Posted: Tue Mar 09, 2010 4:43 am Post subject: Due 9 March
Maybe it's just me, but I'm pretty sure we read most of this chapter before. Anyway, it was interesting to see how these ideas fit together: land conflicts has to do with humanitarianism (or lack thereof) which leaked into anthropology, and into reservation life and the Ghost Dances and more oppressive acts. I wonder if this reading felt a little less jumpy for people, since we got to see the entire picture instead of just a few pieces.
I was really intrigued by the anthropologists and their role in Native American life. On page 315, a tribal chief asked Cushing "How long will it be before you go back to Washington?" This made me sit and think for a little bit, because his question is not, "Why are you here?" but "When are you going back?" It seems like this tribe is resigned to being studied, are used to it, and even expect it. This is a huge transition from what we've seen before, where Natives have either resisted or assimilated... but now they're being treated like a living museum, and are resigned to that.
I wonder if just by being there, Native American culture changed. On page 317, Page mentions that a joke about NA life is that each household has a family and an anthropologist. It reminds me a little bit of Quantum Physics, where the experiment changes because it's being watched. There's a whole generation of children who are used to being recorded 24/7, and I wonder how that impacts a culture. Any thoughts, anyone? And another question for people to answer. on 316, Page says that the Zuni didn't persecute people for homosexuality because there were so few people left to begin with. Do you think that would have been different had they never experienced a drastic decline in population?
No Celina it is not just you we defiantly already read this chapter. But perhaps never responded to it so here goes.
I think life on a reservation as apposed to ones own land is defiantly different and would have many impacts on the population. I think life on a reservation would have been different than any where else in America on 309 it page writes about how the reservations were not a real part of the U.S and I do think it was similar to how Celina compared it to a museum.
We came back to the subject of schools again in this reading which was much more grim than the reading about the boarding schools. I am not sure how I feel about the schools. I think we can all agree that the U.S Gov did some really bad shit to the Indians so perhaps putting them in a school where they could enter the society was not that bad. That said it would have been better to invite them into our culture and get along than destroy their culture. Or at least accept them into schools for everybody.
How do people feel about the fact that we still have reservations in the U.S. One could look at it as a slice of land that we have set aside for the Indians while all the other land was stolen and as a sort of reparations. However it could also be seen as a current form of segregation and a tool that is there for white people to benefit from. Only a few Indian people have made money from casinos and such whereas many more in the reservations have become poor.
I feel as though i have strayed from the reading so, sorry but a general question for the end is this:
The white people always somehow seemed to make their culture the standard. I feel that this was a big advantage that they had and it does not all seem to be because they were more powerful. I have not figured it out but in general it seems as though they broke down the majority that the Natives would have had and masked everything with paper work and formalities of their own. How was this done? Examples I couldn't think of any specific examples. Why were the Europeans so much better at it?
So we already talked about the "kill the indian, save the man" part in class, and maybe worn it out? but I kinda wanted to look at it a little more because I find it so intruiging. This clearly states that the very act of being an Indian is something to be ashamed of. I think that is the basis of all the oppression we have seen. Just being an Indian entitles them to less and that even with attempts at assimilation they will never really "earn" their place in society.
I really liked the Cushings guy, even though he was the pushy, and fit the typical rich white guy persona. I think he came in thinking that he was superior to these people but found the experience humbling, I mean that is just my guess though of course. It was a good, comfirming example that American Indian culture could be accepted by the white man, though for the vast, vast majority, they clearly chose not to. I think if the colonial peeps had tried to understand the culture, they would have come out with the same respect. Maybe that is a cheesy thing to think, but I can dream. I guess I just kinda had an overall respect for the guy, that he ended up completely emmersing himself in the culture and became a leader and advocate in the community
Would reverse assimillation have made a difference in the American Indian's plea? or would they be in the same place? whose side did government anthropology studies benefit?
soooo... like the others i noticed that we have read all of this except for a couple of pages (thanks to my vigorous active reading) so im just going to copy/paste what i wrote last time this chapter was assigned + a little bit about the pages we didnt read
"hey this reading wasnt so bad, or most of it anyway
i was shocked that page was willing to refer to the Navajo reservation as "not to shabby." it seems like no matter what, being forced off your land and into the desert kinda sucks. i guess this reading answered the question though about whether the Cherokees would have been better off leaving on their own accord, it seems that because the Navajos relocated without being told to they got away with the biggest chunk of land that any tribe got. its kind of shocking actually that they got such a big piece, even though the land sucked i feel like the government would try to reclaim it somehow.
the part about the schools was depressing. it reminded me of something i had heard at one point about how the public school system in America was originally created for the purposes of education, it was created to keep kids off the streets and to socially discipline them. this seems like the same sort of idea, making sure everybody gets some of the same influences no matter who they are so that in the end everybody is somewhat the same. sad.
i was under the impression that at the time of this religious stifling, legislature to restrict a groups religious practices were unconstitutional. i also didn't know that such drugs were outlawed so early on, i kinda wish page had gone deeper into that cause he sorta just described all of these hallucinogens used in ceremonies then said that they were outlawed without the reasoning.
i want to know if people think it would have been more empowering for the Indians to be regarded as sovereign nations or to be immediately American citizens free to practice their own laws like states?"
the pages we didnt read last time were actually pretty interesting. we never really got to learn about anthropology and how the whites knew about the indians. i think it is telling that most anthropologists were in support of the tribes and didnt want to see them anglicized, it seems that in general the people who actually knew the indidns knew their way of life was cooler. also the part about the transgendered indian was interesting. it made me think about this movie i saw about how people use the bible to oppose gay marriage/ glbtq civil rights and to paraphrase the message is that the bible was written in a time when the focus of politicians (i guess kings would be more suitable) was to have people have as many babies as possible and that homosexuality simply didnt fit into that plan. obviously along with many other things in the bible this is outdated and should never have be taken literally but it is fascinating to compare it to the zuni views on transgendered people. they see the issue as " we dont have enough people to exclude someone for such a dumb reason" rather than trying to clense the tribe of them like white people would have tried to. i love how this sort of conflict of interests can be traced back to a tangible point in history where the norms we now take as "morals" or "religious beliefs" can be tied to actual events/ circumstances.
that is all, there is a question up there if anyone wants one
Hey all
So kind of surprised to find most of this actively read already in my book… oh well.
I was also surprised by the sudden burning interest in Native American culture. To me, at least, the anthropologists seemed to spring up out of nowhere. They seem very random in a world that for the past couple hundred years has been trying to wipe out Native culture all together. The most surprising part was how aggressive they were. Like when it said the Matilda Stevenson (really surprised to see a lady scientist by the way) would just go barging into the middle of sacred ceremonies and demand Zuni objects. She would even go to the point of threatening them with military action. Doesn’t seem like the best way to get what you want…
I enjoyed the Cushing fellow as well. I was really surprised by how deep he managed to infiltrate Zuni society. The fact that he was a member of the Bow priesthood was astonishing to me. You would think that the Native Americans would be totally unwilling to allow whites anywhere near their traditions at this point.
Something that stood out for me was the story about We’wha the transvestite (transgender?) Zuni. I think that it is interesting that this was a common and accepted sexual orientation. I think that Page made a really intriguing comment that “in small societies every individual is valuable; there are simply not enough people to exclude someone for something as unimportant as sexual orientation.” (pg 316) Do you guys think that if we lived in a smaller society, that different sexual orientations would be more acceptable?
I also found it funny how once the “5 civilized tribes” gained US citizenship they lost everything. Their land became Oklahoma. Would it have been better for them to remain independent?
The issue of sovereignty is very confusing and it comes up again in this reading. In the book it seems like they keep on making new laws about it and then completely ignoring them. On page 307 it says “provided, that hereafter no Indian nation or tribe within the territory of the United States shall be acknowledged or recognized as an independent nation, tribe or power with whom the United States may contract by treaty.” I thought most reservations know were regarded as sovereign, meaning they can make their own laws and are exempt from taxes. But I also thought it meant they could still make treaties and agreements like they are an independent country which is opposite of the quote above. Could someone clarify please? I also thought it was very interesting that he brought the idea that most people thought citizenship was the best thing for the Native Americans. Both people who hated them and people who liked them thought they were doing good for the Native Americans by making them become Christians and citizens. It is amazing how when people think they are doing good for a group of people yet they can still be very misguided. “For these people of goodwill and high principle, the point of all Indian policy, all humanitarian efforts, was assimilation.” (309) It makes me wonder what other people and I think we our doing that is good intentioned but actually is hurting someone or a group of people. I hope that is not happening but I am almost certain it is somewhere in the world.
How do you think we can stop these good intentions from turning against what a group wants for themselves? Can we stop doing this or do we ourselves have too strong of convictions? Maybe talking to the group before implementing rules would help?
So I also liked this reading and found the whole boarding school thing to be really interesting. The main thing that I thought was weird was the fact that the government seemed to be justifying the schools by saying “well, at least we aren’t killing them.” I thought this was absolutely crazy because while they didn’t kill them they definitely tried to kill their culture, and isn’t that almost as bad as killing the people? I just think that if their culture is killed ands they are basically turned into the “perfect white American” its basically as if you killed them and they don’t exist, I know not literally but in mind that’s what is happening.
I also thought Cooper brought up and interesting question, “My question is why did the Europeans fear a mixed race. Many of them had this blood idea and that they wanted to separate and record peoples lineage. Why is that?”
I think that white people have always had weird feelings about mixed races. I think this had less to do with the fact that they don’t like other races and more to do with how they really like themselves. They could be scared of other races, I don’t really know, but I think its more likely that they are more concerned with themselves. I think the reason they don’t want to have mixed races is because they don’t want the “bad blood” of other races to contaminate their “perfect” blood. I believe they think they are a special race and they want to be separate from others, almost like an exclusive club. I also think that they want to have a clear line between them and other races, which is why they seem to really like the whole lineage thing.
Ok so I couldn’t think of a question to go along with this but I did have one about the schools. This is kinda similar to Alec’s but here it is, Do you think that the kids in these schools disliked them/ felt out of place?
Posted: Tue Mar 09, 2010 8:12 am Post subject: ...
The main section of this reading which I found to be the freshest information (early in the chapter we read/discussed/etc.) was under “Final Solution Number One”. Again the question of the Native Americans self-government came up and the police forces and tribal courts seemed to be ok, but I was intrigued/saddened by the “penalties on those who persisted in tribal ways (such as ceremonies) that were banned”. Why are these “tribal ways” banned and why would they be banned on reservation land? Am I just missing something here?
Another interesting development was after a Supreme Court case of murder between two Native Americans which had its own resolution but provoked Congress to pass an act which put select crimes in the hands of the state where the reservation is. Although I am not sure how I feel about the U.S. getting too involved in the Native Americans affairs (it’s kind of too late anyways) I do think that this is a good law and is a starting point for defining the Native Americans place in America. Contradicting views and opinions about what the Native Americans are as a nation/people make politics and learning about Native Americans very difficult and confusing. Page comments on how all of these events were not very big on Washington’s radar, and how the American people did not really have much of a clue what was going on with the Native Americans. This obviously is not very different in America today. Few Americans notice as Indian culture and people start to fade away.
Then the Dawes Act which basically just was a way for whites to buy up/control more land was just crazy. The movie (“Wounded Knee”) talked about a similar situation, I apologize I am not aware exactly how/where these two events fit together (or if they are the same thing). The way I pictured the Dawes Act was a way of organizing and squeezing the Indians into undesirable allotted plots. Page says: “The fact that many Indian were equally unable to make even smaller plots work is, in hindsight, no surprise.” All of these events and losses for the Native Americans understandably left them in a discouraged state with no real direction. Then there was trouble with the census and yet again collaboration with the U.S. census which we talked about in class a bit too. It is amazing and saddening to me how even having starving Cherokee speaking in front of the Senate, can’t inspire/persuade the drive for acknowledgment and positive change for the Native Americans even a slight amount.
The first thing that really stuck out to me in this reading was the rectangular shapes of the reservations. I feel like this really emphasizes how little the US government cared about the Native American reservations, because instead of planning out where they would be, the just marked it down on a map.
In response to what Max saying “it seems like no matter what, being forced off your land and into the desert kinda sucks” I agree with this, but I think Page could justify calling it not too shabby because, correct me if I’m wrong, but wasn’t the desert Navajo land to begin with?
I was also interested to learn that corporal punishment as a means of child rearing was unheard of in Native American societies. This seemed like a universal thing aspect of cultures to me much like prostitution that we read about earlier, and I think it is interesting that Native American society lacked both of those things.
On a different note, is the whole “separation of church and state” thing in the United States just a myth? Because it seems like a lot of these policy regarding Native Americans, are being created with Christianity at the heart of them.
Now my question, what do you think prevented other tribes from encroaching on lands outside their reservations and claiming squatters rights? Do you think the government simply allowed it to happen with the Navajos because nobody wanted the desert anyway so they didn’t see it as that big of a deal?
New post:
I found the research "methods" that the Stevensons and Cushing used appalling. the "collecting" of the eighty-five hundred items was nothing more than thievery. Also it seemed from the reading that Cushing ha the same attitude towards joining the Zuni culture as the United States had towards detribalizing the Native Americans. Just push until they get what they want. I was angered by the part in the reading that said “President Cleveland saw the Dawes Act as essentially a scam for land-hungry whites to get more land – but signed anyway” Did Cleveland just see it for what it really is, or did he actually have an objection to it and sign anyway due to pressure/coercion/whatever?
-The parts about the anthropologists was very interesting because we haven''t learned about them at al yet. At the beginning of this reading it made it seem like there was like only 2 or 3 anthropologists but hen it made it seem like it was this huge boom in european culture, to study Native Americans and learn about them. The part about the joke saying that the typical Navajo house had a family and an anthropologist made it seem like there was a lot.
-The part about the transvestites or twin spirits was soo interesting I wish it talked more about that subject. It said it was very accepted in Native American culture, but I was wondering if you guys think the europeans would have been cool with that if they fond out.
Yeah...not going to repost my old post partially because I have no clue what night we read this, so hopefully I'm not repeating myself...
My favorite part of this reading was the paragraph on page 316 about Matilda Stevenson and We'wha. I think it's really, really funny that this person who founded the Women's Anthropological Society of America had no clue that her "Zuni princess" was a man. It's also kind of depressing though, because there are probably so many more historical things that were really just totally misunderstood. Also loved the picture of the anthropologist on the next page. Looks like he's got a pipe, an ax, and a basket. What every anthropologist needs.
I also liked the part about the Ghost Dance because it's really interesting, especially peoples reactions to it. On page 326 it says "The Ghost Dance soon spread far and wide on the Plains, only the Southern Cheyennes and the Comanches shunning it." Really wish he would have mentioned why these two tribes shunned it...Also said on the same page that one tribe had white people doing the dance too. Wonder if they knew the hopes behind the dancing or if they thought it was just a nice little dance.
My question-- Why do you think this one specific dance became such a widespread thing?
Yeahhhhh so we already read a lot of this. However I would like to talk about the quote celina presented, as it is one that stayed with me the whole time I (re)read the assignment. I feel as though yes, Native Americans have gone through resistance, assimilation, resitance again and now in present day (as we'll probably see when we go to the pequot museum later this mod) they have sort struck a balance between the two. They have their own land (…hmmm), are (mostly) a sovereign nation and even though the U.S. government still continually screws them, they (sort of?) have a way of life now. However in order to make a decent living they (native americans) have put themselves on display for the world. They are no fools, they know they can attract large crowds and make a good living this way. So in short celina, yes native americans have resigned themselves to being "studied." However in the end I think they are the ones benefitting from it more… they dont walk away empty handed
The schools seemed to essentially be concentration camps, cultural and racial cleansing. The United States (at least IN the country, “legally”) must have been uncomfortable killing large groups of people, so they put their cultural values through the test of time, slowly getting watered down, but still not letting the people themselves vote. They are doing everything except killing them… So they have the ability to no longer recognize the any given tribe as legal, but give them no benefits at all. The reason the Navajo did off better than other tribes was because the United States government was NOT concerned with the land they would be receiving. They already considered it uninhabitable. I do not think that killing their culture is as bad as killing their people, simply because to spare some ones life when you wish them to die is an expression of some sort of sanity or mercy. It’s an expression of humanity from the Euro Americans. However in ruining their culture, they certainly had similar ideas in mind. They would water them down until it was no longer considered a “problem”. But here’s where my curiosity comes in. WHY is this the turn that humanity decided to take instead of one of benevolence? What is it that makes these people fear a separate culture? Is it fear itself?
i would like to present that last idea again, even if it may be more of a psychological question.
This was a pretty cool reading. I like the fact that this more recent history seems more definite, as opposed to the earlier chapters where there was a lot of differing opinions and questionable facts. The actual subject matter of this reading, however, was pretty sad and depressing. It was really just a continuation of my frustrations in class.. One thing that pissed me off was how picky the settlers seemed to be. Page said something about how the land that the Navajos were spreading into wasn't particularly attractive to white settlers at the time. It makes me angry that they have the nerve to be choosy and demanding about what land they wanted. Assholes. Also! For once I got pissed off at the Native Americans.. It's frustrating to me that some of them are fighting between tribes (Hopis vs. Navajos, etc). It seems completely pointless to try to fight another Native American tribe, especially at this time. They should all be working together.
The whole thing about the boarding schools is such bullshit, too. Ugghkwjlkfj. It makes me angry reading about it. I don't understand what's right about that. It's completely absurd that they would tell kids that being an Indian isn't something to be proud of. That just infuriates me. I don't get WHY they hate on the Native Americans so much. I know that might sound so stupid and basic, but like... WHAT?! WHY!? I actually want to punch that guy Pratt in the FACE. Who the hell actually believes that "the solution to the 'Indian problem' was to 'kill the Indian and save the man.'" That's just fucked up. Not only are they implying that Indians aren't men, that's just RIDICULOUS. lksjdglksjdlgkjsldgj. I'm sorry, I'm done.
One thing I'm wondering is how and why the Navajos have the largest reservation to this day. What did they do differently to keep their tribe alive? That's something I'd be interested in researching.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
