 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Who Are You?
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: X Date: 11 Jan 03 - 12:22 PM Amos: Nice of you to say that. My family are Medicine People and my Uncle's have been War Chiefs. I'm from the Clan of The Little Lizard, Big Frog. Both are water Clans. My Clan name is Hesh-Ta-Ue, in english it means Rainmist. Hugh |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: Stilly River Sage Date: 11 Jan 03 - 12:01 PM I've been mulling over this a bit more. There are ways to learn more about and to be of assistance to the modern day nations/tribes your ancestors were members of even with very diluted percentages of Indian ancestry. For each person who has knowledge of their American Indian origins, they have a piece of a puzzle that other people are probably also trying to work out. American Indians included. One way to explore this history and perhaps contibute something meaningful would be to contact the tribe in question and find out if they have a historian or geneological clerk or some other such title. Your family history might help someone else with the documentation they need in relation to the same tribal member or his/her family. Dig out the family papers and make good copies (it might be good to have them notarized), write down what you know of the family history as pertains to this person, making it a useful capsule of information. Be sure to name as many places as possible when identifying people (house addresses, parts of town, parts of the county, county, etc, narrow it down as close as you can get to where they were born or lived). Some tribes, like the Cherokee of Oklahoma and North Carolina (there is no longer a reservation in Oklahoma since the land was set aside in North Carolina) have scholarships available for individuals with even very minute amounts of Indian blood. It's a stretch, and I'm probably not alone in having seen articles about strapping young white men who were able to claim scholarship money based on 1/32 amount of Cherokee. But if the tribe is okay with this I'm not going to argue it. Your paperwork, as it links back to the indiviual(s) stretches between you and that ancestor, and might be of assistance to anyone whose own family is arrayed along that line. If your tribe isn't recognized by the federal goverment (a source of continual irritation for many Indian people--my ex's tribe included) the papers may be all the more important. Through research you should still be able to find tribal individuals who are lobbying for recognition, and every bit of documentation is helpful. SRS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: mack/misophist Date: 11 Jan 03 - 11:44 AM Strictly in terms of numbers, I've read that if one goes back 12 generations, everyone alive in the world is your ancester. Given that, it only takes one long distance traveler to unite two continents. Others might recollect that, from Roman times to the present, an estimated 4+ million Africans were absorbed into the European population. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: Rapparee Date: 11 Jan 03 - 08:28 AM My maternal ancestors came from Hanover, and by actual genealogical reckoning, if I bumped off only 12,355,943 (plus or minus a 2% error rate) people, I'd be Queen of England!!! Almost anyone of European extraction can claim some descent from "royalty", and considering how ofter the "royal" houses changed, it should have given everyone pause about the God and the "Divine Right." And considering how armies raped and pillaged throughout all the world's countries, we're all related to each other. Me, I'm an American of Germanic ancestry, as far as I know. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: *daylia* Date: 11 Jan 03 - 07:20 AM How does the granddaughter of Twylah, Seneca Elder and former leader of the Wolf Clan, become a "well-meaning white woman"? Guest if you're going to make claims about other people's genoelogy I suggest you invent or provide yourself with that DNA scanner first. That would give your claims at least a hint of credibility anyway. Otherwise, why don't you just concentrate on your own identity and leave the judging of others to the judges? And why are you so interested in attacking others anyway? Do you not have a life that's worth living? I suggest therapy. BTW the Cherokee had no princesses, kings, queens or royalty of any kind. Neither did any of the First Nations of North America. That form of social structure belonged to the Europeans. The North American native peoples practiced one of the most evolved forms of individualism known to the human race, until the arrival of the 'White Eyes'. So the "Cherokee Princess" idea falls flat on it's pretty little face. I do kinda like 'Princess Daylia' though! Has a nice little ring to it he he he! Thanks! :-) daylia |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: GUEST,Michael Bloody Caine Date: 11 Jan 03 - 04:24 AM Are you bleedin' fick or sumfing? D'you know who I am? Sh'I wear a bloody name tag?!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: GUEST,Guest Date: 11 Jan 03 - 04:15 AM Ah'm fine, who's yersel'? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: Amos Date: 11 Jan 03 - 02:50 AM No question about you, Hugh -- you got the medicine in your bones and in your eyes. I have no pretensions to Amerindian blood. Nor any to Irish kings. I don't really know where my blood comes from, prior to whitebread New England, but to tell you the truth I don't much care. As long as it keeps circulating, I'm happy with iit! A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: X Date: 11 Jan 03 - 02:38 AM I'm a Laugna Pueblo Indian from New Mexico, descendants of the Anasazi. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: Cluin Date: 11 Jan 03 - 01:57 AM You can't honestly say you're really surprised it happened, can you? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: mg Date: 11 Jan 03 - 01:55 AM It's a perfectly fine question and there is absolutely nothing wrong with honoring and acknowledging all of your ancestors. They undoubtedly suffered from racism etc. It is no more wrong (how in the world could it be wrong) to say you had a Nez Perce grandmother than to say you had a Portugeuse or Danish one. mg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: mack/misophist Date: 11 Jan 03 - 01:40 AM Hi Folks, Remember me? I'm the idiot who started this mess; an error for which I am most heartily sorry and for which I apologize. I had anticipated a nice, cosy chat about family origins. Silly me. For those tossing around the term wannabee, what I said was that I recently discovered that I MAY be part Nez Percé and that I like the idea. To those who wish to discuss crimes against the Native Peoples, I suggest a more specific approach, rather than this energy and idea dissapating shotgun style. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: Cluin Date: 11 Jan 03 - 01:30 AM I'm descended from Irish blacksmiths. Hey, somebody had to do some work while all "the quality" were gadding about. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: mg Date: 11 Jan 03 - 12:16 AM I'm descended from Irish royalty. No biggy. All of us bogtrotters are. Or that is what my dear father said. So I believe him. mg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: Stilly River Sage Date: 10 Jan 03 - 11:56 PM Pardon my typos. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: Stilly River Sage Date: 10 Jan 03 - 11:54 PM Here's a review from a few years back of Jamie Sams. I had to go looking for her, I'd never heard of her in a relatively small world of Native American literature. Only one scholarly review, and this is it:
Using the Seneca Medicine Stone, Jamie Sams interprets the stories passed on from her grandmother. The trouble is that the book tries to "explain" often unspoken understandings of a tribal culture in the language of the dominant white culture. Thus we are told on the bottom {116} of page 81 that "The remnants of Turtle Island floated above the blue seas of seeming contentment as the new generations refused to look deeply into the watery past, which had left them with the legacy of separateness." And further on, this: "As the Two-legged children of our Planetary Family began to explore their individual beliefs, the understanding of the concept of the Great Mystery dwindled." What do phrases like "the legacy of separateness," with their Madison Avenue packaging, violate, miss, and destroy? What New Age incursions do phrases like "our Planetary Family" betray? One can easily imagine the next level of distortion the reader is apt to make: don't bother to sit at the feet of the elders or put in years of studying a particular tribe; just read this book and discover a Pan-Indian/New Age way to gloss all North American tribes, a shortcut to the usual time-consuming homework for tribal understanding. Let me emphasize that the book does not make this gross claim; the way it is written merely invites gross misunderstanding. The "Language of the Stones" section, for example, begins by explaining the basic symbol, the circle, thus:
It should be said on behalf of this volume that the retelling of the tales is riveting. However, the interpretations, slickly glib, invite misgivings. In this way the oral tradition is betrayed in print by being overtold. Roger Weaver, SAIL 2, 5.1 Doesn't bode well for this woman being a connection to Indian spirituality in the way that some would hope. However, there is a big double-standard that I alluded to before that this highlights. I went looking for a review, and had to look hard, because in the first 150 hits on Google, all had to do with bookstores. I finally went to the website for the Association for the Study of American Indian Literature (SAIL) to find this review. There's nothing the bookseller or publisher is going to say that is going to diminish the credibility they hope to establish by selling the book. The publisher of The Education of Little Tree (U of New Mexico Press) isn't going to put a disclaimer on their cover. I spoke to the president of the university about this once at a writers conference. He said that frankly they weren't going to touch it. It was their best-seller. Period. The double-standard comes into play when you look at the success=sellout formula that is so often leveled at Indian writers. It's what Alexie charged Owens with in the beginning (until Alexie became so big that he clearly was going to shoot himself down with his own argument). Or Madison Avenue="inauthentic" or "appropriated material." This isn't always the case. But it's a shame that the books about Indians that so many bond to emotionally were written by well-meaning white women with the Noble Savage, the museum artifact of the Wild West Shows in mind. I agree with Katlaughing--a lot of us have friends and family who are Indians and these relationships are complexly based on many things other than the "wannabe" trope that we've tossed around here a bit to carelessly. My friend Louis Owens was a deep thinker, and he said it so well. I'll put a couple of paragraphs from his Other Destinies in here (this is from the first and second page of text in the first chapter. It only gets better as you read it, but it isn't always easy, because he makes you think!)
Identity for Native Americans is made more complex yet by the fact that the American Indian in the world consciousness is a treasured invention, a gothic artifact evoked like the "powwows" in Hawthorne's "Young Goodman Brown" out of the dark reaches of the continent to replace the actual native, who, painfully problematic in real life, is supposed to have long since vanished. Even individuals seemingly well informed about American Indian literature can exhibit this tendency to relegate "real" Indians to an absolute past, as when we see a writer for the New York Times, reviewing James Welch's Fools Crow, stating in the simple past tense that "Indians applied revelations from the world beyond to the workings of this one, for they believed that by tapping into the spiritual they could gain power over everyday occurrences." SRS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: GUEST Date: 10 Jan 03 - 08:35 PM A whole lotta pagans and new agers became descendants of Irish royalty in recent years too. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: GUEST Date: 10 Jan 03 - 08:34 PM From Genealogy.com: Watching Out for Red Flags Many families have cherished myths and stories about their immigration to America or other pivotal events and people. Sharon DeBartolo Carmack shos you how to determine which family legends are true, and what to do if you prove one false. "Great-grandma was a Cherokee Indian princess, you know." At the family reunion or while interviewing relatives, you might hear family stories like this or other lore about your forebears. Nearly everyone has a story that has been handed down about their ancestors. Some of these legends may be quite factual; others are myth. Almost all family stories have some grain of truth, however. Family legends aren't usually created out of thin air, and that tiny grain of truth may be the clue that leads you to genealogical success. There are many myths that have worked their way into family stories, and perhaps you've already heard some of these. Often, they are about ethnic origins or how the family came to America. If you haven't heard any of these common legends yet, make yourself aware of some of the most common ones, since you may eventually hear variations as you talk with family members. The Cherokee Indian Princess Myth It's always a Cherokee princess, almost never Navajo or Apache or Pueblo or Lumbee. Native American ancestry is an extremely common family story, and it seems it is always to an Indian princess. The Cherokee, of course, are a large tribe with a diverse culture, divided by the Trail of Tears. They intermarried widely, perhaps increasing the likelihood of Cherokee/white ancestry. One reason this princess myth may have evolved is prejudice. For those who frowned upon a white male ancestor marrying an Indian woman, elevating the woman's status to princess made the truth easier to swallow. Keep in mind that any story that says you have Native American ancestry — often Cherokee — may in itself be a myth. Even though it's currently an "in" thing to have Native American ancestry, just a few decades ago, it might have been the skeleton in your family's closet. Proving certain ethnic ancestry can be difficult because of prejudice or popularity toward a culture at any given time. Throughout history, some people who were victims of prejudice may have tried to hide their native origins by changing their name or claiming a different ethnicity. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: GUEST Date: 10 Jan 03 - 08:25 PM OK Princess Daylia, thanks for clearing that up for us. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: *daylia* Date: 10 Jan 03 - 08:18 PM Jamie Sams is, to the best of my knowledge, a full blooded Seneca medicine person. Here are a few exerpts from her Sacred Path Cards which address the very heart of some of the issues raised above. "In my heart of hearts, I knew the time was right to share with the world the Medicine that has brought me through the Void of Great Smoking Mirror. I was concerned about the reaction I might encounter from those who belieive that the Sacred Teachings are not to be shared. So I went to the Grandmothers and asked, then I went to the Elders who had been my teachers and asked. They all said, "Yes, it is time". They also reminded me that the teachings are to be shared though my personal experience and the secret steps of ceremonies were not to be related, for there are those who would defile or misuse the information. So I began with the purpose of assisting those who would not be able to receive the knowledge otherwise... It has not been my attention to assume that I know all that has ever been taught on any of these subjects...I have been taught some of the teachings of the Seneca, Aztec, Choctaw, Lakota, Mayan, Yaqui, Paiute, Cheyenne, Kiowa, Iroquois and Apache nations. In the spirit of the Wolf Clan, my clan, we share and teach the goodness of wisdom that brings peace to all nations, all peoples...My purpose in reopening these lesson paths for others is to promote understanding and peace between all creeds, all Nations, all Clans, all Tribes, and families. If in some small way I can assist my fellow Two-leggeds (humans), I will feel the joy that comes from the rich appreciation of sharing. I do not care if others choose to criticize this work. My answer to them is, "What are you doing to help the Children of Earth to better understand themselves and All Their Relations?" This is my gift. It comes from my heart and it is good." And on the use of the Sacred Path Cards as a 'Tarot' deck: "Some may feel that this divination system is a toy, and it can be if you choose to use it on that level. The depth of any teaching has to do with the level the student is willing to explore or has capacity to understand. As always, "Still waters run deep". The use of the Sacred Path Cards in the silence of a seeking heart allows that deeper understanding to emerge". Finally, to address the matter of being 'Red in your heart' - from the 18th lesson (card) in the deck, the "Whirling Rainbow" teaching: "The Whirling Rainbow is the promise of peace among all Nations and all people... When I lived in Mexico and worked with the Grandmothers, the Dreamtime Buffalo Society, or Sisterhood, had many prophecies derived from Seers and Dreamers that had come down through the ages. The prophecy of the Whirling Rainbow was very specific. When the Time of the White Buffalo approaches, the third generations of the White Eye's children will grow their hair and speak of love as the healer of the Children of Earth. These children will seek new ways of understanding themselves and others. They will wear feathers and beads and paint their faces. The will seek the Elders of the Red Race and drink of their wisdom. These white-eyed children will be a sign that the Ancestors are returning in white bodies, but they are Red on the inside. They will learn to walk the Earth Mother in balance again, and to reform the ideas of the white chiefs. The Whirling Rainbow of Peace destroys the lies that have made the Children of Earth mistrust one another and replaces the illusion of separation with the truth of unity." I think these words are most relevant to the issues raised in this thread. I for one am grateful that she published these teachings. Using them transformed my life in very beneficial ways, regardless of the form in which she chose to present them.. Especially since, like a few other people mentioned above, my own "Red" heritage had unfortunately been lost through the generations as my mother's family found it a source of shame and tried to hide/forget it as best they could. daylia |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: GUEST Date: 10 Jan 03 - 07:10 PM You'll ignore us until the next time one of us pisses you off and you can't keep your mouth shut about it, as per usual with you. You know katlaughing, I'm not stating my opinion here for your benefit. I'm stating my opinion so others might learn what NOT to do if they are serious about respecting Native people. I'm doing that by using you and other Mudcat "Cherokee Indians" as an example of the problem. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: katlaughing Date: 10 Jan 03 - 07:04 PM As I said before, GUEST, your opinion of me and my claims, opinion, heritage, mean nothing. What matters to me is what my Native American friends believe of my heart. Your points, arguments, claims would have much more validity if you 1) shared a name and 2) shared your own ancestry. Pointing fingers from anonymity means nothing. If you really followed the links and read some of the discussions you would see many of them raise the same issues you do. This is the last time I will address any postings by GUEST. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: GUEST Date: 10 Jan 03 - 06:52 PM It isn't about who "owns" a culture's spirituality. It is about what happens to a people who are dispossessed of their spiritual traditions' meanings to their fragile, marginalized community, when the dominant culture surrounding their community decides to commodify it, repackage it, and sell it as tarot cards. It is about who the community can trust as their spiritual leaders. American Indian people have some experience with this, after all. They know what went down when the Ghost Dancers followed the spiritual ways the white missionaries told them to follow, after all. I don't know any American Indians who don't want to have the theological and philosophical treatises of their religion taught at universities. Quite the contrary, American Indians I know have been instrumental in trying to get their religion and their language taught in universities for quite some time, largely to no avail. The result? Well, around here, Dakota is nearly a dead language, and you can stop at the reststop down in Pipestone and buy yourself a peace pipe. The problems are much more complex than you seem willing to admit katlaughing, and no amount of links (yes, I followed them) to Native websites will change the way you exploit Native people every time you make claims of having American Indian ancestry and being "spiritually red in your heart." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: katlaughing Date: 10 Jan 03 - 06:35 PM SRS, meaning no disrespect to you, but it seems to me there are a lot of assumptions being made about some claims of ancestry. I think it is also good to remember that some of us are either married to or living with, or have had in the past, members of one tribe or another. Not all are "wannabes." I understand what you are saying and I did see a lot of what you speak about when living back East, during the Pequots building of the largest casino in the Western hemisphere. The contrast between them and their way of life and those in Wyoming on the Wind River or the Rosebud in S. Dakota, for instance, is stark and extreme. FWIW, here is a site with extensive NA links. I have not checked all of them, so do not vouch for their veracity, but it does look as though there are som good ones: please click. For a very interesting and scholarly discussion on whether it is ethical to teach Native American Religions at unversity, please click here. This includes imput from Native American and non-Native American professors. Finally, for some direct quotes about what SRS is pointing out, please click here. This, imo, points up the distinction I am trying to make, that is that many of us are accepted by and associate with Native Americans and are not considered "wannabes" by them. We don't pay them money for the sweats, etc. as is noted in the last link, etc. In other words, I believe it is important not to generalise about anyone. This could bring about another interesting discussion, that of cultural ownership of spirituality. Thanks, kat Thanks, kat |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: GUEST Date: 10 Jan 03 - 06:25 PM Casino profits, allotments, treaty rights (around here where I live, treaty rights are a much bigger deal than the casinos), stolen identities, ESPECIALLY stolen spiritual identities whereby EVERYONE is an Indian in their heart... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: Stilly River Sage Date: 10 Jan 03 - 05:17 PM Mary, I don't know if there is a lucid way to describe the entirely accurate point that GUEST is trying to make, and he/she isn't doing it to be nasty, but because it is a complusion to try to set at least some small thing right. It comes from an entirely different world view that isn't easily interpreted for the dominant culture. The difficulty with this discussion that GUEST is trying to point out is that for a privileged group of primarily Euro list members to pull great great ancestors forward is simply a matter of interest to them, but it has an entirely different meaning for the American Indians who are alive and not all doing so well today. Do you know that if your blood quantum isn't just right (and this stems from the Dawes act, as was mentioned above), that you can't be included on the tribal roles, perhaps even in the town or rez where you've lived all of your life? And without that enrollment, assistance is slim or none. And these days, a lot of Wannabes are recreating tribes in order to cash in on the legislation that allows tribes to set up casinos. If your ancestors didn't trust the census taker, you're out of luck if there is no other authoritative paperwork dating back that far or farther to show that you're really as much Indian as you claim. It's amazing (read: obscene) how fast these reconstituted "tribes" appear, are recognized, and build their casinos, when the BIA is slowly slogging through a list of legitmate tribes who were overlooked or excluded for political reasons when the BIA set out the names of tribes they would "recognize." I heard something on NPR one night--they do some thing like 10 groups a year at the most, and there are hundreds waiting to be added to the list. Before they die off. I've discussed this via PM with another list member, and this is part of what I responded back earlier today:
SRS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: mg Date: 10 Jan 03 - 04:02 PM I don't know if this is Abusive Guest or another Guest. But why in the world can't we claim our own ancestors? They are part of who we are. We are part of who they are. I wish we all did more, like in other cultures, to honor our ancestors. I just read a book about the Hawaiaan concepts of that. I'm all Irish on my father's side but my mother's family (Williams), predominantly Welsh, has been here much longer. There has always been a lot of intermarriage etc., maybe particularly among the French..I don't know that for a fact, but certainly in my neck of the woods with the fur trappers and Hudson's Bay and all. And I doubt that all the marriages, seeing as they probably tended to be with European-derived men and Native American women, were welcomed by the tribes. It probably brought more heartache and problems than not. So I can understand their thinking this is not a good thing. And as for the Cherokee question..I have asked it myself..and someone who was Cherokee answered it..unfortunately I forget what the answer was but it made sense. The mathematics of it would have very very many of us with Native American ancestry, proportional to the number of generations the European (Asian, South American etc.) side of the family has been here. There is pain involved because of many of the circumstances, and we should apologize retroactively where we can. mg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: GUEST Date: 10 Jan 03 - 01:47 PM I think the idea of using DNA testing to determine one's ancestry is pretty chilling. Imagine what the Nazis could have done with that technology. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: Alice Date: 10 Jan 03 - 11:20 AM Hi, misophist, records on paper can be incorrect. A DNA test is the solution to finding facts regarding ancestors. If you wanted to go to the expense of DNA testing, you could find out if you are related to the Nez Perce. I think some day genealogy research will use DNA as a routine method of finding relationships. I was fascinated by the documentary on tracing the DNA of Cheddar Man. THE DNA ANCESTREE |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: GUEST,Foe Date: 10 Jan 03 - 11:04 AM My g-g-g-g-g-g-g-g-g-grandfather was killed by Indians luckly for me after my g-g-g-g-g-g-g-g-grandfather was born. (They say he was not liked by the Pequoids) Some people report that through ancestral connections, 85% of Europeans are related to each other. There is also the estimate that the original 28 male Mayflower passengers now have 35,000,000 (million) descendents. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: Amos Date: 10 Jan 03 - 11:03 AM Well, mebbe h/she's a two-bagger, kat! :>) QA |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: katlaughing Date: 10 Jan 03 - 10:55 AM SRS, yes, I think you sent me a link by PM. I did find one reference you made in the threads, too. Thanks for that, again. I am sorry to hear that about your friend and Alexie. I know Alexie's is not the only voice; it's a shame the way our society does put that mantle on someone who becomes known, believing they speak for everyone. One of our friends on the Wind River Reservation, J. Washakee and I were talking about the problems of "rez" life, etc. He left, went East, came back. He now makes it a point to talk with the young people as much as possible, urging them to leave the rez and see what else life has to offer, away from the control of poor government practises, etc. Of course, he knows it can be hard for them off the rez, too, but he sees no future for them if they remain. I agree with you, totally, that native peoples are still colonised. And, finally, GUEST, it doesn't matter to me what you think. What matters is what my friends, native or not, believe to be true in my heart. Your logic is ill-concieved as by our very nature people who would be interested in posting to this thread would feel they had some claim to heritage or at least have an affinity for some connection. If it were a true sampling in which you might deride some claims, it would have to be a much broader selection of all Mudcatters. It really is pathetic that you feel the need to judge, yet are afraid to take the bag off your head. kat |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: GUEST Date: 10 Jan 03 - 10:29 AM SRS, thank you for posting the long explanation. I live in an area of the US with one of the few remaining substantial Native populations. I've lived and worked with a lot of Native people. I know of no other subject than quantam and Indianness that causes such fierce battles among American Indians and between American Indians and whites. I also don't know of anything that causes Native people more pain than sitting around and listening to the kinds of "claims" of Native ancestry being made in this thread. And I'm not about to explain why, because it just depresses me. Perhaps you are right, that we should just leave the matter alone. But I couldn't sit here silently without commenting about something I find so profoundly disturbing as this behavior by European Americans. Most of the Native people I know fully support the Lakota Declaration of about 10 years ago--vociferously. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: Cluin Date: 10 Jan 03 - 12:26 AM How long did she remain a maiden after she got married, ballpien? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: *daylia* Date: 09 Jan 03 - 08:57 PM Leadfingers, if everyone had that attitude there'd be no racism and far fewer wars in the world. Simplicity? Bring it on PLEASE - better late than never. daylia |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: ballpienhammer Date: 09 Jan 03 - 08:43 PM Great Grandmother was an Erie indian maiden married to PA Dutch/German "Shingledecker". Dad is a 3rd generation Swede. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: Leadfingers Date: 09 Jan 03 - 08:38 PM If I wanted to pigeonhole myself I suppose I would drop into Anglo Saxon ( Fairish hair and blue eyes ) But I am at least a quarter Irish , So what the hell . As has already been said we are all in the same planet so what difference does it make? If you are nice people you are nice people and what else REALLY matters?? Or am I just being too simplistic? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: Stilly River Sage Date: 09 Jan 03 - 07:42 PM I can understand why this particular GUEST chose to post anonymously. If this list had the same members who I speak with regularly on several American Indian literature lists, it would have been a flame war by now. What GUEST is trying to point out is that just being able to parse out in the family history an ancestor who was American Indian in a time when it is very trendy to BE American Indian is not the same as having grown up identifying as a member of a tribe or nation and the horrible infighting that takes place there, for so many reasons. (Take a breath--sorry that sentence was so long!) American tribal land is managed (badly) by the federal government. American Indians are STILL COLONIZED PEOPLE. In many other places of the world, the colonizers went home and left the carnage behind (see Africa for many recent examples of this. Or Vietnam. Or Korea.). But here the colonizers remained. And somewhat less than 50% of self-identified Indians are on reservations. Many were relocated in the 1940's and 50's, others left because there was no living to be made there. Sherman Alexie is very proud of being an American Indian, but he has done a lot of damage as he makes his proclamations about who is and isn't really an Indian. My friend, Louis Owens, who took his own life this summer, was 1/2 Choctaw and Cherokee, identifying primarily with his father's Choctaw family. They were migrant farm workers, a family of 9 children moving through California fields and back to Mississippi along the Yazoo River for periods of time. Louis defied the odds and put himself through college, getting his Ph.D. in English in 1981 from UC Davis. If you want an excellent analysis of American Indian literature, read his Other Destinies: Understanding American Indian Literature. And if you want to understand how very difficult it really is to grow up identifying as Indian (especially when it wasn't popular in the 1940's and 50's) read his autobiographical book Mixedblood Messages, with a mix of autobiography and observations on literature and film. And how Indians are represented therein. Louis didn't choose to kill himself just because of Sherman, but Sherman was a continual thorn in his side for the past 10 years or so. Louis, by the way, who died at age 54, had just reached the average life expectancy for American Indian men. Sherman Alexie decided that Louis "wasn't really an Indian," a pronouncement he made for some reason known only to him. Louis, like many mixedbloods, had dark hair, Choctaw features, green eyes, but was lighter skinned than fullblood Indians. And perhaps this was what Alexie was viewing. Or perhaps because, like so many Indians, Louis didn't come from a reservation, and refused to apply for papers. "My dog has papers" was his response when I asked him about this one time. Louise Erdrich has a joke in one of her novels about some crawdads. I know I won't tell this right, and it isn't a funny joke anyway. It's sad and ironic. The gist of it is that two buckets of crawdads are sitting on the mud, one white crawdads, one Indian. The white bucket empties as all of the crawdads climb out and skuttle off. The bucket of Indian crawdads are all picked up and eaten, because each time one tried to crawl out, the others pulled him back down into the bucket. She's right. In some ways, American Indians can be their own worst enemies. And there's so much more to argue about now, with outsiders getting Indians to front their gambling casinos. Amazing how many Indians there are all of a sudden, though I personally think it's turn about's fair play if Indian people reap profits from whites gambling in their casinos. My ex is Taino Indian, born in Puerto Rico, but wasn't raised with a strong identity as Taino, because he grew up in Brooklyn where they moved when he was six. This was at a time when there wasn't the density of Puerto Ricans to support the oral traditions and carry on the stories. He knows more about knishes than he does his Indian culture. My daughter is dark like him, my son isn't. They both know they're Indian, but they also both know that except as a statistic on government forms, they'll have to learn about their family on their own (they have a large family in PR, so this is a possibility). And that by just having the blood, it doesn't confer on them any special skills or spirituality. That comes from nurture, not nature. They can't go around appropriating some other Indians' culture and spirituality (unless of course, they chose to be christians--many of whom can't stop themselves from pushing their religion down everyone's throats--but I digress). If they choose to practice one of these religions, fine, and they won't look so much like outsiders, but they'll understand the issues involved in taking such a step. I've suggested that Unitarians or Buddhists might be directions to explore. ;-) My 10 cents worth. Thanks Kat for referring to what I've sent before (I think I sent the Little Tree essay to you as a link or a PM, I don't remember posting it to the entire list). I'm sure there are lots of holes in my arguments here, but I don't think I'll revisit this thread to hash them out. GUEST might want to leave it alone as well. Ok, I'll take a breath. 'Nuff said. SRS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: mack/misophist Date: 09 Jan 03 - 06:10 PM It is estimated (by some) that there were perhaps four million people here when Columbus landed. All were 100% Native American. I'd be surprized if there were four million such today, but watered down, those genes are probably present in everyone who's family has been here long enough.I know for sure the Cherokees will accept you if you're 25% and your name is on the rolls. The only tribes I know of that can claim to be more or less intact are the southwestern ones, principally the Navajo. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: GUEST Date: 09 Jan 03 - 04:27 PM Astounding. The Native American population in the US is less than 1%, yet here in Mudcat (based upon the ancestry given by posters in this thread), the Native American population in Mudcat looks to be running about 75%. That's better than Native.Net fer chrissakes. Who knew? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: Bill D Date: 09 Jan 03 - 04:17 PM one of my great-great-great grandmothers was Cherokee and spoke no English, and it scandalized the family so much they refused to record her name...my aunt has found the names of the children of that marriage, but not hers. Such strange ways we have of internalizing our identities. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: fat B****rd Date: 09 Jan 03 - 04:03 PM I'd tell you that I'm descendedfrom German and French Glassmakers (Alsace) who went to work in Sunderland and that I was born in Cleethorpes. But that's nowhere near exotic enough to be included here. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: katlaughing Date: 09 Jan 03 - 02:51 AM In looking at Alexie's site, I thought this review of his latest movie, The Business of Fancydancing was interesting in context with the title of this thread: "The director's dry sincerity leavens the sentiment of this quasi-autobiographical film, a tale about the burden of constantly being asked who you are and where you come from - a question that artists of color constantly hear, either from others or themselves. Mr. Alexie is smart enough to know it's never satisfactorily answered." --Elvis Mitchell, New York Times |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: katlaughing Date: 09 Jan 03 - 02:34 AM I second that recommendation, Cluin. Alexie's stuff is all good, but Indian Killer is exceptional, imo. Have you seen the movie based on his book, Smoke Signals? Excellent, as well as a fantastic sound track. It's got a great song about George Washington's teeth! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: catspaw49 Date: 09 Jan 03 - 01:42 AM Interesting that we cross posted there Cluin......... Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: catspaw49 Date: 09 Jan 03 - 01:33 AM I'm 1/2 English origin, 1/4 Italian, and 1/4 German. The only relationship anyone in my family had with the American Indian/Native American/First Nation people comes from my maternal grandfather's side where a great-uncle had killed a few after the Civil War, having remained in the military and gone west for awhile. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: Cluin Date: 09 Jan 03 - 01:30 AM A good book dealing with some elements of this thread (racism, Wannabe Indians, charlatanism, etc.) is Alexie Sherman's Indian Killer. I highly recommend it. (same author as "Tonto and the Lone Ranger Fist-Fight in Heaven") |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: mack/misophist Date: 09 Jan 03 - 01:14 AM re Pancho Villa: You're all correct, of course. But individuals move around. The town was, I'm told, Rainbow, Texas; a railroad water tank and little more - 6 or 8 houses. My grandmother was there with her family. They left somewhat hurriedly. Documents that MIGHT have supported later stories were lost. I guess one of the sub-texts I was unaware of when I started was that you can't really tell a person's past (ancestry) without records.I've known 2 men who were damn near pure Native American and looked more Anglo than me. As I said before; it's interesting. it's colorful, it's fun. Europeans have a sense of anchored continuity that we lack. Maybe I'm jealous, I don't know. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: Donuel Date: 09 Jan 03 - 12:46 AM Cousin of Gene Hackman, far distant relative to John Stewart Mills. And like everyone else closely related to at least 1/6th of the worlds population. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are You? From: katlaughing Date: 09 Jan 03 - 12:15 AM GUEST 7:54pm - We've already been there, thanks to Stilly River Sage. If you'd done a Forum Search you'd have known that. Not everyone is a wannabe; some have "red" hearts regardless of genes. My Lakota, Shoshone, and Arapahoe friends recognise this. They know we are all related and that's why they invite us to their sweats, sundances, etc. It is a point of honour for me that one of them even wants me to play my dulcimer for her when she is dying, if at all possible. Holier-than-thou nameless ones are pathetic. |