I enjoy reading, whether fiction or historical, as I think most people do. But I’m also able understand and separate the two genres.
An authors purpose when writing fiction can be merely to entertain or to promote a specific viewpoint, an agenda you might say.
There was a time within our communities that were peaceful, and only truth was spoken for the great shame it was not to-we genuinely worked to that end and knew in doing so it was to the benefit of all.
There were no drug addictions, no alcoholism, no gangbangers, no rapes-elders were respected and listened to, not vying for titles or bestowing them upon ourselves.
True leaders and elders spoke and were listened to in the sure knowledge they had proved themselves and the welfare of the community was a priority to them.
A medicine person would never have corrupted or allowed the corruption of ceremonies-the thought of selling participation would have been beyond them and would have not been tolerated had they entertained the idea, much less selling licenses to anyone to conduct one.
What a major difference between now and then, and the works of fiction that are so routinely penned serve as a proof of this difference, as does the paucity of understanding, embracing, and adhering to traditional ways.
It’s all about FB, youtube videos, and sites now-each pledging that what is presented is the way, a truth stretching back into antiquity, passed down through the generations, and remaining pristine.
Everything is for sale,and everything has become tainted as the result of this reality-yet the target audience is appeased, convinced that although they may not be indigenous they have a “red heart” and at least wish us well.
The “red heart” for the most part is a little more than a promotional gimmick created to separate the unsuspecting from their money, and I’ve often wondered if for instance a person who is enamoured of Japanese customs could be said to have a yellow heart?
Or what about a person who has aligned with the civil rights movement-could it be said they have a black heart?
How about non Hispanics who marched with the UFW, could it be said they had a brown heart?
No you say-why is that? Is it because it might not be perceived to have the same cachet, or because neither the Japanese, the Black, or the Hispanic communities are offering a feather to braid into one’s hair? Or maybe because they aren’t offering any ceremonies for sale?
I’m really curious about this and would welcome an explanation, a personal perspective from a non indigenous person.
I’d like to know how we as a people have gone from protecting our beliefs , customs, and languages to allowing any among us to offer them as trade goods?
How any not of the nations can claim to be a firekeeper or even attempt to champion the hang around the fort drugstore Indians among us?
Criminals are criminals, it doesn’t matter what ethnicity they are -people who wantonly murder are murderers, people who burn, ransack communities, and take hostages are arsonists, thieves, and terrorists-and again it doesn’t matter who they are or what their ethnicity is.
These are universally recognized and accepted definitions-yet for some they don’t apply. Why is that, is it because they promote themselves, these murderers, arsonist, and rapist, as being victims?
If so I’d like to know how that translates to the ability to victimize your own-how that translates to liberation and patriotism?
Is it the result of works of fiction? Fact is they are what and who they are -and it is what it is it , doesn’t take a “red heart” to understand that.
There are good people from all ethnicities that are good friends, who genuinely care and don’t go about sticking a feather in their hair and saying they have a red heart, or that they are a firekeeper -we know who they are and appreciate them, just as we know who their counterparts are, and speaking for myself I have no appreciation for the latter.