The other piece we discussed in class was "Poor Sarah." I do not think that Boudinot wrote the story because I feel the overall tone of the story is from a woman's perspective and voice. However, I do think that it is significant that Boudinot elected to publish this work. Because of what we've previously discussed about Boudinot, I think he selected the piece because on some personal level, he identified with Sarah, wanting so badly to be accepted by whites. I also think that Boudinot selected the story because he believed there was wide appeal to a white Audience. It portrayed Indians in a deeply sympathetic light and showed that Indians can be just as, if not more pious and understanding that white Christians. This is why I think Boudinot selected this piece for a white audience. However, as evidenced by our class discussion, there are a number of ways to interpret the intention and effect of the piece. I understand why Boudinot would have chosen the piece for a white audience, but I cannot imagine being a native reading the piece and feeling good about it's message. In fact, reading it as a native, would have a completely opposite meaning to that of a white reader. Rather than encouraging Christian conversion, it would serve more as a cautionary tale to resist white influence.
Friday, February 19, 2010
Old Lady Week
I found the Greg Sarris piece, "The Woman Who Loved a Snake" extremely thought provoking. in particular, it made me reconsider how I was approaching the readings we are doing in class. It also really solidified the issues that arise when we read select texts and learn portions of a particular culture. It's easy to fall into the mindset that you think you have a good grasp on what that culture "is about." I think on a level, people know that they really don't, but as Gina said in class, we take so many things for granted, we forget limitations to understanding. "The Woman Who Loved a Snake" makes me want to go back and read Lucy Thompson more carefully to reconsider how I was interpreting the information before. The piece made me think about the function of oral tradition and how writing down oral stories is far different that telling and listening to a story. The essence of somethings simply cannot be captured fully when transfered from one medium to another.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree, I don't believe Boudinot wrote "Poor Sarah" either. It's overly dramatic, I just don't believe Boudinot would have dragged out the story like that. I also think that the story would evoke positive feelings and actions from a white audience, who would sympathize with the pathetic character Sarah. I can't say what a Native would think upon reading this story, but I believe there could be potential for a slightly better impression of whites (due to the sympathetic narrator).
ReplyDeleteI agree with your opinions on both texts-I think that an important part in trying to understand many native stories is understanding that many were originally oral and understanding what this means. The same story can have a much different meaning or interpretation written down than told out loud. Orally the reader can add intonation and gestures which may influence the audience's interpretation greatly, while with written stories, the reader is more so left to determine the tone and intentions of the writer.
ReplyDeleteI think that you are right to point out the different reactions that the story would evoke in Euro and Native Americans. Euro-Americans, who are well versed in the teachings of Christianity, would likely compare Sarah to the bible character Job, thinking of her in terms of her undying faith. The Cherokee, however, were not as aware of the Christian ideology and may have seen the story as a negative account of Native American assimilation. I wonder how this story would manifest itself orally. If we assume that the narrator is a Euro-American how might they engage with such a story as compared to a Native American?
ReplyDeleteI agree with what you point out about “The Woman who loved a snake”. I believe that people interpret stories differently, and its obvious that people who are not familiar with a culture will have trouble understanding the meaning of traditional native stories. On the other had I think that Boudinot had something to do with the “Poor Sarah” story, maybe he didn’t write it but he might had had some influenced on the Indian woman who told him her story. It could be that he wanted to explain, the conversion to Christianity from a native perspective. To reveal that native people were more Christian than white people.
ReplyDeleteWhat you say about the two texts makes alot sense and I absolutely agreed. Cultures and languages played a critical role in our lives but what's more is that our understandings of other cultures are limited by our own knowledge, mindset, and traditions. Secondly, I also did not think that Boudinot wrote the story but perhaps he was credited to translating and editing the text. It's interesting how you suggested that Boudinot's piece was reared towards a resistance to the white influence. In contrast to the story of "The Woman Who Loved a Snake," the ambiguous meanings of the context were also displayed in "Poor Sarah."
ReplyDeleteI agree with what you're saying in both parts of your blog. Our discussion in class about Sarris's piece made me rethink a loot about what we have read this quarter and how I perceived them. It makes me wonder how much my cultural background influenced my understanding and how vastly my understandings or trains of thought would change if I were to read them more consciously of my natural biases.
ReplyDeleteAnd before I was kind of opposed to the thought of Boudinot writing "Poor Sarah," because it seems to contradict his beliefs that whites should assimilate into the white man's culture, because after all Poor Sarah is seemingly fully assimilated into the white culture and still lives a life of misery up through her death...not very encouraging for fellow natives to adopt themselves into the white culture. However, after reading your blog i agree that it would be very Boudinot for him to write this, not for the purpose of having his fellow Native Americans as an audience but rather the white man himself, to impress him and prove that Indians are fully capable of living a "dignified christian" lifestyle like the white man. Good point.