Posts
Ohiyesa negotiated so many concerns, longings, and duties, and he was so grounded in his own self that did not fit into any one camp of thought on American Indian issues. Even while he was alive, people tried to pigeonhole him into a perspective that suited their views, reducing his complexity. He obviously ran into racism in the white world, and many wanted to portray him as the perfect "assimilated Indian", which he resisted. But he also encountered some hostility from his own people and from other American Indians of the time.
He was criticized by a minority as being an "apple" -- red on the outside, white on the inside -- or not Dakota or Indian enough, for varied reasons:
* he left the reservation life and never came back to live in Flandreau to settle on his allotment;
* he married a white wife and encouraged intermarriage, and spoke well of her throughout his life, even after separation;
* he became famous and some thought he had therefore forgotten or neglected his own;
* he chose to be a practicing Christian and promoted the "Christ philosophy" even while maintaining his personal "Indian faith" and prayer rituals -- noting the similarities in their essential religious truths and criticizing the white Christian society that didn't live up to its own beliefs.
* he worked for over a year on re-establishing treaty rights that had been negated in 1862, and he advocated that he receive payment for this -- some believed that he didn't deserve the money he received;
*because he recommended the outlawing of peyote, feeling the natural narcotic would sap the energies of Indian peoples like alcohol;
* because he criticized the "demoralization" and apathy he witnessed on reservations, advocating a return to many traditional disciplines of outdoors training, fitness, and values;
* because he pushed for citizenship as a choice for all American Indians so they could have a say in the courts, a vote, and a part in the political processes that ruled their lives -- (others wanted no part in the United States and wanted to go back to being considered completely separate Indian nations. which he didn't see as possible any longer);
* because at times he spoke for "Indians" or "the Indian" instead of just for himself or as a Dakota.
* because he advocated for land allotments so American Indians could have some land of their own that the government couldn't take away at will and that agents couldn't rule.
* because he pushed for the abolishment of the BIA, while also at times working for it.
He spent his lifetime educating whites on Dakota values and ways (and reminding the Dakota of their past); lobbying presidents and Congress for American Indian rights; collecting and preserving Dakota and Indian stories and history; co-founding the Society of American Indians; speaking out for American Indian religious freedom, maintaining his kinship and friendship ties in the Dakota communities, etc. The list goes on.
He didn't live his life in a path already made. He used the Dakota training instilled in him in his early life to embrace a new life and keep the wisdom and ways of the past alive in new forms in the new world. To him, it was not all loss.
He thrived on travel and the new cultures he encountered and friends he made. He was dedicated to his Dakota-white family -- despite struggles and elements of separation -- and he loved loved studying American and world history and enjoyed greatly much of the music, arts, literature he encountered. To him, it all emanated from the Creator of Life and he refused to consider only those things that were Dakota as good. He considered all things in their essence and urged others to do so.
"We of the twentieth century know better! We know that all religious aspiration, all sincere worship, can have but one source and one goal. We know that the God of the lettered and the unlettered, of the Greek and the barbarian, is after all the same God; and, like Peter, we perceive that He is no respecter of persons, but that in every nation that feareth Him and worketh righteousness is acceptable to Him."
The Soul of the Indian
Saturday, July 17, 2010
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Cobell vs Salazar settlement, 1887 Dawes Act addressed
As I hear about the historic settlement in December 2009 of the case of the suit of Elouise Cobell's and the Native American Community Development Corporation against the Federal Government for the stolen, misused, and unpaid funds of the 1887 Dawes Act, I wonder what Charles Eastman would say.
The 1887 Dawes Act (and the following laws built upon it) took collective land ownership rights away from the tribal American Indian nation, dividing the land up into allotment plots to male family members, collecting the rest into a "trust" that the government leased out for lumber, mining, grazing, etc. The leases fees were supposed to be placed into a trust fund with the royalties paid out to the tribal citizens. Unfortunately, neither were records effectively kept (some deliberately destroyed)nor money paid out.
In the late 1880s, the "collective ownership" of the varied American Indians nations over their own lands was a farce -- the military had forced them onto reservation and taken over the decisions about their lands, dismissing treaty rights and Indian leadership. Eastman,a Dakota Sioux, originally from Minnesota and then from Flandreau, South Dakota, tired of having Indians and their lands being treated as "wards" of the state, spoke out in favor of the Dawes Act, taking it at its face value as a way to return the rights of Indians to Indians. Parceled out was better than no land rights at all. It would also allow individuals to have more choices about their futures and more freedoms.
Eastman never imagined the amount of graft that would be accomplished in that bill or how it would contribute to the demise of much of Indian land ownership throughout the United States. He later regretted not the support of the initial concept, to give land back into Indian control, but the realities of its affects.
Besides the enormous loss of lands in individuals, families, and tribes, in 2004, it was estimated that 137 billion dollars was owed by the federal government, and the new settlement addresses only a fraction of this, with 3.4 billion dollars. But it does admit wrongdoing, something over one hundred and twenty years in the coming. President Obama and his administration pushed for this, to somehow make steps to begin a different kind of relationship between the federal government and Native American nations. But this specific settlement, 13 years in courts, finally may start the nation on the road to make some amends, offering Americans some awareness of the extent of dishonor the Dawes Act enacted.
The 1887 Dawes Act (and the following laws built upon it) took collective land ownership rights away from the tribal American Indian nation, dividing the land up into allotment plots to male family members, collecting the rest into a "trust" that the government leased out for lumber, mining, grazing, etc. The leases fees were supposed to be placed into a trust fund with the royalties paid out to the tribal citizens. Unfortunately, neither were records effectively kept (some deliberately destroyed)nor money paid out.
In the late 1880s, the "collective ownership" of the varied American Indians nations over their own lands was a farce -- the military had forced them onto reservation and taken over the decisions about their lands, dismissing treaty rights and Indian leadership. Eastman,a Dakota Sioux, originally from Minnesota and then from Flandreau, South Dakota, tired of having Indians and their lands being treated as "wards" of the state, spoke out in favor of the Dawes Act, taking it at its face value as a way to return the rights of Indians to Indians. Parceled out was better than no land rights at all. It would also allow individuals to have more choices about their futures and more freedoms.
Eastman never imagined the amount of graft that would be accomplished in that bill or how it would contribute to the demise of much of Indian land ownership throughout the United States. He later regretted not the support of the initial concept, to give land back into Indian control, but the realities of its affects.
Besides the enormous loss of lands in individuals, families, and tribes, in 2004, it was estimated that 137 billion dollars was owed by the federal government, and the new settlement addresses only a fraction of this, with 3.4 billion dollars. But it does admit wrongdoing, something over one hundred and twenty years in the coming. President Obama and his administration pushed for this, to somehow make steps to begin a different kind of relationship between the federal government and Native American nations. But this specific settlement, 13 years in courts, finally may start the nation on the road to make some amends, offering Americans some awareness of the extent of dishonor the Dawes Act enacted.
Eastman and Camp Fire and Boy Scouts of America
It is very fitting that Camp Fire USA and Boy Scouts of America are honoring Ohiyesa/Dr. Charles Eastman in 2010 as they celebrate their 100th anniversaries.
Eastman, who was raised traditionally until the age of 14, retained his language, both reading and writing in it, till death. At the time he attended American schools, Indians were known only negatively as savages. Eastman, through his famous classic American work "Indian Boyhood" about his early life, helped Americans change their view of what a "savage" education was. Prior to Eastman, it was either viewed as brutal and warlike or romantically "noble." Eastman showed that his childhood was both free in the outdoors and incredibly disciplined and systematic in his community teachings of values, respect, natural history, tribal history, mental acuity and ingenuity, survival skills, outdoors games, and spirituality. His book subverted the negativity of the word "savage" and suddenly educators were looking to him and to Indian life for strengths that American culture was losing in their youth because of required daily indoor schooling and the disrespectful "sassiness" of young people.
At that time, the Pan-Indian movement was growing among Indians nations as they met each other in the forced boarding schools and they realized that in terms of values and upbringing, they had more in common with each other than with the whites that were part of the mainstream American culture that was in a sweep of ethnic cleansing, stealing their lands, penning them on reservations, and militarily and legally making them "assimilate." Also, if they wanted to have any political power, they had to unite, and it was their commonalities that united them in contrast to mainstream America that did not recognized them as legitimate.
Eastman's Pan-Indian values, rituals and lore were born of this time period and these aspirations for understanding and recognition. He did not want individual tribes to lose their identities -- he fought valiantly in the courts and in the press for their rights -- but instead he wanted to impress upon whites the significant common values and skills that Indians shared that were counter culture. By educating American youth in amalgamated Pan-Indian elements, Eastman and many other Indians of the time believed that American youth would have greater respect for the Indians in their nation and Indians could hold their heads up with pride in any society.
Eastman was right about this. He and his colleagues produced major shifts in American thinking through these educational efforts. One cannot understand this unless one lived prior to Eastman and afterward, but the contributions of Ohiyesa/Eastman and his colleagues in the Society of American Indians (SAI) are immense and still felt today. Unfortunately, it is true that familiarity can breed contempt, and some individuals and groups have intentionally or unintentionally substituted the surface information Eastman provided as an overview of commonalities for the reality, diminishing and dismissing individual Indian nations and cultures.
The history of Camp Fire shows that it respectfully tried hard to distinguish their work-health-love (WOHELO) rituals based on Pan-American guides offered to them by Eastman from those of Indian nations. The organization urged youth to learn about the Indian nations near them.
The challenge now for the Boy Scouts of America and the Camp Fire Organization is to acknowledge these roots and Eastman's gift to them and again send out all their members to learn more about the individual Indian nations living locally in their midst and as part of their membership. As in Camp Fire, the members need also to investigate their own ethnic backgrounds to discover values, rituals, and ethnic clothing of their ancestors. We do not have to disregard the past but instead enliven it with greater knowledge now.
So I agree that it is inadequate and can be disrepectful to pass on the Pan-Indian materials without explaining their origins and intents and explaining the difference between such elements and the real cultural rituals and items. We need to offer more depth, not less. And we must acknowledge the value in sharing of ethnic customs and what Native Americans have contributed to our nation and youth organizations in particular and in conglomerate ways. What Eastman shared has helped open minds and discussions for over a century -- and and have gotten American youth engaged with the woods and plains and in service in positive ways. Eastman would be very supportive of the present No Child Left Inside movement and those working to prevent the Nature Deficit Disorder, as noted in Richard Louv's book "Last Child in the Woods." All his life, he was a great supporter of the Boy Scouts and Camp Fire Girls, and he strove to get Indian nations to create their own versions of such youth organizations to pass on their specific traditions that were being lost. He felt that under the cover of such organizations, the Indian nations could preserve parts of their cultures against the genocidal laws at work in the United States that forbid Indian nations to speak their languages, educate their own children, or hold religious observance or retain sacred items. Until the 1930s, their traditions and language were outlawed.
(P.S. Unfortunately, Eastman was erroneously portrayed as a complete assimilationist in the documentary "Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee.")
Marybeth Lorbiecki
Eastman biographer
"Beyond Wounded Knee: The Life and Works of OHIYESA: Charles Alexander Eastman" to be released
Eastman, who was raised traditionally until the age of 14, retained his language, both reading and writing in it, till death. At the time he attended American schools, Indians were known only negatively as savages. Eastman, through his famous classic American work "Indian Boyhood" about his early life, helped Americans change their view of what a "savage" education was. Prior to Eastman, it was either viewed as brutal and warlike or romantically "noble." Eastman showed that his childhood was both free in the outdoors and incredibly disciplined and systematic in his community teachings of values, respect, natural history, tribal history, mental acuity and ingenuity, survival skills, outdoors games, and spirituality. His book subverted the negativity of the word "savage" and suddenly educators were looking to him and to Indian life for strengths that American culture was losing in their youth because of required daily indoor schooling and the disrespectful "sassiness" of young people.
At that time, the Pan-Indian movement was growing among Indians nations as they met each other in the forced boarding schools and they realized that in terms of values and upbringing, they had more in common with each other than with the whites that were part of the mainstream American culture that was in a sweep of ethnic cleansing, stealing their lands, penning them on reservations, and militarily and legally making them "assimilate." Also, if they wanted to have any political power, they had to unite, and it was their commonalities that united them in contrast to mainstream America that did not recognized them as legitimate.
Eastman's Pan-Indian values, rituals and lore were born of this time period and these aspirations for understanding and recognition. He did not want individual tribes to lose their identities -- he fought valiantly in the courts and in the press for their rights -- but instead he wanted to impress upon whites the significant common values and skills that Indians shared that were counter culture. By educating American youth in amalgamated Pan-Indian elements, Eastman and many other Indians of the time believed that American youth would have greater respect for the Indians in their nation and Indians could hold their heads up with pride in any society.
Eastman was right about this. He and his colleagues produced major shifts in American thinking through these educational efforts. One cannot understand this unless one lived prior to Eastman and afterward, but the contributions of Ohiyesa/Eastman and his colleagues in the Society of American Indians (SAI) are immense and still felt today. Unfortunately, it is true that familiarity can breed contempt, and some individuals and groups have intentionally or unintentionally substituted the surface information Eastman provided as an overview of commonalities for the reality, diminishing and dismissing individual Indian nations and cultures.
The history of Camp Fire shows that it respectfully tried hard to distinguish their work-health-love (WOHELO) rituals based on Pan-American guides offered to them by Eastman from those of Indian nations. The organization urged youth to learn about the Indian nations near them.
The challenge now for the Boy Scouts of America and the Camp Fire Organization is to acknowledge these roots and Eastman's gift to them and again send out all their members to learn more about the individual Indian nations living locally in their midst and as part of their membership. As in Camp Fire, the members need also to investigate their own ethnic backgrounds to discover values, rituals, and ethnic clothing of their ancestors. We do not have to disregard the past but instead enliven it with greater knowledge now.
So I agree that it is inadequate and can be disrepectful to pass on the Pan-Indian materials without explaining their origins and intents and explaining the difference between such elements and the real cultural rituals and items. We need to offer more depth, not less. And we must acknowledge the value in sharing of ethnic customs and what Native Americans have contributed to our nation and youth organizations in particular and in conglomerate ways. What Eastman shared has helped open minds and discussions for over a century -- and and have gotten American youth engaged with the woods and plains and in service in positive ways. Eastman would be very supportive of the present No Child Left Inside movement and those working to prevent the Nature Deficit Disorder, as noted in Richard Louv's book "Last Child in the Woods." All his life, he was a great supporter of the Boy Scouts and Camp Fire Girls, and he strove to get Indian nations to create their own versions of such youth organizations to pass on their specific traditions that were being lost. He felt that under the cover of such organizations, the Indian nations could preserve parts of their cultures against the genocidal laws at work in the United States that forbid Indian nations to speak their languages, educate their own children, or hold religious observance or retain sacred items. Until the 1930s, their traditions and language were outlawed.
(P.S. Unfortunately, Eastman was erroneously portrayed as a complete assimilationist in the documentary "Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee.")
Marybeth Lorbiecki
Eastman biographer
"Beyond Wounded Knee: The Life and Works of OHIYESA: Charles Alexander Eastman" to be released
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)