celebrating love

celebrating love

A year ago today, we celebrated your love.


You walked into the day together.


You embraced each person, bringing us into your love.


You are two very unique, very independent, very amazing people.


Your love is one.


Untitled by R.M. Drake

You will be the clouds
and i will be the sky.
you will be the ocean
and i will be the shore.
you will be the trees
and i will be the wind.

whatever we are, you and i
will always collide.


Love Sonnet 17, by Pablo Neruda

I don’t love you as if you were the salt-rose, topaz
or arrow of carnations that propagate fire:
I love you as certain dark things are loved,
Secretly, between the shadow and the soul.

I love you as the plant that doesn’t bloom and carries
hidden within itself the light of those flowers,
and thanks to your love, darkly in my body
lives the dense fragrance that rises from the earth.

I love you without knowing how, or when, or from where,
I love you simply, without problems or pride:
I love you in this way because I don’t know any other way of loving

but this, in which there is no I or you,
so intimate that your hand upon my chest is my hand,
so intimate that when I fall asleep it is your eyes that close.


Land acknowledgements

Land acknowledgements

Was listening to a rebroadcast yesterday of Unreserved on CBC. The best description I can find of the show comes from their website:

Unreserved is the radio space for Indigenous community, culture, and conversation. Host Rosanna Deerchild takes you straight into Indigenous Canada, from Halifax to Haida Gwaii, from Shamattawa to Ottawa, introducing listeners to the storytellers, culture makers and community shakers from across the country. The Unreserved team offers real talk from the people behind the headlines, with a soundtrack from the best in Indigenous music.

Yesterday’s show, a rebroadcast from June, talked about several topics, but the theme was the idea of maps (colonial contrasted with Indigenous) and also land acknowledgements.

I was struck by everything I heard, but I was keenly interested in the piece on land acknowledgements. You know those – a short bit of information at the start of a meeting, stating the Indigenous land you are currently occupying.

The person being interviewed for the piece I was listening to, Hayden King, is an Anishinaabe writer and educator who also has responsibilities at Ryerson University that include teaching courses, but also in an advisory capacity. One thing that King did was write Ryerson’s land acknowledgement:

Ours basically said that Ryerson is on the territory of the Haudenosaunee, the Anishinaabek, and it’s a territory that is governed by the Dish With One Spoon Treaty, a treaty that committed these nations to share the territory in peace, friendship and respect and all newcomers are invited into this treaty and in the spirit of those obligations.

He now regrets what he wrote.

I think that as the conversation has advanced around territorial acknowledgements, some more scrutiny was put onto ours, among others. I think internally, we were having an internal conversation about it and it’s [like], who are we, really, to invite anybody into the Dish With One Spoon Treaty?

For me, personally, I think I started to see how the territorial acknowledgement could become very superficial and also how it sort of fetishizes these actual tangible, concrete treaties. They’re not metaphors — they’re real institutions, and for us to write and recite a territorial acknowledgement that sort of obscures that fact, I think we do a disservice to that treaty and to those nations.

What King is encouraging people to do now is go beyond making those blanket statements, ones that were intended to get people (specifically non-Indigenous people) thinking and hopefully acting.

King proposed something that I felt was doable and very important. He proposes that people add to the land acknowledgement calls to action – what are the responsibilities laid out for colonizers in the specific treaty for the land you are acknowledging.

As King says, It’s one thing to say, “Hey, we’re on the territory of the Mississaugas or the Anishinaabek and the Haudenosaunee.” It’s another thing to say, “We’re on the territory of the Anishinaabek and the Haudenosaunee and here’s what that compels me to do.

King proposes the idea that land acknowledgements need to have a call to action.

It could look like, as King says, a provost of a university make the land acknowledgement and then state what the university is going to do to make good on the commitments of the Treaty for that particular land. In a place like B.C., where there are no treaties, it is a completely different call to action than in Ontario.

In Ontario, we have treaties that have commitments that the Crown agreed to for Indigenous people – access to hunting or fishing grounds for instance.

But the spirit of the treaties means that institutions need to be leaders in calling for action – how, as King states, the institutions will be breathing air into the colonizers commitments of the treaties.

(If institutions are wondering what that action can look like, there’s this little document called The Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada: Calls to Action.)

It is important to consider this next step as presently these acknowledgements are, as King states, becoming a box that gets ticked off on the agenda items for meetings or gatherings and do not have the intended meaning.


When Giving Is All We Have

When Giving Is All We Have

I woke up to a newsfeed that left me with no hopeful words.

So, here are someone else’s.

When Giving Is All We Have
               – Alberto Rios

 One river gives
its journey to the next.
We give because someone gave to us.
We give because nobody gave to us.
We give because giving has changed us.
We give because giving could have changed us.
We have been better for it,
we have been wounded by it—
Giving has many faces: It is loud and quiet,
big, though small, diamond in wood-nails.
Its story is old, the plot worn and the pages too,
but we read this book, anyway, over and again:
Giving is, first and every time, hand to hand,
mine to yours, yours to mine.
You gave me blue and I gave you yellow.
Together we are simple green. You gave me
what you did not have, and I gave you
what I had to give—together, we made
something greater from the difference.

good, strong words

good, strong words

Can we talk about words for a minute?

A long minute.

This week, I spent time up north doing chores, a bit of swimming and SUPing, but mostly reading and writing.

I read Beirut Hellfire Society by Rawi Hage, not in one sitting but pretty darn close. Hage is originally from Beirut, and his novel is about death, plain and simple. It’s also about war and how people exist (often by separating themselves from reality in one way or another) in the midst of conflict. I was drawn to the book when I heard Hage interviewed by Shelagh Rogers. They discussed how the story looks at commemorative practices for the dead. I was hooked as this is a direct connection to my work at McMaster.

One of the most interesting techniques that Hage employs is he uses these incredibly long, detailed sentences. All the rules about keeping sentences to a digestible length that I’ve been taught – out the window. (Truth be told, I’ve also been taught to learn the conventions and rules, so I know when, as a writer, to throw them out the window effectively.)

The long sentences make the pacing very chaotic. At other times, he slows things right down, for instance, describing an encounter with a group of men that was meant to humiliate the main character. The descriptions instead make you get inside the head of the targeted character and you feel his emotional reactions and clearly see how he took control back from his tormentors.

This book is violent and full of death, literally FULL. Yet there is such beauty in his writing that I wanted to keep reading.

I am also reading A Mind Spread Out on the Ground by Alicia Elliott. Elliott is a Tuscarora writer from Six Nations of the Grand River and living local to the Brantford area. I had heard a lot of buzz about her work and I now know why: there are not enough platitudes to say about this book. It is a collection of essays that cover a range of topics including her experience of having both Indigenous and white parents. The essays are forthright and clear in their purpose: to show her experience and that of her family and ancestors in relation to colonialism, racism, sexism, poverty, and trauma.

By contrasting, for example, gentrification in Toronto with colonialism, she draws stark comparisons that simply cannot be ignored.

As I began reading the book, I was reminded of The White Supremacy Workbook by Layla Saad. She created the workbook out of an Instagram challenge.  It provides non-BIPOC a framework for taking a deep look at racism, if we are willing, and how we participate and uphold white privilege and supremacy. The framework was created even though it is not Saad’s (or any other BIPOC) responsibility to create a way for white people to learn about racism. And yet she did just that.

Similarly, Elliott wrote her essays and through them, there are lessons that can begin to help people more fully understand the experience of Indigenous people in Canada.

If we are willing. Read Elliott’s book. Be willing.

I also have been reading a lot of Alice Munro short stories. I think that short stories are my biggest interest as a writer, and I have found no better mentor than Munro. Through the use of often simplistic language, Munro reels you in to the depths and complexity of life. Her characters, people who appear from the outside to have simple lives, are like all of us: nowhere near simple. There are nuances at every turn to surprise and delight you, to keep you reading. One of the pieces she is most known for, Gravel, has been in the curriculum for two of my three writing courses to date. It is beautifully written, but not one of my favourites. I get frustrated with Munro sometimes because I don’t want heroic endings, or cliché endings, but sometimes she leaves me hanging. Or surprisingly disappointed.

Case in point: a story I read Friday has the main character leave her young children. Like permanently. Not a mistake, leaving them behind at the grocery story, or in the back seat of a car. She leaves them.

I don’t relate to every character of Munro’s, but I usually identify on some level with a mother. But this one, I could not fathom walking away from my children. I’m not talking an abused woman fighting for her life in hopes of fighting for her children from a position of strength.

Nope. Just chose a different life. No goodbyes, just gone.

So, I put down the book and walked away for a day. Not the first time.

I always come back, because her words are spectacular and her narratives so wonderful.


I may have to revise my belief that Margaret Laurence is my favourite writer. She is my favourite writer of a novel, The Diviners. And Munro is my favourite short story writer.

Pretty lofty idols I’ve got going there.

Finally, I have been reading Startle and Illuminate which is a collection of thoughts of Carol Shields about writing. I’m confident my highlighting pen will be dry by the time I’m done underlining all the points which intersect with my understandings of what being a writer is, can be, should be, and hopefully will be.

biographical statement

biographical statement

This weekend, I submitted a short story to a “small magazine with an international reputation” and part of the submission process was to submit a short biographical statement.

I was stumped.

Honestly, writing a piece, having it critiqued (repeatedly) by my peers and instructors, and editing it (repeatedly) was easier than coming up with a biographical statement.

In the end, I wrote something that on reflection seems flip because it’s not necessarily how I identify myself. Or maybe it is.

I’ve been struggling with the concept of identity for some time – writing a post back in 2017 about how I no longer had a neat label for society to put me in a valued/not valued category.

I wonder if this is the true fall out from the empty nest syndrome – for more than 20 years, I was first and foremost mom. I wanted that role, I loved it (puke and all), and I still miss having little humans around me.

Case in point: I went to a party in April and found the people I spent the most time with to be under the age of 2!

I am still a mom and I get to be a part of my children’s lives in meaningful ways. I am a wife. I do archaeological research. I garden (begrudgingly). I do a lot of laundry.

But who am I?

Part of my biographical statement was: I hate to train but I love finish lines. I hate to fly but I love to travel.

Those are true – I do not love training to walk in races, and I’m not even sure that I love the whole race itself. I do love a finish line though. Hubby is there after riding to various checkpoints to inspire me, a nice heating blanket is offered (I don’t seem to race in the good weather!), and we always find a celebratory food item I can consume.

I do love to travel, though with celiac, it’s proven more difficult. I like my own house and my own bed, but I love a good beach and once I’m out there, I love to see the world. Flying is not my favourite thing, but at the end of each flight, there’s always something good.

But, can I define myself, create my biographical statement, based on what I hate contrasted with what I love?

Feedback – it’s not always easy to hear the truth

Feedback – it’s not always easy to hear the truth

(photo of work by Mario Pfeifer – artist – exhibition at Power Plant, Toronto)

I am happy to report I have survived peer reviews.


Although we were given some guidelines about how to give feedback by our writing instructors, a fellow student did not exactly follow those guidelines. Her feedback on my first submission was longer than the piece I wrote.

It was BRUTAL.

It also was completely accurate.

I expected no less as this particular person spent significant time on the discussion board, always speaking with something bordering on uncomfortable superiority. She also spoke from a place of authority having spent her career as a teacher, specializing in reading.

I hate when that happens. You can’t really hate on somebody who knows what they’re talking about.

More than anyone in either of my courses (excluding the instructors), this particular classmate’s suggestions were the most helpful. You might think I should be a little more grateful. I am. Really.

It was her delivery. A little condescending (maybe a lot condescending) and dismissive.

If the feedback was printed, the watermark on the paper’s background would definitely have said DUH.

But, again, totally accurate and incredibly helpful.

I was reminded of a couple incidents in university (which I blogged about in 2017) when two professors I really respect gave me strong feedback. One was done with a very blunt delivery, and the other with more of a guiding hand.

Both were bang on accurate. My reaction to each was diametrically opposed.

As I begin the next steps of this writing adventure – the submission of the two pieces deemed by my instructors to be “publishable” – I feel better prepared.

But I’m going to be honest: I’m not fully prepared. All the words I put on the page are my ‘little darlings’. They mean something to me. They mean a lot of something to me.

I’m not sure you can ever be prepared the multitude of ways rejection is delivered. That is the unknown.

I know I’ll get rejected. Probably more often than not the rejection will come in the form of radio silence. I’ll enter a contest and hear nothing until the formal announcement of the winners is published and my name is not on it (been there, done that). But when I do receive feedback, it will be the delivery that I will need to prepare for, not the ‘no’. Because the ‘no’ is part of the process.

Feedback – it’s a catch-22. My writing is better because of feedback – incredible growth has occurred this term. Multiple eyes and minds mulled over my work and it came out at the end sharper and more fulsome – better. Much, much better.

And yet, interestingly enough, the piece that classmate shred to pieces – it never had the chance to pass the bar for ‘publishable’ – I lost my footing and I never found it again. That piece is sitting in a file, waiting to be loved once again.

By the end of the class, my ability to hear feedback also strengthened. But I know, I have a long way to go before I can take it all in without flinching.