In light of the recent postings on the Navajo-Hopi land dispute, I hope
that this discussion sparks some interest. Someone on this list informed
me that some of the proceeds of the book are going to the cause...I would
hope that she would make a posting and clarify for me (sheepish grin).
The book is excellent and many of the people about which the illustrious
"jn" has posted are in the book. You get to know them quite personally.
This is long (about 915 lines). You might want to print it out instead.
Respectfully submitted
Sandra Mathews-Lamb
Instructor, New Mexico and Spanish Southwest History
U of New Mexico
Albuquerque, NM 87131
skmlamb@carina.unm.edu
>Date: Thurs, 2 Feb 1995
>From: "Jim Oberly, History Dept.,
> U of Wisc-Eau Claire" <JOBERLY@CNSVAX.UWEC.EDU>
>Subject: H-RURAL book reviews to start on Monday
>
>Hello, H-RURAL subscribers:
>
>At long last, the H-Rural book review project is about
>to begin. The Board of Editors and your two co-moderators
>(Jim Oberly and John Hannum) have worked over the past
>year to begin online reviews that go beyond the standard
>500 word essay in the _JAH_ or _AHR_. In addition,
>we hope to invite authors to join us on H-RURAL as we
>talk about their works. The result can be a blend of
>scholarly book review, information from the publisher,
>responses from the author, and discussion among ourselves
>on H-Rural as a reading club.
>
>As a starter, we'd like to run one book review per
>week, announcing in advance the title so that you can
>take a little time to look at the book yourself (or
>at least some other reviews). Next Monday, the book
>we will be reviewing and discussing is:
>
>THE WIND WON'T KNOW ME: A HISTORY OF THE NAVAJO-HOPI
>LAND DISPUTE, by Emily Benedek (New York: Vintage, 1992).
>
>
>The reviewer is H-Rural Board member Sandra Mathews-Lamb
>(Dept. of History, Univ. of New Mexico).
>
>
>Remember, to become an H-Rural book reviewer yourself, fill
>out the reviewer_form that has been posted from time to
>time on H-Rural. If you have misfiled it, send me an
>E-Mail message directly and I'll send you a new form.
>
>--Jim Oberly, H-Rural Co-Moderator
>=====================================================================
>Date: Mon, 6 Feb 1995 17:13:03 -0600
>Sender: An H-NET list for discussion of Rural & Agricultural History
> <H-RURAL@UICVM.BITNET>
>From: "Jim Oberly, History Dept.,
> U of Wisc-Eau Claire" <JOBERLY@CNSVAX.UWEC.EDU>
>Subject: Update on _Wind Won't Know Me_ author response
>
>H-Rural subscribers:
>
>Vintage Books's Publicity Dept. called me to say
>that Emily Benedek is interested to join
>us this week on H-Rural as we discuss her
>book and Sandra Mathews-Lamb's review. John
>Hannum and I will do our best to shuttle
>the messages back and forth. Do feel free
>to join in. This is a very much an experiment in
>online communication.
>
>--Jim Oberly, H-Rural Co-Moderator
>=========================================================================
>Date: Mon, 6 Feb 1995 11:31:55 -0600
>Sender: An H-NET list for discussion of Rural & Agricultural History
> <H-RURAL@UICVM.BITNET>
>From: "Jim Oberly, History Dept.,
> U of Wisc-Eau Claire" <JOBERLY@CNSVAX.UWEC.EDU>
>Subject: Book Review: THE WIND WON'T KNOW ME (250 lines)
>
>H-Rural subscribers:
>
>Below you will find an online book review in three parts
>of Emily Benadek's _The Wind Won't Know Me: A History
>of the Navajo-Hopi Land Dispute_. Part I is the review that
>H-Rural board member Sandra Mathews-Lamb wrote.
>Part II is the table of contents of the book. Part III consists
>of blurbs and other publicity material supplied by Vintage Books.
>I have contacted the Publicity Department at Vintage and
>asked them to invite the author, Ms. Benadek, to join
>us this week with her response. Your comments on the
>book, the review, and the topic, are also invited.
>
>
>--Jim Oberly, H-Rural Co-Moderator
>*****************************************************************************
>PART I
>****************************************************************************
> THE WIND WON'T KNOW ME:
> A HISTORY OF THE NAVAJO-HOPI LAND DISPUTE
> by Emily Benedek
> (NY: Vintage Books, 1992)
> 439 pp., map, 31 photographs, chronology, endnotes, index
> US $14.00/Canada $18.50
>
> Reviewed by Sandra Mathews-Lamb
>
>"The Wind won't know me there.
>The Holy People won't know me.
>And I won't know the Holy People.
>And there's no one left who can
> tell me."
> --An Old Navajo Woman
>
>
>This woman's statement explains the Navajo perspective of this 113-year
>old disagreement between the Navajo and Hopi. The issue, however, is
>much more complex. Emily Benedek tells a convincing story about how the
>Unted States government became involved in Hopi and Navajo internal
>affairs, causing this dispute to take on a more desperate form.
>
>THE WIND WON'T KNOW ME, as Benedek writes, "grew out of a story I
>reported for NEWSWEEK 'Two Tribes, One Land', in 1985" (np). A
>journalist by trade, Benedek has a knack for organizing interviews, oral
>histories, and primary research together in a coherent and interesting
>narrative. Organized chronologically from interviews and research she
>did betweeen the summer of 1985 and the spring of 1986, Benedek
>consolidates these disparate sources into a story of persistence,
>discouragement, and power. She introduces the reader to Navajo families
>that are being forced to move (Hatathlies and Tsos), Hopi
>traditionalists that oppose the forced migrations, the Hopi Tribal
>Council who support Navajo removal, and a myriad of government officials
>and lawyers who played a significant role in the dispute. She uses
>individual and personal stories to illustrate how various court cases,
>public laws, and Hopi/Navajo enforcement affected the many people
>involved. The story is a tangled web of relationships, power, and
>religious ties to land and life ways.
>
>Benedek illustrates this complexity with the help of a brief but
>comprehensive background of the migration and establishment of the Hopi
>and Navajo into northeastern Arizona, correctly adding that the Hopi
>inhabited the area long before the Navajo. Expansion of the successful
>Navajo sheep raising industry made movement into uninhabited areas of
>Hopi traditional land necessary in the ninenteenth century. As the Hopi
>tried to assert their ownership of the disputed area, they discovered
>that since they had never fought against or made treaties with the United
>States, the US government did not recognize their title to the land. The
>1882 Executive Order officially established the Hopi Reseravation. But
>many problems would be associated with this decree. Benedek's extensive
>survey of federal documentation and litigation adds a much needed
>dimension to her work.
>
>The Navajo story is one of suffering and poverty, brought on by forced
>reduction in sheep and other livestock, as ordered by the federal
>government to alleviate the environmental strain on the Hopi Partition
>Lands (HPL). Unable to rebuild or maintain their homes due to
>restrictive federal regulations, they found themselves living in
>dilapidated homes. According to Benedek's interviews, the Navajo chose
>to remain because this was their home and had been for generations.
>Their gods told them to live there. Benedek's comprehensive narrative
>illustrates beautifully the Navajo's close ties to the land, but also
>reminds the reader that the Hopi as well have the same religious
>connection to the land. This discrepancy caused tensions to rise between
>two tribes which, according to Benedek's interviews with both Hopi and
>Navajo, had lived side by side harmoniously for generations but were
>prodded into disagreement by US involvement in internal affairs.
>
>"We call them foxes" (167), one Hopi woman describes her dealings with a
>Navajo who sold her bad meat. But there is more to the story of distrust
>than rotten meat. Benedek carefully documents the resentment that the
>Navajo (and traditional Hopi) have toward the Hopi Tribal Council--a
>government that was set up by the US. Through her meticulous use of
>interviews, Benedek helps the reader understand the complexities of
>relationships between Hopi and Navajo, and between the Hopi Tribal
>Council and the traditionalists.
>
>Benedek argues that the strained relationship between the Council and
>traditionalists is a consequence of US government interference in Hopi
>internal affairs. As is typical of US-Tribal relations, she asserts, the
>federal government often chose to negotiate with those most willing to
>placate the federal government. Benedek certainly does not heed John
>McCain's advice (then an Arizona Representative, now a US Senator) when
>he said, "No one should know how their laws or sausages are made" (241).
>Instead, she offers a personal look at the complicated decision-making
>process, as well as the individuals involved.
>
>One of Benedek's strengths is tying oral tradition and federal policies
>to form her narrative. Most convincingly, however, Benedek tells the
>story of two peoples who lived in relative harmony before the instigation
>of the 1882 Executive Order. Although the author focuses mostly on
>Navajo attempts to remain on the land, as well as the hardships they face
>daily, Benedek does treat this politically-charged subject with a fairly
>balanced pen.
>
>This reviewer would like to know, however, at what point do we stop
>history and declare land ownership? The author of THE WIND WON'T KNOW ME
>chose to stop the clock after the arrival of the Navajo into Hopi lands.
>But there is much more to the story than this. By reading this work the
>complexity of the issue can be understood. It is a welcomed addition to
>the few up-to-date monographs about the Hopi-Navajo dispute.
>
>
>Sandra Mathews-Lamb
>Dept. of History
>U of New Mexico
>Albuquerque, NM 87131
>(505) 277-2451
>(505) 277-6023 FAX
>Review posted originally on H-Rural, January 1995
>
>*******************************************************************************
*
> ********************
>PART II
>*******************************************************************************
*
> *********************
>THE WIND WON'T KNOW ME
>
>Table of Contents
>
>Acknowledgments xi
>
> Summer 1985
>
>1. The Sun Dance, Big Mountain 3
>2. The Hatathlies, Coal Mine Mesa 14
>3. The Complicated World of the Hopis 25
>4. The Law: Healing v. Jones 32
>5. A Brief History of the Hopis 43
>6. A Brief History of the Navajos 58
>7. TheTsos, Mosquito Springs 67
>
> Fall 1985
>
>8. The Hatathlies and the Old Ways 83
>9. The American Assault on the Hopi Spirit 109
>10 Coal 133
>11 Public Law 93-531: The Settlement Act 143
>12 Traditional Hopis Try to Hold on 157
>13 Hope for Change: The Morris-Clark Mission 174
>14 The Relocation Commission 200
>
> Winter 1986
>
>15 Washington Gets Involved 237
>16 Sandra Massetto's Last Act 257
>17 Ross Swimmer Travels to the HPL 261
>18 Peterson Zah Brings His Plan to Hardrock 273
>19 Askie Throws Mae Out 279
>20 Indian Anger, White Guilt 281
>21 Annie Oakley's Hopi Friends 291
>22 Two Faces of Relocation in Hardrock 295
>
> Spring 1986
>
>23 The Fence 307
>24 Small Victories 321
>25 The Rug Sale in Tucson 329
>26 The Messiah of Relocation? 338
>27 "All This Madness Building Inside" 351
>28 The International Indian Treaty Conference 356
>29 Utah Pulls Out 364
>30 Violence Erupts in Teesto 371
>31 July 4, Independence Day 380
>32 The Sun Dance, Big Mountain 383
> Epilogue 387
>
> Postscript to the Vintage Edition 395
>
> Chronology 405
> Notes 407
> Index 431
>*******************************************************************************
*
> ****************
>PART III
>*******************************************************************************
*
> ****************
>
> THE WIND WON'T KNOW ME
>
>PUBLISHER'S COMMENTS AND OTHER REVIEWS
>
>Sweeping, comprehensive perspective ..this is history with a
>human face."
>
> -- Boston Globe
>
>"The wind won't know me there. The Holy People won't know me.
>And I won't know the Holy People."
>
>-- an old Navajo woman, on the
>prospect of moving away from
>her ancestral home
>
>THE WIND WON'T KNOW ME is a brilliantly told analysis of the
>Navajo-Hopi Big Mountain land dispute, that illuminates how an
>already complicated, centuries-old tribal relationship was turned
>into total disaster through the intervention of the U.S.
>government. While the struggle over rights to two million acres
>of Arizona land has been covered on the front pages of national
>newspapers Emily Benedek goes beyond the specific circumstances
>to examine relations between different Native American
>tribes, and between those tribes and the U.S. government. Vintage
>Books will publish this powerful analysis of contrasting
>cultures, for the first time
>in trade paperback on Noember 18. It will include a postscript by
>the author with commentary on events that have occurred since
>last year's hardcover publication.
>
>Until November 1992, our country's last Indian war was still
>raging in the territory near Big Mountain, Arizona. The Navajos
>have been fighting their Hopi neighbors -- as well
>as the United States government, that had arbitrarily divided the
>land between the two tribes and decreed that all who lived on the
>"wrong" side of the mountain would have
>to move. THE WIND WON'T KNOW ME recounts the history of that
>struggle, with its byzantine politics, broken promises, and
>devastated cultures, a powerful metaphor for the experience of
>American Indians since the first white
>Europeans "discovered" America for themselves.
>
>With the narrative sweep and emotional depth of a novel, THE WIND
>WON'T KNOW ME tracks the legal and personal progress of the Big
>Mountain dispute, and portrays the lives caught up in its
>history. A new postscript, written especially for the Vintage
>edition, describes the historic agreement between the Navajos and
>the Hopis which, if passed by Congress, will serve as a model for
>more enlightened future relations between the U.S. government and
>the diverse peoples that comprise what is known as Native
>America. "An exhaustive, engrossing account...fascinating...full
>of discomfiting truths." (Newsweek)
>
>ABOUT THE AUTHOR
>
>Emily Benedek grew up in Belmont, Massachusetts. She graduated
>magna cum laude from Harvard College in 1981. Her stories have
>appeared in Newsweek, Rolling Stone, the Washington Post,
>Redbook, and others.
>=========================================================================
>Date: Mon, 6 Feb 1995 22:36:33 -0600
>Reply-To: An H-NET list for discussion of Rural & Agricultural History
> <H-RURAL@UICVM.BITNET>
>Sender: An H-NET list for discussion of Rural & Agricultural History
> <H-RURAL@UICVM.BITNET>
>From: "Jim Oberly, History Dept.,
> U of Wisc-Eau Claire" <JOBERLY@CNSVAX.UWEC.EDU>
>Subject: Emily Benedek on H-Rural, ready to talk
>
>H-Rural subscribers:
>
>Our experiment in online book reviewing continues.
>
>Emily Benedek has now joined us on H-Rural and is ready
>and willing to talk about her book, _The Wind Won't
>Know Me_, and the book review posted earlier today,
>or some related topic. Let's see if we can't get
>a thread going.
>
>--Jim Oberly, H-Rural Co-Moderator
>*******************************************************
>
>
>> Dear Jim,
>>
>> I would be happy to participate in the on-line conversation. I will not
>> write a statement, however, because I don't think the review really demands
>> a comment from me, and because I am swamped with work.
>>
>> Sincerely,
>> Emily Benedek
>>
>=========================================================================
>Date: Tue, 7 Feb 1995 09:00:20 -0600
>Reply-To: An H-NET list for discussion of Rural & Agricultural History
> <H-RURAL@UICVM.BITNET>
>Sender: An H-NET list for discussion of Rural & Agricultural History
> <H-RURAL@UICVM.BITNET>
>From: "Jim Oberly, History Dept.,
> U of Wisc-Eau Claire" <JOBERLY@CNSVAX.UWEC.EDU>
>Subject: H-LOCAL wants to take part in book talk
>
>H-Rural subscribers:
>
>I thought you would be interested to know that our
>fellow list, H-LOCAL, wants to take part in our
>discussion of Ms. Benedek's book.
>
>--Jim Oberly, H-Rural Co-Moderator
>*********************************************************************
>
>> From: IN%"tmc5a@pluto.clinch.edu" "Thomas M. Costa" 7-FEB-1995 08:34:32.92
>> To: IN%"joberly@CNSVAX.UWEC.EDU", IN%"rpatton@kscsuna1.kennesaw.edu"
"Randy
> Patton"
>> CC: IN%"skmlamb@carina.unm.edu"
>> Subj: Sam's review
>>
>>
>> Jim: May we at h-local post Sam's review of the Benedek book
>> and any relevant discussion? The book incorporates oral
>> history and might be of some interest to our subscribers?
>> --
>> Tom Costa Dept. of History and Philosophy
>> tmc5a@clinch.edu Clinch Valley College, Wise, Va.
24293
>> (703)328-0231
>=========================================================================
>Date: Tue, 7 Feb 1995 13:11:32 EST
>Reply-To: An H-NET list for discussion of Rural & Agricultural History
> <H-RURAL@UICVM.BITNET>
>Sender: An H-NET list for discussion of Rural & Agricultural History
> <H-RURAL@UICVM.BITNET>
>From: "Anne B. Effland" <AEFFLAND@ERS.BITNET>
>Subject: The Wind Won't Know Me--comments
>
>----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>To Ellen Benedek or Sandra Mathews-Lamb:
>
>Although it would probably be best to go look at the book for an answer to
>this question, in the interests of beginning on-line discussion, let me ask:
>what prompted the Hopi to assert their claim to disputed land in the late
>nineteenth century and, given that historical event, why did the twentieth
>century Hopi traditionalists believe the Navajo and Hopi lived side-by-side
>in harmony before Hopi Tribal Council and U.S. government interests intervened?
>(To be sure that no one misinterprets the intention of this inquiry, I am
>genuinely curious about what changed the Hopi view, if indeed it did change,
>about use of this land.) Thanks.
>
>_____________________________________
>|ANNE B. W. EFFLAND |
>|ECONOMIC RESEARCH SERVICE |
>|U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE |
>|1301 NEW YORK AVENUE, NW 932D |
>|WASHINGTON, DC 20005-4788 |
>|202-219-0788 FAX: 202-219-0391 |
>|AEFFLAND@ERS.BITNET |
>-------------------------------------
>=========================================================================
>Date: Tue, 7 Feb 1995 13:12:17 EST
>Reply-To: An H-NET list for discussion of Rural & Agricultural History
> <H-RURAL@UICVM.BITNET>
>Sender: An H-NET list for discussion of Rural & Agricultural History
> <H-RURAL@UICVM.BITNET>
>From: "HAMBURGER, SUSAN" <SXH@PSULIAS.BITNET>
>Organization: Penn State University / University Libraries
>Subject: Re: Emily Benedek on H-Rural, ready to talk
>In-Reply-To: Your message dated "Mon, 06 Feb 1995 22:36:33 -0600"
> <01HMQWSCKH3M8ZHPCP@psulias.psu.edu>
>
>----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>For Emily Benedek:
>
> I have two questions about your research:
>
> 1) Did you find some Hopi and Navajo more, or less, willing to
>talk with you than others?
>
> 2) Are you planning to preserve your oral history interviews in a
>library or archival repository for other researchers to consult in the
>future?
>
>Susan Hamburger
>Penn State
>sxh@psulias.psu.edu
>=========================================================================
>Date: Tue, 7 Feb 1995 23:53:58 -0600
>Reply-To: An H-NET list for discussion of Rural & Agricultural History
> <H-RURAL@UICVM.BITNET>
>Sender: An H-NET list for discussion of Rural & Agricultural History
> <H-RURAL@UICVM.BITNET>
>From: "Jim Oberly, History Dept.,
> U of Wisc-Eau Claire" <JOBERLY@CNSVAX.UWEC.EDU>
>Subject: Emily Benedek responds to Anne Effland and Susan Hamburger
>
>H-Rural friends:
>
>Continuing our book discussion of _The Wind
>Won't Know Me_, our guest author
>Emily Benedek's responds to two queries,
>the first from Anne Effland and the second
>from Susan Hamburger.
>
>--Jim Oberly, H-Rural Co-Moderator
>*************************************************************
>
>
>>> To Ellen Benedek or Sandra Mathews-Lamb:
>>>
>>> Although it would probably be best to go look at the book for an answer to
>>> this question, in the interests of beginning on-line discussion, let me ask:
>>> what prompted the Hopi to assert their claim to disputed land in the late
>>> nineteenth century
>
>It is a very tangled history, this, and to understand it, you'd best read
>the book. However, the Hopis complained about the Navajos ever since the
>Navajos appeared on the scene, around the time of the arrival of the Spaniards.
>
>The reason the Hopis eventually sued the Navajos (in 1858) to determine who
>owned what was the discovery of 20 billion tons of coal under the land. It
>was not the Hopis who were so interested in the coal, but rather, energy
>companies, and the tribe's lawyers.
>
>>> and, given that historical event, why did the twentieth
>>> century Hopi traditionalists believe the Navajo and Hopi lived side-by-side
>>> in harmony before Hopi Tribal Council and U.S. government interests
>>> intervened?
>
>Your question is not exactly appropos--or answerable. No short answer
>here--better read the book, if you're interested.
>
>> (To be sure that no one misinterprets the intention of this inquiry, I am
>>> genuinely curious about what changed the Hopi view, if indeed it did change,
>>> about use of this land.) Thanks.
>
>Why would I question your intention?
>
>Emily Benedek
>>> _____________________________________
>>> |ANNE B. W. EFFLAND |
>>> |ECONOMIC RESEARCH SERVICE |
>>> |U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE |
>>> |1301 NEW YORK AVENUE, NW 932D |
>>> |WASHINGTON, DC 20005-4788 |
>>> |202-219-0788 FAX: 202-219-0391 |
>>> |AEFFLAND@ERS.BITNET |
>>> -------------------------------------
>*****************************************************************
>
>
>>> For Emily Benedek:
>>>
>>> I have two questions about your research:
>>>
>>> 1) Did you find some Hopi and Navajo more, or less, willing to
>>> talk with you than others?
>
>Yes, sure. I spent a lot of time out there--and basically, if people thought
>you were sincere and really wanted to learn, they'd talk to you. They did
>not much like anthropologists. They said about them: "This person or that
>person came out here and got their PhDs and never came back to see us."
>
>>> 2) Are you planning to preserve your oral history interviews in a
>>> library or archival repository for other researchers to consult in the
>>> future?
>
>No. Had no plans to do so. I have written a second book called Beyond the
>Four Corners of the World, about one Navajo woman's struggle to negotiate
>the distance between the sacred and the profane--the old world and the new.
>It comes out from Knopf in August. And I used material gathered for the
>first book for this one as well. So I feel like the stuff I gathered is
>still rather personal--to me and to my informants. Also, the meaning of the
>words is so dependent on the context in which they were uttered and what the
>listener understands about the lives of the people who are talking--that I
>think the meaning could easily be distorted in the hands of someone who was
>less informed. So I would be hesitant to "post" the stuff in an archive, if
>you will.
>
>But then again, I have never thought about it.
>
>>> Susan Hamburger
>>> Penn State
>>> sxh@psulias.psu.edu
>=========================================================================
>Date: Wed, 8 Feb 1995 15:38:09 -0600
>Reply-To: An H-NET list for discussion of Rural & Agricultural History
> <H-RURAL@UICVM.BITNET>
>Sender: An H-NET list for discussion of Rural & Agricultural History
> <H-RURAL@UICVM.BITNET>
>From: "Jim Oberly, History Dept.,
> U of Wisc-Eau Claire" <JOBERLY@CNSVAX.UWEC.EDU>
>Subject: book talk query--role of feds in tribal dispute?
>
>H-Rural friends:
>
>I would like to continue with the conversation between Emily
>Benedek, Sam Mathews-Lamb, and others on H-Rural. I start
>by saying I have not read the book and am therefore relying
>on Sam's review and the blurbs from Vintage Books as background
>(of course, I will want to go out and read the book!).
>
>As I understand the story, the charge is made that U.S. Government
>interference in tribal affairs led to the state of affairs
>where one tribe battled another. The implication is that the
>Navajos and Hopis would have been able to work out their dispute
>in the absence of outside federal intervention.
>
>I would like to know more about this federal intervention. Are
>we talking mainly about the 1882 decision to establish the
>Hopi Reservation with what were apparently erroneous boundaries?
>Or is the main problem the creation of tribal governments under
>the 1934 Indian Reorganization Act? If the latter, when did
>the Navajos and Hopis adopt IRA-based constitutions? Did conflict
>emerge immediately thereafter between the two tribes or did the
>conflict come out of changes in the nature and power of tribal
>governments? Let me also pose a hypothetical question. Let's
>say that both had tribes rejected IRA-style tribal government
>after 1934 (as some tribes did do). Would reliance on more traditional
>forms of exercising power and decision-making have averted the
>wrangling? How and why?
>
>I invite Emily Benedek and Sam Mathews-Lamb to respond to these
>questions, and, of course, anyone else on the list who can help
>with answers.
>
>--Jim Oberly, H-Rural Co-Moderator
>=========================================================================
>Date: Thu, 9 Feb 1995 09:10:14 -0600
>Reply-To: An H-NET list for discussion of Rural & Agricultural History
> <H-RURAL@UICVM.BITNET>
>Sender: An H-NET list for discussion of Rural & Agricultural History
> <H-RURAL@UICVM.BITNET>
>From: "Jim Oberly, History Dept.,
> U of Wisc-Eau Claire" <JOBERLY@CNSVAX.UWEC.EDU>
>Subject: Emily Benedek answers Oberly's queries
>
>On Feb. 8, Jim Oberly wrote:
>
> > As I understand the story, the charge is made that U.S. Government
> > interference in tribal affairs led to the state of affairs
> > where one tribe battled another. The implication is that the
> > Navajos and Hopis would have been able to work out their dispute
> > in the absence of outside federal intervention.
>
>
>The suggestion is that the two tribes may have been able to work out a
>_different_ solution, one that accorded more with the ways of the
>tribes--though, of course, the two tribes are very different. I have never
>suggested that all would be harmony and happiness had the US stayed out--but
>more likely, much easier. The fact of the matter remains that the Navajos
>arrived on land the Hopis had for almost a thousand years considered their
>own. They didn't conduct hit and run raids like the Utes, for example. They
>stayed.
>
> > I would like to know more about this federal intervention. Are
> > we talking mainly about the 1882 decision to establish the
> > Hopi Reservation with what were apparently erroneous boundaries?
>
>That was one problem. There was more federal intervention. At one point, the
>War Dept. encouraged the two tribes to live together, and encouraged the
>Navajos to live even closer to the Hopis. At another point, they considered
>moving the Hopis to a reservation along the Colorado River (and some went.)
>There was plan after plan--each one different from its predecessor. Then of
>course, were the infamous days sending children to boarding schools far from
>home, so the children no longer had an opportunity to learn Hopi ways. If
>you read the book, you'll see that the reason the boundaries were created in
>the first place was to satisfy the pique of a federal Indian agent, who
>wanted to evict two whites from the area--whites who were helping the Hopis
>protest the sending of their kids to school. The agent had no legal recourse
>to remove the whites because the land was public--so he got an executive
>order signed. Then the boundaries were written with the same amount of care
>and foresight--none.
>
>
> > Or is the main problem the creation of tribal governments under
> > the 1934 Indian Reorganization Act?
>
>This is another problem.
>
> > If the latter, when did
> > the Navajos and Hopis adopt IRA-based constitutions?
>
>The Navajos never adopted the IRA, the Hopis did--the vote was in 1936. But
>there is great question, outlined in the book, about whether or not the vote
>at Hopi was proper or representative of Hopi feeling. Hopis register
>disapproval by abstention--yet the abstention votes were not counted as no
>votes....
>As far as I'm concerned, this vote, and the way it was handled--by Oliver La
>Farge, no less, had a devastating effect on the Hopis. They have been riven
>ever since by internal divisions, over those who would adopt the modern form
>of representative government, and those who wanted to retain the
>traditional, religious leadership of the separate dozen-od villages--whose
>connection with each other was a delicate balance of cln and ceremonial
>responsibility.
>
>The whites basically came in and tramped all over this delicate structure.
>And La Farge realized this as soon as he left--as soon as he'd impressed
>whomever it was in Washington he wanted to impress. He realized he'd done a
>terrible thing. But then it was too late.
>
> > Did conflict
> > emerge immediately thereafter between the two tribes or did the
> > conflict come out of changes in the nature and power of tribal
> > governments?
>
>There had already been conflict--but when we talk about conflict, we're
>talking about Navajo pilfering from Hopi cornfields, Navajos killing Hopi
>horses for food in the winter. Conflict over who had rights to water sources
>for animals--We're not talking about suicide bombers a la Middle East.
>
> > Let me also pose a hypothetical question. Let's
> > say that both tribes had rejected IRA-style tribal governments
> > after 1934 (as some tribes did do). Would reliance on more traditional
> > forms of exercising power and decision-making have averted the
> > wrangling? How and why?
>
>This is a hard question to answer or speculate upon. The IRA imposed a
>structure for decision making--it established a body (the tribal government)
>that could make decisions and respond to federal questions or demands.
>WIthout this, the federal government never would have got answers from the
>tribes on many issues--because their decision-making process is to discuss
>and discuss until you have a consensus--no majority rule here.
>
>So, the tribes might have been better off--but they would have existed as a
>bubble away from the feds and the US---this may have been better for
>them---may have been worse--who knows what would have happened to the
>traditional forms of government left to their own devices and the increasing
>encroachment of whites. Would it have been better if their kids had never
>gone to schools? Better that they never had anti-erosion programs, or
>livestock reduction programs? Better that they not have access to U.S.
>Public Health? These questions are hard to answer--although nostalgia makes
>us want to believe they would have been better off left alone.
>
> > I invite Emily Benedek and Sam Mathews-Lamb to respond to these
> > questions, and, of course, anyone else on the list who can help
> > with answers.
> >
> > --Jim Oberly, H-Rural Co-Moderator
>
>I hope this has been helpful, if not exhaustive.
>
>--Emily Benedek
>=========================================================================
>Date: Thu, 9 Feb 1995 14:38:41 EST
>Reply-To: An H-NET list for discussion of Rural & Agricultural History
> <H-RURAL@UICVM.BITNET>
>Sender: An H-NET list for discussion of Rural & Agricultural History
> <H-RURAL@UICVM.BITNET>
>From: John Hannum <JHANN00@ukcc.uky.edu>
>Subject: Server Problem
>
>I should tell you all that our entire system went down with 60 seconds
>notice yesterday at 10:15 or so -- I was unable to log off in time, since
>I was away from my desk when the warning message came on. It was down
>until after midnight and then came up only rather tentatively, but is fine
>now, thanks to the valiant efforts of the folks at UKCC.
>
>So, some messages may have been lost. I posted all the H-RURAL stuff that
>was in my mail box this morning, but I don't know what might be missing.
>If you posted something and it didn't make it to the list, please repost.
>
>I'd hate to lose anything, given the interesting book review discussion.
>I'd like to add my 2 cents worth to Jim's earlier message. I think this
>is a fascinating way to do reviews, particularly when we can involve the
>author. I'll be posting a review done by Patrick Mooney in a few weeks,
>and I'll certainly involve Pat and try to get the author of the book
>involved as well. So, please participate! Thanks.
>
>John Hannum
>Co-Moderator/H-RURAL & RURSOC-L
>Owner CAT-CHAT (The UK Basketball Network)
>Date: Thu, 9 Feb 1995 11:13:17 EST
>Reply-To: An H-NET list for discussion of Rural & Agricultural History
> <H-RURAL@UICVM.BITNET>
>Sender: An H-NET list for discussion of Rural & Agricultural History
> <H-RURAL@UICVM.BITNET>
>From: sandra kathryn mathews-lamb <skmlamb@carina.unm.edu>
>Subject: Re: Emily Benedek answers Oberly's queries
>In-Reply-To: <m0rcb42-00065hC@carina.unm.edu> from
> "@unmvma.unm.edu:owner-h-rural@UICVM.BITNET" at Feb 9,
> 95 09:10:14 am
>
>----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>First of all I would like to add to Emily's comments that indeed few
>tribes did complete the Indian Reorganization Act (IRA) 3-step
>procedure. As Emily mentioned, the Hopi did--and much in the same way as
>many other tribes who actually completed the process. The tribes were
>not aware that an abstention would be counted by the US Government as a
>vote FOR the IRA. So, by default, tribes across the US accepted the
>IRA. But some didn't follow through on proposing and accepting a
>constitution.
>
>The hypothetical for the Hopi is as difficult to discern as would be for
>any other tribe. However, many examples do exist of the different levels
>of acceptance of the IRA and the impact that it had on tribal
>organization and cultural continuity. This is a book in and of itself.
>Which reminds me, IS THERE a book that deals with this issue
>specifically? If so, a review of that book might be of further interest
>to listmembers.
>
>Jim, I want to thank you for the opportunity to take part in this, the
>interactive book review. But especially to thank Emily for a wonderful
>book and discussion! I hope that listmembers continue ask thoughtful and
>provocative questions.
>
>Sam Mathews-Lamb
>Dept of History
>U of New Mexico
>Albuquerque, NM 87131
>skmlamb@carina.unm.edu
>=========================================================================
>Date: Thu, 9 Feb 1995 15:30:22 EST
>Reply-To: An H-NET list for discussion of Rural & Agricultural History
> <H-RURAL@UICVM.BITNET>
>Sender: An H-NET list for discussion of Rural & Agricultural History
> <H-RURAL@UICVM.BITNET>
>From: "Marc S. Rodriguez" <mrod@merle.acns.nwu.edu>
>Subject: Re: Emily Benedek responds to Anne Effland and Susan Hamburger
>
>----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>Dear H-RURAL
>
>I am responding to the Emily Benedek question and answer session. I would
>ask Benedek, as a Mexican-American Oral Historian myself, to seriously
>consider donation of her tapes, notes, early versions of the book, to some
>library later in life or in a will. So many of these Graduate Students,
>PHD's, reporters, authors, keep their tapes to themselves, and in so doing
>deprive people, and often people of color, of the right to go back and
>listen to what was said by earlier people. Also, historians benefit, as
>does history, from the availability of any and all information on Native
>Peoples, Chicanos, Asian-Americans, Rural whites, etc.. These are the
>poeple that do not often leave records of their lives in local historical
>societies, libraries, or research institutions. I would reccomend that
>Emily Benedek give these tapes,notes, etc, to the Newberry Library in
>Chicago sometime in the future when she is done with her project, and also
>have the recieving institution donate copies to the related tribal
>university, or government. As for Historians, Anthropologists,
>Sociologists, when you are done with YOUR interviews, and have written the
>books and articles that get you good university jobs, you too should give
>your tapes, notes, etc., to research institutes, public library
>collections, or historical societies, after all, these people who agree to
>talk give us something by talking to us -- we should give future
>generations access to the original data.
>
>Sincerely,
>Marc Simon Rodriguez
>Department of History
>Northwestern University
>Evanston,Illinois, 60208
>Phone:(312)764-8639
>Internet: mrod@merle.acns.nwu.edu
>=========================================================================
>Date: Fri, 10 Feb 1995 12:06:35 EST
>Reply-To: An H-NET list for discussion of Rural & Agricultural History
> <H-RURAL@UICVM.BITNET>
>Sender: An H-NET list for discussion of Rural & Agricultural History
> <H-RURAL@UICVM.BITNET>
>From: Emily Benedek <ebenedek@escape.com>
>Subject: Re: Emily Benedek answers Oberly's queries
>
>----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>This is a message I received from Sam Matthews-Lamb:
>
>>----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>>First of all I would like to add to Emily's comments that indeed few
>>tribes did complete the Indian Reorganization Act (IRA) 3-step
>>procedure. As Emily mentioned, the Hopi did--and much in the same way as
>>many other tribes who actually completed the process. The tribes were
>>not aware that an abstention would be counted by the US Government as a
>>vote FOR the IRA. So, by default, tribes across the US accepted the
>>IRA. But some didn't follow through on proposing and accepting a
>>constitution.
>>
>>The hypothetical for the Hopi is as difficult to discern as would be for
>>any other tribe. However, many examples do exist of the different levels
>>of acceptance of the IRA and the impact that it had on tribal
>>organization and cultural continuity. This is a book in and of itself.
>>Which reminds me, IS THERE a book that deals with this issue
>>specifically? If so, a review of that book might be of further interest
>>to listmembers.
>
>There is a document, produced by the Indian Law Resource Center in
>Washington DC, and titled, Report to the Hopi Kikmongwis, which offers a
>blow by blow narrative of the "passage" of the IRA at Hopi. It is very
>painful reading.
>
>I'd like to comment further--so far, I've seen a lot of theoretical
>discussion here about this policy or that--and the book review of The Wind
>Won't Know Me dealt almost exclusively with policy matters. But as far as
>I'm concerned--this is a book about people-people who are very different
>from the average reader, people who live in a world full of reverance and
>faith. Although it was necessary for me to plow through a lot of history to
>explain how that very complicated land dispute had come about, to me, the
>center of the book is the people, their loves, their pains, their strivings.
>Yet no one here has mentioned anything about this--probably because, if they
>haven't read the book, and all they know of it is the review, it remains
>obscure. But it it the people for which you would read this book, it seems
>to me.
>
>Emily Benedek
>
>>
>>Jim, I want to thank you for the opportunity to take part in this, the
>>interactive book review. But especially to thank Emily for a wonderful
>>book and discussion! I hope that listmembers continue ask thoughtful and
>>provocative questions.
>>
>>Sam Mathews-Lamb
>>Dept of History
>>U of New Mexico
>>Albuquerque, NM 87131
>>skmlamb@carina.unm.edu
>>
>>
>===========================================================================
>Date: Sat, 11 Feb 1995
>
> Sat. afternoon
>
>H-Rural friends:
>
>I have just sent an off-list message to Emily
>Benedek thanking her for being our virtual
>author-in-residence this past week on H-Rural. I believe
>that the thread generated considerable interest,
>and speaking for myself, I am going to spend some
>of today and tomorrow reading _The Wind Won't Know Me_.
>Thanks also to Sam Mathews-Lamb for starting us
>off with the book review. I will post the complete
>text of the review and all subsequent followup posts
>and discussion on the H-Rural Gopher at UICVM.UIC.EDU
>
>As for the future of online book reviews, co-moderator
>John Hannum, the H-Rural Board of Editors, and I have many
>more books out on review now awaiting posting on the list.
>I would like to hear on the list what you, the H-Rural subscribers
>think of interactive book reviews & discussions. Are there
>ideas and suggestions you have about format or arrangement?
>Please feel free to write into the list with your ideas.
>
>--Jim Oberly, H-Rural Co-Moderator
>