Information to Users
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. ProQuest Information and Learning 300 North Zeeb Road. Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 USA 800-521-0600 UMI UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA GRADUATE COLLEGE THE HOLY LAND IN TRANSIT: COLONIALISM AND THE QUEST FOR CANAAN A Dissertation SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE FACULTY in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy By STEVEN SALAITA Norman, Oklahoma 2003 UMI Num ber: 3077424 UMI UMI Microform 3077424 Copyright 2003 by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest Information and Learning Company 300 North Zeeb Road P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 © Copyright by STEVEN SALAITA 2003 All rights reserved. THE HOLY LAND IN TRANSIT: COLONIALISM AND THE QUEST FOR CANAAN A Dissertation APPROVED FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH BY Akin'VcIie, Director Dan CoUoin Lkji Catherine John. bert Warrior TABLE OF CONTENTS Preface I Introduction: The Holy Land in Transit 5 Chapter One: Demystifying the Quest for Canaan: Observations on Mimesis in the New World and Holy Land 70 Chapter Two: Digging up the Bones of the Past: Colonial and Indigenous Interplay in Winona LaDuke’sLast Standing Woman 111 Chapter Three: The Kahan Commission Report andA Balcony Over the Fakihani: A Tale of Two Fictions 152 Chapter Four: Reimagining the Munificence of an Ass: The Strange Circumstances of Vizenor and Habiby 192 Conclusion: Dreamcatchers on the Last Frontier 237 Bibliography 249 IV ABSTRACT Through a comparative analysis of colonialism in the New World and Holy Land with attention to how politics influence literary production, I examine the process by which settler societies transform theological narratives into national histories to justify their occupation of foreign land. In particular, I analyze the similarities between rhetoric employed by early colonialists in North America and that employed by Zionist immigrants in Palestine. In doing so, I examine histories, theories, and literary depictions of colonialism and inter ethnic dialectics. Having established this comparative analysis, I then develop it further through the textual criticism in the second half of the dissertation, where I discuss Anishinaabe authors Gerald Vizenor and Winona LaDuke and Palestinian authors Liyana Badr and Emile Habiby. Preface Since entering doctoral school at the University of Oklahoma three years ago with a clear vision of my dissertation topic—a comparative analysis of Native Americans and Palestinians, with attention to how politics influence literary production—I have been asked repeatedly how that topic came into existence. It is a good question, one that I cannot answer even now, after six semesters of intense reading and research, after five seminars in Native Studies, and after three trips to the Middle East. If 1 were able to respond easily to any inquiry about my dissertation project, then 1 imagine there would have been no need for me to write the dissertation, and life would have been considerably easier these last three years. 1 should preface my discussion by saying 1 wish sincerely that this dissertation were not needed. In fact, 1 hope that it will someday be an artifact that reflects historical conditions rather than political realities; that is, a window to the past rather than a mirror on the present. If that actually happens, it means the social and political realities that frame the concepts presented herein will have abated and justice will have prevailed for the Indigenous peoples 1 study, thus rendering moot my criticisms of colonization and imperialism. For one of my goals is not simply to cast light on how colonialism functions in particular situations, but to contribute to a culture working hard outside the Academy to eliminate colonialism. As a student, 1 was never much interested in work that failed to ground itself into pragmatic contexts relevant to the activist or general reader in addition to the specialist. Given the choice between Frantz Fanon or Homi Bhabha, I would without hesitation pick up Wretched o f the Earth — not just because it is a brilliant theoretical text, but because it gave me a feeling of empowerment outside the classroom. In my estimation, that is what the very best scholarship does, and the very best examples of literary criticism highlight aesthetics in literature that do the same. Now that my time has come to produce work, I refuse to abandon my sensibilities as a reader, which would essentially be an act of hypocrisy. I have therefore constructed this dissertation in a way that might satisfy academics as well as any reader interested in issues of justice for Indigenous peoples, especially if they are concerned with formulating resistant strategies or incorporating theoretical models into public debate. Only time will tell, of course, whether that approach has been successful. More specifically, I conceptualize this project as traditional literary criticism. I will examine fiction in detail, placing emphasis on textual features that contribute to the critical framework detailed in the introduction and first chapter. In another sense, though, this project is also oriented toward literary theory. While I will spend much energy explicating texts in a thorough way, an approach that has—regrettably, in my opinion— lost appeal in today's English departments, 1 will contextualize those explications with broader theoretical designs. All theoretical positions expressed henceforth will be, 1 hope, relevant to academics and activists alike. Before 1 proceed, 1 would like to answer the question of how this topic came into existence as my first attempt at constructing a theoretical position. As with many projects, the foundation for this one was and continues to be happenstance; that is to say, a coincidental discovery of something that already exists and need only be articulated. 1 was raised in Appalachia by Arab immigrants who nurtured my childhood interest in the Middle East, Palestine particularly. My entire life has thus been dedicated to Palestinian politics and activism, and nothing has occupied my thoughts more than Israeli brutality and the way it is described so euphemistically in the United States, if even it is mentioned at all. For the majority of my life. Native America was nothing but an abstract backdrop to the old leftist politics 1 have since outgrown. I knew, as most Americans do, that the United States was constructed on other peoples’ lands, and that terrible domestic atrocities occurred in America’s past. But it was a knowledge without understanding, an abstraction without consciousness, an acknowledgment without history. After I enrolled in an Indian novel seminar in college, however, I learned that Natives are alive en masse and engaging in myriad ways with the American polity. As I read Silko and Momaday and Welch—and the accompanying scholarship—I gradually realized that I had seen all the concepts before and that I had already read the history inspiring those novels’ creation. And, in fact, 1 had. It was simply in the form of Palestinian history. Not only were the rhetorical techniques of the dominant power in both cases similar, at times they were identical. Even the language colonialists used in their errands was the same, as with the concepts of “noble savage’’ and “chosen people.” Similar is an awfully weak word on which to predicate a comparative study. Had 1 found only similarities, this project would never have been conceived. The fact that 1 found identical discursive methods compelled me to pursue the jxissibility of looking in more detail at colonization across national boundaries. When 1 discovered that Zionist leaders drew inspiration from American history in conceptualizing ways to rid Palestine of its Indigenes, the project became a reality. Every week, I uncover more evidence to suggest that the United States and Israel are more than strategic partners. Numerous sources indicate that they are actually bound historically and philosophically in ways that run much deeper than conventional political expediency, although it too is at play in their relationship. More important, I have long had distaste for ethnocentric tunnel vision, a phenomenon that has recently plagued the Arab American community. In pressing the American government to reconsider its support for Israel, Arab Americans often reinforce (sometimes unwittingly, sometimes not) all of the colonial values framed in a vocabulary of enlightenment and civility. This is a disturbing development, for it indicates yet again the ability