Reading and Literature Studies · Reading Literary TextsCanadian Short Fiction: Leacock's Humour and Johnson's "A Red Girl's Reasoning"
1.5 2.3About 70 minutes
Learning goals- I can explain how Stephen Leacock uses hyperbole, repetition, understatement and escalation to create humour.
- I can explain how E. Pauline Johnson uses dialogue, characterization and an ironic title to challenge her readers.
- I can make meaningful connections between a story and my own experience, other texts and the world, and explain how they deepen my understanding.
- I can name contemporary First Nations, Métis and Inuit writers of short fiction to explore.
Words to know
hyperbole
Deliberate exaggeration for effect.
understatement
Presenting something as smaller or less important than it is, often for humour or irony.
deadpan
Humour delivered in a flat, serious tone, as if the speaker does not notice how funny it is.
escalation
A structure in which each event makes the situation more extreme than the last.
anticlimax
A let-down ending: a build-up that ends in something trivial.
characterization
How a writer reveals a character: through actions, speech, thoughts, appearance and others' reactions.
custom of the country
A historical term (in French, à la façon du pays) for marriages between fur traders and Indigenous women made according to Indigenous customs rather than church law.
meaningful connection
A link between a text and something else that helps explain the text's meaning, not just a similarity.
Hook: two kinds of courage
One man is so nervous inside a bank that he accidentally withdraws every dollar he just deposited. One young woman stands in a crowded ballroom and calmly tells her new husband that his idea of a "real" marriage is wrong. Both stories were written by Canadians, about twenty years apart, and both are free to read online. One will make you laugh out loud. The other may make you angry, on the character's behalf. Today we look at how style creates those reactions, and how connections help us understand why they matter.
Remember from Grade 10
You learned to turn surface connections (this reminds me of...) into meaningful ones that explain something about the text. You also studied elements of style such as diction, imagery and figurative language. Grade 11 asks you to make increasingly rich connections, and to explain how style choices create effects such as humour or outrage.
Stephen Leacock: My Financial Career (1910)
Stephen Leacock (1869 to 1944) was born in England and moved to a farm near Lake Simcoe, Ontario, as a boy. He became a professor of political economy at McGill University in Montréal, and also one of the most popular humour writers in the English-speaking world. His Sunshine Sketches of a Little Town (1912) gently mocks a small Ontario town, Mariposa, modelled on Orillia. Canada's best-known prize for humour writing, the Stephen Leacock Memorial Medal for Humour, is named after him.
My Financial Career appeared in his first book, Literary Lapses (1910), and is in the public domain. It begins:
When I go into a bank I get rattled. The clerks rattle me; the wickets rattle me; the sight of the money rattles me; everything rattles me.
The narrator's salary has gone up to fifty dollars a month, so he decides to open an account. He asks, very mysteriously, to see the manager alone. The manager assumes he must be a private detective, then a very rich man. In fact he wants to deposit fifty-six dollars. Flustered, he then tries to withdraw six dollars for spending money, but writes the cheque for fifty-six, and is too embarrassed to correct it. So he takes all of it, and flees. Since then, he tells us, he keeps his money in cash in his trouser pocket and his savings in silver dollars in a sock.
| Style element | Example | Effect |
|---|
| Repetition | the clerks rattle me; the wickets rattle me; the sight of the money rattles me; everything rattles me | Builds a rhythm of panic; the final everything tops the list. |
| Hyperbole | A tiny deposit treated as a matter needing the manager, alone | Exaggerates his anxiety until it is absurd. |
| Deadpan first person | He reports each disaster calmly, as if it made sense | We laugh because he never quite sees how funny he is. |
| Escalation | Each blunder causes a bigger one | Drives the plot toward a crash. |
| Anticlimax | All that drama, and he ends up with savings in a sock | The big build-up collapses into something small and silly. |
How Leacock's style makes My Financial Career funny. The structure of My Financial Career is escalation: each mistake makes the narrator more flustered, which causes a bigger mistake. The "graph" is for fun, not measured, but the climb is the joke's engine.E. Pauline Johnson (Tekahionwake): A Red Girl's Reasoning (1893)
E. Pauline Johnson (1861 to 1913), whose Mohawk name was Tekahionwake, was born at Chiefswood, her family's home on the Six Nations of the Grand River, near Brantford, Ontario. Her father, George Johnson (Onwanonsyshon), was a Mohawk chief; her mother, Emily Howells, was born in England. Johnson performed her poems and stories in recitals across Canada, the United States and Britain. A Red Girl's Reasoning was first published in the magazine Dominion Illustrated in February 1893, and later in her collection The Moccasin Maker (1913). It is in the public domain.
A note on the title: Red was a common word for Indigenous people in the 1890s. It is now considered offensive. Johnson used the language of her readers in her title, and then used the story to challenge their assumptions.
What happens: Christie, the daughter of a Hudson's Bay Company trader and an Indigenous mother, marries Charlie McDonald, a young Englishman. Before the wedding her father, the trader Jimmy Robinson, warns Charlie: Be pretty good to her, Charlie, my boy, or she'll balk sure as shooting. At a fashionable dance in the provincial capital, guests press Christie about her parents' wedding. She answers honestly: they were married by Indigenous rites, with no priest and no magistrate. The room's reaction humiliates Charlie. Back home, he accuses her of disgracing her parents and herself, and he treats her as if she were born outside of marriage. Christie reasons back: if her parents' marriage is not real, then by the same logic neither is theirs. Her people's ceremony is as sacred as his church's. She takes off her wedding ring, throws it aside, and leaves at dawn. Months later, Charlie finds her in a small Ontario town. She refuses to return.
Charlie's brother Joe says of her early in the story: that girl has but two possibilities regarding humanity—love or hate.
Worked exampleLet's analyse style in Johnson's story
How does Johnson use the title and Christie's characterization to challenge the attitudes of her 1890s readers?
- The title: readers of the time might expect a Red girl's reasoning to be emotional or simple. The story shows the opposite: Christie's argument is calm, logical and consistent. Charlie, the educated Englishman, is the one whose thinking contradicts itself. The title becomes ironic.
- Characterization through speech: Christie speaks quietly and plainly at the party and in the argument. Charlie's speech is angry and accusing. The contrast in tone guides the reader's sympathy.
- Characterization through action: removing the ring and leaving at dawn shows self-respect and decisiveness; she acts on her reasoning.
- Effect: a mostly non-Indigenous readership is led to agree with an Indigenous woman's argument against a white husband's prejudice, sometimes before they notice it is happening.
Johnson makes the title ironic: the Red girl's reasoning is the sound argument, and the Englishman's is the prejudiced one. Calm dialogue and decisive action make Christie the story's moral centre.
Meaningful connections branch out from the story. Each box should lead somewhere: a connection is only useful if it helps you understand the story more deeply.Worked exampleLet's turn a surface connection into a meaningful one
A student writes: Christie reminds me of Louise in The Story of an Hour because they are both women. Improve this connection.
- What's weak: being women is a similarity, not an insight. It doesn't explain anything about either story.
- Look for a shared idea: both stories show a woman whose self is defined by marriage, in the 1890s, discovering or defending her own identity. Louise discovers hers privately; Christie defends hers publicly.
- Notice the difference: Louise's freedom is only imagined and is taken away. Christie acts: she chooses to leave and refuses to return. Johnson also adds culture: Christie defends her mother's people as well as herself.
- Say what the connection reveals: reading them together shows that Johnson's heroine claims a power Chopin's never gets, and that for Christie, personal dignity and cultural dignity cannot be separated.
Like Louise Mallard, Christie is a woman of the 1890s whose identity is tied to her marriage, but where Louise's freedom exists only in a private hour, Christie claims hers in public. Johnson links a woman's self-respect to respect for her mother's people, so Christie's leaving is both personal and political.
Connections to the world
Rich text-to-world connections use accurate history:
- Fur-trade marriages. For generations, many fur traders married Indigenous women according to Indigenous customs, often called marriage à la façon du pays, "in the custom of the country". As churches and colonial courts gained power, some people began to treat these marriages as not "real". Christie's parents' marriage belongs to this history, and so does the prejudice she meets.
- The Indian Act and women. For about a century, the federal Indian Act took legal Indian status away from First Nations women who married men without status, while men who married women without status kept theirs. Parliament amended the law in 1985 (Bill C-31) to begin correcting this. Johnson's story raises a closely related question: who gets to decide whether a person's marriage and family are legitimate?
Contemporary short fiction by First Nations, Métis and Inuit writers
To extend your reading, look for these short story collections at your library:
- Eden Robinson (Haisla and Heiltsuk): Traplines (1996).
- Richard Van Camp (Tłı̨chǫ Dene, from Fort Smith, Northwest Territories): Angel Wing Splash Pattern (2002).
- Lee Maracle (Stó:lō, 1950 to 2021): Sojourner's Truth and Other Stories (1990).
These are under copyright, so read them in full from a library rather than from quotations here. Check with a parent first: some stories in these collections deal with mature subjects.
Just for funLeacock also wrote parodies of over-dramatic novels. In Gertrude the Governess (1911), the furious young hero, Lord Ronald, flung himself from the room, flung himself upon his horse and rode madly off in all directions. It is a perfect example of hyperbole: no one, not even a Leacock character, can ride in all directions at once.
Hands-on activityRattle me: a Leacock-style monologue
You need: a notebook and an audience of one (a family member or a pet).
- Think of an everyday place that makes you a bit nervous: the dentist's office, a job interview, phoning to order food, the first day at a new school.
- Write a first-person opening in Leacock's style, using repetition that builds (The receptionist rattles me; the clipboard rattles me...).
- Plan three escalating blunders, each caused by the last.
- End with an anticlimax: your solution is tiny and silly (Since then I brush my teeth with great care and see the dentist only in my dreams).
- Perform it deadpan: no smiling.
What to look for: repetition that builds to a peak, escalation where each mistake causes the next, a calm narrator, and an anticlimactic final line.
Your turn
1Name two style elements Leacock uses in the opening sentence and their effect.
Repetition (rattle me four times) and listing that builds to everything. The effect is a rhythm of growing panic that exaggerates his nervousness for humour.
2Why is My Financial Career's ending an anticlimax?
After all the drama, his solution is tiny and silly: he keeps his money in his trouser pocket and his savings in a sock.
3Why does the manager want to see the narrator alone?
He doesn't; the narrator asks for it. The manager then assumes such secrecy must mean he is a detective or a very rich man.
4What does Christie say about her parents' marriage at the dance?
That they were married by Indigenous rites, with no priest or magistrate.
5What is Christie's main argument to Charlie?
If her parents' marriage is not valid, then neither is theirs; her people's ceremony is as sacred as his church's.
6Why is the title A Red Girl's Reasoning ironic?
Readers might expect an Indigenous woman's reasoning to be weak, but hers is the logical, consistent argument, while Charlie's is prejudiced and contradictory.
7Explain the difference between a surface connection and a meaningful connection.
A surface connection notes a similarity (both are women). A meaningful one explains what the link reveals about the text's ideas.
More practice: warm-up
1Which Ontario town inspired Leacock's Mariposa?
2What was Pauline Johnson's Mohawk name?
At Chiefswood, on the Six Nations of the Grand River, near Brantford, Ontario.
4What does hyperbole mean?
Deliberate exaggeration for effect.
5What does Christie do with her wedding ring?
She takes it off and throws it aside.
More practice: on your own
1How does Leacock's deadpan narration make the story funnier than if the narrator laughed at himself?
Because he reports absurd events seriously, the reader sees the humour he misses. The gap between his calm tone and the ridiculous situation is the joke.
2How does Johnson use contrasting speech to guide the reader's sympathy?
Christie speaks quietly and plainly; Charlie speaks in anger and accusation. The calm voice seems reasonable and the angry one unreasonable, so readers side with Christie.
3Make a meaningful text-to-world connection for A Red Girl's Reasoning.
Example: the story connects to the history of **fur-trade marriages à la façon du pays, which colonial institutions later dismissed. The connection shows that Charlie's attitude was not just personal but part of a wider pattern** of refusing to recognize Indigenous law and family.
4Why might Johnson have chosen a wedding and a marriage as the centre of her story?
Marriage is about who is recognized as family and whose laws and ceremonies count. By focusing on it, Johnson can show the clash between Indigenous and colonial authority in a way her readers would feel personally.
5Both stories feature a character who is embarrassed in public. Compare how each writer uses embarrassment.
Leacock uses the narrator's embarrassment for comedy: it drives escalating blunders. Johnson uses Charlie's embarrassment critically: his shame at his wife's heritage exposes his prejudice. One invites laughter; the other invites judgment.
Challenge
1Write an analytical paragraph explaining how Johnson's story challenges ideas about which marriages are "legitimate". Include a connection to another text or the world.
Sample: Johnson's story turns the question of legitimacy back on the people who ask it. When Christie calmly explains that her parents married by Indigenous rites, Charlie assumes only a church can make a real marriage. Christie's reply exposes the contradiction: if her parents' union is invalid, so is the marriage he made with her, their daughter. Her logic is consistent; his is prejudice. This connects to the history of fur-trade marriages made 'in the custom of the country', which colonial authorities later dismissed. Johnson shows that deciding whose marriages count is a form of power, and her heroine refuses to accept it.
2Leacock's humour is gentle and self-mocking; Johnson's story is serious and critical. Is there any critical edge to Leacock's humour? Explain.
Yes, arguably: the story pokes fun at how intimidating banks and money are to ordinary people, and at the respect people show to anyone they assume is wealthy (the manager's sudden politeness). A strong answer cites the manager's assumptions and the narrator's retreat to a sock as a comment on ordinary people's discomfort with financial institutions.
3Explain why studying Johnson's work in Grade 11 is an example of reading "from different periods and cultures" in more than one way.
Johnson's work comes from a different period (the 1890s) and expresses a Mohawk perspective in a form (the magazine short story) aimed at mostly non-Indigenous readers. Reading it, you consider how an Indigenous writer of her time negotiated with her audience, which differs from both colonial writing about Indigenous people and contemporary Indigenous writing.
Check your understandingQuiz
1. Leacock's opening, the clerks rattle me; the wickets rattle me..., mainly uses...
2. How does the narrator of My Financial Career end up storing his savings?
3. Pauline Johnson was born at Chiefswood on...
4. Christie's main argument is that...
5. Which is the most meaningful connection?
For parents and teachersWhat this lesson teaches: ENG3U Reading 1.5 (extending understanding through meaningful connections to self, other texts and the world) and 2.3 (how elements of style create effects), using two public-domain Canadian stories: Stephen Leacock's My Financial Career (1910) and E. Pauline Johnson's A Red Girl's Reasoning (1893).
How to help at home:
- Read Leacock aloud together; it's short and very funny. Ask which line got the biggest laugh, and why.
- After Johnson's story, ask: Who decided that Christie's parents' marriage didn't count? Why did they think they had the right?
Sensitive content: Johnson's title uses a word for Indigenous people that is now considered offensive; the lesson explains this. In one scene Charlie grabs Christie's wrists. Encourage respectful language: name specific Nations, and speak of First Nations, Métis and Inuit communities in the present tense.
Common difficulties:
- Shallow connections. Ask So what does that show? after every connection.
- Listing devices without effects. Every device needs an explanation of what it does to the reader.
Facts used: Leacock (1869 to 1944); Literary Lapses (1910); Sunshine Sketches (1912). Johnson (1861 to 1913); the story appeared in Dominion Illustrated in February 1893 and in The Moccasin Maker (1913). Bill C-31 amended the Indian Act in 1985. This unit does not use Thomas King's story Borders, often taught in Grade 11. In November 2025 King wrote (in an essay in The Globe and Mail) that genealogical research had shown he has no Cherokee ancestry; he said he had believed a family story of Cherokee heritage for most of his life. If your teen reads Borders, discuss that news with them.