General > Non-Frauds
Native American Authors Project
Defend the Sacred:
Wikipedia desperately needs better First Nations info. I know the site can be frustrating, and some articles over there are lost causes. But since the articles there get high search-engine placement, I often find it worth it to get better info out there.
There are a small number of us who have tried to improve things there, but I don't always know enough on the topic to fix things, and there is SO MUCH to do. There are so many hideously wrong articles on Native issues; it's a lot of work. The key thing is to have good sources and to know policy. If anyone wants to work on things over there, let me know and I will help if I can.
A.H.:
--- Quote from: educatedindian on April 14, 2008, 01:39:21 pm ---Deloria is very highly recommended. So is Fixico. They're both some of the finest minds out there. The site doesn't seem to have been updated in many years. For example they don't even mention the controversy over Churchill, and that began at least three years ago. And Fixico's first book (on the history of Termination) is over 20 years old. It seems like they mostly chose the best known Native literature and then never updated.
In the thread NAFPS Highly Recommends I listed some history books.
--- End quote ---
Well, I just ordered two books by Vine Deloria Jr. and Donald Fixico.
I found an excerpt on Amazon - some function "search inside" I didn't know of - and read the first few pages of "The American Indian Mind in a Linear world" - I am now a little puzzled that Fixico mentiones and quotes Ed McGaa that was critized around here and introduces him as "native elder" on the first pages of the book - I hope this book is valid despite of that, but I am a bit confused now... Can both be valid - your criticism and Fixico's use of the Mcgaa's quote to illustrate a certain way of thinking? Or is he describing a way of thinking of a fraud?
Well, I will have to read the book to decide. Your opinion would be appreciated..
frederica:
I think Ed McGaa was an enrolled member of the Oglala. There may be differences in philosophy what someone does, but it doesn't change who they are. He would still be an Elder.
Moma_porcupine:
--- Quote ---Can both be valid - your criticism and Fixico's use of the Mcgaa's quote to illustrate a certain way of thinking?
--- End quote ---
Just adding to what Frederica said as I know this can be confusing ;
I think probably every elder carries some traditional knowledge mixed in with a few of their own personal quirks. Some might have more traditional knowledge and less quirks than others, but that doesn't mean people with a personal approach that gets criticized have no traditional knowledge.
There's also been a lot lost , and even Native people who are struggling to reconnect with their culture will use information put out by people like Ed McGaa, not necessarily because it is the best resource, but sometimes because it is the only resource they can find.
The story of one person like this in the link below
http://www.ammsa.com/buffalospirit/February-2000/welcome.html
This might be another example of why these things can be confusing for someone who doesn't have contact with a wide range of Native people to provide enough variation that people get a balanced experience. Like the sublties of grammer in a language , it can be really hard to recognize the underlying cultural norms, and what is an individual quirk, and what is an individuals acceptance of another individuals quirks, even if this acceptence might not be the cultural norm.
Just like any other society there is a lot of individual variations in opinion in Native communities but underlying this there is also general cultural norms.
A.H.:
Thank you both. Good points. I was wondering along those lines too..
Good to know that there is a valid (enough) part to Ed McGaa's persona..
And sometimes "wrong" persons speak the right words, :)
I am looking forward to read those books.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version