Catherine Knutsson's SHADOWS CAST BY STARS

Catherine Knutsson's Shadows Cast by Stars came to my attention in November 2012 when I was looking for young adult paranormal romance novels that have Native themes or characters. Published in June, here's Amazon's description for Shadows Cast by Stars:

Old ways are pitted against new horrors in this compellingly crafted dystopian tale about a girl who is both healer and seer.

     Two hundred years from now, blood has become the most valuable commodity on the planet—especially the blood of aboriginal peoples, for it contains antibodies that protect them from the Plague ravaging the rest of the world.
     Sixteen-year-old Cassandra Mercredi might be immune to Plague, but that doesn’t mean she’s safe—government forces are searching for those of aboriginal heritage to harvest their blood. When a search threatens Cassandra and her family, they flee to the Island: a mysterious and idyllic territory protected by the Band, a group of guerilla warriors—and by an enigmatic energy barrier that keeps outsiders out and the spirit world in. And though the village healer has taken her under her wing, and the tribal leader’s son into his heart, the creatures of the spirit world are angry, and they have chosen Cassandra to be their voice and instrument....
     Incorporating the traditions of the First Peoples as well as the more familiar stories of Greek mythology and Arthurian legend, Shadows Cast by Stars is a haunting, beautifully written story that breathes new life into ancient customs.

Intrigued? I sure was! A story about aboriginal blood being a commodity because it has antibodies against a Plague that is killing those who aren't aboriginal... And being hunted for blood...

So I started reading, but kept stumbling over the narrative. Below, my summary of the novel is in plain text, and my comments are in italics.

__________

Shadows Cast by Stars is set 200 years in the future. The earth is slowly getting colder, and fertility rates are down.

Debbie's comments: That would be approximately the year 2212. In my analysis, I use that date to set dates for other bits of chronological information provided in the story.

On page one, we are introduced to Cassandra Mercredi, the protagonist. She is Metis, 16 years old, and with her dad and brother (Paul), lives "the Old Way" in a house on farm land that once belonged to her great grandfather. The house is located near the "Western Population Corridor." In their home, they are safe from the government (the "UA"), the people in the Corridor, and "the Band." Living in "the Old Way" means they live without electricity, running water, garbage collection. Living that way keeps them connected to the earth.

The farm land was treaty land, but on page 28, we learn that in 2210, the Band signed it "back to the UA" and left for the Island. Cass and her family still live in it but the author doesn't tell us how that happens. The Band still feels some ownership, though, and show up at Cass's home whenever they want. They enter without knocking and drink with her father and brother. They all talk about how they will, one day, overthrow the UA and take back the land.

Debbie's comments: This is confusing... The Band signed it BACK? Using the word 'back' suggests it was the governments land to begin with. It also seems to me that if the Band gave up the land, Cass and her family would have had to leave, or, buy or lease it from the government. How is it they live in it?

Each morning, Cass and Paul head to the Corridor, where their school is located. At school, they "plug into the etherstream" (p. 1) via computer chips embedded in their forearms. By law, the chips cannot display information about race, religion, or sexual orientation. All their schoolmates know that they are "Others, of aboriginal descent, marked by the precious Plague antibodies" (p. 1) in their blood.

Debbie's comments: That confuses me... She doesn't say the government doesn't have the info. She says the chips can't display the info. So... does the government have the info?! If so, why doesn't the government just go after them for their blood right off? Why are they allowed to go to school?! It seems they would be protected by the government, due to the value of that blood. It also seems that the not-Others would kidnap them FOR that value.  

At school, Cassandra gathers things like twine, old pencils, elastic bands, and paper clips to make dreamcatchers.

Debbie's comments: Dreamcatchers? Seeing them as part of this story is, for me, a red flag. They signal "Indian" in the same way that a totem pole or 'totem' or 'spirit animal' does. 

Cassandra and Paul have powers. They both have visions. She has special powers that enable her to see a person's "shade" or "totem." Sometimes she has seizures and sees sparks that symbolize a spirit world. The spirits of that world figure prominently throughout the book, ever-there, wanting to take her into the spirit world. She guards against that happening, though, because it is not a good thing.

Debbie's comments: Hmm... She sees things others don't.... Totems...  These signal 'new age' to me... 

When Cass is making lunch for herself and Paul to take to school, she uses paper, not plastic bags, because her dad doesn't allow plastic in the house. Later, their father hurries them into his truck because the searchers are coming for them.

Debbie's comments: I guess the truck is an exception to the "Old Way." Her dad doesn't like that she gathers those things she uses to make dreamcatchers either, but his objection is because the things don't belong to her. His objection has nothing to do with them not being part of the "Old Way." Are some things ok and others aren't? Or is this an inconsistency in the development of the story?

With her dad in his truck is a woman named Madda who goes into the kitchen and sets up a tray of scalpels and needles.  Her father has heard that there aren't enough full blood aboriginals in the Corridor anymore, and the government is rounding up the half-bloods. That means Cassandra and Paul aren't safe, and it explains why Madda is with her dad...

Debbie's comments: Ok... so, being half-bloods, they weren't under threat until now. I'm curious about the author's constant use of "half blood" and "half breed." Today, those are derogatory terms rejected by Metis people. In 200 years, are we to believe there was a change such that the Metis people stopped using Metis and started using half blood or half-breed again?! It doesn't seem likely to me, and, given the family's desire to live in "the Old Way" it seems that using "Metis" would be part of that Old Way.  

Madda cuts the chips out of Cass and Paul's arms and they all leave the farm, headed to "The Island" which is "treaty lands" where "the Band" lives. Cass worries that the incisions will leave scars and mark them as outsiders to the Band. She thinks (p. 22):

[W]e'll both have scars. This is how they'll know where we came from when we get to the Island, that we weren't born there, that we weren't raised native. The Band might open its arms wide to us now, but they'll never, ever let us forget that we came from the Corridor first.

Debbie's comments: That is a very intriguing excerpt, and I wonder what it says about the author. On her website, she says that she recently learned that she is Metis. (Update: July 5 2016--the bio page has been edited and replaced with this one.) She was not raised Metis. Is she saying to us, by way of her protagonist, that First Nations people might open their arms to her but will never let her forget she was not raised Native? 

Debbie's comments: Learning that she wasn't raised Native and that she's recently been learning about her Metis heritage explains a great deal of what I find troublesome in the novel. It is sprinkled with things like dreamcatchers and totems (things embraced by people with scant knowledge of indigenous cultures) but the novel is also deeply laden with words and ideas that sound more like outsider perspective than insider perspective. One example is the half-blood/half-breed term used throughout. As the novel progresses, Cass is pitted against "supernaturals" who wish to harm her. Calling spirits---good or bad---"supernaturals" is outsider perspective. And, it isn't just Cass who uses that sort of language. The "full bloods" on the Island use it, too. 

To get to the Island, they have to pass through a boundary, or "the boundary." At one point in time, only Others could pass through it, bringing non-Others with them if they wanted to. Without an Other, the non-Others would be pushed away from the boundary. They'd never actually know about the boundary, though, because they'd attribute their movement to wind or water currents.

On the Island, Cass sees "full bloods" and whites, too.

Debbie's comments: On the Island, the men are depicted in derogatory ways. They drink. And there was a line that bothered me, too. On page 251, the text reads "Grace Eagleson is a drunk." Throughout, Grace (she's white) is depicted as being over-the-edge. She's obviously got problems, and while we are given some context for those problems, there's no compassion for her in the narrative. I know many people who struggle with alcohol, and while their family and friends grow frustrated in caring for them and lash out at times, there is compassion for them, or, at least a sadness, or, if someone does say "so and so is a drunk" there is a quality of shame or regret in having uttered that heartless statement. In one of the major review journals, the reviewer said that Alexie fans would recognize the characters in Shadows Cast By Stars, but I don't agree. When Alexie's Junior talks of his dad being "a drunk," he immediately follows that remark with how his dad never missed his games or concerts. Earlier, he says that his dad is a drunk and his mom is an ex-drunk but that they don't want their kids to be drunks. None of that sort of nuance or context occurs in SHADOWS around the alcoholism or other negative qualities of the Band. 

On the Island, there is a Longhouse at the heart of the community. When Cass, her brother, and her dad move into a house on the Island, Cass thinks about her mother (deceased):

...I can't help wondering what my mother would think of all this. She worked so hard to make sure we had a home at the Corridor. She didn't want me here. She wanted me in a place where I would have a future that didn't involve marrying a warrior and bearing him babies, a future that didn't condemn me to working my fingers to the bone and aging far before my time.

Debbie's comments: Her mom was white. She married a Metis. From what I read, she didn't work her fingers to the bone. Why did she think that she had to raise her children away from the Island? Was it due to the alcohol? Is this 'away from the Island/band' also part of the author's identity? 

At one point, one of the Native guys on the island says to Paul (p. 84):

"Whatever you say, apple."

Paul freezes. I can see he's fighting himself, that he wants to walk away, but he can't. Apple. Red on the outside, white on the inside. One of the worst insults an Other can throw.

Debbie's comments: I was pretty surprised to see Knutsson use 'apple' in her story. Alexie used it, too, in DIARY. Junior tells his white friend, Gordy, that people on the reservation called him an apple when he left the reservation school to attend the public school with the goal of becoming successful.  Her use of it signals to me that she's done some research on the tensions within Native communities.

As I read through the book, I kept waiting for the blood theme to develop, but it just went away as the story shifted to Cass struggling with the "supernaturals." I also waited for the Native peoples of the "five treaty territories" to enter the story. They're introduced on page 32. One is the Pueblos! So, obviously, being Pueblo, I wanted to see how Knutsson would present Pueblo people! But, she never does. 

As the story progresses from our introduction to Madda, we read that she is "a witching woman--a medicine woman..." (p. 113)

Debbie's comments: A witching woman?! So, Madda is speaking to Cass as though Cass has no knowledge of "the band's" ways? Again, I'm confused. All of the talk earlier of "the Old Way" and "traditions" doesn't quite match up with Cass's ignorance. And, I'm not convinced that Madda would call herself a witching woman anyway! Knuttson could have put a few more words into Madda's remark, saying something like "people who don't know our ways would call me a witching woman..."

In a dream, Cass sees Bran (her love interest) and Paul (her brother) talking. Bran takes out a hunting knife, "makes an incision in his forearm, right in the spot where a chip scar would be if he had one, and as blood wells up and drips onto the rock, he hands the blade to Paul, who embeds the point right into his chip scar. They press their forearms together, melding their blood, the water of their body" (p. 150).

Debbie's comments: Oh dear! Blood brothers?!

There's to be a gathering of the Band. Madda "wants to make a tea for the hangovers she'll have to treat tomorrow." Madda says: "Make sure you don't drink any of that firewater the Band brings tonight--horrible stuff" (p. 168).

Again---presentation of Indigenous people as being drunk... 

How to sum up?! Knutsson's book does not feel like a story written by an insider. It isn't the honest and contextualized portrayal of dysfunction that we saw in Alexie's book. Combined with the new age stereotypes, the superficial and derogatory ways in which Knuttson presents Indigenous people leaves me both outraged and sad. I'll be thinking about this book for some time... We need Native writers. Ones like Knutsson, who learn of their Native heritage as adults, could give us some much-needed stories, but dressed up in this sort of framework... it isn't working. 


Update: This blog post on Metis identity by Chelsea Vowel is very helpful (for those of you who want to know more about the Metis people).


Update, July 5, 2016

After Rowling's Magic in North America stories appeared, one of the conversations on social media was regarding speculative fiction by Native writers. Daniel Heath Justice (he's a citizen of the Cherokee Nation and is a professor in First Nations and Indigenous Studies at the University of British Columbia) has a list: A Sampling of Speculative Fiction by Indigenous Writers. It includes a few books I've reviewed as ones that can be read by, or are marketed to, young adults, like Shadows Cast by Stars. Specific to my questions about the term "half breed" Daniel wrote to me about it and suggested I take a look at Adam Gaudry's work. I've read some of his work before and look forward to spending more time with it. You can follow him on Twitter: @adamgaudry.

Rush Limbaugh's RUSH REVERE AND THE BRAVE PILGRIMS

Editor's Note, May 14, 2014 8:00 PM: Limbaugh won the Children's Book Council's 2014 Author of the Year Award.

Editor's Note, June 17, 2014, 5:08 AM: Yesterday, Rush Limbaugh made Teaching for Change and its Executive Director, Deborah Menkart, the targets of his venom. In his segment he derides her for not stocking his books. He says he has characters of color in his books that are "heroes." My review (below) illustrates that he created a Native character to fit his agenda. She is not a hero. His use of the word "diversity" is spurious. See Rush Limbaugh Calls Teaching for Change Racist for Promoting Diverse Children's Books

~~~~~

Rush Limbaugh's Rush Revere and the Brave Pilgrims
Review by Debbie Reese, March 23, 2014

Rush Limbaugh's book, Rush Revere and the Brave Pilgrims is a best seller. That status means he is on the Children's Book Council's (CBC) list of contenders for Author of the Year. People in children's literature were shocked when they saw his name on the list. Some suggested that the best selling status was not legitimate. The CBC responded with an open letter explaining why Limbaugh is on the list:

The Author of the Year and Illustrator of the Year finalists are determined solely based on titles’ performances on the bestseller lists – all titles in those categories are listed as a result of this protocol. Some of you have voiced concerns over the selection of finalists from bestseller lists, which you feel are potentially-manipulable indications of the success of a title. We can take this into consideration going forward, but cannot change our procedure for selecting finalists after the fact.  

The CBC letter goes on to say that children will choose the Author of the Year. Voting starts on March 25th. The CBC says that they have procedures in place to eliminate duplicate, fake, and adult votes.

Transcripts on Limbaugh's website state that his company, Two If By Tea, bought many copies of the book and sent them to schools. In this transcript of Limbaugh's conversation with a 10 year old girl from Cynthiana, Kentucky, she thanks him and Two If By Tea for sending books to her school. He asks how many books they got, and she replies "I think we got 60." He goes on to say "We sent like 10,000 or 15,000 books to schools as a charitable donation across the country." At the end of the transcript, he says they donated over 15,000 copies. Presumably, the other authors on the contender list for author of the year do not buy thousands of copies of their own books and donate them to schools.

Sales aside, what does the book actually say (I read an electronic copy of the book and cannot provide page numbers for the excerpts below)?

Limbaugh opens the book with "A Note from the Author" wherein he says that America is exceptional because "it is a land built on true freedom and individual liberty..." and that:

The sad reality is that since the beginning of time, most citizens of the world have not been free. For hundreds and thousands of years, many people in other civilizations and countries were servants to their kings, leaders, and government. It didn't matter how hard these people worked to improve their lives, because their lives were not their own. They often feared for their lives and could not get out from under a ruling class no matter how hard they tried. Many of these people lived and continue to live in extreme poverty, with no clean water, limited food, and none of the luxuries that we often take for granted. Many citizens in the world were punished, sometimes severely, for having their own ideas, beliefs, and hopes for a better future.

The United States of America is unique because it is the exception to all this. Our country is the first country ever to be founded on the principle that all human beings are created as free people. The Founders of this phenomenal country believed all people were born to be free as individuals. 

Nowhere in that note does he reference slavery of American Indians or African Americans in the United States, pre- or post-1777. The word "slave" does appear in his book, though, when his protagonist, "Rush Revere" and two students who time travel with him to 1621 meet Squanto. The two students are a white boy named Tommy and a Native American girl named Freedom.

When Limbaugh's Squanto speaks, he does so with perfect English. Why? Because, Squanto explains, he had been kidnapped and taken to Spain. He says that Bradford's God rescued him from slavery in Spain when Catholic friars helped him escape.

See that? Limbaugh tells us that Spain is one of those places where people could not be free. Slaves in the United States of America? Nope. Not according to Limbaugh. The way that he presents Squanto's enslavement fits with his exceptionalism narrative. How, I wonder, are parents and teachers dealing with that narrative? At Betsy Bird's blog with School Library Journal, Jill Dotter says (in a comment) she is a Libertarian, and that she bought Limbaugh's book for her son. He loves it. She doesn't note any problems with the book. I'll post a question and see what she says.

Squanto continues, saying that he shows his gratitude to Bradford's God by serving his "new friend and holy man, William Bradford." Limbaugh would have us believe that Squanto was loyal to Bradford. The facts are otherwise. Squanto was an opportunist who played one side against the other for his own benefit (see Debo, A History of the Indians of the United States; Jennings, The Founders of America, and Salisbury, Manitou and Providence: Indians and Europeans, 1500-1643.)

In the Prologue, Limbaugh introduces his readers to his buddy, "Rush Revere" who is a history teacher from the twenty-first century at a school where they hire only the "smartest and most educated" teachers. In Limbaugh's world, apparently, it is smart to completely ignore slavery as part of US history.

"Freedom"

Of interest to me is the character, Freedom, in Limbaugh's book. Mr. Revere loves her name. She has long black hair. One day she wears a blue feather, the next day she wears a yellow one. Other students don't like her, but Mr. Revere is intrigued by her. She has dark eyes and a determined stare. She speaks "from somewhere deep within." From her grandfather, she learned how to track animals. She and Mr. Revere's horse, Liberty, can read each other's minds. Liberty can also talk, which I gather from reviews, is what children like about the book. Freedom explains that he must be a spirit animal, that "there is an Indian legend about animals that can talk to humans." She wondered if Mr. Revere was "a great shaman" when she saw Revere and Liberty enter the time travel portal. (Note: Screen capture of Freedom added at 5:30 PM on 3/23/2014. Mr. Revere gazes at her hair, thinking "It was silky smooth, as if she brushed it a thousand times.")

What is behind Limbaugh's creation of a Native American girl named Freedom?

Later in the story, we learn that her mother (we never learn of a specific tribe for Freedom or her mother) named her Freedom because she was born on the fourth of July. Let's think about that for a minute. There are obvious factual errors in the book related to Limbaugh's presentation of slavery. With his character, Freedom, we see how fiction can be manipulated in the service of a particular ideology. Limbaugh is creating a modern day Native girl as someone who holds the same views as he does. Packed into, and around, his Native character are many stereotypes of Native peoples. Does he cast her in that way so that it isn't only White people who view history as he does?

I think so. He casts Squanto and Samoset that way, too.

As noted earlier, Squanto is in Limbaugh's book. So is "Somoset" (usually spelled Samoset). Both speak English. In the note at the end of the book, Limbaugh lists William Bradford, Myles Standish, William Brewster, Squanto, and Samoset (spelled right this time) as brave, courageous, ordinary people who accomplished extraordinary things. Remember how Limbaugh presented Squanto as "serving" Bradford?

Massasoit, who is also part of Limbaugh's story, is not amongst Limbaugh's list of brave and courageous people. Maybe because he spoke "gibberish" instead of English. There's more I could say about Limbaugh's depiction of Massasoit, but I'll set that aside for now. The point is, Limbaugh's book is a factual misrepresentation of history that Limbaugh is donating to schools. How are teachers using it? I think we ought to know.

I will not be surprised if Limbaugh wins the contest when kids vote. They seem to like the horse. Some people seem to think it doesn't matter what kids read, as long as they read. Others, of course, agree with Limbaugh's political views and, no doubt, pass those views on to their children.

As CBC's open letter indicates, they will be revising their criteria. With Limbaugh on the short list for Author of the Year, their credibility is suddenly in question. I had concerns with CBC prior to this when I saw books that stereotype American Indians on CBC Diversity's bookshelf at Goodreads. Amongst those books is Scott O'Dell's Island of the Blue Dolphins, which is one of the best selling children's books of all time. It is fraught with problems in the ways that O'Dell presents his Native character. I asked that it be removed, but that could not be done. As some have said, what I call a stereotype, someone else views as a role model.

Perhaps Limbaugh's book will push CBC to think more critically about the distinctions between quality, viewpoint, and quantity--especially as census data points to the rapid change in majority/minority statistics and the country tries to recognize all of its citizens.

Below are the notes I took as I read Limbaugh's book. I invite your  thoughts on the book, what I said about it, what I left unsaid... Please use the comment option below to submit your thoughts. And--another 'thank you' to K8 for giving me permission in January to post her excerpts/comments about Limbaugh's book.

~~~~~

Detailed notes I took as I read Rush Revere and the Brave Pilgrims; some are not part of the review but could use further study and analysis:

When chapter 1 opens, the principal is telling a classroom of honors history students that their teacher has to take leave. But, he reminds them, their school has the smartest and most educated teachers, and, well, Mr. Revere (remember, in this book, "Mr. Revere" is Rush Limbaugh), the substitute is among the smartest and most educated.

He starts some banter with the students, and notices a girl in the very last row, in the corner:

Her dark hair had a blue feather clipped in it. She wore jeans with a hole in one knee, but I could tell it wasn't a fashion statement. I looked at the seating chart and noticed the girl's name, Freedom. What an unusual name. Personally, I couldn't help but be a fan!

He brings his horse into the classroom. The students gather round, but Freedom hangs back, "unsure of whether she was welcome to join them in their new discovery." Another student, Elizabeth, tells her not to get too close, because the "horse might smell you and run away." Freedom goes back to her desk. Mr. Revere sets up a way for students to watch him and Liberty time travel, and takes off, heading to the portal. Just as he does that, he sees that he was being watched, by Freedom.

Mr. Revere talks with William Bradford and his wife, before they set off from the Netherlands. Revere returns to the present and asks the students what they think of Bradford choosing not to take his little boy on a "death-defying voyage across a tempestuous sea." Freedom, with "dark eyes" and a "determined stare" just like Bradford's, raises her hand and speaks "from somewhere deep within" saying

"I could tell they loved their son, more than anything. They only wanted what was best for him. It took courage for the Pilgrims to leave their homes and travel into the unknown. But it takes more courage to travel into the unknown and leave someone you love behind."

Chapter 3

Freedom and Tommy stay after class (Tommy got in trouble with the principal). Revere thinks Freedom stayed behind because she knows he's doing the time traveling. Liberty (the horse) seems to have disappeared, but Freedom says:

"Liberty, he's still in the room," she calmly said. "I can smell him."

Revere thinks Freedom has a gift. Revere decides to tell Freedom and Tommy that Liberty can make himself invisible, but Freedom says he doesn't disappear, that he just blends into his surroundings. Revere wonders why Freedom could see him, and she says

"I've had lots of practice tracking animals with my grandfather."

Because Liberty can talk, Freedom says:

"he is more than a horse. He must be a spirit animal. There is an Indian legend about animals that can talk to humans."

Revere asks Freedom if she saw he and Liberty jump through the time machine portal earlier that day, and she says:

"Yes, I did. At first I wasn't sure what I saw. As I said, I though Liberty must have been a spirit animal. Maybe you were a great shaman. i did not know. But I'm glad to know the truth."

She leaves, and Tommy and Rush ride Liberty back in time to the Mayflower where they meet Myles Standish. When it is time to leave, Liberty is sleeping. They wake him with an apple and he asks if he missed anything important:

"Nothing too important," I said, still feeding him apples. "But it's time to jump forward to the end of the Mayflower voyage. There's a new land to discover! There are Indians to befriend and a new colony to build. And a celebration to be had called Thanksgiving!

When the ship captain tells them they're going to land at Cape Cod, Tommy wonders if Indians will be in the woods. Myles Standish says:

"Yes, probably Indians," Myles said. "We will do what we must to protect ourselves. We have swords and muskets and cannons if need be."

Chapter 6

Tommy and Revere and Liberty return to the  classroom where Tommy tells the principal all he's learning from Revere. The next day, Tommy and Freedom are waiting for Revere at school:

She was wearing a faded yellow T-shirt and faded jeans. It was hard not look at her black hair. It was silky smooth, as if she brushed it a thousand times. This morning there was a yellow feather clpped in it.

She wants to time travel with them. Revere has winter clothes for her and Tommy because the trip will be to wintertime. Freedom says "I'm a wimp when it comes to the snow." Earlier in the book, Freedom and Liberty started talking to each other without speaking. They can hear each other's thoughts. Tommy asks about it. Revere says:

It's apparent that Freedom has a gift. How long have you been able to communicate with animals?"

"Since I was eight, I think," said Freedom. "My grandfather says that animals can feel what we feel, especially fear. Our emotions are powerful. He trained me to use emotions to speak to the mind of an animal."

Before they leave, Revere tells them it will be cold, and that the Pilgrims were "even attacked by Indians." Freedom replies by talking about the cold, and Tommy says:

"Wait," Tommy said wide-eyed. "Did you say they were attacked by Indians? I thought the Indians were their friends. How many Pilgrims died?"

Rush tells him that none died, and that "friendly Indians" came later. Liberty says he hopes they had friendly horses, too. Elizabeth (another student who happens to be the principal's daughter) shows up. Her and Freedom get into a fight when Elizabeth takes a photo of Freedom dressed as a Pilgrim and says she's going to share it. Elizabeth storms off.

Revere asks Freedom if she can ride a horse. She sprints up to, and jumps up onto Liberty's back. They travel to 1620, Plymouth Plantation. Revere approaches Bradford and Standish, telling them that he and Tommy had been out exploring and

"were fortunate to come across a young Native American girl riding a horse. Strange, I know. But the girl took a liking to us and helped us find our way back to you!"

Bradford tells Revere that Myles and his men had survived an Indian attack, that Mrs. Standish had died, and many others are sick. He also says they found a place to build their town

"When we arrived we found barren cornfields with the land strangely cleared for our homes."

Revere asks if someone once lived there, and Bradford says "Perhaps" but that it has been deserted for years. They talk of building a fort. Revere says he remembers building forts in his living room, using blankets and chairs, and using Nerf guns to keep out his annoying little sisters. Smiling, Standish says those guns probably wouldn't be effective for "savage Indians."

Revere heads off up a hill. Tommy and Freedom approach, on Liberty. Tommy says "We saw Indians!" and Rush asks 'what' and 'where' and 'how many.'

Freedom says there were two scouts, watching, and that they wore heavy pelts and furs and were only curious. They time travel to 1621.

Chapter 7

They arrive in 1621 and see a deer nearby. Tommy asks Freedom if she can talk to it. She stares intently at it, and it approaches then. She walked over to it. All around them are tree stumps. The Pilgrims had cut down trees to make their homes. In the Pilgrim town they meet up with Bradford. Revere introduces Freedom:

"This is Freedom," I said. "We've spent the last couple of months teaching Freedom the English language. She's an exceptional learner."

She replies:

"Thank you," said Freedom slowly. "Please excuse my grammar as I have only just learned to speak your language. I was born on the fourth of July, so my mother felt like it was the perfect name for a special day."

Bradford asks what the significance of that day is, and Freedom realizes the Pilgrims don't know about that day yet. Before Revere or Freedom can come up with an explanation, a bell rings. The bell means Indians. Bradford points to a lone Indian walking towards a brook by the Pilgrim settlement. Bradford tells the men not to shoot:

"Do not fire our muskets! The Indian walks boldly but he does not look hostile. He is only one and we are many. There is no need to fear. God is with us."

The Indian man has black hair and no facial fair, but

the biggest difference was the fact that the Indian was practically naked. A piece of leather covered his waist but his legs and chest were bare.

He approached the group, smiled, saluted, and said "Welcome, Englishmen!" The wind catches his hair. He surveys the group and sees Freedom's hair moving in the wind, too. He stares at her for a minute and then talks to Bradford, saying "Me, Somoset, friend to Englishmen." Bradford asks how he learned English, and he replies

"Me learn English from fishing men who come for cod" 

and then tells them that the harbor is called Patuxet. He says

"Death come to this harbor. Great sickness. Much plague. Many Pokanokets die. No more to live here."

Bradford asks if it was the plague, and Somoset replies

"Yes," said Somoset. "Many, many die. Much sadness. And you. Your people. Much die from cold and sickness. Massasoit knows. Waiting. Watching."

Bradford asks who Massasoit is:

"Massasoit great and powerful leader of this land. He watching you. He knows your people dying. He lives south and west in place called Pokanoket. Two-day journey."

Bradford asks Somoset to let Massasoit know that they (Pilgrims) are his friends. Standish says they have guns, bullets, armor, and cannons, and that they "are here to stay" and hope they can be friends. Samoset says

"Me tell Massasoit. Bring Squanto. He speak better English."

Standish asks who Squanto is, and Samoset says

"Squanto translate for Massasoit. Squanto speak like English man. Help Massasoit and William Bradford together in peace."

Liberty and Revere marvel at what just happened. Liberty wonders about trust, and Revere says Liberty watches too many movies, and that Bradford relied on God's grace to protect them in rough waters and was doing it now, too. Tommy and Freedom offer Somoset a plate of food. Before he takes it,

he reached out to touch the yellow feather in her hair.

She takes it off and offers it to him. He leans toward her and she clips it in his hair. Bradford and Standish wonder if it is safe for him to stay with them overnight. They ask Revere for advice and he tells them that they can't afford to offend Massasoit, and so they agree to let him stay the night. Tommy wonders if Somoset is trustworthy, and Revere tells him that, from everything he'd read, Somoset and Squanto became friends with William, that they realized they could help each other.

Revere, Tommy, Freedom and Liberty are hungry, so time travel to a 50s diner. As they eat, Freedom talks about how hard Pilgrim life was, and Revere tells them that many Pilgrims starved. They return to 1621.

The bell rings and they see five Indians approaching the settlement, led by Somoset, still wearing the yellow father. Squanto steps forward:

"I am Squanto," he said. "I used to live here in Patuxet Harbor. That was many years ago. I've been sent by Massasoit, the sachem and leader of this land. He permits me to come and speak with you. He will come soon. He is eager to meet you."

Bradford asks why his English is so good.

The ease in which Squanto spoke English was unnerving. It didn't seem natural. And yet he was a perfect gentleman as he stood there in his leather loincloth and bare chest.

He doesn't answer, instead talking about sharing of food, and friendship. Somoset gets ready to leave, but before he does, he looks around for Freedom and then gifs her a leather strap with a bear claw attached to it.

Samoset leaves, and Freedom asks Squanto why he and his people left Patuxet Harbor. He replies

"I have heard about the girl they call Freedom," said Squanto. "The girl with midnight hair who speaks perfect English."

She blushes, and, he tells her:

"Seven years ago, I was kidnapped and taken from Patuxet Harbor, never to see my family or loved ones again. I was put on a ship and sailed across the ocean to a new world called Spain. Eventually I sailed to England and learned to speak like you do. Finally I had the chance to travel back to my homeland. I was eager to see my family, my parents and brothers and sisters. But when I returned, there was nothing. Everyone was gone. I soon learned that the plague, a great sickness, had swept over Patuxet Harbor and killed my people."

He pauses, looking into the distance. Freedom and William express condolences. Squanto blinks and a tear rolls down his cheek. He tells them they are kind, and that many of their people died, too, and that the place has "great sorrow" for both Indian and Englishman. But together, he says, they will change that. He will show them how to plant corn.

Revere, Tommy, Freedom, and Liberty travel back to the school where, he thinks, Elizabeth is like Massasoit, that she is "the leader or sachem" of the school, and that students revered or feared her. She watched and waited for signs of weakness in her classmates, or any opportunity to send a message that she was in control of the school. Tommy approaches Revere with a letter that Bradford wanted him to give to Revere. It is an invitation to the "very first Thanksgiving! What an honor!"

Revere, Tommy, Freedom, and Liberty go the the first Thanksgiving. Freedom says "Look at all the Indians." Bradford introduces Revere to "the Indian king, Massasoit" who smiled "and spoke a language that was complete gibberish."

Squanto tells Revere he has a gift for Freedom, and asks permission to give it to her. Revere says it is fine, and that Squanto has been a good friend to Bradford. Bradford says they learned a lot from Squanto, and that

"We believe he's been sent from God as an instrument to help us grow and prosper."

"You are too kind, William," said Squanto. "God, as you say, rescued me from slavery in Spain. The Catholic friars, holy men, helped me escape. They risked their lives to free me so that I could return to my native land. I have much to be grateful for. And I choose to show my gratitude by serving my new friend and holy man, William Bradford."

Later, Revere hears loud shrieks and pounding drums

I turned to see Indians dancing around a fire ring, their faces streaked with paint. Both Indians and Pilgrims smiled as they watched the performing Pokanokets twirl and bend and wave their arms as they sang and chanted to the drums.

They stopped after a while and other Indians whooped and hollered for more. Revere finds Tommy and Freedom. She is wearing a

deerskin dress trimmed with fur and matching moccasins. She also wore a necklace of shimmering shells and two hawklike feathers in her hair.

She tells Revere that Squanto gave her the dress and that

"He said I should be proud of who I am and that I shouldn't care what people think of me. He knows a lot."

The book closes with a note from the author, where Limbaugh writes that Bradford, Standish, Brewster, Squanto, and Samoset were brave and courageous ordinary people who accomplished extraordinary things.

Some thoughts on the use of the word "tribe" by teachers and schools...

Eds. note on Sunday, Sept 9, 2018: Many people responded to the thread I started on Sept. 7. Several asked if I knew about the Tribes Learning Community program. That question prompted me to add to the thread. I am adding the additional tweets as an update at the bottom of the post, along with a summary of some of the responses.

_____

"Some thoughts on the use of the word "tribe" by teachers and schools..."
September 7, 2018

Below is a thread I did on Twitter this morning. I used the spool app to compile the individual tweets so I could paste them here.

A conversation is taking place on Twitter, where some teachers are asking other teachers not to use "tribe" to describe their classrooms of students. 

Some people are trying to push back on those asking that it not be done. They are pointing to dictionary definitions of the word (tribe) to say that it does not mean only Native people--that it has roots elsewhere. 

That's true. The word 'tribe' is not an Indigenous word. It is used to describe many other nations/peoples around the world. But--we are talking about the US. Here, that is precisely what it evokes. 

And one need only do some google image searching to see that teachers are definitely using their ideas of Indigenous people to create classroom materials for their "tribe" of kids. (I did the red x overlay to indicate NOPE.)

Here's another one (and again, I added the red x):

And here's another! I could do this all day long. If you are a teacher, please reconsider. This is a new-ish fad, but like many fads, it is harmful. Don't do it!

I took a look at the site "Teachers Pay Teachers" and found many similar problematic ideas there. "Create a tribe" is one. It is like the too-many "what is your Indian name" activities that are everywhere. They draw on stereotypes. 

When you do these kinds of activities, teachers, you are introducing and/or affirming stereotypes. Remember! You're a teacher and you have a responsibility to educate children. Stereotypes do not educate! They misinform! 

Librarians: when you do these kinds of activities in your libraries, you are also misinforming children. 

Writers/illustrators: when you use stereotypes in your books for kids, you contribute to this problem. Case in point: Lane Smith's picture book, THERE IS A TRIBE OF KIDS, and kids in it shown like this: (…ansinchildrensliterature.blogspot.com/2016/07/lane-s…)

Bottom line: there's too many ways this can--will--and DOES go wrong in a society that knows so very little about Indigenous people and our nations. I recommend you step away from using "tribe" to describe your classrooms.

Update on September 9, 2018:

Picking up on my thread yesterday about teachers using "tribe" to refer to their classrooms.... Several people have written to ask me about the pre-packaged "Tribes Learning Community" and its use of "tribes". 

I gather it was created in the 1970s by Jeanne Gibbs and that its goal is to create classrooms where there was an emphasis on positive environments in the school and classroom. As the project was being developed, someone said "We feel like a family... we feel like a tribe."

Gibbs and all those involved in the development and implementation of this "Tribes Learning Community" meant well. But I wonder--given the length of time it has been in use--if any of the teachers using it had a Native child in the classroom? 

If one of my daughter's teachers had been using it, I would have had a meeting with the teacher. I support efforts to foster a positive environment (I was a classroom teacher, too), but there's no need to use "tribe" to do it. 

When I started this thread yesterday, I shared a few images of how "Tribes" materials look. A lot of those materials reference the Tribes Learning Community. Gibbs and her team are probably not monitoring the kinds of materials teachers use when they adopt Gibbs's program. 

But Gibbs and her team -- however -- are aware that some question its use. One of their trainers is Ron Patrick. On her website, Gibbs has a letter written by him, defending the use of the word. 

Correction: it isn't a letter. It is a statement 'Why the Name "Tribes"'. In it he says his tribe is Eastern Band of Cherokee. In his signature line, he used a phrase I associate with Navajo people (May you walk in Beauty). That's a bit odd, to me. 

Also on Gibbs's website is a pdf "What Tribes Are and How They Work" that opens with this:

"A Native American teacher, Paula Swift Robin, is talking with four other teachers at a conference in eastern Washington."

Let's look at that sentence, critically. 

Why did TLC start with that particular person? With that particular name? I think they are using that person and her identity to protect them from being questioned. 

Now let's look at how they described her, as a "Native American." Is Paula Swift Robin a real person? If so, what is her nation? Does Gibbs know that Native people prefer to be identified by their specific nation? 

Gibbs writes that the Tribes Learning Community is used in Native schools. There's a comment from a person in one, in Ontario, but I don't think she is Native. If you are Native and it is used in your child's school, what have you seen? 

Given that the Tribes Learning Community emphasizes listening and positive classroom environments, I wonder if there's anything in any of their books about stereotyping of Native people? Do they help teachers with any of that? 

I can see parts of REACHING ALL BY CREATING TRIBES LEARNING COMMUNITIES online. It has a "Matrix for Achieving Equity in Classrooms." Columns include linguistic bias, stereotyping, invisibility/exclusion. But

... there's a reference to having a "council meeting" where students can make presentations. A council meeting? Hmm...

On page 140 of the book is a:

"Step by Step Process for Group Problem Solving. 1) Ask the tribes to discuss how they feel about people spraying paint on the wall of the school." 

The "tribes" discuss & then "tribe by tribe" they vote on a solution. 

Are there more than one tribe in any given classroom? Or is this example one where all the 3rd grade classrooms (for example) are participating? How does the person managing all of this designate a particular "tribe"? Is it by teacher name? 

If you have the book, can you share (in a reply, here) how tribes are delineated?

Summary of responses:

One parent said that her child's classroom has a "tribes agreement" and asks if it is part of the Learning Communities program. It is a key component. She also says that arrows, dreamcatchers, and teepees are everywhere. She plans to speak to the principle and is optimistic. 

Many people asked about other words they could use. Others responded, suggesting team, squad, house, and family. In daughter's middle school they used "pathfinders" and "navigators" which I liked ok because they're about action and don't default to imagery that has problematic stereotyping associated with them. 

A parallel conversation evolved about the use of "spirit animal." I've written about that before: What is wrong with Buzzfeed's WHAT IS YOUR SPIRIT ANIMAL and Neal Shusterman's UNWIND dystology. 

Some raised questions over other problematic phrases. I've been working on a list of them, here: Common phrases. 

Some are working hard to understand why it is a problem. They see or use the word to describe their (or a friend's) classroom. I appreciate that they're trying to understand. They strike me as receptive to critical thinking. Others are resistant. They assert that they (or their children) are "part Native American" and think that carries weight. A claim to being "part Native American" is used as a defense of mascots, too. These are well-meaning but ignorant and ultimately, harmful to education. 

Tlingit Elder's Comments on Ben Mikaelsen's TOUCHING SPIRIT BEAR: "I can just picture Tlingit kids being very, very embarrassed."

Eds. note: These comments about Mikaelson's Touching Spirit Bear were submitted to American Indians in Children's Literature by Tlingit elder, Eileen Baustian. 

To me, the first thing that comes to mind is embarrassment. When the banishing incident happened in 1993, two teenage Tlingit boys were taken to Klawock, Alaska, by Rudy James, who claimed to be a tribal judge. The whole tribe felt embarrassed by his misrepresentation of our tribal customs. And then to have this book, which was obviously based on this incident, just felt insulting. I just know that Mikaelsen flat-out copied this event for his book. I felt that it was totally bizarre that Mikaelsen would use this incident, even though he denies it.

I really have a hard time, I don’t know how to express what we feel about words, about using words like “at.oow,” which is special regalia. It’s not just a blanket, it’s spirit. It’s the clan’s property. It would never, ever have happened that this kid would be given at.oow. This Tlingit probation officer could not have handed over at.oow. Mikaelsen’s use of that word it implies an understanding and yet the context is inappropriate; it just couldn’t have happened that way. I don’t feel Mikaelsen had the right to use the word without understanding how at.oow is used.

The animal dances, the ancestor rock, the anger rock, the anger stick, I don’t even have any words for this. I kept thinking, where did he come up with this? I can’t even imagine any of these rituals happening today. And the animal-impersonation dances: I thought I’d die. Even if these things all existed, this is a white boy from Minnesota. How would he know how Tlingits move when we dance?

It’s interesting that Mikaelsen says that the Tlingit culture was peripheral to the story, so he didn’t feel he needed to delve into cultural aspects in great depth. But he did go into cultural aspects in great depth; he just made them up. He says that his book was shared with a “First Nation [sic] spiritual leader,” but who is this unnamed spiritual person? Is she/he Tlingit? Does she/he have permission to advise non-Indians about Tlingit culture and ritual?

I can just picture non-Native kids reading this book and thinking they understand Tlingit culture. I can just picture teachers using the “Tlingit culture” in this book as a springboard for cross-cultural exercises. And I can just picture Tlingit kids being very, very embarrassed. 

Eileen Baustian

Elder

Eagle/Shark Clan, Tlingit

Dovie Thomason: Lakota/Kiowa-Apache Storyteller

I spent much of yesterday with Dovie Thomason. She was at UIUC's Spurlock Museum for it's annual storytelling event.

I'd be willing to bet that most people---when they think of Native stories---think of stories about animals. That isn't a bad thing, but it isn't the only kind of story Native people tell.

Recently, Dovie is telling a very different story.

You can get her Lessons from the Animal People, or her Fireside Tales: More Lessons from the Animal People, or Wopila, a Giveaway: Lakota Stories from Oyate.

You can invite her to your school, or your college, or city, or performing arts center, to tell the stories of the Animal People.

But, consider inviting her to tell the story she told here yesterday: The Spirit Survives: The Boarding School Experience, Then and Now.

As she started, she said "There are some stories you don't want to tell your children. And, there are some you have to."

The story she's telling is among the too-many dark episodes in U.S. history about the ways this country has treated American Indians... It is among the stories that are completely left out of textbooks used in elementary or high school.

It is about Carlisle Indian Industrial School, established in 1879. The school was designed to "Kill the Indian, Save the Man." In her story, she talks about being at Carlisle a few years ago, with her daughter, standing in the cemetery, reading the headstones there. Headstones of children who were at that school.

To get in touch with Dovie, write to her at this address:
Dovie Thomason
P.O. Box 6351
Harrisburg, PA 17112
.

A reader wrote to me to ask about a line in DEAR MARTIN, by Nic Stone

Update on Thursday, April 19, 2018: Nic Stone is working with her editor on that line. AICL thanks the reader who wrote to us, and, Nic Stone, too, for her understanding! 

Have you read Nic Stone's Dear Martin? Published in 2017 by Random House, it got favorable reviews, including a starred review from Booklist.

I haven't read it yet, but last week, I got an email from a Native reader who had started reading it. When she got to page 22, she was struck--not in a good way--by a class discussion the characters in the "Societal Evolution" class are having. The main character is Justyce McAllister, a 17 year old senior. He's a scholarship student at Braselton Preparatory Academy in Atlanta, Georgia. He's one of eight black students at the school.

Chapter three opens with Justyce walking into Societal Evolution class. The teacher ("Doc") writes "all men are created equal" on the digital chalkboard. He asks the class about the origin of those words. Jared says it is from the Declaration of Independence.

Here's the dialog. Earlier, we read that SJ is Sarah-Jane Friedman, who has been Justyce's debate partner since they were sophomores. She's likely to be the valedictorian (page 21-22):

Doc: Now, when we use our twenty-first-century minds to examine the quote within its historical context, something about it isn't right. Can you explain what I mean? 

Everyone: [Crickets]

Doc: Oh, come on, y'all. You don't see anything odd about these guys in particular making a statement about the inherent "equality" of men?

SJ: Well, these were the same guys who killed off the indigenous peoples and owned slaves. 

Doc: Indeed they were.

Jared: But it was different then. Neither slaves nor Indians--

Justyce: Native Americans or American Indians if you can't name the tribe, homie.

Jared: Whatever. Point is, neither were really considered "men."

Doc: That's exactly my point, Mr. Christensen. So here's the question: What does the obvious change in the application of this phrase from 1776 to now tell us about how our society has evolved?

[Extended pause as he adds the question to the digital chalkboard beneath the quote, then the scrape of a chair as he takes his regular seat in the circle.]

Jared: Well, for one, people of African descent are obviously included in the application of the quote now. So are "Native American Indians." 

Justyce: [Clenches jaw.]

It is SJ's comment that the Native reader wrote to me about. Let's look at it:

"Well, these were the same guys who killed off the indigenous peoples and owned slaves."

If you're a regular reader of AICL, you likely know why that line is a problem for a Native reader. Today, too many people think that all of us were "killed off" and that we no longer exist. That line reflects that idea--but it isn't true. We're still here.

As the conversation continues, Justyce corrects Jared's use of "Indians." That's great! Though I haven't read the book yet, it seems to me that Jared is a character who is meant to signify resistance to social change. That's reflected in the author's use of italics to emphasize Jared's use of "Native American Indians" in his reply to Doc.

Several writers have asked their publishers to make small changes to future printings of their books. In particular, those are instances in which an author used "low man on the totem pole" or "spirit animal." Their publishers agreed to their request.

Jared's comment that people of African descent and Native peoples are "obviously" included in "all men are created equal" might be how Stone intended for readers to understand that we're still here, but I don't think it is explicit enough to have readers move away from the vanished Indian idea.

In that conversation, Justyce corrected Jason. In future printings of Dear Martin, I think Stone could use Justyce to correct what SJ said, too. Or, she could modify what SJ says. What do you think? What kind of edits could be made?

K8's Notes on RUSH REVERE AND THE BRAVE PILGRIMS

Recently, a teacher wrote to ask if I'd reviewed Rush Limbaugh's Rush Revere and the Brave Pilgrims. I haven't reviewed it, but I do know about it. And, this morning in my email cue, there was one from Goodreads. Once a week I get an email telling me what people I follow have read or reviewed. Today's email included what K8 said about the book. With her permission, I'm sharing some of what she wrote about Native content in the book.

There is a character in Rush Revere and the Brave Pilgrims named Freedom. Though he apparently does not identify her as being Native, what he says tells us that she is.  From K8's post at Goodreads:

On page 117:

It was hard not to look at her black hair. It was silky smooth, as if she brushed it a thousand times. This morning there was a yellow feather clipped in it.

Earlier, when we first meet Freedom, on p. 39

Freedom smiled and replied, "I've had lots of practice tracking animals with my grandfather."

On page 59:

"I like him, too," said Freedom. "But he is more than a horse. He must be a spirit animal. There is an Indian legend about animals that can talk to humans."

On page 146 is Samoset, saying:

"Me learn English from fishing men who come for cod."

On page 190 when Rush meets Massasoit:

"He smiled and spoke a language that was complete gibberish."

Why bother, you might be thinking, with Limbaugh's book? Well--because one person wrote to ask me about it, and I assume there are others out there who wonder about it, too.

Another reason?

Take a look at the rating at Goodreads and at Amazon. Four and five stars?! While it would be tempting to just turn away, I think we have to pay attention to what people embrace and give to their kids. Describing a Native language as "gibberish" and attending to a Native girl's hair as he does tells me that kids are getting a very narrow--and frightening--view of Native people.

Tim Kessler's WHEN GOD MADE THE DAKOTAS

[Note: This review is used by permission of its authors. It may not be published elsewhere without written permission from the authors.]

_______________________________

Kessler, Tim, When God Made the Dakotas, illustrated by Paul Morin. Eerdmans Books for Young Readers, 2006. Unpaginated, color illustrations, grades 2-4, Dakota

Published by a Christian book house and written and illustrated by cultural outsiders, When God Made the Dakotas is a mishmash of Christian creation mythology and invented Dakota cosmology, replete with misplaced Dakota symbols and words (some of which are misspelled).

According to the jacket copy, “Tim Kessler’s creation story, framed as a Native American legend, reminds readers to find beauty and joy in what surrounds them.” In order to create a picture book about the Dakota landscape, one wonders why it was seen as necessary to make up a creation story about the Dakota people, since we’ve already got our own.

After Wakantanka/Great Spirit/Creator has made the rest of the world, he arrives at the world’s edge, where he is greeted by a Dakota medicine man named Woksape (wisdom). After each request from Woksape about what kind of land he wishes for the Dakota people, Wakantanka answers that he has already given that land to someone else. Finally, Woksape says he will take what’s left and Wakantanka, pleased with the medicine man’s humility, fashions for the Dakota people the wondrous Dakota land.

The depiction of Wakantanka as an elderly Indian guy—with white hair, face paint, and three goose feathers stuck in his hair—is more reflective of the Judeo-Christian ethos than it is to ours. In the belief system to which the author apparently ascribes, God is said to have created man in his own image. In our belief system, however, the Creator’s presence is manifest in all things, and does not appear simply in human form.

Further, no informed Dakota would give the Creator a detailed description of what kind of land he’d like his people to inhabit; this would be an insult to the Creator. To us, all creation is beautiful and a great mystery. From the beginning, we have developed a complex, symbiotic and reverent relationship with the land. We are not above the earth but are a part of it and our belief in creation and by extension our Creator stresses this relationship.

There are many other troubling aspects to this book. Here, Dakota people have to settle for the prairies that pale in comparison to the abundant lands that have already been given away. (Kessler’s God acts much like the white men in this way). This seems to diminish both the austere beauty and abundance of the plains, and the importance of the Dakota people. And, by the way, the Dakota live mostly in the woodlands further east. It is the Lakota who inhabit the plains.

That one “medicine man” speaks for a nation is not reflective of the Native value for the collective participation of the group, and of the respected elders, men and women, within the tribe. Finally, a promise by God that the plains will be forever pristine and depopulated belies the white people’s past and present economic and environmental roles in dramatically altering the face of the land to make it uninhabitable for humans, the buffalo and other living beings.

And when in the scheme of creation is this story supposed to have taken place? It seems odd, for example, that the Creator would have created the Pendleton blankets upon which the two are sitting before “he” finished creating the world. “He” creates Tatanka, the buffalo, out of his medicine bag; he creates Maga, the goose, out of two goose feathers. Which came first, something made out of animal hide, or the animal itself? Which came first, the feathers or the geese? It would seem pretty strange in a Christian creation story for God to apologize to Adam for not having enough material to fashion Eden to Adam’s specifications. Why, then, is it seen as acceptable for Wakantanka/Creator/Great Spirit to continually apologize to Woksape?

That this may be “only a children’s book” is where the most damage lies. Who, if not the children, are we more responsible to for instilling honest representations of peoples, an informed respect for the land, and an understanding that man’s heavy hand has much to do with both? If Kessler wanted to extol the beauty of the plains, he could have written what he knows, perhaps about the plains ecosystems, for he certainly doesn’t know the people.

Since everything else of ours has already been stolen, we could at least be left our creation stories. The final page of When God Made the Dakotas closes with the summation, “And it was good.” Pity that from this indigenous perspective, I can close only with the simple conclusion, “No, it is bad.”

---Janeen Antoine (Sicangu Lakota), with Beverly Slapin, Oyate

HOW TO WRITE A DYSTOPIAN YOUNG ADULT NOVEL (or short story) WITH NATIVE CHARACTERS FOR FUN AND PROFIT, by Kim Shuck and Beverly Slapin

Editor's Note: Kim Shuck and Beverly Slapin submitted this satirical "how to" piece in response to my review of Neal Shusterman and Michelle Knowlden's short story, Unstrung. Shusterman responded to that review (see point 13 below). I am currently working on a review of the first three books in Shusterman's series. 

 HOW TO WRITE A DYSTOPIAN YOUNG ADULT NOVEL (or short story)

WITH NATIVE CHARACTERS FOR FUN AND PROFIT

by Kim Shuck and Beverly Slapin

1. Strive to know nothing about the real lives and histories of Native peoples. Knowing is counterproductive and can be used against you if you accidentally let something real slip in. Do not do any research at all. That way, your tribe will be a genuine object of your invention, and no one will be able to accuse you of cultural appropriation. 
2. Invent a tribe. Give it a name that sounds kind of sort of like an Indian word. Or forget it—don’t give your tribe an actual name. Rather, refer to your tribe in a way that relates to a well-known stereotype. “People of Chance,” as an example, works well, because it will remind readers of casinos and how wealthy Indian people are. If you’re a little unsure, feel free to work in a backstory about gaming and skilled tribal lawyers.
3. Write as though your invented tribe is just like any other transplanted culture with the exception of periodic decorative localized mythology. There should be no long memory stories of things that have happened where your tribe lives. Rather, for instance, you might go on and on about your tribe’s ostentatious show of material wealth—curbs that “gleam with gold,” an abundance of luxury cars, “gold plaques embedded in the adobe walls” and everyone wearing business suits “finer than the best designer fashions.”
4. Assign at least some of your tribal characters names that sound vaguely “Indian.” To do that, make sure that the names contain lots of vowels; something like “Chowilawu” might be a good example. Don’t worry that someone might think the names of your Indian characters mean something. They don’t have to—they’re Indian.
5. Describe your tribal characters as having small but important Indian mannerisms. For example, make sure that at least one of your Indian characters sits cross-legged on an animal skin. That will remind readers of the good times in kindergarten when they were instructed to sit “Indian style” for long periods of time.
6. Make sure that the main character (preferably white and male) bonds with a member of your invented culture. Your Indian character need not be developed in any sense, because his only purpose is to teach your main character a major life lesson, after which he expires or goes back to whatever mystical land he comes from. Feel free to use this Native mentor in the style of any of the old tropes: Black nanny, Asian martial arts master, or supernaturally animated Indian doll who lives in a cupboard.
7. Create new racial slurs to take the place of discredited old ones. “Redskins,” for instance, would be totally last century for a dystopian story. Try something like “slot monger,” or something else that you can make sound vaguely sexual, yet have a backstory that creates deniability.
8. Put the power in the hands of your invented culture. Make sure that some of the members of your tribe express xenophobic opinions, such as referring to other tribes as “Low-Rez.” This will make the point that xenophobia is logical when it exists in empowered communities.
9. Because there is no cultural attribution, feel free to use whatever stereotype or debunked expectation you may envision. It’s totally appropriate in this case to evoke offensively weird stories as long as you don’t name your tribe. For instance, you can have characters in your tribe hunting for a male mountain lion in order to transplant his heart into a dying Native elder for whom this animal is his “spirit guide.”
10. Make sure to work in tropes that are pseudo-spiritual-cultural givens for your tribe: spirit animals and vision quests, for instance. And, above all, make sure that your main Native character, despite—or because of—his otherworldly psychic gifts, gets killed off.
11. Now, take out your checklist. Invented tribe—check. No real reference to land, language, culture, community–check. No history or memory stories—check. No Indigenous meaning to names or anything else—check. Stereotypical mannerisms—check. Trope-type mentor—check. New racial slur to replace old ones—check. Xenophobic power—check. Offensively weird rituals—check. More tropes—check. Main Native character gets killed off—check.
12. Done! Now sit back and collect your starred reviews for creating a multicultural dystopian novel with mystical Indian characters whose only raison d’etre is to interact with a white hero in a mentor role worthy of inclusion in a 1950s flick.
13. On the off chance that you are criticized for inaccuracy, cultural appropriation, racism, or just plain abysmal writing, make sure to respond immediately—preferably with a vague reference to political correctness, reverse racism and/or the humorless nature of the critic. Mention how sensitive you tried to be. Use the phrase “considered carefully” to insure that everyone understands how hard you worked at appropriate representation. You can always fall back on the fact that you invented your tribe and therefore are immune to criticism, but it is worth trying to put the reviewer on the defensive—especially if the reviewer happens to be Native and has worked in the area of American Indians in children’s literature for many years.

—Kim Shuck and Beverly Slapin

(We would like to acknowledge Neal Shusterman and Michelle Knowlden—and the many other authors of “children’s books about Indians” [you know who you are]—without whose important research and writing these helpful hints would not have been possible. Wado, y’all!)