The first relates to Boudinott’s address, which focuses on the “improvements” of the Cherokees. How much did white missionaries really help the Natives? How much assimilation did conversion really require? and 2. And whites, not Indians, become those in need of conversion (58).” This raises two issues: 1. The introduction to Apess’ The Experiences of Five Christian Indians of the Pequot Tribe states, “”Conversion,” which for most white readers would conventionally have read as a synonym for assimilation, becomes the medium, instead, for an affirmation of Indian pride and autonomy. William Apess: Praying Indians as the Ideal Christians? Will you push them from you, or will you save them? Let humanity answer.” Is this humanity? Is it just the fact that we are all of the same species deserving of the same rights, or as Boudinot defines of the same flesh and blood born of the same God? Is it culture or human nature? What is humanity? When he spoke of the future he said, “They hang upon your mercy as to a garment. When Boudinot referred to the Cherokee Nation he said, “…she pleads only for assistance to become respectable as a nation, to enlighten and ennoble her sons, and to ornament her daughters with modesty and virtue.” This language also highlights the contrasts and stereotypes we have discussed in class the dependent Indian and his salvation through the generosity of the white people. By referring to Christian values, such as that the Cherokee are the children of the same God as white and black men, he built up a sense of humanity as the saving grace of both Native Americans and white peoples. Throughout the speech, Boudinot emphasized the acculturation of the Cherokee to Christian morality as a great sign of improvement. Further still, he suggested that by helping the Cherokee “complete her civilization” the white influence may help other nations be saved from their savage ways. “I ask you, shall red men live, or shall they be swept from the earth?” as if to say that the lives of the Cherokee rest solely in the hands of these white listeners. In fact, he even went so far as to address the whites as if they were gods. On page 13, Boudinot stated that, “such a paper could not fail to create much interest in the American community” in a way that would have a “powerful influence on the advancement of the Indians themselves.” He continued by regarding the white audience as sympathetic philanthropists whose quest to help the Indians could only be strengthened with an educational paper. In comparison, the language in his argument regarding the potential white readership carries a different tone. To white philanthropists, he appealed for a printing press that would be used to educate and improve the Cherokee. ![]() The word “improved” is used multiple times, illustrating the distance between the original Cherokee condition and the current state on the road to white perfection. He called his people “ignorant,” wallowing in the darkness of barbarity, and hence prejudiced. ![]() He adopted white vocabulary to refer to his own people as savages in need of civilizing. There is a stark contrast in the language Boudinot used when he remarked about his fellow Cherokees and the white members of his audience. ![]() His opinions on this issue were not popular among his fellow Cherokee people and after moving out west with his wife (who was white) and family, Boudinot was assassinated. Boudinot’s efforts were quite successful in acquiring the funds needed for the purchase of a printing press that later facilitated the creation of the first Native American, bilingual paper – the Cherokee Phoenix. Four years after the speech, the Indian Removal Act was signed into law.īoudinot was a supporter of the voluntary removal of the Cherokees and was a signer of the New Echota Treaty (1835), which permitted the forced removal of the Native Americans living east of the Mississippi River that ultimately led to the Trail of Tears (1839). Elias Boudinot of the Cherokee Nation spoke and recorded this speech during a time of great turmoil between the Native Americans and the US government. First I want to start by addressing the author and historic context of this speech.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |