Це відео не доступне.
Перепрошуємо.
Problematic Indigenous Writers and the Hype Around There There
Вставка
- Опубліковано 18 сер 2024
- Well warranted hype for Tommy Orange's There There which delivers the goods from a currently-not-embroiled-in-some-type-of-controversy indigenous writer.
MENTIONED:
There There - bit.ly/2BaAmEz
The Making of Joseph Boyden - tgam.ca/2nzG3Cu
Viaguard Accu-Metrics - bit.ly/2MLscUH
Sherman Alexie Accusers - n.pr/2BcxVRS
Homegoing - bit.ly/2w7aqny
The Good Son - bit.ly/2NWaw9U
ELSEWHERE:
Goodreads: goo.gl/vlGtSd
Twitter: / daejin_v2
Instagram: / daejin
Discord: bit.ly/2r5160U
#booktube
This has been on my TBR for a little bit now, and I'm so happy to hear you enjoyed it.
Such a great read! And I just got it in on the hype sweet spot, where it's building but hasn't overshadowed the book itself. Great to go in with zero expectations.
I think both Boyden and Alexie demonstrate why it's a bad idea to let *any* author become, like a beacon for an entire group of people. Boyden's identity crisis and his propping up of UBC Accountable go hand in hand, too, so actually sexual harrassment and assault are wrapped up in both these scandals. For me, There There was good but not great, I didn't see much difference in the voice between the many different characters, and it was all a little too convenient, like, everyone finding their family and what not. So the hype kind of killed it for me. I've read two books recently from Sherman Alexie's students, this one and Heart Berries - neither totally worked for me.
I also still love The Orenda (and have a similar pic of me and Boyden from an event in 2014!) but you have to wonder if it was so palatable because it's actually written by a fellow settler, not from an Indigenous perspective as it was presented?
The Stephen Galloway incident and Boyden's writing of a letter where he got other Canadian luminaries to sign was a step too far. He was clearly occupying space and once again styling himself the voice for a larger group without any consultation with that group. How disheartening to be a young author and see your CanLit heroes defend someone who has clearly abused his own power. That sort of misstep could easily carry over, if it hasn't already, into indigenous issues where he might similarly make decisions for the community as someone who settler Canada deems palatable. And his inability to address these charges doesn't help his case.
Well I absolutely have to pick this up. That disparate threads weaving together to form a larger narrative you described is one of my favorite things to read
Tommy Orange does a great job knitting these stories together despite how far flung they all start. Great read that I hope you enjoy!
Great discussion. Saw this one at Chapters yesterday and now wish I’d picked it up!
Thanks - appreciate it! There's still time to sneak it into the rotation - I'm sure it'll be hitting year end lists for a resurgence again.
Not to be the indigenous person giving a lecture, but while I think it's important to think about the ways in which indigenous identity can be exploited for the benefit of outside party, I don't know how productive it is to play the game about indigenous identity. I'm from the US and don't know a ton about the legal system in the US around indigenous people, but I come from an indigenous group in the US and find it deeply frustrating. Indigenous people are among the only who have to federally prove their identity and are constantly expected by outsiders to provide documentation or proof or whatever in order to lay claim to heritage. While that is obviously due to legal reasons wherein indigenous people are often entitled to certain aids from the government, it happens in social situations, professional ones, and platforms like youtube. I'm not trying to attack anyone, I love your videos and how thoughtful and intelligent your discussion is. But to push indigenous people to "come clean" is...well, it's hard. I don't know too much about Boyden, but I think people and media tend to feel much more welcome to be skeptical of indigenous heritage, and in fact often feel rightfully entitled to proof, to some kind of truth, to documents or ID cards or a closetful of regalia or something. And while it sounds far-fetched, I know a great number of people who identify with and hail from many different tribes. Most tribal entities as we know them came together into hard and fast groups with some concept of citizenship and with a sense of distinct ethnic separation from even nearby, culturally interwoven people only in response to colonialism. The moment of colonial contact necessitated clearer diplomatic groups which formed along fault lines of language, region, family, in some cases seasonal migratory habits or marriage, means of documentation and record-keeping, storytelling and cultural preservation practices, etc etc etc. As colonizers continued to move westward, individual groups and their deeply connected co-cultures were killed, brutally forced into false assimilation, or beaten westward into OTHER cultures which were forming clearer diplomatic, international lines amidst each other. General cultural clashes happened, as did wars, battles, and treaties between nations. It wasn't just the "Indians" and the white people--it was complex intergovernmental, international, interethnic relationships on both sides. And that led to manhy complex cultural stories in the backgrounds and family trees of indigenous people. Cultures are interwoven. In the US, Cherokee people started in the Carolinas but settled largely in the Southern state of Oklahoma and surrounding region and less so North near the Ojibwe people in the great lakes region. These areas had extant indigenous cultures, and other indigenous nations had to move to these areas as well. It's not always cut and dry, particularly because many--although absolutely not all--indigenous groups still hold some of the less American or anglican or European ideas about governing bodies or national boundaries or national identities. Yet, the system in which indigenous nations must exist, as imposed by colonizing governments in order to perpetuate the process of colonization in North America, does demand defined national identities and an existence centered around matching the diplomatic customs/expectations of the US and Canada as defined largely by France and Britain hundreds of years ago. So at any rate, all this to say that it is a complicated history. Culture as we understand is relative to our own culture, and while it's fair to criticize a mishandling of indigenous culture, it's also fair to think about where external groups get the license to make that criticism on behalf of "in" groups, to think about how freely picking apart indigenous identity and demanding that it be documented actually harms indigenous people.
Wow - thanks for the thoughtful and thorough response here! I get the frustration over having to "prove" your indigenous identity - to say nothing of blood quantum and the mess that creates. What does it even mean to be 20% indigenous?! I'll push back a bit on Boyden though - he's become the defacto face for Canadian indigenous people. A handsome, affable avatar of Native peoples who has the ear of the Prime Minister - who more than any other single person in Canada has the ability to shape the discourse around Native issues. Part of his being examined is your idea that Native identity isn't a monolith - that one person speaking for a massive community is only helpful to the colonist community.
Lacey Harvey Thank you Lacey for putting all this so eloquently. I came to comment something similar about the policing of identity from all sides. The issues around Boyden scare me because I have no status card stating that I'm Mohawk and I don't look Indian enough and I didn't grow up on a reservation. In other words, I have no proof of my identity but people don't question me when I also tell them I'm part English. Why do people, both status Indians and European Canadians, get to decide whether I'm Indian enough for them?
I am Choctaw and Cherokee, documented and a citizen of the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma. Tribes *do* closely police who is allowed to claim their tribe because huge numbers of white people claim to be Indian based on vague family stories of their great grandma being “a full blood Cherokee princess” with zero documentation and no connection to the tribe. This is viewed as an extension of colonialism, where now tribal identity itself is being stolen. Tribes in the US are sovereign and they reserve the right to decide who is and who is not a member of that tribe. Here, when you meet someone who claims to be Cherokee or Choctaw, the first question is “what kin claims you?” You can only be Cherokee or Choctaw if the tribe claims you.
Getting back to There, There, I haven’t read it yet despite it being THE book I am most excited to read! I don’t know what’s wrong with me but I’m heading to order it right this second so I can stop this delayed gratification crap. 😌
Delayed gratification is over-rated, time to get your hands on this one and enjoy! Thanks for the insight as well!
That's true--I'm Eastern Band Cherokee and exist in a nation where you have to join legally before the age of 18 and literally have to be able to prove a direct ancestral relationship to one of the people who signed the charter of the nation wayyyy back in the day. That said, I also have familial, kin relationships to a couple of different Ojibwe nations, and know people in various online and IRL indigenous centered communities who have equally complex kin relationships. A lot of the policing is a response to the actions of external groups, and it's also because of the way US law works. Tribal nations are, unfortunately, not really sovereign. They are in some ways, but the system in which they are sovereign was designed for the decimation of tribal identity and infantilizes and cripples tribal authority. The federal government regulates which tribes get to be tribes and which tribes don't. Some tribes don't have the right to claim, some tribes claim in ways that extend beyond or around legality. At any rate, what I mean is that the story of kinship is often (not always, but often) more complicated than legality. I have not chosen to pursue legal citizenship in any other nations or communities for the mutual benefit of those involved, but I still have kin bonds that are not necessarily defined by law. I still have ancestry that does not imply or necessitate citizenship. All of this aside, I still believe there is something to be said about the idea that it is tribes who should do policing and regulations rather than external groups in public, social conversations. Does that make sense? Anyway, thanks for your thoughtful discussion/commentary on my comment. I've also just ordered it!! I'm so excited!!
It really does live up to the hype! Thanks for the broadened perspective about it too. That chihuahua bit 😧
ikr! Glad you enjoyed the book too!
Wow, I’ve seen this book around a lot but didn’t know what it’s about, sounds really interesting. I’ve always wanted to read something about indigenous groups in North America, the situation here seems a little different from Brazil and other South American countries.
Any recommendations as far as indigenous writing from outside North America? Sounds like it would be super interesting!
ThePoptimist Yeah, from Guatemala there's "I, Rigoberta Menchú" and from Brazil I know that Daniel Munduruku's work has been translated to English. :)
Such a great, concise discussion! I would have bought this book because of the hype anyway, but it was selected for The Strand's Book Hookup box for the summer quarter and I was thrilled to receive it. I might wait a little while to let some of the hype blow over, but I am really looking forward to it :)
It is everywhere, but I suspect it'll probably pop up again for end of year lists. It's totally in the hype sweet spot right now where it's just a dull roar instead of a deafening din. Great read regardless
Hmmm! The Orenda is on the shelf at the bookshop in my local library. Perhaps I should buy it! It’s only $1. I keep overlooking it.
For a buck?! Totally worth it!
Have you read any Louise Erdrich? I think LaRose would be right up your street
Looks like she's biracial like Tommy Orange too - thanks for the recommendation! Sounds like another incredible writer.
The Round House is amazing
I'm sure you'll like her. She's a local author for me (Minneapolis) and owns her own bookstore that focuses on Native books and artwork. And girl can definitely write!
Agree - you must! For me, her books live up to There There hype levels - flawless.
I really enjoyed There There as well. Fun to read with lots to give the reader to think about. And that pow wow section of the narrative was brilliant!
Really interested to see what Boyden's next move is going to be. It's none of my business what his real "identity" is, but what I think is more interesting is that he was Canada's go-to representative for the Indigenous experience. I think that speaks great volumes about Canadians and what kind of voices/narratives are accepted in the mainstream. I'm excited to see other voices to break through, but no one else has seen anywhere near the success Boyden has so far... #canlitdrama
And then Boyden had to go and write a letter in defense of Stephen Galloway questioning the charges of sexual harassment, bullying and threats, and got some of CanLits heavy hitters to sign their names to it. So much drama. On a different note, I loved how Orange evoked the dancers readying for the powow!
Ugh yeah UBC Accountable was a bad look. I found an article about CanLit a few months ago calling the scene a "raging dumpster fire"-- lots of scandals to keep up with!!
Where would you suggest starting with Boyden? I have all his novels but have yet to pick them up lol.
Orenda was just so good - bloody and dark, but a fantastic read. Love Three Day Road too - and that's all I've read so far.
The title of this video made me click right away, loved this book
I didn’t know about the controversy surrounding Boyden , only that I wanted to read his books but these topics are always of interest. Glad to hear another positive vote for There There, I always appreciate it when the hype is well deserved.
Still love the two I've read of his but I wish he'd be a bit more transparent about his lineage - but maybe it's just too far gone. I feel lucky reading this one now, I find once the hype hits a fever pitch I can't read the book anymore. I just in on the sweet spot.
I know what you mean, I heard about this months ago on a podcast and thought I'd love to read it then didn't get to it and now I feel I'll have to wait a year to forget about it!
Don't do it! There's still time to get in on the ground floor!
😄 ok I'll go for it!
I feel lost that I've never heard of Boyden. His WWI title sounds like my kind of novel.
It was so good, loosely based on Francis Pegahmagabow a native, Canadian sniper and also chief councillor for the Wasauksing First Nation which Boyden has laid claim to in the past as well.
As the core demographic, an indigenous reader, who is supposed to be hyping this book up, I was let down by it. There were chapters that didn't seem to serve any purpose or enlighten the readers understanding of native people. the characters often had little agency, wandering around clueless in their own plot. When they are highlighted they serve as a mouthpiece for the author to spoon-feed you his own personal thoughts.
If this viewpoint occurred only a couple times, I might forgive this. But, Orange's ongoing bashing of his own people, is baffling to me. There were no answers being given, just the highlighting the standard pity the Native narrative, that only further harms our agency to solve issues like suicide or domestic violence within our city communities, that are quite common in America. Why bring up these issues, if the author has nothing new to say?
Maybe this is only apparent to me as a native reader.
But, I found his belittling of the traditional Native person troubling, perhaps its due to his own lack of native insight though, since he is half German, and had little interaction with why traditional people and why they do what they do. He can't understand why some forego education for a traditional path? He cant tell you why traditional native people choose to travel through out North America powwowing, they must do it for the money, right?
We need to make room for more native voices, who actually come from these communities and aren't just highly educated white raised tourists within them. There are the MBA "Indians" who are pinned against those who live a traditional lifestyle, one doesn't seem to understand or interact with the other.
Example: the native man opposing the film maker, this again seems to be the authors own opinion of other traditional native people, those who will highlight how wrong it may be to support the tropes we are fighting so hard to disprove. Will native people benefit from another narrative that showcases alcoholism, abandoned children, and abused indigenous women? I find it funny that all the half white characters were raised by their white parents, what is this saying? What is the portrait of native men as drunken neglectful fathers, telling American reader?
Native Lit in general, often struggles with the stagnant character problem, they don't change, rather they exist to be a platform, to feed the non native audience more of what they are accustomed, the poor poor Indian story line. Where every character only exists to say what the author needs you to think. None of this is characterization, none of these people feel real or tell a story.
This plot line could've existed with half the cast to be honest, I only wish that editors were honest, and pushed native writers to be better. Rather they say: well I guess its good enough for an indigenous author. It should make $.
I want more as a native reader, I want to see characters that have agency, goals, dreams. I want to showcase a part of being native that til now has been ignored, other stories do this. I want younger readers to see themselves differently, as you do when you read a well structured narrative filled with realistic characters. It isn't too much to ask, is it?
I struggle with whether to read more of Boyden's work. I really enjoyed three day road and want to read the Orenda but...seeing him give a talk soon after the controversy started was painful. He tapdanced around the issue so charismatically, I just don't think I can lend him any support....
That's the most frustrating part, and he can just run back down to New Orleans and lay low until it all blows over, come back as an "indigenous ally" pretend none of it happened and imply anyone still harping on it is just being petty and pedantic.