LITR 5731: Seminar in American Minority Literature
University of Houston-Clear Lake, fall 2004
Poetry Presentation Summary

Poetry: Chrystos, "I have not signed a Treaty with the United States Government"

Poetry reader / discussion leader: Michael Russo

October 7th, 2004

Short Analysis: 

This poem effectively conveys a sense of frustration and anger that is uniquely American Indian.  It reminds the audience that American Indians were the original human inhabitants of North America (Objective 3b, loss and survival), and that they have not chosen to participate in the “theory” that is the United States of America (Objective 1.a, Involuntary Participation).  As Dr. White pointed out in a previous semester, there are no Native American restaurants, which can be seen as a rejection of assimilation.  This poem too rejects any thoughts of assimilation with the dominant culture, and reminds the reader that – from the American Indian’s perspective – the dominant culture is nothing more than an unwelcome and uninvited houseguest.  This poem gives voice to strong feelings of injustice, yet to me there is almost a sense of futileness in the exercise that is effective in conveying the choiceless condition of the American Indian who does not wish to assimilate (Objective 1b).  What are his or her options?

In the interest of Objective 7, consider the following words used to describe the United States and its dominant culture: nightmare, crazy, theory, illusion, ghost, dead.  These words paint the United States as a kind of bad idea with no real substance: shallow and soulless, and without the capacity to understand reality from the perspective of an American Indian.

Discussion Questions:

What do you make of the lack of punctuation and the non-standard use of capitalization?  What message does this form convey to the reader?

Does the fact that this poem was written in English affect the poet’s message of non-assimilation?  Can we tie this into Objective 1.a concerning involuntary participation?  And does it give us any clues as to the poem’s intended audience?

When you read or heard this poem, did the confrontational approach of this poet make you angry?  In most cases if someone were to come up to you and tell you to get lost, you’d probably be upset.  If the tone of this poem is not upsetting, what does that say about the American psyche concerning American Indians?  How might we react to a similar message from a different ethnic group?

The poet seems to be wishing against hope.  How does the poet’s message compare to the concept of “The Dream” in African-American literature?

What about the tone of this poem.  On the surface it appears to be merely angry and confrontational.  Is there more to the tone than anger?  How do the word choices at play here affect the overall tone of the poem?