In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Notes 1. See, for example, Cornel West, RaceMatters, Kenneth O'Reilly,Racial Matters, and Michael Levin, Why Race Matters, among others. 2. See my Ethnocriticism: Ethnography, History, Literature. 3. The upper case is awkward, to be sure, but I will occasionally use it to indicate the fact that a given first person plural and a third person plural pronoun include not merely designation and number but pronounced difference.Thus: we are many and they are fewer; but, We think one wayabout some things, and They think another. Some of my upper- and lower-case choices are indeed subjective; Others would write them other ways; still others would write them Other ways. 1. I quote Churchill here as a nationalist (and below as an indigenist) although Lakota lawyer John P. Lavelle, in a recent essay, refers to "Churchill's distinctive anti-tribal ideology" (251). Lavelle ascribes to Churchill the belief that "Indian tribes ought to be reviled and actively opposed for employingtribal membership criteria that require an individual to be possessed of a given degree or 'quantum ' of tribe-specific Indian blood —typically one fourth—in order to be eligible for tribal enrollment" (252). Lavelle's "blood" logic has its own problems (on the subject of "Indian blood" see Strong and van Winkle 1996,and also Chapter 4 below), and,in view of Churchill's collaboration with Means, it may not represent his position in regard to tribal sovereignty altogether fairly. Lavelle's essay,however , is of great importance in that it cites chapter and verse to demonstrate the errors, falsifications, and misrepresentations that mark and mar Churchill'swritings . In the interest of full disclosure, I should note that I have been —alongwith James Clifton, Sam Gill, Werner Sollors, and others—the object of aparticularly distorted and unfair attack on Churchill'spart, and so I claim no neutralityor objectivity toward him —although I cite him with no adverse commentary beyond this note. 2. See Wilkinson;Harring; Strickland;P. DeLoria; V. DeLoria and Lytle; and Resnik. 3. As noted, however, a great many Native people do notwish to regard tribal membership as comparable to citi/enship, a notion, it might be said (and has been Chapter 1. Nationalism, Indigenism, Cosmopolitanism Preface said), that the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934 sought to impose on the tribes. The Native view is not rights-based but nation-people-based. 4. Translation, like anthropology, has historically been in the service of colonialism . But both translation and anthropology today have also sought to take forms that oppose colonialism. See Chapter 3 below. 5. For European meditation on these matters, see Pierre Clastres, Society Against the State. 6. For an insightful and moving account of these matters from a personal perspective , see Hans-Ulrich Sanner's "Confessions of the Last Hopi Fieldworker." 7. As ethically distinct from invocations of the nation in support of oppression, for example, as in the last days of apartheid in South Africa, in the Balkansvery recently, and currently, it would seem, in Macedonia. 8. See Womack, for example, on Alex Posey and Joy Harjo; Julian Rice on Black Elk Speaks; and Shari Huhndorf on DArcy McNickle's Wind from an Enemy Sky. 9. Or songs, as Donald Bahr, Lloyd Paul, and VincentJoseph, Ants and Orioles: Showing the Art ofPima Poetry, makes clear. See also Larry Evers and Felipe Molina, YaquiDeer Songs, among other studies too extensive to cite. 10. See chapter 5 of Red on Red, "Fus Fixico: A Literary Voice Against the Extinction of Tribal Government." 11.For more on the "question . . . whether cultural sovereignty can be seen in the same terms as political sovereignty," see David Murray, "Cultural Sovereignty and the Hauntology of American Identity." The quotation is from p. 237 of that essay. 12. Owens's sentence concludes, however, as follows: "a consciousness and worldview defined primarily by a quest for identity: What does it mean to be "Indian"—or mixedblood — in contemporary America?" (20). Although Owens here subscribes to the idea that there isa common indigenous "consciousness and worldview," for him that "consciousness and worldview"does not inevitably lead to a common indigenous identity. 13. The indigenist sense of difference/distance from Western epistemology has on occasion manifested itself as an attack not merely on social science, as in Vine Deloria, Jr.'s powerful and witty attack on anthropology in 1969, but, as in Deloria 's recent RedEarth, White Lies, an attack on "science" of every kind. For the claim that science isindeed constituted byworldview,see also Maurice Bazin...

pdf

Additional Information

ISBN
9780812200683
Related ISBN
9780812218039
MARC Record
OCLC
759037221
Pages
184
Launched on MUSE
2011-07-21
Language
English
Open Access
No
Back To Top

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.