CCBC-Net Archives
Evaluating Books By and About American Indians
- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
From: Marc Aronson <75664.3110>
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1999 18:24:13 -0400
There seems to be a contradication in the guidelines we've been urged to follow: on the one hand, we are urged to be on the alert for "oversimplifed and generalized" portrayals of native societies, and instead to see native peoples as "genuine individuals"; on the other, we are told that Native peoples should be shown "as coexisting with nature in a delicate balance...[and] seen as having been taught the sacred responsibility we all have toward all forms of life" -- which is a very grand generalization that does not accord with the history of ecological damage that is now be uncovered in many Native societies, such as the Mississpean mound builders whose 13th civilization may well have collapsed because it made too many demands on the local ecosystem [this is discussed in some detail in Alvin Josephy, ed. America in 1492 The World of Indian Peoples Before the Arrival of Columbus]; we are told to seek out images of women "as respected parts of Native societies" -- which is surely a generalization when speaking of peoples scattered all across two continents over tens of thousands of years; we are told to be on the alert for "anything in the story that would embarras or hurt a Native child" -- when, for example, the history of the Cherokee includes owning black slaves, which should be as much a part of what we tell children as it is when we discuss white slave holding.
To treat any people as individuals means to be fair to all of their actions, good and bad. Only that trust in history can really help readers, young or old, truly to appreciate everyone as their equals.
Marc Aronson
Received on Fri 15 Oct 1999 05:24:13 PM CDT
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1999 18:24:13 -0400
There seems to be a contradication in the guidelines we've been urged to follow: on the one hand, we are urged to be on the alert for "oversimplifed and generalized" portrayals of native societies, and instead to see native peoples as "genuine individuals"; on the other, we are told that Native peoples should be shown "as coexisting with nature in a delicate balance...[and] seen as having been taught the sacred responsibility we all have toward all forms of life" -- which is a very grand generalization that does not accord with the history of ecological damage that is now be uncovered in many Native societies, such as the Mississpean mound builders whose 13th civilization may well have collapsed because it made too many demands on the local ecosystem [this is discussed in some detail in Alvin Josephy, ed. America in 1492 The World of Indian Peoples Before the Arrival of Columbus]; we are told to seek out images of women "as respected parts of Native societies" -- which is surely a generalization when speaking of peoples scattered all across two continents over tens of thousands of years; we are told to be on the alert for "anything in the story that would embarras or hurt a Native child" -- when, for example, the history of the Cherokee includes owning black slaves, which should be as much a part of what we tell children as it is when we discuss white slave holding.
To treat any people as individuals means to be fair to all of their actions, good and bad. Only that trust in history can really help readers, young or old, truly to appreciate everyone as their equals.
Marc Aronson
Received on Fri 15 Oct 1999 05:24:13 PM CDT
