1

“How Do We Forgive Our Fathers?”: The Generational Trauma Model and Native Peoples, Issues and Applications Michael Mongeau Edited by Volker Benkert and James Riding In Arizona State University Undergraduate

Paper submitted as thesis for Barrett: The Honors College on November, 15, 2018.

Advisor: Dr. Volker Benkert

[email protected] (480) 334-5197

2

Biography:

Michael Mongeau graduated from Arizona State University in May of 2018, with a major in

History and a minor in American Indian Studies. His main historical emphasis is on American

Indian history during the late 19th, early 20th century (Progressive Era of American Indian Policy) and the American Indian rights movements of the 1960’s and 70’s (the American Indian

Movement). He currently works as a docent and assistant to the director at the Pueblo Grande

Museum in Phoenix, Arizona and as a privately contracted tutor. He is the recipient of the Moeur

Award and the Schwartz Jewish Studies Memorial Scholarship for Public Service. He also is a member of Phi Beta Kappa and Phi Kappa Phi. Currently, he wishes to pursue a duel master’s program at Simmons College in Archival Studies and History.

3

Introduction

The quote, “How Do We Forgive our Fathers?” is part of a monologue in the movie,

Smoke Signals, referencing how Native peoples are frequently in conflict with their pasts. The film Smoke Signals symbolizes the historical trauma inflicted upon Native peoples. This is seen through Victor Joseph’s struggle to forgive his biological father’s abuses (Alexie and Eye, 1998).

This relates to the concept of Generational Trauma Theory, how past trauma inflicted impacts people in subsequent generations. This idea was first referenced during the 1980’s and 90’s in

Jewish Studies, but was formally developed in the late 90’s, early 2000’s, by Native American scholars and psychologists, most notably, Lakota psychologist Maria Yellow Horse Brave Heart.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze generational trauma theory and discuss the limits of the applicability of this framework to the Indian boarding school experience, and analyze how the framework should be applied for the benefit of native peoples.

Introduction to Generational Trauma Theory

To understand how generational trauma theory is applied to Native people, one must understand the basics of Generational Trauma Theory. Historical Trauma (HT) is an event that occurs in the past which causes pain to a group (the Holocaust or Boarding Schools). The

Historical Trauma Response (HTR), is how trauma manifests in individuals. HTR has three major aspects: “transposition” (where a person lives in both the past and present), “identification with the dead” (feeling emotionally dead) and “identifying with ancestral suffering” (re-enacting the suffering). (Yellow Horse Brave Heart, 2003: 7-8). Scholars debate how exactly this trauma is passed down from generation to generation, and generally fall into two groups. The first was described by Hellen Epstein in her 1979 book recording of second generation Holocaust survivors testimony, Children of the Holocaust. Her work emphasized how pain and suffering 4 from a traumatic event is passed directly from generation to generation, like genes. In this viewpoint, there is some form of redemption that an later generations go through (14). The second was described by Larry Langer in his analysis of second generation Holocaust survivors testimony, Holocaust Testimonies: the Ruins of Memory. He proposed that the second generation creates its own understanding of the trauma, independent of the first generation.

There is no redemption from the trauma, as it is not inherited. However, they are still tied to the trauma. (37-38). The impact of trauma across generations manifests itself into two more important concepts, sites of memory and liturgical time. Sites of memory are locations that are important in a peoples’ memory of the past, including places, where an event takes place, and a place memorializing an event (Yerushalmi, 2002: 15). Liturgical time is the commemoration of certain events at certain dates, creating connections between the past and present (Yerushalmi,

2002: 128-129).

Primer to Boarding Schools

Introduction to the Boarding Schools

In this paper, the term “Native American boarding schools” will be used to refer to off- reservation, federal boarding schools, parochial/missionary schools or on-reservation day schools. In 1931, estimates reported that 30% of Indian children were in non-Native schools and roughly 2/3 of Indian people had attended non-Native schools during their life (Bear, 2008).

Scholars at Eastern Michigan University estimate that 180,000 Native children were taken from their families (Millich, 2011). Roughly 10,000 of those 180,000 attended Carlisle Indian School

(Carlisle Indian School Project). Estimates suggest that 106 Indian boarding schools operated across the U.S. (Churchill, 2004: 119-124). The first Indian boarding school, Carlisle Indian

School, was founded in 1879 by former army officer Richard Henry Pratt. By the 1960’s, 5 however, most boarding schools have closed, and only a few remain open today (Bear, 2008).

The boarding schools were a part of what became known as the “Progressive Era” of Native

American policy. Progressive policy developed in response to the Indian Wars. During this period, the government, and reformers, attempted to raise the standard of living for Native peoples by converting them into white farmers (destroying their Native identities) (Pewewardy,

2005: 141). This policy was “progressive” because it did not advocate killing Native peoples, rather destroying their cultures. Boarding schools were designed destroy Indian culture and replace it with white, European culture as one arm of a larger progressive program (Churchill,

2004: 24). This was described succinctly by Carlisle founder Richard Henry Pratt in the following quote, “…all the Indian there is in the race should be dead. Kill the Indian in him, and save the man.” (Bear, 2008).

Impacts of Boarding Schools

As assimilationist institutions, the administrators destroyed outward symbols of Native culture. They replaced Native dress with military uniforms and symbolically cut Native people’s hair (Churchill, 2004: 19). Names were also changed to further remove people from their culture.

(Lesiak and Jones, 1992). Native languages were banned and only English was spoken

(Bellecourt, 2016: 27). The punishments for violating the rules of came with harsh punishments.

This is demonstrated by the following quote, describing how Clyde Bellecourt’s mother, a boarding school survivor, was punished for refusing to give up her language, “…when they hadn’t been able to rob her of the Ojibwe language, the nuns tied sacks of marbles to her knees and forced her to scrub floors on them…The rest of her life she had problems with her legs.”

(Bellecourt, 2016: 25-26). After stamping out Native culture, the school attempted to replace

Native culture with a “white” trade or craft (usually menial labor) (Meier, 2016). Physical and 6 sexual assault by administrators and teachers was rampant, and many children died from disease, malnutrition, abuse and homesickness. The exact numbers are unknown, but estimated to be in the thousands (Haskell Indian School alone has 600 deaths) (Churchill, 2004: 34). These assimilationist efforts were successful in some instances, and unsuccessful in other instances

(Lesiak and Jones, 1992).

The Boarding Schools, and Ethnocide

The boarding schools are an example of settler colonialism. In Settler Colonialism, settlers come to make a new home on occupied land (Tuck and Wayne Yang, 2012: 5). To control the land, they must destroy peoples who were previously living on the land by killing them and destroying their relationship to the land (culture). This involves both external (taking raw materials) and internal (maintaining a social order favorable to the colonizer) modes colonization (Tuck and Wayne Yang, 2012: 4). In this system, the settler justifies their actions by viewing themself as superior (Tuck and Wayne Yang, 2012: 6). The boarding schools reflected settler colonialism by ensuring the colonizer’s domination in indoctrinating Native peoples and promoting oppression through strict control of all aspects of living (Pewewardy, 2005 :140). The idea was for native peoples to forget traditional ways of living, destroying their identities and connection to land (Pewewardy, 2005 :141). In 1981, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) signed the Treaty of San Jose, which defines the term,

“Ethnocide”. Ethnocide means eradicating a group by destroying their culture. This is demonstrated in the following quote, from the Treaty, “Ethnocide means that an ethnic group is denied the right to enjoy, develop and transmit its own culture and its own language, whether collectively or individually…” (United Nations, 1986: 1). This is separate from genocide, because genocide attempts to remove a people, by lowering their population (e.g. physical 7 killings) (Churchill, 2004: 5-6). While the boarding schools were a collective attempt to destroy

Native culture, staff focused on individual students, and committed violations of human rights on an individual basis (Churchill, 2004: 3).

The Boarding School Survivors

To understand generational trauma, one must understand the impact boarding schools had on the students. The boarding school experience left lasting physical and emotional scars. Many boarding school graduates felt cultural dysphoria, and lacked a sense of belonging (Lesiak and

Jones, 1992). In addition, the boarding school created a sense of loss, including loss of culture, family, and self. Those who were not directly impacted by the boarding schools experienced collective loss. This manifested in substance abuse, alcoholism and other destructive behaviors, as demonstrated in the following quote, “These psychosocial problems are superimposed upon a background of historically traumatic losses across generations…For example…massive traumatic group experiences… the separation of Lakota children from their families and their placement in…boarding schools” (Yellow Horse Brave Heart, 2003: 8). The abusive environment of the boarding school made many survivors abusive. The impact of the schools was so significant that Native psychologists argue that it is one of five major origins of

“historically transferred PTSD” (Duran and Duran, 1995: 33-34).

The to the boarding school varied. Some Native peoples resisted ethnocide. The capacity to resist was based on the connection they had with the culture, and the connection with their families (Lesiak and Jones, 1992). However, students who retained their culture were frequently hesitant to pass down cultures, because they wanted to protect their children from similar abuses.

One example of this was Clyde Bellecourt’s mother, who did not teach her children the language, because, “…she didn’t want us to be punished like she was. She was protecting us as 8

Indian mothers all over the country were doing protecting their children by not teaching...”

(Bellecourt, 2016: 27). However, other Native peoples accepted the assimilationist practices of the boarding schools. Many of these peoples, found it difficult to integrate into white society, because of racial biases (Lesiak and Jones, 1992). However, others didn’t fall into the dichotomy of “assimilated” and “non-assimilated”, and took a middle ground, where they took some of the aspects of white society while retaining their culture, and pride in being Native (Lesiak and

Jones, 1992).

Second Generation Survivors

The second generation is also impacted by the trauma. Many second-generation boarding school survivors were raised without knowing their cultures. However, they would re-discover their culture later in life. Second-generation survivor Clyde Bellecourt re-discovered his culture through books on Native culture in prison (Bellecourt, 2016: 37). Alcoholism and substance abuse among the first-generation fostered similar problems in the second generation. This is demonstrated in the following quote, from second-generation survivor, Denise Lajimodiere,

“We’ve all struggled with emotional or drug and alcohol issues... We are trying to break the cycle with our grandchildren.” (Lajimodore, 2012 :7) This is because stress that is passed between generations. To understand the impact of the boarding schools, one must also understand the political movements of the 1960’s and how boarding school experiences impacted them. The children of boarding school survivors grew up during the 1950’s/60’s. At this time

(called the Termination Era of Indian policy), the federal government attempted to end the federal-tribal relationship by “terminating tribes” (Deloria, 1988: 55). The government also moved Native peoples to the cities to destroy their culture (Lobo, 2010: 426). However, this period witnessed another phenomenon, the rise of Indian rights movements, like the American 9

Indian Movement (AIM) (Bellecourt, 2016: 51). These groups advocated the revitalization of culture, which would take on different forms than the original culture, with the trauma catalyzing for cultural change. Since many different Native groups were in urban areas, culture grew to be

“pan-Indian”, that it took many of the similarities between Native peoples and blurred the lines between tribal groups. While pan-Indianism pre-dated the 1960’s, it gained more during this period (Lobo, 2010: 429). This lends credence to Langer’s idea that the second generation interprets the trauma differently from the first generation.

Limitations to Application

Socioeconomic differences

The generational trauma approach has some limitations when applied to boarding school survivors. The first is the socioeconomic differences between the post-Holocaust American Jews and Native peoples. Second-generation Holocaust survivors were mostly part of the middle class, and succeeded financially in America (Bergen, 2009: 239). In contrast, American Indians were

(and remain) some of the poorest communities in the , making a distinct difference between the Jewish communities referenced in Epstein and Langer’s works. Poverty has physical, mental and psychological impacts on people (Steinberg, 2014: 173). Many of the side effects of systemic poverty overlap with generational trauma. These include, frustration, anger and anxiety. Alcoholism is also common among both (Yellow Horse Brave Heart, 2003: 8).

When analyzing the American Indian trauma, it is difficult to differentiate the symptoms caused by the poverty and trauma. In addition, racial persecution was not as prevalent for Jews in

America, as it was for Native peoples (Bergen, 2009: 239).

Cultural Differences 10

Another major difference between Native and Jewish communities is how the Native

American worldview differs from worldviews. One important way this manifests is in religion. It is important to note that not all Native peoples practice traditional religions as many have accepted Christianity (Deloria, 1988: 101). While there is variance among Native religions, there are several similarities between Native beliefs. Donald Fixico mentions how traditional

Native religious beliefs are important to Native peoples. In addition, he also mentions how

Native peoples have a spiritual connection to their ancestors and the world around them. These connections are not as prevalent in the Jewish religion. In addition, Native worldview frequently is cyclical in nature as mentioned by Donald Fixico in the following quote, “’Indian thinking’ is

‘seeing’ things from a perspective emphasizing that circles and cycles are central to the world and that all things are related within the universe” (2003: 1). This connection plays a role in the

Native trauma response. In transportation, people who suffer from trauma simultaneously live in the present and past, connecting onto a cyclical worldview. (Yellow Horse Brave Heart, 2000:

247). While cycles play a role in Jewish liturgy, as seen through the Ninth of Av, it is more it serves as the core of native people’s beings (Yerushalmi, 2002: 11) (Fixico, 2003: 1).

Variations of Experiences

The changing nature of the Historical Trauma is an issue present for both traumas. In the

Holocaust, forms of persecution and murder changed throughout the years, including persecutory laws, ghettoization, shootings, death camps (Sobibor, Belzec and Treblinka) and death/work camps (Auschwitz) creating a variety of experiences among Holocaust survivors (Bergen, 2009:

154). There is similar variance among boarding school survivors. While the philosophical underpinnings behind the schools were similar, how this philosophy manifested in daily actions varied. While there existed some constants (cutting hair, forcing students to turn in Native garb), 11 other aspects depended on the individual teachers and students (Churchill, 2004: 19). The Clyde

Bellecourt’s mother’s trauma is unique to her. Her trauma is not Lajimodiere’s father’s trauma.

Like the Holocaust, the boarding schools changed over time. A student who graduated from the boarding school system in the 1960’s would have a different experience than a student who graduated from the boarding schools in the 1900’s (Bear, 2008). Because every survivor has a different experience with trauma, making it difficult to create a unifying theory. The inconsistency makes finding patterns between first and second generation more difficult. This factor is present in both the Holocaust and Boarding School experience, and is a general problem with trauma theory.

Philosophical Bases of Trauma

A another major issue in applying Holocaust generational trauma theory to the Boarding

School experience are the differences between the philosophical underpinnings of those traumas.

The underlying philosophy of the Holocaust emphasized racial differences between the Jews and non-Jews. In Nazi ideology, a Jew will always be a Jew, as Jewishness was an inherent, racial trait. One example of this were the Nuremberg laws, which defined “Jewishness” as having three or four Jewish grandparents, as well as banning the fraternization of Jews and non-Jews (Bergen,

2009: 72-73). This idea that the Nazis viewed Jews as a separate race is demonstrated in the following quote, “Moreover the notion of ‘Jewishness’ as a race was invented…” (Bergen, 2009:

7). While not all plans involved killing the Jewish people (sending the Jews to Madagascar), there was no “redemption” for the Jewish people. Meanwhile, Native peoples’ issues were viewed as more of a cultural problem where the solution was assimilation. As a result, rather than being an inherent part of a Native person, indigenousness was the problem that could be solved by destroying Native culture (Bear, 2008). This is demonstrated from the following quote 12 from Richard Henry Pratt, “The solution of the Indian problem hinges upon the destruction of the present systems and in the devising of means that will disintegrate the tribes and bring them into association with the best of our civilization.” (Lajimodore, 2012: 8). However, racist attitudes by the general public made integration difficult for Native peoples. Unlike the Holocaust, there were ways for Native peoples to be “redeemed”.

Applications of Trauma Theory

Psychology and Trauma

There are universal constants to the way that that people react to pain and suffering allowing many aspects of trauma theory to be applied. Generational trauma theory has a psychological basis, and can be supported by scientific evidence, facilitating the application. The primary idea behind this outlook is that, psychologically, we are all similar and, despite cultural differences, our brains develop and react to trauma in similar manners (Duran and Duran, 1995:

24). As a result, elements of generational trauma theory are universal. In his work, outlining the development of adolescents living in lower income areas, Lawrence Steinberg notes that adolescents who have traumatic experiences will develop differently than children who have not

(Steinberg, 2014: 20). It is particularly important to note that Steinberg places emphasis as the mental development that takes place during adolescence (when most boarding school survivors were in schools) (Steinberg, 2014: 207). People raise their children in the same environment as they were raised in. Abusive typically raise abusive children. This is demonstrated in the following quote by Steinberg, “How parents discipline their children matters, too. Parents who use physical force or express intense emotions when punishing are less likely to raise kids with good self-control than are parents who are calmer and gentler, while still maintaining authority.”

(Steinberg, 2013:171). A similar series of abuses can be seen by Native American boarding 13 school survivors. For example, Lajimodore recounts the abuses that he experienced at the hands of his father, and how he also abused his children, and tried to break that habit (Lajimodore,

2012 :7). Steinberg also notes that abuse is likely to have a history in families. If somebody was abused as a child, they are more likely to abuse their children as an adult. (Steinberg, 2014: 175).

Maria Yellow Horse Brave Heart finds evidence that links trauma to alcoholism, that is transmitted between generations. This is demonstrated in the following quote, “Childhood exposure to trauma, often associated with parental substance abuse, influences perceptual and emotional experiences of childhood events…persist into adulthood.” (Yellow Horse Brave Heart,

2003: 10). The trauma response, tends to include intersections of culture and psychology.

Terminology

Another application of Holocaust trauma theory to Native Americans is the use of

Holocaust terminology by Native American scholars. The term, boarding school survivor is a reference to the term, Holocaust survivor (Langer, 1991: 5) (Yellow Horse Brave Heart, 2000:

245). The term survivor was originally used by Holocaust survivors when they recorded their memoirs of the Holocaust (Bergen, 2009 :233). In addition, Hellen Epstein, and other second- generation survivors describe how they carry on the burden of the Holocaust through the use of various terminology, such as “those of us who bear our parents burden” and “memory candles”

(Epstein, 1988: 13-14). A similar sort of terminology is used by second-generation boarding school survivors, like the words of anonymous second-generation survivor, as recorded by

Yellow Horse Brave Heart, “I can’t separate myself from the past, the history and the trauma.”

(Yellow Horse Brave Heart, 2003: 7). This terminology, was most likely independently developed by the Native American scholars and psychologists

Sites of Memory 14

Another important similarity is the application of sites of memory by Native peoples. For

Native peoples, boarding schools’ serve as conduits of memory. The boarding schools, serve as symbols of pain inflicted upon Native peoples, like the Holocaust death camps and museums like the USHMM serve as symbols of the Holocaust. As part of the Boarding School Project, boarding school survivors and their children returned to the Mount Pleasant Indian Industrial

Boarding School in Michigan to share their experiences (Millich, 2011). The school was abandoned since it closed in 1931. In 2016, the Saginaw Chippewa tribe purchased the school and restored it, making it a memorial (Malmont, 2016). In that same year, members of the San-

Carlos Apache tribe visited Carlisle Indian School. The significance of the journey demonstrated in the following quote, “It is…a source of closure… but also a confirmation that the stories that were passed on by relatives were… true.” (Sipes, 2015). The Carlisle Project has made efforts to preserve the school grounds. A museum being constructed there will feature both Carlisle’s history as a boarding school, and its sporting history. The intent is to balance both aspects of the school (Carlyle Indian School Project). The graves of the Native children who perished at the boarding schools are a particularly powerful symbol of the trauma inflicted upon Native people.

In addition, Native peoples performed healing ceremonies in both of these gravesites, to provide closure for both the dead and the living (Malmont, 2016).

Liturgical Time

Native memory reflects what scholars would refer to as liturgical time. Native ceremonies take place at certain times of year to commemorate different things. In her study of

Native American trauma. Yellow Horse Brave Heart notes that during the progressive era, the federal government banned traditional ceremonies, unless they were church sanctioned. These ceremonies included the Sioux Sun Dance and the “Wiping of the Tears” Ceremony. (Yellow 15

Horse Brave Heart, 2000: 290). This severely limited the ways that Native peoples could express their grief. As part of her project to help Native people suffering from trauma, Maria Yellow

Horse Brave Heart helped people perform the ceremonies as part of the healing process. These festivals set aside a time of the year to commemorate the past, and trauma that occurred to Native peoples (Yellow Horse Brave Heart, 1998: 290). This is similar to the ninth of Av in Jewish tradition, which sets a particular day of the year to remember trauma.

Political Use of Trauma

Another similarity between the Holocaust and Native trauma is that both groups have used the historical trauma for political ends. While a Zionist movement existed before WWII, the movement experienced widespread support after the Holocaust (Bergen, 2009: 8). When the

Holocaust became known, it served as impetus for the creation of Israel. Israel (and many in the

U.S.) continue to use the Holocaust as a justification for Israel’s existence (Bergen, 2009: 239).

Similarly, Native reformers have used American Indian history, such as the boarding schools, as justification for Native sovereignty. Native reformers like AIM pointed to the injustices that the federal government forced on Native peoples, to advocate for self-determination, rather be governed by the federal government (Deloria, 1988: 226). Since the federal government failed in educating Native youth, Native peoples must create their own schools, and write their own textbooks (Bellecourt, 2016: 297-298). This manifested in the conversion of many boarding schools into tribal colleges (Haskell Indian Junior College) and the 1975 Indian Self-

Determination and Education Assistance Act, allowing Native peoples to compact with the federal government and run their own programs (Prucha, 1986: 376). The purpose of this paper is not to discuss whether or not the political ends that both groups advocate are justified, but rather to demonstrate that a similar phenomenon is present for both groups. 16

How Far Can the Application be Made?

This begs the question; how far can generational trauma theory be applied to the boarding school trauma? Evidence suggests that the theory can be applied to American Indian boarding school experiences, but this application is limited. A scholar must take into account the populations they are working with and the nature of the trauma. One must understand that Native peoples are distinct communities with worldviews that are different from European worldviews who experienced different traumas. As a result, the HTR and the ways that the trauma is passed down is different. This is demonstrated in the following quote by Maria Yellow Horse Brave

Heart when discussing her analysis of Lakota trauma, “…Lakota grief may be qualitatively distinct from typologies of grief identified in Eurocentric literature.” (Yellow Horse Brave Heart,

2000: 263) Before applying the framework to a community, a researcher must first understand their worldview, and how it impacts the HTR. For example, Maria Yellow Horse Brave Heart understood the Lakota worldview, being part Lakota. She was able to apply trauma theory and utilize Native worldviews to better comprehend the response to trauma. Her use of Native worldview to provide insights is demonstrated in the following quote, “…some trauma response features may be more of a culturally congruent manifestation of a traditional orientation”

(Yellow Horse Brave Heart, 2000: 263). She also doubted if a person who was not Lakota could, as effectively, treat the historical trauma inflected upon the Lakota people, without the assistance of the community (Yellow Horse Brave Heart, 2000: 263). It is important to note that Yellow

Horse Brave Heart is not discounting non-Native assistance for Native peoples, but rather, cultural understanding is essential to assisting Native communities.

The Healing Process: Overcoming the Trauma 17

This begs the question; how can Native people recover from the trauma that was inflicted upon them? The modes and methods of overcoming the trauma differ from person to person.

Several first and second generation boarding school survivors came to peace with their pasts through memoirs, like, Lajimodiere in his 2012 article, “A Healing Journey”. In addition, as part of her work with boarding school survivors, Yellow Horse Brave Heart collected the memories of boarding school survivors. She found that recording the stories of boarding school survivors helped them heal. By recording their journey, it helps them process through and recover from the trauma (Yellow Horse Brave Heart, 2000: 252). Another method of recovering from the trauma is working one’s emotions through art. For example, in 2014, the Los Angeles Equity Theater hosted their fourth annual short play festival, which focused on the Native American boarding school experience. The plays are written by Native authors and performed by Native actors.

Many are single person monologues emphasizing the schools’ impacts (Native News Online

Staff, 2014). Other forms of artistic media reference the boarding school experience. For example, in the Concho Indian Boarding School in Concho Oklahoma, Native artist Stephen

Grounds, painted murals over the abandoned school buildings to pay tribute to the Cheyenne and

Arapaho tribes. The murals juxtapose historical figures of the tribe (Chief Black Kettle) with contemporary figures (Susan Shown Harjo). This art connects the past and present, reflecting the survival of culture, despite attempts to eradicate it (Meier, 2016).

Natives have also put their pain into advocating political change, particularly, decolonization movements. As mentioned earlier, the Bellecourts, and other second-generation survivors channeled their frustration into pushing for social change through the American Indian

Movement. Clyde Bellecourt used the pain inflicted upon his mother as impetus and inspiration for his political work with AIM, as demonstrated in the following quote, “When she told me this 18

[her boarding school trauma], I was so angry and hurt…That knowledge seemed to justify everything I was doing in the Movement” (Bellecourt, 2016: 26). One framework for this political change is “decolonization”, which sets out to undo the effects of settler colonialism.

Much of the philosophical framework for decolonization comes from West African philosopher

Franz Fanon, and was later expanded upon by Native scholars and activists like Vine Deloria and

Russel Means (Deloria, 1988: x). Native scholars and activists have also emphasized taking biases out of education and removing colonizing aspects of schools. This can be accomplished by hiring culturally responsive teachers, advocating cultural curriculum and cross-cultural collaborations to counteract the settler colonialism in schools (Pewewardy, 2005: 151).

Another method for overcoming the trauma is the “Return to the Sacred Path” program, developed in 1998 by Maria Yellow Horse Brave Heart, combining psychology and Native worldviews. The Return to the Sacred Path is a psychological intervention plan designed for the

Sioux people. The plan utilizes psychoanalysis and counseling to address the symptoms of the trauma (like AA counseling for people struggling with substance abuse) (Yellow Horse Brave

Heart, 1998: 293). The main portion of her project is to let the Lakota people mourn for their grief, in a culturally supportive manner. This includes group counseling overseen by a male/ female Lakota survivor pair and ceremonies like the “onikage/inipi” (Lakota Purification ceremony) and a “wiping of the tears” ceremony. This intervention successfully increased awareness and decreased grief (Yellow Horse Brave Heart, 1998: 293). It also proved that grief interventions should be tailored to the culture of the group who the trauma was inflicted upon.

The significance of culture is demonstrated in the following quote, “The Importance of incorporating traditional Lakota spirituality and leadership in this intervention model cannot be overstated.” (Yellow Horse Brave Heart, 1998: 301). During her research, she found that 19 emotions like sadness, grief, anger, hopelessness, helplessness shame and guilt decreased throughout the intervention, and emotions like pride, and increased. 89% of respondents found the intervention to be helpful (Yellow Horse Brave Heart, 1998: 296).

Conclusion: What is Left?

In conclusion, the off-reservation boarding schools created trauma that scarred multiple generations of Native people. Several scholars use the generational trauma theory, to explain and help to heal boarding school survivors. Some limitations of this approach are, economic/cultural differences, the changing nature of the traumas, and differences in the philosophies underlying the traumas. Areas where the generational trauma theory can be applied include the psychological basis of trauma, concurrent use of terminology, the use of liturgical time and sites of memory and the political use of trauma. The recovery process is based on the individual, but, scientific frameworks are being developed. The conclusion that this paper draws is like the one that Yellow Horse Brave Heart draws in her work. Before applying trauma theory, one must analyze the culture of who experienced the trauma. This begs the question, what happens to a community once they come to terms with their past? The last few words of Thomas Builds-the-

Fire’s monologue in Smoke Signals ends with the following line, “If We Forgive our Fathers, what is Left?”. This references the peace Victor Joseph finds after forgiving his father’s abuse.

(Alexie and Eye, 1998). This is references how Native communities find peace after coming to terms with the past, similar to how Victor comes to peace with his own past.

20

References Alexie S. (Producer/Writer) and Eye, C. (Director) (1998). Smoke Signals [motion picture].

United States: Miramax

Bear, C. (2008, May 12) American Indian Boarding Schools Haunt Many. NPR. Retrieved from

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=16516865

Bellcourt C. (2016). The Thunder Before the Story: The Autobiography of Clyde Bellcourt.

Minnesota Historical Society Press, St. Paul

Bergen, D.L. (2009) War and Genocide: A Concise History of the Holocaust. Lanham, MD:

Rowman and Littlefield Publishers Inc.

Carlyle Indian School Project (n.d.) The Carlisle Project. Retrieved from

http://www.carlisleindianschoolproject.com/

Churchill W. (2004). Kill the Indian, Save the Man: The Genocidal Impact of American Indian

Residential Schools. City Lights Books: San Francisco

Deloria, V. (1988). Custer Died for Your Sins: An Indian Manifesto. Norman, OK: University of

Oklahoma Press

Duran, E. and Duran, B. (1995). Native American Postcolonial Psychology. Albany, NY: State

University of Press

Epstein, H. (1988). Children of the Holocaust: Conversations with Sons and Daughters of

Survivors. New York: Penguin

Fixico, D. L. (2009). The American Indian Mind in a Linear World: American Indian Studies

and Traditional Knowledge. Binghamton NY: Routledge 21

Lesiak, C. (producer/writer) and Jones, W.L. (co-producer). (1992) In the White Man’s Image.

[television series episode]. In C. Lesiak (producer), The American Experience. Boston,

Massachusetts, PBS WGBH-TV Retrieved From:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpkIsyc0YRU

Lajimodiere, D. K. (2012) A Healing Journey. Wicazo Sa Review. 27. 5-19.

http://muse.jhu.edu.ezproxy1.lib.asu.edu/article/488625/pdf

Langer, L. L. (1991). Holocaust Testimony: The Ruins of Memory. New Haven, CT :Yale

University Press

Lobo, S. (2010). Is Urban a Person or a Place? Characteristics of Urban Indian Country. In Lobo,

S., Talbot, S. and Morris, T. L. Native American Voices: A Reader. (426-431). Boston,

MA: Prentice Hall.

Meier, A. (2016, September 12). A Mural Honors the Ruins of an American Indian Boarding

School. Hyperallergic. Retrieved from: https://hyperallergic.com/320611/a-mural-

honors-the-ruins-of-an-american-indian-boarding-school/

Millich G. (2011) Survivors of Indian Boarding Schools Tell Their Stories. WKAR News.

Retrieved from http://wkar.org/post/survivors-indian-boarding-schools-tell-their-

stories#stream/0

Native News Online Staff (2014, November 4) Native Voices at the Autry Presents Five Plays on

Indian Boarding Schools. Native News Online. Retrieved from:

http://Nativenewsonline.net/currents/native-voices-autry-presents-five-plays-indian-

boarding-schools/ 22

Pewewardy C. (2005). Ideology, Power and the Miseducation of Indigenous Peoples in the

United States. In , A. W. and Yellow Bird, M. (ed.) For Indigenous Eyes Only: A

Decolonization Handbook. (139-156). Santa Fe: School of American Research.

Prucha, F. P. (1986) The Great Father: The United States Government and American Indians.

University of Nebraska Press: Lincoln, NE

Sipes, A. (2015, July 16). Apache Group Visits Carlisle Indian Industrial School The Sentinel.

Retrieved from http://cumberlink.com/news/local/communities/carlisle/apache-group-

visits-carlisle-indian-industrial-school/article_4083c410-407c-5f53-8fd2-

b567f0ee0759.html

Steinberg L. (2014). Age of Opportunity: Lessons from the New Science of Adolescence. New

York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing

Tuck, E. and Wayne Yang, K. (2012). Decolonization is not a Metaphor. Decolonization:

Indigeneity, Education & Society. 1. 1-40. Retrieved from

http://www.decolonization.org/index.php/des/article/view/18630

United Nations, UNESCO, UNESCO and the Struggle Against Genocide: Declaration of San

Jose, December 1981, retrieved from

http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0004/000499/049951eo.pdf

Yellow Horse Brave Heart, M. (1998). The Return to the Sacred Path: Healing the Historical

Trauma and Historical Unresolved Grief Response Among the Lakota Through a

Psychoeducational Group Intervention. Smith College Studies in Social Work. 287-305.

Retrieved From https://search.lib.asu.edu/primo- 23

explore/fulldisplay?docid=TN_tayfranc10.1080/00377319809517532&context=PC&vid

=01ASU&search_scope=Everything&tab=default_tab&lang=en_US

Yellow Horse Brave Heart, M. (2000). Wakiksuyapi: Carrying the Historical Trauma of the

Lakota. Tulane Studies in Social Welfare. 245-266. Retrieved from

http://discoveringourstory.wisdomoftheelders.org/ht_and_grief/Wakiksuyapi-HT.pdf

Yellow Horse Brave Heart, M. (2003). The Historical Trauma Response Among Natives and Its

Historical Relationship with Substance Abuse: A Lakota Illustration. Journal of

Psychoactive Drugs. 35. 7-13. Retrieved From

http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy1.lib.asu.edu/10.1080/02791072.2003.10399988

Yerushalmi, Y. F. (2002) Zakhor: Jewish History and Jewish Memory. University of Washington

Press: Seattle WA

This paper has not been submitted for consideration to any other Journal nor is it currently under review by any other journal.