Flight by Sherman
Alexie embodies the genre of sf literature characterized as Native Slipstream.
According to the introduction of the anthology, this unique Native method of
storytelling is “a species of speculative fiction within the sf realm, infuses
stories with time travel, alternate realities and multiverses, and alternate
histories.” (pg.3) Zits, the main character of the story, transitions through
episodes of slippages that call forth “representative moments in Native
American history.” (pg.52) Another theme that resonates throughout the
narrative arises through the interpretation of these representational events
that inform Zits identity in his present life. As a result, Alexie provides a
larger argument or discussion for the state of reservation youth as it stands
today by examining the effects of internal colonization on them. Shellshaker
and this story makes a reference to internal colonization and I would like to
learn or discuss more about what this means to us. Dillon seems to say that
internal colonization has a capacity for “self-loathing” (pg.52) of the
individual. Does this story really move beyond the “self-loathing” dimension of
internal colonization?
I was also very intrigued by the symbolism of the character
or imagined character named Justice who allegedly prompted Zits to “go to the
bank and kill people.” (pg. 58) I think Justice was a fabrication in Zits mind
symbolizing the violence of colonialism, or perhaps the internal implantation
of colonization in the mind. The fact that we never see Justice is also a
commentary of his invisibility to Zits. He/she whatever Justice was was the
distributor of the two guns. So by not deciding to kill innocent people does
this mean that Zits triumphed over the attempt of colonialism to eliminate him by
confining him to incarceration or some other systemic punishment?
In Men on the Moon,
Simon J. Ortiz “shares skepticism for a common sf trope, the discovery (sic) of
“new worlds” that offer plunder and adventure to technologically advanced
colonizers. The story quietly questions assumptions about Native peoples’
‘technoprimitism’ by juxtaposing the television imagery of the first lunar
landing with an elder’s dream of a machine monster on the moon.” (pg.85) Throughout
the story, the grand-father, Faustin, is puzzled by the objective of the Apollo
mission because the goal of space exploration was in search of something that
was already answered. “He wonders, hasn’t anyone ever told them?” (pg. 86)
Ortiz clearly emphasizes the importance of ancestral knowledge as something
inherent in the Native, or inherent in oral tradition that seeks to uncover
“truth.” Faustin’s ancestral message comes to him in the form of a dream of
contact between a machine monster and the Native people of the moon. He devises
this ʻike pāpālua or second vision, as the “truth” or the ultimate symbol of
knowledge. A theme also interwoven in Shellshaker. Ortiz’s larger commentary
highlights the importance of Native story-telling as a means to seek knowledge
as opposed to the danger of technological advancement of knowledge (really
colonization in the case of the exploration of the universe).
When Faustin, relays the events of his dream to his
grand-son, Amarosho is skeptical at first, but then he agrees that it is the
“truth” thereby passing this “knowledge” to his grand-son. Amarosho, serves as
the symbol that teaches his grand-father of “modern” ways because his
grand-father is not familiar with english and “Mericano” ways. The grand-father
is then the symbol of ancestral knowledge that translates what his grand-son
teaches him into Native perspectives. I like how they both refer to eachother
as Nana. It relates to how we have discussed the new contemporary grand-child,
grand-parent relationship where the grand-child teaches the grand-parent about
cultural knowledge. Yet, Ortiz seems to say that no matter who is doing the
teaching, we are all products of our ancestors, or that Amarosho and Faustin
are reciprocal reflections of eachother.
I chose this story because I like learning about the Apollo
missions and question the need for space exploration in general. I used to
devise conspiracy theories of how the U.S. never went there and how the event
was staged because of the context of the historical “space race” of the time.
Further, I have no reception going through/up the pali and your telling me that
the U.S. went to the moon? Why hasn’t this technological age figured out how I
can get service on the pali yet? There’s something wrong about this picture and
investing so much in things that have simple answers as Faustin would agree. I
haven’t devised any new theories recently because my boyfriend went to Space
camp and got to wear Neil Armstrong’s glove, hold a moon rock, and bla bla bla.
I’ll think of something though, are we story-telling in class again today? Haha
just kidding...
Sorry so late guys. I was engrossed in the U.S. election last night.
No comments:
Post a Comment