Book Nook Cafe discussion

What: Book Buddy Read ! All are welcome to join in the fun.

Book: War Dances

Author: Sherman Alexie
Sherman Joseph Alexie, Jr. (born October 7, 1966) is a writer, poet, filmmaker, and occasional comedian. Much of his writing draws on his experiences as a Native American.

When: Discussion begins around February 1, 2012
You do not have to have the book read by that date, only start on that date.

Where: The entire discussion will take place in this thread.

Spoiler Etiquette: Please put the name of the short story or poem at the top of your post. Also type out SPOILER at the top of your post if giving away a major plot element.

Book Details:
# Paperback: 208 pages
# Publisher: Grove Press; Reprint edition (August 3, 2010)
# Language: English
# ISBN-10: 0802144896

Synopsis:
War Dances is a 2009 collection of short stories and poems by Sherman Alexie. It received the 2010 PEN/Faulkner Award for Fiction.

Amazon link:
http://www.amazon.com/War-Dances-Sher...

Discussion questions- May contain spoilers !

War Dances Discussion Questions

1. To varying degrees, each of the 23 entries in this collection is a stand-alone work. How cohesive is this collection? What are some of the stronger connecting themes in the book?

2. The book primarily presents a male voice. In what ways, if any, is this significant to you, as a reader? How do you respond to the general absence of the female voice? Do you think that men react differently to books that are perceived to be primarily reflective of the female voice than women react to books that tend to be more representative of the male experience? In the selection, Home of the Braves, Alexie makes the statement that “all men are alike.” Are there are other instances in the book where Alexie seems to support this opinion? Reflecting on the entire book, what might be some generalizations about men that Alexie would consider valid? To what extent do you agree or disagree?


3. Why do you think that the collection is titled: War Dances? What is a War Dance? Is this title an attempt to connect all the selections in the book or does the title simply reference one of the selections? Is this a good title? If you were to select an alternative title, what would you choose?

Explain the cover. Why were these particular shoes selected for the cover?


4. What are Alexie’s purposes for writing this book? To what extent are these purposes realized?


5. Did you expect Sherman Alexie to be a voice for Native Americans? If yes, why? To what extent, were your expectations met? Does each selection connect to some degree with the Native American experience or culture?

Does this work attempt to break away from Alexie’s identification as a NA writer?

The degree to which the selections inform about Native Americans varies. Which selections expanded your knowledge about and understanding of Native Americans? How does this book show a different perspective about Native Americans than most other books? In this book, how does Alexie attempt to shape readers’ opinions about Native Americans? To what extent is he successful?

Some of the selections are more universal in focus: reflective of American life rather than only the Native American experience. How do those selections transcend ethnicity and/or class? How strong are his stories when they are less focused on the NA?

To what extent does Alexie break down stereotypes about Native Americans? Is this a strong purpose of the writing? Which selections attempt this and to what extent is each successful? How is his content or characterization used to dispel stereotypes?

On the other hand, some critics have argued that certain NA stereotypes seem to be promoted by Alexie in some stories. What is your opinion? In the title story: Alexie describes his father as dying from the “natural Indian death: alcohol and diabetes;” explain your reaction to this statement?

How are we impacted by the way that others perceive us? Why do stereotypes exist; how do they come to be? Are there positive stereotypes? Are there advantages to stereotyping or being stereotyped? Disadvantages? What are some stereotypes about NA?

Alexie often focuses both on disabilities he suffered because he was born with hydrocephalism and on the problems caused by his father’s alcoholism. How seriously does he take these problems? Is he bitter? Amused? What role do these challenges play throughout the book and seemingly in Alexie’s life? What do we learn about the way Alexie deals with illness and disability? Discuss his self-deprecating style, as it emerges in other selections? What is your reaction to Alexie’s thinking about such life challenges?

How does Alexie deal with the issues of alcohol dependency and alcohol abuse among Native Americans? Why do you think there is so much drinking by Native Americans? What are the consequences of there being so many Native Americans with alcohol issues? Does Alexie take these things as a matter of fact? Does he think that they are amusing? Does he seem hopeful that things will change?

Discuss how Alexie conveys the general sense of poverty and hopelessness that exist for many Native Americans, particularly those living on reservations. Is Alexie angry and bitter about the general quality of life for Native Americans? Is he able to keep a sense of humor about things, or is he simply depressed?



6. At times, the book is highly political. The author has much to say about our society. What appear to be some of the more important societal issues from his perspective? What are his opinions on these issues? How effectively are these opinions substantiated? Explain your opinions and how they were affected by Alexie’s thinking or points of view?

Sherman Alexie has said that “the true purpose of art is to ask questions.” Do you agree? In War Dances, Alexie asks some tough questions . . . what tough questions are posed by Alexie? Are some questions raised repeatedly? Do any themes emerge? To what degree does Alexie answer his own questions? How obvious are his opinions? To what degree, are readers encouraged to answer these questions for themselves? Explain why certain stories/questions were especially provocative for you.

Some authors believe that a writer should explain nothing. To what extent does Sherman Alexie seem to follow this principle of leaving the answers, particularly about right and wrong, up to readers?



7. Often the book uses direct language. What is your reaction to this? How effectively does the use of direct language advance the purposes of the writer?

Alexie’s use of strong direct language is offensive to some. When giving a talk at an Illinois High School, Alexie used similar language and some students walked out. According to a newspaper report, Alexie apologized to anyone he had offended but stood by his use of the words in his novel “. . . because that was what was said. And to blunt the hatred of that insult blunts the incredible obstacles my character had to face.” (“Author Defends Using Slur, but Apologizes to Students,” by Melissa Jenco, Daily Herald of Arlington Heights, IL, October 6, 2007.) Do you agree with Alexie that in order to make his points, he sometimes has to use words that inevitably would offend some people?

Discussion questions - Continued

8. Sherman Alexie has referred to humor as “an antiseptic that cleaned out the deepest personal wounds.” (The Approximate Size of My Favorite Tumor) To what extent, is this definition reflected in War Dances? Is there a selection where Alexie’s use of humor worked especially well for you? War Dances has been said to “. . . ask tough questions in a funny voice.” http://www.cleveland.com/books. What are your thoughts about Alexie’s use of humor in War Dances?

9. The book is structurally inventive, combining a variety of poems and prose pieces. Some entries actually are difficult to categorize. How do you respond to this approach? Did you find this structure effective? Does it widen or diminish the book’s appeal?

The book begins and ends with poems. Do these poem choices work for introducing and concluding the book? Compare and contrast the opinions expressed in the first and last poems. The Limited opens the selections. How does it prepare the reader for the collection? Does it set a tone for the collection? Why was Food Chain selected to conclude the collection?



10. Discuss some of the selections that focus on the process of self-identification. How one defines herself/himself changes through life. How do you identify yourself? Has that identity been fluid? How did you come to identify as you do today? What are some of the most influential forces that shape one’s identity? How important is self-identification? How does it shape behavior, attitudes and values? How does self-identification influence who you are, how you present yourself and how you view others and the world through time? Is a self-identity important? What are the pluses and minuses of a having a strong self-identity? Which selections focus on self-identification? How does each deal with the process? What do the selections tell you about Alexie’s views about self-identity and self-identification?

Discuss some the selections that examine the difficulty in knowing who people are. Why is truly knowing someone a challenge? What prevents you from knowing another person? Through time and space, masks are lowered and often we learn more about ourselves and others. What contributes to this phenomenon? Select a story that focuses on the experience of learning that another person is not whom you had thought? Based on the readings, what are Alexie’s opinions are about such discoveries? How can getting to know someone better impact you— your self-view; view of others; world-view; feelings about your past as well as those about the future.

In the story “Breaking and Entering,” the narrator succeeds in thwarting a burglary of his house. Why didn’t this make him happy? Describe his conflicting emotions. Did he have any sense of shame? Why would that be? Then, when the radio announcer describes him as a “white man,” why does he call the station to correct the record? Did that make him feel better or worse? Why? Have you ever done (or said) something that at first seemed like a victory and then later brought you shame?



11. Why are you who you are? How does your past determine who you are? How does it determine who you want to be? And who you become? Why do we wear masks? Are masks essential? What are the benefits and drawbacks of wearing masks? Are there differences between wearing masks and misrepresenting yourself? What risks are involved in lowering your mask? What are the benefits and drawbacks to lowering your mask? Are there stories that highlight these benefits and drawbacks? Given these particular selections, what are Alexie’s opinions about being more of yourself with others?

Much of the book focuses on the past. The past is a powerful influence on the present and the future. Is nostalgia a positive or negative word? Why does it often provoke anger, hostility or other negative feelings and behavior? Why does it also support positive feelings and behavior? Which selections that deal with the past, particularly resonate with you? To what extent do these selections demonstrate Alexie’s historical sense and sensibilities regarding the past? Which stories evoke or illustrate the author’s perceived power of the past? What are Alexie’s thoughts and feelings about the past?



12. Not all past experiences are positive. Survival is another theme of this collection. Alexie offers ideas about surviving tragedy and/or injustice. Which of the selections reveal his ideas for surviving and/overcoming negative life experiences? What are your thoughts about his suggestions for or philosophy about survival? Which stories inform about and/or inspire surviving?

In some instances, Alexie focuses on collective injustices or injustices perpetrated on a specific group, such as the Native Americans. Which selections reflect his feelings and thoughts about the injustices suffered by Native Americans throughout history? How would you describe his feelings? What are your thoughts?

Upon reflection about War Dances, how does Alexie think history, as both lived and written about, is created?



13. Throughout the book, Alexie provides his thoughts about efforts to change or save other people. What are his opinions and how do they mesh with your own? Is it true as he claims in the opening selection that “The only life I can save is my own?” After reading the entire book, what do you think Alexie thinks about his own claim?

In the poem “The Limited,” what did the narrator do to stop the “bad behavior” of the other character (the one who tried to run over a dog)? Do you think words are enough when you see injustice? Do we always take action? Why do people act or fail to act as witnesses to injustice? Can we always take action? How often are we able to “do something about it”?



14. How might the story of Paul Nonetheless be seen as a story of a man stuck in adolescence? Are we meant to feel sympathy for Paul or disdain?


What are the ways in which Alexie holds up the experiences of adolescence as seminal in the formation of his characters? Which characters/experiences from youth, revealed in his stories and poems, take on significance as he remembers them from the perspective of adulthood? Is there a pattern in those stories, particularly in the kind of moments or people that continue to move him?

Why do so many of Alexie's references to adolescence include the feeling of humiliation or shame? Is Alexie sharing a personal reality or is he speaking for most of us?

Does Alexie idealize the people and experiences from adolescence or remember them with clarity, nostalgia and/or pain?

How does Alexie's identity as a Spokane and Coeur d'Alene influence his memories of adolescence? Do his stories reflect a universal experience or does the specific context make them unique?

15. What does Alexie believe about the relationship between father and son?
Do his stories engender primarily feelings of disappointment, shame, warmth and closeness and/or respect? Which story or stories do you think provide the truest key to Alexie's feelings or desires?

16. How do the issues of forgiveness and shame merge in the selections to elucidate the experience of the narrator or the author? Do Alexie's characters exhibit the capability to forgive themselves and/or the people closest to them?

* Why does the narrator in Breaking and Entering say, "It's not oil that runs the world, it’s shame."?

* What does Alexie believe about forgiveness? Is it infinite? Should it be?

* In several stories, the narrator is very hard on himself. What does Alexie seem to be saying about forgiving oneself?



17. In the opening story of War Dances, "Breaking and Entering," Alexie describes his background training as an editor, who was instructed to "skip the door...and you will be set free; advice he applies to his writing and to his "entire life."

* What is Alexie's definition of "editing"?

* Why does he give this information to the reader at the outset of his book?

* Through this information, what insights does the reader gain about the writer?

* As a result of this "editing" process, what common themes emerge in this collection?

* Which selections seem most strongly to exhibit this artistic style?

http://sites.google.com/site/onebooko...

LOL--wwwaaaaayyyyy too many questions! I have the book and will begin this week. I'm looking forward to sharing our thoughts on it.

deb

I agree...all those questions scare me...:)

I just post the questions as a guide to help facilitate the discussion.

LOL, i know you do, Alias. And, to be fair, because it's a collection of poetry and short stories, more questions arise, too.

I began reading the book last night and fell in love with Alexie all over again. He has a good knack at portraying the way reservation-raised people combine their urban experience with the way they are raised. Even in the first story the question arises, "Do I 'correct' people when they assume I'm white?" And so we go.

I wanted to vaguely address a question from above, specifically #2. It's interesting that the question of the sex of the narrator is asked. It didn't bother me & i doubt i would have noticed had i not seen the question prior to beginning. I'm trying to think of Native American writers of fiction. Here's the Wiki list i found. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category...

Most of these are authors whose names i do not recognize. Of those i know, most are writers of nonfiction books, often about their tribe, self or family. I guess i'm just asking myself if it's important or not. In earlier books i know he spoke from a female POV, i'll keep it in mind here. Either way, i can't imagine it would bother me.

I love this man's humor. DH was next to me as i was laughing aloud. He's already said he wants to read it next but the laughs just made it more certain.

deb

Has anyone else read this book? It was a very fast reading experience for both myself & DH. We appreciate his observations about urban living.

The questions Alias shared with us spent some time on the observation about humor as an antiseptic, as Alexie put it. I noticed this with my DH's grandmother & stories shared about his grandfather, both of whom were enrolled members of their tribes, Eastern Band Cherokees and Caddo, respectively. They told painful stories but with an ending chuckle, as though to make a statement of some sort. When i was first part of the family i took offense (this was the beginning of the American Indian Movement's headline making news in the early '70s), thinking they were dismissing the segregation and bigotry they faced. Later it was explained to me that tribal members across the country turn to humor to help alleviate the pain. Interesting coping mechanism, if that's what it is. Today i wonder if the chuckle has more to do with thinking how things have changed and how little such discrimination mattered in the bigger scheme. I don't know.

I'll refrain from commenting further on the book until i know others are ready to discuss.

deb

Sorry for joining the discussion late. I was tired when I started so I went through all the shorter pieces first. I also read the first story about the film editor.

deb - re question 2: sorry, you only vaguely addressed it but I kind of got carried away responding.

Anyway, I think the idea behind the question is that in general, the thinking/assumption is the (straight white) male voice is universal or the default and the voice of everyone else is not. And related to that is if men like something, everyone should but if women like something, it's not worthy or men don't necessarily have to like it. For example, the not uncommon practice of using initials for a female author (e.g., J. K. Rowling) to not "restrict" readers; or the example of Jonathan Franzen not wanting his book to have the Oprah logo on it because, in his opinion, it would dissuade male readers.

So based on that, I do think there is an assumption that men in general don't read "women's books" and react differently to female voices and because I don't actually have too much interaction with male readers, I think I also sort of believe it too. For example, a man in my book group suggested we read Jane Austen sometime this year and I was surprised.

And back to me, I didn't ask myself that question while reading because it wasn't significant to my reading in this case but I did notice most of the narrators were male, partly because of the descriptions on the inside and back covers but also because most of the pieces were in first-person and therefore felt sort of autobiographical and representative of the author.

I mention "in this case" because in general, I want to read different voices and this year, I set some reading goals around that.

But yes, he is very funny. And I think you're right that humour is sort of used as a coping mechanism; maybe it's of the "laugh or else you'll cry" variety?

Sumofparts, i appreciate what you wrote about the voice of the narrators. I am sure you are correct about what men will & won't read, as well, although i didn't realize that was one of Franzen's objections. No doubt it works the other way, too, but not as regularly.

I was intrigued that you jumped around in reading this book. Usually i don't do that, although there are times i have, for the reasons you shared. I used to jump around much more when i read this sort of book but then i read an article by an author who spoke to the process of deciding where to put which piece in such compilations. Prior to that i gave it no thought. And, to be honest with you, i rarely get the sense of why some stories are put in the order they are. When i "get it" i always feel as though i've truly been touched by the author.

deb

Moving along, i thought i'd address question 5. Did you expect Sherman Alexie to be a voice for Native Americans? If yes, why? To what extent, were your expectations met? Does each selection connect to some degree with the Native American experience or culture?

When the Museum of the American Indian opened in D.C. in '04 our family attended the ceremonies. ( http://www.nmai.si.edu/ --note the chocolate festival discussions!) The mall was full of exhibits, tents and programs offering glimpses into tribes and their customs. We spent much time with the storytelling aspects, as that is an interest of mine. In almost every such event the speakers shared stories about contemporary Native lives both on & off the reservation. When asked (& even when not), they shared that one of their points in being there was to illustrate that "Indians" are just a thing of the past, that they live and continue to create lives with stories to share.

I feel Alexie offers those sort of insights into members of tribes. Some of his poetry directly offers a way to look at the historic aspects of tribes while sometimes connecting them to the lives of a 21st century tribal community. For my money, this is a great example of encouraging others to consider and reconsider what we think we know.

Otoh, part of the same question asks about the stereotypes perpetrated by Alexie. When i read his first couple of books, i was bothered by them. To ignore those issues (alcoholism, diabetes) or not address them at all, particularly when he has a cast of different characters, would be misleading.

I suppose the question is whether he overdoes it. Because not all his characters have or consider these problems, i think not. They are aware of them because it might have been a part of their personal history. To avoid mentioning it might well lead to critics and other readers wondering why he didn't address the issues. It's almost a no-win situation.

deb

deb - I read your reply and comments and had them going through my head as I was finishing the book and everything's in a big juicy clump of thought in my head (that sounds kind of gross actually, sorry, but I meant it in a good way).

Re reading order: I don't usually read out of order and kind of wish I hadn't with this one, since I think I can see the connections or juxtapositions of ideas and themes when the pieces are in order and especially since you mentioned the process! I think I might have to reread the book now.

Re question 5: I agree with your opinion here and those of the storytellers - Natives are not merely relics of the past or a tragic chapter in history; they're people who are living here and now. Also, I think Sherman Alexie does offer insights into members of the tribes he knows and is part of and that he does so from a very personal perspective, as in he doesn't try to make it universal or pretend that everyone feels the same way.

After finishing, I Googled to find out more about the book and came across a really interesting reading/Q&A he did that discusses some of these ideas. Link here: http://libwww.freelibrary.org/authore...

(There are no time markers but it's the last question asked at the end of the file). Someone asked whether it's okay for a person outside of XYZ group (e.g., Native Americans) to write about any of the group's experiences. His answer (paraphrased) was that he used to care a lot but now he doesn't because he feels most of that writing is so obviously bad anyway. He feels the writing should be judged as art. I recommend listening to at least the last third (approximately) of the file which is the Q&A. I don't necessarily agree with everything he's saying but it was funny and thought-provoking.

Also, as you say, not all his stories/pieces touch on the experiences or stereotypes; some of them are outside of that, for example, in "The Ballad of Paul Nonetheless", it's about the main character and his relationship with his (ex-)wife and daughters or in "Salt', it's about life, death, grief and memory.

By the way, thanks for the link to the NMAI. It sounds like the ceremonies were a really rewarding experience and I did note the chocolate festival discussions though I'm disappointed I can't go.

Another question - 9: The book is structurally inventive, combining a variety of poems and prose pieces. Some entries actually are difficult to categorize. How do you respond to this approach? Did you find this structure effective? Does it widen or diminish the book’s appeal?

I really enjoyed it and liked the way he sometimes subverted the formats and did something unexpected. My favourite is part 15 of "War Dances", titled "Exit Interview For My Father". I can't answer whether it widens or diminishes the book's appeal in general but it certainly widened it for me. I think the use of the different structures were also really effective too, not just a gimmick. Back to the interview piece, I thought it was a good way to convey the questions the character had for his father and also to describe his father and their relationship.

This kind of ties in to question 17 about editing. I think he's definitely "skipping the door" in, again, a piece like "War Dances" and especially in that same part 15. The insight I'm gaining is that he's careful about what he keeps in; everything is there for a reason and he's trying to get to the heart of the matter as much as possible. I'm thinking of a piece like "The Ballad of Paul Nonetheless" and the scene when Paul tells his wife he's lost his sexual desire for her and thinks about what he wants to say to her about her body and the changes he saw it go through that led to these feelings. The fact that he's aware but doesn't voice his feelings showed us more about the character and it was awesome.

Sumofparts, thanks for the link. It was neat to hear some of Alexie's talk, as well as his Q & A session. He can be a riot, even when serious.

Around 30 years ago a novel, Hanta Yo by Ruth Beebe Hill was published. Critics loved it because she apparently spent 30 years researching it. However, the Sioux eviscerated it. At the time i was living in North Dakota and took a class about the Sioux. While we learned plenty about customs & such, a big portion of the class time was spent pointing out inaccuracies in the book. It was daunting. Today, when posting the above link, i looked at the reviews and only see praise. I don't know what to think about that. The reason i even recall what i do is because last week i was cleaning out files & found my notes on the class. Online i could barely find mention of the controversy. Here is the sole complete article i could find, from People magazine. http://www.people.com/people/archive/...

I think my point here is that i'm not sure Alexie is correct about the bad writing. Of course this was written 30 years ago, around the time of Roots: The Saga of an American Family and people believed that the Hill book represented the American Indian Roots. That the book is still read (although, judging from GR notes, found in odd places) and liked is interesting.

It's really neither here nor there, probably. I think enough nonreaders wouldn't realize a book was poorly written if it was about a topic they wanted to learn. And this isn't strictly about Native American or African American authors/topics but holds true for many. Alexie may feel that way and i hope his literature has made more books about tribal life available. It may be the Hill book & its ilk never surface for teenaged tribal members.

Heck, i spent so much time listening to the recording, i've run out of time to reply more right now. I'll be back...

deb

I'm back & i'll bet ya didn't even miss me. ;-)

I agree with you, Sumofparts, about the way Alexie plays with formats. "Roman Catholic Haiku" was a neat example, imo. Indeed, his poems often left me with more admiration than the stories.

Which reminds me of a question i wanted to ask. A good poem, "Looking Glass", is about Chief Joseph but the question for me is about the title. Why that one? The reflection from his grandmother? Or was it more about the depression in the impression that cessation of fighting led to sadder ends? I felt a certain disconnection from the title & the poem itself and wonder if i missed something.

I agree fully with you about part 15 of "War Dances". It was one mind expanding question after another. The questions mingled his humor with painful questions about being an Indian today. This is what i think Alexie does best.

deb

deb - glad you found the talk worth listening to.

Thanks for bringing the Hanta Yo incident to my attention. It's interesting especially since the author did spend the time to research for the book though it struck me as odd that she asked Indians of other groups when writing a story about one specific group, according to the quote from the People magazine article.

Maybe there'd be a difference if the author acknowledges that he or she is not attempting to write a definitive or representative history or that he or she made changes to suit the story. It sounds like Hill insisted the story was very accurate despite members of the Sioux, whose history she was writing about, having objections. For example, I just finished The Book of Negroes and Anil's Ghost, both of which are based on and/or inspired by true events and both authors note that their books are, ultimately, works of fiction with changes made to suit the stories. (Just a note that the first book was called Someone Knows My Name in the US.)

I think I agree with you about Alexie's view on bad writing. I don't think it's as simple as asking whether the writing is good art, when enough people wouldn't know about any inaccuracies, but I don't think it should become as extreme as discouraging or "banning" non-members from writing about the group.

On one hand, authors write the stories they find interesting in creating their art and should be allowed freedom to do that but on the other hand, they are, of course, people too and bring their biases and misconceptions and those of the larger society into their writing which can be hurtful. So first, they should try to be aware and also research, research, research and if they're told by people of the group - who have lived these experiences and are directly affected - that there are inconsistencies or inaccuracies, they should try to listen instead of getting too defensive (easier said than done) and "fail better" next time. I'm curious as to what happened with Hill's book; how did she somehow miss all the inaccuracies when she wrote it? It seemed like she was trying to avoid that kind of situation.

Nowadays, when I choose a book about the experiences of a minority group, I tend to give the benefit of the doubt to a member more versus non-member unless it's recommended to me by someone I trust. But when I was younger, I definitely didn't know any better and read a lot of books thinking I was learning all this interesting history but not examining it in any way and found out later that some of it was all wrong or distorted. But then again, members can also be terrible writers or be writing for a certain audience and show their own biases, etc.

Re "Looking Glass" - that is an interesting question and to be honest, I didn't notice the title when I first read the piece. Reading it again, I don't think I quite understand the connection either. It could be that the looking glass or mirror is for Chief Joseph and is showing the different sides or reflections of him - a legendary leader of his people, a depressed man exiled from his homeland, and a kind and peaceful man babysitting a young girl and braiding her hair - and this in turn showing the reader that he was a person first and foremost, with different facets.

Starting from the bottom of your post, Sumofparts, i thank you for sharing your thoughts on that piece. For some reason when i completed reading it, i returned to the title. Usually i barely notice titles, which is no claim to proper reading. Maybe something in my brain was expecting a sort of Alice-Adventure & had to recheck. I like what you wrote about different facets. It also occurs to me that this could be a comment about his aging. Over the years, the glass reflects the same person, yet different.

I tend to agree with you about reading books about minorities. I can see why authors would like the challenge of writing in "the skin" of another person but my reading time is limited (the older i get, more so!) and if i know i'll probably only read one book about a certain segment of society, i tend to go with one written by someone who has lived in that skin. Sometimes this means i'll have to cut some slack when the prose seems too-anti others. For me, that is part of their experience, as well as healing in some cases.

The objections i remember most about Hanta Yo was not about the day-to-day situations. This makes sense because of her research. Apparently she decided to write about battles as well and it was here most of the problems arose. First of all, iirc, she misused the title words, of all things! At the time tribes were trying to preserve their languages, so to see it misrepresented in print was viewed as a large step backward. It is interesting that the language was the focus i recall because Hill claimed she translated her book into Lakota, then back into English. Hmmm.

At the time of all the objections a ruckus was being raised about many other "American Indian" books & ideas. Spiritual sweat lodges were being marketed, even, so it's not surprising to learn this was part of a larger protest. The popularity (as well as the marketing ploy of it being the "Roots" for Indians) of the novel offended. As noted, i was on a Sioux reservation & don't know how much of the protesting was visible away from there.

Alexie would have been 10 or so when Hill's book came out. His reaction today may be part of a new generation's outlook. Or not.

Around the same time another author wrote a comic novel which was eventually made into the movie Little Big Man. (Little Big Man by Thomas Berger ) While the Lakota had problems with it, too, they felt the humor made it clear he was making things up, whereas Hill's novel was serious & purporting to be a sort of history. Given that Alexie is a humorist, this may be reflected in his comments, too. I don't know for sure.

deborah

Sumofparts, i just wanted to end by stating that i enjoyed reading this book with you. It served to remind me how much i enjoy his writing, even if i don't think of him as often as i wish. I believe the next book i read by him will be Flight. Again, good chatting with you about this one.

deb

deb - thanks for reading the book with me in the first place! I also enjoyed reading and discussing the book with you; your comments definitely provided more insight and perspective and increased my enjoyment. Let me know how Flight is; I definitely would like to read more of his writing in the future.