Dec 8, 2023·edited Dec 8, 2023Liked by River Selby (they/them)
Thanks for this. I live in the Puget Sound region. I did a little research on white interactions with Native Americans here for four-part series I did on land ownership and the family farm as a colonial concept: https://johnlovie.substack.com/t/land
Echoes of the gold rush and the nineteenth century still echo. Much of the land here, after being stolen from the Native Americans, was sold to people who had made their money from the gold rush. Many of their descendants still own that land today, and that history still defines the land use patterns.
And that concept of wilderness just will not go away. I cringe now every time I see a "Wilderness" sign when out hiking. It's a raw reminder of who is being left out of the story.
I appreciate your scholarship here and look forward to reading more.
takes me back to the UConn library Summer of 1989, when I THOUGHT I'd be doing something like this for my Ph.D., onl to get sidetracked--and gobsmacked--by Irving's Chronicles of the Conquest of Granada.
Irving has a LOT to answer for: whatever his misgivings, he made up most of the Columbus mythology we fight against.
So, in honor to the Peace and Dignity walkers I wound up meeting twice in 1993 (once in Windham Center, CT and then, on July 3rd at the Peace memorial at Gettysburg in one of the most amazing moments): it might be time to revisit Irving's conflicted participation in Indian resettlement to Oklahoma that becomes _A Tour on the Prairies_: the promised encounter with "savages" never occurs--except for all of Irving's tour partners, who are a motley bunch. I've written on it before--but the waffling requires judgment. Irving accepted the gig KNOWING that most writers had refused because it would involve buttkissing the Trail of Tears policy-makers, but he needed to re-establish himself as "American". & in the process, doesn't accomplish ANY of the things he could have except for muddling things.
(There's also the matter of Moby Dick and Queequeg and Tashtego . . .)
Thanks for this. I live in the Puget Sound region. I did a little research on white interactions with Native Americans here for four-part series I did on land ownership and the family farm as a colonial concept: https://johnlovie.substack.com/t/land
Echoes of the gold rush and the nineteenth century still echo. Much of the land here, after being stolen from the Native Americans, was sold to people who had made their money from the gold rush. Many of their descendants still own that land today, and that history still defines the land use patterns.
And that concept of wilderness just will not go away. I cringe now every time I see a "Wilderness" sign when out hiking. It's a raw reminder of who is being left out of the story.
I appreciate your scholarship here and look forward to reading more.
Thank you for your hard work.
Let me know if you want information on the nimiipuu (Nez Perce). I have a number of resources and can point to reliable ones.
takes me back to the UConn library Summer of 1989, when I THOUGHT I'd be doing something like this for my Ph.D., onl to get sidetracked--and gobsmacked--by Irving's Chronicles of the Conquest of Granada.
Irving has a LOT to answer for: whatever his misgivings, he made up most of the Columbus mythology we fight against.
So, in honor to the Peace and Dignity walkers I wound up meeting twice in 1993 (once in Windham Center, CT and then, on July 3rd at the Peace memorial at Gettysburg in one of the most amazing moments): it might be time to revisit Irving's conflicted participation in Indian resettlement to Oklahoma that becomes _A Tour on the Prairies_: the promised encounter with "savages" never occurs--except for all of Irving's tour partners, who are a motley bunch. I've written on it before--but the waffling requires judgment. Irving accepted the gig KNOWING that most writers had refused because it would involve buttkissing the Trail of Tears policy-makers, but he needed to re-establish himself as "American". & in the process, doesn't accomplish ANY of the things he could have except for muddling things.
(There's also the matter of Moby Dick and Queequeg and Tashtego . . .)