I have a few questions.
- Why is Dickens (for example) studied in literature class at our local university, but not saskatoon leaves like this in the fall?
Is this not writing? Is there not reading here?
2. Why do students not demand it?
3. No, really. Why do students, who argue for an end to colonial culture and a recognition of non-normative selves, not demand a truly post-settler-culture literature? Like this?
4. Is it a game?
5. I know that universities have taken on the idea of protest, to destroy the ongoing normalization of words, and I know that a lot of White people are writing anti-settler culture papers right now, but why are they not reading saskatoon leaves and then writing in that language?
6. Or, crikes, choke cherries?
7. Why, in a system that advertises itself as universal, is Indigenous culture not honoured?
I’ll say this much: books are honoured in this system. If it’s in a book, it’s real. If it’s not in a book, it can form no part of any argument, proposal or discussion. But that’s just the thing:
8. Shouldn’t we be discussing how this…
Choke Cherries Behind Fronds of Leaves
… and this…
… are the same? Because the bees fertilize the choke cherries from here. This is not metaphor. It’s not a stylistic device. It’s a circle, in which two beings take part as one. So…
10. Why this resistance to be a part of things? And:
11. Why this desire to maintain settler culture at the cost of the Earth? I dunno. Ask Dickens. Charles?
12. Isn’t it time to put the 19th century to bed?