Inez Peterson’s “What Part Moon?” stresses the detrimental effect that quarrel over blood quantum has on the fight for Native American rights. Like “Only Approved Indians Can Play Made in the USA” by Jack Forbes, Peterson’s story argues that Indians only hurt themselves with battles over blood percentages. Constant suspicion about the “Indianness” of each other causes indigenous people to lose sight of their true target. Inez Peterson states plainly “if we divide ourselves, we are doing the work of the dominant culture; there is no need for them to keep us down, for we do it ourselves” (148). The amount of “Indian blood” a person has is inconsequential. What matters instead is their passion for what they believe in. Moreover, all movements need followers. If the Native movement demands pure blood, then their support will be dramatically insufficient. By denying the right to defend to Native mixed-bloods, the Native Americans essentially become hypocrites to their own cause, rendering their choice of survivance ineffective.
Furthermore, I really like Peterson’s “determination to deflate expectations of what a Native American woman should look like” (147). I find that her story reveals that whites are not the only ones with specific expectations for Native appearance (Teepees?), but Indians also seem to be guilty of stereotyping their own kind. Inez shows that in addition to blood quantum, physiognomy is irrelevant to who a person truly is or how they should be treated, and demonstrates her defiance by dying her hair red. This challenge is simple, but I believe it illustrates the triviality of blood and appearance constraints and perhaps suggests that the Native rights movement should instead be a movement for equal human rights, fought for by all races alike, not solely a few purebloods who look the part.
Furthermore, I really like Peterson’s “determination to deflate expectations of what a Native American woman should look like” (147). I find that her story reveals that whites are not the only ones with specific expectations for Native appearance (Teepees?), but Indians also seem to be guilty of stereotyping their own kind. Inez shows that in addition to blood quantum, physiognomy is irrelevant to who a person truly is or how they should be treated, and demonstrates her defiance by dying her hair red. This challenge is simple, but I believe it illustrates the triviality of blood and appearance constraints and perhaps suggests that the Native rights movement should instead be a movement for equal human rights, fought for by all races alike, not solely a few purebloods who look the part.
Cultural expectations always tear people apart. Its hard to not stereotype in a society where stereotypes are so common. Peterson brings up a good point of not having boxes to check "mixed blood" on things like the census or the SATs. The reason people tend to divide themselves into purebloods and "not sure" bloods is because it gets weird trying to figure out who people really are. Even though this is sad to say, its true.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIt is interesting to consider the point at which the Indian can become a stereotype that Native American people use to measure one another. At what point are current Native Americans so far removed from their ancestors that they cannot recognize their roots in each other? I think that by ascribing to the Petersonian ideology we can call upon a system of measure that transcends physicality.
ReplyDeleteI think the idea of blood percentage being related to integration into a culture is a really interesting topic. I wonder what you think about people who are not technically native but still consider themselves a part of the culture. Do you think someone can be Indian without having any Indian blood?
ReplyDeleteI commented on another post that discussed this ("The Light of Knowledge" blog)...
ReplyDeleteIn response to your blog and the post above mine, I think somebody can identify with being Indian without having any Indian blood in a personal, spiritual, or emotional sense. However, physically, I do not think that they can identify as being Native American. Like, I can't say that I am every race out there just because I feel like it. There needs to be some aspect of truth to race (in a physical sense). My statement is not meant to promote stereotypes or anything negative of that nature, but I just believe that we need to acknowledge our differences. Our differences are what make each one of us unique, so why try to hide what race/nationality/ethnic identity we really are physically? We need to be true to ourselves.
In "What Part Moon," I liked how Petersen tried to break the stereotypes of what Native Americans should look like by dying her hair red. This action shows that she was confident in expressing who she truly was, so kudos to that!
That's an interesting point. I think the reason that the level of blood is so important is, like stated in We AIM not to please, that the native american movement does not want equal rights, but rather separate rights. With this different goal it is required for a separation to be made and for all practical levels the separation can only be made on a physical level. Could you imagine if at a whim a person could change their nationality and how the government treated them? Perhaps you are right, perhaps the movement should really be moving towards equality instead.
ReplyDelete