I really disliked this novel. I found it really hard to concentrate on what was going on in the novel because it jumped around so much without much detail to lead you from one scene to another. I disliked the fact that Watson cut out so much detail in the story because it made it really hard to follow. I found that once I got half way through the book, I had no idea who anyone was, or what was going on. It wasn't until I went back to the first page and saw the opening passage that I finally understood what exactly was going on.

Aside from my general dislike for the novel, I really liked the use of Coyote in the novel. The first passage that I found really interesting was on page. 33 when the stench of Coyote's bed-hole was begin mentioned. In that quote it also mentioned the weight of clay sheets that he feels upon his shoulders. I thought this passage was really interesting in showing the all-knowing, ever present essence of Coyote. The stench of his bed-hole is reminiscent of the smell of death and how the old lady is dead in the house with James and Greta. The clay sheets are depicting the heavy guilt that James is carrying with him for killing his mother. Another passage that I thought was interesting was the passage on page 26 when Coyote is quoted as calling Kip his servant. This is very interesting because you always see Kip as a wanderer and a go-between for the other characters. It would make sense that Kip was Coyote's servant because Kip serves as a messenger of those messages that Coyote wants to be conveyed of the characters. Kip is the person in the novel that places everything in perspective for the other characters; many times the things that Kip is explaining are the works of Coyote or events that Coyote has been somehow involved in.

I really disliked this novel. I found it really hard to concentrate on what was going on in the novel because it jumped around so much without much detail to lead you from one scene to another. I disliked the fact that Watson cut out so much detail in the story because it made it really hard to follow. I found that once I got half way through the book, I had no idea who anyone was, or what was going on. It wasn't until I went back to the first page and saw the opening passage that I finally understood what exactly was going on.

Aside from my general dislike for the novel, I really liked the use of Coyote in the novel. The first passage that I found really interesting was on page. 33 when the stench of Coyote's bed-hole was begin mentioned. In that quote it also mentioned the weight of clay sheets that he feels upon his shoulders. I thought this passage was really interesting in showing the all-knowing, ever present essence of Coyote. The stench of his bed-hole is reminiscent of the smell of death and how the old lady is dead in the house with James and Greta. The clay sheets are depicting the heavy guilt that James is carrying with him for killing his mother. Another passage that I thought was interesting was the passage on page 26 when Coyote is quoted as calling Kip his servant. This is very interesting because you always see Kip as a wanderer and a go-between for the other characters. It would make sense that Kip was Coyote's servant because Kip serves as a messenger of those messages that Coyote wants to be conveyed of the characters. Kip is the person in the novel that places everything in perspective for the other characters; many times the things that Kip is explaining are the works of Coyote or events that Coyote has been somehow involved in.

I am a huge fan of The Double Hook, especially following on the heels of The Tin Flute. Gabrielle Roy tended to delve deeply into thoughts and emotions, tangling them up until the reader couldn't know what was reality and what was the narrator's fancy. The Double Hook is the exact opposite; it is a short, pithy account of words and actions, with very little direct reference to thought or emotion. Instead, these are implied by what happens or what is shown. For example, nowhere in The Double Hook does it expressly say "Felix was very lonely and wanted Angel back even though their first attempt at love was a failure." Instead we are introduced to this internal dilemma through his dream, which leaves us with no doubt where his thoughts are. In the same way, we never are told that Coyote symbolizes a mystical power, but he is present for the old lady's death, the beginning of the rainstorm, Greta's suicide, and other moments of chaos. I think this novel is made all the more powerful with its scarcity of words, and for the most part, explanations. Like life, things just sort of happen, and we alone are left to figure it out.

I read The Double Hook twice because I found it to be a little complex. When I read carefully I noticed that tons of sentences are filled with double meaning. I didn't really enjoy this book but the more we discuss it in class the more value I find behind it. However, I thought it was interesting how certain descriptions of the natural world were related to the human or animal body. For instance, in Part 1 halfway through section 12 "Overhead the sky was tight as rawhide. About them the bars of the earth darkened. The flat ribs of the hills." I found that particular description natural is all ways. It brings you back to the earth and I felt a deep connection with perhaps, First Nations. I felt connected through their eyes.
Still in Part 1 section 15 there is another description relating the sky above to a body. "In the sky above evil had gathered strength. It took body writhing and twisting under the high arch. Lenchen could hear the breath of it in the pause. The swift indrawing. The silence of the contracting muscle. The head drop for the wild plunge and hoof beat of it." I am utterly fascinated by that description. You can really imagine the possible force behind this... "evil had gathered strength" "body writhing and twisting" "silence of the contracting muscle" that is raw description. I felt more of a connection with Coyote and the First Nations side than anything else because I felt a connection with the natural earth.
I suppose what I appreciate more and more about this book is that there are tons of beautiful sentences in it. Certain things were able to be articulated in the shortest line. I could interpret things in several different ways and find new connections tying everything and everyone together.

I had mixed feelings about the Double Hook until we started discussing it in class. I did not particularly like Watson's use of language until the story started progressing more, in sections 3, 4, and 5, either. Now that I understand the story and characters more, however, I think the novel is brilliant and I plan on reading it again in the future. One passage that caught my attention was in section 5, chapter 16, page 113 when William is speaking to the Widow's boy about fire. "It seems a strange sort of thing ... to light another fire on top of what fire has destroyed. The curious thing about fire ... is you need it and you fear it at once." I think this paradox is seen throughout the novel--everything has negative and positive effects and repercussions, including the fire that Greta starts. Fire is necessary for warmth and for preparing food, and it is also something to be feared because it can destroy lives. Another interesting part of the story, I think, is the final page when we discover that Lenchen names her baby Felix, meaning happiness, after the man who helped her the most through her delivery. The final page of the book has a passage from Coyote that mentions "I have set his feet on soft ground" and this is important because it is an optimistic ending to the novel; it is the calm after the storm. James has returned and all disorder is set right again in the town.

I found the Double Hook extremely hard to understand betwen the references to the environment, to the characters, the glory of the light and the coyote i was lost. After discussing the first lines, in the first chapter that begins, "In the folds of the hills under Coyote's eye.." I have come to find this to be the best aspect of the novel. I love how it begins this way, although I could never figure out what it meant if we did not discuss it in class, it was a great introduction to the characters in a way i've never seen. It's like a hierarchy among the characters and the words are placed to resemble an actual visual of the hills. Another aspect of the novel i liked is the use of the word "coyote" and how it represents God in a way. One of the passages i liked is, " if you want to go down to Wagner's now, Kip sais," I saw your old lady climb down through the split rock with Coyote, her fishes stiff in her hand. He smiled." pg 36.Coyote has a connection to Kip, like a conscience for James. he knows whats going on because he is unattached, but involved in everything regardless. In this passage, Kip links the old woman and the Coyote together. Kip knows james killed the old woman. I think the constant link to "Coyote" fits the story well. Here you have a group of people, secluded in a community in the mountains. It only makes sense for their "god" figure to be a Coyote, an animal that is always lurking around them. It is a mythology for the Native People that has a physical presence. It is truely part of their lanscape.

This has not been my day!!! I just typed out my response and when I went to post it something happened and I lost everything so here goes again. I too found this a difficult novel to read and understand. I found myself having to rereadf many of the sections over again to make sense of anything. Things started coming together for me after some of the discussions in class. The part of the novel I most remember was when Kip reveals that he knows that James has killed the old woman. Kip acts as everyone's conscience throught the novel. It is then that Kip makes the link to coyote and the old woman. Coyote's presence in the novel is ominous and weighs heavily on all of the characters. "There's no big coyote like you think. There's not just one of him. He's everywhere." (47) Greta just wants there to be peace in the house and the old woman's death will not end this turmoil.

In general, The Double Hook did not resonate with me in any great way. I found Sheila Watson's writing style to be quite distracting from the narrative, and thought that the short, choppy sentences made effective character development difficult. Although the book was written well after the inception of the motion picture, Watson chose to present her tale in slide-projector fashion - frame by densely allusive frame - and in that, I felt that some of the melody of the storytelling was lost.
That said, oftentimes it is the works which you initially react to least favorably which require the most attention. After discussing The Double Hook in class, there have appeared more and more interesting facets to the text which I found I had hurried over at first reading. One of these was the sense of claustrophobia that Watson creates with her descriptions of indoor scenes.
Take for example the description of Kip in part one, scene 18:
"Kip was standing on the doorstep, peering into the darkness of the room. Light flowed round him from outside. The sun was shining again low in the sky. The mist rose in wisps from the mud of the dooryard and steamed off the two horses standing there."
This passage immediately follows a scene of great suspense, in which James is indirectly questioned about the disappearance of his mother. Like the seer that Kip has been established in our class discussions, he looks in on the "darkness" of James' house with a penetrating light. Kip is linked with the outdoors by the light that flows around him, and contrasts his figure with the conspiring James within. In a later passage:
"The door opened outward.
I have broken my word, Lenchen thought. And she imagined the old lady's eyes and Greta's blazing like lamps in the inmost corners of the room." This passage, found in part two, scene 12, describes the widow's daughter Lenchen, and the fearsome sight she imagines inside James' house. Much like the previous scene with Kip, Lenchen stands in the relative light of the doorway, and looks in on the house. Here, though, Lenchen is curiously framed by the darkness of the door which "opened outward". Her guilt for having "broken [her] word" reflects in her anxiety of what lies within the house - eyes "blazing like lamps" and probing her conscience.
In some ways, the second passage is quite the opposite of the first. But both operate on the discrepancy between darkness and light, between indoor and outdoor, between clarity and obscurity. Like the phenomenon of windows which act as mirrors when the sun goes down, Sheila Watson creates a sense of fear and entrapment associated with the indoors.

I am not sure how I felt about the novel the Double Hook. It was very confusing in the begining, but as I continued to read, it became much clearer. After, I figured out what was going on and which characters belonged where, I started to enjoy the book. I found the discussion in class extremely helpful because it clarified many aspects of the book that I wasn't sure about before.
The part of the book that I found most interesting was the part when Greta decided to set fire to her house. An important passage is on pg. 99 when Watson says "They had stopped the fire from spreading, but they had not stopped the fire." This passage shows the language the author uses to describe the events that come. "Happy are the dead, for their eyes see no more," is another line that was used to illustrate Greta's death. It is important because it is wispered by Coyote, a key symbol in this novel.

Like most of the people who have responded so far, I too reacted unfavorably to The Double Hook. I found Watson’s writing style jarring and confusing, often having to reread passages multiple times in an attempt garner any knowledge from them. However, after going over the work in class, I have found it to be somewhat more tolerable. Probably the aspect I find most interesting about the novel would have to be the impact Coyote has in regards to fate and self determination. One of the scenes that resonated most with me, involving the mixture of first nations and Christian beliefs was the scene on page 50 where Angel questions “Do that Coyote really be prying about? Who says where a woman shall lie but that very woman herself. Who keeps chawing at a man but a man’s own self?” This questioning of self determination is then shadowed by the Widow’s own doubts over the actions of her daughter, “The girl chose to go. How can God judge, she said. But she pulled the covers up over her eyes to shutout the moonlight.” The question of fate or predetermination is also brought up in my other favorite scene dealing with Kip and his ability to see things others don’t. James, obviously angry upon learning that Kip knows the truth confronts him, “They heard Kip’s voice: You bastard James! They heard James’ voice. They heard his words: If you were God Almighty, if you’d as many eyes as a spider I’d get them all”(55). James is obviously not a fan of predetermined fate and his restlessness is expressed through his attempts to escape the hills, efforts which eventually prove fruitless.

The Double Hook was an interesting book, and a huge contrast between the other books that we have read thus far. It was hard to get very engaged because I was constantly stopping and re-reading passages, but I generally liked the book because it was so different. One aspect I thought was interesting was the way Sheila Watson left so many things up to the reader. Many of her sentences were vague and interpertation was needed. I thought that the character of James was interesting because of the complete transformation he made. "A flick of the hand had freeded James from freedom" (page 106). Though at first James thinks he wants to run away and be free, he comes to the realization that running away doesn't solve problems. He knows that the only road to redemption for the things he has done is the road back home. Freedom is not freedom is you still have ties to your past that you can't let go of, like James had. However, when James returns home, he finds his house burned to the ground and in that act of sacrifice made by Greta, James becomes free. He admits "we both had reasons to wish the thing gone and everything in it" (page 116) and now that the house is gone, with his mother and sister in it, he really has to start over. It's James' chance for a second chance. It wasn't running away that brought James freedom but returning. I thought this was the most interesting aspect of the book.

My first thoughts when reading this book were that it reminded me of a book I read last year for an English class I took on race. We had to read a book called "Sons of the Wind" and it resembled this book in a lot of ways. It was about Native Americans and they too, were very immersed in nature and a spiritual side of life. However, I didn't really find that book interesting as a narrative piece. The story lacked, and I feel that this book, also was slow in places. I like to get to know the characters when I read and be able to get intimate with them. In the Double Hook, I felt again like I was kept a little at bay...HOWEVER...I do think that the allusions in this novel are very interesting and I think that it makes a deeper read, One that you can study more as an art and takes becoming involved in the piece.
Generally though I thought the use of imagery was very beautiful and if I were to write a paper on anything in the book I would choose the "eyes" references that are brought up so many time. On page 33 "Eyes everywhere.In the cottonwoods the eyes of foolhens. Rats' eyes on the barn rafters...Eyes multiplied. Eyes. Eyes and padded feet." Then later, Coyote says, "happy are the dead for their eyes see no more." And then even later when Kip is blinded by James, James says, "if you'd as many eyes as a spider, I'd get them all." page 56
There are just so many references throughout and I think it has to do with the idea of seeing and being a "seer." Many images of your eyes being closed versus being open, and the difference between seeing with your eyes and your mind which for example on page 115 it says "He shut his eyes. In his mind now he could see only the seared and smouldering earth..." I am sure if you were to study this fact in depth, there would be a reason that Watson has chosen to use them.

At first, I didn't enjoy reading The Double Hook because I felt that there were too few details to make the story fit together. Once we began discussing it in class, this changed. The class discussions certainly helped clarify the parts of plot that I felt were missed because of the lack of detail, but also helped clarify the meaning of the book. There was so much more depth to it than I had initially thought. The most interesting aspect of the book for me was the character Coyote. I liked the mystic qualities attributed to Coyote, like our initial meeting with him, where we are only aware of a single footprint left where James' mother had been fishing. It was interesting that Watson connected Coyote to the old woman throughout the story. There was a feeling of uneasiness every time Coyote came up, which I would attribute to both mischief and death. It was more mischief when the old woman was fishing in other people's ponds, but undoubtedly death when Coyote was mentioned after Greta lit the fire in her house.

I have very mixed feelings about Watson's book. Her writing style proved to be distracting (I found the poetic feel somewhat contradictory to the prose and I didn't like the choppy effect); however, there were elements in her writing that pervaded the fiction in a way that made it unique from many other books I've read. The fact that there was so little detail given about each character and, really, what was going on in the story initially made it hard to get into. I felt lost and like I was misunderstanding her intentions. As I read further, I found myself having an easier time because the lack of detail compelled me in some way.

I found Mrs. Potter's character extremely intriguing. Not only does she fish purely for glory and not to eat her catch, but she did it in water running through other people's property and had no qualms about it. Also, Greta is so trapped, so twisted (I think she's just a little bit twisted) that I have to wonder what kind of mother Mrs. Potter was--what kind of woman Mrs. Potter was. For James to have killed her simply because she was disrupting his affair doesn't seem plausible. Shouldn't it take more than that to kill your own mother? That's some serious hatred. She raised three very different children and I can't help but wonder why/how.

Greta's suicide seemed to me to be a release for her. Here, we see, the double hook: she gained freedom from whatever it was that was holding her hostage and she destroyed her mother's house (which I guess could be considered good depending on how you interpret the story. At this point, I'm not even sure about what I think). Good carries evil and vise versa. You could say the same thing for James' leaving. This was the final straw for Greta, yet simultaneously it was the key to unlocking heavy chains she carried with her.

I found the way the relationship between James and Greta was presented to be the most interesting aspect of The Double Hook. On the page that introduces the various characters James and Greta are listed side by side in the same fashion that the names of couples appear, while the Widow's girl Lenchen and the Widow's boy are listed separately (as it would be assumed that James and Greta would be displayed as well). The fact that Watson decides to call the relationship between Lenchen and James an affair also calls the concept of incest into question (James having an affair on whom? Greta, his sister?) In the scene where Greta speaks to the Widow's girl that night she was waiting for James leaves an eerie feel as well. "He'll kill me too, Greta said. He'll shove me down for standing in his way," states Watson (page 55). When Greta goes mad and burns down the house is also very interesting. "She felt hands on the knob. She felt hands twisting her ribs. Picking the flowers on her housecoat and bruising them, Stripping off the leaves until her branch lay naked as a bone on the dusty floor... She wanted to cry abuse through the boards... Don't play with those Greta," (page73-74) This passage makes me wonder if Greta setting fire to the house was an act of sacrifice or if she had gone crazy because of her love affair with James, which seems as though it could have been abusive. Watson's lack of detail makes questions like this very hard to answer, but I loved the novel anyways.

I guess I’ll start out by saying I loved The Double Hook. Watson distills the narrative, leaving barely anything in terms of character background, setting, time, etc., but at the same time, ingeniously leaves pieces and parts of these basic elements that relate to each other in such a fine, delicate way that they end-up weaving an incredibly deep and extensive well of thematic/symbolic text beneath the surface. To be honest, I couldn’t even tell you what most of it was, as I haven’t had the time to pin the surface details down and hunt down the depths of their connections, but I hope to do so eventually. It is literature like Watson’s—that which absolutely requires some puzzle piece work on the part of the reader—that I really enjoy, because I find it far more artful than mere storytelling or regurgitation of events and emotions.
One of these wells of symbolic wealth can be found in Watson’s use of sensory details, particularly that of sound. For the majority of the novel, where characters and lifestyles are in dissonance with the “natural order”, we hear repeated examples of a stagnant, simple sounds, such as, “No other sound except the shift of a horse’s hip and the clink of bit on teeth grazing the short grass”, and “All about him as he rode into the yard he could hear the breathing of his animals. Close to the house waiting” (32, 44). Peppered throughout the first four parts of the novel, these examples of peripheral silence give readers a sense of a stationary inquietude, or a passiveness, when it comes to the characters and landscape. It’s as if the air is unnaturally still with waiting, so still you can hear horses breathing in the fields. In the last part of the novel however, when characters are taking it upon themselves to restore order, we finally get some noise to signal this transition from the unnatural to the natural. Watson writes, “From the next room came the sound of the Widow’s voice and the sound of Angel’s hand upon the stove”, and “she leaned out across the bush where the sparrow chattered…she heard the voice of Coyote crying down through the boulders” (117, 118). In the final pages of the novel, where James has returned, Felix and Angel have salvaged their relationship, Greta has taken herself out of the picture (eliminating the unnatural relationship between her and her brother), and a baby has been born, we see natural sounds bursting from every corner, including that of Coyote, the natural spiritual presence.
Watson’s use of sound to mirror the development of plot and character is delicately maneuvered, tucked under the surface of the narrative. It is symbolic elements such as this one that lead me to appreciate her novel so much, for its richness demands and deserves effort on the part of the reader.

When I first started reading the novel I was kind of confused. I hadn't read a book written anything like this in the past. The sparsity in the writing took awhile to get used to, but in the end I kind of liked. It helped the book move along at a quick pace and before I knew it I was done. Sometimes though, it took some consideration after to piece the details that were given all together and we discussed some things in class that I hadn't picked up on when I had read it myself. What I really liked about the novel was despite the spare prose, a lot is said in the few words. Large ideas are spoken that cause the reader to pause. One of example of a sentence where I thought this is on page 45 where Theopil says, " it's not always right for the mouth to say what the eyes see. sometimes its better for the eyes to close". The book is full of passages like that where the characters impart pieces of wisdom. This kind of beauty and message in words is also often conveyed through the voice of coyote, the end of the novel for example, coyote says "I have set his feet on the soft ground; I have set his feet on the sloping shoulders of the world". I guess what really gets me is that Watson is able to get across so much meaning and touch the reader, but she doesn't bury them under mountains of words. She really puts to use the phrase less is more.

I cannot say that I absolutely loved The Double Hook because it was so dense and i found myself lost at times, but I truly respect the author and the work itself. Watson does an amazing job in detail. I thought it was interesting how there was no quotations throughout the story, which made it hard to differentiate between thought and dialogue. Another aspect i loved was how the characters were introduced on page one. I found it a useful tool as i was reading to go back and see which characters were connected to each other. One passage I liked was on page 45 when Theophil says " It's not always right for the mouth to say what the eyes see... Sometimes,too, it's better for the eyes to close." He is talking to Kip here about staying out of people's business, which seems to be a big theme throughout the story. This quote also portrays how the novel is full of piece like this, which kind of teach us a lesson and make you think. Another quote that I noticed was about Greta. " Since Greta never thought of anyone. Not even herself. Only what had been done to her." This quote shows Greta in a nutshell. She is always defensive about herself and her privacy. Im not sure if my analysis's' of this novel are correct because i missed all of the discussion, but these are my thoughts !

I enjoyed the moderist sytle of The Double Hook. It definately keeps you on your toes. In my Moderism class we've been studying T.S. Eliot, Ezra Pound and James Joyce, which helped my understanding of this novel. At times, I think Watson's choice of words appear random without achieving the same connection that other modernist writers express. Nevertheless, there is still much to enjoy in her writing. The use of Coyote is one of the more interesting techniques. He definately contributes to the atmosphere. Sometimes he appears to represent death: "In my mouth is forgetting. In my darkness is rest" (20), or after Greta kills herself: "my right hand embraces her" (74). It's not clear whether Coyote is death or a salesman for it with comments like, "Happy are the dead/for their eyes see no more" (100). Other times he seems to be more of a god-like figure, or a local god, such as when he apparently takes credit for the birth of the baby: "I have set his feet on soft ground. I have set his feet on the sloping shoulders of the world" (118). He also refers to Kip as his "servant" on page 26. However, Watson goes to great lengths to keep Coyote mysterious and hard to define. Some of his utterences are eerily vague. Coyote, like the rest of the novel, is meant to be difficult and open to interuptation. Much like poetry, different readers will experience it in different ways. With the exception of a few flaws, I thought it was an enjoyable work.

The Language in The Double Hook is very succinct and precise so that even skimming one sentence haphazardly, can result in missing out on understanding key events that are taking place. In the opening sentences of the novel Sheila Watson describes the death of Greta and James’s mother with the quick incomplete sentence “into the shadow of death” (1). When I originally scanned this passage I did not even realize that anything significant had occurred. Because of the style of the language, I had to constantly read with the utmost attention to each detail and word so as not to miss anything significant. I reread quiet a few parts of this book, easily finding myself lost within the span of a couple pages. Although a challenging read, I thoroughly enjoyed The Double Hook. Always a poetic form enthusiast, I found the prose style beautiful and aesthetically luring.
I really liked Watson’s examination of perspective. She shows that human perspective is universal only in its differences. Human beings can look at the same items or situations and each individually see a completely different image. Greta says, “There are things one needs from time to time. There are things people think other people have no need of. There are things that other people think people need that no one needs at all” (31). Human needs and wants are diversified through the lens of perspective. One’s treasure is another’s trash; One’s excesses are another’s dearth. One’s desires are another’s distains; One’s wants are another’s needs. There is not a concrete understanding or definition of what is universally necessary and what is universally superfluous. Despite this fact, Watson suggests that humans consistently try to determine what is right for their fellow men and women. Characters throughout the novel suggest to each other this point saying to each other “you don’t know what I know” (28) or “people keep thinking thoughts into other people’s heads” (67). Watson explores how we project our prospects and images unto others. She cautions against such behavior though saying, “It’s not always right for the mouth to say what the eyes see. Sometimes too its better for the eyes to close” (45) Here I believe Watson is suggesting that just because one “thinks” they see something correctly, does not mean they have the right to voice these thoughts because they are after all just a matter of prospective.
(As mentioned above in previous posts) I also thoroughly enjoyed the author’s use of personification. Watson’s descriptions of an earth with human expressions and attributes are often poignant. She describes the earth as infected by distemper, “the ground rotten with it” (33) Describing the earth with emotions which “rot” it is an intriguing concept. I often feel rotten with my emotions, as if my whole body surged and acted through the portal of this one feeling. Isn’t this what passions are: Emotions which course through the veins and psyche like rot, overtaking everything? t I also loved Watson’s description of the creek as death. She says “death leaking through from the centre of the earth. Death rising to the knee. Death rising to the loin” (13). It could be assessed that death submerges human conscientiousness and knowledge. It is an unknown. A creek or body of water is also dark and unknown. The imagery of death as a creek is strong making it fathomable. It conjures death into an actual imaginable physical presence such as water.
I also thought giving the physical environment human emotions, a great tool in emphasizing the theme of environment and it’s effects on human identity. In part 1 section 12 Watson describes the sky as if it was the skin stretched across one’s chest, “overhead the sky was tight as rawhide. About them the bars of the earth darkened. The flat ribs of the hills.” The wording in this phrase is beautiful; she describes walking across hills as a carnal experience akin to strolling across a ribcage under the snug stretched blanket of skin. Watson does this in many places especially when describing the sky. She uses phrases such as “stones breathed in her hand” (26), “sky filled with adder tongues.” (26), and “ The silence of the contracting muscle” (34). Watson explores how the environment within the Double Hook affected all of its characters thoughts and decisions. Reversing this theme to imply that the earth expresses human characteristics intensifies the theme, suggesting that environments and humans inhibit each other mutually.
When thinking of the parallels drawn between environment and inhabitant, I noticed what I thought was another theme. This might be a stretch but something I nevertheless observed. I find Watson’s examination of enclosures and the limitations they present very interesting. She references several times the limitations of the human body. Skin holds a person’s pieces together but also holds them back (79). As mentioned before, Watson also describes the physical environment as a limiting boundary like human skin, “for a minute she saw the light. Then only the raw skin of the sky drawn over them like a sack” (100). She describes the physical world like a sack made of skin, holding and forcing the insides together. One can only push so far against this barrier before finding themselves obstructed by its limits. The world is one where even “joy be bound by a glass rim” (62). This can be seen through certain characters, especially female. I tried to find the quotations denoting this but was unsuccessful, so I will just have to paraphrase them. Watson in the book describes the lack of roles for women in the hills of this Cariboo country. Women were limited by the environment, which held them in like a second skin. The effect of which was for some (such as Greta and her mother) lose of wits. The Old Lady fishes relentlessly because it is all she can do, it is the only purpose she has even if it is fruitless and obsolete. Greta burns her house to the ground while still inside. She wants to escape her physical limitations but could not do so without destroying herself. She is stuck inside for she “had inherited destruction like a section surveyed and fenced. She sat in her mother’s doom as she sat in her chair” (98). She could not burn the house down without catching fires to those sinews of herself still tied to it. Watson suggests that humans cannot escape the limitations of the earth, because “how can a man escape it since he can’t hold and shape the world” (66). She further muses that men cannot escape the limitations of environment, even in death. After all the struggles against the environment “curiously a man lies down in the ground at last” (49). In death our bodies are buried amongst dirt, forever intertwined with the boundaries of the earth. Watson also examined psychological limitations. She says, “All the time people go shutting their doors. Tying things up. Fencing them in. Shutting out what they never rightly know” (48). Humans apply and create further limitations to life. Maybe this is a result of a constant conditioning under those limitations that are natural and unavoidable. Humans form limitations because they are so use to them.

I didn't care for this novel at all while I was reading it. I found it extremely hard to follow and I just didn't completely understand what was going on. But, once we started talking about it in class I found a new appreciation for it. Once we started talking about the book I realized that it was full of symbolism that I had missed that first time around. One example of this is the peoples visions of the old lady, even after her death. Her sightings were typically intertwined with signs of the Coyote who was representative of death and was also a trouble maker and trickster. "Yet as she watched the old lady, Ara felt death leaking though from the centre of the earth. Death rising to the knee. Death rising to the loin" (Watson, 13). Another example of a symbol is the use of the environment throughout the novel. Fire is one symbol that is used as a form of death and birth in this book. "Fire doesn't burn clean. The things you see. Beds standing when there's no one left to lie in them, and bits of dishes when there's no one left to eat" (Watson, 99). Although Greta killed herself, she in a way released herself from the confinement of her childhood memories and her barred life. Also fire is symbolic of life as when a forest burns down, it soon is sprouting with regrowth as will this family and their lives.

I did not really love this book. It had a lot of interesting events occur in it and I was intrigued by the dual meaning of Coyote and the examples of Coyote actually being god, and Coyote actually being the animal Coyote. The overall spirituality of the novel was fascinating to me although I cannot say I myself am very spiritual. Even though I did not love the book I did find a couple of parts particularly interesting in relation to Coyote. We see the spiritual Coyote throughout the novel giving out wisdom through his voice. "I have set his feat on soft ground; I have set his feat on the sloping shoulders of the world" (118). "Above them a Coyote barked. This time they could see it on a jut of rock calling down over the ledge so that the walls of the valley magnified its own voice and sent it echoing back: Happy are the dead for their eyes see no more" (100). In these passages we see the duality that Coyote possess in both the spiritual and physical worlds. Coyote can present himself as both a voice and a physical animal that speaks and give out his wisdom. This was very interesting to read because it showed us as readers that some things are not always as they seem.

I very much enjoyed this novel in spite of the frenetic plot and ambiguous dialogue and action. The key to enjoying this novel for me was not to dwell on the idiosyncrasies of the writing style, or even to discern word for word what was happening, but to let the language flow and to take in the overall tone of the novel. I cannot discern the style with a great degree of clarity, but the afterword, along with class discussions, confirmed a modernist/symbolist reading of the text, making comparisons to Joyce.

In spite of the ambiguity of the text, I found it to be a very powerful piece of literature in terms of its content. One of the most interesting passages is in part three, chapter seven, which finds William, Ara, and Heinrich approaching Greta and James' house immediately following James' departure. This passage highlights the prevalence of imagery over dialogue and action in Watson's writing style. As Heinrich, Ara, and William converge, a veritable non verbal conversation occurs as Heinrich analyzes Ara on William's steed in comparison to his own sister, and gauges William's would-be response to his own inklings and intuition. To me the conversation that takes place seems to be a bunch of hot air. William stuffily attempts to separate the business of men and the business of women once again, ignoring the fact that in a community that small there is no business that concerns only one gender, let alone one person. The conversation itself is merely a representation of the dynamic between Heinrich who knows the truth of James and Lenchen's relationship, William who shields himself from it thinking it to be best, and Ara who sees the truth and tries to make others see it as well.

Another passage I'm particularly enamored with is the final chapter of part four, where James rejects the transience and moral emptiness offered by Traff and his ways. At first I marveled at the passivity of James, who is in the process of losing everything he had previously saved for, and what he had previously viewed as his means of escaping his former life. Upon rereading this chapter and attempting to analyze James' reasoning, I zeroed in on the phrase "The price of his escape lay snug in one of Traff's trouser pockets" (95). James subsequently laughs at Traff's notion of a life and is beckoned to return by the same aspects of his former stability and life that drove him to run away. Only, looking at them from the other side, from a different point of view, stability and family were no longer overwhelming and limiting. Perhaps James simply needed the ability to claim he chose his path, rather than feeling like it was defined by his mother, Greta, the landscape, the emptiness, and whatever else kept him from leaving before.

Continuing the catch-up game here…
My reaction to the Double Hook when read and still now is the difficulty in reading it. I have read difficult works before, but this was such a unique format to so much of it that it was very much a challenge. The language used though is extremely descriptive and very much puts you in the place where the scene is occurring, and the short sentences punctuate the mood, making everything feel more intense, more urgent.
One very powerful scene that stuck with me was the description of death of Section 5 in Book 2. “Dear God, she cried. Then she stopped short. Afraid that he might come. / Father of the fatherless. Judge of windows. Death, and after death the judgment.”
The random poetry is also something I have never seen before, and the use of it with the Coyote was certainly intriguing to me. Section 4, Book 4 – “To gather briars and thorns, / said Coyote. / To go down into the holes of the rock / and into the caves of the earth. / In my fear is peace.”

THE DOUBLE HOOK elicits a very brief response from me. This book/story,is raw, dismal, lacking benefit or enjoyment or knowledge or teaching & it is crass, bleak & vulgar. . . however, the two examples which I did find interesting (to fulfill assignment) were the Epilogue and page 3.P.S. was Tennesse Williams lurking in the pages?

THE DOUBLE HOOK elicits a very brief response from me. This book/story,is raw, dismal, lacking benefit or enjoyment or knowledge or teaching & it is crass, bleak & vulgar. . . however, the two examples which I did find interesting (to fulfill assignment) were the Epilogue and page 3.P.S. was Tennesse Williams lurking in the pages?

When we first started to discuss The Double Hook I heard mostly negative reviews. I must admit however, that despite my initial impressions of the Double Hook I found the book to be rather enjoyable. I especially liked Shelia Watson's style of writing; departing from conventional norms, the unusual style of writing she presents is quite fascinating. Her writing is poetic and thought invoking. Her use of allusions to Biblical and ancient past times was really interesting, namely through the character of Coyote: "And in a loud voice, Coyote cried: Kip, my servant Kip." (26) Kip, who is lurking around the whole novel is in search of the truth. It is as if he has been given an order to carry out and will stop at nothing to fulfill his goal. Thus the quote makes sense as Coyote appropriately calls Kip his servant and orders him to go out and seek the truth. Depending on one's interpretation it may even be possible that Kip is being tested, although in the end he does not seem in any way rewarded by his faithfulness and relentless pursuit of the truth. Another thought provoking passage, and one of my favorites, appears on p. 34: "In the sky above darkness had overlaid light. But the boy knew as well as he knew anything that until the hills fell on him or the ground sucked him in the light would come again. He had tried to hold darkness to him, but it grew thin and formless and took shape as something else. He could keep his eyes shut after that night, but it would be light he knew. Light would be flaming off the bay mare's coat. Light would be kindling on the fish in the dark pools." I am very much interested in the contrasting of light and darkness in this passage. My guess is that light symbolizes good, which would make sense since Kip is ultimately seeking out the truth and is certainly not thought of as a particularly dark character, like James may be. "He could keep his eyes shut after that night but it would be light he knew" (34) suggests that Kip is inherently good-matured and despite what comes across his path, light (good) will prevail over darkness (evil). I am interested to hear what anyone else thinks about this passage. Overall the Double Hook was a great book from start to finish and was pleased to read it.

Sometimes when you are reading a novel you conceptualize a view of the author. Most of the time that view is genderzied. As I was reading the Double Hook I felt like the author was male. I think the reason that I felt this was because of the style of writing. Which is void of details and stricken down to the bare bones sentence wise. This style is minimalistic yet it gives you so much to think about. I think the style is what informed my idea of gender. But as i look back I think I was just fooled by Sheila Watson's incredible abilty to shift perspectives. On page 54 you get a great sense of Greta's way of thinking, "A woman can stand so much, she said. A man can stand so much. A woman can stand what a man can't stand. To be scorned by others. Pittied. Scrimped. Put upon. Laughed at when no one has come for her, when there's no one to come. She can stand it when she knows she still has the power." As the reader we gain so much from these powerful moments of insight from each of the characters. Another passage that displays aptitude in understanding the opposite gender is on page 71 when Ara is talking to William about James, "I can't tell her, who can I tell? She might make things straight somehow. Can a man speak to no one because he's a man? Who says so? Those who want to be sheltered by his silence. I've held my tongue, he said, when I should have used my voice like an axe to cut down the wall between us". The shifting perspectives throughout the novel make the book a difficult yet extremely rewarding experience.

The Double Hook, by Shelia Watson is a very captivating and innovative novel for many reasons. First, the difficult style and descriptions used by Watson to explain the complex relationships within this small town make this story very inaccessible for many readers. Unfortunately for many readers, this confusing format inhibits their ability to see the deep and poetic meaning that Watson is striving to portray. Furthermore, Watson uses extensive dialogue without out quotations or other descriptive words making it even more difficult for stubborn readers to digest. Secondly, Watson’s image of the double hook and its symbolism in relation to glory and happiness create an incredibly deep and profound meaning to the constant struggles that exist between the characters of this text. That being said, my reaction to this book was mixed. At first I really struggled with the style and the content and almost gave up on it all together, but after pushing through I realized that the dense and profound style only serves to augment the incredibly intuitive and symbolic nature of this story. My favorite character in this story was Coyote, due to the centrality of his character to almost every conflict and character interaction. I also enjoyed his position as the trickster figure and his connection to the symbolic and spiritual aspects of the work. On page 48, Kip, the seer of the community and often Coyotes servant, notices the imbalance within the community and realizes that new connections and relationships must be made to break the bonds of isolationism. This isolationism is exemplified by Felix’s character as seen on page 28 when we discover that Felix has a need for no one and that things came and things went. It is only later in the story that Felix finally breaks away form indifference and transforms through the birth of a child into a caring and providing figure. With this transformation the town is now complete and can move away from the ideals and isolation of the past.

The Double Hook i must admit was a really odd piece of literature. the way that it was written has made it very challenging to read however it also makes it that much more interesting. Not really being able to know which character is talking or who you're reading about makes you have to reread pages at a time. This in turn makes you get more out of the book. i wouldn't have understood half of what was going on had i not read each paragraph a few times. Even though i found the writing to be difficult is was truly poetic. This is an aspect that i was fond of in this book. I also enjoyed the unpredictability. The Passage on page 74 when Greta lights herself on fire i thought i was completely reading the passage wrong, later to find out i was dead on. This passage was also an example of how poetic the written could be. Watson uses very abstract imagery when describing what happened to Greta. She didn't write "Greta light herself on fire" she wrote "the flowers raised gold filaments anthered with flame". She then changes the format of the writing to say "And Coyote cried in the hills: i've taken her where she stood, my left had is on her head, my right hand embraces her". This part was a poem plopped down in the middle of the page. I enjoyed how Watson put emphasis on sections of the book is this way. It showed the importance of the passage while maintaining a poetic feel to it. Watson even starts off the book with a bang when james kills the old woman on the first page. this passage sort of set you up for all the twists and turns that the book would take. She again used very poetic language to write this event. This seen is written in very sort sentences and sets up the facts that need to be known. It made the passage lack emotion towards the old lady and really gave you the correct impression that the old lady would not be missed.

I agree with a lot of what Sean has said above. I really dig the style
of writing that Shelia Watson uses. Having done some recent research
on modern art (post 1945), her writing style certainly captures many
of the themes of that time period; using the writing style, not just
the text, to convey a message, as well as using ancient literary tools
to form analogies for a modern story (she uses ancient Greek themes,
the concept of a tragedy, and she uses biblical references. The
passage that Sean discusses above on page 34 is a piece of a larger
theme that we see in the novel. The contrast of light and dark is
connected to that of good versus evil, and chaos versus order. As the
novel progresses we see the lives of the characters move from chaos to
order, my conflict to rest; with the birth of a child comes the
rebirth of a community. Prior to this of course, there is a sense of
power struggle. On page 37 we see this vividly between Greta and
James, "Get out she said. Go away. This is my house. Now that Ma's
lying dead in her bed I give the orders here. When a person's dead in
a house there should be a little peace. She pointed to the door. But
when the others went out James did not move." Then, the book
immediately progresses to part two. This is an example of two things
that I really like about the book. The first is what I have already
discussed about modern literature. Watson uses the jump to the second
part of the book as a pause and forces readers to identify the quoted
passage as an important passage. Second, this passage exemplifies one
of the major themes of conflict.
I don't know if this novel changed my impression of Canadian
literature. If I had to say I would say no. I actually have a fairly
high regard for Canadian authors. I took a Canadian history course
last semester and did a fair amount of reading by Canadian authors. I
thought this book was quite good, and it simply furthers what I
already knew; women are excellent writers.

The Double Hook is definitely a book one wouldn’t want to judge by the cover. When first picking it up I thought it would be a breeze to get through. So short, so small. But much like the content of the novel itself, so much more lays underneath the surface. I had to read it slowly because The Language in The Double Hook is very succinct and precise so that even skimming one sentence haphazardly, can result in missing out on understanding key events that are taking place. The book left me feeling clueless and puzzled at times, but I nonetheless enjoyed its prose like form.
I really enjoyed how Watson showed the unstable and multifaceted nature of understanding. The way one perceives a situation, event, a sentence, or just anything that comes into contact with them is never definable. Each person comes to understanding something not through concrete facts or situations but through what their previous perceptions and experiences incline them to believe. Greta says, “There are things one needs from time to time. There are things people think other people have no need of. There are things that other people think people need that no one needs at all” (31). There is nothing concrete about life. I think this is interesting because human beings tend to be invested in this idea that we have a higher purpose that it is this concrete destiny we all share, yet there is so many different versions of what that “destiny” or “purpose” is.
I also found that Watson had a lot of little reflections on human existence and experience that were incredibly insightful and yet poetic in wording. Angel talks to Prosper about pondering moving with her children to a place that is more than rocks, wild beasts, and empty space. But she says she hesitates because “loneliness is being one’s own skin and flesh, there’s only more lonely people there than here. One man is one man and two men or ten men aren’t something else. One board is one board. Nailed toether they might be a pig pen or a hen house. But I never knew men you could nail together like boards.” (75) Human beings have this tendency that believe that loneliness is the absence of someone else’s presence, and that it is bad and something that must be remedied. Our “flesh calls for flesh” When really it is the condition of being an individual. Humans relish when they find someone with similar interests or thoughts or tastes because it makes them feel connected to or apart of someone else. I think this also explains people’s ability to throw themselves headlong into religious beliefs. I am not denying the possibility of religious values holding truth but more suggesting that maybe some create God when they loose hope in finding complete connection with fellow men. So they reach to something intangible and open to interpretation, that they can mold to fit their idea of what will cure loneliness. I think it was Bukowski who said “Or is God something we talk to when we have no one else to talk to”. Maybe Watson is right, loneliness isn’t a problem to be solved, its just the state of being an individual, and that is something that men just refuse to accept and live with. I believe that Watson alludes to this idea by her representation of Coyote. His presence reaches manifestation depending on whose point of view it is. Those who believe in him, see him. Those who don’t believe in him, don’t see him. Now that I think of it Bukowski expresses this same view of loneliness in a poem entitled Alone with Everybody. He actually says something very similar to what lenchen thinks on page 69. She thinks “Flesh calls for flesh”. I will post an excerpt from the poem because I think it expresses my feelings toward Watson’s examination of lonliness a lot better than I just did.
The flesh covers the bone
and they put a mind
in there and
sometimes a soul,
and the women break
vases against the walls
and the men drink too
much
and nobody finds the
one
but keep
looking
crawling in and out
of beds.
flesh covers
the bone and the
flesh searches
for more than
flesh.

On a final note, to address your question regarding whether this book changed my perception of Canadian Literature, I would have to say no. Although the form is very different from other Canadian books, I think the content has themes that are consistent throughout Canadian Literature, such as the relationship between man and his environment and powerful and violent landscapes that often reflect the characters on emotions or feelings.

*I was looking through my posts and noticed that the one I had written for Double Hook was not present. I think I may have accidentally hit preview instead of post the first time around. Conveniently I hand write everything before typing it so it was still in my notebook.

My initial reaction to Double Hook was primarily dislike and confusion. I had trouble comprehending what was going on and how everyone was intertwined. I also didn't really feel that the characters were fully developed and that they were almost one dimensional with only one defining feature. However, after analysing Double Hook in class and going over certain aspects I had missed, my perspective completely flipped. I really enjoyed looking at the symbolism and mixing of cultures we reviewed. Also I discovered that the characters were much more complex than I had previously thought. What I found most interesting was the relationships the members of the community all had with eachother. Each person was concerned with one main point occuring in their lives but those points brought them together whether they liked it or not.

My impression of Canadian Literature written by women really did not change after reading this because I did not have an impression to begin with. All of the books by Canadian female authors that I have read have been very different, so with Double Hook I didn't know what to expect.

My post seems to also have disappeared from this prompt...oh well.

When I started reading The Double Hook, I thought it was strange. When I finished it, I still thought it was weird. Because of Watson's writing style, I felt like it was hard for me to really embrace the book like other books. I didn't think it was inviting. The style and the language is very bare and stark. Even though this kept me further away from the book, I think it is one of the most interesting aspects of it. The starkness of the language reflects the starkness of the landscape and the interpersonal relationships of the characters. The language is plain, direct, harsh. The landscape is open, harsh, empty -
"the sky stretched lie a tent pegged to the broken rock" (134). The emotional connections between people are equally as sparse. Even between family: "The old lady falling. There under the jaw of the roof. In the fault of the bed loft. By James's hand. By James's words: This is my day. You'll not fish today" (19). These lines recount the death and murder of a mother, and yet are emotionally barren.

The double hook has been a very interesting read for me. This is the fourth time I have read through this book and it still brings some confusion to me. Who is coyote? What does he represent? I think for me the most interesting aspect of the story would have to be the character of Coyote himself. Coyote both enters the physical and the spiritual world throughout the novel and we see examples of this throughout the story.

Coyote controls the spiritual world and he is seen crossing the gap between living and spiritual worlds. The first example of this is when Kip see coyote leading the old woman through the crack in the rocks. “I saw your old lady climb down through the split rock with Coyote, her fishes still in hand” (36). Kip sees coyote doing this even through the old woman has been dead for hours, pushed by James during an argument down the stairs. Kip is the ultimate seer in the story. He can view the spiritual world better than anyone else in the novel and he gains coyote’s trust in this way. Coyote can also be seen in the physical realm in which he is known only as coyote. There are several times when people see or hear coyote’s in the novel and these are just your common everyday coyote’s. However some times coyote will trick people by taking on the guise of coyote. “coyote reaching out reflected glory. Like fire to warm. Then shoving the brand between a mans teeth right into his belly’s pit. Fear making mischief. Laying traps for men. The dog and his servants plaguing the earth” (50).

What an intense read! For such a small book, I felt there was so much going on in The Double Hook. Until the discussion in class, I didn’t understand that the “old lady” was actually dead. Also, reading the book on my own made me question what Coyote actually was—the name of another character? A spirit? An omniscient force? A universal myth accepted by the community?
After the class discussion I was clearer on the logistics, but for a first read, I thought a lot of the text was insightful and honest—well deserving of a deeper analysis. Watson applied several universal truths to these few characters and their situations. So much of my book was underlined when I finished. Passages like, “Remembering turns grief to anger” (116), and “A woman can stand what a man can’t stand…She can stand it when she knows she still has the power” (54), are so carefully worded that they perfectly express Watson’s greater opinions of the world. There is so much personal (and truthful) insight packed into this small book, I feel like (beyond its context) it would continue to offer something new to think about after dozens of readings, which is what I found most interesting about it.
One book does not influence my opinion of an entire culture, as its insights would have been just as important coming from any other country. Though I think The Double Hook offers a lot of perspective to any reader, it does not at all change my opinion of Canadian literature or literature by Canadian women.

As far as I know this is the only blog entry that I skipped over. Before we discussed this book for two classes I was not a fan; after the discussion I disliked the novel slightly less. Largely influenced by Modernism, THE DOUBLE HOOK is very convoluted with biblical allusions, making it difficult for a secular reader to make sense out of a good portion of the text. I clearly need to take a course dealing with the writing of the bible and also greek mythology for a refresher.

Criticism aside, the novel certainly has its merits. Being so dense in content (although it such a small book), Watson offers a lot of great insights into our world. My favorite aspect of the novel was the role that dualities play in the lives of the characters. Before the novel even begins, a quote is on display that sums up the whole book,

"He doesn't know you can't catch the glory on a hook and hold on to it. That when you fish for the glory you catch the darkness too. That if you hook twice the glory you hook twice the fear."

Since I waited so long to complete this blog, this is the only quote I know I will be able to locate, but I think it goes nicely with the role of duality in the novel regardless. One can view the role of duality from infinite angles. My favorite angle has to do with role of literature. Watson writes through the expressive vehicle of her characters (which ones specifically escapes me at this point) that without literature, we are left with violence and insensibility. Art or religion can rescue a person from that. She looks at these two ends of the spectrum and the reader is able to see characters that do not have a saving grace like literature or religion in their lives, and they are violent. Some other dualities Watson looks at are good/evil, male/female, life/death, etc.

And now I am finally done with all of the blogs. Hope everyone has an enjoyable summer.

When I first picked up Sheila Watson’s The Double Hook, I thought, “Awesome—this shouldn’t take me more than a few hours to read.” After reading the first few pages, I realized that I’d need a little bit more time to digest it.
What struck me most about the text was its sparseness: aside from being physically slim, the story is told in extremely minimalist detail. The sparseness of both the form and content mirrored the sparseness of the landscape in which the story takes place and the dialogue exchanged between characters. As readers, we’re given mostly plot-centric details from which to sketch portraits of the characters’ inner lives. The whole effect leaves one feeling a big hungry. This hunger seems to correlate with the paratext: the image of the skinny, barking dog on the cover: the “apocalyptic dog,” by Jean Dallaire.
Putting an “apocalyptic” dog on the cover—who, I imagine, is supposed to represent the trickster deity, Coyote—points to The Double Hook’s biblical thread. I found it difficult to fully decipher the biblical allusions, because, like Eric above me, I haven't studied the bible in depth. I can take a stab though: The book begins, “In the folds of the hills / under Coyote’s eye / lived / …” and then names all of the characters in the story. This opening sounds much like the opening of a biblical story, listing all of the people who will play important roles, and the eye of Coyote is like the eye of God. However, Coyote is not a God in the supernatural sense—he imports elements of the supernatural, but his supernatural power is confined to the natural world. Thus this story is set in the absence of an infallible, supernatural God, leaving only earthly beings, like Coyote, to run things. Earthly beings are ultimately unstable, and likely to make mistakes.

Although I read The Double Hook a ways back, I can still remember the affect that the Coyote had on me while I indulged in this ever-so complex text. Initially, I saw Coyote as a character attempting to restore situations. It is Coyote's land and he is constantly appearing and dissapearing, as there grows a connection with the physical spaces Coyote is a part of. "There's no big Coyote, like you think. There's not just one of him. He's everywhere" (47).

Coyote is a recurring theme in many native mythologies. Often portrayed as the "trickster" figure, in this particular text it appears that Coyote is unaware that he may be tricked, too. While Coyote fools people, it seems that he is the one being fooled sometimes. "That if you hook twice the glory you hook twice the fear. That Coyote plotting to catch the glory for himself is fooled and every day fools others" (50).

My initial reaction to The Double Hook was one with much confusion but immediate intrigue. I really enjoy and delve into books that make you think, read each word, and pay attention to every detail. At first the book was coming from so many different angles, and was rather dry. After chapter one, things started coming together in my mind. I started paying particular attention to my favorite characters (Felix and Ara) and to when the coyote was mentioned versus when the old lady was mentioned. I was particularly intrigued with how the image of the coyote was portrayed throughout the community, from character to character.

The Double Hook was one of my most favorite books that we have read this semester. Due to its dynamic and unique nature, the book sparked lots of intrigue and worthy class discussion. The Double Hook was an interesting portrayal of Canadian prairies. Before this class I had little experience with Canadian literature as a whole. After this novel, I was left with a different attitude towards the genre. I like different, quarky literature and this book fit right in. The inlaid symbolism and interwoven native references to an already unusual story made the appeal to this book far greater. Left and right I found myself talking about this book with my friends.