I'd like to continue our conversation today on Red Power. Since a majority of you don't enjoy speaking in front of the class, maybe you'll be more apt to do so here. I feel there were certain things we touch upon in class that deserve further conversation. First off, was a question Justin posed. He asked if we believed the case would have been handled differently had it been someone of a different race. I wholeheartedly think it would, and I think this due to the way Native Americans were outspoken at these times. When a minority group gives themselves attention like this, it increases hostilities between the minority group and majority. Because of this, the FBI felt less inclined for further research of the shootings, and were merely interested in the incarceration of (I'm terrible with names), and the end of this Red Power movement. Another topic I'd like to raise is a question I wrote for my topic, but never got around to asking. How did everyone feel about the satirical way Indians presented the Alcatraz Proclamation? Do you think they should have done it differently?
-Samuel Roux, Post 1 Week 5
Hi Sam--I agree I think we should continue the conversation here. You pose excellent questions both about the Leonard Peltier case and the occupation of Alcatraz. What was the point of the occupiers writing such a satirical statement? What point about dominant/Native relations were they trying to make? It reminds me a bit of Elizabeth Alexander's poem where she turns the tables and imagines Sara Baartman dissecting George Cuvier instead of the other way around.
ReplyDelete