“Americans who have always looked westward when reading about this period should read this book facing eastward.”
Assess the validity of dee brown's statement above in regards to his construction of Bury my Heart at Wounded Knee as a work of history and its impact on american culture
The struggle for historical objectivity in writing is present in all modern historians who aim to present an accurate depiction of the past as they are all influenced by their context. Historians with cultural or social agendas however extend this contextual perspective to manipulate a history which fulfils their own ideology. Up until the late 20th century, the colonisation of america had been represented as a heroic expansion of civilization from coast to coast with brave generals battling against savage indians. The late Dee brown in his work of history bury my heart at wounded knee presents a ‘eastward’ perspective which he claimed ‘balanced out’ years of cultural propaganda. However brown's strong agenda essentially means he intruded upon the very history he is tried to recover and save from myth. The validity of maintaining a subjective agenda is assessed through his construction of history and representation of people and events, and its later impact on american culture.
Brown states in his original publican of bury my heart at wounded knee the intentions for writing this one-sided version of history. He expresses his concern regarding the lack of historical alternatives in the colonisation of the west and stresses the value of a native american perspective to influence current ideology and prejudice in america. The necessity of maintaining and revising previous written history to stay up to date with current technologies and get rid of past propaganda is an idea which became popular in the period surrounding the book's publication and is still seen as a historiographical concept today. Historians such as Robert Hughes advises a constant reconsideration of events, specifically regarding european conquest of north america, “After the myth sank from the histories deep into popular culture, it became a potent justification for the plunder, murder and enslavement of peoples”. Brown attempted to fulfil this requirement of reassessing history in a unique construction which was openly subjective and sympathetic towards native americans.
Concluding from brown's introduction, he wrote with an agenda to change the beliefs of the modern american not only about history of the west but the effects of this old view of the past, stating “history has a way of intruding upon the present”. This statement of browns was constructed under the attitude of the 20th century which which was still idealising the philosophy of manifest destiny. The idea that of the superiority of american settlers gave them a destiny to spread their institutions and traditions which enlightened primitive nations is inextricably linked with american history. The cultural development of america under this philosophy created a prejudice against native americans. Brown aims to educate his audience on the present “hopelessness and the squalor of the modern indian man” through his eastward perspective on the real impact of manifest destiny to an audience which has always looked westward.
Dee Brown’s unique career as a librarian has supported his construction of bury my heart at wounded knee and leads to its success as a historian as he fulfils his role by revealing new information to the public. The iconoclastic position he holds is supported through his meticulous analysis of sources derived from the perspectives alternate including government accounts, native american interpretations and eyewitness accounts of battles.
However, despite analysing both perspectives, his real influence in constructing history is shown in the statement: “I am a very, very old Indian, and I'm remembering the past.. I'm looking toward the Atlantic Ocean”. Developing a persona to understand the native american point of view results in a prejudice towards government soldiers. Hence brown characterises “white beastliness and indian saintliness” throughout his work, this showing his subjectivity as emotional influences affect the representation of events and people. K. Kaintz states:
“the blood-thirsty savages in this book cannot be found among the Lakotas and Cheyennes but among the Euro-Americans such as Chivington or Connor.”
A good example of this old native american persona can be seen through brown's interpretation of the fetterman massacre in chapter six, red cloud's war. In this passage, native american victors are still represented as victims of european expansion rather than savage murders despite their actions. In brown's opinion this is due to the influence of the sand creek massacre two years prior where the same mutilations committed by native americans were inflicted upon native americans. The crimes committed in brown's perspective were a form of military flattery as they were “only intimidating their enemies”. Brown continues to explain the effects of the massacre, stating that carrington, with an “impression of disgust” wrote an essay philosophising that the indians were “compelled by som paganistic belief to commit terrible deeds.” The use of this account emphasizes two main arguments. Brown asserts the innocence of native americans despite their actions and upholds the saintliness of native americans. Secondly he stresses the injustices committed against native american culture, using the essay as an example of the zeitgeist of the 1800s. Therefore emphasising the necessity of a one sided native american history to equate westward and eastward versions.
As each culture has their own way of representing history, one of the issues in constructing red history is the misinterpretation of sources. Brown acknowledges native american way of presenting history. By drawing inspiration from both western and native american narrative forms, brown appeal to a wider audience. Scattered throughout his work are photos, poems, song lyrics and chords; this unconventional addition of these references as features of his work rather than sources to analyse humanises the victims of the massacres and allows the reader to visualise a time and culture in history which had been close to lost. Brown also uses these sources to recognize unique way of communicating history, however as the mode of poetry and symbolism is not valid in the views of the western standard history, browns synthesis of cultural standards and appropriation of the native american style creates a respectful and unified account of the american west.
( include Ghost dance chapter analysis)
However, one of the criticisms of bury my heart at wounded knee is its construction. From an academic point of view it lacks sophistication and adopts a narrative form. Brown adopts this literary style for the convenience of his readers as the form of writing broadens his audience and allows the alternate history to be acknowledged within popular culture. All history tells a story, without narrative form events would appear unrelated and confuse the audience. However brown's use of describing events in explicit detail in bury my heart dramatizes events. An example of this is seen in the last chapter, wounded knee; describing the events before big foots death.
“Bigfoot's blankets were stained with blood from his lungs, and as he talked in a hoarse whisper with Whitside, red drops fell from his nose and froze in the bitter cold.”
Although understanding the nature of bigfoots death is necessary in understanding the outcome, the use of language in this passage demonstrates browns skill for adding dramatic detail to contribute to the book's legacy as an “epic history” of the american west.
This narrative style is accompanied by endnotes rather than footnotes which adds a greater flow within his work. From initial review this distracts from the validity of brown's work the majority of his historical claims are not supported with a reference number, mainly just direct quotes. While all of his sources are included at the end of the book, this is not equivalent to direct referencing as later historians need to analyse where he got his information from. In addition to the photos and songs incorporated throughout bury my heart, its academic credibly is not communicated successfully in a westward standard. Therefore his aim in showing the native american history of the american west and persuading his audience to understand how the west was “really won”, is not successfully communicated through his construction.
One of the main problems that added to the continuity of native american prejudice was the impact of the stereotyped figure of the native american in american cultural representations in hollywood and is the main form of false history brown rejects. In hollywood cinema, two variations were depicted; “the idealised noble savage, or the treacherous, cruel defiler of captured white women” . However as the 60s and 70s progressed and past injustices were acknowledged, a new reductive stereotype was produced and this attempt to undo the effects of this pernicious mythology saw the indian as the tragic, eternal victim. While Dee brown rejects the hollywood version of the past, his consistent emphasis on the wrongs of the soldiers and the victimization of native americans demonstrates his own contribution to the native american stereotype. Changing the native american image from a savage to a victim, ends in the same isolation for the culture.
Book reviewer Chris schluep highlights this flaw in brown's work by stating, “Very simply, the Indians weren’t all good and the white people weren’t all bad”. The hollywood myth was a main source in delivering this false version of history and promoted the Eurocentric point of view which brown fought against. While dee brown’s work of history was seens as a rebuttal of decades of hollywood fantasy about the west, the characterisation of native americans as eternal victims means brown promoted his own myth of the past.
Despite the many structural and ideological flaws in dee brown's work of history, its effects for american culture were profound and is still continuing today. Initially browns timing was explosive, the postcolonial resurgence of indigenous issues opened up a discourse in america regarding native american land rights. The alcatraz occupation by awareness group AIM (american indian movement) of 1969, months before its publication, was the most significant of events. Similar to brown's intentions, these activists acted to “promote the renewal of tribal heritage and awareness of the government mistreatment of native americans.” Browns timing deepened the understanding of pat injustices and informed the modern view of the conflict between native american and the united states government. This connects to Brown's statement “history has a way of intruding upon the present”. In 2016, journalist D.Brinkley states that bury my heart at wounded knee “dramatically succeeded in changing the attitudes of the generation of the 1970s”.
Brown's passion for dispelling the myths of the past and exposing the injustices towards native american people continued has been credited with contributing to the new wave of historians in understanding her past history of america. Bury my heart created a resource for america which was embedded into popular culture to understand the present injustices to native americans, aided by the various political events of the time and group activities. Brown's interpretation of the past and his understanding of added to a global movement which wanted to understand the construction of our past challenging orthodox views.
"Wounded Knee opened the way for the modern school of revisionist historians, who have largely confirmed Brown's perception that, rather than a triumph of pioneers, the west was subdued by a bloody, military conquest of native Americans that amounted to genocide."
During the following decades, bury my heart opened the door for the native american voice and launched a generation of american indian studies in academia. Its significance in american culture is seen through its revelatory qualities, “it presented information that was both little known and contradictory to the general public's idea about the west's”. It persuaded a generation to listen to the voice of native americans and also helped to revise scholarly views of the subject, paving the way for so-called ‘New Western historians’ who were more inclined to see oppression than triumph in the way the West was settled. “All practicing historians who came of age from the mid-'70s on were very conscious of 'Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee,' " said professor C. Fred Williams, an expert on the American West at the University of Arkansas at Little Rock.
Wilcomb washburn states “While Brown's work, from the scholarly point of view, leaves something to be desired, its impact has been phenomenal in raising the consciousness of white Americans about the past history of Indians and whites in America.”
However many journalists and historians have recently criticized that Brown's apparent revolutionary attempt at changing american attitudes was merely him catching the “revisionist mood about westward expansion”. The reasoning for discrediting browns impact is due to the number of historians who released works of history around the book's publication which all attempted to do what brown succeeded. The new york review of book released an article indian corn in 1971 which assesses five of these works including bury my heart, addressing some main historiographical issues.
Despite the number of books, none attracted the attention bury my heart received. This can be credited to their construction and approach to understanding native american sources and perspectives. An example of this is i have spoken: american history through the voice of the indians by v. armstrong. In his review farb criticises her lack of analysis on the reliably of her sources. As many of the native american speeches were transcribed by settlers with either their own biases or little linguistic training, they often reflect what the indians should have said or what the whites would have wanted them to say.
Contemporary conflicts continue in native american culture with the government, bury my heart is still significant in american culture to help deepen the understanding of the present injustices. The dakota pipeline is one issue recently that resulted in controversy. Brown's statement that we must “understand what the indian man is by understanding what he was.” is still relevant to understand the larger historical and cultural motives in contemporary events.
Today bury my heart is still studied and discussed as a revolutionary book that changed the understanding of the past. While bury my heart had many issues involved with its construction and since its publication many factual errors have been pronounced, it represents a major concept in historical thinking as stated by hughes, “Revise we historians must. There is no such thing as the last word”. The significance of his work is not about his content but rather about his intention, the changing attitudes reflects our world that is understanding the consequences of past actions and acknowledging the lies in our history which needs to be constantly revised and reconstructed.
conclusion
No comments:
Post a Comment