Responses to Blog Presentations

Group 1: Erika Sison, Holly Lam, Sarah Gleeson
The explanation of what purgatory is was very useful. I foudn it very interesting that this group thought that Cheryl's sin was silence because she felt guilty about not standing up and distracting the gunmen. I didn't pick up on that when I first read the book and it really made the whole four fold ontology theory make sense.

Group 2: Clayton Ng, Jamie Masaro, Wilfred Tsang, Roy Ma
This group found common themes in most of the texts we read which I think will be useful for the final. I enjoyed how they related the whole concept of Carpe Diem to Hey Nostradamus! and All Tomorrow's Parties.

Group 3: Ken Smith, Bryce Brentlinger, Cvijeta Stojanovic, Lorenz Nierves
I think that the beginning of this group's presentation could be tied into group 2's presentations becasue it talked about poetry and how it is fragmented and often difficult to understand. The part of the presentation about the preface of Hey Nostradamus! was very interesting. Ken was saying that the Corinthians part of the Bible which the preface is from also said something to the effect of, "without the knowledge of sins, you can't knowingly commit them". I thought this was really interesting - kind of like saying "ignorance is bliss".

Group 4: Melissa Yeaman, Lauren Brown
This group talked about fragmentation. I thought it was really interesting that they broke down All Tomorrow's Parties into macro and micro fragments. It was also really interesting how they highlighted the importance of fragments in Hey Nostradamus! because they separated each character's point of view.

Responses to the Presentations

Jodie, I didnt get your email until just now. These posting were ontime I promise! :)

Group 2: Ken Smith, Bryce Brentlinger, Cvijeta Stojanovic, Lorenz Nierves

I found it very interesting how Ken thought that rather than the main theme of Hey Nostradamus being faith and doubt, it is hope. Throughout the novel we see so many characters change and need to ask ourselves whether or not they are genuine changes. Douglas Coupland leaves us to make our own decision on whether or not we think so. Do the parents of Cheryl really change their thoughts of Jason like they claim? Or is Cheryl's brother right, and are they faking it? What about Reg? Does he really change? Who killed Jason? Is it Barb? Does her character change? As readers, we so badly hope for a happy ending and hope for characters to change, but whether they really do is up to us. Coupland leaves it to his readers to figure out our own ending and I think that is unique.

Group 4: Clayton Ng, Jamie Masaro, Wilfred Tsang, Roy Ma

You mentioned how you thought that Douglas Coupland constantly reminds us of how we live our lives in fear, but is that really a bad thing? I think that if we live life boasting about tomorrow, sure that what we have today will be there forever, we're in for a big surprise. We will fall hard when something unexpected happens. I think too many people have the mind set of "it will never happen to me". Too many people are thinking about the present instead of looking into the future. I think this is a big problem because the consequences of the unexplainable events that catch us off guard, can be minimized if we're only aware of what can happen. It's important not to get too comfortable with our lives but to be prepared to shift. It's kind of like when we're playing tennis. If we stand on our feet with our knees locked, when the ball doesn't come directly to us, we won't be prepared, and we'll miss it. If however, we have our knees bent, and the ball curves to the left or to the right, we'll have been prepared and be able to hit it back. So in response to Clayton, I don't think that living in fear is a bad thing, but a way of preventing unfortunate events from becoming disastrous.

Group 5: Melissa Yeaman, Lauren Brown

I found it interesting how when speaking about the novel Hey Nostradamus, you said that "each of these characters are fragments because there is no unity with one another. There is no unity due to a loss of a unifying idea and in this story, the unifying idea is religion". Religion is supposed to bring people together, but instead distances and alienates people from others. It is supposed to enhance love and relationships, but instead creates hate and arguments. So many people today are frusterated with religion because of this common outcome. Religion initiates judgement and it is for this reason that people think they are better off without it. Ironically, religion was created for our own betterment, but in the end people choose to stay away from religion in order to have a better life. Why has religion become like this? Why have people twisted and distorted the concept of religion and turned it into something horrible? I wonder if its reputation will ever morph back to the way was intended to be, an idea of a loving, selfless, peaceful life.

Blog Presentation Comments

-->Group 1: Erika Sison, Holly Lam, Sarah Gleeson
I agree with the point that Holly made about how Reg does not convincingly representing heaven (as Madiha also commented on before me).
Holly said that Reg does not represent heaven because he "does not show any love". I completely agree. He does not show any characteristics of what heaven should be about: love, trust, apathy. The proof that Dr. Ogden provided on how Reg represented heaven did not convince me. Although I do believe that Cheryl represents purgatory, I think that Reg can also represent purgatory. In his section of the book, he grows as a person when he purges his own sins and admits to his own wrong-doings.

-->Group 2: Clayton Ng, Jamie Masaro, Wilfred Tsang, Roy Ma
The group made an interesting connection between the similar themes of fragmentation in All Tomorrow's Parties and The Innocent Traveller.
Dr. Ogden pointed out in lecture that All Tomorrow's Parties had sentence fragments and that the chapters were fragmented, to come together in the end.
We can also say this about The Innocent Traveller because the chapters are fragments of short stories that fit together to make a plot.
When initially looking at the two novels, I find it very hard to see a connection between the two, but you guys have made a very interesting connection!

-->Group 3: Ken Smith, Bryce Brentlinger, Cvijeta Stojanovic, Lorenz Nierves
It was interesting to hear two different interpretations of the preface from Hey Nostradamus! by Ken and Lorenz.
I thought that both interpretations had very good points and were both very convincing.
I especially liked the interesting point that Lorenz made about the line, "we shall not all sleep".
He pointed out that "sleeping" is when you're at peace. He related this to the line by saying that "we shall not sleep" could represent the attitude of the people after the massacre and how they "will not be at peace". This definitely helped me connect the preface to the book and helped me look at it in different ways.

-->Group 4: Melissa Yeaman, Lauren Brown
There were a lot of good points made on sentence fragments during the presentation. The group made an interesting point about how fragments separate different perspectives. It would be interesting to consider that if different people read different fragments, they might interpret the whole story in completely different ways.

Group Presentation Comments

Group: Erika Sison , Holly Lam, Sarah Gleeson

It was interesting to watch this group’s presentation because they added on to what Dr. Ogden had said in class about the four fold ontology: heaven, hell, limbo, and purgatory. They also explained what the term ontology meant which I am sure was very helpful to those who still were not sure about that term.

In examining this topic, I actually do have a different view after looking through the text myself and having listened to what Dr. Ogden had to say in class. I still cannot bring myself to believe that Jason is in hell and that Reg is in heaven. There is not enough evidence of this in the novel that I can find. I was especially confused after Dr. Ogden first said that Jason is like Jesus and then he says that Jason is in hell. I found these two statements to be somewhat contradicting. Perhaps it is the case that interpretations of the novel may be different for many people and that there is not one “correct” answer because it is based on opinions. Therefore, as this group agreed with Dr. Ogden for the most part, others may not. There is nothing wrong in agreeing but it‘s good to consider other view points as well. For instance, my blog entry titled, “Heaven or Hell: You Decide?” shows things form a different perspective and so does the entry Emily posted titled, “Does Jason really represent Jesus Christ?”

Hopefully after reading some entries from my group blog site in addition with this group’s presentation, the class can begin to form their own opinions on the four fold ontology.


Group: Clayton Ng, Jamie Masaro, Wilfred Tsang, Roy Ma

I agree with the points that this group made in regards to the novel Hey Nostradamus! I also enjoyed reading the novel very much and I would not mind reading it a few more times! I think that Clayton was right in stating in his entry that Coupland is looking for two responses from readers. As this group explained, some readers would be amazed after reading it while others would be destabilized. Personally, I believe this is what makes this novel so interesting. It is the questioning of beliefs that causes readers to become more open minded and that is what allows for change to occur. Then again, some people may be dogmatic and may not change their opinions even when faced with doubt. Ultimately, the group did a good job in mentioning
Coupland's target audience and what message he was trying to send.


Group: Ken Smith, Bryce Brentlinger, Cvijeta Stojanovic, Lorenz Nierves

I found that the presentation topic of this group was very interesting, especially when they mentioned the preface of the novel. I remember being curious to know more when we first spoke about the preface in our tutorial. At that time, I can recall fellow class mates coming up with various interpretations of it. For instance, when I first read the preface it seemed to me as if Coupland was telling readers to prepare themselves for a journey that will change them. It was wonderful that Ken did some research as to what the first Corinthian was. After listening to their group presentation, I have learned more about the 1st Corinthian and what point Coupland is trying to make by using it in the preface.Overall, this group had great ideas when interpreting the preface.


Group: Melissa Yeaman, Lauren Brown

What made this group’s presentation different from others is that they mentioned the importance of fragments in the novel Hey Nostradamus!. Interesting points were made as the group spoke about how each part of the novel is split into fragments and that it separates the characters. At first when I began reading the novel, I was not too sure if I liked this approach but after reading it I can understand why Coupland chose to include fragments. In brief, the fragments aided readers in understanding that each character is different.

**Note to Jodie: Here are my group blog posts/comments:

3 group blog posts:

1.)Imagery in "The Two Sisters"
2.) Val from "Forgiveness in Families"
3.)Heaven or Hell: You Decide?

500 word post:

Patriarchy vs Matriarchy

Bonus blog posts:

1.)Avison says, “I am Canadian.”
2.)Thoughts on All Tomorrow’s Parties

Comments:

1.) "Snobbery in the character of Mrs. Coffin" (Emily’s post)
2.)"The Minerva Club" (Sunshine’s post)
The group presentation responses. (This entry)
3.) Group: Erika Sison , Holly Lam, Sarah Gleeson
4.)Group: Clayton Ng, Jamie Masaro, Wilfred Tsang, Roy Ma
5.)Group: Ken Smith, Bryce Brentlinger, Cvijeta Stojanovic, Lorenz Nierves
6.)Group: Melissa Yeaman, Lauren Brown

Thanks Jodie. :)

Noticing the Details

Margaret Avison chooses her words very carefully in her poems. This allows the reader to analyze them and uncover the hidden message she is trying to imply. My viewpoint on the title “Always Now,” is that she is suggesting us to slow down, take a deep breath, and stop worrying about what is next in life. She is telling her readers to prolong the present tense to the point where the future is so distant, it is not even worth considering.

Reading “Cement Worker on a Hot Day” (19), this message I think she is implying is magnified by her use of vocabulary. “Yellow,” “sun,” “stops,” and “yield” are all words that really standout and evidence her intentions of this poem. When it comes to traffic signs in North America, the yield sign indicates that a driver of the vehicle must slow down and prepare to stop if necessary. They do not need to stop if there is no reason to. It is so easy to rush through life without savoring each moment. It is so easy to walk right past a dandelion on the side of the road, or even to walk past trees blowing in the wind without taking the time to see how beautiful nature is. We take advantage of running water every day, and its not until it is unavailable, that we begin to appreciate it. Margaret Avison is trying to tell us not to wait until the extreme before we stop and see the loveliness of the world we live in.

Believe it or not, the life of a cement worker involves many risks. When cement is spilled on the skin it must be brushed away in a particulate matter, then flushed with massive amounts of water. Wet cement can produce third degree alkali burns in less than 2 hours so the need for water immediately after the accident is necessary to eliminate pain and permanent damage. This is why the man suddenly stops and “wrenches the hydrant till it yields a gush for him to gulp and wash in.” If he didn’t need water at that moment in time, he never would have acknowledged the hydrant or been thankful and “wowed” of its presence.

Margaret writes how she’s “passed this yellow hydrant in sun and sleet, at dusk,” and how the hydrant “was always there, but now” she acknowledges its presence because she now sees the necessity of it after watching the cement worker. Life is so much more fascinating when you notice the details and that is what I think the essential message of this poem is.

Thoughts on All Tomorrow’s Parties

I have read quite a bit of the book so far and I must say it is interesting. The style that William Gibson writes in is very unique.

During lecture, Dr. Ogden spoke about the title, in particular “tomorrow” refers to the near future. Therefore, readers know that the book may be about something that may happen in the future. Dr. Ogden also mentioned that Gibson believes that Coupland has failed and that people remained selfish. This book shows what the world looks like according to Gibson’s ideas. However, Gibson agrees with Coupland but he thinks that there is a different solution. According to lecture, Gibson sees fragmented humans and says that humanity has failed. Gibson tries to explain that a non-human force has taken over instead. For greater understanding, during lecture we were shown a clip from a movie which is somewhat representative of the novel.

Overall, I think that this novel is a great example of what our society can look like. Gibson helps readers become more aware about the world and about humanity. At first, it may be difficult to grasp the main ideas of the novel but just seeing the video clip even helped me visualize the novel better. I think that after reading this novel it would be interesting to compare it to Coupland’s Hey Nostradamus!

Does Jason Really Represent Jesus Christ?

March 5th in lecture, Professor Ogden stated that Jason in “Hey Nostradamus!” represents Jesus Christ, the Son of God. His main reason behind this statement is that Jason’s name in Greek, translates into the name “Yeshua,” and Yeshua translates into the name Jesus. Although this is true, the name Jesus does not say anything about Jason’s character. Jesus is the Son of God. He is perfect in every way. He is loving, He is kind, and He is forgiving. In my opinion, Jason’s character is nothing like that. In fact, I think Jason is the complete opposite.

Jesus was a man who spent 3 years of his life teaching, discipling, and setting a good example for the world. One of his main teachings is to love one another. He says “so now I am giving you a new commandment: Love each other. Just as I have loved you, you should love each other. Your love for one another will prove to the world that you are my disciples.” (John 13:34-35) Jesus was a man who genuinely cared for others, but Jason on the other hand, was a man who portrayed hate. Not only did he hate the assassins who killed his wife Cheryl, but he hated the people who prayed for their forgiveness. He admits that he’s “gone through [his] life with this massive chunk of hate inside [him] like a block of demolished concrete, complete with rusted and twisted metal radiating form the inside.” (125) Ever since the massacre, Jason’s “heart is so cold” (146). How on earth is this man like Jesus when he even admits bitterness? Jesus taught love, not hatred. He also taught His people how to forgive.

Professor Ogden named another reason why Jason resembles Jesus is because he is forgiving. Jesus teaches about forgiveness and getting rid of burdens. He promises freedom and rest if you trust in him. He says, “Come to me, all of you who are weary and carry heavy burdens, and I will give you rest” (Matthew 11:28). Jesus is forgiving, but Jason definatly is not. In my opinion, the reason why Jason is so angry and bitter about life is because he isn’t able to forgive the people in his life. He isn’t able to let go but instead, remains angry spiteful.

After the school shooting at Delbrook High, Jason heard people “who were praying for the killers, and that made [him] furious” (125). He thought to himself, “it’s a bit too late to pray for them now, wouldn’t you think?”(125) When Jesus was crucified and hanging on the cross, one of the last phrases that He spoke cried out to God in heaven asking forgiveness on the people who put him to death. He prays. “Father, forgive them, for they don’t know what they are doing” (Luke 23:34). Jesus prayed for forgiveness on the people who put him to death, whereas Jason was furious because people were praying for the assassins. If Jason were to represent Jesus, He would be rejoicing at the fact that others were praying for the killers, because that would mean that people are obeying his teachings.

Professor Ogden also mentioned the fact that both Jesus and Jason were unique. This is true, but they are unique in different ways. Jesus is unique because he is God, hence in a completely different category of holiness than anyone on this earth. Jason on the other hand was unique by alienating himself from this world. He is antisocial and hates being around people. He even states that what appealed him to certain jobs, was the fact that the job didn’t entail him talking to anyone. He couldn’t mind his own business, and still get paid. Jesus was never like that but instead was constantly in the public eye. He spent every waking hour with his 12 disciples by his side, teaching them how to live and love. Never did he wish for alienation unless he needed some alone time to pray.

Although their names can be translated to be the same name, Jason and Jesus have completely different personalities and character traits that contradict each other. Jason is not forgiving; he is not loving towards his enemies, and enjoys alienation from the world. He even admits feeling like “the unholiest thing on earth” (146). Jesus on the other hand is a perfect man who forgives and loves his killers, and spends countless days flawked by people wanting to hear about what He has to say.

Avison says, “I am Canadian.”

During a past lecture, Dr. Ogden spoke about Margaret Avison in great detail. He said that as a Canadian poet, her love for Canada is evident in her poetry. He also explained that Avison sees Canada as a country with beautiful landscape and weather.

At one time in Avison’s life, Dr. Ogden said that she had a huge personal crisis and that “being Canadian changed everything.” It was the passion and love for nature that caused Avison to embrace Canada’s landscape. During difficult times, Avison would wander off and observe the simplistic beauty of a lake while soaking in the peace and calmness of the nature around her. Perhaps this is how Avison dealt with the stresses of life.

Personally, I admire Avison for her thoughtful reflections on Canada’s landscape because as Canadians we may take it for granted at times. I think that just like Avison, it is important for us to take time and to enjoy what we have. By doing so, not only will we gain inner peace but we will also learn to cherish and appreciate how fortunate we are to live in Canada as Canadians.

In the scheme of things...

My favourite poem from Margaret Avison’s Always Now is “Detroit … Chicago … 8 a.m. … Platform 5”(page 147). It stands out for me because it holds a mirror to society by pointing out one of the many idiosyncrasies that people in general are guilty of. I took the poem to be a discussion of why it is that people do not consider the possibility of human error when a human being is responsible for almost everything that occurs in this world.

Technology today is making the First World an easier place to live in. Everything is becoming so easy and convenient that people just expect what they want to appear in an instant, just like the people in the poem waiting for the 8am bus. What sometimes gets forgotten is that humans create every new piece of technology. Humans are responsible for every convenience and new advancement. Nowadays when the bus is late or the person behind the counter makes your double tall non-fat 180 degrees sugar-free vanilla latte wrong (sorry, I work at a Starbucks) people get all up in arms. Impatience is the negative side effect of convenience. We need to remember that human beings still make mistakes. The bus being half an hour late isn’t really that big of a deal; it could be a lot worse.

Yay!

Yay Jodie! I was so excited when I saw on Dr. Ogden's blog that you are going to lecture for us on Monday!

Heaven or Hell: You Decide?

In a past lecture, Dr. Ogden spoke about how the novel, Hey Nostradamus! is broken down into four sections. He claimed that they are: Heaven, Purgatory, Limbo, and Hell. By doing so, Dr. Ogden surely caused some sort of disagreement among students. Some students that I spoke to felt that he should not have had religious translations of the novel while others thought that he was simply interpreting Coupland’s work. Personally, I believe that Dr. Ogden needed to discuss religion because Coupland refers to it several times throughout the novel. However, although Dr. Ogden provides the class with an clever interpretation of Coupland's work, I don’t think that he should have gone as far as to say which character is in hell or in heaven.

First of all, according to Dr. Ogden, Reg is in Heaven. This is proved by Ogden as he finds this quote: “Heaven must be like this” (242). In this case, Reg is experiencing what heaven must be like from his point of view. However, this does not indicate to me that he actually is in Heaven on earth because of they way his life is narrated. Specifically, Reg spends some part of his life regretting his mistreatment with Jason and wishes he could have taken back his words. This does not indicate that Reg lived a joyous life full of peace and happiness but rather a life full of denial and regret. These are not feelings one experiences in Heaven.

In addition, Dr. Ogden tells the class that Cheryl is in Purgatory. He provides evidence of this: “Here I am in the calm dark waiting to go to the next place” (13). In my opinion, there were not enough examples to prove this point. Besides, I think it is unfair to say where Cheryl ended up going after her death. No one really knows where she ended up going.

Furthermore, Dr. Ogden states that Heather is in Limbo. This is true for Dr. Ogden due to this quote: “people vanish and they don’t give you a clue” (154). Here Dr. Ogden says that since Cheryl has no way of connecting to anything it means that she must be in Limbo and is damned. Again, I didn’t find much support in the novel to prove this point as being true for me. Just because she's frusterated does not mean anything. Many people are frusterated, does that mean they all are in Limbo?

Finally, the lecture closes as Dr. Ogden says Jason is in hell. This was hard for me to take in because during lecture Dr. Ogden says that the name Jason means Jesus and that “Jason was God coming down” (215) just like Jesus. He further says that Jason happens to be the same age as Jesus was when he died. Then in a past lecture Dr. Ogden had said that Jason was in hell due to his suffering and that he “sees hell on earth” (57). It doesn’t make sense to me how Jason can be first compared to the holy prophet Jesus and then he is considered to be in hell. Even religiously speaking it does not make sense because prophets are not in hell, they are in Heaven.

After the lecture had ended, I know my mind was full of questions and concerns about what I had just heard. I also know that many other students felt the same way. Who knows what Coupland was really trying to get at in terms of religion in the novel. However, I feel that there could be many different interpretations and that different things can be true for different people. Perhaps I may be wrong as well, but it’s the questioning that's important in order to promote uncertainty and who knows I might be right!

The Minerva Club

The Minerva Club was a club in which Topaz was the secretary of. It was a club of nine ladies that listened to or discussed poems. In lecture, Dr. Ogden asked us to find out why they were called the “Minerva” Club. This is what I found:

Minerva was a Roman goddess of wisdom and crafts. Apparently, Romans would easily confuse her name with the word “mens”, which means “minds”. Minerva was also the virgin goddess of warriors, poetry, medicine, wisdom, commerce, crafts, and was the inventor of music.

These ladies must have thought very highly of themselves when naming the club. Poetry? Sure. But mind and wisdom? Maybe not. In my mind, as a result of the pudding-faced lady, the Minerva Club was not put in such a positive light when I first started reading about the club. Considering the racist views that the pudding-faced lady had on the Joe Fortes and Mrs. Coffin issue, maybe a Minerva Club of wisdom and mind was not a well suited name. However, Topaz changed my mind when she stood up to defend Joe Fortes and Mrs. Coffin. At that moment, Topaz was the mind and the wisdom of the club. As Topaz became furious, she also brought the Minerva warrior to the club as the warrior inside of her arose to defend Joe Fortes.

Make time to stop and smell the flowers

The very first piece of literature that I read as an English 101 student was “In Vancouver” of Vancouver Short Stories. In my first time reading it, I found that it was uninteresting and I felt that it had no relevance to me because I could not relate to what it was like to be a British, immigrant logger. However, after analyzing the story for my paper, it started to grow on me. In my opinion, Grainger’s “In Vancouver” actually conveys a message that every one of us could learn from and that’s why I want to share it with you.

After reading the story multiple times, I started to see many similarities in these young, British loggers and our current Vancouver citizens.

The first logger characteristic that was easily noticeable was their selfish attitude towards the Vancouver land. These citizens greatly overlooked Vancouver’s beautiful landscape by covering it up with many shops and stores to make the city more “attractive”. As a logger you see, “shoe stores, drug stores, clothing stores” as you walk down the streets of the city (7).
To compare this with Vancouver’s current situation, think about downtown Vancouver. The place is crammed with shops and people. Even as you travel through the city, you will notice that any free land remaining in the city is being demolished and replaced by business buildings or condos. There is little that allows us to actually see Vancouver for it’s true beauty.

Secondly, the loggers enjoyed spending their free time inside to drink. It was their mentality that “by keeping good-and-drunk you keep joyous” (10). These loggers did not care to enjoy any free time outside, to truly appreciate the beautiful city.
Similarly, today’s Vancouver citizens enjoy to spend their leisure time indoors. With the many clubs and bars, many people of Vancouver also tend to spend their time inside to enjoy themselves and to spend money. There are many things that one can do to enjoy themselves on Vancouver’s beautiful land, which requires no cost to do.

Another similarity that I found was the resemblance between the logger’s view on Vancouver history and current Vancouver’s view on the cities history. In both cases, the history has been buried under the progress-driven mentality of both societies. Also, I found that inequality between men and women where present in both cases. In Grainger’s “In Vancouver”, only loggers were seen in the city during the day. Even at night, only men were out drinking and enjoying themselves. In this story, men over powered the women. Although it may not be as obvious in today’s society, inequality still exists as many men are considered over women in career fields such as politics or the police force.

Everywhere you look, Vancouver’s picturesque landscape is being destroyed and covered. If we continue on in this selfish manner and continue to disregard Vancouver’s history, there may be nothing left for future generations. With this, I ask you (as I asked myself after analyzing this story), when was the last time you actually devoted sometime to truly appreciate the natural beauty of Vancouver?

Patriarchy vs Matriarchy

In the novel, “The Innocent Traveller,” issues relating to gender can be evident throughout. In particular, gender roles are viewed for females and males. Ethel Wilson provides many examples which show conflicting concepts of patriarchy and matriarchy during a time when females were expected to behave according to society’s standards.

Readers can first notice gender role differences being highlighted during the opening sentence in the novel. During the introduction, Topaz illustrates the dinner scene as her father is seated “far away at the end of the dinner table” (9). Topaz describes him as being “the kind, handsome and provident man.” This sentence reiterates the socially constructed role of the father in a traditional household system. The paterfamilias being seated at the end of the table indicates dominance or leadership qualities which are essential values of patriarchy. Also, the father is referred to as being provident. Once more this corresponds to the concept of males providing the family with income and support. Moreover, Topaz introduces her mother as being a silent and passive observer as she casts a “quiet somber gaze” (9) around the table. Evidently, her mother neatly fits into the traditional gender role of females being soft and gentle while conforming to patriarchal values.

Furthermore, the character Emily is strong willed and was referred to by Dr. Ogden during a past lecture as a “blue stocking.” Basically, that just implies that she is somewhat of a feminist and believes in matriarchy values. For instance, upon breaking up with Mr. Potter, Emily tells herself, “I am a strong woman” (36) and decides to do something to keep herself occupied rather than being buried in sorrow. This demonstrates to readers that she is independent and does not have the desire of needing a male figure to take care of her. As Dr. Ogden also mentioned, blue stockings generally do not express their emotions which is why Emily hides her feelings and moves on by setting up the School for Young Ladies at Brighton.

In the same way, Topaz also is seen as an independent woman who lives a single life without a male companion. Topaz in particular is a very outgoing woman who does not conform to traditional gender roles. For instance, in the novel there is a part where Topaz joins the men’s section on the train and begins a conversation with them as they smoke. This act of hers is of course seen as a taboo by Anne and Rachel. Also, Topaz may come across to readers as being a feminist. For example, Topaz tells Miss Umplethwaite, “If I had a husband and he forbade me to do anything…I should kick him” (230).

In addition Anne and Rachel can also be considered independent women since they travel alone along with Topaz to Canada. Especially during the time that the novel was written, it was a big deal for females to travel alone without a male chaperone. In doing so, concepts of matriarchy can be viewed since these women are independent of men. Therefore their independency is evident since they live together in a household which is run by females.

In brief, many values of patriarchy and matriarchy are evident in the novel and the examples help readers pay attention to small details. As Ethel Wilson carefully selects her words it causes readers to think about the concepts of how society easily sets male and female standards. Also, the bigger message may be about how one can redefine these traditional roles and break typical gender stereotypes just as Topaz successfully does in the novel.

Celebrities + Religion = Disaster

Ogden mentioned in lecture that led zeppelin consider religion to be an imaginative truth, meaning that it has an “undeniable resonance for the human imagination”. I think that most creative minds, be they musicians, authors or artists can appreciate the entertainment value of, for example, the stories in the Bible because they appeal to the imagination.

Religion nowadays has less of an influence on the artist’s creative works and more of an influence on the artists themselves. Religious belief has become a hot new trend. Madonna made red Kaballah bracelets a fashion statement and Tom Cruise has made Scientology the punch line to countless late-night talk show monologues. Instead of letting faith and belief influence their work as artists, they are trying to convert the world.

This is the opposite of what Coupland was trying to do in Hey Nostradamus! The book written to show that faith is not something to be skeptical about and that normal people can have religious beliefs. This is a good message to convey. Unfortunately the Tom Cruises of the world aren’t helping the cause.

Accusations and Judgments in Hey Nostradamus!

Prof. Ogden talked a lot about the theme of doubt in Hey Nostradamus!, but I found that there is also a common thread of accusations in each character’s story. Cheryl’s Youthalive! friends accuse her of “going all the way” with Jason outside of wedlock which causes the only real source of stress in Cheryl’s short life. In Jason’s section, the police, general public and even Cheryl’s parents accuse him of orchestrating the whole massacre, which is why out of the four stages of the afterlife that each character is supposed to be in, Jason is in hell. Throughout the book Reg is accused of being a cold and heartless monster, and also of abandoning his son when he needed him the most because of his devout religious convictions.

Accusations about Heather were a bit harder to figure out, until Heather started talking about Cheryl and how she manages to pop up in their lives every so often. She stated that the five “most unattractive traits in people are cheapness, clinginess, neediness, unwillingness to change and jealousy” (204).

Heather encompasses all five of the traits she thinks are so horrible. The only time she was generous towards another person was when she was desperate for information from the psychic; this could mean that she is cheap. Heather is very clingy and needy; throughout her whole story there is a tone of desperation and loneliness that is highlighted by her relationship with the psychic. Even though Heather knew that the psychic was messing with her, she still called her dozens of times a day. She was so desperate for some contact with Jason that she basically lost her mind. Unwillingness to change on Heather’s part was obvious because she left all of Jason’s stuff lying around the apartment, even though he had been missing for months, “there’s a man’s wallet with credit cards collecting dust on the counter…I’ve been trying to keep Jason’s aura alive…”(175).

Heather is obviously jealous of Cheryl, she even admits to it; even after she says that she think jealousy is the worst of the five most unattractive traits. She is jealous of Cheryl because Jason still loves her and it would be impossible to change that, which is also more evidence of Heather being clingy. Heather’s self-loathing nature is why she is in limbo; she is desperate to the point of insanity for information about Jason’s whereabouts and is very self-loathing. I think that the reason Heather is not in hell is because she befriended Reg when no one else would. She saw the good in him when everyone else thought he was a monster.

The characters in the book also seem very judgmental. Reg judges everyone because in his mind they are imperfect in the eyes of God, Heather judges Cheryl’s parents, “And don’t even get me started on Cheryl’s plastic, mean-spirited parents. Hypocrites. […] I’ve never heard them discuss an idea at the table, let alone give much thought to where Jason might be.” (202) and even Jason’s family, “his family was one notch less than totally useless.” (201). This book is supposedly against all things cynical, but these characters seem pretty cynical to me. Whatever happened to “only god can judge me?”

Jason's disconnection from the real world

The cover of Hey Nostradamus! depicts a silhouette of someone who is kneeling in the act of prayer. I believe that this person symbolizes the person that Jason became after the school massacre.

Primarily, it is common that when people pray, they look up towards god or heaven. However, the person’s head on the cover is looking down, away from heaven. This represents Jason and his view on faith, as he has turned away from religion and his own beliefs. He gave up on his beliefs after the school massacre, when the people he cared about most turned their backs on him. In Jason’s section of the book, he is often cynical about religion and turns his head away from it by doubting his faith. For instance, as Douglas Coupland ends Jason’s part of the book, Jason examines the universe when he says that “the universe is so large, and the world is so glorious, but here I am on a sunny August morning with chilled black ink pumping though my veins, and I feel like the unholiest thing on earth” (146). Jason feels insignificant and detached from the world and, in turn, he is detached from his faith.

Secondly, the person on the cover is kneeling. I believe that this is a representation of Jason and how he has given up or surrendered to where he is in life. He is not working at a job that he enjoys and is not doing anything to move forward in life. When Jason writes to his clone, he warns him not to “screw up your life the way that I did” (93). Jason has surrendered and accepted the fact that he has failed in life. Jason has also given up on his family, namely, the relationship that he has with his father. Following the massacre, he lost all contact with his own father and had given up on trying to level with his father’s opinions. Throughout the book, Jason cynically speaks about his father, portraying his father’s thoughts in an evil way. When he analyzes himself and his sins, he realizes that “it’s religion all over again; it’s [his] father’s corrosive bile percolating through my soil and tickling my taproot… we’re all slime in the eyes of God” (87). Jason pessimistically speaks about his father’s opinions, without attempting to understand them. He surrenders to the fact that he never will never understand why his father acts this way.

Lastly, the cover’s silhouette has a head which is disconnected from it’s body. In the novel, Jason’s character starts to distance and disconnect his mind from his body. I believe that the body represents Jason in physical nature which is a metaphor for the real world. At the same time, the head represents Jason as a person. Together, this separation between the head and the body resembles Jason’s separation from the world. This is portrayed in the novel when Jason decides to experiment with drugs. I believe that Jason does this as an escape, in order to disconnect himself from all of his memories about Cheryl, the massacre and his father that are in the real world. These are the thoughts which have been haunting his mind for too long. At the same time, Jason’s job as a home renovator shows disconnection between his mind and body. Jason has a creative mind and he has many eccentric thoughts and opinions about life. This is a mind that is not fitted for the job that his body does.

Snobbery in the character of Mrs. Coffin

Wednesday January 31st, Mr. Ogden mentioned the idea in lecture that in "The Innocent Traveller", Mrs. Coffin comes off as somewhat of a snob. His reasoning for this statement is simply because this woman is health conscious, and healthy people think that they are better than others. When I look at my own life and at the people around me like my friends and family, I see health conscious people, but I do not see stuck up personalities. Although I agree with Mr. Ogden in saying that Mrs. Coffin is a snob, I do not think that eating Ralston’s Health Foods is strong enough evidence for this statement. I think that Mrs Coffin is a snoot not because she cares about her appearance, but because of how she delivers this information.

When Topaz and Mrs. Coffin meet up at English Bay and begin chatting, Mrs. Coffin does not even begin the conversation with a “hello” or a “how are you?” but instead, dives right in and begins talking about herself. The first sentence that comes out of her mouth mentions that lately she has “come under the influence of Ralston’s Health Foods” and that she is “making a careful study of physical health and exercise and right thinking…” (131) Saying this would have been alright if they had been on the topic of health or exercise, but instead it is forcefully brought up. Out of all people, Topaz would be the least person to care about her health. Why bring up the topic? The reason why she mentions this is not to start conversation, but because she is fishing for complements and wants to bring to light how great she looks. Mrs. Coffin then goes on to say how already her “complexion is brighter” and her “whole mental attitude is improved” (131). This comment leaves Topaz no option other than to say, “yes Mrs. Coffin, you look wonderful.”

This woman is trying to be perfect in every way and wanting people to know it. Mrs. Coffin also goes on to say that she has “made an appointment with Mr. Fortes for a swimming lesson” and hopes “very soon to have mastered the art” (131). This is yet one more area of her life she is wishing to excel in, and one more thing she mentions to let people know how crowning she is.

Questioning the Sincerity of the Letters to Jason

Today in lecture Mr Ogden spoke about the letters written to Jason a couple months after the massacre (106-116). He mentioned that he got the impression that these letters from Cheryl’s family were horrible letters contributing to Jason’s state of hell. Even after reading and rereading this section in the book, I can’t find the negative vibe that professor Ogden seems to feel. If anything, I think that the letters from Mr. and Mrs. Anway would soften Jason’s heart and reduce the hate going on in his life.
These letters are sincere letters written out of love and remorse, rather than out of hate. When something as tragic as the death of your daughter takes place, your natural reaction will be anger and blame. We make decisions out of impulse because our body is in shock and our mind is so fogged up and twisted. As humans, we need explanations and reasons for everything and it fell into place that the reasonable explanation for their daughter’s death is that Jason is to blame.
Linda Anway writes at the beginning of her letter, “I don’t ask your forgiveness, but I do request your understanding”(106). According to Mr. Ogden, this is why this letter contributes to Jason’s state of hell. She’s not even asking for forgiveness but just wants to explain herself and ask him to see where she’s coming from. Although it starts out like this, throughout the letter, her pride breaks down and Linda ends up apologizing. She writes, “I beg your forgiveness, wherever you are. Please write or phone or visit if you can. Please think of me kindly and know that is how I think of you”(108).
Mr. and Mrs. Anway’s letters are genuine as they realize their wrongdoing in blaming Jason. It is when Jason receives Chris’ letter that one may second-guess the sincerity of the first two. I think that Chris still isn’t over Cheryl’s death and still wants to blame Jason. He is upset about his parents’ change of mind and that is why he told Jason about their reactions after the shooting. Even without reading his parents’ letters, he still knew what they were about. He doesn’t want to make Jason’s life any easier and knows that Mr. and Mrs. Anway’s letters will be a load off Jason’s chest. This is why he tries to make it seem like his parents are lying, he wants Jason’s life to remain a living hell.

Mythology becomes reality

The story that I found the most enjoyable to read was The Two Sisters. The words in this story were seamlessly chosen and put together to lay out a beautiful image of the two mountains in the opening paragraphs of Pauline Johnson’s short story. Johnson paints a picture for your imagination when she marvels at the twin peaks as “slanting rains festoon scarves of mist about their crests, and the peaks fade into shadowy outlines, melting, melting, forever melting into the distance” (12). This striking illustration sets up a mystical mood that is carried on throughout the rest of the story as the Chief tells the great Indian tale of The Two Sisters. As Dr. Ogden stated, Johnson deliberately re-mythologizes and lets her mythological writing represent everything that is real. When we hear the Chief’s story of peace and wisdom, we almost feel like young children who are hearing a fairy tale for the first time: the people and events of this legend have captivated us, taking us into their world and letting it represent all that is the truth.