The Midwest Quarterly A. JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY THOUGHT Volume XL, Number 3, Spring 2001 CONTENTS In this issue 236 ARTICLES ‘Shawn St, Jean “aye, Chance, Free Will, and Necessity”: Sister Carrie's Literary Interweavings ..... 240 © bnita Tare Getting To the Lighthouse: Virginia Woolf and ‘Thomas Carlyle 957 George. Clay In Defense of Flat Characters an irom Nat From Down South to Up South: An Examination of Geography in the Blues .... 306 Thomas Matehie Writing About Native Americans: ‘The Native and the Non-Native Critie/Author 320 Kathryn jacobs How Not to Shed Tears, and What to Do, Instead: James Mereill 34 POEMS Michael Cadnun Rain's End 281 Basbara Siegel Carlon Woman Found . 283 ox)Peter Desy Perfectly Square Martha Greenmald ‘The Greek Week Tomado For Sale by Owner Janke N, Harrington In a Shivering Wind Dust Joseph Hutchison Open and Closed Eyes Mary Mearthur Sunrise Dance yea Melvin Half Moon [Lenard D. Moore Letter to My Father Paul Soha Spring Seduction Larry D. Thomas Crape Myrtles Suan Varon Farther Barth ‘This Pond Can Fly 6.6. Waldvop Geometry Lesson Joanne Mureay Walker ‘Writing Workshop Don Weleh ‘Across the Road From the Cemetery Mary Wintors Spin Myself Into a Cocoon So Soft And ean ey 285 237 259, 290.REVIEW Darall Beavsho Christopher Philips Mlssoun'’s Confederate: Claibirne For Jackson andthe Creation of Southern [dentity in the Border West a6Writing About Native Americans: The Native and the Non-Native Critic/Author THOMAS MATCHIE § A TEACHER of American literature, I have often asked myself who should be writing about Native Amer- ican culture, Does it depend upon one’s race, political view- point, or particular creative style? Tentatively, [ have con- cluded that anyone interested can (and pethaps should) write about American Indians, as long as the person vrites well, has something significant to say, and is accurate in doing so. Stil, there is some questionable fiction oxt there, and cer- tainly some noted critics profoundly disagree over how Amer- ican Indians are represented in literature. What I would like to do in this essay’ is propose a few of the problems that certain writers have crested. Then, after surveying some of the ways Natives have been represented historically in liter- ature, I want to comment on some recent fiction, modem and postmoclern, as well as some telling differences between critics. Finally, I'll conclude with several observations on con. temporary novelists I think are the most provocative writers writing about Native Americans today. Recently, 1 attended a regional history conference in which awoman from the University of North Dakota, Bridget Hans, presented a paper on Karl May. He was a popular [9th tury German writer who wrote numerous novels about Amer- ican Indians in German. Of his 73 novels, 29 were about American Indians. Bridget grew up on these novels and gives him credit for her interest in American Indians. Still, she stressed that Karl May, who never visited the U.S. until two years before his death in 1912, plagarized much of his ma- (20)NATIVE AMERICANS 32 terial. So his landscapes are more or less invented, his char- acters one-dimensional, and his plots formulistic. There are several ironies in this story. First, though his novels are mis- leading and often erroneous, to this day many Germans get their understanding of Native Americans from Karl May. See- ond, though Hans gives May credit for her interest in Native Americans, she now knows the difference between authentic and inauthentic fiction and teaches this difference; she is now the head of American Indian: Studies at the University of North Dakota. Third, she wanted us to know that, though May may be an exciting writer, his stereotypical and over- romanticized novels are a big reason that Natives distrust white Europeans writing about Indians. Such writing is not only misleading, it is unfortunate and demeaning. But let me back up and look at some of the history of the way American Indians have been represented in literature. From the time of the Mayflower until about 20 years ago. American literature, largely white European, has pictured Native Americans as almost sub-human, An early Puritan writer, Mary Rowlandson, in her famous captivity narrative popularized the word “savage,” and ever after American Christians have used terms like “pagan” or “heathen” to de- seribe Indians, In the 1700s, a century after the Puritans, Natives like Samson Occom, a Mohegan, and Hendrick Au- paumut, a Mahican, leamed English and became Christians Occom became a preacher while Aupaumut fought in the Revolution, later functioning as a diplomat for the U.S, gov- ernment on the western frontier. The narratives of these two are sow anthologized, but perhaps less because they were Indians than because they helped popularize “The Great Awakening,” a widespread 18th-century religious movement, or helped America defeat the British. Ironically, Aupaumut'’s involvement may even have facilitated the demise of the Plains Indians as white Europeans moved westward, Later still, in the 1800s, James Fennimore Cooper, writing from his drawing room in France, began to puta positive spin on Natives in Last of the Mohicans. Uncas, for example, has‘THE MIDWEST QUARTERLY amazing woodland skils, but Cooper says little about any in- tellectual or spiritual values among the New England tribes And unlike his less-popular contemporary” Catharine Sedgwick in Hope Leslie, he avoids any intermarriage be- bween the races. Even Mark Twain, in the late 1800s, though he undercut white racism with his characterization of Jim, the Black slave, and Jim’s loving relationship to Buck Finn, could not do the same for Indians—cither in Tom Sawyer (cf. Indian Joe) or Tom and Huck Among the Indians. Tt was not until the 1930s when Black Elk in an “as-told-to autobi- ography,” Black Elk Speaks, spoke the John Neihardt about the mystical aspects of Sioux culture, that we begin to get a positive picture in literature of Native life from a Native viewpoint, Perhaps the first significant novels about Indians were wnit- ten around World War II, This was not a popular time to be ‘writing about Indians, so these books are before their time They inchide Marie Sandoz’s Crazy Horse, Ella Deloria’s Waterlily, ancl Frank Water's The Man Who Killed the Deer. Deloria was as much a sociologist-ethnologist as a novelist and in Waterlily she tries to show that before the coming of the white man to the piairie, the Sioux were a highly civilized people; that is, she tried to reverse the idea of them as savage. Sandoz was not an American indian, but she grew up very close to them at Fort Robinson in Nebraska. In her semi- biography of Crazy Horse she developed an idiom to capture the point of view of the Sioux during the years of the Indian ‘Wars leading up to the Battle of Little Big Horn (1876). A very informative novel, it counters hundreds of accounts writ- ten from the view of the white military. Frank Waters cap- tured in his novel a beautiful liturgical account of the meaning of the deer to the southwestern Pueblos, in contrast to simply hunting an animal for sport or food, Here ritual and ceremony betray & highly spiritualized, mystical culture that is ironically rooted, not in the abstract, but in the earth and animal life. These three pieces of early fiction formed stepping stones to awhole new age.NATIVE AMERICANS 323 But they are exceptions. Deloria’s work was not published until 1988. In fact, is was not until the mid-S0s that the real proliferation of Native American Literature by Native Amer- jeans took hold. There is a key date here—1978, the passage of the Indian Religious Reformation Act. In an interview with Bill Moyers, Michael Dorris and Louise Erdrich elaborate on the U.S. government's radical reversal of its approach to In- dians at that time. In the 19th century the government's pol- icy was to get rid of Indian culture through assimilation, Na~ tives were relegated to reservations, their children were dressed as whites, had their hair cut, ancl were taught to speale English. Moreover, each reservation was assigned a Christian denomination in which to raise these “heathens.” Years later, when it became clear that that policy did not work, it was changed; in the 1930s the government through the Collier Reforms hoped to at least recognize Indian cul- ture so that red and white people could live side by side, But given the variety of tribal histories and viewpoints, the De- pression, and the advent of World War IT, that approach was only partially successful, Then, in 1978, instead of their cul- ture being crushed, usurped, or ignored, the U.S, elected to recognize Native peoples as legitimate, in fact to try to learn from their different ways of thinking and acting, maybe even to consider how Native perspectives might contribute to, even enbance American Culture overall. This approach as- sumes the possibility, indeed the power, of Indian spirituality to change our lives. This is a major shift from the way Amer- icans first viewed these “heathens.” In 1984 Jerome Klinkowitz wrote an article in the Journal of American Literature, saying that we need more Native American writers. He noted that with the exception of M. Scott Momady (Way to Rainy Mountain, 1969), James Welch (Winter in the Blood, 1973), and Leslie Marmon Silko (Cer- emony, 1976), that there were very few noted Native Amer- icans writing. But 1984, ironically the year of Klinkowitz’s article, was the very year that Louise Erdrich published Love Medicine, which by hindsight was the beginning of what 124 ‘THE MIDWEST QUARTERLY would cal! a Native American Renaissance, the unleashing of many good American Indians writing good literature. Now we read such people as Gerald Visenor, Louis Owens, Diane Clancy, W. S. Penn, Betty Louise Bell, Sherman Alexie, Su- san Powers, Darch McNiekles, Thomas King, and others. Not long ago I reviewed a book for North Dakota History called Returning the Gift. The book grew out of a prolonged work- shop for young and old aspiring Indian writers at the Uni- versity of Arizona which published the anthology. It includes works produced by Natives—short stories, poems, and es- says—that relate to their lives, their particular culture, their view of America and their place in it. It shows that there are now many new faces telling the Native story in our midst. ‘This is truly a Native American Renaissance ‘There isa problem in this renewal, however. Native Amer- icans and non-Native Americans do not always agree on what it means to write about Native Americans. In Mixedblood Messages Louis Owens has written extensively on the com- plex problem of “Indianness.” For my part, I would like to highlight the debate by contrasting two novelist-crities who are diametrically opposed on the subject, Elizabeth Cook- Lynn, the noted Sioux critic and author, fundamentally dis- trusts “assimilation,” the diluting of tribal culture with white- Enropean influences. In her novel From the River's Edge, a Native man, when his land is taken to make room for a Mis- souri River water project, tries to live as a white rancher Consequently, he ends up betraying his wife and his people. Only later, when sitting in a sweat lodge with his own does he come to the realization of how destructive assimilation, or mixing red and white values, can be—at least for him. But Cook-Lynn is even more direct in a book of essays, Why I Can't Read Wallace Stegner, where she says Stegner, like so many whites, assumes that Native life ended at Wounded Knee in 1890. She then takes many writers to task for misrepresenting, even abusing, Native culture. Her best example is Ruth Beebe Hills's Hanto Yo. Unlike Karl May's oth century novels, this was written by an American in Eng-NATIVE AMERICANS lish as late as 1979, the begianing of what Tam calling an American Indian Renaissance, and it was on the best-seller list for 30 weeks. A lengthy work about the early Sioux, on the surface it appears to be authentic, indeed highly re- searched, complete with a linguistic dictionary. Yet, for Cook- Lynn, the book is an over-romanticized version of the Sioux that the Sioux themselves have called “obscene and false.” She says it is not ani epic as Hill claims, and it is Billed with errors. Moreover, it ignores oral history, its language is vep- etitious and boring, and (according to her) Sioux metaphor and philosophy simply do not come through, Most offensive is the fact that sodomy and homosexuality are ritualized as though they are sacred ceremonies—again, a return to the old notion of Indian as “savage.” For this Native writer, white Europeans writing about Natives in such ways hurts more than helps the cause of national, or tribal sovereignty But one non-Native white European navelist and eritic who defends his right to write about Native Americans is Arnold Krupat, Krupat is a Jew, a people one might think would have much in common with Indians. They look to the land, to ancestry and blood relations, to their nation or tribe, to nature as a vehicle of the sacred, to community and its ceremonies far a sense of identity and belonging. All these things are true for Jews—a religious people with a history related to the land, But Krupat says his family background is, negligible. He sees himself not as an orthodox Jew, but as ai academic, an individual thinker, a modern rationalist, secular rather than religious, diasporie, that is, personally removed from his people, and rather than tribal he calls himself “tran: national and cosmopolitan.” Still, he claims that a white eritie like himself, an avid student of Native culture, has a great deat to say about Native fiction, Like Cook-Lynn, Krupat bas written a short novel called Woodsmen, or Thoreau and the Indians. It takes place shortly afier the 1973 siege of Wounded Knee in South Dakota, but it is set in the northeast, where Thoreau lived, and it features a group af white academies who want to buy some land that926 ‘THE MIDWEST QUARTERLY belongs to the Poquosett Indians, who defend it vehemently ‘The novel juxtaposes Thoreau’s philosophy of civil disobed! ence that comes from living in nature with American Indian thought on the subject of and they say belongs to them. In the novel who is to possess that land becomes a dilemma in. which several intellectuals become involved and with which they have to wrestle. Krupat obviously sympathizes with the Native Americans in a way that brings the two races together. This is how he is transnational and cosmopolitan As a critic in The Turn to the Native Krupat aligns himself with the Chippexa novelist Gerald Visenor in books hike Bearheart where Visenor creates a mythical people, called pilgrims, who forge a new type of America on a magical level, though this group moves from north to south, rather than east to west, With Visenor, Krupat thinks fiction, Native and non-Native, ought to be done without fear of assimilation, as is the case with Cook-Lynn, but “in the name of healing,” One author that he and Cook-Lynn would probably disagree ‘on is Michael Dorris, author of Yellow Raft on Blue Water and Cloud Chamber. Gook-Lym speaks of his “tribelessness” because he does not champion tribal values. Whether he does or not is debatable, but what Dorris certainly is is a healer In Cloud Chamber he brings together Irish, Black, and Native communities in 2n apocalyptic finale. For Krupat this is what is paramount in writing about Native Americans—good re~ lationships on an equal level, asserting common values with- out diluting identity, ultimately healing. As acritic/noyelisthe is different from Cook-Lynn. She is Native, he is white, But both are good writers/eritics who have emerged as major au- thorities on Native writing. I think that reading and teaching both in tandem might be the best way to evaluate any piece of writing about Indians, whether it be historical, modern, or postmodern. But let me come at this subject somewhat differently. 1 would like to make a case for an early white novelist who has written what 1 think is a fairly good novel about Indians, though some might disagree. Then I want to compare him toNATIVE AMERICANS a popular Native writer who uses literary techniques not un- like those for which the white writer is often criticized. The white man is Frederick Manfred. In the 1950s he wrote a series of novels called the Buckskin Tales covering the history of the 19th century. Two of them are about Indians—Con- quering Horse and Scarlet Plume. The first is a story about a young Native’s coming of age before the advent of the white man. In it he shows some significant Native concerns, like the vision quest, closeness to the earth, the centrality of horses, and the problems of family and extended family life. ‘At an early period, the mid-20th century, he wanted to help ‘Americans to better understand 29th-century Indian history and culture. What intezests me is that in writing the novel, which is basically a bildungsroman (novel of growth), Manfred em- ploys some interesting mythology. His prose has a poetic flow similar to Walt Whitrnan’s, and there is a pantheistic quality to the way he intertwines human and animal life as Whitman, did. He also uses Greek myth to explain the disappearance of the protagonist’s—No Name’s—father (who resembles Zeus vanishing in the clouds), and he mimics the Old Tes- tament “Song of Songs” when No Name, sow Conquering Horse, marries his loved one, Leaf, So he uses white myth to explain Native realities. He may be criticized for this, but it is a convincing book. Mantred was close to the Sioux. Freya Manfred, his daughter and a poet herself, says he periodically held powwows in their back yard, and he used Sioux con- sultants for this epic novel (another Greek parallel). What makes his book different fram the earlier Waterlily (also about the early Sioux) is that, written in the 50s a decade after Waterlily but years before the Native Renaissance, is that it isa better novel. Itis also highly educational without the over- romanticizing or attempting language with which he was not familiar, as in Hanta Yo. Compare this to a recent writer, lest we think that a white man using American and classic myth to explain Indians is, out of piace. Sherman Alexie, in the mid-1990s, wrote a novel338 ‘THE MIDWEST QUARTERLY called Reservation Blues which has received mixed reviews by Native erities. Leslie Silko thinks it is "the best we have.” while Spokane Gloria Bird contends the book is stereotypical of Indians and “an exaggeration of despair.” Itis about a band of Spokane Indians who form a musical band, called Coyote Springs. The protagonist is Thomas Builds-the-Fire. The book begins with a mythic Black figure from the Louisiana Delta, Lionel Johnson, who gives his guitar to Thomas, the director of the band, in exchange for his freedom. And Tho- mas goes on to guide the band to success and a New York audition (a kind of paradigm of the American dream). But here they fail, after which some of the band members get drunk, and one commits suicide. So the story is built on an old Afro-American myth, Except for their music, the blues, which they sang in the cotton fields, the Blacks lost their whole culture when they were brought to America as slaves What Alexie has done is apply that myth to the Indians, They have lost much of their culture and cannot make it suc- cessfully in America, so the blues help them endure the loss, which includes failure in the business world, drunkenness, and occasionally suicide. What this comparison reveals is that both the white man, Manfred, and the full-blooded American Indian, Alexie, use non-Native myths extensively to underpin their writing—a feature Cook-Lynn would find highly ques- tionable, if not destructive, in both cases. For me, however, both authors are authentic, effective writers, though they write in different styles. Manfred had associated with Natives in an effort to capture their historical spirit. Alexie is a Native caught up in white American popular culture and uses it to write realistically about his people today. What they have in common js their use of non-Native mythology to accomplish their purposes at two radically different times in history. ‘Then there is the related question: what about mixed bloods, those canght between worlds, who write about Native ‘Americans? Cook-Lynn thinks that one of the leading mixed~ blood Native writers today, Louise Erdrich, has compromised her tribal roots through her “Christian-oriented apocalypticNATIVE AMERICANS Mision.” In Love Medicine, for example, in a chapter entitled Saint Marie,” Marie goes to the convent as a part of her religions training. Here Se. Leopolia tries to pour boiling water in the girls ear to teach her a lesson in obedience. Marie eventually wins the battle after Leopolda sticks her with a poker in the hands, whereupon the nuns begin to ven- erate Marie because they think it is Christ’s stigmata, calling her “star of the sea.” This is Erdrich’s humorous critique of the worst in Catholic practices coupled with a celebration of the best in Christian theology—a kind of resurrection follow- ing crucifixion. This is grotesque Christian humor, the kind used by Flannery ©'Coanor in her stories In another chapter, “Crown of Thorns,” the drunken Gor dhe hits and kills @ deer, After putting it in the back seat of his car, he begins to fantasize that itis June, his dead wife, so he goes to the convent and confesses his sin, as though to apriest, though in this case a atm. tn the process he weaves, his own “crown of thorns,” swhich is a Christian coneept, alan with the confession of sins. On the other hand, one aspect Chippewa myth inchides the mythic presence of the deer woman, In this case, she may be the wife in the back seat exiticizing Gordie’s escapist approach to life. Like the deer woman's spiritual presence, june permeates all of Love ihe. icine as well as other Erdrich novels. But this mixing of Chip. pewa myth ancl the Christian grotesque, which she probably gleaned from writers like O'Connor and Faulkner, is what infuriates Cook-Lynn, On the other hand, Susan Farrell says it is the constant pull between Christianity and traditiona Indian beliefs that gives balance and spiritual unity to Ex dvich’s prose. Critics themselves disagree in regard to Er drich’s nixed approach, but no one can deny the effectivenes of her tragic-comic approach to telling her story One other mixed blood who 1 think is most effective i Thomas King, who is of Cherokee, Greek, and German de scent, In introducing a collection of Canadian writers in A. Ay Relations, he concludes that we need a balance betwee Native and white myths. Myths for hien are patterns of thint330 ‘THE MIDWEST QUARTERLY ing by which we live, and historically the balance has been tipped toward the whites. For him, this balance needs to be reestablished, something he attempts in a novel entitled Green Grass, Running Water. It contains realistic characters and a conflict-resolntion plot which revaives around the building of a dam. But it also has a magical dimension in which several mythic characters and a trickster, Coyote, come into the linear plot as though they too were real. These cha acters, like Ishmael, Hawkeye, and the Lone Ranger, suggest myths from American literary history and popular culture What they do is challenge traditional white myths, like the cowboy myth, Old and New Testament myths of creation, especially as they deal with the control of nature, and the Columbus myth—the meaning of the discovery of America. In regard to the latter, there are three cars which go over the dam in the end. These big dams, of course, often origi- nated by displacing Indians and taking their land for the pur- pose of water power, fishing, boating and the like. In Green Grass, Coyote causes the dam to break and three cars to go over the dam. The cars are a Nissan, a Pinto, and a Karmann- Ghia, suggesting a new Nita, Pinta, and Santa Maria. In ef fect, King is rewriting the Columbus myth, calling for a re- discovery of America with a new view about Indians, Coyote says: “There are no truths, only stories.” Change the story and you change the myth, or a people's way of thinking, That is what King does through the novel—with cowboys who in this book don’t massacre the Indians, with creation accounts where whites do not gratuitously “subdue the earth,” and the Columbus story where three “ships” turn a different trick than the original vessels, ‘The technique is funny, but also profound, Margaret Atwood calls it “subversive humor.” Itis King’s way of balancing myths—historically, politically, sociologically So who should write about Indians? Historically, there have been some questionable white novelists, like James Fen- nimore Cooper and Karl May, who wrote about American Indians from Europe, largely out of fgnorance. Ruth BeebeNATIVE AMERICANS 331 Hill is less excusable because she is a recent American writer and claims to be authentic, yet (as Cook-Lynn argues) is just the opposite. In my view there are some respectable white aecounts of the early Sioux. Frederick Manfred’s Conquering Horse is an example, written slightly before the Native Ren- aissance, But it needs to be compared to earlier novels by Natives, like Waterlily, and more recent ones, like James Welch's Fools Crow, which is not only historical, but prophetic. There are also some white critics who need attention. Kru- pat is a good example. He humorously calls himself “a nice Jewish boy among the Indians.” He sees his personal back- ground as different from Native Americans, yet he loves to ‘write about their philosophy and culture—something he does ina scholarly and an insightful manner. His main point is that, ‘we ought to write about Native Americans “in the interest of healing,” in this sense he is a good contrast to Cook-Lynn, who thinks that assimilation is basically destructive. Both their viewpoints need to be studied, evaluated, and painstak- ingly applied. ‘Then there are creative writers like Sherman Alexie, a full- blooded Spokane who grew up in a postmodem world and has no qualms about using all kinds of techniques to write about Native Americans whose lives, he contends, are inex- tricably mixed with white society. Reservation Blues is a con- glomeration of ways of thinking, making him the subject of criticism even from his fellow Natives. Leslie Silko thinks his language is fresh and his perception of Indian poverty insight- ful, while fellow Spokane Gloria Bird contends he is a product of a video culture, that his novel lacks structure and his char- acters are sterotypes. In short, he is a controversial novelist, even for Natives. My point in discussing him is that Manfred may be criticized as a white man for using white myths, but ‘Alexie in using non-Native myths out-Manfreds Manfred. ‘This brings us to the subject of mixed-bloods, who are caught between two or more cultures. Michael Dorris and Louise Erdrich combine cultures, I think, without detracting332, ‘THE MIDWEST QUARTERLY from either, though Cook-Lynn (as well as others. like Silko and Owens), have reseyvations about the way they represent Indians. For me, both have made substantial contributions to Native thought, though they differ stylistically and themati- cally. Erdtich is less political and more poetic than Dorris. She is a realist, a humorous one at that, who writes about the mixed culture she knows, especially North Dakota, while still championing Chippewa history, culture, and mythology. Jean Smith argues that it is the trickster er comic quality in Er drich’s prose that allows her to express contemporary history in all of its complexity, thereby helping the Chippewa com- munity survive. She might read and draw upon other Amer- ican writers like Faulkner and O'Connor, but her vision is ultimately Chippewa, and in that way she contributes sub- stantially to American thought and culture at large. But Thomas King may be the king of mixed-blood writers today. He is unique in that he does not use one culture's myths to explain another's (like Manfred and Alexie), or com- bine myths in ways that detract ftom neither culture (like Erdrich and Dorris), but he humorously employs Native inyths to challenge white myths. This is true of Green Grass, but he has also written a collection of short stories entitled ‘One Good Story, That One, which like his novel challenges traditional mytbs, like creation itself. The lead story is a spoof on Genesis, where Eve, instead of causing Adam to sin (for original sin is foreign to Native thinking), she passes out the apples (mee-so) to everybody, something Natives are likely to do, given their interest in the extended family. Such a story is not only a commentary on the beginning of humankind, but on creation in any sense that involves words, stories, lit- erature itself. Whenever you read a story you are involved in creation—the author's and yours as a reader. In this way King helps us all to reevaluate all our stories, our myths, our white- European ways of thinking so as to better understand our- selves—and Native Americans—in society today. As Coyote says, “There are no truths, only stories.”353 NATIVE AMERIC: BIBLIOGRAPHY Arwood, Margaret. A Duubla bladed Kaila: Subversive Laughter in Bao Storieshy Thos King” Canadian Literate, 120125 (1990), 21350, Alese, Sherman, Resersation Blut. New York: Warner Bovks, 995 Bird, Gloss, "The Exaggeration of Despatrin Shosian Alsi’ fesettion Bos" Wieo Se Review, Fall 105, 47-52, CCookeLyn, Etsbeth. From the Rice's Ege, Now York Arca, 1901 Why ant Real Walle Stoner and Qther Essay Tribal Voie, Madson Wisconsin University Press, 997 Dorms, Michiel. Cloud Chember: New York: Senne, 1097 Erdrich, Louise. Love Medicine, New York: Holt, Binet & Winston, 1084 Feel, Sssan. "Erdrich Love Medicine,” The Bxplleatr, 56:2 (1995), 100. il, Ruth Beebe. Hants Ye, Saw York: Pobleday, 1979, King, Thomas: Greer Graz, Running Water, New York: Houghton Mii, 1960, = Inerduction.” Aly Relations Norma University of Osho Press, (992. — One Good Story, That One. Toronto: Hager Perenn,195, Winkows, Jorome. “Picton: The 1960s tothe Present." American Lateran Sohlarship “An nnaait985, |. alber Robblus Durham Duke Unversity Pres, 1958 Kup, arnold. The Turn tothe Nts, Lincolas Univer of Nebraska Press, 1986 =, Woxdsmen: Thora the Indians, Noraun: University of Oklahoma Press, 1994 Manfed, Frederick. Conquering Horse. Lincln: Unversity of Nebraska Ress, 1958 Matehie, Thoms, ev. of Returning che Gif Joseph Brachae, North Dakota History, ‘Springer 1096, 63:63, Moyers, Bill. "Louse Bedich apd Michael Doris." A Worl ef Idec. Nw Yor Double ‘ey, 1958. 46069, Owens, Louis. Mixablaod Mesinges. Norman: Univerty of Ochoa Fre, 198, ‘lho, Leslie Marmon, "Big Bingo.” Rey. of Reservation Bliss, by Shennan Ale. The ‘Nation 12 June 1095, 856-60 senor, Gord. Bearhvar: The Hlatrship Chronicles Maneapoi: University of Minnesota ress, 1000. Smith, Joanne Roser Writing Tiksters, University ef California Press, 1097