OK. The powwow performances are of course in the original. Too many
years--what was it, Cheyenne? Lakota? Still an interesting question.
Powwows, for those who've never been to one: I'll start with the
word--corruption of a Massachusetts Indian word for shaman, becomes a
healing or magical ceremony, becomes a meeting for discussion whether of
whites or Indians, becomes a meeting or conference of Indians. In this last
sense it denotes a gathering of members of various tribes to compete in
dancing, drumming, and singing. Prizes are also given for the best costumes
and for crafts. These are pretty deracinated affairs--the word is
algonkian, taken into English in New England in the early 17th century, but
almost all of the participants are either Cherokee or from Western Tribes.
The competitions almost always involve Plains costumes and Plains and
Navajo dances and singing. So Keresan speakers from the Rio Grande valley
pueblos will wear Sioux war bonnets. In the face of the majority culture a
pan-Indianness that didn't exist (except in limited form in Pontiac's and
Tecumseh's wars in the late 18th and early 20th centuries) is being
celebrated. Non-Indians are invited and ofeten charged admission. The foods
served, hominy soup and something called an Indian Taco, is the crude
version of some Mexican staples incorporated into their diet by Navajos in
the 19th century. One of the local-to-San-Diego Kumeyaay bands, whose
staple was acorns, serve these foods at the powwow they host every year.
So even for the very few who would understand the chant it has been
recontextualized as part of a homogenized Indianness created as a
resistance to the homogenizing pressures of the majority Euroamerican
culture. How's that for context?
At 07:33 PM 12/6/2000 -0500, [log in to unmask] wrote:
>And in the context of POW-WOWS???
>
>
>At 04:14 PM 12/6/00 -0800, you wrote:
>>My reservations as to denotation in the absence of context.
>>
>>At 06:09 PM 12/6/2000 -0500, [log in to unmask] wrote:
>>>your "reservations"? (thank you!)
>>>
>>>
>>>At 02:55 PM 12/6/00 -0800, you wrote:
>>>>I've been at powwows and seen them performed, and I've also heard
>>>>recordings. As to the words themselves, in either language these are
chants
>>>>with precious few words repeated several times. Given my reservations I
>>>>meant to say that the word meaniongs are exact and the chanting almost
>>>>identical. How one would bring them over complete with context is a poser,
>>>>and I suspect impossible.
>>>>
>>>>At 04:33 PM 12/6/2000 EST, you wrote:
>>>>>Mark Weiss wrote:
>>>>><<Jerry's a good friend. The "Horse Songs," which I assume you refer to,
>>>>are not my favorites of his work, but I don't have much use for
performance
>>>>poetry in general. At any rate I think they lose their usefulness when
seen
>>>>only on the page. But they are accurate--they replicate the originals with
>>>>great exactitude. Which is another problem for me: my sense is that they
>>>>fail to incorporate the context or translate the significance within the
>>>>culture of origin into terms understandable by members of the target
>>>>culture. Translation between cultures as well as languages is what
>>>>translators are supposed to do, in my humble.>>
>>>>>
>>>>>My reaction is based on a casual reading years ago, so I'll defer to you.
>>>>Certainly agree that translation between cultures is the thorniest of
>>>>problems. But given your own reservations, what can it mean to say that
>>>>these versions "replicate the originals with great exactitude?" And how do
>>>>you know this? Do you know any of the languages in question?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Alan
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
|