Robert S. Andresakis

Journal

Skimming Cultural Concepts with Humor:

A Vine Deloria Review

I.                     Introduction:

            As a student of Literature, I expose myself to a variety of reading topics and a variety subjects. This course has been no exception. In the course of reading Sherman Alexie, I crashed into Vine Deloria. I say crashed because to read Vine Deloria’s material is to crash into a wall of humorously caustic cultural uncertainty. His wit makes the dominate cultural reader feel ashamed, and at times, rather stupid, while Indian readers rally behind strong words of a leader. Deloria is an awesome inspiration through the power of text, and gives insight into the world of the American Indian. In giving this insight, he seems to repeat certain themes in each of his books. Deloria presents themes such as forced assimilation as compared to other culture’s forced isolation, a renewal of Indian hope and revival of Indian culture, and an overall removal of the dominant white culture’s perceptions, views and iconography of what an Indian means. All taught in the same acidic tradition that Indian culture employees in teaching each other- the tradition of sarcastic humor.

            Deloria’s sarcastic trademark humor was the first alluring quality that infatuated me with his writing. I started reading “Custer Died for Your Sins” with a relevant question “whose sins did Custer die for?” Did Custer die for our sins, or did he die for the Indians sins? And what sins did the Indians have, other than being Indians? And is being an Indian really a sin? All these questions and many more sparked a tiny desire to read on. And so I did. Slowly my shroud of ignorance on Indian plight is lifting and I am begging to see the light- Deloria style.

            As I have said, Deloria’s style of sarcastic wit goes along way in opening the eyes of a reader. As a reader, I cannot stress the importance and the frequency of this style. At one point, I believe it was Sherman Alexie who stated in his stories “The Lone Ranger and Tonto Fist Fight in Heaven” that Indians used sarcasm and biting humor to teach lessons without humiliating or berating the person. Moreover, many times the berated laughs it off with self-humiliation letting people know that the lesson had been learned. This mode of education can explain the sarcasm presented by Deloria in his books. And it becomes an important tool to awaken the perceptions that have been clouded over time by a historical rendition of the romantic Indian lifestyle.

            White culture has always attempted to reduce the Indian to a fading myth that vanished with urbanization of the plains and demolition of the forests. Indians left the public eye, rather quickly, sometime in the early 1900 and late 1800’s. The exodus of the Wild West left behind a bad media stereotype of the Indian. Deloria tries to combat this stereotype by presenting a face of the Indian that is not rooted in a dead history, but instead, concentrates on the present day live Indian -the American Indian instead of the Native American. By presenting this new idea to an old truth (the modern American Indian instead of the feather toting Native American) Deloria is attempting to reshape the perspectives of the Indian iconology. In doing so, he hopes that it will give the White culture a new perception, and, in turn, a new heart to care. The problem Deloria suggests is that people do not believe that the Indian exists in a modern form as anything other than drunken, feather toting red skins that live wealthy lives on the reservations. To elicit a compassionate response instead of a response of denial, the iconography of the Indian must change -at least according to Vine Deloria.

            According to Deloria, a directly opposite comparison between the African American struggle and the Indian struggle, both with white oppression, can be seen. Vine Deloria clearly suggests this in his book “Custer Died for Your Sins”. Touching upon the subject briefly here and further elaborating in the review of the book, Deloria suggest that the dominate white population has attempted to proactively assimilate and destroy the Indian culture while systematically attempting the alienate the African society by forcing them away from the mainstream white society and into a secular, ostracized culture of their own. While attempting to assimilate and remove the Indian and Black culture respectively, the white culture completely ignored the Asian and the Mexican cultures. Deloria states simple that these cultures currently have nothing to offer the white dominant culture.

            Of course, according to Deloria, the white dominant culture is the problem. The compassion of the white man only extends to the financial gain to which he can reap. This attitude may be dangerous; simply concluding an open subject like this leaves too much unanswered. Yet, Deloria suggests that if the Black man wants independence and equal rights then he has to become financially independent. Yet, this same idea is not entirely embraced by Deloria as a solvent for the American Indian.

            In the course of his three books, how does Vine Deloria solve the Indian problem? It is an answer that I am still looking for and have a hunch I may never find. It may not be a problem that can be solved by a single knowledgeable writer. Instead, it is a cultural dilemma that must be changed. Who’s cultural dilemma? That is integrally dependant on the culture pointing the finger. The white culture may say that it is the Indian problem, if they acknowledged that Indians exist and have a problem. The Indians may say that it is the white cultures inherited problem.

            Whose ever problem it may really be I cannot answer in this journal. Instead, I only wish to address the concept as Deloria addresses it. One of the problems that the Indian culture faces is that it needs a strong central leader that would unify all the tribes in the United States. This is no small feat for the tribes have been fractionalized. Even before the presence of the white Europeans, the Indian culture has been warring with each other for slaves, hunting rights, and just common hatred. When the white European arrived, the Indians still refused to unite into a collective unit to drive back the invaders. Sherman Alexie, in his poem Crazy Horse Speaks addresses this when he says, “After the civil war the number of Indian warriors in the West doubled tripled the number of soldiers but Indians never have shared the exact skin never the same home”. (UA, 237). To Indians, the white man was a Sioux problem, or an Iroquois problem. It never became their problem until it directly affected them. Vine constantly refers to the Indian resurrection being led by a strong leader. He often hints that it may be soon.

            Soon has not happened yet. Yet the battles, battles of land rights, battles of reservation rights, and battles of treaty rights to name a few, are being fought and won not on the land or in the public eye, but behind the oaken gavel of the supreme courtroom. Deloria painstakingly attempts to educate the readers on the finer points of these arguments.

            Despite the slow times in his books, mostly the times concerning the treaties when he walks on to a proverbial soapbox, the way he writes and the message that he has to say is stirring and moving. He motivates the reader, captivates them with humor, and then drives them to almost a reverent reaction of the Indian culture that the Indians wish to reclaim. First, however, the American Indian must remove the popular media myth. It is a myth that has developed over decades of stereotypical portrayals of the Indian in movies and book romanticizing the Indian, which now has grown to be something more fantastic then true. There are no more feather-toting chiefs with solemn faces running down the nearest white woman with a hatchet. Instead, the chiefs of today are well-dressed businessmen, and respectable leaders of the Indian community. Yet, if you listen to Deloria, there is a sense of longing to return to the days of a simpler life. A life where the Indian can roam on large tracts of land and hunt what they need to survive is what Deloria suggests the Indian seem to desire. Deloria seems to suggest a return to the lifestyle of freedom that, in essence, was the foundation of the cultural stereotypes. Maybe it is more than just that. Maybe it is an attempt to return to the cultural tribal homogony that the Indian fellowship had when they were with their own. Assimilation of American values places the Indian awkwardly in a territory of heterogeneous design where someone is expected to live, work, participate, and interact with many different cultures and people. Yet, the Indians of white myth did not like company much and neither did the Indians of reality; unless you were of their own tribe or an allied tribe.

            Deloria makes me think. Talking of the Indian mythos created by the media, makes me stop and ask myself just how much I have been affected by genre of stereotypical white man propaganda. Unfortunately, I think I have been affected more that I care to admit. However, at the same time, that same technique of propaganda works both ways and somewhere in the middle is the truth; if there is a truth anymore.

II.                   Autobiography

Vine Delorai is a man of Internet obscurity. While his name resounds from every bookseller web sight, his past remains somewhat of a mystery. Deloria has become a leading Native American writer that teaches about history, culture, law and religion of the American Indians. Works include, “Custer Died for Your Sins”, “Red Earth, White Lies”, “Spirit and Reason”, “Power and Place”, and “Evolution, Creationalism, and Other Modern Myths.” This list of works is not complete because he has authored over 20 books on the American Indian. He is a member of the Standing Rock Sioux tribe and one of one the most vocal speakers of Indian Nationalism.

Vine Deloria has helped educational positions at both University of Colorado and University of Arizona. He has taught history as well as Indian Treaty law. At one point, he was a teacher of Political Science.

III.                  Material Review:

“Custer Died For Your Sins: An Indian Manifesto “

Deloria writes to the Indian youth. This statement explains so much about this book In particular, it explains why this book was written the way it was and the affect the book intended to have. Simply stated, the book was designed to awaken the cultural fire of the young Indian and, also to remove the impartial taint that the white America attitude holds; a purpose that some, including I, think succeeded. Why did it succeed?  

         One reason the book succeeds is because of the direct nature of the material and the tone to which he used to relay it to his Indian readers.

“Experts paint us as they would like us to be. Often we paint ourselves as we wish we were or as we might have been. The more we try to be ourselves the more we are forced to defend what we have never been.” (2)

Deloria wrote this sarcastic book as an attempt to stimulate the younger Indian tribe into a cultural fever. According to Deloria in his book “God is Red”, “Custer Died for Your Sins” was written to the Indian people. Indian papers carried the release of the book and Indian people sponsored publicity for the books release. The concept that the book was intended for the Indian consumption goes right along with the idea that sarcasm is a tool for teaching. This book as a teaching lesson goes a long way to explain the tone that Vine Deloria uses in this book. His sarcasm, bluntness, and anti-white cultural extrapolative, go a long way to rouse the cultural fire of the Indian population. In fact, Deloria states that his book, in combination with several other books, is the primary reason that the cultural revolution in the early 70’s happened as passionately as it did.

         I would like to look at chapters and pull out some highlights as a synopsis of his book. The first Chapter, “Indians Today the Real and the Unreal”, attempts to explain what an Indian is. I have spoken a few times about the mythic Indian genre that popular literature has created; this chapter further expounds upon that myth and how that myth relates to the Anglo-Saxon. Deloria also compares broadly the situation between the black freedom movements and the Indian assimilation. Let me approach these two ideas one at a time before I move on.

The first introduction to Indian culture that the Anglo-Saxon population receives today is the romanticized free spirited Indian girl who falls in love with the white explorer. Children today are introduced rather early to the Disney version of Indian lifestyle with “Pocahontas”. An Americanized, and “Disneyized” retelling of a semi- factual person, “Pocahontas” mixes Indian culture with a Shakespearean “Romeo and Juliet” love story without the dark twist at the end. Then there is the ideology of the Indians presented in 70’s and early 80’s westerns, where Indians were either drunk, raping and killing white settlers, or in bands of hundreds, sitting proudly on the back of their ponies, facing down the small forces of Union soldiers. Inevitably, the soldiers win even though they are hopelessly outnumbered and the Indians are made to look like strategic fools and personality free savages. Why then do Anglo-Saxons obsess over the Indian Culture? Deloria asks the same question and poses this answer: 

“Somehow the white was linked with a noble house of gentility and culture if his grandmother was an Indian princess who ran away with an intrepid pioneer. And royalty has always been an unconscious and but all consuming goal of the European immigrant. (3).”

Deloria goes on to suggest, “…they need some blood tie with the frontier and its dangers in order to experience what it means to be an American”. (3)

         These two statements are very interesting to me. The first one makes sense when you contemplate that English wealth and nobility in the 17 and 18 hundreds meant a lifestyle free of hunger and strife. A connection with royalty generally meant a connection with money and a connection with credit. This goes further by suggesting that a newly arrived English immigrant could gain some “traveling fame” by marriage to a savage native. The fame then could lead to political connections and future political power and wealth. The Anglo-Saxon culture has been very big on progressing upward. Upward mobility in society meant better opportunities to capitalize on monetary opportunities. The Indian mystique helped to provide some of the upward mobility by giving a sort of exotic flair to that person and his family.

         The second quote is interesting because it asks a fundamental question that I will navigate carefully through, “What does it mean to be American?” It is a question that is hard, in my opinion, to answer and I will lightly attempted to discuss it in a further section.

         As I have stated early, Deloria also draws a comparison between the Indian predicament with the white man and the Black war with the white man. While at some points he admits the oppression is similar, but basically says that the two situations are night and day. Deloria states that:

“Because the Negro labored, he was considered a pack animal. Because the Indian occupied large areas of land, he was considered a wild animal.”(8)

 He further goes on to suggest that the White Anglo-Saxon ignored the Mexican and Asian cultures because, effectively, these two cultures had nothing that the white man wanted. The blacks filled the work force, the Indians had the land, the Mexicans and the Asians had nothing of value. Some how Mexico was never quite effected by Manifest Destiny. Maybe they were not effected because they were a little too south for most northern tastes, either that, or migrants strictly adhered to the eastern movement suggested by Manifest Destiny. Vine Deloria further elaborates, in the Delorian fashion, that the Indians were meant to be made into domestic animals, while the blacks were expected to disassociate themselves with the white world. “Blacks trapped in a world of white symbols, retreated into themselves, and people thought comparable Indian withdrawal unnatural because they expected Indians to behave like whites.” (8). These statements, when contemplated, are rather true. The white man did everything that it could to assimilate the Indian and make them white in an attempt to destroy the Indian culture. Taking Indian wives to interbreed, taking Indian children and teaching them in white schools, and opening a multitude of church’s on Indian Reservation all were attempts to make the Indians white. Conversely, the white population did everything they could to disassociated themselves from the black population. Segregation, poorer education, organizations like the KKK, and misinformation in religious teachings, were all attempts to ostracize the Negro. To alienate them and keep them oppressed in an attempt to forget about them could have been the reason. Another possible reason may be the attempt to create and sustain a lower class working force. Either way the treatment between the Negro and the Indian was conversely different. Deloria homes in on that difference and discusses it as a proof that the two cultures can not be compared.

         Deloria concludes that chapter with an amusing statement of fact. “What we need is a cultural leave us alone agreement, in spirit and fact.”( 27) Deloria is suggesting in the concluding remarks, as well as interspersed comments, that the Indian population just wants to be left alone. They do not want the white man bothering them anymore. This attitude was briefly discussed by one of the students when she recited her experiences in a reservation hospital. This cultural seclusion mentality is something that Deloria is arguing with a duel tongue. In one instance, he suggests that we should just leave Indians alone. Yet, in the same breath, he says that the Indian population should not be a fading myth anymore, but instead should be a proactive force that dictates politics in the dominant white world. We should leave them alone, but they should have every right to mingle freely in American society as they so choose. In this case, it is not just an “either or” situation, Deloria suggests both plainly.

         The third chapter offered a comical outlook on the American anthropologist. It is safe to assume that Deloria does not like the infamous breed of Anthropologist because it likes them to educated oafs that really do not care about the Indian population; rather instead they only care about their grant money. At one time, he suggested that he knew why societies of the near east were defunct. Claiming that anthropologist had eventually killed them off with their policies (85). Yet, he is fair to the “anthros” (an abbreviated form of anthropologist) by saying that the Indians sin because they only allow the anthros that best flatter the Indian ego to be present on the reservation. Continuing for most of the chapter, Delora finds comic fault after comic fault with the anthro and societies views on the created anthro-policy.

         After he has thoroughly trounced the science of anthropology, Deloria makes a statement that I found particularly interesting. He said, “Unless a man is rebelling he is not really a man.(98)” When I read this I had pause for reflection. In life, we have always had our own forms of personal rebellion. in the 60’s you were rebelling to rebel 70’s rebelling against the war, 80’s rebelling against political agendas, 90’s rebelling against society stigmas 2000’s rebelling against the loss of freedom. Each decade marks more and more personal rebellions or mini rebellions. This is not to be confused with full-scale social, political, military rebellion, but instead a small personal “stand up for your rights and speak your mind” kind of rebellion. A fight against the norms, in a peaceful version of rebellion, is the interpretation of rebellion that Deloria was discussing. We all fight out own rebellions. Maybe, its revolting against the dress code in a school, or protesting abortion, or fighting some cause for somebody, its all a mini rebellion agaist the system- a small revolution to get a policy changed. Does this define us as men, or does it simply define us as human?

         Deloria never really answers the question and I am hesitant to answer it for him. Instead, he moves on to another chapter, and so shall I. The chapter named “Missionaries and the Religion Vacuum” posed an interesting introduction. Page 101 reads:

“An old Indian once told me that when the missionaries arrived they fell on their knees and prayed. Then they got up, fell on the Indians and Preyed.”

This was another one of those statements that floored me with its insightfully sarcastic truth. The missionaries did feed off the Indians in so many different ways. Converting them, taking land from them, “Anglo-Saxon-izing” them- making them more white- are all example of the way that the missionaries fed off everyone. Missionaries seemed to be the first wave of any conquering force. They were the eyes and ears of the governments that would soon follow with either military might, or conquest by occupation as it so happened with the Indians.

         Were the Indians really conquered though? In the Chapter marked, “Laws and Treaties”, Deloria argues that the Indians were never conquered and are therefore still the rightful recipients of the Land. He argues that the treaties that bound the American people to the Indian desires were made to protect the fledgling colonies from domination by the Europeans. He is correct. The Indian never was formally conquered, however, it could be justified to say that they have been culturally conquered. The treaties that protected the Americans also allowed for a series of mismanagements that effectively conquered the Indian people. Why did they allow themselves to be conquered? Sherman Alexie answered the question when he said that if the Indian tribes had ever united they would have far surpassed any military might that the colonies could have mustered. Instead the tribes remained fractionalized and warring with each other as much as with the white man. With attention divided it was easy for the military to enforce the constant breeches in the treaties. In the same fashion of divide and conquer, the missionaries kept the Indians warring religiously as well, for each faith took a reservation. Protestant had one reservation while Catholic had another. Baptist and other Christian religions controlled other reservations. It became a fractionalized even still as one Sioux faction on a reservation would be Baptist and conversely anther Sioux tribe on a different reservation might be Protestant. Therefore, the missionaries perfectly divided an already divided Indian Nation.

         However, they might not be divided for much longer, according to Deloria. All it takes is one strong voice to lead the Indian reservations in becoming a unified nation. They have had several voices so far, but not one of them strong enough to lead them all. Until then, the Indian population will wait, and laugh.

Humor is an important aspect of the Indian culture. It gives an avenue for releasing tension. It teaches lessons without humiliating people. It breaks the ice at parties. Humor is very important for us all, but the Indians seem to embody dry humor. This can easily be seen in an antidote. When I started to read this book I wondered and wondered what it meant when Custer died for your sins. Who was “your”? Was “your” the Indians, or was “your” the white man? And how can he justify saying it was the white mans sins if indeed “your” was white? I found the answer in the Deloria’s section entitled “Indian Humor”. The phrase, “Custer died for your sins” was a bumpersticker.

“Originally, the Custer bumper sticker referred to the Sioux Treaty of 1868 signed at Fort Laramie in which the United States pledged to give free and undisturbed use of the lands claimed by Red Cloud in return for peace. Under the covenants of the Old Testament, breaking a covenant called for a blood sacrifice for atonement. Custer was the blood sacrifice for the United States breaking the Sioux Treaty.” (148)

Indeed the book was titled after Custer dieing because the white man had sinned. Does that make Custer our Jesus? Will Custer’s resurrection remove our sins from the annuals of Indian history? Did the Indian’s forgive our sins because Custer died for our sins? While the parallel to the Jesus figure is defiantly present, it lacks any real merit to justify a direct correlation. Then again, that may be why it was in the humor section of the book instead of the Religion section. Deloria goes on to list many funny jokes that make light of the Indian conditions that exist. I would suggest to any interested party to read Vine Deloria’s “Custer Died for Your Sings: An Indian Manifesto.” It is well worth the eye opening experience.

         Vine Deloria attempts and succeeds to awaken my conscious of the Indian plight. He speaks in many terms of the hardships that the Indian people have faced both form the Anglo-Saxon invasion and the Indian relationship with themselves. He broadly speaks of traditions and relates humors jokes that bring to light the Indian culture. His sarcastic tone teaches us through quiet prodding. Deloria tricks us, through the use of his sarcasm and wit, into seeing the other side of the equation, and see it through the eyes of an American Indian rather than a Native American.

III God is Red:

         To point out a certain chapter and suggest that this chapter is the most important would not be doing justice to Deloria. Unlike the method I chose for the first one, this review will be a little more conversational.

         Vine Deloria wrote “God is Red” for the Anglo-Saxon. He wonders why, in the introduction, the Indian people did not pick up the message of the book with the same zeal as they consumed “Custer Died for Your Sins”. Reading a good portion of the book, I have observed that Deloria does not employee the same amount of sarcastic acridity that he did in his first novel. This book is more educational, more pacifistic in tone. It is a “this is the way it because these are the deductive logical reasons” kind of book. It does not employee the same sarcastic wit to shake the sense. Instead, he merely banters, almost conversationally, through his messages. This is not to say that his message has changed much since “Custer Died for Your Sins”. In fact, it has not changed at all. He still speaks of the white man’s assimilation. This time, however, he further elaborates by including the Indian’s current responses. He focuses on a 1972 Indian frevor that resulted in the demolition of a Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) building. He sights this as a win in the cultural assimilation war between the white America and the Indian.

         While the war between cultures is interesting, his opinions on the religious stories are even more so. In the history of the world, one thing is common of most of the major creation myths. The great flood was a common component as seen in the Babylon story myth “Epic of Gilgamesh”, the Noah story in the Bible, and the certain myth stories in other cultures. The flood seems to be almost everywhere, so it makes sense that the flood would be present in the Hopi stories. The Hopi story as related by Deloria tells of the creation of four worlds. Three worlds of those worlds were systematically destroyed by various calamities of nature. The first world was destroyed by fire. The second world was destroyed by ice, the third world was destroyed by water, and the forth world is the current world. Each time the earth was destroyed the Hopi people retreated underground like ants to survive. We can see by the story that creation of the world, the ice age, and our ever-present flood myth. The myth has once again raised its head. It is no real surprise that a massive flood could have existed once in history. Moreover, sense floods to simple people were rather a curious event something had to explain the mystery that made the floods. For the Hopi, that reason was supernatural. Because of warring parties of men who flew on magical shields, the earth had to be destroyed. Something, someone, or a higher power warned the Hopi of the impending flood. They built an arc, housed some birds, and weathered out the flood.

The one consistent theme, besides the flood, is the idea of survival. The Hopi survived each of the destructions of the worlds, and it is assumed by the literature that they will survive the next destruction. It is the same view of the Plains Indians; the ancestors will rise, the buffalo will run again and the white man will disappear, then everything will return to the way it was. Will cable television remain? That is another discussion for another time.

The majority of “God is Red” relates the interaction between the religions of Christianity and the relationship both with other religions and the Indian culture. It is fascinating to see the observations that he makes in conjunction with some of the facts. One observation that comes to mind is that the Genesis story of the Bible is not as old as myths such as the Hopi story and the Babylonian myths. Another fascinating observation speaks of Adam and Eve. Adam and Eve had been banished from the Garden of Eden. This banishment by God was the first introduction of sin into the world. Or so Deloria suggests. Deloria’s tone changes dramatically from his first novel. The sarcastic nature seems to have lessoned some. My fiancé said to me, concerning the change in his tone, “Maybe he is not so angry anymore.” While that may be true of Deloria, it does not subtract from his ability to get the message across or his capability of presenting an eye-opening rendition in Delorian fashion.

IV.               Red Earth, White Lies: Native American and the Myth of Scientific Fact

I must admit that I have not had a chance to read this book. Currently it is on order with Barnes and Noble. Unfortunately, it is not due in until after the due date for this project. However, I would like to include a link to what I feel to be a knowledgeable outline. http://www.knowledge.co.uk/xxx/cat/deloria :

      From the review it seems that Deloria has returned to his sarcastic tone and challenges scientific contemporary theory. With titles relating concepts of “Evolutionary Prejudice” and “Creatures Their Own Size”, it will be wonderfully delightful item to read. 

V.                 Web Site Review

www.press-on.net

Ironically Native American Press/ Ojibwe News is the full name for Press-on. The mentality of forward movement is reflected in the articles of this Indian Newspaper. A sample paper can be viewed here. www.press-on.net/2003_11_14web.pdf . This paper is dated November of 2003.

            I was able to pull a second article, www.press-on.net/articles/4-11 sovereignth.htm, from this site. The article describes the concept of the dominate culture once again taking things away from the Indians once they realize that it is valuable. In 1998 Congress legalized casinos on reservations. Now that the gambling community has reached to be over a 12 billion dollar industry, politicians may want to rethink their position. The article brings to truth some of what Deloria has been saying in his book. How the dominant culture keeps taking things away from the Indian and how the Indian keeps fighting for sovereignty. The same themes keep reappearing. A need for cultural unity and a rising of the Indian culture are both presented in this article.

www.findarticles.com/cf_dls/m0KWZ/2_5/110265051/p1/article.jhtml

            This web site held a conversation with Vine Deloria about his book, “Evolutionalism, Creationalism and Other Modern Myths”. Deloria suggests in the article and in the book that scientist overlook the myths of Indian people, as well as other cultural creation myths, as false because they simply cannot be proven. He goes on to say that even scientist who accept Christian ideology will not accept the creation stories of other cultures, even when there is an obvious theme. The obvious theme he is referring to is the fact that many different myths have had times of destruction and revival and the survival of the people after the destructive elements have occurred.

http://www.narf.org/nill/2002-2003update.htm

You cannot talk about the Indian war without reviewing the legal actions that are being heard by the Supreme Court. This site documents the cases and relates information pertinent to the case files. The shear volume of cases indicate a progressive Indian war to protect themselves so that they do not loose any more, and to attempt to gain back some of what they have lost.

VI. Reflection of Ancestry: What does it mean to be American?

When I first started this class, I had a vague concept of what we were to read and discuss and a understanding of what it meant to be American. To me, an American was someone who lived in America. It did not really matter to me the skin color or the variance in culture. An American was simply an resident of America. However, in the course of dialogue, I began to question my assumption. I began to wonder what exactly made the American culture, because it had to be assumed, under my American people, that Americans then had their own separate culture. Yet, if we had our own separate culture then how is it that we African Americans with their own separate culture, Asian Americans with their culture and so on? How is that we have a variety of Americans with so many cultures? We are a melting pot of culture, but does this melting pot intrinsically define the American Culture? The truth of the matter is: I still have not answered these questions. For every answer I give only comes up with further more complicated questions.

         While I am not an authority of being American, Deloria can, and does, speak of what it means to be an Indian. He speaks of the dominate white greed that affects his people regularly. He talks on how our greed has done nothing but enslave the Negro, and take the land of the Indian people. Does greed define Americans? Are Americans only White Anglo Saxons deriving for southern Europe? It seems in class when we discuss of cultural identity someone always claims other heritage besides American. One is Irish, one is Scottish, one is Italian, and they trace particularly those heritages. Deloria would suggest that for Americans today there is nobility in being something other than just American. People today have to have something to identify with so they choose their cultural heritage. At what point do we become just plain Americans? Is it wrong to be just an American? We have learned that many times when a culture moves to America, that culture become double alienated. Double alienation occurs because the culture at home views the culture that left with doubt and skepticism and the culture that is already here views the newly arriving culture as not entirely being Americanized. Moreover, the reverse is true as well; the culture that newly arrives does not view the existing culture as being the same, instead changed by the American way of life. So where is the balance? A friend remarked that America does have a culture, our culture is fast food, fast life, capitalism, American Dream apple pie, baseball, football -all the things that speak volumes of the American Past. It also been said that America is not old enough in itself to be culturally independent. America has not found it self yet.

         Yet, I think that in part both viewpoints are correct. Perusing a web site I came across an interesting statement about American Culture. I will present it here for review and say no more that it gives a comprehensive list on what American’s think and know. ( www.zompist.com/amercult.html ) But, is what we know and we think define us as a culture? After defining culture with a dictionary, I would have to say yes. All of the above is correct. Being diverse is part of the American culture. Mom’s apple pie and baseball, ET and Starwars, are all cultural icons of the Americans. Capitalism, greed and the American dream of success is part of the American Culture. So who am I?

         I ask this question based on the idea that I am of Greek descent, but I am not Greek. I am the typical mutt conglomeration of 5 or so different heritages. My blood flows with different cultural ties. So where do I belong? If being American is being cultural identified with other cultures as well as being American, where do I fit in? I am positive that I am not the only person that has asked this question.

         Furthermore, being that I am an affluent White American without any other cultural association, I seem to fall into the classification akin to the evil empire. I have on my shoulders the responsibly of the atrocities afflicted by my predecessors. In many cases, dominate white America is still trying to oppress people. This is dangerous ground to tread because it is easy to slip off into a poor pitiful me routine. However, when is enough, enough? When will the Indian and the Black cultures forgive? Will it ever be over when these two cultures are seeking reparations with an open hand, palm out?

         Vine Deloria suggests that the Indian culture wants to return to the way it was. They want the land without the White society. However, would they really return back to a life without Television, modern convinces? Or do they really want it all, all the wealth of the white dominated America? The African America militant Muslim groups claim that for reparations that want half of America to be black only in addition to multi million dollars of reparation funds. These groups do not speak for all African Americans, however, just wanting reparations alone is a version of having your hand out for something.

         Most assuredly, capitalism is a defining aspect of American Culture. And while the Indians claim not to be part of the White American Culture, Deloria’s suggestions and attitudes surely imply a capitalistic tendency for survival. I am American. I am a white Male in this society. I may not have defined my cultural heritage, and may not claim it. Why should I have too?. Maybe I, like Deloria, am a trickster figure in our society.

VI.               Vine Deloria as a Trickster Figure:

When asked if Vine Deloria was a good example of a trickster, I paused, grinned, cocked my head and simple said in my best Bugs Bunny voice, “Umm could be.” What makes Deloria a good example of a trickster figure is the same reason why his first book, “Custer Died for Your Sins”, was so popular. For the Indian people, Deloria’s voice was the mantra that burned into them a rekindling cultural flame for the generation. His words became a healing voice to the fractionalized Indian Nation in an attempt to unify them behind the codex of a homogenous Indian culture. He tried to educate the younger generation and carry on the oral traditions of teaching through his written word.

      Deloria’s logical approach to the circumstances that affected the Indians coupled with the tone motivates any reader to a discovery of truth. Yet, his powerful language almost assures that in the final moments of discovery, the reader sees the truth that Deloria wishes them to see.

 Running across a web page on tricksters, http://acunix.wheatonma.edu/rpearce/MultiC_Web/Culture/Tactics/Conventions/Af-Am_Conventions/Trickster/body_trickster.html), I happened to find a list of criteria used to identify a trickster as: “fleet-footed and nimble-witted, beneficent, sometimes malevolent, both guardian and troublemaker, bringer of order and chaos, maker and breaker of rule, a mediator between human society and the realms of the spirits, protean--changing shapes, successful in his ability to adapt to changing conditions failing as often as he succeeds, often a figure of mockery, able to enjoy humor, physical pleasure, and playful trickery, sometimes gentle and self-mocking, sometimes mean-spirited and cruel, and able to die and come back to life as a powerful storyteller.”  It is rather easy to see how Vine Deloria fits almost all of these traits. To go through each trait and apply it to his works would be a paper into itself. Therefore, in the favor of space constraints, I urge readers to see for themselves how the traits apply.

What is Deloria attempting to trick us into then? As an Indian reader Deloria wants remembrance of the past and unification for the future. Simply put, he wants to raise the Indian community’s ire. As dominant cultural readers, he wants us to see the Indians as they should be seen, not as they are popularly portrayed. He wants us to remember and think about them as people– more importantly a wronged people- not as savages

Did he succeed? According to Deloria, in “God is Red”, “Custer Died for Your Sins” had a powerful influence on the Indian community. I have to assume he is correct. As a dominate white reader, I have spent more time contemplating and debating his words, thoughts, suggestions to the point of weary exhaustion. He has succeeded in opening my eyes and making me rethink the Indian culture. Deloria embodies a trickster and does his job well.

VIII Conclusion

            When I first started to read Vine Deloria, I questioned whether I liked him or not. However, I quickly found that with every word I read I became more and more riveted to his meaning. My like or dislike of him was no longer important. The importance was replaced with the burning desire to know where he was going to go next, what would he say next, and what message was he was trying to impart. Deloria worked literary magic with the use of his acrid, sarcastic writing style, influencing not only myself, but also many Indian readers.

            His strong message of unification of the Indian Nation pervaded until the very end of his books. At the same time that he called for Indian unification, he suggested the removal of white influence on Indian affairs. Yet, he did it such a way that white reader was not overly threatened by the words that Deloria wrote. Instead, Vine’s writing made me pause and consider all the points that he brought to the table to justify his argument. He has some very valid points.

            The European settlers never forcefully dominated the Indian culture, rather subverted it, assimilated it, and isolated their culture. Sovereignty, the ability of self-governing should remain in the hands of the Indians. Why should the dominant white govern a people that they have no real concern over?

            Deloria presents to both the Indian reader and the non-Indian reader, what it means to be an Indian. He taught us to appreciated the Indian humor, and, indirectly, to see the point of his sarcastic humor as a device for teaching without humiliating others. He portrayed Indians as a people of today fighting to retain their own identity, instead of a people of history lost in the myths created by movies and books. He taught me what it meant to be red.

            Nothing is taboo in discussion, to Vine Deloria; everything can be scrutinized with a critical eye. “God is Red” is proof of this scrutiny. Deloria challenges the very fabric of Dominant cultural ideas- religion and God. And I could not help but to keep reading with a grin and a chuckle.

            I thoroughly enjoyed reading Vine Deloria, and will be continuing to study his text. This journal does not do him justice. There is too much that needs to be said and not enough voice to say it. Instead, I hope my enthusiasm relates just enough curiosity to inspire others to read and enjoy Vine Deloria.