company changed their name to Winnipeg Electric and Gas Light Company, of which were granted wide powers by the Manitoba Legislature to “supply light and heat in Manitoba by gas, electricity, or other means”. But it wasn’t until 1883 when the North West Electric Light and Power Company when Winnipeg was finally lit up at night. After the first initial power company came into Winnipeg many other electrical companies came and went. It was very competitive to see who could provide the most sustainable electricity to Winnipeg.

The first electric item that we know of in Manitoba is the arc lamp. In 1873, it was switched on outside the Davis Hotel in Winnipeg . Though other sources claim it was the telegram, there is not enough documentation to confirm this unlike the arc lamp. The arc lamp was the first practical light that consists of an arc between carbon electrodes in air (M. Whelan, 2014). The arc lamp brought the introduction of electricity to Manitoba (A History). This demonstration of electricity outside the Davis Hotel caused a scurry for companies to try to gain profit off this invention. The telegraph was also introduced, and provided Manitoba with long-range communication. This device helped as communities were quite scattered throughout Manitoba. Instead of letters, people could send messages from the comfort of their own settlements. These two inventions, the arc lamp and the telegraph, showed Manitoba how beneficial electricity could truly be.

The introduction of electricity to early Winnipeg was not instant. It took many years for Winnipeg to settle into a main electric company, to install the electronics, and to have a sustainable way to power their homes. In 1873, when the first arc lamp was turned on, the first company to provide Winnipeg with lighting was made. This company was called the Winnipeg Gas Company, and it provided the city with gas lighting (A History). This lighting was not electric, but later this company merged with another that supported electricity in 1881. Founded in 1880, Manitoba Electric & Gas Company was granted wide powers by an Act of Manitoba legislature to “supply light and heat in Manitoba by gas, electricity or other means” (A History). Later in 1881, this company and Winnipeg Gas Company combined, keeping the name of the latter. But all this was contained to only Winnipeg, so in 1883, the Northwest Electric Light And Power Company was made to “provide electric supply and lighting to any city or town in Manitoba” by the Manitoba Joint Stock Companies Act. Several more companies came and went, until Manitoba settled with the hydroelectric company the province is well-known for.

The province of Manitoba heavily relies on hydroelectric power provided by the company Manitoba Hydro for their electricity. In 1900, a company called Brandon Electric Light Company sought out a new source of power - hydroelectricity. They built a dam across the Minnedosa River (now called the Little Saskatchewan River), and this dam became the first hydroelectric generating station in the province. Soon, several generating stations for hydroelectricity were scattered about Manitoba, notably on the Winnipeg River. In 1919, the Manitoba government passed the Electric Power Transmission Act, with the aim of providing rural Manitoba with hydro power from the generators on the Winnipeg River. This Act created the Manitoba Power Commission, the predecessor to Manitoba Hydro. In 1961, the commission was merged with the Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board to create Manitoba Hydro. Over the next three decades, Manitoba Hydro took over several other companies (Darren Bernhardt, 2019). Hydroelectricity continues to be a big part of everyday life in Manitoba.

The next big step for electricity use in day-to-day life was the introduction of streetcars. In 1882, the first streetcar ran down Main Street in Winnipeg. This streetcar was pulled by horse just a few years after Winnipeg was incorporated as a city. This quick introduction of the horse-pulled streetcar to Winnipeg allowed the city to be built around that kind of transportation. So a decade later, when electric streetcars were introduced, it was easy to integrate the technology into Winnipeggers daily lives (Dacey, 2018). In 1918, gasoline powered vehicles were operated in Winnipeg, and slowly took over the industry; and in 1955 electric cars stopped operating (Transit History), taken over by their gas-powered counterparts. Although electric cars are rarely used now, they shaped the way Winnipeg was built to incorporate transportation.

Electricity impacted every aspect of life of Manitobans across the province. The first practical applications used were the telegraph for communications and the arc lamp for lighting. By 1883, permanent arc lighting lined the streets of Winnipeg (W. G. Richardson, 2006). The arc lamp lit up the night in Winnipeg, and “provided a measure of reassurance to some people,” (Atkins, 1991) when it came to crime, specifically for women. In more rural settlements, Manitobans used electricity for their livestock. For example, baby chicks need heat to keep from dying in the cold. Heat lamps were used to keep a consistent temperature and these chicks alive. Without the heat lamp, farmers would have to maintain a fire to keep these animals warm, which was not practical. A fire would have to be checked on every few hours to be refuelled. (Goldsborough, 2019). Electricity revolutionized farming and husbandry of livestock, as well as life in the city, by communication, transportation, and light.

Electricity revolutionized Manitoba’s past, and still has a huge impact on the province today. No matter what people do or where people go, every aspect of their daily lives is impacted by electricity. Manitoba wouldn’t be what it is today without electric power. Farmers wouldn’t have the combines to harvest the wheat that has become a symbol of Manitoba, nor would the hockey teams that dot the province be able to play in tournaments without long-distance communication and transport. Everyone and everything relies on electricity to fuel their livelihood.

References

(A History of Electric Power in Manitoba [PDF file]. Winnipeg; Manitoba Hydro. Retreived from https://www.hydro.mb.ca/corporate/history/history_of_electric_power_book.pdf)

(Transit History [webpage]. Winnipeg; Winnipeg Transit. Retreived from https://winnipegtransit.com/en/about-us/transit-history-2/)

[random-hw]

Isolation and Entrapment in Ethan Frome

Isolation and entrapment is something a lot of people can relate to, whether it is due to work, relationships, or schooling. Everyone has been isolated or entrapped at some point in their lives. This isolation can be seen in the book Ethan Frome. In its representation of both character and situation, Ethan Frome represents both the life and the concerns of its author, Edith Wharton.

Isolation is present in both Ethan Frome’s life and Edith Wharton’s. In the book, Ethan Frome is isolated from the outside world as he is trapped at home with his sick wife Zeena. He does not have money for either of them due to his failing farm and sawmill. We get a glimpse at his situation when Ethan is reminiscing the time his mother fell ill, “Left alone, after his father’s accident to carry the burden of the farm and mill… [he] had had no time for convivial loiterings in the village” (Wharton, 50). He never had any intentions of staying at the farm, and hoped to earn enough money to move him and his wife somewhere more urban. Unfortunately, the lack of money keeps him from doing so. He feels isolated from the outside world as he lives so far from town and has to work so much. In Edith Wharton’s life, she is isolated due to her interests. She loves to write in a time where women do not typically write. This separates her from others. Her intellectual isolation is described in the “Afterword” of Ethan Frome, “[H]er struggle ato establish herself as a literary artist and intellectual on equal terms with her European familiars … had fostered extraordinary bitterness” (Kazin, 133). Edith Wharton was isolated from her peers due to her being a woman. This isolation caused her a great deal of pain, as she wished to be regarded for her writing, not her sex. Clearly, Wharton vents her frustrations of isolation into her work.

As well as isolation, entrapment is present in both Ethan Frome’s life and Edith Wharton’s. In both, they are trapped by relationships. In the book, Ethan Frome is unable to pursue a relationship with Mattie because he is already married to her cousin Zeena. His relationship with Zeena is not a happy one, and he dreams of marrying Mattie. His inability to marry Mattie saddens him. As Ethan walks to the Hale’s stables, he intrudes on a couple kissing along the road, “It pleased Ethan to have surprised a pair of lovers on the spot where he and Mattie had stood with such a thirst for each other in their hearts; but he felt a pang at the thought that these two need not hide their happiness” (57). It fills Ethan with grief that he cannot show his affection towards Mattie without hiding it from everyone else, especially Zeena. People would not think kindly of him if he had an affair with his sick wife’s cousin. Similarly, Edith Wharton is unable to pursue a healthier and happier relationship due to her marriage to her husband. Edward Wharton, her husband, is written as “a real husband, as society measures these things, but a less suitable match for Edith Jones would be hard to imagine.” (Armitage, 2). Edward did not share many interests with Edith further than their shared love for travel and dogs. Like Ethan Frome’s marriage, Edith Wharton was not happy in her relationship with her husband. In 1908, Edith started an affair with her friend Morton Fullerton, another writer, similar to the relationship seen between Ethan and Mattie. Edith Wharton undoubtedly expresses her failing relationship through her book Ethan Frome.

Entrapment is shown to be caused by cultural and societal expectations of the time period as well. This entrapment is present in both Ethan Frome’s life and Edith Wharton’s. In the book, Ethan Frome is expected to care for his sick wife Zeena, as she did for his mother. When Zeena first comes to help Ethan’s mother, he feels free. Zeena’s help relieves him of nursing his mother and allows him to return to his normal routine. This freedom “magnified his sense of what he owed her” (51). When his mother dies and Zeena is about to leave, Ethan begs her to stay so he would not be alone. Zeena’s illness causes him to feel trapped again, just like he was when his mother was ill, but he cannot leave Zeena due to what he owed her. Similarly, Edith Wharton is also entrapped due to societal expectations. She is unable to pursue her interests, especially writing, due to societal expectations of a wife at the time. She looks down on women of higher education, due to “tacit family disapproval, poised from the first in search of worlds beyond her own” (Armitage, 9). Thus trapping her to the societal norm of being a housewife. With this in mind, we can connect Edith Wharton’s responsibility of being a housewife to Ethan Frome’s responsibility to being a providing husband.

As can be seen, Edith Wharton vents her inner troubles through the character and situation of Ethan Frome. She expresses her predicament of entrapment and isolation through writing. Isolation is seen today due to the novel COVID-19 virus, as people are told to stay indoors and to not interact with others. The difficulties of isolation are obvious when experienced personally, and we can relate to what Edith Wharton must have felt.

References

Macmillan Publishing Company. (1987). Ethan Frome. New York, N.Y.

Edith Wharton, A Writing Life: Marriage. (2013, November 8). Retrieved April 16, 2020, from https://www.nypl.org/blog/2013/11/08/edith-wharton-writing-life-marriage

[random-hw]

Gender Roles as Represented by the Intertextuality between Atwood and Browning

“People share a common nature, but are trained in gender roles” (Grace Farrell). Humans are not born knowing gender roles, but throughout their childhoods they are taught that men are superior to women. Both men and women share the same nature, being human. This shared nature is disregarded as people bring up their children to fit very strict gender roles set by society. In Atwood’s story and Browning’s poem, these aforementioned gender roles are an ongoing theme between the texts. Margaret Atwood in her short story “My Last Duchess” uses intertextuality, specifically referring to Robert Browning’s poem by the same name. By referencing Browning’s “My Last Duchess”, Atwood comments on gender roles, particularly as they have failed to evolve.

In the past, men dominated women through their power given to them by society. Men’s domination and power is portrayed in Browning’s text, “I gave commands; then all smiles stopped together” (Browning 45-46). The duke “gave commands,” and the duchess was expected to follow these commands. The reason he is able to give commands is because he has all the economic power. She has his last name, and due to thi,s she doesn’t have money, but he does. He is able to buy a new wife and kill his current wife off, and knowing this, he has infinitely more power and control over the duchess. Another example of gender roles in the past is female objectification. Women were often made to cover up their bodies. In Browning’s poem, the painter comments on the duchess’ clothing, “Her mantle laps / [o]ver my lady’s wrist too much” (16-17). The duchess’ “mantle” is revealing her skin. A woman’s skin, and their whole body, iswas owned by their husbands. Over the centuries, men have had control over what women wear. This control is reminiscent of religions which are able to dictate what women wear and what men wear. Usually in these religions women are made to wear clothing that hides their skin, such as a niqab, veil, or even just a dress. A part of where gender roles originate is from these religions. The objectification of women due to male dominance is still prevalent today.

Today society would expect that the playing field would be flattened a bit. Flattening the playing field, or growing out of male domination and female objectification, would step closer towards men and women having equal rights. Equal rights would allow both genders to pursue what they want without the other gender holding them back. Browning’s poem talks about how the duchess is held back from being happy and sharing her happiness by the duke. Nobody should be shamed for being happy. In Atwood’s short story, it will be obvious that things have not changed significantly between the times.

In modern society, men still dominate women, but in different ways. Atwood emphasises this in her short story, “The boys were expected to become doctors, lawyers, dentists, accountants, engineers. As for us girls, we weren’t sure where we were headed” (Atwood 58). The boys are meant to take the higher-paying jobs. They are to take the higher-paying jobs because society sees men as smarter and overall better than women. Women, instead, are expected to be married off and take care of the home and children, or take up a job as a maid or a teacher. Of course women can try to earn a higher-paying job by working hard for it, but a man is more likely to take the job over her without working as hard. Men have more control over women because they hold economic power. Another way gender roles are prevalent today is female objectification. Men still objectify women, even if it is just a catcall in the street. This objectification starts at a very young age, as Atwood suggests in her story, “Breasts of any kind were shameful and could attract catcalls…” (59). These highschool-age girls are taught to hide their chests. They hide their chests because the sexualiztion/fetishization of women is normalized, a man is allowed to make comments on their bodies without consequence. This normalization teaches girls from a young age to be ashamed and insecure about their bodies. It becomes her responsibility to look modest. If she has a visible chest and gets a comment on it then it becomes her fault for not hiding it. Her own body is “shameful”. This shame circles back to religious roots, where women are made to cover up their bodies. It is not fair that girls and women are taught to be ashamed of their biology while men are praised for it.

In today’s world, the gender roles are not much different than the ones put in place a hundred years ago. Society still tells people what their gender is and what they can do as a result of their gender. Gender dictates the power a person has over another. Men have power over women due to the gender roles society has established. Humans all have a shared nature. The nature they share is their humanity. Perhaps not pushing gender roles on children in the most critical time of their brain development would help to remind society of its shared nature between all individuals. Maybe remembering this shared nature would procure an abolished patriarchy.

Works CitedBibliography

Atwood, Margaret. Moral Disorder and Other Stories. New York, Nan A. Talese, 2006.

Browning, Robert. “My Last Duchess.” Sound and Sense, edited by Laurence Perrine, Harcourt, Brace and World, 1956, p. 109.

Farrell, Grace. Lillie Devereux Blake: Retracing a Life Erased. Amherst, University of Massachusetts Press, 2002.

[random-hw]

Comparison Surveillance Societies in 1984 and Modern Society

The dystopian society portrayed in George Orwell’s novel 1984 ominously mirrors today’s society. Orwell’s novel serves as a warning about the world becoming a surveillance society and surveillance systems’ role in giving power to the government. Using cameras, microphones, and even social media, corporations and the government watches and listens to people, even inside their own homes. This breach of privacy is also prevalent in 1984 where Big Brother has cameras and microphones inside of people’s homes and constantly watches them for any sign of disloyalty.

Surveillance of citizens is a characteristic both of modern society and of the world created by Orwell in 1984. Big Brother has devices called telescreens installed in all the Party member’s homes. These telescreens both watch and listen. The Lower Party members can not turn it off, but Upper Party members can turn the telescreen off whenever they please, although most of them choose to only turn it off for thirty minutes at a time to avoid suspicion. Even they, the most trusted members of the society, only turn off their screen for thirty minutes. No one in this society is above suspicion. These telescreens are also placed in the streets and other public places, constantly monitoring people for any sign of defiance. Microphones are also placed in places where people may go to get away from telescreens. For example, the character Winston and his lover Julia often hide away in a room above an antique store. They believe that they have found a location free from the eye of surveillance. One day it was revealed that there is a telescreen hidden behind a picture frame on the wall, always listening to Winston and Julia’s conversations. No actual escape from surveillance exists. Winston and Julia were doomed. In modern society, people may also find it hard to escape from surveillance, as technology is everywhere. Just like in 1984, society is being constantly surveilled with no or little escape.

Another method Big Brother uses to watch the people in 1984, is to make the children surveillance devices. The children are taught from a young age to turn in their parents to the Thought Police if they think their parents are committing a thoughtcrime. The Thought Police also walk the streets and watch people, keeping an eye out on any signs of disloyalty to the Party. As a result of being watched all the time, the Party members have to censor themselves, in speech and in thought. They have to make sure they do not say the wrong thing as it may get them in trouble, and if they think the wrong thing, it may show through in their facial expressions. The telescreens are a symbol of a metaphorical eye. The characters in 1984 keep an eye on themselves, and correct any inappropriate thoughts. By the end of the novel, Winston refuses to acknowledge memories of his mother. He has become his own prison guard. As a result, the telescreens are working as intended. They teach the characters to maintain their inner thoughts and memories so they fit with the rules Big Brother has created.

Modern society is much less dystopian than 1984. Society today has surveillance cameras in stores, public spaces, schools, and some people have cameras outside and inside of their homes. These cameras are in place for the purpose of deterring criminals or identifying criminals. Unlike 1984, the footage from these surveillance cameras is not constantly monitored. Instead, it is only kept for a short period of time until it is erased to allow for new footage to take its place. When it is looked at, it is for the purpose of identifying criminals, and sometimes solving a missing persons case. Surveillance cameras are not seen as malicious by most people. However, they do have the potential to monitor and record phone calls. As revealed by Edward Snowden, former employee of the NSA, the National Security Agency in the United States monitors and listens to phone calls (Templeton 00:00:40 - 00:00:58). It is not hard to assume that other countries do the same sort of surveillance on their own civilians as well, and there is no place that is safe from being surveilled. Similarly, apps also have the ability to take information from their users. It has been revealed that apps, such as Facebook, often scan messages or even tap into microphones to gather information so they can target ads that meet the user’s interests. Phone users do not have the ability to know what apps will gather information and which will not, but it is safe to assume that all apps and websites are compiling information on users around the world. Although this maintenance of data may appear benign, there is no telling of who is able to access one’s data, and it takes one hacker or data leak to reveal your information to the world.

In both modern society and 1984, the constant surveillance is an obvious breach of privacy. In 1984, the Party members have no privacy in their own homes as they are being constantly surveilled by telescreens. They cannot show their true thoughts and emotions. Even sleep talking, something people cannot control, can be punished. They have no privacy in public as well, as they are being monitored by telescreens, microphones, and their own peers. There is nowhere they can go where they will not be watched. In modern society, people have similar surveillance devices to telescreens, but they voluntarily put them in their homes, smart devices such as Alexa and Google Home. These devices are always listening for their “wake word”, and as a result, they are listening all the time. Although companies will deny it, there is evidence to show that these devices collect information to target ads. Another device that may be monitoring people in their own homes are cameras. Security cameras, baby monitors, and smart doorbells have all been proven to be hackable if they are not secured properly. These hackers have access to live footage of a person’s home, without the person knowing it. Sometimes these hackers share the live feed with others, as seen on websites such as Insecam.org and Camstreamer.com. Security cameras in public are also at risk. If they are live feed, then they can also be hacked. If the cameras physically record footage on tapes or disks, if put into the wrong hands a person could figure out where someone has been and when.

The government and corporations use surveillance as a means of gaining and securing power. A way they gain power is by controlling people. This gain of power through control is seen in 1984. In the novel, the fear of being caught and probably killed if they break a rule gives control to the government. The fear of being caught keeps the people in line and keeps them devoted to Big Brother. Under surveillance, the people in the Party make sure to censor themselves in thoughts and speech to make sure they do not, even unconsciously, break any rules. In modern society, the government and corporations also use surveillance to control people. They use surveillance to keep people from stealing or committing other crimes such as vandalism. Another way companies and corporations gain power in modern society is through money. Corporations will sell information to other corporations or even the government for monetary gain, They use this information to target advertisements to consumers (Kiss 00:00:59 - 00:01:09). This information can also be sold to political parties, who then are able to target a person based on their beliefs held. The algorithms that help advertisers respond to their consumers are the same algorithms that create the echo chambers that are contributing to the polarization to society.

1984 obviously mirrors modern society, but some of Orwell’s predictions were wrong, while a lot of them were right. Unlike 1984, most of society has the right of freedom of speech, and a right to privacy. On the internet, though, censorship and monitoring does take place, and some of our rights seem to be taken away. It is hard to say if the future of our surveillance society will ever reach the terrifying predictions Orwell has written, but it looks like for now society has a good balance of surveillance and privacy.

Works Cited

Templeton, Brad. "Brad Templeton: Today’s Surveillance Society is Beyond Orwellian" YouTube, uploaded by Big Think, 21 August 2014, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=awFrWxfDA30&t=41s.

Kiss, Jemima. "The NSA and surveillance … made simple - animation" YouTube, uploaded by The Guardian, 27 November 2013, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GoM4jIZbTtQ&t=60s.

Orwell, George. 1984. New York, Signet Classic, 1981.

[random-hw]

Sin and Redemption in Indian Horse

Sin and Redemption in Indian Horse

Post-colonial literature is the literature written by people from formerly colonized countries. This literature’s purpose is to confront the issues and consequences of decolonizing a country. An example of post-colonial literature can be seen in the novel Indian Horse by Richard Wagamese, where the book follows an Indigenous boy named Saul Indian Horse, and his life in post-colonial Canada. His life follows the pattern and journey through innocence, sin, and redemption. His journey represents the larger journey of Canadian society through this cycle as it deals with its colonial past.

In the first half of the book the reader sees how Saul is innocent in his youth. His lack of acquaintance with evil can be traced to his grandmother. His grandmother protects him. Saul’s grandmother shields him from the horrors of residential school, “It was the school that Naomi hid us from” (Wagamese 9). The [residential] school symbolizes evil, and this evil is what Saul’s grandmother keeps him away from. In any event, Naomi is there for Saul. When his grandmother dies, it marks the end of this protection. Saul becomes isolated from any help and is thrust into the residential school system, the one thing his grandmother was trying to protect him from. Another way Saul is innocent is that he is connected to Indigenous culture, unlike his sinful parents. He practices Indigenous ways alongside his grandmother. When Saul learns Christian beliefs, however, he is confused by the practices of the school, “I could never understand…” (52). Saul cannot grasp how the white man say God is looking over him, just for God to turn his head away and ignore the sufferings of the Indigenous children. He fails to understand the motivations of the school. He cannot “put together” the actions with the words of the school. In any case, Saul tries to remember Naomi’s teachings to stay innocent, alongside learning the Christian religion.

Saul also lacks guilt. He plays hockey purely, using his seer ability, to find joy and freedom where it was once lacking. Hockey is seen as a freedom by Saul, and this is pointed out by Virgil, “You walk into a secret place…” (115). In the light of all the abuse and suffering Saul endures, he has a secret place to go to, where no one else can follow. Saul uses his newfound sport as an escape from the horrors of the residential school. He continues to be proud of himself and his culture, and refuses to see being Indigenous as negative. When he escapes the school and connects with more Indigenous people, he is told, “You are like a brother to me” (157). He creates a family that he had once lost. All things considered, Saul’s innocence derives from his grandmother’s love and spirituality.

Saul soon delves into sin. He becomes guilty. During hockey, he gives up being a seer and becomes a fighter. Being a seer is a part of his Indigenous identity, and this ability was passed down from his grandfather, but he throws these important things away. Moreover, he gives in to the ignorance of the white people, highlighting the theme of post-colonial literature. These people believe his background makes him unworthy of playing a white sport, “...made me feel ashamed of my skin” (164). The white players made Saul so ashamed of his skin, something he was once proud of. They believe they own the game. Saul soon abandons the sport he had once found freedom in and turns to alcohol, “Before long I was too broke to get out of town and too wasted to care” (182). In addition to drinking, he starts to accept he is a deadbeat. He pushes everyone away, including his Indigenous identity, his family, and his sport. In the same way, he becomes no better than his parents. Post-colonialism is the cause of this addiction. The white people pushed Saul to this low, and provided the poison that fueled his addiction. In the long run, post-colonialism is the root of most of Saul’s problems.

Father Leboutilier is guilty as well. He takes advantage of Saul’s innocence and ignorance. Saul does not know from right and wrong, and the priest uses this ignorance for his own pleasure. Likewise, he rapes Saul to please himself and strips the boy of his innocence and childhood. Father Leboutilier lets Saul play hockey to make up for the rape, “I loved the idea so much that I did what he asked” (199). Saul just wants to play what the older boys are playing, and when he gets offered to play for the price of his innocence, he can’t say no. The boy is too ignorant and young to give or take away consent, too young to decide if it is alright, and too young to make these choices. He uses hockey to drown his guilt because hockey is “payment” for the rape used to “buy [his] silence” (199). This payment makes Saul silent, because the boy assumes that their exchange is fair. In brief, Father Leboutilier is the spark of which starts the flame of Saul’s sin and guilt.

As can be seen in Indian Horse, reconciliation means for Indigenous and non-Indigenous to live together without conflict, to maintain their own cultures without impeding each other. Saul finds forgiveness in the white people and in himself by looking back on his life, retelling his story. He visits the places he went to as a child, places such as God’s Lake and the residential school. At God’s Lake, he spiritually finds himself through his family, and reconnects with his Indigenous culture, “I offered my thanks aloud in an Ojibway prayer” (206). Saul finally abandons the Christian learnings in favour of his former Ojibway ones, and shows this switch when he prays. He also decides to go to rehab to help quit his addiction to alcohol, “Saul ends up in the New Dawn Centre for substance abuse recovery. Now that Saul is sober and no longer playing hockey, he is forced to face his past” (Regan 4). Deep down, Saul has a spark that wants to continue living, to keep fighting for his people. In rehab, he writes about his life. Revisiting his life helps him find himself again. Altogether, Saul’s search for forgiveness also gives him back some of his innocence.

Saul finds redemption by realizing he is not guilty for others’ actions. He understands that his rape is not his fault. He also finds that the racism used against him was not his fault either, but society’s fault. Saul recognizes that throughout his life he was taken advantage of by people. Father Leboutilier took advantage of his ignorance to rape him, and white people took advantage of his Indigenous background to bully him. The gift of being a seer shows Saul a way to redemption. He talks about what he learned over the years, “In the end, I learned the only one I could take care of was me” (Wagamese 217). Saul understands that he can’t control the actions of other people, only the actions of himself. He can choose not to seek vengeance on those who wronged him, and that is what he does. Saul tells Martha his dreams of being a coach, “I want to bring them the joy I found; the speed, the grace, the strength and beauty of the game” (212). He becomes a hockey coach for more young Indigenous boys, and uses his ability to help others, taking a more peaceful path than he had taken before. Namely, he wants to give them freedom, like hockey did for him. Saul uses his past experiences to become a better person. As shown above, Saul redeems himself and learns to use his abilities to help pave a path for future generations.

Although formally guilty, Saul finds peace and redemption in the end. This is the same for post-colonial Canada, for the white people were guilty for their racism against the Indiginous, but reconciled the best they could. This book revisits the horrors of residential schools and racism, and reminds the reader that Canada cannot make the same mistake again. This story adds to post-colonial literature by giving the reader insight into the life of an Indigenous person in a post-colonial country.

Works Cited

Wagamese, Richard. Indian Horse. Douglas and McIntyre, 2013.

Regan, Rebecca. “Inside, Outside, Inside-Out: Circles in Indian Horse.” https://roam.macewan.ca/islandora/object/gm:812/datastream/OBJ/download/Inside__outside__inside___out__circles_in_Indian_horse.pdf.

[random-hw]

Motif and Symbol:

Plants - In Tuesdays with Morrie by Mitch Albom, the author uses symbolism of plants to illustrate how life goes on after someone dies. At the start of the book, it opens with Mitch describing the small hibiscus plant that sits on the windowsill, “...by a window in the study where he could watch a small hibiscus plant shed its pink leaves” (Albom 1). The book ends the same way, describing the plant, “...by a window in his study where he could watch a small hibiscus plant shed its pink flowers” (192). The only difference between these quotes is what the plant is shedding. In the beginning of the book, it's shedding its leaves, as a plant does when it is dying. At the end, it is shedding its flowers, which a plant does when it is thriving and growing. As Morrie is on his deathbed, the plant beside him is also dying. Once he dies, however, the plant thrives, symbolizing rebirth or growth. Throughout the book, the plant is mentioned, often just a passing observation, “The hibiscus plant behind his head was still holding on, small but firm” (167). Just like Morrie, the plant is small and weak, but firm. Morrie is firm in his personality and the way he talks to others. The plant represents Morrie, and him dying. When Morrie dies, his life is carried on in others, including the plant. Albom uses the plant symbolism well to represent Morrie.

[random-hw]

Homologous and Analogous Structures

Homologous Structures

- - - - X

A homologous structure is defined as a similar structure found in animals that evolved from a common ancestor. Birds and seals share a homologous structure in their forelimbs. They both have the same kind of bones in their forelimbs even though they use them for different purposes. Both have a humerus, radius, ulna, and digits. The difference between them is that birds use their forelimbs to fly while seals use their forelimbs to swim.

Another example of homology is the leaves of a pitcher plant, a Venus fly trap, a cactus and a poinsettia. Their structures are derived from a common ancestor but each has its own different purpose. Pitcher plants and Venus fly traps are evolved to catch live prey. Poinsettia is evolved to look like it has flower petals and cactuses have spines for protection.

Analogous Structure

- - - - X

An analogous structure is defined as similar structures that evolved independently in two living organisms to serve the same purpose. Birds, certain insects, and bats share an analogous structure. The structure of their wings is different in each individual organism.

Despite the difference in structure in each of their wings, they have all evolved their wings for the same purpose - to fly. Birds' wings are comprised of elongated arms with a single finger on the end. Meanwhile, bats have 3 fingers over which the skin is stretched. Insect wings have no bones at all.

Citations:

Scoville, Heather. (2021, February 16). Analogous Structures in Evolution. Retrieved April 26, 2021, from https://www.thoughtco.com/about-analogous-structures-1224491

Statham, D. (2012, October). Homology made simple - creation.com. Creation Ministries International. Retrieved April 26, 2021, from https://creation.com/homology-made-simple

Salter, M. (n.d.). Examples of Homology in Animals and Plants. Your Dictionary. Retrieved April 26, 2021, from https://examples.yourdictionary.com/examples-of-homology.html

[random-hw]

Genetics and Pea Plants

Gregor Mendel

The way traits are passed from parent to offspring, up to this point, has been a mystery. How are the traits shown decided? Is there a way to predict what traits will be passed down? Through years of research through pea plants, I may have found the answers to these questions.

My hypothesis was that each parent contributes some physical traits to their offspring. By using pea plants, I observed how the peas inherited traits from their parent plants, and I found that some traits take dominance over others. Through these findings, I concluded that traits are passed using three laws. The law of dominance, law of segregation, and the law of independent assortment.

For these experiments, I worked with true-breeding varieties of pea plants. These plants possessed identical factors for a particular trait. I would cross these plants with other true-breeding plants, such as plants with purple flowers and plants with white flowers, and observe the traits shown in the hybrid offspring plant.

I observed several traits of the pea plant: the seed shape, seed color, pod shape, pod color, flower color, flower location, and overall plant size. By making hybrids out of true-breeding plants for all seven of these traits, I found that each hybrid offspring gave similar results. I found that, unlike prior belief that parents traits “blend”, some traits took dominance over other traits.

Firstly, I bred the parent plants together to create a hybrid plant. After many trials I found that the offspring plants show traits of only one parent plant. I then bred the offspring together and found that there was a 3:1 ratio of passed down traits.

For example, when I studied the offspring of a tall pea plant and a short pea plant, the offspring of those two plants were always tall. But when I bred the offspring together, I found that the new offspring had a 3:1 ratio of tall:short. These findings suggest that traits, despite not being expressed physically, are still prevalent in the plant. This also suggests that the factor of a tall plant is dominant over the factor of a short plant.

With this new knowledge, I created three laws. The first law is the law of dominance. The law states that some traits have the ability to mask other traits. I call the traits that can mask others dominant traits, and the traits being masked are called recessive traits.

Secondly is the law of segregation. The law of segregation states that during meiosis, the factors are seperated. Therefore, each gamete carries only one factor for any particular hereditary unit. When the gametes combine, the two factors combine. For example, if a pea plant received a factor for red flowers from its female parent and a factor for white flowers from its male parent, the plant would possess two factors for each color.

The third and final law is the law of independent assortment. This law says that during the formation of gametes, segregating pairs of factors assort independently, making the combination of factors a random process. You cannot know which combination of factors will end up in any particular egg or sperm.

From these findings, I can conclude that the prior knowledge of traits mixing together is false. Traits do not mix. The offspring is given traits from each parent. The chances of a trait being passed on can be predicted, as some traits hold dominance over others, but otherwise it cannot be 100% determined what traits will be passed on.

REFERENCES:

Miko, I., Ph.D. (2008). Gregor Mendel and the Principles of Inheritance. Retrieved February 19, 2021, from https://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpage/gregor-mendel-and-the-principles-of-inheritance-593/

Openstax. (2012, August 23). Mendel’s Experiments and the Laws of Probability. Retrieved February 19, 2021, from https://cnx.org/contents/185cbf87-c72e-48f5-b51e-f14f21b5eabd@9.85:60/Mendels-Experiments-and-the-La

[random-hw]

Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome

Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome (HBOC) is an adult-onset, cancer predisposition syndrome. HBOC is characterized by a high risk of breast and ovarian cancers, and an increased risk of other cancers such as male breast cancer, prostate cancer, pancreatic cancer, and melanoma.

CAUSES: HBOC is caused by a mutation in the BRCA1 or the BRCA2 gene.

SIGNS:

BREAST CANCER:

Thickening or swelling of part of the breast.

Irritation or dimpling of breast skin.

Redness or flaky skin in the nipple area or the breast.

Pulling in of the nipple or pain in the nipple area.

Nipple discharge other than breast milk, including blood.

OVARIAN CANCER:

Pelvic or abdominal (belly) pain

Trouble eating or feeling full quickly

Urinary symptoms such as urgency (always feeling like you have to go) or frequency (having to go often)

SYMPTOMS:

BREAST CANCER:

bone pain

weight loss

nausea

loss of appetite

jaundice

shortness of breath

cough

headache

double vision

muscle weakness

OVARIAN CANCER:

Fatigue (extreme tiredness)

Upset stomach

Back pain

Pain during sex

Constipation

Changes in a woman's period, such as heavier bleeding than normal or irregular bleeding

Abdominal (belly) swelling with weight loss

PATTERN OF INHERITANCE: HBOC syndrome is most commonly associated with mutations in either the BRCA1 gene or the BRCA2 gene. In HBOC syndrome, there is usually a family history of cancer and the variant gene is inherited. The underlying causes of cancer are not completely understood and while inheriting a variation in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene greatly increases a person’s risk of developing certain cancers, it does not mean that the people will definitely develop cancer.

About 5-10% of breast cancers and 10-15% of ovarian cancers can be attributed to HBOC.

DIAGNOSIS:

A diagnosis of Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer Syndrome (HBOC) is considered when there are multiple cases of breast cancer and/or ovarian cancer on the same side of the family or there is a history of cancers on one side of the family..

The diagnosis of BRCA1 and BRCA2 HBOC is established in a proband by identification of a heterozygous germline pathogenic variant in BRCA1 or BRCA2 on molecular genetic testing.

A male relative is diagnosed with breast cancer

A woman is diagnosed with a second breast cancer in the same or the other breast or has both breast and ovarian cancer

TREATMENT:

Chemotherapy is the use of drugs to destroy cancer cells. It usually works by keeping the cancer cells from growing, dividing, and making more cells. Because cancer cells usually grow and divide faster than normal cells, chemotherapy has more of an effect on cancer cells.

Surgery can: remove as much of the cancer as possible, find out whether the cancer has spread to the lymph nodes, and relieve symptoms of advanced cancer

You may have radiation therapy to: lower the risk of the cancer coming back, or recurring, after surgery (called adjuvant therapy), shrink a tumour before surgery (called neoadjuvant therapy), treat breast cancer that comes back, or recurs, in the area of a mastectomy, relieve pain or control the symptoms of advanced breast cancer (called palliative therapy)

PREVENTION:

Tamoxifen (available as a generic drug) taken for 5 years by women with a high risk of breast cancer lowers this risk by 50%. Some research suggests that tamoxifen can help lower breast cancer risk for women with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations.

preventive surgical removal of both breasts, can lower the risk of breast cancer by more than 90%.

preventive surgical removal of the ovaries and fallopian tubes, can lower the risk of ovarian cancer by approximately 90%. It may also help lower the risk of breast cancer by 50% for women who have not been through menopause.

CURRENT RESEARCH:

Because both PARP and BRCA also serve to repair DNA damage inside cancer cells, disabling the PARP first-responder in someone who doesn't have a functioning BRCA repair crew delivers what Rudolph describes as a lethal "double whammy" to cancer cells. Scientists recently discovered that another protein called HPF1 (histone PARylation Factor 1) is attached to the PARP protein at precisely the location where all the action happens, working closely with it in its role as first responder.

Scientists and researchers try to figure out how to cost-effectively test greater amounts of people. The results indicated that population screening of 30-year-old women resulted in 75 fewer cancer cases per 100,000 women. With 45-year-old women, the benefit decreased sharply with only 24 fewer cancer cases per 100,000 women. The researchers also analyzed quality-adjusted-life-years (QALYs) with the two scenarios and found that 288 QALYs were gained for women age 30 compared to 97 QALYs for women age 45.

INTERESTING FACTS:

Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome can cause cancers other than breast and ovarian cancer

About 3% of breast cancers and 10% of ovarian cancers are caused by inherited mutations.

You can get genetically tested to see if you have HBOC.

FREQUENCY:

5-10% of breast cancers are attributed to HBOC

10-15% of ovarian cancers are attributed to HBOC

[random-hw]

TIMELINE OF WORK:

Mary-Claire King first started to work in genetics in 1967, when she transferred into a genetics PhD program while in university.

Throughout 1968 she worked for political activist Ralph Nader to research the effects of pesticides on farmers in California. King joined Dr. Allan Wilson’s lab at this time. She analyzed the molecular similarities between humans and chimpanzees, and the DNA sequence of protein coding genes and the resulting amino-acid sequences. She reported that 99% of amino acid sequences in humans and chimpanzees are identical.

In 1973 she began to focus on breast cancer research. She hypothesized that inherited genetic mutations could make women predisposed to breast cancer. This was unheard of at the time because the cancer research at the time focused on viruses being the cause of cancer.

In the early 1980’s, King convinced the National Cancer Institute to add questions about family history regarding cancers in their survey to determine the effects of birth control pills in the development of breast, ovarian, and uterine cancer. King created mathematical models to search for a variable that would explain the patterns of breast cancer in affected families. She found that models with the assumption of an autosomal-dominant breast cancer trait explained all cases of heritable breast cancer. At this point, King knew there was a breast cancer gene.

After 17 years, in 1990, King and her group located the gene. They had identified the BRCA1 on chromosome 17. King continued to research the BRCA1 gene and developed multiple screening tools to detect cancer-causing mutations.

In 1995, King moved her lab to the University of Washington, where she researches epidemiology, sequencing, and genomics to identify novel disease-causing mutations and improve human health.

KEY CONTRIBUTIONS/DISCOVERIES

Analysis of the molecular similarities between chimps and humans in 1968.

The discovery of the breast cancer gene BRCA1 on the 17th chromosome in 1990.

CONTEXTUAL/BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION

Mary-Claire King was born on Feb 27, 1946, in Evanston Illinois. She went to the University of California where she got her PhD in genetics. She taught at the University of Chile in 1973 before a military coup and the overthrowal of President Salvador Allende made it unsafe for her to teach, and she moved back to California with her husband and daughter.

AWARDS

1992, Susan G. Komen Foundation Award for Distinguished Achievement in Breast Cancer, Susan G. Komen for the Cure

1994, G. H. A. Clowes Award, American Association for Cancer Research (AACR) & Eli Lilly and Company

1999, Basic Science Award, Brinker International Awards for Breast Cancer Research, Susan G. Komen for the Cure

2010, CSHL Double Helix Medal Honoree

2016, National Medal of Science

2018, Advocacy Award, American Society of Human Genetics (ASHG)

2020, William Allan Award, American Society of Human Genetics (ASHG)

[random-hw]

Human Cloning personal response

Personally, I am on the fence about human cloning. I think human cloning has positive aspects to it as long as it is used right, but in the wrong hands it can be pretty harmful. I also think that a lot more research needs to be done on it as well.

One of the best aspects of human cloning is the ability to clone certain parts of a person’s body. For example, if a person needs a transplant they can get a cloned, healthy version of that organ that their body won’t reject unlike a transplant from a random person. Their body won’t reject the new organ because it is made of the exact same genetic material and the immune system will recognize that.

Another positive aspect of human cloning is the opportunity for infertile or same-sex couples to have biological children. The process to create a human clone is to remove the chromosomes of an egg and replace them with the nucleus of a somatic cell from the individual which is being cloned, and by doing this couples can have biological children. Although the cloned offspring is only biological to one of the parents, it is better than neither.

The research into human cloning has also gained insight into gene editing. Using gene editing can eradicate genetic diseases like cystic fibrosis or gene mutations that make people more prone to certain cancers. The absence of these diseases can cause a great positive impact on a child.

Now, the downsides of human cloning. Will clones lack the individuality of the average person? Will they be expected to behave just like their original counterpart? In pop culture, clones are usually portrayed as exact replicas of a person, including behaviours, personality, etc. If they aren’t being portrayed as this, then they are usually being shown to be “evil”. Society already has a rock-solid outlook on how they expect clones to behave. But clones will be shaped by their surroundings and the people around them and will develop their own personality as they grow up just as every child does. Clones would also have a lot of pressure put on them to be exactly like their original counterpart. Clones would be another minority people would look down on, it’s not fair.

Speaking of minorities, the topic of eugenics comes up. With gene editing, will people create “designer babies”? People may clone humans to be built the way they think the perfect human would look like. If we go back in time to World War II, we know that Hitler had a similar idea of using eugenics to “benefit” humanity by creating a world of people with Nordic/Aryan traits. History may repeat itself with human cloning.

We also have to think about how we view disabilities. I know plenty of people with autism or people who are deaf who do not view themselves as disabled, just different. Is it ethical to edit genes to avoid “disabilities” such as these? Ableism comes into play here, where some people may have a negative outlook on people who are a bit different from themselves.

The world isn't ready to clone whole humans yet. We need to be able to accept the people around us before we go cloning people. I think cloning organs and getting rid of genetic diseases that are deadly or painful to the clone is beneficial and that’s what we should work towards.

[random-hw]

Body Checking Response

In the article “Bodychecking and concussions in ice hockey: Should our youth pay the price?” by Anthony Marchie and Michael D. Cusimano, the authors talk about the relation of sports and concussions among youth. A concussion is defined as a type of brain injury caused by any trauma that causes the head and brain to move rapidly back and forth. Evidence shows that aggressive behaviours in sports such as body checking can result in such concussions. Should these types of behaviours be allowed in the game?

Personally, I think body checking shouldn’t be allowed. The author states that, “Even minor concussions are serious injuries because they can lead to second-impact syndrome or cumulative effects in the event of another concussion” (Marchie and Cusimano 2). The concussions people receive during sports can have terrible and life-long effects on the brain. In my opinion, children are not able to consent to the dangers that hockey and other sports with body checking pose on their health. Many parents force kids into sports and it’s not fair to the child that they could do permanent damage to their brains for something their parents choose to put them in. It’s also not ethical to endanger children in something that can impact their brain and possibly even kill them (second-impact syndrome).

Coaches in hockey teach children that aggression will make them better players. The article reports, “...minor league coaches refused to participate in a video about concussion prevention because they thought that watching the video would make their players less aggressive and successful as a team” (3). The aggression that leads to concussions is taught through the belief that aggressive players are better players. We know that this isn’t true as statistics show that teams that focused more on sportsmanship and working as a team won more than teams that were physically aggressive. From personal experience boys who have been taught to be aggressive in hockey are more aggressive in other aspects of their lives like at school.

The authors of the article are clear about their opinion on the issue. They end the article by saying, “Education and the elimination of bodychecking remain the most effective strategies for preventing concussions and other hockey-related injuries'' (3). The authors believe that hockey can be an injury-free game while remaining fun without body checking being involved. I agree with their beliefs. There is no reason young boys should be taught that injuring their peers is the way to success. They need to be educated on how teamwork and other strategies can be more effective. Coaches also need to be educated on how brain injuries can result in life-long issues and the growing brain of a young child should not be enduring such injuries.

I think federally they need to implement new rules and regulations on body checking and other sport-related violence to protect Canada’s youth. By making it the responsibility of the federal government, all across Canada will have the same rules. We need to create regulations for who can be coaches and make sure they get the proper training to be able to coach properly and safely.

People will argue that hockey has always had body checking and you can not change the way the game is played. But I argue that a lot of things have changed in society to protect people’s health, and that tradition is not always the best way to do things. We don’t use asbestos in houses anymore to protect people’s health, even though we once thought that that was the best way to insulate houses. Once we become educated on the dangers that something might cause, the smart way to move forward is to set preventative measures so that people aren’t being harmed by it anymore. Why would we not implement this logic into sports?

The dangers of concussions are seriously downplayed. The brain is one of the most important parts of the human body and injuries to such a sensitive but important organ can be detrimental. The article talks about how these injuries can have negative impacts on the brain, “The younger developing brain is at an even higher risk of injury. Repeated concussions may lead to permanent learning disabilities and other neurological and psychiatric problems” (2). Injuries to the brain can literally alter the way a person thinks or the ability for other organs or body parts to operate properly. We need to see concussions as what they really are: a serious injury to the most important organ in our bodies.

All in all, I think the conclusion that we can pull from the article “Bodychecking and concussions in ice hockey: Should our youth pay the price?” by Anthony Marchie and Michael D. Cusimano is that more regulations should be put in place for youth hockey so that Canadian youth is being protected from traumatic brain injuries. Young children cannot consent to the risk of life-long injuries and coaches need to be trained to prevent these injuries. So why haven’t we, in 2021, taken the steps forward to protect our children?