Elissa Washuta |
Debra Magpie Earling |
Ernestine Hayes |
Yesterday I took part in a
panel on the use of non-fiction by Native women writers at AWP. The panel was
organized by Elissa Washuta, lecturer at the University of Washington and
member of the Cowlitz Tribe, and our
panelists were Debra Earling (Bitterroot Salish tribe), and Ernestine Saankalaxt' Hayes (Tlingit). It was one of the best discussions about the
power of storytelling I’ve ever had with other Native writers, and my
appreciation for these women and their work just fills my heart. What a gift Elissa gave us! The session was full of stories and gems, like
Ernestine’s wondrous phrase, “Truth chronology” when responding to a question
about narrative structuring of events.
There is a chronology to the truth, she said, a truth chronology which
transcends temporal chronology. At least that’s what I heard.
So, what does writing
non-fiction, as part of a multi-genre collection, mean for me as a Native
women? Well, it means that I have long
since been seduced by the power of language to craft and change and save and,
yes, when captive in the wrong hands, destroy.
It means that I learned early on to use words and story to keep myself
from disappearing in a colonized world that didn’t need one more Indian child
seen OR heard. It means that I have
learned to use whatever talent I possess with language as a weapon to fight for
my tribe and our Ancestors, as a ceremony to praise our culture, our people,
our history, and as a tool to do what I can to craft a future for us as we move
forward into the 21st century.
Nowadays, I use language to
keep my tribe from disappearing. In large part because of my sister Louise
Miranda Ramirez’s passionate pursuit of tribal recognition, her efforts to
re-establish cultural knowledge, and her persistent (and as yet unfulfilled)
push to have a small piece of our tribal homeland returned to us, I have found
my way into the work of my life. “Every
time you publish something, every time you speak somewhere, re-tell a story
found in some archive, I log it into our records,” Louise told me early on in
my grad school career. “I add it to the
documentation for recognition. I put it
in the Tribal Newsletter. Your work makes
us visible and real in the eyes of this colonizer’s government.” My sister was letting me know that my work as
a scholar was an extension of my responsibilities as a tribal member.
I have long been deeply
suspicious of the entire tribal recognition process, and the past twenty years
have only made me moreso. This is a
grueling story for another time; long story short, the process is hideously
expensive – we are talking millions and millions of dollars per tribe – and the bureaucratic
governmental wringer that the United States puts non-recognized Indian tribes
through reminds me of a rapist being put in charge of supervising a rape
victim’s court testimony. But Louise and
I understood long ago that we have found our place in this struggle side-by-side,
each doing what she does best, as a compliment to the other. Although we both had a contentious heart-bond
with our father, it was with gratitude that Louise turned to me once and said,
“The best thing our father ever did was give us each other.” As usual, she hit the nail on the head.
So, while Louise works toward
federal recognition (among many other goals she has for The Esselen Nation) I
have turned my attentions as a scholar and poet to work that addresses my responsibilities as an Esselen tribal
member. I realized that our tribe’s
story is scattered, fragmented, chopped up, strewn around the world in museum
collections, library archives, family photo albums, newspaper morgues,
anthropological publications, field notes, crumbling Mission records, and
half-forgotten tape recordings of men and women whose voices wait for us to
find them, and listen. In order to
re-assemble or reinvent a tribal identity, California Indians must be
detectives, poets, theorists, dreamers, mosaic artists – in short,
storytellers. Without a story of our own, I
understood that The Esselen Nation would in fact become extinct, whether our
bodies continue to exist or not. Unfortunately,
the story we have inherited is not a story which honestly represents us and is
rarely, if ever, told by members of the Esselen Nation.
This was the impetus behind Bad Indians: A Tribal Memoir – in which
I used the multiple sources listed above, and multi-genre writing to pull our
story back together. As I’ve stated
elsewhere, when too many pieces of a broken thing have been removed or are too
damaged to reassemble, we are not just faced with loss. We are also being given an opportunity to
transform, to remake ourselves. In
Albuquerque at the Indigenous Book Festival, a Cahuilla woman told me that in
her culture, potters are obligated to reuse the broken shards of pots to make
new pots. Obligated. That’s a good
word for how I felt as I uncovered or encountered the many shards of my tribe’s
history: obligated to honor and re-integrate them, by whatever means necessary.
With non-fiction, for
example, I can take a story from my grandfather about that light he used to see
as a kid working as a vaquero on the Carissa Plains, and, with some research
about that actual light – which turned out to be an airplane beacon on Mt.
Diablo, 150 miles from him – write about the ways we are called back to our
homelands and the power of those homelands and places of emergence. The story is there – I knew that my
grandfather’s fascination with that light was about something deeply moving for
him. I can hear it in his voice on the
old tape recording, and feel it in his use of words. But without the non-fiction research, I never
would have known why. Or explored my own fascination with the
yearning for return, for xulin, a
kind of taking back. We might think that
research – that academic , intellectual, analytic act – would make my
grandfather’s story less personal, less heart-felt. But it actually brings my grandfather and his
story closer to me, more accessible, gives me ways to understand his
fascination for a light located on one of the peaks in Ohlone creation stories
might have also been a longing for home.
Recently I thought long and
hard about another story from my book, the one about Vicenta Gutierrez, and how
a non-fiction format was the best way to honor both the story and the voice of
the young woman who told it. Here’s the
story, told by Isabel Meadows, the Carmel Indian woman who deposited her
stories with ethnologist J.P. Harrington:
April 1935.
Vicenta Gutierrez, sister of El Huero Gutierrez, when
a girl went to confession one evening during Lent, and Padre Real wanted to
grab her there in the church. And next
day, nothing could be seen of the Padre there, and he was never seen
again. He probably fled on horseback in
the night. Some said he fled to
Spain. He was a Spaniard. He grabbed the girl and screwed her. The girl went running to her house, saying
the padre had grabbed her.
I had a lot of questions
about this story. Why does Isabel
Meadows tell Harrington this story
about a girl named Vicenta who is raped by a priest? And why retell this story one hundred years
after the crime? Why give room to these particular destructive powers when
trying to harness the creative powers necessary to create our mosaic
history? I knew these are questions that
people would ask, even members of my own tribal community.
There are, at least, four
main acts of cultural work that this story performs.
1. It spotlights and gives voice to an act of colonization that
is, to this day, under-reported. Statistics
tell us that 34% of Native women are raped sometime in our lives; 1 in 3! and 80% of the rapists are non-Indian. As Sarah Deer says, “[contemporary] Native
American women suffer the highest rate of sexual assault in the United States,”
yet when she travelled into Native communities,
advocates tell me that the Justice Department
statistics provide a very low estimate, and rates of sexual assault against
Native American women are actually much higher.
Many of the elders that I have spoken with in Indian country tell me
that they do not know any women in their community who have not experienced
sexual violence. (456)
At the same time, prosecution against rapists of Native women are
notoriously non-existent. Last year, I
read “Dear Vicenta,” the letter I wrote back to Vicenta Gutierrez in which I
told her, “it happened to me as a kid,” at a reading of young Native students
recently. Afterwards, a young Native
woman approached me. She handed me a
folded piece of notebook paper, said, “Thank you,” and left. When I opened up the piece of paper, I saw
that it was a letter. It read, “Dear
Professor Miranda: it happened to me as a kid, too.” Clearly, Vicenta’s story is relevant to
Indian women today.
2. I believe Isabel’s
telling of Vicenta’s Story acknowledges rape as a colonizing weapon, and in
fact asserts that rape of indigenous women
is a crime. Vicenta not only names
names (“Padre Real”), but her speaking out about the rape calls attention to
rape as a crime, and works as a call to action from her community. Given the centuries of rape as a colonial
weapon, and the generations of raped Indian women who came before her,
Vicenta’s loud protest at the violation of her Indian body is nothing less than
amazing. I did some research: I located
the young woman Vicenta Gutierrez in Monterey census records, established that
she lived in Carmel during the 1835-1840 era of a priest named Jose Maria Real;
I learned that he did, indeed, abruptly leave Carmel and was, in fact, the
subject of several gossipy letters by other priests who noted that his
‘relationships’ with Indian women resulted in many children who bore his
name. Let me be clear: these priests
were more concerned with the breaking of priestly vows than in the well-being
of the Indian women and children. In
that time and place, when California Indians, especially women and children,
were legally being sold as slaves, the rape of a native woman was almost an
oxymoron. If you were a native woman,
you were a raped native woman. You were
available to be raped at any time. So
“telling” typically brought on more abuse, not justice. And still, Vicenta told.
3. The story preserves
Indigenous women’s knowledge about being female, colonized, survivor. The women of Vicenta’s community – including
Isabel’s mother, aunts and friends - heard and remembered her story, but the
oral tradition of our community, for many reasons, did not seem to have a
viable future. Isabel seemed to intuit
that, in a perilous time, Vicenta’s narrative had to enter into the written
realm, leave the community of Indian women, in order to return to us someday –
as it turns out, almost two hundred years after it happened. To me, this means that Isabel herself knew
the power of story, and believed in our survival; she trusted that Indian women
would, somehow, continue - and she knew we would need this story as part of our
education as women. Isabel learned about
this kind of education from her mother, who learned it from her mother, and on
backwards into time immemorial. She
passed on that inheritance in the only way she could: by making a white
ethnologist into her stenographer!
4. In this way, Isabel’s story also serves as a
teaching device for Vicenta’s descendants, Isabel’s descendants, for
contemporary California Indian women – for me, my sisters, our daughters, our
granddaughters. Through the vehicle of
Isabel’s words, we are engaged in a very indigenous practice: that of storytelling as education, as
thought-experiment, as community action to right a wrong. Isabel preserves and praises Vicenta’s brave
act. She exhorts the Indian women who
will one day read Harrington’s notes to also speak out against injustice. This has happened to other women, she says:
they resisted. You can resist too.
So my non-fiction response to
this story, which in Bad Indians is a
long letter written directly to Vicenta, gives me ways to have a kind of
conversation with a young Carmel Indian woman who, like me, faced violation and
resisted the silencing about violation our culture demanded. It gave me the opportunity – and the
responsibility – to enter into the education of other Indian women, and
myself. The ways in which I researched
materials – finding Vicenta in an old box of my mother’s Xeroxed materials that
included an 1836 Monterey Census, locating Vicenta in mission records, matching
up her timeline with that of Padre Real, looking at Real’s documented
relationships with other Indian women in the correspondence of other Franciscan
priests in the area at that time – it all worked together to allow this
conversation.
Interacting with Vicenta’s
story (which is what a non-fiction approach allows) makes me part of the thread
that goes back over 100 years to Vicenta, and forward for hundreds more years
into the lives and education of future Indian women. Perhaps this is part of what Ernestine Hayes
means when she says there is a chronology of truth: truth has its own
time. I know that I am grateful beyond
words for this story. It’s a kind of
homecoming and belonging which I could never have predicted.
Isabel, I feel certain, knew
all of this, and acted on it. She knew
her responsibilities, knew they extended far, far into the future, beyond what
she could see or imagine. She knew
storytelling was the vehicle that could go there. She understood about Ernestine's Truth Chronology. And she's still teaching us all these years later. Nimasianexelpasaleki, Isabel!
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments on this blog are moderated.