THE DEVELOPMENT OF A NATIVE
AMERICAN INTELLIGENTSIA AND THE CREATION OF D-Q UNIVERSITY JACK D. FORBES PUBLISHED IN HARTMUT LUTZ, ED., *D-Q UNIVERSITY:* *NATIVE AMERICAN SELF-DETERMINATION IN* *HIGHER EDUCATION* (DAVIS: TECUMSEH CENTER, 1980) PP 75-88 **Disclaimer*: The original Document was hand typed of a type writer and was not completely scanned properly to the UC Davis Archives. Towards the last Pages (Specifically 14), some words were cut off. This Document duplication is for you all to have a clear doc of the genius work the Dr. Forbes left in our hands as a plan and so that we can see the original vision D-Q U was founded to be. For more Info regarding Original Documents of D-Q University visit http://nas.ucdavis.edu/Forbes/resources.html *The Significance of a Native American Intelligentsia* An "intelligentsia" is that sector of a population which utilizes the powers of the mind and creativity for purposes of problem-solving, advanced creative work, the advancement of wisdom, long-range planning, and so on. Traditional Native American societies formerly possessed intelligentsias which were thoroughly integrated into the general population. Native leaders *were*usually also "thinkers" and creators of beauty. These leaders, whether "secular" or "ceremonial" or "healing" (or all three) were ordinarily at one with the masses (the general population) and consistently served the interest of the community. The invasion and conquest of the Americas by Europeans usually resulted in the wholesale slaughter of the Native intelligentsia (as in California) or in their destruction by the various techniques of colonialism. In the latter case, for example, the colonial powers consciously sought to discredit the intelligentsia, deprive it of the ability to help educate the young," and attempted to create a new Christianized, Europeanized group to take its place. *A resistance movement which lacks an intelligentsia *(or which lacks information for careful decision-making and long-range planning) *will usually* *degenerate into a mere rebellion or uprising.* Uprisings are ordinarily put down by the colonial power, as is evidenced by the thousands of Native American insurrections ("risings") crushed by the Spaniards, Portuguese, French, British, and Anglo-Americans. The numerous slave insurrections carried out by African and Red-Black slaves also are examples of the same type, as are the ghetto "riots" of the 1960's. Let me give a very specific example of what happens when accurate information and a pan-Indian intelligentsia are lacking. In 1670-1715 the powerful confederacies of the Southeast (The Choctawes, Chickasaws, Muskogees, Cherokees, Catawbas, and Tuscaroras) *allowed *the British, Spanish, and French to manipulate them so that a European victory was ensured. The various confederacies and native republics allowed themselves to be used as cannon-fodder for European imperialism, wiping each other out, selling each other as slaves to South Carolina, and serving as mercenaries in various European armies. Finally, in 1715, a pan-tribal rebellion took p1ace--but it was too late. The English were already too strong and such tribes as the Cherokees and Catawbas held back. Others, such as the Choctaws, had little reason to join the rebels since literally thousands of their people had been carried off *by other Indians *to be sold as slaves in South Carolina, the West Indies, and New England. The 1715 revolt collapsed and the fate of the South was sealed. Of course, historic tribal rivalries and narrow localism had a lot to do with the European victory. But the key factor, in my opinion, was the absence of any means of gathering *and analyzing *essential data relative to English, Spanish, and French strengths, intentions, methods, and weaknesses. Perhaps this could not be helped, since it could be argued that few Indians were in a position in 1715 to listen in on English conversations or meetings in Charleston or London. On the other hand, the whites were badly outnumbered even along the coast by a large slave population, at least one fifth of whom were Indians. In any case, Indians of today must seriously ask whether we are in any better position, insofar as gathering *and analyzing *data is concerned. Are we prepared to deal, intellectually, with the massive power of the structure oppressing us? Do we simply react and rebel, or do we plan? *Colonialism and the Native Intelligentsia* In any case, colonial powers learned many centuries ago that the best way to prevent successful rebellions is to destroy, buy-off, or emasculate the native intelligentsia. *Rebels without plans or without accurate information will often defeat themselves*, thus making the conqueror's work that much easier. A few years ago I wrote that: *The overall process of colonial exploitation requires that the conquered population be rendered instantly impotent and that the possibility of rebellion be eliminated or at least diminished*. This means that Native religions, social units (such as men's societies) having the potential of serving as centers for insurrection, and traditional political structures be eliminated or completely subverted.... *The most common practice in establishing a long-term colony is to literally liquidate the Native population as a self-conscious nationality and to convert the surviving individuals into unorganized masses*… This process is facilitated by the destruction of Native institutions...and by the suppression of the Native language… Whenever possible colonial systems seek also to destroy Native nationalism by promoting loyalty to new institutions which support colonialism, such as a church or a government run by the ruling classes. [Jack D. Forbes, "Colonialism and American Education" in Joshua Reichert and Miguel Trujillo, *Perspectives on Contemporary Native American and Chicano Educational Thought* (Davis: D-Q University Press, 1973-74, pp. 18-21)]. In the United States the traditional Native intelligentsia was often effectively cut off from the young people who were taken away to BIA or mission schools. Likewise, Christian missionaries attempted to split the communities ideologically. The immediate effect of this process was to usually isolate and render powerless the "elders," while positions of authority were given to compliant Christianized persons whose only task was to obey the white man. The nationalist intelligentsia was often wiped out by force, as with the murder of Chitto Harjo in the Muskogee Nation, or driven into intellectual isolation as were Dr. Carlos Montezuma and Dr. Charles Eastman (both being driven away from BIA reservation employment). By the early 1900's a new Indian intelligentsia was arising, largely from the ranks of BIA and mission school graduates. But with a few exceptions, such as Montezuma and Eastman, this new intelligentsia was effectively 5 colonialized and Christianized. This group organized the Society of American Indians, an organization hostile towards “grass-roots” Indians in many significant respects. In a “mature” (long-established) colonial situation the native intelligentsia, effectively “brainwashed" as they are, becomes cut off from the masses both economically and culturally. *The native community is deprived of their brain-power and creative abilities. *Not only that, but their skills are often used to harm the long-term interests of their own people. The brainwashed colonial intelligentsia have “given up.” They have accepted conquest. They accept the rules laid down by the conqueror. Nationalism, resistance, liberation, and struggle are concepts which are frightening to them, because these concepts threaten the comfortable "bargain” they have made with the system of oppression. From the early 1900's until virtually the present day the vast majority Of “educated” Indians have gone to work for the BIA, other federal agencies, or white-controlled museums and schools. Their incomes have been dependent upon continued employment in agencies dominated by the invaders. Their thinking, their outlook on life, their culture, and so on, has all been affected or even molded by this dependence. The Society of American Indians proved in the long run to be a very disappointing organization. It failed because it was totally cut off from the so-called “ignorant” and “backward” Indian masses. Its leaders appear to have held the masses in contempt. This entire process, whereby a native intelligentsia is co-opted by a colonial system, is very well explained in the works of Franz Fanon and Albert Memmi and it isn't necessary to review it here. Nonetheless, we need to stress that just as many African and West Indian intellectuals tried to become Frenchmen, so too, many Native American “educated” persons tried to become white men or at least “Americans of Indian descent” rather than “Indians.” It is true, of course, that an intelligentsia survived within the Indian community, consisting in elders and some younger people who had rejected white values. (Carlos Montezuma, for example, returned to his Yavapai people and worked at the grassroots level.) But this native intelligentsia declined from the 1920's onward as older people died and reservation colonia1ism gained ever greater control over Indian life. Still further the grassroots intelligentsia has been, and is still, often severely handicapped by poverty, isolation, and a lack of essential (vital) information for decision-making. *In spite of the changes of the 1960's and 1970's most Indians at the grassroots level still operate in an information vacuum. *It easy for misinformation, rumor, half-truth, and propaganda to flow into this vacuum and seriously handicap liberation efforts. In any event, the Native American World, by the 1960's, had *two* intelligentsias, largely at odds with each other. One consisted in the whiteoriented, economically prosperous, BIA, Christian Indians who dominated virtually every position of authority. Even when well-intentioned this group comprised a “c1assical” co1onia1ized intelligentsia, thoroughly enmeshed in the colonial system. The second consisted in grassroots elders and religious leaders, many of whom could not speak English or, at least, could not read or write it effectively, supplemented by a few “educated” persons who had been able to break the intellectual bonds of oppression and a larger number of poor1y trained but patriotic Indian individuals anxious to work with their communities. It must be stressed that the differences between these two groups were significant indeed. One cannot "paper over" the difference between being a servant of colonialism, however "beneficient," and being an avowed nationalist. The two perspectives are always at war with each other. *The Creation of D-Q University* It was within this context that the concept of an Indian-controlled university was conceived by this writer and others in 1961-1962. From the very beginning the university (called at first "The Indo-American University," then "The Native American University," and finally, in 1970-1971, D-Q University) was conceived as an integral part of a national liberation struggle for the Indian race. Needless to state this is also a key reason why D-Q U has been vigorously opposed by white agencies and by the colonialized Indian intelligentsia. *D-Q is the only Native college openly dedicated to pan-Indian liberation.* What does this mean? From 1970-71 onward the university described itself as pan-Indian, that is, as embracing (in theory) the *entire *Native race from Alaska and Greenland to the very tip of South America. This concept must have upset those people who wanted Native people to think of themselves as "United States Indians" whose very identity is dependent upon the BIA colonial system. For years Native Americans have been told to forget their Canadian, Mexican, Peruvian, Guatemalan, Bolivian and Paraguayan Native brothers and sisters! Not only that, but they have been told to forget about eastern Indians ("State" Indians), "terminated" Indians, and landless (unrecognized) Indians. They have been told to forget about Indians who are part-Black, and Indians who speak Spanish. They have been taught to accept white-looking persons of fractional Indian blood who speak only English (so long as they are good BIA recognized people) while at the same to reject full-blood Mexican Indians who can speak an Indian tongue! And, of course, white racism has programmed most Indians to accept white mixture and to reject Black mixture even though traditional African tribal cultures are closer to our own heritages than are most European cultures. All of this, of course, has been a clever colonial strategy designed to split the Native race into as many factions as possible and to persuade us to accept as permanent the armed conquest of the Native nations. D-Q U, by embracing pan-Indianism and by ignoring so-called international boundaries, broke the ground-rules laid down by U.S. colonialism. Of course, D-Q U *had *to break those ground-rules. *A patriotic native intelligentsia cannot be developed at all unless someone breaks the rules set by the oppressors*. Colonialists fear and despise native patriotism and their rules are designed to destroy the self-identity of the conquered people. In any case, the originators of the D-Q U concept were extremely aware of the need to do two things: (1) *to empower and strengthen the traditionalist intelligentsia already existing at the grassroots level*, and (2) *to train younger people in such a way so that they would be able to return to their communities and lead the intellectual and creative struggle for liberation, *always in conjunction with the traditional elders. Naturally, this philosophy, so necessary for a national reawakening, can be expected to arouse the wrath of Indians who are elitists and “assimilationists” or of those who continue to be loyal to the colonial system. Still further, it can be expected to antagonize the white churches, the white government agencies, and the white foundations controlled by corporate executives. In short, the idea of creating a university dedicated to a national reawakening within territory controlled by powerful groups opposed to such a reawakening is, to say the very least, a radical concept and one sure to arouse continued and obstinate opposition. Such has, indeed, been the case. Before proceeding it is necessary, however, to note that not all Indians have seen the wisdom of establishing such a university. In fact, most Indians in leadership positions do not even see the need for an * independent *Native intelligentsia. Since the late 1960’s the vast majority of Indians, guided perhaps by the funding policies of white government agencies and foundations, have concentrated upon the development of a series of "tribally-controlled" junior colleges or "Native American Studies" programs in white universities. Admirable as these developments may be (when compared with earlier conditions) they do not in themselves guarantee the creation of an intellectually 1iberated Native intelligentsia. Junior (two-year) colleges are ordinarily concerned primarily with "vocational" and remedial training, especially in many rural parts of the country. Most Indian junior colleges have courses in Native Studies of some sort or in the social sciences or humanities but, of necessity, these classes have to be operated at a very elementary level. In junior colleges teachers usually have a heavy class load, do not do research, and, in general, do not have any opportunity to write or otherwise sharpen their own intellectual insights. Rural colleges, especially, will tend to attract instructors either desperately seeking any kind of a teaching job (however temporary) or ones who are interested primarily in such rural amenities as hunting and fishing. Any ‘higher” intellectual interests will tend, in any case, to become blunted over the years by isolation, poor libraries, and hostile administrators. In any case, the first two years of college will not normally be the place to develop an Indian intelligentsia unless traditional elders are given a free hand at building the curriculum. Other pressures (for “transfer” credits, vocational skills, etc.) will usually minimize such developments. Native Studies programs in white universities are few and far between and they are limited, with few exceptions, to only a few western states. In most (or all) instances they are limited in size and must meet criteria set by the ruling white administrators and faculty. In many cases such programs are being forced to admit large percentages of non-Indian students in order to “stay alive” and are changing the internal content of courses to respond to the majority audience. Indian faculty teaching in white colleges are also forced to write what their white peers consider to be acceptable scholarly or creative works, in order to obtain tenure or promotion. This means that purely Indian works intended for Indian audiences will not be produced, will have to be seriously altered, or will have to be produced “on the side” Most white universities, still further, will never develop a "critical mass” of Indian faculty. There will usually be one artist, one historian, one political scientist, and so on, so that even if a program has four to six faculty they will always be in different fields. Many colleges, of course, will hire only one or two Indians who will, in turn, be isolated in separate departments. In many respects, the development of a multitude of separate, isolated two-year Indian colleges is a *disservice* to the Indian people. Only one or two such colleges can ever develop the size necessary to hire outstanding faculty or to develop a complex program. The tribally-controlled junior colleges can, however, be viewed as an asset if we think of them as meeting strictly vocational-remedial-preparatory needs and if we do not fall under the illusion that they are meeting *all *of the higher education needs of Indian people. D-Q University was designed as a four-year school with a graduate program, that is, as a university, precisely because of the above considerations. It was designed to bring together a diverse mix of Native students and scholars in order to facilitate the full-scale evolution of a modern Indian intelligentsia independent of white control. Unfortunately certain concrete conditions have forced D-Q U to largely concentrate on junior college-level offerings and to neglect formal upper division or graduate training. What are these conditions? First, the Federal government has forced D-Q U to become "accredited" which means securing at least minimal acceptance by a white-controlled accreditation association. Because of financial constraints D-Q U had to seek junior college accreditation. This, in turn, led to the abandonment of any higher-level work (at the insistence of the junior college accreditation people). Secondly, the large white foundations have proven to be singularly hostile to the creation of an independent Indian-controlled university. They have withheld funding and thereby have forced D-Q U to seek federal funds primarily. Thirdly, the large white religious denominations have refused to fund D-Q U for reasons which probably need little explanation. Clearly the "liberalism" of some of the major denominations does not extend so far as to support an independent, non-Christian, educational institution. (Many, of course, support their own Christian colleges for Indians or Blacks.) Fourthly, the Federal government since Nixon's 1972 electoral victory has turned away from the support of grassroots-controlled programs of all kinds. D-Q U has, in addition, suffered as a specific target of anti-"mi1itant" policies directed at the American Indian Movement. It seems very likely that D-Q U has been "black-balled" by most Federal agencies. Fifthly, most powerful Indians are themselves linked to the colonial system and are very much afraid of D-Q U. It is clear that some of them have used their positions to block grants to the university. Nonetheless, D-Q Uhas had considerable success at stimulating the growth of an Indian intelligentsia but primarily by means of conferences, workshops, meetings, and publications. Since 1972 numerous events at D-Q U have brought together large numbers of Indians and Chicanos to discuss significant topics and especially noteworthy has been the bringing together of traditional elders, college professors, community people, and public school teachers. Truly "advanced" and deep dialogues have occurred in such settings and that may yet prove to be D-Q U's greatest contribution. *Obstacles Faced by a Native Intelligentsia* For the moment, however, I want to turn away from a specific discussion of D-Q U in order to probe more deeply into the problems faced by the Native intelligentsia in general. We must begin by noting that the white intelligentsia in the U.S. is extremely large and powerful, relative to the very small Native intelligentsia. Whether liberal, radical, or conservative the white intellectuals ordinarily insist that non-white intellectuals (especially writers) enter into a continuous dialogue with them. They do not tolerate or comprehend an intelligentsia independent of their continuous embrace. This pressure placed upon the Native world arises both from the use of English (or Spanish) by the Indian intelligentsia (which exposes them constantly to white "inspection" without, however, forcing the whites to master a Native language) and, secondly, by the fact that the whites control virtually all of the means for self-expression (magazines, reviews, recording studios, galleries, publishing houses) as well as controlling promotions in a college setting, research grants, fellowships, research libraries, and advanced study centers. Native intellectuals and artists, to be even moderately successful, must go through a "rite of passage" completely controlled by aliens. One simply will not be appointed to a key board controlling a Native American research collection, for example, or secure a grant for advanced study unless one has produced works "acceptable" to the white world. Moreover, the very essence of such "acceptable" works is that they are in dialogue with the white intelligentsia rather than with other Indians (and especially not with the Native masses). This continuous pressure, whether consciously applied or not, serves to prevent the full development of an independent, authentic Native intelligentsia. It effectively "assimilates" the Native intellectual into the white world or, if he resists, it will often bar him from all recognition and guarantee a life of poverty and struggle. (The latter is not bad in itself but it does severely interfere with productivity and the dissemination of knowledge.) White colonialism, in short, forces the authentic Indian intellectual or artist to identify with the Native masses because, once his eyes are open, he can seen that he is just another "red dog" insofar as the ruling classes are concerned. Moreover, he is a "mad red dog" and his authentic artistic or analytical statements may cause him to be seen as a "frothing at the mouth, rabid red dog" whose works are "shocking" or "biased" and "repulsive." (Can one write or paint the truth and please the white power structure? Probably not for long!) The Native intellectual or artist also discovers that he is outnumbered by white "experts" on Indian subjects. Many of these experts have lucrative full-time positions where their major (or only) responsibility is to write about Indians or comment on Indian art, et cetera. Others teach courses, run galleries or museums, and otherwise dominate a job market that could (in theory) be open to Indians. I don't mean to imply that all whites who write about Indians are doing a disservice. Some have produced excellent works and these authors are usually typified by a degree of modesty which prevents them from posing as experts on all phases of Native life and politics. Others, however, are anti-Indian authors or are simply "mining" the archives for data to be used for career advancement. Still others have tried to write popular articles or reports relating to contemporary Native affairs in spite of having no expertise. But they are the kind of people the *New York Times *or other white publications tend to turn to for insight into the "strange" world of the modern aborigine. (One good thing about this state of affairs is that the shoddy research methods and concealed biases of, say, a scholar specializing in the nineteenth-century, may be revealed for all to see in such an article.) The fact that the Native intelligentsia must exist, as it were, in the shadow of a dominant white group specializing in Native affairs is not unique. It is a typical by product of colonialism, experienced even more completely by Indians in Latin America. It is a situation similar to that faced by Blacks in the U.S., Africans in the former French and British empires, et cetera. Directly parallel also is the manner in which white "social scientists" took over the administration of Indian affairs from the 1920's-1930’s onward and made the area of Native administration "an experiment in guided culture change" (according to advocate Oliver La Farge). Another problem faced by the Native intelligentsia arises from the continuous assault upon Native historical accomplishments staged by non-Indian forces. From one direction come the Mormons with their notions of an ancient Hebrew migration to the Americas (coupled with the idea that brownness of color is a curse for wickedness). From another comes the pseudo-scholarly cultists who seek to assign Native accomplishments to Egyptians, Phoenicians, visitors from outer space, migrants from Atlantis, or travelers from Asia. Then there are those now seeking to prove that white Europeans built megaliths in New England or that Black Africans developed the Olmec civilization in Mexico. And all of this is in addition to the myriads of anthropologists still pushing the Bering Strait theory or some new anti-Indian thesis (such as that the Aztecs were cannibals in order to supply a major part of their protein needs). It would take a full crew of Native writers just to keep up with the continuous attacks being made by white racist writers, let alone meet all of the similar assaults of local newspaper editors, columnists, school boards, teachers, et cetera. We must face up to the reality that the white invaders of the Americas not only want to wipe out the Native nations as political realities. They also want to, if at all possible, explain away every Indian contribution so as to either establish their own "nativeness" or to provide a sort of justification for genocide against the Native race. (Of course, I should stress that most professional archaeologists and anthropologists help us in our struggle with the pseudo-scholarly white attackers even though a few of them occasion all do us a disservice.) The colonialism faced by the Native intellectual is one and the same with the colonialism faced by the poorest, most oppressed sector of the Native masses. The only difference is that the Native writer, artist, or performer can, if he chooses, accept colonialism and recast his work so that he can make a living by producing what the system will reward. The poorest of the oppressed cannot, of course, achieve such "success" (even if they manage to join the army or become a reservation cop). What is it that the system wants? The system wants studies about Indians which reveal "secrets" of Native life in a manner which cannot be at all useful to 99% of Native readers. Or the system wants novels about helpless alcoholic Indians who haven't a political notion in their head. Or the system wants songs about sex and romance, not protest songs. Or the system wants paintings of splendid Indian chiefs in war-bonnets rather than portrayals (for example) of a Papago child dying of malnutrition in a cotton-picking camp. The system also wants us to write histories of Indian tribes using methodologies defined by white disciplines and using concepts forced upon us by alien methods of classification. The tragedy is that such "histories" are often not worth the paper they are written on since the end result is a falsification of reality. (Slowly but surely, of course, white systems of classification and disciplinary methods are creating a new "reality" among Indians as the younger generations are indoctrinated with the way white people define and describe and demarcate Native societies.) It is difficult indeed to see how all of this can change so long as the members of the Native intelligentsia with higher degrees are isolated in white-controlled departments in white universities, or are teaching in vocational junior colleges to students in need of remedial education, or are forced to struggle to keep Native Studies programs alive in hostile environments. Isn't it clear that we need to support an Indian-controlled university? The sad truth is, of course, that Indians of all kinds have been "trained" to believe in the superiority of white-controlled institutions. I am told, for example, that most of the "best" Navajo high school graduates do not want to go to Navajo Community College. They, instead, seek to go to white colleges (even though many of their choices are of dubious intellectual quality). Other Indians would rather go to Haskell Indian Junior College (which is under BIA control) for the same reason and also perhaps because Haskell has a full-range of athletic teams, cheer leaders" marching bands, et cetera. We must, in all honesty, recognize that our Native youth are at least as affected by the propaganda of colonialism (television for example) as are our political leaders, tribal chairpersons, and the intelligentsia. Maybe the Indian people are finished as a viable nationality. But perhaps also we have made a tragic mistake in supporting sometimes remedial and uninspiring junior college programs which in truth might not effectively challenge the better Indian high school graduate. Maybe we have put the cart before the horse. It *is *important that our youth learn to read and write English but isn’t it also important to give them things to read which are free from the taint of colonialism? Who is going to do that? When? Are we only preparing our youth for more effective indoctrination by and assimilation into, the dominant society? At this point it would be wise to review what an intelligentsia is like. Such individuals as Hank Adams, Richard La Course Phillip Deer, Roxanne Dunbar Ortiz, Vine Deloria Jr., Oren Lyons, Mad Bear Anderson Dave Risling Sr. and Jr., Simon Ortiz, Peter MacDonald, and Carl Gorman can be easily identified as members of the Native intelligentsia (of course, any others could be mentioned as well). What distinguishes these people? Some are writers, some are artists or poets, some are traditional thinkers, some are college-trained, and some are “grass-roots.” What do they have in common? They all use their minds and creative skills to think, to pioneer, to plant to propose, to explore, to create new visions--and they do these things in a manner which is, to some degree or another, independent of the white system. The Native People have thousands of school teachers, artists, administrators, and other “trained" persons who are *not* part of the intelligentsia (although many could become part of it). Why? Because most of these "trained” people do not ask questions, do not innovate, do not rebel t do not rock boats, do not provide any new visions--in short, *they have been trained by BIA or other white schools to allow the white society to do their thinking or creating for them. No degree of technical competence or skill can make one an intelligence or a creative artist. *No artist who simply reproduces trite formulas de in “Indian art” schools can help us very much. No teacher who simply pa what administrators tell him to say can help children to learn to think critically. *The mind cannot function effectively if it is imprisoned. *An intelligentsia cannot exist if the minds of the people are programmed to accept whatever colonialism decrees. No true intelligentsia is allowed to exist in the Soviet Union (publicly at least) because social and political criticism or artistic innovate are subject to anti-intellectual police-state control. Similarly, most modern Indian intellectuals and creative artists are people who have never been under the control of the BIA or who have managed somehow, to live apart from the BIA and other white agencies controlling Indians. Among reservation Indians, for example, the intelligentsia exists mostly among grass-roots traditionals who have chosen not to participate high-paying BIA-government jobs (or who have been barred by poverty or 1anuage barriers). An Indian artist or writer or speaker, to be authentic, must be able, make a living completely outside of the normal white-controlled agency of tribal “government” spheres. This is extremely difficult indeed, and for reason the Native intelligentsia is often both small and un influential. are some of the problems? First, a Native writer has great difficulty obtaining publication for novel, poem, play, non-fiction work, or article--and this is especially true if the work looks at things from an internal Indian perspective or seriously challenges white society. Things which are "quaint" or which present stereotypical confused, alcoholic, or "silent and stoical" Redmen are acceptable, as are good novels which lack any Indian "political" content, but even these kinds of works have to compete with well-financed white authors and their books (such as Hanta Yo) which are promoted by the publisher while Indian books have to make it on their own. Native writers are limited to a very few outlets and most of these have almost no impact on the Indian world, let alone reaching non-Indians. Even a "successful" book such as Deloria's Custer Died for Your Sins has probably been read by only a tiny number of Indians (outside of Native American Studies classes where the book used to be widely read). The truth is that 95% of Indian people (I would venture to guess) have never actually read *any *book written by an Indian. It might be 99% with 1% (about 10,000 Indians) being the largest number ever to have read a serious Indian-authored book. Perhaps as many as 5%have read a serious article (not a basketball game story), but that would be 50,000 people which is perhaps on the very high side. Normally, I would guess that our greatest poems, novels, and books reach only 1,000 actual readers (among Indians). My Chicano book, *Aztecas del Norte*, sold 21,000 copies between 1973 and 1977 which means that I had perhaps 50,000 readers for the book (out of a potential Chicano audience in the 5,000,000 range). And that book was an attractive Fawcett paperback selling for only ninety-five cents! As I recall I received an "advance" of $500 for *Aztecas del Norte *and that is all I ever got. My royalty rate was so low that I never received 21 another dime, and that brings up the second problem: one cannot make a living as an Indian writer (unless one has some other income). Most Indian people have to work for bureaucratic agencies or for white people, or they have to produce art works or books to be sold to white audiences. Economically, most of our potentially talented people are castrated! They are either afraid to be authentic, cannot "live" on authenticity (like air it provides virtually no protein!), or they have never discovered, in any case, what it means to have a free mind. Basically, one must have simple tastes and a modest life-style to be an "independent" Indian and while this is not bad in itself, the lack of money severely handicaps such activities as travel, dissemination of materials, promotion of products, sharing of ideas with others, and so on. *The struggle to survive cuts down on the productivity of many Indians.* Similarly, working for a white agency (such as a university) leaves little time or energy (often) for Indian-oriented creative work, even where the atmosphere might be such as to tolerate it. (And most universities will not promote a professor who writes for an Indian audience. For example from1972 to 1979 I didn't receive a single "merit increase" from the University of California because key people didn't approve of such publications *as Aztecas del Norte: the Chicanos of Aztlan, American Words, A World Ruled By Cannibals, Grassroots Community Development, The Wapanakanikok Languages, Religious Freedom and the Protection of Native American Sacred Places, and Racism, Scholarship and Cultural Pluralism in Higher Education. *They hated the latter study and threatened to have me fired largely because of it. (I didn't bother to report half of my articles.) So much for "academic freedom. II One is free only if you produce articles or books *about *Indians but written *for *white audiences, or so my experience indicates. In any case, if one is to be authentic and have a free mind one must be prepared to pay the price. Sometimes it's not too great a price if one is .working for a liberal university, but if one is working for a more bureaucratic agency, then the price is one's job. It's that simple. So it is, then, that Native writers, artists, singers, and thinkers are severely handicapped. *So many of our great minds have to spend most of their time just taking care of the necessities of life so that their full potential is never realized.* Still further, they have relatively few opportunities to have their thoughts, poems, stories, and music disseminated. We have so much talent in the Indian world, but it is constantly being wasted, thwarted, or stifled. Can we change that? Take for example our great musicians and song-writers like the late Ed Lee Natay, or Buffie Sainte-Marie, or Willie Dunn, or Floyd Westerman. They are frozen off of the air waves, barricaded away from television, and isolated behind the "Sagebrush Curtain." Most of the time their records are unavailable (except for Buffie when she sings "folk" music). Indian music, if it is either "political" or traditional, is, in effect illegal. The truth is that our most authentic music, books, and so on are all "outlaw" productions, *not* "illegal" in a technical sense but outlawed in practice. A word might be said here also about the manner in which the white elites bestow "honors" upon such Black, Red-Black, or Indian singers as Ella Fitzgerald, Sarah Vaughn, Lena Horne, Pearl Bailey, the late Louis Armstrong, Rita Coolidge, and so forth. If you will analyze their songs you will discover that they virtually never sing a song with the slightest hint of 23 protest or social criticism. They "entertain” white audiences and make them feel good. Paul Robeson tried to do more than just “entertain.” He got into serious social criticism and was literally driven into exile. The white corporate society in which we live gives out rewards and punishments in such a way as to force non-white artists, singers, and writers to conform. The vast majority of Black, Red-Black, and Indian artists who are well known today and who are financially successful have given up all “serious" work. As “entertainers" of white people they have, in effect, given up their own people and the struggle for justice. (It is true that they serve as “role models” or lIexamples,1I but of what? Of “upward mobility" and cultural annihilation?). We, as Indians, face planned cultural genocide, and the destruction of our intelligentsia is part of that process. What can we do? *Restoring the “Greatness of the Indian Mind”* When I go out to give speeches now I don't talk about Indian politics much anymore. Instead I speak of “the greatness of the Indian mind” and I read lots of quotes from great Native thinkers, poets, and writers. Also I am very much into the notion of helping to organize conferences on Native books, poetry, songs, fiction, art, et cetera. Why? Because the vast majority of Native People have been brainwashed into almost total ignorance about their own intellectual-creative heritage! Somehow we have to revive the “greatness of the Indian mind.“ If we don't we will all perish as Indians. Historically Indians were a philosopher-people, a race of “seekers after wisdom. “Perhaps no group of people anywhere has so universally valued "wisdom" (as opposed to mere technical expertise). But that heritage has been gutted by the hard-sell of the fictitious notion that the Indians are ignorant savages. Incredible as it may seem, there are thousands of Indians who haven't the least awareness that their ancestors had a rich * intellectual* civilization. This is especially true among eastern Indians and among Christianized groups farther west. I recently read an article by a Lumbee author, in the Carolina Indian voice. The article, an effort to revive the notion of a "Croatan" identity. For the Lumbees, was enough to make any Indian cry not only because it echoed ill of the fundamentalist Christian stereotypes about Native history but because it reflected our failure as Native writers and scholars to reach our own people with accurate information. Many Indian people, in places like North Carolina (or Oklahoma), are hemmed in by a shroud of racist, anti-Indian propaganda. It oozes from the pulpits, the newspapers, the radio, the television, and from school textbooks. The Native intelligentsia has not been able to pierce it. It is true that occasionally in such areas one sees a copy of *Akwesasne notes *here and there. It is true also that one meets individuals thirsty for accurate information. But by and large we have failed because most of our publications, cassette tapes, alternative films, and art works are not reaching the Indian people, especially in the "Bible Belt" states. Bookstores and record stores do not carry our materials, libraries do not buy them, and local Indian newspapers, like the*Carolina Indian Voice*, do not offer any promotion of Native materials. If there is to be a Native intelligentsia, if it is to grow, and if its products are to be of any value to this generation of Indians we must seriously Insider changing a few things. First, we must all support D-Q University in its efforts to go beyond nior college programming. The trustees of D-Q U have approved the incorration of a D-Q U Center for Advanced Studies, a separate school offering graduate degrees. This program will, however, fail unless additional funding located and unless established Indian scholars are willing to work with D-Q graduate students. Additionally, we should do everything we can to help D-Q develop advance programs in such areas as film-making and television production, creative ___iting, and Native language literacy. (D-Q U formerly had an excellent Papag____ teracy program but it lost federal funding at a critical point. D-Q U also helped Zuni get a literacy project established). Secondly, whether at D-Q U or elsewhere, we need to stimulate the creati a new style of Native film, one which directly serves the goals of Indian __eration and which uses Native languages as much as possible. Thirdly, we need to encourage writing in Native languages (unless we 'e decided to become monolingual English-speakers). All of our languages1 die if they exist only at the oral level. Many will disappear within tl :t five to ten years unless massive efforts are made to stimulate learning. Languages which are not used will die. ess there is something to be read. People will not learn to read Fourthly, we need to find ways to bring Native writers, artists, et era, together at *Indian *gatherings (not at white-dominated conferences) i… ___ er to stimulate an internal Indian dialogue. More groups need to use the facilities for this purpose. Fifthly, we need to support the D-Q U University Press and other Indian controlled publishing programs. Moreover we need to develop a national Indian dissemination program that will make Indian books, pamphlets, tapes, records, films, videotapes, et cetera, available on a national basis, reaching every Indian community. A catalogue of such materials would be a beginning. But beyond that we need to consider ways of developing local programs, such as a "mobile store" owned and operated by a family which reaches all of the pow-wows , conferences, and communities in a given area. Perhaps such mobile stores could provide a family with a livelihood and also result in thorough dissemination. It is clear that we cannot break into the average white bookstore (most of which are now chain-owned and operated), except under very rare circumstances. Finally, we must make sure that all BIA schools, Indian-controlled schools, and Title IV education centers purchase Indian-authored materials. This is clearly not the case at present, since the buying power of such agencies, alone, could have made "best-sellers" out of many of our books, pamphlets, cassettes and films. We still dream of a D-Q University where Indian films are made, where bright young Indians share dialogue with great Indian minds, where books in Native languages are published, where Indian novelists get together to discuss Indian literature, and where the Native intelligentsia has a home-base, secure from white control. This dream has not been realized yet. A start has been made, but only a start. Will the national Indian community realize before it is too late that the struggle to create D-Q U is central to the Native movement for self determination? Tribally-controlled junior colleges are popular because they can be operated locally and can fit into the needs of the reservation tribal bureaucracy. Each tribe wants jobs and money flowing into its reservation. A national Indian university is more difficult to create, especially if it tries to meet the needs of grassroots and traditional people as well as those of the emerging Indian middle-class. Is there an Indian constituency to support a pan-Indian university? Is there an Indian constituency to encourage the development of an independent Indian intelligentsia? What happens with D-Q U will help to answer both of these questions. Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
