Fred Heath
Eng 48A
November 1st 2009
Eng 48A
November 1st 2009
Journal on Apess
William Apess
1798-1893
1798-1893
"I would ask you if you would like to be disfranchised from all your rights, merely because your skin is white, and for no other crime." (Norton)
"Some critics claimed Apess, in adopting the rhetoric of Christian conversion narratives, "lost his voice" as a Native American and wrote in a derivative style" (Enotes.com)
The first quote exemplifies the empathetic method that Apess uses throughout An Indian's Looking-Glass For The White Man. By using sharp rhetoric, he forces the reader to contemplate the harsh realities of racism: To face inequality, and bear the manacles of segregation; To wonder what it would be like to think of yourself as an inferior, for no reason other than the color of the skin that you wear. Although non representative of his pervasively christian voice, this quote also highlights the conversational tone used in order to interact directly with the audience.
The second quote is representative of the contemporary criticism that Apess faced at the time. Being as he was a Methodist minister living in white society, many critics believed that he had no right representing Native Americans, as if Christianity naturally took the Indian out of him. I find this to be a hollow criticism. Although it is true that Apess was no longer living as a traditional tribal Indian, Apess was most definitely still an Indian. He still shared the sting of racism, the fractured childhood, and bitter abuses of an Indian heritage. Why else would he be demanding equality for Native Americans? Is it because he didn't fit the wild, and savage Indian stereotype that he faced this criticism? Because he was educated? Maybe he was seen as a man who had given up the fight for a world where Indians could still support their way of life, and turned to the society that had destroyed that possibility. But is that a crime? Did he really give up his heritage or was he just trying to keep it alive?
Another interesting thing to take note of, is the manner in which Apess brings across the Issue of race. Reminiscent of Martin Luther King Jr. Apess' use of analogies and biblical quotations echoes throughout future civil rights movements and as a method, it's very effective. By speaking in analogies, Apess gets the message across in a manner that isn't difficult to understand, and at the same time, retains a powerful depth of meaning. It doesn't exclude the lower class, and has a clarity of voice that is hard to get ahold of otherwise. It also brings about vivid imagery, and invites the audience to instill a meaning of their own to the words. The use of biblical quotations is yet another tool that is very effective because it disarms the audience of their bias. By referencing the bible, Apess roots his ideas into words that are inherently respected by the dominantly christian contemporary society. Even if they don't respect Apess because of his racial background, they respect the ideas that he presents, because they are founded on a common ground.
Apess's direct deconstruction of the typical white Jesus stereotype is also very effective. Just like the typical eurocentric representation of god as a white man living up in the clouds, the stereotype of Jesus being white is not only ignorant, but insulting. I've always thought that god would be better off being represented as a black bi-sexual cross-dressing transvestite woman, but then again, that may be asking too much. As for Jesus, it wouldn't much matter if he was accepted as being black, or brown, because he was born in the middle east and it would be an accurate representation of his complexion, but by purposefully painting him as a white man, European society implies that only a white man could be the son of god. Apess attacks this conception of superiority by bringing up the issue of Jesus' color. By establishing Jesus, as a non-white son of god, Apess dismantles the founding stereotypes of racism. He argues that if people of color are inferior, and victims of hatred, and abuse, then wouldn't the son of God be as well?
In another powerful example, Apess invites the reader to envision all of the nations of the world together in one room, and search for the white man. Leaving quite a striking image, and one that is just as true today, Apess example can only leave the reader imagining a room full of colored people, with few whites. I think to myself well big deal, I knew that, but it's still shocking to realize. Representing a majority of the media today, the 'white man' is misrepresented as the majority man, although he undoubtedly isn't. Consciously I know that caucasian males are a minority, but I feel like they're a majority because when it comes down to it, in California I'm not a subject of much ethnic diversity. It makes me wonder how much inherent racism there is in American society, and how such a cycle can ever be stopped.
"Some critics claimed Apess, in adopting the rhetoric of Christian conversion narratives, "lost his voice" as a Native American and wrote in a derivative style" (Enotes.com)
The first quote exemplifies the empathetic method that Apess uses throughout An Indian's Looking-Glass For The White Man. By using sharp rhetoric, he forces the reader to contemplate the harsh realities of racism: To face inequality, and bear the manacles of segregation; To wonder what it would be like to think of yourself as an inferior, for no reason other than the color of the skin that you wear. Although non representative of his pervasively christian voice, this quote also highlights the conversational tone used in order to interact directly with the audience.
The second quote is representative of the contemporary criticism that Apess faced at the time. Being as he was a Methodist minister living in white society, many critics believed that he had no right representing Native Americans, as if Christianity naturally took the Indian out of him. I find this to be a hollow criticism. Although it is true that Apess was no longer living as a traditional tribal Indian, Apess was most definitely still an Indian. He still shared the sting of racism, the fractured childhood, and bitter abuses of an Indian heritage. Why else would he be demanding equality for Native Americans? Is it because he didn't fit the wild, and savage Indian stereotype that he faced this criticism? Because he was educated? Maybe he was seen as a man who had given up the fight for a world where Indians could still support their way of life, and turned to the society that had destroyed that possibility. But is that a crime? Did he really give up his heritage or was he just trying to keep it alive?
Another interesting thing to take note of, is the manner in which Apess brings across the Issue of race. Reminiscent of Martin Luther King Jr. Apess' use of analogies and biblical quotations echoes throughout future civil rights movements and as a method, it's very effective. By speaking in analogies, Apess gets the message across in a manner that isn't difficult to understand, and at the same time, retains a powerful depth of meaning. It doesn't exclude the lower class, and has a clarity of voice that is hard to get ahold of otherwise. It also brings about vivid imagery, and invites the audience to instill a meaning of their own to the words. The use of biblical quotations is yet another tool that is very effective because it disarms the audience of their bias. By referencing the bible, Apess roots his ideas into words that are inherently respected by the dominantly christian contemporary society. Even if they don't respect Apess because of his racial background, they respect the ideas that he presents, because they are founded on a common ground.
Apess's direct deconstruction of the typical white Jesus stereotype is also very effective. Just like the typical eurocentric representation of god as a white man living up in the clouds, the stereotype of Jesus being white is not only ignorant, but insulting. I've always thought that god would be better off being represented as a black bi-sexual cross-dressing transvestite woman, but then again, that may be asking too much. As for Jesus, it wouldn't much matter if he was accepted as being black, or brown, because he was born in the middle east and it would be an accurate representation of his complexion, but by purposefully painting him as a white man, European society implies that only a white man could be the son of god. Apess attacks this conception of superiority by bringing up the issue of Jesus' color. By establishing Jesus, as a non-white son of god, Apess dismantles the founding stereotypes of racism. He argues that if people of color are inferior, and victims of hatred, and abuse, then wouldn't the son of God be as well?
In another powerful example, Apess invites the reader to envision all of the nations of the world together in one room, and search for the white man. Leaving quite a striking image, and one that is just as true today, Apess example can only leave the reader imagining a room full of colored people, with few whites. I think to myself well big deal, I knew that, but it's still shocking to realize. Representing a majority of the media today, the 'white man' is misrepresented as the majority man, although he undoubtedly isn't. Consciously I know that caucasian males are a minority, but I feel like they're a majority because when it comes down to it, in California I'm not a subject of much ethnic diversity. It makes me wonder how much inherent racism there is in American society, and how such a cycle can ever be stopped.
20 points. "Being as he was a Methodist minister living in white society, many critics believed that he had no right representing Native Americans, as if Christianity naturally took the Indian out of him. I find this to be a hollow criticism." Yes, so true.
ReplyDelete