LITR 5731: Seminar in
American Minority Literature
Sample Student Final Exam Submission,
fall 2004
Jennie Branch
Assimilation vs. Resistance in Native American Literature
Through our readings and interpretations of Native American culture, the theme of assimilation vs. resistance has surfaced and resurfaced time and time again. The culture has not chosen a unified way to handle the overtaking of their existence by the dominant culture, and different individuals have decided to take different routes in respect to their choice. People like Sherman Alexie have chosen resistance as a result of defiance in regards to the loss of their culture. Black Elk, on the other hand, though he hasn’t turned his back on his culture entirely, has chosen to assimilate.
I believe that the general sentiment in regards to Native American culture and their dealings with the dominant culture is to resist. Such thoughts are exemplified in works like Crazy Horse Monument, where the Indian culture resists the monument erected in honor of Crazy Horse, constructed for the eyes of a culture that has no rights to him or his legacy. Though Sherman Alexie writes of problems that are not just ‘minority issues’ (such as alcoholism, broken families, etc.) deeply intertwined within his work is the fact that these issues are coming from an Indian author and that he is on a reservation. He mentions briefly in “The Approximate Size of my Favorite Tumor” that “…making fry bread and helping people are the last two things Indians are good at.” (170) In light of the tone of the novel, this does not reflect disappointment in his culture’s loss, but resentment at the dominant culture because of that loss. The tendency to resist assimilation stems from loss, another course objective. These seem to go hand in hand in terms of Sherman Alexie. His culture has lost its roots, and so they resist assimilation because of the anger that is brought about by that loss. Such is the case in “Every Little Hurricane”, when he claims that “One Indian killing another does not create a special kind of storm” (3). The same sentiment is suggested in “Indian Education” when the Indians on the reservation are being questioned about a suicide that has taken place on the reservation and they reply that they don’t know, but “when [they] look in the mirror, see the history of [their] tribe in [their] eyes, taste failure in the tap water, and shake with old tears, [they] understand completely” (178). That suicide is a better alternative to assimilation proves the propensity to resist.
Contrarily, in Black Elk Speaks, though the novel is very centralized on Native American culture, the background of Black Elk himself reveals assimilation to dominant culture. Though some of the themes of the novel are visions that Black Elk has, he has given up his lifestyle, converted to Catholicism, gone on tour with Wild Bill’s Wild West show. Black Elk has put himself on show for the dominant culture. Though he has not entirely given up his Indian Heritage, he has assimilated enough to the dominant culture so that that culture is no longer apprehensive of him. The fact that he has chosen to tell his story through a white male alone proves assimilation, if one considers the upset that the construction of Crazy Horse monument has caused in the Native American community.
A culture as deeply ingrained as the Native American culture will never completely vanish because there will always be the spirit of those who have decided to carry on the beliefs of the culture, though these people may be few and far between. Black Elk has assimilated to a level that the dominant culture finds comfortable, but has still held on to some of the ways of his culture which makes his assimilation more of a parallel, an aligning of values as opposed to Sherman Alexie who seems to resist assimilation to the dominant culture in regards to his writing. What is interesting, however; is that the fact that he is published for a main-stream audience at all is evidence that he is somewhat assimilated. Perhaps there is no choice other that to participate in different levels of assimilation.
Mexican American Literature: Assimilation vs. Resistance
As with so many minority groups, the question of assimilation versus resistance is raised with respect to how they are to handle their status as American citizens. Though the Mexican American culture is seen as an ambivalent minority, I believe that the choice still remains to either assimilate or resist, and I further believe that the culture, in regards to Ultima and Woman Hollering Creek has chosen to do neither, that they have chosen to keep their own culture and live in the United States, an aligning of cultures, which makes them neither ambivalent nor a group that fits nicely within another label. This is evident both in the author and the characters within both works, as evidence
In Anaya’s Bless me Ultima, so much of the Mexican culture is ingrained within the story that the setting is nearly forgotten. Antonio has visions that are so associated with their culture. The vision of the Lady Guadalupe is an example of these culture-based beliefs. Ultima herself is an example of how the culture carries over to the United States as she is a medicine woman, a curandera. Not only do we have the existence of a medicine woman, definitely not a part of the dominant culture, but we also have the instance of extended family living together, the same family cohabitating in the same village with regards to the Luna family. Ultima tells Antonio that the “Luna family has lived in that village for many years” (48); another parallel to the standard practice in Mexico. Perhaps one of the greatest examples of this choice to neither assimilate nor resist is the fact that Anaya writes so much of the novel in Spanish, without offering a translation.
There is much of the same context which echoes in Woman Hollering Creek. It is evident that Cisneros has not chosen to assimilate or resist, but has chosen to keep living her life as she would either way, in Mexico or the United States. In many of her short stories, it would be unclear as to whether or not the speaker was part of the dominant culture. This is true in “Eleven”, where the story is more about the pain of being a child, rather than the pain of being either part of a cultural minority or a female. Following this story, however, is “Barbie-Q”, a clear attack on the views of what a modern woman should look like. This is most evident when Cisneros talks about their newly acquired dolls that are slightly damaged and says “so what…so long as you don’t lift her dress, right?—who’s to know?” (16). Cisneros writes in Spanish and in English, like Anaya, seldom offering a translation. This is not a fight against the dominant culture. This is not assimilation. This is simply an author writing about her own culture. Language plays such a major role in culture, Cisneros couldn’t properly write about being a Mexican-American living in the United States or anywhere else, without writing in Spanish. It wouldn’t be believable. In “One Holy Night” she writes about a girl, living in the United States, becoming pregnant, and having to move to Mexico. The setting is not as important in the novel as the idea behind the story itself. The settings are interchangeable because the culture is maintained in both places. The girl lives with extended family. They speak Spanish. It wouldn’t matter if the situation was reversed and they lived in Mexico and had to move to the US. The culture is the same in both places.
In these two novels, the existence of a dominant culture is not addressed, nor is it purposely ignored. It is simply not taken into consideration because it is not an integral part of the authors’ stories. This neither makes Mexican-Americans an ambivalent minority, nor does it force them to choose between assimilation or resistance. It is evident in Ultima and Woman Hollering Creek, that these issues are not central to the problems they needed, as authors to discuss. They simply weren’t topics that the authors considered important enough to discuss in either novel.