In my last post I gave a thorough analysis of cultural
appropriation and how it is a rhetoric of colonial control. I ended my post by posing a final
question that all post-Indian warriors of survivance must answer. To re-appropriate or not, or do severe all contact. I hastily made the decision that it would be
better if we stop trying to appropriate the needs of Natives, and that we
should leave them be. They need not
re-appropriate if they can live without the myths and images they are plagued
with by modern American society.
But I am wrong in
assuming that the past can be undone and Native Indigenous people and Americans
can live happily ever after…… Damn romantic gestures of human grandiosity! There is no way we can live separately as
much as we try to create and instill division.
Whether it is through destruction or control, there is no use in
ignoring the voice of either side. Each
has a voice within the binary of communication, but in the case of
Native/Non-Native the Natives voice is always within the channels of the
Non-Native. Most of the time, the voice
is marginalized and ignored all together.
With that said, Post-Indians have a duty to reclaim their
voice and make it their own. The Native
voice is synonymous with their culture.
With the appropriation of their voice, their culture was appropriated as
well.
Post-Indians, in order to be warriors and survivors, must
use re-appropriation as their rhetoric of decolonization to reclaim a voice
that has been taken. IT is the only way
they can break the myths surrounding their beautiful civilized culture, and
break free of the paracolonial space they inhabit. There is no way of going back to a state of pre-colonial
time. Once two cultures have come in
contact, they are FOREVER changed—spiritually and physically. If it
is one thing I have learned so far as a post-colonial theorist, it is that no
society can ever go back to pre-colonial times. There is, however, a caveat.
A colonized society must use the past to understand how they
can survive in the present and beyond. Historicize!
As I was watching the Symposium, I noticed a theme that constantly
entered the conversation between all five scholars—acknowledgment and recognition.
I think King and Jackson both gave the
best explications of how acknowledgment and recognition are the first steps to
re-appropriating and understanding how to survive in the present. (Reminder:
Post-Indian warriors must understand the present to fight for a futre!)
Dr. Jackson says that the dominant group must be in support
if any change is to take place—a mutual recognition. In order for this to happen Jackson states
that Natives must acknowledge the dishonor done to them directly to the
dominant group. Jackson also points out
that images are text (which in other terms means Images are rhetoric!) and as
such they function as a visual and written text. I agree with this type of
thought and scholarship. Images are
forms of textual power, and function as rhetoric! Love it.
Yet, the reason this has not happened—recognition and acknowledgment—is
because there is miscommunication on both ends.
The Non-natives think they are honoring Natives. All speakers agree that
Natives have been just as guilty as perpetrating the myths that are “honoring”
them. The only reason the system works
is because of an imbalance which I keep referring to. The
dominant always enfold the sub-dominant group.
I like what Dr. Jackson proposes, but he doesn’t provide a
direct answer—except to say we must come to the space in which communication
takes place. Instead Dr. King provides
the answer of how re-appropriation takes place through recognition and acknowledgment
and how to arrive at the space of communication.
***This space is none
other than the cultural space of enunciation.
It’s the space in which both cultures are in constant dialogue***
Dr. King says that Origin stories are important. Yet it is not the beginning where the focus
should be placed. He thinks people get too
caught up with why the story started in the first place. I think he’s referring to why these cultural
appropriations took place in the first place.
Instead he thinks it is important to focus on the evolution of
appropriation and how it has become an institution of thought. Instead of focusing solely on the why, it is
important to examine the historical process of HOW the appropriation is able to
survive, and how it survives in the present.
I agree with Dr. King and Dr. Jackson. WE must reach a place of cultural
enunciation, where each culture can speak for itself. ONLY then, we will begin to understand, as a
nation of humans, the racism, hate, and cultural superiority that is a product
of cultural appropriation.
If we never reach this space of dialogue, I think both
cultures will die. Native and non-Natives
must learn the dialogue of survivance together.
Decolonize, survive.
No comments:
Post a Comment