• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

PROGRESSIVE TRADITIONS: CHEROKEE CULTURAL STUDIES A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Cornell University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy by Joshua Bourne Nelson February 2010 © 2010 Joshua Bourne Nelson PROGRESSIVE TRADITIONS: CHEROKEE CULTURAL STUDIES Joshua Bourne Nelson, Ph. D. Cornell University 2010 My dissertation intervenes in prevalent debates between nationalists and cosmopolitans that have dominated American Indian literary theory and displaced alternative questions about the empowering potential of local identities. Both positions too often categorize American Indian literature with a reductive dichotomy that opposes traditionalism against assimilation, resulting in the seizing of mechanisms that coordinate change and in the unwarranted archival exclusion of many authors—such as those I discuss—who speak to historical problems with present effects. Seeing past this dialectic requires a fresh look at what precisely is gathered under “assimilation” and “traditionalism”—a reassessment I initiate by arguing that Cherokee representations of dynamic, agentive identities proceed from traditional, adaptive strategies for addressing cultural and historical dilemmas. My project is organized into two sections of two chapters, the first of which introduce principled practices from several scholarly perspectives then applied to primary texts in the subsequent chapters. In the first, I examine an array of traditional religious dispositions and the critical theories that have been advanced to interpret and apply them to Cherokee literature. In the second I take up gendered religious innovations in the memoirs of Catharine Brown, a nineteenth-century Christian convert, and in the science fiction of contemporary novelist Sequoyah Guess, both traditionalists who synthesize identities through pragmatic accommodation and find not erasure but support for Cherokee culture through traditional practices like “gaining knowledge.” The third chapter looks at traditional political structures, providing a cultural context for discussion of Elias Boudinot’s and John Ross’s contentious (and again gendered) rhetoric in chapter four. I argue here that failure to understand the tension over Cherokee Removal to Oklahoma in the (de)structure of political centralization, which vacated the discursive spaces that once forged consensus, has led too many critics to authorize nationalist rhetoric uncritically. I emphasize the major themes of worship and dissent herein because they most often suffer misapplications of the assimilated/traditional dichotomy that simultaneously says so much and so little. I hope my work opens American Indian literary criticism to critical theory, opens theory to American Indians, and most importantly, opens the imaginative possibilities of communal identity. BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Joshua B. Nelson, a citizen of the Cherokee Nation, is a native Oklahoman, and he and his wife divide their time between Norman and Canoe Mountain, south of Park Hill. He earned his B.A. in psychology from Yale, his M.A. in English from Cornell, and is now Assistant Professor of English and Native American Studies at the University of Oklahoma. iii Dedicated to Tiffany for her love and support, to Mom for her example, to Ronnie for his instruction in the essentials, and to Granddad for his stories. iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Thanks especially to the chair of my committee, Laura Donaldson, who pushed, pulled, and prodded me into bringing my project into clear focus. What’s best in my project comes from her guidance. Shirley Samuels offered no end of help and expertise and generously sprung for coffee more than a few times. Her critiques were pointed, demanding, and always spot-on. Angela Gonzales, too, never let up, and her expectations of uncommon rigor remind me constantly of the importance of intellectual responsibility. Her own service and commitment to the American Indian community at Cornell was both a source of strength and a powerful example. Cornell’s administrative teams in the Graduate College, the English department, and the American Indian Program backed me at every turn. Particularly helpful were Dean Terry Plater, Jim Adams, Jane Mt. Pleasant, Kathy Halbig, Michele Manella, Darlene Flint, and Jenka Fyfe. The students in my freshman writing seminars at Cornell helped me perhaps more than they know in getting my ideas into communicable shape. Special thanks are due Alan Velie at the University of Oklahoma for his mentorship and unflagging support. He opened the door for me, and I return to his scholarship for its keen eye, its sympathy, and its realism. People who wonder about the value of non-Indian scholarship must not know him or his work. Robert Warrior and Craig Womack moved me along in both in my thinking and my career, and better examples of engaged scholars I could not hope to find. David Mair, Geary Hobson, Vince Leitch, Kim Roppolo and the rest of the faculty and staff at the University of Oklahoma have been as welcoming and accommodating as anyone could hope for, and I’m grateful for the chance they’ve given me to contribute to the intellectual lives of their communities. I’d also like to thank the good folks at Northeastern State University in Tahlequah for their interest, time, and support: Wyman Kirk and Harry v Oosahwee, instructors in the Cherokee language program, listened to a lot babbling and taught me everything I know about the Cherokee language (and it’s not their fault I don’t know much); Terri Baker at the English department provided me with wonderful opportunities to teach at NSU and equally inspiring conversation; Phyllis Fife of the Center for Tribal Studies extended generous invitations to speak; Delores Sumner, librarian at Special Collections, pointed me toward incredible sources and shared wonderful stories; my students at NSU helped me see much that never even occurred to me; Ed Jumper also put up with a lot of yammering and translated Boudinot’s “Poor Sarah” in its entirety—in his spare time—just because I expressed some interest in it and asked him to take a look; and the administration at NSU also offered me opportunities greater than I have merited. My friends at Cornell are a good bunch. Scott, Pepe, and Cole Perez, and Whitney and Mike Mauer opened their homes several times. Alyce Spotted Bear’s kind heart knows no equal. Alyssa Mt. Pleasant and Alice Te Punga Somerville swiftly and generously welcomed me as a newcomer. John and Robin Parks were uncommonly generous in opening their home. Thanks also to Seth, Ken, Will, and Keith, the other Ken, and the good people at First Indian. I owe my greatest debt to my family, near and far, all of whom offered support and encouragement—I could have done nothing without the Paddyakers, the Hardys, the Nelsons, the Tidmores, each and every one. My mother, Jeanie Nelson and step-father Ronnie Roberts have done more for me and meant more to me than I can express. ᎠᎴ ᏩᏙ ᎩᏟ. ᎡᏚᏚ, ᏦᏪᎵᏒᎢ. Above all, thanks to Tiffany for her sacrifice, her support, and her love. To her I owe everything. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Biographical Sketch iii Dedication iv Acknowledgements v Introduction 1 Section One: ᏙᏥᎳᏫᏍᎪᎢ 30 Chapter One Paths of Righteousness 34 Chapter Two “Gaining Knowledge”: Religious Improvisation in Catharine Brown’s Memoir and Sequoyah Guess’s Kholvn 78 Section Two: ᎣᏥᏲᎯᏍᎪᎢ 148 Chapter Three Town and Country: Contexts and Principled Practices of Deliberation 152 Chapter Four “No Weapon to Use but Argument”: The Removal Rhetoric of Elias Boudinot and John Ross 179 Works Cited 223 vii INTRODUCTION Since the 1990’s, debates between nationalists and cosmopolitans have dominated American Indian literary theory, displacing theoretical and political arguments not immediately concerned with either camp’s political programs. Looking to literature for creative articulations of communities’ shapes among Cherokee people, Cherokee critics like Jace Weaver, Daniel Justice, and others have taken Craig Womack’s cue in approaching literature from theoretical perspectives grounded in some aspect of relevant tribal culture.1 Major trends have included emphasis on traditional orature, ties to and relationships with land, embeddedness in tribal history or political problems, and connections with communities of various shapes. On the occasions that literary critics confront the problematic work of Cherokee authors like Catharine Brown, Elias Boudinot, John Oskison, or Will Rogers, they seem compelled to apologize for the writers’ assimilationist appearances, adopting a historical pattern of dismissal that reduces Indian identity to dichotomies wherein Indians are either traditional or assimilated, and the latter is a code for “not really Indian.” Disassembling this too-long enduring, heteronomous dialectic requires an reassessment of what precisely is meant by assimilation and traditionalism. I argue that Cherokee authors employed traditional adaptive strategies to resolve cultural and historical problems. At the edges of the already liminal, smaller groups of Cherokee 1 Jace Weaver, That the People Might Live (New York: Oxford UP, 1996) 1-36; Daniel Justice, “‘Go Away, Water!’ Kinship Criticism and the Decolonization Imperative,” Reasoning Together: The Native Critics Collective, by Janice Acoose, et al., ed. Craig Womack, Daniel Justice, and Christopher Teuton (Norman: U of Oklahoma P, 2008) 147-68; Daniel Justice, Our Fire Survives the Storm: A Cherokee Literary History (Minneapolis: U of Minnesota P, 2006) 7-10;

Load more

  246

Copy Link