Loading...

Decolonizing Native American Rhetoric

Communicating Self-Determination

by Casey Ryan Kelly (Volume editor) Jason Edward Black (Volume editor)
Textbook XVIII, 352 Pages

Summary

As survivors of genocide, mnemonicide, colonization, and forced assimilation, American Indians face a unique set of rhetorical exigencies in US public culture. Decolonizing Native American Rhetoric brings together critical essays on the cultural and political rhetoric of American indigenous communities, including essays on the politics of public memory, culture and identity controversies, stereotypes and caricatures, mascotting, cinematic representations, and resistance movements and environmental justice.
This volume brings together recognized scholars and emerging voices in a series of critical projects that question the intersections of civic identity, including how American indigenous rhetoric is complicated by or made more dynamic when refracted through the lens of gender, race, class, and national identity. The authors assembled in this project employ a variety of rhetorical methods, theories, and texts committed to the larger academic movement toward the decolonization of Western scholarship. This project illustrates the invaluable contributions of American Indian voices and perspectives to the study of rhetoric and political communication.

Table Of Content

  • Cover
  • Title
  • Copyright
  • About the author(s)/editor(s)
  • About the book
  • This eBook can be cited
  • Table of Contents
  • List of Illustrations
  • Acknowledgments
  • Foreword: The Questions of Decolonization (Mary E. Stuckey)
  • Notes
  • Introduction: Decolonizing Native American Rhetoric (Casey Ryan Kelly / Jason Edward Black)
  • Where We Have Been, Where We Are Going
  • A Commitment to Decolonization
  • Preview of the Book
  • Notes
  • Part One: Time, Memory, and Identity
  • Chapter One: Decolonizing Reconciliation: Art and Conciliation from the Ground Up Among Canadian Aboriginal Peoples (Randall A. Lake / Tyler Hiebert / Chris Robbins)
  • The Indian Residential School System and Reconciliation
  • Artistic Visions of Reconciliation
  • The Witness Blanket
  • The Witness Blanket’s Visual Counterargument
  • Conclusion
  • Notes
  • Chapter Two: Women at the Greasy Grass/Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument: Remapping the Gendered/Sexed Circumference of Memory (Catherine Palczewski)
  • Decolonial Remapping as a Rhetorical Practice
  • Goeman and Massey on Mapping Space
  • Burkean Scenic Circumference
  • A Physics Tutorial: Centrifugal/Centripetal Forces and Velocity
  • Remapping the Greasy Grass/Little Bighorn
  • From Custer Battlefield National Monument to Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument: Still a Battlefield
  • The Indian Memorial: Outlining Women’s Presence
  • The Events: Remapping Histories’ Stories
  • Conclusion
  • Notes
  • Chapter Three: Melancholic Mirages and Ethopoeic Enemies: Reconsidering Temporality in Canada’s Apologies to First Peoples (Lee M. Pierce)
  • Lines Are Made for Crossing
  • Ethopoeia: (Neo)Colonialism’s Master Trope
  • Melancholic Mirages
  • Ethopoeic Enemies
  • Conclusion: Trudeau’s Concentric Circle
  • Notes
  • Chapter Four: “The Original Homeland Security, Fighting Terrorism Since 1492”: A Public Chrono-Controversy (Matthew Brigham / Paul Mabrey)
  • Chrono-Controversy
  • “Homeland Security” Rhetorics
  • “Homeland Security” as a Post-9/11 Response
  • “Fighting Terrorism since 1492” as a “Homeland Security” Response
  • Rhetorical Invention and Agency
  • Geronimo’s Ghost
  • Transgressing the Sacred
  • Risks
  • Temporalizing Sovereignty
  • “Homeland Security” as Insecurity
  • Constructing Homeland and Hometime
  • Lessons for Decolonial Public Address Scholarship
  • Notes
  • Part Two: Representations, Caricatures, and the Popular
  • Chapter Five: Decolonizing Caricature: Prosopographia in the Comic Politics of Marty Two Bulls, Sr. (Christopher J. Gilbert)
  • Slings and Arrows
  • Caricature Is Wakan
  • Conclusion: Forked Tongues and Volte-Faces
  • Notes
  • Chapter Six: Indians Aren’t Funny: Native Stand-Up as Contact Zone (Amanda Morris / Casey R. Schmitt)
  • Introduction
  • Native American Studies, Stand-Up, and the Academic Perspective
  • Contact Zones, Epideictic Rhetoric, and Crossing Disciplinary Boundaries
  • Decolonizing Theory
  • Howie Miller: “Caucasionally-impaired”
  • Don Burnstick: “I’ve Got Nothin’ Against White People”
  • Powwow Comedy Jam: “Trail of Laughs”
  • Deanna M. A. D: “Bullshit Alarm”
  • Conclusion
  • Notes
  • Chapter Seven: A Critical Rhetorical History of the Utes Nickname (Danielle Endres)
  • Colonialism
  • Rhetorical History as Critical Intervention
  • The Utes Nickname
  • American Indian Responses to the Utes Nickname
  • Cultural Appropriation and Self-Determination
  • Harm and Honor
  • Unsanctioned and Sanctioned Behaviors
  • Ute Experience and American Indian Experience
  • Conclusion
  • Notes
  • Chapter Eight: Survive or Surrender: The Rhetoric of Indigenous Land in Hell or High Water and Wind River (Raymond Blanton)
  • The (Modern) American Frontier
  • Western Myth
  • Western Films
  • Dispossession of Native Land
  • Taylor Made
  • Hell or High Water
  • Wind River
  • Conclusion
  • Notes
  • Part Three: “Rhetorics of Resistance”
  • Chapter Nine: The Tail of the Black Snake: Social Protest and Survivance in South Louisiana (Stephanie Houston Grey)
  • Reclamation and Survivance
  • Back to the Well: Colonial Arguments and Displaced Peoples’ Resistance
  • Nomad
  • Circle
  • Paper
  • Conclusion: Oxygenating the Waters
  • Notes
  • Chapter Ten: Intersectional Rhetoric and the Perversity of Form: Ada Deer’s Confirmation Statement as Resistive Rhetoric (Margret McCue-Enser)
  • Ada Deer: Champion of Tribal Sovereignty
  • Intersectional Rhetoric and the Perversity of Form
  • Relationships
  • Land and Sovereignty
  • The Failure of the Federal Government and the Call for a Federal-Tribal Partnership
  • Rethinking American Indian Agency and the Perversity of Form
  • Notes
  • Chapter Eleven: The Rhetorical Persona of the Water Protectors: Anti-Dakota Pipeline Resistance with Mirror Shields (Kelly Young)
  • Mirror Shields: Reflecting the Colonial Gaze
  • Water Snake Performance: Water Protector Persona and Transcending Focus
  • Conclusion
  • Notes
  • Chapter Twelve: Between a Rock and a Hard Place: Rhetorical Strategies for Environmental Protection and Tribal Resistance in the Dakota Access Pipeline Movement (Rachel Presley)
  • Indigenizing Political Resistance
  • Reimagining Kairos towards Indigenous Temporalities
  • Contextualizing the Chronological: The DAPL from February 2015–November 2016
  • Protesting/Protecting: An Orientation
  • Protesting/Protecting: Environment
  • Protesting/Protecting: Colonialism
  • Rhetorical Survivance and Future Uncertainties
  • Notes
  • Chapter Thirteen: Counterpublicity and the Trail of Broken Treaties: Why Not “AIM” for New Sites of Deliberation? (Kristine Warrenburg Rome)
  • The Trail of Broken Treaties and the Pan American Native Quest for Justice
  • A Confrontational Ethical Paradox
  • Conclusion
  • Notes
  • Chapter Fourteen: Farming, Fieldwork, and Sovereignty: Addressing Colonialist Systems with Participatory Critical Rhetoric (Anthony Sutton)
  • Western Influences Shaping Symbolic Orientations to Land, Cultures, and Bodies
  • Growing the Methods of Change: From Fieldwork to Sovereignty
  • Complicating Notions of Distance in Fieldwork
  • Creating New Symbolic References with the Farm and the Micmac Community
  • Creating New Symbolic Reference Within Fieldwork and Farming
  • Creating Opportunities to Support Sovereign Food Systems
  • Conclusion
  • Notes
  • Contributor Biographies
  • Index

| vii →

Illustrations

Figure 2.1: Map provided by the National Park Service in a brochure it hands out to visitors: Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument, GPO: 2004–304-337/00130, reprint 2002 and 2007.

Figure 2.2: The Indian Memorial at Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument. Warrior Markers can be seen in the lower right corner of the photo, along the walkway. Photo by author.

Figure 2.3: Original design for Spirit Warriors included in Indian Memorial design submitted by Towers and Collins. Design panel available at LBBNM Archive, located in the visitor center. Photo by author.

Figure 2.4: Spirit Warrior sculpture in the Indian Memorial. Photo by author.

Figure 4.1: “Geronimo, son and two picked braves. [With rifles; just before surrender on March 27, 1886.]” [Library of Congress]. ← vii | viii →

Figure 5.1: “Stopping the Black Snake.” Courtesy of Marty Two Bulls Sr.

Figure 5.2: “Keystone.” Courtesy of Marty Two Bulls Sr.

Figure 5.3: “Cleveland Indians.” Courtesy of Marty Two Bulls Sr.

Figure 7.1: Caricature in the 1907 Utonian, p. 62

Figure 7.2: “Hoyo” as a live mascot. “Transfer Student Plays Hoyo for U Ball Games,” Daily Utah Chronicle, October 9, 1953.

Figure 7.3: “Hoyo welcomed spectators at Ute football games,” Utonian, 1966, p. 405.

Figure 7.4: Image of the Crimson Warrior.

Figure 7.5: Circle and Feathers Logo.

Figure 9.1: The Path of Bayou Bridge.

| ix →

Acknowledgments

This collection would not have been possible without the support and advice of Mary Stuckey. Although many of us who write about American Indian rhetoric had informally discussed assembling such a volume, it was Mary who suggested that we should take advantage of the fact that more and more scholars were conferencing and publishing excellent work in rhetorical studies on American Indians, Canadian First Nation peoples, Oceania, and other global indigenous communities. We imagined a book that would bring together senior scholars and emerging voices to bring attention to the innovative theory and criticism generated by scholars of indigenous rhetoric. Since the beginning, Mary’s expertise in both American Indian rhetoric and book publishing has made the process of assembling and editing this project as easy and painless as possible. We cannot adequately express our gratitude for Mary’s mentorship and support. We could not be happier publishing this book with Mary and Mitchell Mckinney’s Frontiers in Political Communication book series with Peter Lang.

We are also indebted to the colleagues who have inspired our research in American Indian rhetoric—several of whom honored us by agreeing to be a part of this book. These scholars include Cate Palczewski, Danielle Endres, John Sanchez, Oscar Giner, and Randy Lake. We would also like to thank all the authors in this volume for volunteering their extraordinary work; essays they could have published in academic journals but chose to commit to this project. The authors were extraordinarily diligent and patient throughout the revision process. We are ← ix | x → grateful that these authors would share their work with us and thank them for helping the process go smoothly.

We also have people we would like to thank individually. Casey Kelly wishes to thank the Department of Communication Studies at the University of Nebraska for financial support of this book, with special thanks to his department chair Dawn Braithwaite. He also wishes to acknowledge the support of his rhetoric colleagues Jose Angel Maldonado, Kristen Hoerl, and Ronald Lee for the moral support through the process. He would like to especially thank his spouse Kristen Hoerl for her love and support throughout the process of putting this book together. Jason Edward Black thanks his colleagues in the Department of Communication Studies at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte for their scholarly and emotional support of this project throughout its stages. He is particularly indebted to colleagues—in Charlotte and beyond—who have over the years entertained conversations about such a collection and have contributed to the framing and contours of this book. These folks include Andrew C. Billings, Dan Grano, Ray Harrison, Richard Leeman, Charles E. Morris III, and Jefferson Walker. Special gratitude is due to his family—Jennifer, AB, and Amelia—for their encouragement, love, and understanding.

| xi →

Foreword

The Questions of Decolonization

MARY E. STUCKEY

“American Public Address” has long been an important part of the curriculum in rhetorical studies. Curiously, however, very little of that tradition’s course is generally dedicated to indigenous rhetoric. There are good reasons for this—authenticating such speeches can be difficult; it is hard to place indigenous rhetors in the context of hegemonic Western discourse; there are over 500 distinct nations and a multiplicity of cultures, making generalization problematic; and, of course, not many rhetoricians are adequately trained in or even aware of the broad patterns of indigenous public speech and both written and performative discourse. In short, including indigenous voices in ways that do not render them mere tokens or exceptions is both challenging and risky. Trying to include indigenous voices in ways that appropriately contextualize them and avoid reproducing the worst elements of colonialism is not a task for the faint of heart. This is what makes this volume so important.

These essays—by some of the most thoughtful scholars in the field, both indigenous and Euro-American—range across the North American continent, consider various historical and contemporary moments, focus on important political and cultural controversies, and, most significantly, emphasize resistance and survivance.1 The individual chapters are accessible, they contextualize their subject matter in helpful ways, and they point to ways that indigenous rhetoric is foundational to North American political history and experience rather than ancillary to it. Indigenous rhetoric illuminates several important elements of that ← xi | xii → history and experience: issues of authenticity; of voice and voicelessness; of whose interests are being served by prevailing structures of power and influence; and of power relations among and between different groups, both indigenous and non-indigenous. These intertwined questions are constitutive of the politics and history of the North American continent. They form the core of scholarship concerning indigenous America, and they are also the center of this book.

One of the most important questions when dealing with indigenous politics revolves around authenticity: questions of whose speech is included and attended to; whose translations are considered reliable; which among the competing definitions of “indigenous” are accepted; who, in fact, appropriately speaks for indigenous communities.2 These are all questions of power, identity, and the confluences that unite them. They are thus bound up with questions of representation, which include, but are not limited to, issues surrounding what Jason Edward Black has called the “mascotting of Native America.”3 Issues of representation importantly involve issues of who gets to decide what is authentic, what is appropriate, what is allowable in the public sphere. Often, these issues are litigated through determinations of identity.

The question of who is and who is not entitled to consider themselves indigenous is a messy one, involving thorny issues of blood quantum, governmental documentation, historical records, lived experience, and recognition by others in indigenous communitities.4 If we eschew the “great speeches by great men” model of rhetorical worth (as we should), then locating, translating, collecting, and circulating texts by historical and contemporary indigenous voices becomes a paramount concern for scholars of rhetoric.5 Questions of representation are no less fraught, involving as they do the question of who gets to decide what an appropriate representation of indigeneity is and how such decisions ought to be made.6

Questions of authenticity are related to questions of voice, questions concerning which voices are deemed legitimate. There are, for example, early collections of “Indian Oratory,” which purport to offer authentic texts of historic speeches.7 While well-meaning and instructive in many ways, such volumes suffer from many of the same problems: they focus on speeches of those presumed by non-indigenous people to have power; they tend to historicize indigenous people, sometimes failing to include contemporary voices; and they focus on the “failure” of indigenous peoples to resist the onslaught on Euro-Americans, perpetuating the myth of the vanishing Indian, and thus also perpetuating colonialism. They can position indigenous rhetors within a hegemonic understanding of rhetoric and politics, in which they must also be inferior, failed, or victimized.8 Such collections and approaches have been and are being challenged, but they retain a grip on the American political imagination.9 ← xii | xiii →

Rhetorical scholars have tended to focus less on these historical examples, and more on more contemporary instances of social movements. For instance, we have paid particular attention to the rise of Red Power and its associated protests.10 This work illustrates some of the central issues of dealing with indigenous rhetoric, addressing the unique position indigenous people occupy in the American legal tradition,11 highlighting the exigencies specific to indigenous political rhetoric,12 and emphasizing the issues that pertain to indigenous communities.13 There is an equally important body of work on representations in popular culture.14 In these areas, scholars contend with tangles of questions centering on authenticity—which issues are properly considered indigenous; whose voices and which positions of those issues must be included, and under what terms; and who gets to decide the appropriate answers to these questions.

These questions matter because they influence both political processes and political outcomes. In the assignment of legitimacy, we can also perceive questions about whose interests are being served by the inclusion of indigenous concerns in academic research and public policy.15 Here, of course, the stakes are very high, comprising as they do both important issues of public policy ranging from environmental racism and environmental protection through popular culture and the very legal survival of indigenous nations.16 Unsurprisingly, education is an important policy area, and there are important collections that address the question of who gets to decide what is best for indigenous people and those who study them.17

Cultures have always learned and borrowed from one another, a fact that makes determining what counts as cultural appropriation a difficult one.18 Such determinations involve both the practices involved and the ends those practices serve; they are always reflections of specific power relations between hegemonic groups and indigenous peoples. While it is never okay for a non-indigenous person to falsely represent herself/himself/themselves as Native, it is less easy to know when buying indigenous jewelry or art for instance, is an act of cultural appropriation.19 Such purchases on the one hand support Native artists and sustain indigenous communities. They also allow non-indigenous people access to indigenous material culture—artifacts that indigenous people themselves are frequently unable to afford. And it is not clear how a dispassionate observer is to understand and judge such purchases and other cognate practices. It is equally unclear who is best trusted with deciding the rules for understanding and judgment.

These questions are in turn implicated in the relationships among and between important groups. There is a long and often brutal history of paternalism and violence between the colonizer and those who were colonized. One consequence of this history is the assumption that indigenous worldviews and practices are somehow primitive, inferior to those of the colonizer.20 Indigenous peoples are studied as ← xiii | xiv → examples of the Other, rendered exotic, and dismissed, making it all the more important to include, and to emphasize, indigenous ideologies in our work.21 Otherwise we risk reinscribing colonial ideologies even as we seek to supplant them.22

We must, I think, consider the question of whether indigenous rhetoric can ever be truly decolonial when North American (and other) nations continue to perpetuate colonial relations with Native nations.23 We also must ask whether it is productive to consider indigenous politics alongside those of other marginalized groups, or if they are so historically different that such parallels obscure rather than illuminate important political realities. We should also ask if recontextualizing indigenous rhetoric as a global phenomenon is more useful than remaining within one nation’s borders. This volume reaches for the answers to these questions. In doing so, it contributes to the conversations about indigeneity, politics, and decolonialism in important and constructive ways.

Notes

1. Whereas survival is reactive to external oppression, survivance connotes an active presence and renunciation of victimhood in the rhetorical and literary traditions of indigenous peoples. On the important distinction between survival and survivance, see Ernest Stromberg, “Rhetoric and American Indians: An Introduction,” American Indian Rhetorics of Survivance: Word Medicine, Word Magic, ed. Ernest Stromberg (Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press, 2006), 1–14.

2. For a discussion of this point, see Arif Dirlik, “The Past as Legacy and Project: Postcolonial Criticism in the Perspective of Indigenous Historicism,” Contemporary Native American Political Issues, ed. Troy Johnson (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1999), 73–98.

3. Jason Edward Black, “The ‘Mascotting’ of Native America: Construction, Commodity, and Assimilation,” The American Indian Quarterly 26, no. 4 (2002): 605–22.

4. Controversies can and do erupt over these questions. See Casey Ryan Kelly, “Blood-speak: Ward Churchill and the Racialization of American Indian Identity,” Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies 8, no. 3 (2011): 240–65; Eva Marie Garroutte, Real Indians: Identity and the Survival of Native America (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2003). For a mixblood view of racial classifications and indigeneity, see William S. Penn, ed., As We Are Now: Mixblood Essays on Race and Identity (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1999); see also Louis Owens, Mixedblood Messages: Literature, Film, Family, Place (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 2001).

5. For a discussion of the complications inherent in these processes, see Jason Edward Black, “Native Authenticity, Rhetorical Circulation, and Neocolonial Decay: The Case of Chief Seattle’s Controversial Speech,” Rhetoric & Public Affairs 15, no. 4 (2012): 635–45.

6. Such debates, for example, run through indigenous history. For discussions of these questions in historical contexts, see, most prominently, Jason Edward Black, “Native Resistive Rhetoric and the Decolonization of American Indian Removal Discourse,” Quarterly Journal of Speech 95, no. 1 (2009): 66–88; Jason Edward Black, “Remembrances of Removal: Native ← xiv | xv → Resistance to Allotment and the Unmasking of Paternal Benevolence,” Southern Communication Journal 72, no. 2 (2007): 185–203; Jason Edward Black, American Indians and the Rhetoric of Removal and Allotment (Jackson: University Press of Mississippi, 2015); Casey Ryan Kelly, “Orwellian Language and the Politics of Tribal Termination (1953–1960),” Western Journal of Communication 74, no. 4 (2010): 351–71.

7. See, for example, W. C. Vanderworth, Indian Oratory: Famous Speeches by Noted Indian Chieftains (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1971). See also, Colin G. Calloway, ed., Our Hearts Fell to the Ground: Plains Indian Views of how the West was Lost (New York: Macmillan, 1996); Frederick E. Hoxie, ed., Talking Back to Civilization: Indian Voices from the Progressive Era (New York: Macmillan, 2001); John R. Maestas, ed. Contemporary Native American Address (Salt Lake City, UT: Brigham Young University Press, 1976); Peter Nabokov, Native American Testimony: A Chronicle of Indian-White Relations from Prophecy to the Present, 1492 to 2000 (New York: Penguin, 1999); Wayne Moquin and Charles Van Doren, Great Documents in American Indian History (New York: Praeger, 1973); Bob Blaisdell, Great Speeches by Native Americans (New York: Dover, 2000).

8. There are, of course, other kinds of collections, which include both more contemporary voices and emphasizes people who do not occupy positions of political power. Many of these emphasize contemporary lived experiences. See, among many others, Gloria Bird and Joy Harjo, eds., Reinventing the Enemy’s Language: Contemporary Native Women’s Writings of North America (New York: Norton, 1998); Craig Lesley, ed., Talking Leaves: Contemporary Native American Short Stories (New York: Dell, 1991); Arnold Krupat and Brian Swann, eds., Autobiographical Essays by Native American Writers (New York: Modern Library, 2000); MariJo Moore, Genocide of the Mind: New Native American Writing (New York: Nations Books, 2003).

9. Paula Turner Strong, American Indians and the American Imaginary: Cultural Representations Across the Centuries (Boulder, CO: Paradigm Publishers, 2013).

10. See, for example, Danielle Endres, “American Indian Activism and Audience: Rhetorical Analysis of Leonard Peltier’s Response to Denial of Clemency,” Communication Reports 24, no. 1 (2011): 1–11; Casey Ryan Kelly, “Rhetorical Counterinsurgency: The FBI and the American Indian Movement,” Advances in the History of Rhetoric 10, no. 1 (2007): 223–58; Casey Ryan Kelly, “‘We Are Not Free’: The Meaning of in American Indian Resistance to President Johnson’s War on Poverty,” Communication Quarterly 62, no. 4 (2014): 455–73; Casey Ryan Kelly, “Détournement, Decolonization, and the American Indian Occupation of Alcatraz Island (1969–1971),” Rhetoric Society Quarterly 44, no. 2 (2014): 168–90; Casey Ryan Kelly, The Rhetoric of Red Power and the American Indian Occupation of Alcatraz Island (1969–1971). Dissertation, 2009, retrieved from the University of Minnesota Digital Conservancy, http://hdl.handle.net/11299/54605; Randall A. Lake, “Enacting Red Power: The Consummatory Function in Native American Protest Rhetoric,” Quarterly Journal of Speech 69, no. 2 (1983): 127–42; Randall A. Lake, “Between Myth and History: Enacting Time in Native American Protest Rhetoric,” Quarterly Journal of Speech 77, no. 2 (1991): 123–51; Richard Morris and Philip Wander, “Native American Rhetoric: Dancing in the Shadows of the Ghost Dance,” Quarterly Journal of Speech 76, no. 2 (1990): 164–91; John Sanchez, Mary E. Stuckey, and Richard Morris, “Rhetorical Exclusion: The Government’s Case against American Indian Activists, AIM, and Leonard Peltier,” American Indian Culture and Research Journal 23, no. 2 (1999): 27–52. ← xv | xvi →

11. Considerable work has been done in this area. See, Felix S. Cohen, Handbook of Federal Indian Law: With Reference Tables and Index (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1945); Vine Deloria and Clifford M. Lytle. The Nations Within: The Past and Future of American Indian Sovereignty (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1984); Charles F. Wilkinson, American Indians, Time, and the Law: Native Societies in a Modern Constitutional Democracy (New Have CT: Yale University Press, 1987); Robert A. Williams, Jr., The American Indian in Western Legal Thought: The Discourses of Conquest (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992).

12. See, for example, John Sanchez and Mary E. Stuckey, “The Rhetoric of American Indian Activism in the 1960s and 1970s,” Communication Quarterly 48, no. 2 (2000): 120–36.

13. See Duane Champagne, ed., Contemporary Native American Cultural Issues (Walnut Creek, CA: Sage, 1999); C. Richard King, Unsettling America: The Uses of Indianness in the 21st Century (Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 2013).

14. See Black, “The ‘Mascotting’ of Native America”; Derek T. Buescher and Kent A. Ono, “Civilized Colonialism: Pocahontas as Neocolonial Rhetoric,” Women’s Studies in Communication 19, no. 2 (1996): 127–53; Kent A. Ono and Derek T. Buescher. “De-ciphering Pocahontas: Unpackaging the Commodification of a Native American Woman,” Critical Studies in Media Communication 18, no. 1 (2001): 23–43; Victoria E. Sanchez and Mary E. Stuckey, “Coming of Age as a Culture? Emancipatory and Hegemonic Readings of The Indian in the Cupboard,” Western Journal of Communication 64, no. 1 (2000): 78–91.

15. For discussions of this important point, see Devon A. Mihesuah, “Introduction,” Natives and Academics: Researching and Writing About American Indians, ed. Devon Mihesuah (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1998), 1–22. See also, Devon A. Mihesuah, So You Want to Write About American Indian? A Guide for Writers, Students, and Scholars (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2005); Dane Morrison, ed., American Indian Studies: An Interdisciplinary Approach to Contemporary Issues (New York: Peter Lang, 1999); Russell Thornton, ed., Studying Native America: Problems and Prospects (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1998); Waziyatawin Angela Wilson and Michael Yellow Bird, For Indigenous Eyes Only: A Decolonization Handbook (Sante Fe, NM: School of American Research, 2005); Linda Tuhiwai Smith, Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples (New York: Zed, 2012).

16. For work on indigeneity and the environment, see, Danielle Endres, “The Rhetoric of Nuclear Colonialism: Rhetorical Exclusion of American Indian Arguments in the Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waste Siting Decision,” Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies 6, no. 1 (2009): 39–60; Danielle Endres, “Sacred Land or National Sacrifice Zone: The Role of Values in the Yucca Mountain Participation Process,” Environmental Communication: A Journal of Nature and Culture 6, no. 3 (2012): 328–45; Danielle Endres, “Animist Intersubjectivity as Argumentation: Western Shoshone and Southern Paiute Arguments Against a Nuclear Waste Site at Yucca Mountain,” Argumentation 27, no. 2 (2013): 183–200.

Details

Pages
XVIII, 352
ISBN (PDF)
9781433147999
ISBN (ePUB)
9781433148002
ISBN (MOBI)
9781433148019
ISBN (Hardcover)
9781433147982
ISBN (Softcover)
9781433147906
Language
English
Publication date
2018 (May)
Published
New York, Bern, Berlin, Bruxelles, Oxford, Wien, 2018. XVII, 352 pp. 14 b/w ills.

Biographical notes

Casey Ryan Kelly (Volume editor) Jason Edward Black (Volume editor)

Casey Ryan Kelly, Ph.D., University of Minnesota, is Associate Professor of Rhetoric & Public Culture at the University of Nebraska. Jason Edward Black, Ph.D., University of Maryland, is Professor and Chair in the Department of Communication Studies at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte.

Previous

Title: Decolonizing Native American Rhetoric