1185782

8/12/2019 1185782

1/25

Cultural Identity, Authenticity, and Community Survival: The Politics of Recognition in theStudy of Native American ReligionsAuthor(s): John A. GrimSource: American Indian Quarterly, Vol. 20, No. 3/4, Special Issue: To Hear the Eagles Cry:Contemporary Themes in Native American Spirituality (Summer - Autumn, 1996), pp. 353-376Published by: University of Nebraska PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1185782.

Accessed: 24/12/2010 01:18

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at.http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you

may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at .http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=unp..

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed

page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

University of Nebraska Pressis collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toAmerican

Indian Quarterly.

http://www.jstor.org
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=unphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/1185782?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=unphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=unphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/1185782?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=unp

8/12/2019 1185782

2/25

CULTURALDENTITY,AUTHENTICITY,AND COMMUNITY URVIVAL:THEPOLITICSFRECOGNITIONIN THE STUDY OF NATIVE AMERICAN RELIGIONS

BYJOHNA. GRIMThis article asks the question whether the current politics ofrecognition in American Indian studies provides new perspectives for the

study of American Indian religions.1The politics of recognition is associatedherewith the public effort of many American Indian scholarsand reservationcommunity leaders to raisequestions about the lack of sovereignvoice amongindigenous peoples and about the manner in which theircultural identity hasbeen misrepresented. Closely relatedis Native American postcolonial theorywhich explores the structures of American imperialism and the waysin whichstructures of dominance have framed Native American ethnicity, race,gender, and religion.2 This paper proposes that specific issues raised in thepolitics of recognition, namely, cultural identity, authenticity, and commu-nity survival, provide critical approaches to the study of American Indianreligions. These approaches arenot simply political perspectivesbut ways ofilluminating social forces and ritual practicesin Native American communi-ties.3 Native American identity has rarelybeen understood in its culturaland social setting in mainstreamAmerica. Individualism and stereotypes ofheroic warriorpersonalities have been emphasized in a way that distorts theactual Native stress on individual identity in the context of culturalcommunity. The academic study of Native American healers, shamans, ormedicine men has at times over emphasized the personal biographical andvisionary formation of these healers with little or no attention to thecommunity setting in which these religious healers practice. When Anglos,disaffected by their own religious traditions, turn to American Indianreligions they often imagine themselves as autonomous, heroic visionaries.American Indian scholars sometimes speak of these practitioners as"whiteshamans."In drawing out the reactions of these Native scholars I ampointing toward the basis of their judgments regardingcultural identity aslying in the Native community. Moreover, the direction of their analysisconstitutes a new dialogue between mainstream and dominant America inwhich Native peoples arenot simply spoken for but speak themselves aboutthe study of their religions.JOHNA.GRIMSAPROFESSORNTHE EPARMENTOFELIGIONATBUCKNELL

UNIVERSITYN LEWISBURG,A.

AMERICANINDIAN QUARTERLY/SUMMER996/VOL. 20(3) 353

8/12/2019 1185782

3/25

THE POLITICS FRECOGNITION

Authenticity is connected in this paper to the Native Americanregardfor place. This approach does not collapse Native regardfor land intoa spiritual environmentalism but urgesstudents of Native American religionsto understand the fundamental link between Native community and place.Ward Churchill expressed this saying, "Recognition of the legal and moralrights by which a nation occupies its landbase is a fundamental issue of itsexistence."4For example, Native reservationspokespeople have struggledfordecades to protect sacred sites as well as to restore the land base of theircommunities. Mainstream Americans wonder which is the "authentic"American Indian relationship with the land?Are Native peoples authenticallyreligious in relation to sacred sites so that efforts to augment the communityland base is understood as simply an expression and extension of the privateproperty ethos protected by the United States Constitution for humanmembers of the community? Using the concept of "wilderness,"I take up alegal study as an inquiry into authenticity and place in the Native Americanpolitics of recognition. What does the Native struggle for sacred sites tell usabout American Indian religions?Responding to this question constitutes anapproach which also informs us about American Indian ethics and spiritualdirection.

Many people in mainstream America were shocked during theColombian Quincentennial in 1992 when they heard the term "genocide"used in describing the history of relations between the United Statesand thediverse American Indian peoples. Some Native American scholars haveinsisted that this term is descriptive of these relations into the present. Thus,they use the term not only for historical description but also for politicalpurposes. The overtly political agendaof some Native scholars has dulled thesharper questioning of a mainstream American propensity to commodifyeverything. Objectifying and marketingNativecultures threatens the survivalofviable American Indian communities accordingto this critique.One of theapproachessuggestedhere,namely, community survival,explores the critiqueraised by the American Indian politics of recognition that a systemic globalviolence continues to subvertlocal, indigenous communities, their land, andtheir cultures. This approach to the study of American Indian religions urgesstudents to develop "eyes"to see and "ears" o hear the new voice of Nativepeoples talking about the threats to theirculturalways.In responding to thesechallenges Native American religions have changed just as they havetransformed themselves over centuries of encounters with other indigenoustraditions. Understanding thatchange is not simply ahistorical insight, it hasbeen an issue of community survivalduring the 500 yearsof Native Americanencounters with Euroamerican colonization.Students of Native American religions will see that in using theseapproaches - cultural identity, authenticity, and community survival - theinterpretive act becomes less an application of the anthropological perspec-tive and more of a dialogue. The anthropological perspectivehas emphasized354 AMERICANINDIAN QUARTERLY/SUMMER1996/VOL. 20(3)

8/12/2019 1185782

4/25

JOHN . GRIM

the distinct worlds of diversecultures.The dialogic perspectivefostered in thepolitics of recognition is more interactive.Dialogic approachespresume thatthe different worlds of Native culture interact with one another and withmainstream American culture. Interaction is the key epistemological act inthe approaches presentedhere.That is, understandingdoes not occur withoutreaching out to learn about other Native cultures. Understanding risks thepossibility of change.This dialogic perspective is not the same as the interreligiousdialogue of institutional religions. There is more of a willingness to bracketthe "truths"and structureswithin which most interreligious dialogues occur.A dialogic perspective requires that one learn in the exchange of ideas andpractices about sharp differences and shared concerns. Ultimately, thesedialogic approaches cause a student to ask questions about the study ofreligion itself.The question continues to be raised:Does the current resurgenceofcritical voices in the Native American politics of recognition play a role inthe academic study of American Indian religions? Native scholars havecriticized the study of religion as having promoted demeaning images ofAmerican Indians. What critique can be brought to the work of Nativescholars?Do the politically significant perspectivesraisedby Native scholarsinsinuate themselves as methods for the study of American Indian religionswhich may, in fact, have little to do with the traditional ways of the diverseindigenous communities of North America?Are Native scholars circum-scribed by their political or personal agendas?Are Native scholars and thestudy of Native religions correctly described by Sam Gill when he wrote:

Native American members of the group [those involved in theacademic study of religion] often talk about their experiences,both in terms of their own tribal cultures and as Native Ameri-cans (oppressed minorities in academia as well as Americanculture). ... The publications, few as they are, by members of thisfield tend to be as much discussions about what should or shouldnot go on in the field, who should and should not contribute tothe field, as they are productive studies of Native Americanreligious topics. (Gill 1994: 972)

Gill's criticisms place academic study above discussions of the politics ofrecognition as approaches in the study of religion. Is it not also possible thatthe academic study of American Indian religions can be advanced by thepolitics of recognition?Implied in Gill's critique is the "ethnic criteria"argument regardingthe study of Native American religions. One standpoint says that only anAmerican Indian can truly study and understandAmerican Indian religions.Gill also describes a slightly different position based on languages and field

AMERICANINDIAN QUARTERLY/SUMMER 996/VOL.20(3) 355

8/12/2019 1185782

5/25

THE POLITICS OF RECOGNITION

studies:The topics that have engendered lively discussion in recent yearsin the study of Native American religions are revealing. Discus-sion has frequently centered on whether or not active participa-tion in the study of Native American religions should be re-stricted to those who speak Native American languages and havefield experience. Another topic of recent interest is whether non-Native Americans should study and teach Native Americanreligions. This discussion from start to finish has explored issuesthat divide along ethnic and racial lines (as even the question wasformulated). (Gill 1994: 971)Wendy Rose, a Hopi anthropologist, addressed this question whenshe wrote:The fear exists among non-Native writers that we are somehowtrying to bar them from writing about Indians at all, that Indianpeople might be "staking a claim" as the sole interpretersofIndian cultures, most especially of that which is sacred, andasserting that only Indians can make valid observations onthemselves. Such fears are not based in fact; I know of no Indianwho has ever said this. Nor do I know of any who secretly thinkit. We accept as given that whites have as much prerogative towrite and speak about us and our cultures as we have to write andspeak about them and theirs. The question is how this is doneand, to some extent, why it is done. (Rose 1992: 415-416)If ethnic and racial lines are not acceptable criteria for either Roseor Gill, what arethe criteriathat Native scholars propose regardingthe studyof American Indian religion? Would language study and field experienceprovide a response to Wendy Rose's question about "how" the study ofAmerican Indian traditions should be done? Do questions raised by thepolitics of recognition hold insights for thinking about "why"non-Nativestudents study Native American religions?Overstating the question, as I have done here, bracketsefforts in theacademic study of religion to reassessritual studies and to rethink narrativetraditions of myth-making.?Indeed, this caricatureof the history of religionsis asdubious as some of the ethnographies of Native peoples and many of theinterpretations of American Indian religions. Drawing attention to interpre-tive constructs in the history of religions is part of the advancework that hasalready begun in the study of religion. LawrenceSullivan undertook such acritique in his study of South American religious ideas in Icanchu'sDrumwhere he wrote:

356 AMERICANINDIAN QUARTERLY/SUMMER1996/VOL.20(3)

8/12/2019 1185782

6/25

JOHNA. GRIM

A numberof obstructionsblock the clearview we desireof SouthAmericanreligionsand values.Contrary o generalimpression,South Americans'deasabout themselvesare not thebiggestproblem.Theirimagery,unfamiliar o us, does notobscureSouthAmericanreligious ife;it constitutest and,there-fore,remains he only truesourceof its clarification.Rather,ourown interpretive onstructs tand in thewayof understanding.To come into the light thatSouthAmericanshemselves hed ontheirexperienceof humanity,we must firstinspectour own wayof thinkingand the shadowyconceptsthatundergirdt. Forinstance,no peoplereferto themselvesas practitioners f SouthAmericanreligions n the waythat othersidentifywith Bud-dhism,Christianity,Sikhism,Islam,Judaism,or Hinduism.SouthAmericaneligionss a category onstructedby outsiderswho, in awaythat calls for criticalscrutiny,actuallyconstitute the religioussituation describedby the term(Sullivan1988:6-7).

Sullivanhighlightsself-scrutinyf theshadowy onceptsoften used to thinkaboutreligion.Theapproaches resentedhereserve o emphasize nvestiga-tive conceptsthat come from the communitiesbeingstudied.Misconceptions persist, especiallyin the teaching of AmericanIndianreligionsbynonspecialists.Stereotypes ften areusedbystudentsofreligionto describeNativepeoplesas primalrather hancontemporary;scategorizedby theologicalquestionsrather han embodying ocal religiousthought;astimeless(ahistorical) ndcaught n historical orcesrather hanashistory-making;sincapableof theanalyticaldistanceof westernEnlight-enmentrationalismrather hanthoughttraditionswhichhavesubtleritualand mythic modes of reflection.By derivinginterpretive ools from thepoliticsof recognition, hisarticle eeks o provideperspectivesoreducatorstryingto teachAmerican ndianreligions.Suchperspectives o not explainawaybut open possibilitiesfor the academicstudy of AmericanIndianreligions.In consideringwritingsof theAmericanIndianscholarlycommu-nity I haveselectedstatementsby the Hopi-Miwokanthropologist,WendyRose,and the Lakotaawyer,VineDeloriaJr.,from thecollectionof articlestitled The tate fNativeAmerica.6In thediscussionof cultural dentityI alsodrawon thework,ManifestManners,f GeraldVizenor,a literaryheoristofAnishinabe-Angloeritage.7 hisis followedbyaperspectiveromthestudyf the Osagetheologian,GeorgeTinker, n his work,MissionaryConquest.While thesescholarsareAmericanIndians,I do not intend in anywaytopresentthem astheNativeposition or to collapsetheirdiversestandpointsintoone Nativeview.Rather, havegatheredogethersolatedaspectsof theirwork as articulatingan AmericanIndian politics of recognitionto draw

AMERICANNDIANUARTERLY/SUMMER996/VOL.0(3) 357

8/12/2019 1185782

7/25

THE POLITICSOFRECOGNITION

attention to a particular body of social criticism. This diverse "body" ofwritings has sharply criticized academic researchers as having fostered,knowingly or unknowingly, those unequal processes of representation bywhich indigenous peoples have been caricaturedin the academy.Following the sections on the three approaches to the study ofAmerican Indian religions, I will conclude with a brief case study, namely, aconsideration of theAshkisshe he "Sun Dance"ceremonial of theApsaalooke/Crow peoples of Montana. My point is to consider the implications ofcultural identity, authenticity,andcommunity survivalboth for theApsaalokethemselves as well as for myself as a student of the Ashkisshe ceremony. Theexample of the Ashkisshe/Sun Dance focuses on the reintroduction of thiscomplex ceremony to the Apsaalooke from the Shoshoni of Wyoming andthe first performance of a Shoshoni/Crow Sun Dance on the Crow IndianReservation. This historic event, which occurred in 1941, has had political,social, and ideological implications for the Apsaalooke.The Ashkisshe ceremonial also has been the focus of academicdiscussion by both Native and non-Native writerssuch asThomas YellowtailandJoseph Medicine Crow (Native), as well as FredVoget and Ron Frey(non-Native). This article endeavors to bring some of the epistemological andmethodological questions posed above to the study of the Shoshoni/CrowSun Dance as a religious ritual.Moreover, the fiftieth anniversarySun Danceperformed in Pryor, Montana, in 1991, provides a significant example inwhich this particular Ashkisshe ritual was joined to its founding story, ormyth. A brochure waspreparedby the sponsor of the fiftieth anniversarySunDance, Heywood Big Day, and this particularceremonial was the subject ofaphotographic essaybythesponsorwith the assistanceof MichaelCrummett.10In this case study historical and religious dimensions of the Shoshoni/CrowSun Dance were purposefully linked so as to bring the Crow into reflexivethought about this religious act.What I hope to make clear at the conclusion is that many of theimplications of the politics of recognition have already,to some extent, beenimplemented by traditional specialists who lead, as well as practice, theAshkisshe ritual among the Apsaalooke people. Thus, Apsaalooke leaders ofthe Ashkisshe ceremonial, for example, have made connections betweenidentity asinterior attitudes to be cultivatedduring the ritual and the learningof Crow language and Sun Dance songs. Regardingauthenticity, Crow eldersspeakof the interconnectedness of the dancerswith sacredpower, maxpe.Thedance of the participants becomes the placement of authenticity and ofspiritual blessings for all the community. Finally, the loss of their oldertraditional Sun Dance (Baaiichkiisapiliolissuafringed ankle dance") in 1875reminds the Crow of the fragile nature of ceremonial life especially in apervasively hostile environment. For the Apsaalooke community survivalflows from ritualization, the processof actualizing the imagined community,not in conceptualizations or interpretive schema alone.

358 AMERICANINDIAN QUARTERLY/SUMMER1996/VOL. 20(3)

8/12/2019 1185782

8/25

JOHN A. GRIM

IDENTITY AS DIFFERENCEThe lack of voice given to indigenous communities in history textsand the marketingof Indian consumer products illustratenonrecognition bymainstream America of diverseAmerican Indian cultural identities. Under-

lying dominant American attitudes is the perspective that all Americans arelocated within the same economic and social milieu. The approaches offeredhere provide ways to think about issues, such as cultural identity, not ascommodities or slogans with which to market aproduct but as integralvoiceswhich bring these different communities into being.What has caused suffering and confusion of identity among Nativepeoples has now become a targetfor social criticism by Native scholars. Mostproblematic for many Native communities and scholars arethose non-Nativeindividuals who market American Indian religion and identity for selfaggrandizement and profit. Can the academic study of American Indianreligions be distinguished or separated from this exploitative activity?Forexample, what happens when non-Native individuals present themselves aspseudo Indians, fake shamans, or interpreters of Native perspectives?Theanthropologist, Wendy Rose, considered some of these questions when she

wrote:The problem with whiteshamans is one of integrity and intent,not topic, style, interest, or experimentation. Many non-Indianpeople have-from the stated perspective of the non-Nativeviewing things Native-written honestly and eloquently about anynumber of Indian topics, including those we hold sacred.Wereadily acknowledge the beauty of some poetry by non-Nativesdealing with Indian people, values, legends, or the relationshipbetween human beings and the American environment. A non-Native poet cannot produce an Indian perspective on Coyote orHawk, cannot see Coyote or Hawk in an Indian way, and cannotproduce a poem expressing Indian spirituality. What can beproduced is another perspective, another view, another spiritualexpression. The issue, as I said, is one of integrity and intent.(Rose 1992: 416)Let us takeWendy Rose's emphasis on "integrityand intent" as keyterms for the self-scrutinyof the non-Native student using a cultural identityapproach to study American Indian religions. No non-Native study of aNative religious practicecan identify itself as an Indian explanation. Rather,all interpretations arise from worldviews and related perspectives whosevalues mayhave ideological force.StudyingAmerican Indian religions entailsa reflexive step that activates self-scrutiny.That is, this approach encouragesstudents to inquire into the images they have of Native Americans.

AMERICANNDIANQUARTERLY/SUMMER996/VOL.0(3) 359

8/12/2019 1185782

9/25


Examination of those images opens those dim and tentative begin-nings of memories that have established directions for study in ways otherthan through critical analysis. From this self-scrutinya student can researchthe historical journey of a people knowing that it is not his or her ownjourney. A student can develop an awareness of the limitations of a non-Native student with regardto the inner world, the "shadow-visions"of whichGerald Vizenor speaks when he writes:

The shadows of personal visions, for instance, were heard andseen alone, but not in cultural isolation or separation from tribalcommunities. Those who chose to hear visions, an extrememediation, were awarethat their creative encounters with naturewere precarious and would be sanctioned by the tribe; personalvisions could be of service to tribal families. Some personalvisions and stories have the power to heal and liberate the spirit,and there are similar encounters with tribal shadows in the storiesby contemporary tribal authors.Nicknames, shadows, and shamanic visions are tribalstories that are heard and remembered as survivance. Thesepersonal identities and stories are not the same as those translatedin the literature. (Vizenor 1994: 57-58)

Vizenor uses the neologism "survivance" to suggest the process of survivalembedded in the daily narrative acts of personal identity. He reminds hisreader that the inner world of visions is private and difficult of access butintimately related to the Native communities of a visionary. Because thesevisions are so inimical to translation some individuals yearn to take intothemselves the personal direction and meaningful authority of these Nativevisions.By "whiteshamans,"Rose refersto non-Native individuals who, froma number of motivations venal or romantic, present themselves as actuallyNative or as authorized interpretersof indigenous thought and action. Shedoes not seem to be pointing at non-Native academics in using this term.Indeed, her statement is written in an academic style, but her remarksraisequestions about public statements regarding American Indian religions.Native individuals who publicly market American Indian thought forpersonal aggrandizement are not described in some critical settings as"whiteshamans"but as "plasticmedicine men or women." Regardlessof theterms,variouscommunities of regard,ofwhich the academicstudyof religionis one, feel compelled to examine the plausibility of disingenuous claims inlight of knowledge and understanding of indigenous people.In this sense, the Native critique and the academic analysis arequiteclose. Namely, in the indigenous community, questions might be, "Whatelders have authorized you to speak in this way?What are your kinship

360 AMERICANINDIAN QUARTERLY/SUMMER1996/VOL.20(3)

8/12/2019 1185782

10/25

JOHN A. GRIM

connections to Native peoples? What experiences empower you to speakpublicly?"And in the academic context, the question often arises, "What isthe critical and comparative relation of the whiteshamans' teachings toknown religious teachings of this people?"They aredifferent questions thatarise from the conversations within these particularcommunities that studyAmerican Indian religions. Both communities distance themselves fromthose Native or non-Native individuals whose understanding of Nativetraditions is purely subjective, idiosyncratic, and profit-motivated. Yet, thecrucial point in this identity approach is that the academic standpoint andthe perspective of a Native community are necessarily different. Identityimplies difference in American Indian studies.Wendy Rose focuses on integrity and intent to provide criteria forevaluating poetic and artistic exchange in which Native themes are used bynon-Natives. One striking difference embedded in Rose's emphasis onintegrity and intent is the difference between these communities of commu-nication. In the academy, the integrity of intellectual identity restswith theautonomous rational individual; whereas, in the indigenous communityidentity rests in the relationship between the individual and the collective.Collective cultural identities areprimaryin the religious lifewaysofAmericanIndian communities. This collective identity as relational knowledge set inNative worldview values is violated by the claims of non-members ofindigenous communities who assert unsubstantiated prerogatives to speakfor, or on behalf of, a Native community. Thus, it is not ethnicity alone orautonomous rational analysis but authenticity of intent and awareness ofNative communitarian thought which arenecessaryevaluativecriteriain theacademic study of American Indian religions. Yet, who determines what isauthentic intent and what constitutes communitarian thought remains to bedeveloped more fully in dialogic studies.

AUTHENTICITY AND PLACEThe authenticity approach immediately raises questions aboutcategories used to study a cultural community. If external distortions, suchas bloodlines or literate documentation, are imposed on a people todetermine inner authenticity, serious internal fault lines eventually maybreak a community apart. Several current legal battles on reservationsregardingthe authenticity of tribalgovernments revolve around this issue ofrecognition. Misrecognition occurs when a community is not allowed tospeak for itself but finds itself the subjectof interpretation and presentationby those who arenot members. Distortions and misrecognitions become thestandard of historical nonrecognition and legal manipulation. One majorconcern of Native scholarshasbeen the ongoing misrecognition ofAmericanIndian sacred sites. The complicated issue of sacred sites has religious,historical, legal, and political dimensions for Native communities.

AMERICANINDIANQUARTERLY/SUMMER996/VOL. 20(3) 361

8/12/2019 1185782

11/25


Ironically, the 1978 legislative effort to provide American Indianswith religious freedom has failed in a sequence of legal tests most poignantlyevident in the 1988 Supreme Court case, Lyngv. Northwest ndian CemeteryProtectiveAssociation.In this case, the court failed to uphold religious rightsover a sacred burial and vision quest site of the Native peoples of northernCalifornia from intrusion by a National Forest Service road. A majorargument in the legal process whereby this case came to be heard by theSupreme Court was built around a view that collapsed "wilderness"as aconcept into "wilderness"as a worldview value.The concept ofwilderness, it wasargued,corresponded to aperceivedreality in dominant America in which humans could be separatedout fromthe bioregion, or larger community of life in a geographical region. As aworldview value wilderness could be presented as a viable ethical goal withwhich to relate to land. This worldview value would be simultaneouslyprojected onto American Indians and used to block their legal struggles toprotect a sacred site. The projected worldview value presumes a dualismseparatingwilderness, as land undeveloped by humans, from developed land.This dualism directly relates to the types of dualism prominent in theCartesian objectification of matter that also is embedded in the academicstudy of religion. Ideas of progress and metaphors for the study of cultures,derived from the theory ofevolution, were used to discuss cultural and geneticdifferences between colonizers and colonized peoples. Earlyon, progresswasthe determinative concept for authenticity;of late, undeveloped "wilderness"has become another detachable label for authenticity. Neither "progress"nor"wilderness" are Native American concepts, but both have been used tointerpret and evaluate American Indian thought.Wilderness as a type is often laid as a template on American Indiansacred sites. In this sense, wilderness is a spiritualizing concept, or pattern,that is understood as corresponding to the view of American Indiancommunities. This is a fundamental misrepresentation that marks theinability of mainstream America to understand the sense of authenticrelationships between diverse bioregions and the Native American peopleswho inhabited them. Vine DeloriaJr., aLakotalawyerand educator,observedthat:

According to popular definitions of wilderness, itsprimary value is as an area in its pristine natural state, becausethis represents some intangible and difficult to define spiritualaspect of nature that has a superior value to commercial use ofthe area [the land contested in the Lyngv. Northwest ndianCemetery rotectiveAssociation,1988]. In a sense we have a general-ized secular use, albeit one that representsa recognition ofintangible values no matter how shallow they might be emotion-ally, now holding a greatervalue than a specific religious use of


8/12/2019 1185782

12/25

JOHN A. GRIM

the same region. The question here is whether the Indian argu-ment is to be considered inferior to the wilderness argumentbecause of a racial distinction.

Unfortunately, at the circuit court level and later with theSupreme Court, the close parallel in motive and perspective wasneither recognized nor understood. This neglect should be awarning to Indians and non-Indians alike that the popular beliefprevailing that non-Indians can somehow absorb the philosophi-cal worldview of American Indians and inculcate "reverence"forthe land into their intellectual and emotional perspectives isblatantly false. Inherent in the very definition of "wilderness"iscontained the gulf between the understandings of the two cul-tures. Indians do not see the natural world as a wilderness. Incontrast, Europeans and Euroamericans see a big differencebetween lands they have "settled" and lands they have left alone.As long as this difference is believed to be real by non-Indians, itwill be impossible to close the perceptual gap, and the substanceof the two views will remain in conflict. (Deloria 1992: 280-281)Directly related to Wendy Rose's questioning of the integrity andintent of non-Native perspectives is Deloria's insight into the perceptual gapbetween Indians and non-Indians regarding the concept of "wilderness."When Deloria critiques the court and the National Forest Managementsystem for taking "wilderness"preservation as its motive and perspective, itis obvious how divergent non-Native and Native worldviews can be.The Indian arguments in Lyngv. Northwest ndian CemeteryrotectiveAssociation were lost, according to Deloria, in a racial distinction. Indianargumentswere:first,that the ancient forest has its own integrity;second, that

threeAmerican Indian nations have long used this site as aburialground anda vision quest location; and, third, that old growth forests are part of thenational heritage, and the environmental impact of the logging roadimpoverished both Native and mainstream American communities. TheIndian argument,which favored multiple use, was collapsed into one Indianreligious position that the majorityopinion of the SupremeCourt could denyin the face of government usage of its national lands. Overtly, this case, andothers in the ensuing years, have time and again decided for the Americanmajority usage of such national lands over local American Indian claims ofreligious authenticity vested in those lands. Covertly these legal decisionshave affirmed a dominant American view that the trust responsibility of theUnited States government does not extend to Indian spiritual relationshipswith the land.In the quote above Deloria distinguishes these two points, namely,the negative racial character of the Supreme Court decision, and theincompatibility of Indian relationships with the land and the dominant

AMERICANINDIAN QUARTERLY/SUMMER 996/VoL. 20(3) 363

8/12/2019 1185782

13/25

THE POLITICSOF RECOGNITION

Americanconceptof "wilderness."mplied n hisdiscussion s thechallengeof differingworldviews n the study of AmericanIndian religions.Thischallengenecessitatesan authenticityapproach o the studyof AmericanIndianreligions n which motivesandinterpretive ositionsaresubject o acriticalregard.Often dominantAmericanworldview alues,associatedwithAmericannnerauthenticity, avedisallowed s fromseeingNativeworldviewvalues.Thedominant Americaprojectionof "wilderness" nd "firstecolo-gist" magesonto indigenouspeopleshasoccurredwith littleor no awarenessof the intimatecommunalconversations etweenNativeAmericans ndtheland that are anenvironmental thics.

Thequestionof thespiritualnatureof "wilderness"sanAmericanworldviewvaluedirectlyrelates o the politicsof recognitionandthe studyof religion.That is, the insight of NativeAmerican scholars that such afundamentalview of the landembedded n theconcept"wilderness,"ndinitsopposite,namely,"developed,"xemplifiesapervasive ifferencebetweenindigenous and mainstreamAmerican worldviews.To study AmericanIndianreligionswithout someawareness f thisdifference s to projectontoNativereligionaspiritualizing ualismandto misrecognizewhatsacred itesactuallymakepresent o Nativecommunities.Ironically, hereare"conser-vative"groups apartfrom the academywho for purelypolitical purposesappropriateand exploit the Native American critical mistrust of the"wilderness"oncept.The conservativepolitical agendadoes not sharetheNative Americanregardorcommunities n relation o land,rather t seekssimply to subvertany and all environmental egislation as unnecessaryopposition to the unbridled akingof profit.

SURVIVAL AND SYSTEMIC VIOLENCE

CommunitysurvivalhasmademanyNativeindividualsaware hattheir communitieshave the high moral ground in relation to dominantAnglo America.ManyNativeNorthAmericancommunitieshavesurvivedthe genocidalassaultof the pastcenturies.Nativescholarshavejoinedwithothers to communicate heirawarenesshat the naturalworld,like Nativepeoples,hasbeenobjectified, mptied,andexploited n the name of westernshadowvisionsof technologicalprogress ndnationalsovereignty.AmericanIndianwriterssuggest hatresistanceo thesemistakenways s not simplyapoliticalactbut a lifewayact in the sensethattraditionalreligiousactsareinterrelatedo alarger osmology.Thus,thesacreddoesnotmanifest n fixedtimesor exclusiveplacesbut courses hroughthe dailyactsof life such as alegal-warrior'suest,afaster'smental ourney,amother'sbirthing,adancer'spresencingof power.Survivalrequiresexperienceand evocation of sacredpower in the daily round of activities.As an approachderivedfrom thepoliticsof recognition,communitysurvival ngenders nawarenesshattheassaultson globalindigenouspeoplesandon thelifeof theeartharedirectly364 AMERICANNDIANQUARTERLY/SUMMER996/VOL.0(3)

8/12/2019 1185782

14/25

JOHN A. GRIM

related to the historical genocide of American Indian peoples as well as to theinternational economy of corporate imperialism.Community survival as an interpretive approach related to thepolitics of recognition derives from Native reflection on the history ofrelations between indigenous peoples and mainstream America. Survivalresists imperialistic power that drains reservationcommunities, for example,of sovereign voice in their own financial expenditures. Survival resists aconceptual hegemony that inculcates systemic violence within a communityso that Native Pentecostal Christians, for example, condemn their owntraditional Native ways. Centuries of colonial subjugation may seem to bepast, but conceptual hegemony lingers even in the academic study of religionaccording to the Osage theologian, George Tinker. In his discussion of thelinkages between Christian missionaries and larger civilizational drives inAmerica, Tinker writes:

[T]he failure of the missionaries must be understood not just inindividual terms but as systemic failure. The culpability of theindividual missionaries for imposing their culture on NativeAmericans and perpetuating the lie of white superiority was inactuality prescribed from the outset by European andEuroamerican social structures.That is to say, it was impossiblefor any missionary to avoid complicity in the genocide of NativeAmerican peoples. Again in this case, recognizing the broader,structural impetus of Western social structures toward the asser-tion of white hegemony dare not become an excuse for exonerat-ing the individual's participation in the dysfunctionality of thewhole. Nevertheless, this recognition does push beyond thecriticism of individual missionaries to an analysis of the systemic.This, in turn, raises two questions. First,what aspects of Western,Euroamerican culture have historically generated such myopicsocial and theological arrogance?Second, if the missionaries, withthe best of intentions, perpetuated such havoc among Indianpeoples, what does our own modern myopia conceal from us,whatever our intentions to the contrary. (Tinker 1993: 16)The interconnectedness of social, economic, political, and culturalspheres in a systemicwhole, according to Tinker,must be considered in everyexamination of interactions between Native and dominant America. More-over, it can be said that the quest for harmonious sameness in mainstreamAmerica can bring the systemic whole into such massivehuman engineeringmovements as the westwardexpansion of the nineteenth century in Americaor research projects such as biogenetic engineering in the late twentiethcentury. Survival for Native peoples requires awareness of such shadowvisions that generate"myopic social and theological arrogance."The politics

AMERICANNDIANQUARTERLY/SUMMER 996/VOL.0(3) 365

8/12/2019 1185782

15/25


of recognitiondecries he simultaneousmaskingof such visions in roman-ticallyconstructedmagesof Nativeprimitivity,militancy,andspirituality.Reflectingon the academy,Tinkernotes thatexploitativeagendashavepenetratednto institutionalpolicies,research gendas,and epistemo-logical positions.He writes:

To beginto grasp he full spectrumof the systemic[modernworld-system],ne mustplot everythingromculturalpatternsofsocialbehavior o institutionaldevelopmentandeconomicinteraction,politicalstructures nd processes,and especially ointellectualpatternsof thought.As such, the socialstructures fcognition that arethe basis for all academicdisciplinesandtheoreticalreflectionparticipaten the systemicwhole.(Tinker1993:116)The survivalapproach n the study of religionderivedfrom thepolitics of recognitioncalls for some understandingof the problemsinclaimsof theoreticalpurity oracademic tudy,of thelimitsin research, ndof an awarenesshat all peoplesareindigenousto the earth.Studentsare

limited, as well as informed,by their social structuresn their efforts tounderstand thercultures.Communitysurvivalasanapproachn thestudyof American ndianreligionspromotes nvestigation f thesocialstructuresof cognition to understandwhat has been foisted upon the values andpracticesof indigenouspeoples.This begins the possibilityfor reflexiveunderstandingf one'sownrole in thesystemicwhole,foracknowledginghehistoryof indigenouspeoples in that whole, and for scrutinyof the rolereligionhasplayed n thesurvival f Nativecommunities.Thiscommunica-tion challengespriorhistories, nitiatesresponsibilitieso Nativecommuni-ties, and liberatesa studentto resistphysicaland conceptualviolence asnormative.

A CASE STUDY IN THEAPSAALOOKE SHKISSHETheApsaalooke/Crow rea Siouan-speakingeoplewith a reserva-tion in the Missouri Riverdrift plains and Wolf, Pryor,and Big HornMountainsof NorthAmerica.Theircurrentpopulationof 8,000 sabout hatofprereservation aysandtheircurrent eservation,f whichCrow ndividu-alsand thetribe tselfhold approximately5 percent, s locatedwithintheirtraditionalhomelanddescribedas "four-tipipoles."The Apsaalooke/CrowritualcalledAshkisshe,r Sun Dance, is amajorcommunityevent hathasbeendiscussedn academiciteratureduringthe twentieth century." I have chosen it as a case study for a briefconsiderationof the threeapproachesderived rom the politicsof recogni-tion becauset hasbeen thefocusof myfieldstudieson theCrowReservation

366 AMERICANNDIANQUARTERLY/SUMMER1996/VOL.0(3)

8/12/2019 1185782

16/25

JOHN A. GRIM

since 1983. From that first exchange I have developed, in concert withindividuals and families among the Apsaalooke, an understanding that Iwould not publish written descriptions or reflections on ritual activitywithout consultation with the Crow. Toward that end this article has beendeposited with the archivist, Magdalene Medicine Horse, at Little Big HornCollege, the tribal college at Crow Agency.Drawing on the issue of identity in the study of American Indianreligions, questions can be raised about terminology used in this case study.That is, why would I use the terms "religion" and "ritual"when describingthe Ashkisshe?Do these term say more about my views than insight into thisApsaalookeactivity. Having commented earlier in this paper on the use of"lifeway,"I can readilyacknowledge that the term is not Crow. "Lifeway,"onthe other hand, accentuates the interplayof social, economic, and cosmologi-cal forces in the sense of meaningful social and spiritual life.The Crow term for "religion,"alachiwakiia/"one'sown way"is akinto the translated Crow expression, "It's up to you " which suggests thatexperience and manifestation of the power that enables life is personal yetmanifest in the communitarian setting which extends into the biological lifeof the region. Can the Crow term maxpebe translated as the sacredwithoutimmediately being suffused with Durkheimian epistemology? Is maxpesimply "supernatural"with all the transcendent theological implications ofthat term? The use of such Anglo-European terms not only manifests mypreconceptions, which I use in an effort to gain some understanding of Crowcultural identity, but they may also maskcreativetensions within Apsaalookelifeway between the individual and the community.It is important to note that the Ashkissbe eremonial alone does notconstitute Apsaalooke religion. It is possible to point to the endurance ofancient rituals among these northern plains peoples. Such rituals as theTobacco [adoption] Society (Baasshussheelaakbisuua),weat lodge (auwusua),"medicine bundles," (xapaaliia),also arepracticed.In the nineteenth centurynot only other tribaldances and visions influenced the Crow but also Baptistand Catholic churches and schools were established. More recent twentieth-century religious arrivalsamong the Crow are the Peyote Way and Christiandenominations such as the Holiness Pentecostal Churches. Tensions mayexist between these sacredways but among many Apsaalooke no one way isextolled to the exclusion of the others.The identity approach also causes me to question my use of "ritual"as abracketedor self-contained event.TheAshkissbes amajorceremonial heldin the spring but the ritualprocessof preparationmayextend well over ayear.One description of this ritualprocesscan be found in the photographic essay,Sun Dance: The50th AnniversaryCrow Indian Sun Dance. It describes thesequence of actions which began before the actual Sun Dance on July 25-28,1991. The text reads:

AMERICANINDIANQUARTERLY/SUMMER996/VOL.20(3) 367

8/12/2019 1185782

17/25


The Sun Dance was but the culminating event in a longcontinuum of many events over an eight-month period. Startingon the winter solstice, 1990, there were four Medicine BundleCeremonies through the winter. Then, four Outdoor PrayerServices took place throughout the spring and early summer of1991. Next was a magnificent trip to the top of the Big HornMountains to hunt two buffalo for the post-Sun Dance feast.Other journeys were made to the Pryor Mountains to harvestlodgepole pine, aspen, and fir trees for [the ceremonial] lodgeconstruction. The actual Sun dance was merely the last in a longline of ceremonial activities. (Crummett 1993: xiii-xiv)Using the identity approach I not only ask myself how I am usingthe term, ritual, but why. Obviously fixed notions of ritual as an event thathappens at a set time and in a set place are inappropriate here. Perhaps, twoterms are more helpful, namely, ritual process and ritualization. Ritualprocess emphasizes the spanof time and the sequenceof events thatwill occurbefore anAshkissbe.Ritualization can be used to focus on the stagesof ritualenactment that occur during the specific four days of the ceremonial called

Ashkisshe.My role as an undergraduateteacheratBucknell University is knownamong the Apsaalooke with whom I visit and have conversation. Using sucha term as "ritual" signals both my limitations in understanding thisApsaalooke event as well as my efforts to be a cultural bridge so that Crowwayscome into the classes I teach. Students reflect on these limitations, terms,and possible misrepresentations just as they consider the sequence of eventsbefore the Ashkisshe,he ceremonial itself, and the role of the dancers.The authenticity approach derived from the politics of recognitionbuilds on prior insights gained in the identity approach, regardingperspec-tives, terms, and agendas.However, the authenticity approach explores innerrealms in which the "shadow-visions"play. This study of inner worldviewvalues may lead to creative new perspectivesfor the study of American Indianreligions, or it may generate distortions of Native American peoples andceremonies. It may do both. The dialogue with the people whose ways arebeing studied is central for evaluating this authenticity approach.During the Apsaalooke Ashkisshethe dancers are encouraged byfamily, friends announcers, and one another to aspireto diakaashe,"heor shereally did it."' Diakaashepoints toward the sincerity of determination andeffort to bring benefits to other individuals and to the community. Diakaashealso may bring about a unique encounter with sacred power. The spiritualpowers, called "Without Fires"and "OtherSide Camp," may adopt a fastingdancer and become his or her "Medicine Father,"Iilapxe.Diakaasheas a Crowworldview value is at the heart of that mystery in which individuals acquirethe privileges and responsibilities of personal spiritual power (xapaaliia).368 AMERICANNDIANQUARTERLY/SUMMER996/VOL.20(3)

8/12/2019 1185782

18/25

JOHN A. GRIM

No oneexplicationof thisexchangewithcosmologicalpower,maxpe,is acceptedby theApsaalookeas an explanation.Maxpes itselfthe contextof anyunderstanding.t is at this point that theprospectfor spiritualizingdistortions can occur in the history of religions.Certainmethods havedevelopedin the academicfield to correctdiachronicdistortions.Thus,historicalchangesnApsaalookeunderstandingfdiakaashendxapaaliia retopicsof research.But the authenticityapproach mphasizedhereaskshowboth theseCrowideasinterlock.Can theybe understoodandwhy?My investigationsmake me awareof a single-minded ndexclusive"spiritualizing"hatcan occurwhendiakaashes conceptualized.Academicreflection and classroomteachinginvolve mental transmissions hat canmake hisinteriorCrowworldview aluesomething t isnot.Theexperiencesof thefastingdancerswhoundertakeheAshkissherepersonal, ollective,andprofoundly roubling.Thepainandsufferingof theexertionareunderstoodby the Crowasactswhichcanbenefitboth humansandthe communityofbeingsin the bioregion.Thedetermination f thedancer o reachdiakaashecanbeunderstoodasritualization n whichsocialforcesandspiritual orcesmeet.Paradoxically,heeffortof theacademic esearchero describe,discuss,and transmit his in a classroomresults n the conceptualizations f eventswhich arethemselvesphysical,affective,and emotional.The imaginingsoftheacademic ommunity nvestigating ceremonialarequitedifferent romtheimaginedApsaalooke ommunitybothinsideandoutside heceremoniallodgeof theAshkisshe. usingsof theresearcher,heteacher, ndtheclassarenot the diakaashe f the dancer,but they can meet in the authenticityapproachthat is a dialogue about the place of significant actions andorientation n meaningful ife.FortheCrow,diakaasheaschangedovertimeandis, no doubt,thefocus for newApsaalookeperspectivesn theirowntradition.Twoobserva-tions regarding iakaasheome fromtherecentlydeceasedCrowSunDanceChief,ThomasYellowtail,whodancedatthefirstShoshoni-CrowunDance,andfromtheworkof thesenioranthropologist,FredVoget,whohasstudiedtheSunDancesince tsreturn otheCrow n 1941.First,aseveryCrowknows,diakaashe,hichmay eadto adoptionbyaspiritualpower Iilapxe),anresultin personalrevelationsauthorizing he gatheringof physicalmaterialsn a"bundle."Assembling his spirituallynourishingmatter s a ritualprocessand opening the bundle responsiblyat appropriate imes constitutes aritualizationwhichmaybringblessings o individualsandcommunities.Forthe Apsaalookethe gatheringof these materials, he processof openinPbundles,and the responsibilitiesattached o "owning" hem is spiritual.Talkingabout hemapartromthatspiritualprocesssviewednegatively,hatis,asuselessorharmful.Anauthenticity pproach aisesquestionsaboutthesincerityof inquiry nto medicinebundlesor aboutthediakaashef a dancerby a non-Nativeresearcher. hus,sincerity n appropriately ifferentformsbecomesan evaluative riterionfor both the researchernd for the Native


8/12/2019 1185782

19/25


informant.FredVoget also has reflectedon the importance ofdiakaasheas acoreCrow worldview value in the currentAshkisshe/SunDance. He commentedabout changes from the old Sun Dance, lost in 1875, in which dancersexpressed diakaasheby "skewering"themselves, or piercing their chest andpulling freeafterbeing tied by leatherlines to the centraltree.Voget comparedthis older practice to the current dance focused on fasting:

The present Sun Dance stresses physical suffering to gainsome good ... the medicine fathers informed the Crow in visionsand in dreams that it was no longer necessary to skewer them-selves. Now sincerity of purpose is expressed through abstentionfrom food and water during the ceremony and the sending ofprayersby steady dancing interspersedwith cigarette smokeprayers.As of old, the preparatorysweat bath and prayersare vitalto the sincerity with which a suppliant approaches the sufferingin the Sun Dance. A steady and sincere dancer who "chargesthebuffalo" attached to the center pole at some time may be runover and in his [or her] unconscious mystic state may receivesomething good, perhaps a power to cure. (Yellowtail1991: xxvi)

FredVoget as a non-Native scholar notes the historical changes in the CrowSun Dance especially regardingthe revelation from the Medicine Fathers. Asequence of historical events gradually transformed the manner in whichdancers strove for inner authenticity and sincerity. In that historical process,authenticity and community survivaloverlapped for the Crow who restoredthe Sun Dance. It is as if when one thing changed in the religious universeof the Crow, everything changed.Thomas Yellowtail also understood these changes but, as a memberof the Crow community itself, he addressedthese changes from a differentperspective. Using the authenticity approach we might say that ThomasYellowtail was moved by an inherent politics of recognition to realize thatdiakaashe nvolved commitments to community survival.He narratedin his"autobiography":

There are other things that a member of the Sun Dancereligion should try to learn. For example, it is important for aman who wants to participate in the Sun Dance to understandthe Crow language; then he will understand more. He will alsounderstand what I say in the prayers.This is very important for asun dancer. It was wrong when our people were taught theEnglish language and not their own tongue....It is the same with the Indian songs. The young peopletoday should learn them. They should try to sing the songs; they370 AMERICANINDIAN QUARTERLY/SUMMER1996/VOL. 20(3)

8/12/2019 1185782

20/25

JOHN A. GRIM

must try to grasp them when they hear them. (Yellowtail1991:179-180)Inner authenticity has always held responsibilities as well as privi-leges in Crow understanding and Thomas Yellowtail's reflections are con-nected to contemporary Native scholars concerned with the distortedpresentations of Native American peoples and their religious ways. In thissense,Yellowtail's commitment to the authenticity of the contemporary SunDance made him awareof the danger to his culture from the dissimulationsof global consumer culture.Yellowtail's concerns join with those of his fellow

Crow, Heywood Big Day. Big Day undertook the sponsorship of the fiftiethanniversarySun Dance in 1991. This major event was for Big Day an act ofcommunity survival which echoes the politics of recognition and providesinsight into the history of the Ashkisshe nd Crow religion.When William Big Day arrangedfor John Treherjo, the Shoshoni-Crow medicine man and Sun Dance chief, to bring the Ashkisshe eremonyback to the Crow in 1941, his motivation was to heal his young son who hadbecome ill. Holding that boy up to the sun he vowed to hold the ShoshoniSun Dance, in which he had participated on the Wind River reservation inWyoming, to his Crow reservation in Montana.14The boy he held that dayand who was healed as the days passed was Heywood Big Day.For Heywood Big Day and for the Crow people the celebration ofthis ceremonial was acomplex religious, social, political, and historical event.Big Day prepareda brochure that gives some expression to his thoughts. Thisbrochure not only gavesome "rules and regulations"for those attending theceremonial, it also had a textual statement on the "1991 Crow Sun dance"which, in effect, is a proclamation of survival. Of the six paragraphslet usconsider two using the community survival approach derived from thepolitics of recognition. In his brochure Big Day wrote:

In 1875 my tribe lost its Sun Dance ceremony under thefederal government's policy to assimilate all Indian people. Forsixty-six years we refrained from practicing this deeply religiousceremony, and though many of the Crows forgot the importanceof the Sun Dance, many others kept it in their hearts. ...The 1991 Sun Dance is particularly historical for usbecause it marks the fiftieth anniversaryof the return of thissacred ceremony. Preparation ceremonies are alreadybeing heldduring the full moons of each month. My family is sponsoringthis important Sun dance, and I am conducting it. To carryonthe Sun Dance tradition is a special blessing for me, since I wasthe little son of William who's [sic] restored health made himdetermined to fulfill his promise.


8/12/2019 1185782

21/25


BigDayhighlights hehistoryof hispeoplewhichresultedn thelossof their oldertraditionalSun Dance.He does not useconceptual anguagereferringto a "systemicwhole," but his use of "assimilate" ignals thepervasiveassaultagainsthis cultural dentityasa Crow.What hassurvived,HeywoodBigDay suggests s something"kept n their[Crow]hearts."Thediakaasheincerity n the heart s the valuethat the dancerswill ritualize nthe SunDance.HeywoodBigDayevokes n his brochureadistinctlyCrowreadingof this ritual process.His English translation,namely, that the"Preparationeremoniesare being held,"indicateswhat in English tensewouldexpresspastevents,but whichthe Crowunderstand sstilloccurringand as coming to fruition in the actual dance. The fiftieth anniversaryAshkissheas becomea realizationof theshadow-visionhat thepeoplehavesurvived n the face of this assimilationpolicy.The pain is all present, heliberatingpowerof the ritual is alsopresent.Bringingtogetherthe myth/ritual,the tellingof the storyand theritualizationof power,marksa most significanttheoreticalchangein thehistoryof theAshkisshemongtheCrow. While theongoing importanceofthis joiningof myth/ritualin the CrowAshkissheequiresNative and non-Native investigation, ts immediateeffect can be seen using the survivalapproachas the internalizationof diakaashen a historicalmode.Such an internalization s much morethan simplyunderstandingthefiftiethanniversaryunDanceasretributiveustice hroughmeresurvivalas a people. Heywood Big Day goes on to say that, "Our Crow belief issomethingwe areproudof andwishtosharewithpeopleof allbackgrounds."Survivancehimmershere n theCrowstyleof openlyinvitingandadoptingothers into theirways.17Thus,the survivalapproachnot only allowsus toraisequestionsaboutthereflexiverecognitionof enduranceamong heCrowit also reverses ur perspective o that we seeour role in the historyof theassaultand the continuing powerof the dance.Thephotographic ssaypublishedafter he fiftiethanniversaryunDance noted the widersphereof supportbeyondthe dancelodge.It reads:

... extendedpastthe Sun Dancegrounds .. Roostinghigh on afoothill point overlookingPryorValleysat the minusculefigureof a whiteman,who hadjourneyed . . to participaten thishistoricalSun Dance.As it wasthereweremoredancingIndiansthan space,and the lodgehad to be expandedby shrinking heentrance.TheAnglo ... joinedin with his fasting,dancing,prayersand presence rom a distanceto the southwest, till closeenough to hear the drumming,singingandwhistlingemanatingfrom the lodge. (Crummett1993:60-61)ThereareNativescholarswho saythatnon-Nativestudentsshouldsimply say,No, when invited into Nativeceremonials.The invitation,it is


8/12/2019 1185782

22/25

JOHN A. GRIM

presumed from this perspective, has been prompted from an epistemicviolence in which the indigenous community invites into itself the verysource of its cultural demise. In this sense, students of Native Americanreligions should know that their presence in the Native setting may effectcultural change.Crow sponsors of Ashkisshehave implemented this "No" of theNative American politics of recognition when they decide that someAshkissheare not open to non-Native, or even non-Crow, participants. Yet, theApsaalooke welcome outsiders to view the dance and non-Natives have beenknown to participate in the Ashkisshe.Perhaps the white man roosting highon a foothill at the fiftieth anniversarySun Dance is a dialogic figure in thepolitics of recognition. This person on the hill was allowed by the Crow tojoin by fasting at a distance in the effort at communitarian survival andrenewal. Did the rigorous fast bring him to understand how nostalgic,alienated whites can exploit a Native ceremonial for personal purposes?Didhe join in the collective experience?Did the Crow risk too much?

CONCLUSION

For a student to understand the Ashkisshethey must know thehistorical loss of the older ceremonial in 1875 as well as the transmission ofthe newerCrow/Shoshoni Sun Dance. Using the three approaches suggestedhere they can understand that recent changes in the Ashkisshe rethemselvespart of an ongoing process. Because the Crow have implemented thesechanges, study of the Ashkisshe evealsdeveloping directions in Apsaalookecultural identity and inner authenticity. Because some of these changes cameabout asa resultof the ongoing exchangewith Anglo America there areissuesof community survival to be explored.To critique changes in the Ashkisshenaively as negative influencesfrom dominant America or as inappropriate adaptations is pointless for anon-Native student. Rather, these contemporary changes are part of thedialogic perspective in the study of American Indian religions. This paperexamines some of the multiform dimensions, or approaches, that thisdialogue is taking. That is, Native American scholars in the politics ofrecognition areexploring new rhetorical modes in their writings and publicpresentations which have impact both on their Native communities as wellas on academic circles. Crow Sun Dance leaders, and by extension ritual

specialists throughout American Indian communities, know that the spiri-tual, social, and political forces that meet in the ritualizations of ceremoniallife are constantly changing. The convergence of these transforming forcescreatethose shadow-visionsthat renewthe community. Students of AmericanIndian religions realize that the dialogic perspective, embedded in issues ofcultural identity, authenticity, and community survival,calls for responsibil-ity to the communities studied. Along with the insights into the ways that


8/12/2019 1185782

23/25


peoples haveencountered and celebratedtheir place in the universe comes anawarenessof limits and a recognition of reciprocal exchange.

REFERENCESAnderson,Benedict1983 ImaginedCommunities:eflectionsn theOrigin nd RiseofNationalism.London:Verso.Bernardis,Timothy1986 Baleeisbaalichiwee:rowSocialStudiesTeacher'suide.BilingualMaterialsDevelopmentCenter,CrowAgency,MT.Berry,Thomas1976 "IndianFuture."CrossCurrents6: 133-142.Churchill,Ward1993 Struggleor theLand.Monroe,ME:CommonCouragePress.Crummett,Michael1993 Sun Dance.Billings,MT: FalconPress.Deloria,VineJr.1992 "Troublen High Places:Erosionof AmericanIndianRightsto ReligiousFreedom n theUnitedStates." In TheStateofNativeAmerica p. 267-290.Densmore,Frances1918 Teton iouxMusic.Bulletin61, Bureauof AmericanEthnology,Washington,D.C.:GovernmentPrintingOffice.Duran,Eduardoand Bonnie1995 NativeAmerican ostcolonialPsychology.lbany:StateUniversityof NewYork Press.Frey,Rodney1987 TheWorldoftheCrow ndians: sDriftwood odges.Norman:Universityof OklahomaPress.Gill, Sam1994 "TheAcademicStudyof Religion."Journal fAmericanAcademyfReligionLXII/4:965-975.Green,WilliamScott(ed.)1994 "Settled ssuesand NeglectedQuestionsin the Studyof Religion."ournalof theAmericanAcademyfReligionLXII,No. 4.Grim,John1994 "NativeNorthAmericanWorldviewsandEcology." n WorldviewsndEcology: eligion,Philosophy,ndtheEnvironment(ed)MaryEvelynTuckerandJohn Grim,Maryknoll,NY:OrbisPress,pp. 41-54.Grinde,DonaldA.Jr.1992 "TeachingAmericanIndianHistory:A NativeAmericanVoice."In PerspectivesmericanHistoricalAssociationNewsletter,Vol. 32, No. 6, September: 0-16.Gutman,Amy (ed.)1992 Multiculturalism.rinceton:PrincetonUniversityPress.Jaimes,M. Annette(ed.)1992 TheStateofNativeAmerica:GenocideColonization,ndResistanceoston:South EndPress.

374 AMERICANNDIANQUARTERLY/SUMMER996/VOL.20(3)

8/12/2019 1185782

24/25

JOHNA. GRIM

Krupat,Arnold1992 Ethnocentrism:thnography,istory,Literature.erkeley:Universityof CaliforniaPress.Lowie,Robert1915 "TheSun Danceof the CrowIndians."AmericanMuseumof NaturalHistoryAnthropo-logicalPapers 6:1-50.Mead,GeorgeHerbert1934 Mind SelfandSociety.Chicago:TheUniversityof ChicagoPress.MedicineCrow,Joseph1992 From heHeartof theCrowCounty:TheCrow ndians'OwnStoriesNew York:Orion/CrownPublishers.

Murray,David.1991 ForkedTongues:peech,WritingndRepresentationn NativeNorthAmericanText.Bloomington:IndianaUniversityPress.Peelman,Achiel1995 Christs a NativeAmericanMaryknoll,NY:Orbis.Rose,Wendy1992 "TheGreatPretenders, urtherReflectionson Whiteshamanism."n TheStateofNativeAmerica:Genocide; olonization,ndResistancep. 403-421.Schlesier,Karl1990 "Rethinkinghe Midewiwinand the PlainsCeremonialCalledthe Sun Dance."PlainsAnthropologist5: 1-27.Sharpe,Eric1986 Comparativeeligion: History.LaSalle, L:Open Court(2ndedition).Smith,JonathanZ.1987 ToTakePlace:TowardTheoryin Ritual.Chicago:Universityof ChicagoPress.Sullivan,LawrenceE.1988 Icanchu's rum:An OrientationoMeaningn SouthAmericanReligions. ewYork:MacmillanPublishing.Swanson,Todd1994 "ToPrepare Place: ohannineChristianityand the Collapseof EthnicTerritory."ournalof theAmerican cademyf ReligionLXII/2:241-263.Tinker,George1993 MissionaryConquest:heGospelndNativeAmericanCulturalGenocide.Minneaplis,MN:FortressPress.Vizenor,Gerald1994 ManifestManners:ostindianWarriorsofSurvivance. anover,NH: WesleyanUniversityPress.Voget,FredW.1984 TheShoshoni-Crowun Dance.Norman:Universityof OklahomaPress.Weaver, ace(ed.)forthcomingDefendingMotherEarth:NativeAmerican erspectivesnEnvironmentalJusticeMaryknoll,NewYork:Orbis Press.Williams,PatrickandLauraChrisman eds.)1994 ColonialDiscoursendPostcolonialTheory: Reader. ewYork:ColumbiaUniversityPress.

AMERICANINDIAN QUARTERLY/SUMMER 996/VoL. 20(3) 375

8/12/2019 1185782

25/25


Yellowtail,Thomas1991 Yellowtail rowMedicineMan and SunDanceChiefAnAutobiography.s told to MichaelOren Fitzgerald,Norman,Universityof OklahomaPress.

NOTES1. Particular amesof indigenousnations and peoples,such asApsaalooke,arepreferableto Englishtranslations, .g.Crow,or moregeneralreferences uch as American ndian,NativeAmerican,FirstPeoples,FirstNations,and IndigenousPeoples.As no one Englishterm is preferable,theseterms areusedhere to referbroadly o the indigenouspeoplesof theAmericas.2. SeeJaimes,TheStateofNativeAmerica;Williams andChrisman eds)ColonialDiscourseandPostcolonial heory: Reader,Duran,NativeAmerican ostcolonialsychology;hurchill,StrugggleortheLand;and Murray,ForkedTongues:peech,WritingndRepresentationn NativeNorthAmericanText.3. Theseterms, dentity,authenticityandcommunitysurvival,as terms n the politicsofrecognitionare drawn rom a responseby K.AnthonyAppiah, "Identity,Authenticity,Survival:MulticulturalSocietiesandSocialReproduction,"to an articleby CharlesTaylor "ThePoliticsofRecognition,"n Multiculturalismmy Gutman(ed) (Princeton:PrincetonUniversityPress,original1992,paperback1994).4. Churchill,Struggleor theLand,p. 33.5. I havein mind the issuesraised n the articles n WilliamScottGreen(ed.)"SpecialIssue:Settled Issuesand NeglectedQuestionsin the Studyof Religion,"ournalof theAmericanAcademy f ReligionVol. LXII,No. 4, Winter1994.One needonly look at a recent ssue of the ournalofRitualStudiesuch as the proceedings f the SantaBarbaraConferenceon Ritualand Power n vol.4, no. 2, Summer1990to see thevarietiesof approachesn ritualstudies.6. TheStateofNativeAmerica:Genocide,olonization,ndResistanceed)M.Annette aimes,Boston: South EndPress,1992.7. GeraldVizenor,ManifestManners:ostindianWarriorsofSurvivance anover,NH:WesleyanUniversityPress,1994.8. GeorgeTinker,Missionary onquest:heGospelnd NativeAmericanCulturalGenocideMinneapolis.,MN:FortressPress,1993.9. My use of scarequotesaroundSun Danceis intendedto alertthe reader o theproblematicusageof this term.See KarlSchlesier,"Rethinkinghe Midewiwinand the PlainsCeremonialCalled the Sun Dance," n PlainsAnthropologistol. 35, no. 127,February 990: 1-27.Throughoutthis articleI will follow conventionalusageon the CrowReservation nd useboth termsinterchangeably.10.MichaelCrummett,SunDanceBillings,MT:FalconPress,1993.11. Forexample,RobertLowie,"TheSun Dance of the CrowIndians,"AmericanMuseumof NaturalHistoryAnthropologicalapersNewYork,vol 16, 1915:1-50;FredW. Voget,TheShoshoni-CrowSun DanceNorman:Universityof OklahomaPress,1984;and Yellowtail rowMedicineMan andSun DanceChiefAnAutobiographys told to MichaelOren Fitzgerald,Norman:UniversityofOklahomaPress,1991.12. SeeRodney Frey,TheWorld f theCrow ndians: s Driftwood odgesNorman:Universityof OklahomaPress,1987:59-149.13. See Yellowtail,p. 69-76.14. For a full discussionof theseevents seeVoget,TheShoshoni-CrowunDance.15.Thebrochurehas a drawingof a dancer n Sun Dance attirewith a nameunderneath,namely,"WilliamBig Day"; he brochure s titled"CROWSUN DANCEGoldenAnniversaryuly25, 26, 27, 28, 1991,Itta'tbachisashCeremonial,PryorMontana,Sponsoredby HeywoodBigDay,Sr."The authorreceivedhis brochure rom Heywoodthe daybeforethe dancebegan.16.JonathanZ. Smithexploresthis issue in ToTakePlace,pp. 96-117.17.An understanding f "adoption"n Crowreligious ife is explored n PeterNabokov,"CultivatingThemselves:The Inter-play f CrowIndianReligionand History,"Ph.D. Diss. Universityof Californiaat Berkeley,1988.

1185782

Documents