User login

Who's online

There are currently 5 users and 46 guests online.

Online users

  • wilson
  • einmaleins
  • makerofthings
  • einmaleins
  • Austin American

Support OlyBlog

OlyBlog is run by volunteers who care about Olympia. If you like what we're doing, make a donation:

OlyBlog is powered by:

Who's new

  • Hylik
  • KybosInfo
  • radosintra
  • remitov
  • Kunstkamera

    Creative Commons License
 
Submitted by Mike on Thu, 03/20/2008 - 8:14am.

I read the discussion about the Triway development and noted the discussion about owning land. I think the earth does not belong to us, not any part of it, notwithstanding titles, surveys, etc. We belong to the earth. Chief Sealth's words come back to me:

Yonder sky that has wept tears of compassion upon my people for centuries untold, and

which to us appears changeless and eternal, may change. Today is fair. Tomorrow it may be overcast with clouds. My words are like the stars that never change. Whatever Seattle says, the great chief at Washington can rely upon with as much certainty as he can upon the return of the sun or the seasons. The white chief says that Big Chief at Washington sends us greetings of friendship and goodwill. This is kind of him for we know he has little need of our friendship in return. His people are many. They are like the grass that covers vast prairies. My people are few. They resemble the scattering trees of a storm-swept plain. The great, and I presume — good, White Chief sends us word that he wishes to buy our land but is willing to allow us enough to live comfortably. This indeed appears just, even generous, for the Red Man no longer has rights that he need respect, and the offer may be wise, also, as we are no longer in need of an extensive country.

There was a time when our people covered the land as the waves of a wind-ruffled sea cover its shell-paved floor, but that time long since passed away with the greatness of tribes that are now but a mournful memory. I will not dwell on, nor mourn over, our untimely decay, nor reproach my paleface brothers with hastening it, as we too may have been somewhat to blame.

Youth is impulsive. When our young men grow angry at some real or imaginary wrong, and disfigure their faces with black paint, it denotes that their hearts are black, and that they are often cruel and relentless, and our old men and old women are unable to restrain them. Thus it has ever been. Thus it was when the white man began to push our forefathers ever westward. But let us hope that the hostilities between us may never return. We would have everything to lose and nothing to gain. Revenge by young men is considered gain, even at the cost of their own lives, but old men who stay at home in times of war, and mothers who have sons to lose, know better.

Our good father in Washington—for I presume he is now our father as well as yours, since King George has moved his boundaries further north—our great and good father, I say, sends us word that if we do as he desires he will protect us. His brave warriors will be to us a bristling wall of strength, and his wonderful ships of war will fill our harbors, so that our ancient enemies far to the northward — the Haidas and Tsimshians — will cease to frighten our women, children, and old men. The in reality he will be our father and we his children. But can that ever be? Your God is not our God! Your God loves your people and hates mine! He folds his strong protecting arms lovingly about the paleface and leads him by the hand as a father leads an infant son. But, He has forsaken His Red children, if they really are His. Our God, the Great Spirit, seems also to have forsaken us. Your God makes your people wax stronger every day. Soon they will fill all the land. Our people are ebbing away like a rapidly receding tide that will never return. The white man’s God cannot love our people or He would protect them. They seem to be orphans who can look nowhere for help. How then can we be brothers? How can your God become our God and renew our prosperity and awaken in us dreams of returning greatness? If we have a common Heavenly Father He must be partial, for He came to His paleface children. We never saw Him. He gave you laws but had no word for His red children whose teeming multitudes once filled this vast continent as stars fill the firmament. No; we are two distinct races with separate origins and separate destinies. There is little in common between us.

To us the ashes of our ancestors are sacred and their resting place is hallowed ground. You wander far from the graves of your ancestors and seemingly without regret. Your religion was written upon tablets of stone by the iron finger of your God so that you could not forget. The Red Man could never comprehend or remember it. Our religion is the traditions of our ancestors — the dreams of our old men, given them in solemn hours of the night by the Great Spirit; and the visions of our sachems, and is written in the hearts of our people.

Your dead cease to love you and the land of their nativity as soon as they pass the portals of the tomb and wander away beyond the stars. They are soon forgotten and never return. Our dead never forget this beautiful world that gave them being. They still love its verdant valleys, its murmuring rivers, its magnificent mountains, sequestered vales and verdant lined lakes and bays, and ever yearn in tender fond affection over the lonely hearted living, and often return from the happy hunting ground to visit, guide, console, and comfort them.

Day and night cannot dwell together. The Red Man has ever fled the approach of the White Man, as the morning mist flees before the morning sun. However, your proposition seems fair and I think that my people will accept it and will retire to the reservation you offer them. Then we will dwell apart in peace, for the words of the Great White Chief seem to be the words of nature speaking to my people out of dense darkness.

It matters little where we pass the remnant of our days. They will not be many. The Indian’s night promises to be dark. Not a single star of hope hovers above his horizon. Sad-voiced winds moan in the distance. Grim fate seems to be on the Red Man’s trail, and wherever he will hear the approaching footsteps of his fell destroyer and prepare stolidly to meet his doom, as does the wounded doe that hears the approaching footsteps of the hunter.

A few more moon, a few more winters, and not one of the descendants of the mighty hosts that once moved over this broad land or lived in happy homes, protected by the Great Spirit, will remain to mourn over the graves of a people once more powerful and hopeful than yours. But why should I mourn at the untimely fate of my people? Tribe follows tribe, and nation follows nation, like the waves of the sea. It is the order of nature, and regret is useless. Your time of decay may be distant, but it will surely come, for even the White Man whose God walked and talked with him as friend to friend, cannot be exempt from the common destiny. We may be brothers after all. We will see.

We will ponder your proposition and when we decide we will let you know. But should we accept it, I here and now make this condition that we will not be denied the privilege without molestation of visiting at any time the tombs of our ancestors, friends, and children. Ever part of this soil is sacred in the estimation of my people. Every hillside, every valley, every plain and grove, has been hallowed by some sad or happy event in days long vanished. Even the rocks, which seem to be dumb and dead as the swelter in the sun along the silent shore, thrill with memories of stirring events connected with the lives of my people, and the very dust upon which you now stand responds more lovingly to their footsteps than yours, because it is rich with the blood of our ancestors, and our bare feet are conscious of the sympathetic touch. Our departed braves, fond mothers, glad, happy hearted maidens, and even the little children who lived here and rejoiced here for a brief season, will love these somber solitudes and at eventide they greet shadowy returning spirits. And when the last Red Man shall have perished, and the memory of my tribe shall have become a myth among the White Men, these shores will swarm with the invisible dead of my tribe, and when your children’s children think themselves alone in the field, the store, the shop, upon the highway, or in the silence of the pathless woods, they will not be alone. In all the earth there is no place dedicated to solitude. At night when the streets of your cities and villages are silent and you think them deserted, they will throng with the returning hosts that once filled them and still love this beautiful land. The White Man will never be alone.

Let him be just and deal kindly with my people, for the dead are not altogether powerless.

»

Thank You, Mike.

I don't have the words to express how much I enjoyed this post. History, and especially social justice related history, that brings perspectives of wisdom from people who have lived through similar things that we are currently experiencing is something that I value very much.

We can certainly learn about how to better live by listening to the living voices of people like Chief Sealth.




---------
Nonviolence Includes Animals:
audio
"PETA President Ingrid E. Newkirk's address to the International Nonviolence Conference in Bethlehem"
»

Interesting thoughts on property ownership from

a property owner.

"I de-clutch, you know." Juan Manuel Fangio when asked how he avoids flat-spotting his tires when he spins the car.

»

So you disagree?

Or is your comment implying that Mike is a hypocrite?
»

Chad,

the latter.

"I de-clutch, you know." Juan Manuel Fangio when asked how he avoids flat-spotting his tires when he spins the car.

»

OK, fair enough, but...

...how about this take:

When I was at Urban Studies at the UWT, I learned that looking at geography and land use through the perspective of economics can be useful, and to some extent I see Mike's post(s) as reflecting a strong affinity to what is referred at as "Marxist Geography"(MG).

Mike is expressing what alot of folks feel but find almost structurally impossible to do (live on Earth outside of a classed, economic system).

While I'm not gonna put words in anyones' mouth (I feel I'm already astray here), I'd like to comment that the only thing I have found to be a "real" solution is that owners must stop the capitalist cycle, and a great way to do that is through nonprofit ownership like trusts...I think that land trusts inside of city have potential to lower costs for existence as well as providing a platform for sustainable use.

 

»

I think you are likely correct about what Mike is

is referring to. Which is fine, although I disagree with it, it's not my point.

Mike like others here talk about radical changes in this country that would completely alter the American way of life, but yet do little to live that way themselves. Mike doesn't need to own property, but yet he chooses to and gains all the benefits of that system.

There are people here who likely live their talk. I get the sense that Chia is one of them. I also believe Phil and Meta do too. But there are others besides Mike that don't.

"I de-clutch, you know." Juan Manuel Fangio when asked how he avoids flat-spotting his tires when he spins the car.

»

The "American way of life" is...

...a fluid, ever-changing thing...

I'm not sure that dis-coupling economics from how we as Americans find residence is that much of a challenge to our shared values, and perhaps maybe a step in the correct direction when you consider how many times the US has been a leader and good example.

Stewardship as a model is a pretty strong calling, and I support contemplation on such ideals.

 

»

You don't know much about how I live

and yet are anxious to find an opportunity to call me a hypocrite despite your lack of knowledge. 

I really don't expect much else from you, but I will ask the docents to warn you regarding personal attacks and the veiled name-calling. It serves no one.  

»

I don't kid myself about land ownership.

A bank and I own "my place" and I have various taxing systems that clearly think they have a funding interest in the place and they can express an ownership interest in the place.  At best, I might view my interest in the place as a long term lease.  But in the final anaylsis, it is simply a comfortable and familiar place to hang my hat while I am here in this manifestation.

When I die, it does not cease to exist, I do.  Any property that anyone may have thought I "owned" is not held in perpetuity awaiting my return.  Hence, as Sealth may have noted, I belong to this earth, not the other way around.   

»

Please Chad, is it necessary to play along with this?

So you disagree?

Or is your comment implying that Mike is a hypocrite?

 

an apology would be appreciated for an assist with this line.
»

play?

Sorry Mike, as a fellow home-owner I'm as much of a hypocrite in JT's eyes on this issue as he obviously thinks you are-

-to be honest, the use of the term "interesting" in JT's comment to your post is what got me started (seemed disingenuous), and while I disagree with JT, I can't fault his logic.

»

Not so fast.

JT's "logic" seems to suggest that anyone who has any thought that is possible to perceive as at variance with any part of their behavior is a "hypocrite." It is an all too common ploy among those who wish to marginalize views that threaten their world view. I see no problem with questioning the assumptions of our economic system while still participating in it. That's called "thinking outside the box," not hypocrisy.


> It's OK to be nice. <
enpen's social contract
»

common ploy? or opinion?

I addressed alot of this in my big ole comment about geography, and I'll kindly ask you not to tell me what I'm saying or how to say it, OK?

I agree with JT, ownership is a choice in our economic system, and I'm as much a hypocrite as anyone...

..."thinking outside the box" is great, but what Mike is talking about is real change (and in my opinion, a change for the better), and that can't be accomplished without public (not private) ownership.

...from my point of view, you can certainly express your points without tying them to a critique on anothers' comments, but this ivory tower attitude you posses give me rope burns...

...it is like you are baiting for a debate on semantics.

>end my 2cents, last post on this thread, walking away<

»

Really?

I don't believe I told you how to say anything, and I'm at a loss as to why you would think that. I merely pointed out that JT's logic isn't so logical. It didn't address the substance of Mike's post -- it was just taking pot-shots -- with the intent of silencing a different way of thinking. Now, you are free to take that as an "ivory tower attitude," but it seems like straight-forward common sense to me.


> It's OK to be nice. <
enpen's social contract
»

Fair enough

but I will not call you a hypocrite or lead others to do that and I object to JT's constant verbal assaults.  And I will note again for the record that JT, when he was here in his Olycop incarnation, stated that he wanted to hit me.  This sticks with me given that this guy may someday be in front of me with his baton.  You think this guy would give me a fair shake?

Witness in this instance, JT's refusal to take responsibility for this personal attack, he got you to call me a hypocrite so that he could claim that he did not engage in name-calling.

This kind of behavior is a major concern when we are talking about the people in the community who are authorized to use force.  There is an interest in wielding force and avoiding accountability.  

Olyblog cannot host a civil discourse if JT is allowed to engage in these disingenous personal attacks.  Again, I call for the docents to put the "strikes"  in force.  

»

Mike,

First, your comment about me wanting to hit you is a LIE. I NEVER said that I wanted to hit you, and you know it. You are spinning things like you frequently do with me and a few others.

As far as insults and attacks, you have done so with me far more than I you.

If any strikes are to be put in force, I also ask that Mike receive like treatment.

"I de-clutch, you know." Juan Manuel Fangio when asked how he avoids flat-spotting his tires when he spins the car.

»

I see that you edited

I stand by my account.  You did in fact threaten me here and it was a sufficient threat that a person who was a docent at the time pm'd almost immediately to see how I felt about it. 

I may or may not be able to find your threatening post given that you have deleted significant parts of the record.  

I stand by my account. You have threatened me in the past on this site and that is significant given that you work in a capacity where you have occasion to carry a baton and strike people who stand in opposition to your personal politics.   

»

Well for the record,

as a number of people know that discussion well as to what I did write was read by many, I will be happy to recite here again.

I was posting about your style of writing having an edge to it, and I wrote "you could offer to buy me a beer and I would still get the urge to punch you in the nose." Clearly not threatening to hit you, nor was I suggesting that I wanted to hit you. I was pointing out that even with a gesture of kindness/friendship, your style is enough to piss off the Pope.

As we discussed in PMs, you sir are nothing more than a cyber-bully.

"I de-clutch, you know." Juan Manuel Fangio when asked how he avoids flat-spotting his tires when he spins the car.

»

I favor a single payer health care system...

... yet, until that happens, shall I refuse to carry health insurance for myself and my daughter? I don't think so. If criticizing a system I am stuck with makes me a hypocrite, I guess anyone who envisions something better is subject to that accusation.
»

And I suppose,

the Governator is just "thinking outside the box" when he supports the Green movement, yet continues to drive his Hummer and fly daily round trip from Southern Calif to work in Sacramento.

Of if Norm was working with the Brady foundation to remove guns from society, but leaving the meetings with them and stopping by to shoot a few rounds of Skeet on the way home, that wouldn't be hypocritical either.

"I de-clutch, you know." Juan Manuel Fangio when asked how he avoids flat-spotting his tires when he spins the car.

»

So...

...am I a hypocrite because I don't like our health care system but I use it anyway?
»

Apparently so.

well said, sir.

And for the record, I do not think your decision is anymore hypocritical than mine. It is an accommodation of a system that we exist in until something better can be developed.   

»

The speech is probably a fabrication

to align with Victorian sensibilities of the day and popular myth of the noble savage. This speech was published in the Seattle Sunday Star by Henry Smith more than 20 30 years after the incident where Sealth allegedly spoke. Here is Smith's introduction to the speech, with the same style and flourish that permiates the words attributed to Sealth.

"CHIEF SEATTLE'S SPEECH"

Seattle Sunday Star, October 29, 1887

His Native Eloquence, Etc., Etc. by Henry A. Smith Scraps from a Diary: Chief Seattle - A gentleman By Instinct

10th article in the series Early Reminiscences

Old Chief Seattle was the largest Indian I ever saw, and by far the noblest-looking. He stood 6 feet full in his moccasins, was broad-shouldered, deep-chested, and finely proportioned. His eyes were large, intelligent, expressive and friendly when in repose, and faithfully mirrored the varying moods of the great soul that looked through them. He was usually solemn, silent, and dignified, but on great occasions moved among assembled multitudes like a Titan among Lilliputians, and his lightest word was law.

When rising to speak in council or to tender advice, all eyes were turned upon him, and deep-toned, sonorous, and eloquent sentences rolled from his lips like the ceaseless thunders of cataracts flowing from exhaustless fountains, and his magnificent bearing was as noble as that of the most cultivated military chieftain in command of the forces of a continent. Neither his eloquence, his dignity, or his grace were acquired. They were as native to his manhood as leaves and blossoms are to a flowering almond.

His influence was marvelous. He might have been an emperor but all his instincts were democratic, and he ruled his loyal subjects with kindness and paternal benignity.

He was always flattered by marked attention from white men, and never so much as when seated at their tables, and on such occasions he manifested more than anywhere else the genuine instincts of a gentleman.

When Governor Stevens first arrived in Seattle and told the natives he had been appointed commissioner of Indian affairs for Washington Territory, they gave him a demonstrative reception in front of Dr. Maynard's office, near the waterfront on Main Street. The bay swarmed with canoes and the shore was lined with a living mass of swaying, writhing, dusky humanity, until old Chief Seattle's trumpet-toned voice rolled over the immense multitude, like the startling reveille of a bass drum, when silence became as instantaneous and perfect as that which follows a clap of thunder from a clear sky.

The governor was then introduced to the native multitude by Dr. Maynard, and at once commenced, in a conversational, plain, and straightforward style, an explanation of his mission among them, which is too well understood to require capitulation.

When he sat down, Chief Seattle arose with all the dignity of a senator, who carries the responsibilities of a great nation on his shoulders. Placing one hand on the, governor's head and slowly pointing heavenward with the index finger of the other, he commenced his memorable address in solemn and impressive tones.

There are no other accounts of this speech to be found. Read more here and here.

»

You know, Gug, we, our ancestors,

really pushed the indigenous people off their lands pretty brutally and you seem too anxious to deny the possibility that Sealth said something back in 1854 that bore some resemblance to the notes regarding the speech. 

Part of the reason that Sealth's comments were not transcribed contemporaneously probably had to do with the lack of consideration afforded to tribes and indigenous people in 1854.  I think it might be prudent, kind, and generous to consider the possibility that an indigenous man named Sealth stood up in 1854 and talked about his thoughts on the loss of his tribe's lands.  Is it possible that you are disenfranchising that man all over again with your strong sense that this whole speech is a fabrication?  

Does it seem beyond comprehension that a native american might have felt compelled to speak about the demise of his people and their way of life?

»

First off, I'm not familier

First off, I'm not familier with the facts of this particular historical case. But in principle, you need some sort of historical evidence to justify attributing words to someone . . . and if it was recorded at the time, so much the better.

Sure, he may have said something along these lines. He may have been quite elequent, quite intelligent. There might have been any number of reasons his words wouldn't have been recorded . . . but without a record, it's hard to draw any conclusion as to what he did say. That being said, 30-years is within a lifespan. It's a timeframe in which first hand accounts would still be possible. Also, it is my understanding that some cultures - perhaps especially those without a written language - have very strong oral traditions, which could increase the possibility of something like this being remembered (and repeated) prior to being "recorded".

I don't think we should be taking the question of whether this speach was actually made personally, though. It's a historical question. It requires historical evidence.

»

You need to back off a bit.

Your are on the edge of calling me a some kind of bigot. Do not confuse my affection for historical accuracy with being "anxious to deny the possibility that Sealth said something..." I think a retraction is very much in order.
»

Bigotry has many shades

from the outright bigotry of being offensive for the sake of offense, example:  hanging nooses in trees to offend African Americans, to more socially accepted ideas that are so much taken for granted that many people do not even realize the bigotry or violence in the assumptions. 

Like Chia's point about the interspecies violence that is assumed with discussion about eating meat, I think your sense that Sealth's famous speech is a fabrication, assumes and furthers much negative and dismissive attitudes toward native americans.  It is dominant culture stuff and you may not be aware of how offensive this might feel to native americans.  

I will reserve an apology or retraction until I hear back from the Suquamish elders with their thoughts.  

 

»

Mike...

Contrary to your assumption, it seems just as plausible to me that the issue Guglielmo raised could be based on a concern about the words of Native Americans being manipulated and/or fabricated by White Americans.


> It's OK to be nice. <
enpen's social contract
»

True enough, but I would like to wait and see

if the Suquamish tribal elders claim this speech, these thoughts as part of their oral tradition, if they believe this speech is based on the thoughts and words of Sealth before I would come out and say it is a fabrication.  The de facto disenfranchisement of the fabrication allegation is disturbing without regard to Gug's motiives or intentions.  Frankly, I don't know what Gug's motives or intentions were, I am simply pointing out that the impact of his fabrication statement is very disempowering.  

Do you follow? 

Language and communication is nuanced and powerful.  Intention and motive is not always needed for language and communication to be bigoted, hateful, etc.   That is why I mention Chia's powerful reminder about interspecies violence inherent in discussion about how to cook a nice roast.  Seems like a fine recipe exchange in it's initial manifestation, there is a consciousness-raising element to pointing out the inherent violence that is presented and sanctioned without any evil intention.  It's simply a mainstream, dominant culture attitude that killing animals is not a wrong thing.   

»

That's not good enough

You have no right to impune my motives in this public forum and to accuse me of furthering negative and dismissive attitudes toward native americans. Don't go there. I have done NOTHING to deserve that characterization. Your behavior is inexcusable!
»

Me thinks he doth protest too much

in the matter of race and disenfranchisement, it behooves those of who in the dominant culture to be very careful.  Our intentions and our impact may not align. 

As I said before, I will wait on the tribal elders.  But take a breath.  Impune is impugn I believe.  No need to SHOUT.  

If you can be specific and quote what I said about your motives in my posts, I may be able to respond.  Frankly, I don't think I can discern your motives, I am seeing impact, disenfranchisement, a lack of consideration for the possibility that the power and eloquent thought in the speech attributed to Sealth, might actually represent Sealth's actual thoughts and words.  

I find your behavior excusable, but I am hoping that you will avoid excuses and reflect on the disenfranchisement, the disempowerment that you put out when you come out so strongly that the Sealth speech is a fabrication.  That is not good enough.  

Will you agree to wait and see if the tribal elders claim this oral tradition? 

»

No need to wait

You have merely demonstrated that Olyblog is not necessarily a safe place to engage in a free and open exchange of ideas. I will simply avoid any further interactions with you rather than risk being labelled a bigot or worse.
»

as you wish

nt

I tell you frankly that you are refusing to consider the impact of your communication and you are quite indignant, but I think you should reflect on why you are so alarmed.   

»

I'm pretty uncomfortable...

...with the tone that you're taking here Mike. I think you're looking for enemies in the wrong places. Please try not to cast aspersions on people who are contributing positively to the discussion.


> It's OK to be nice. <
enpen's social contract
»

Apology extended

Gug wrote:   Your are on the edge of calling me a some kind of bigot. Do not confuse my affection for historical accuracy with being "anxious to deny the possibility that Sealth said something..." I think a retraction is very much in order.
 
For the record, I do not think you are a bigot. Sincere apology extended if you felt that was my view of you.
»

Accepted Mike

And very much appreciated.
»

heres wikipedias thoughts

From Wikipedia:

There is a controversy about a speech by Sealth concerning the concession of native lands to the settlers.

Even the date and location of the speech has been disputed,[4] but the most common version is that on March 11, 1854, Sealth gave a speech at a large outdoor gathering in Seattle. The meeting had been called by Governor Isaac Ingalls Stevens to discuss the surrender or sale of native land to white settlers. Doc Maynard introduced Stevens, who then briefly explained his mission, which was already well understood by all present.[1]

Sealth then rose to speak. He rested his hand upon the head of the much smaller Stevens, and declaimed with great dignity for an extended period. No one alive today knows what he said; he spoke in the Lushootseed language, and someone translated his words into Chinook Indian trade language, and a third person translated that into English.

Some years later, Dr. Henry A. Smith wrote down an English version of the speech, based on Smith's notes. It was a flowery text in which Sealth purportedly thanked the white people for their generosity, demanded that any treaty guarantee access to Native burial grounds, and made a contrast between the God of the white people and that of his own. Smith noted that he had recorded "...but a fragment of his [Sealth's] speech".

In 1891, Frederick James Grant's History of Seattle, Washington reprinted Smith's version. In 1929, Clarence B. Bagley's History of King County, Washington reprinted Grant's version with some additions. In 1931, John M. Rich reprinted the Bagley version in Chief Seattle's Unanswered Challenge. In the 1960s, articles by William Arrowsmith and the growth ofenvironmentalism revived interest in Sealth's speech. Ted Perry introduced anachronistic material, such as shooting buffalo from trains, into a new version for a movie called "Home"[5], produced for the Southern Baptist Convention's Christian Radio and Television Commission.[6] The movie sunk without a trace, but this newest and most fictional version is the most widely known. Albert Furtwangler analyzes the evolution of Sealth's speech in Answering Chief Seattle (1997).[7]

The speech attributed to Sealth, as re-written by others, has been widely cited as "powerful, bittersweet plea for respect of Native American rights and environmental values"[5], but there is little evidence that he actually spoke it. A similar controversy surrounds a purported 1855 letter from Sealth to President Franklin Pierce, which has never been located and, based on internal evidence, is considered "an unhistorical artifact of someone's fertile literary imagination".[4]

»

Despite

Despite the speech being in question, I still think Mike is right on in his views on property. 
»

Not defending poseurs at all.

I will say that if one has radical beliefs that would dramatically change society, it is sometimes difficult to live them out while living in the context of current societal norms. You rarely see primitivists who actually live in the woods, for example, because laws prevent it in most places.

image
»

I am familiar with all of the questions about the Sealth speech.

I posted the most original version, there is little question that the speech was translated through at least two, possibly three languages and a cultural filter before we see the notes.   Then the notes and speech were refiltered and represented again in the 70's in the light of Earth Day and those sensibilities.  The oldest notes from the speech likely have some nuances that may not have been Sealth's, but I think there is no historical question that Sealth gave a speech on the day in question and what I have posted is the earliest and least disturbed presentation of that speech.  I think the speech as presented may cover at least some of Sealth's speech from that day long ago. 
»

Actually, there are questions

about the speech and the day it was given. Other than Smith's newspaper account 30 years after the fact, there is no record.
»

Yes, my bad, date of the speech is also disputed

I rely on this site which I think is as accurate and measured as we can find on this man who may or may not have said some pretty profound things on the occasion of the loss of his way of life. 

Are you really certain that you want to disenfranchise this man and what are reported to have been his words based on the poor record?

I choose to give Sealth the benefit of the doubt and believe that he may have said the the things attributed to him.  The journalistic record is poor, I don't think we can know for certain, but what does it say that a white man reportedly took notes of the speech and kept the notes for thirty years?  As a means to perpetrate a hoax, that's seems like a stretch to me.  I think the more likely reason for the notes of the speech to be kept for thirty years was that a white man felt very moved by the speech at the time it was made given the translation that the white man heard and that much later the white man may have done the best he could to reconstruct the translation of the speech he heard based on his notes.  

»

I'm with Gug on this.

What we accept as history can be based on many different things, but it has to be based on something. Making assumptions or believing assumptions, no matter how happy they are, is rarely logical, in my opinion.

image
»

Native Americans

Is there anyone in OlyBlog who can comment from the local Native American point of view?

»

I'm hoping so.

I'm hoping so.


---------
Nonviolence Includes Animals:
audio
"PETA President Ingrid E. Newkirk's address to the International Nonviolence Conference in Bethlehem"
»

Very constructive suggestion

I will ask Sealth's community for their understanding of his words and their authenticity.  I will post back if I receive a response.  
»

I sent the following message to the Suquamish Tribe

Greetings to Wayne and Morrie,

I pray this message finds you both well and I hope you have a moment to reflect and respond to a question regarding Chief Seattle's famous 1854 speech that is carried on your website. 

I recently posted that wonderful speech on Olyblog and several folks there have stated their opinion that the speech is a fabrication.  I don't think so, I think it reflects a profound sense of indigenous sensibilities, but it has been suggested that given the disagreement regarding the authenticity of the speech, that it would be helpful to hear a native american perspective on its authenticity. 

My own sense about this is partly outrage that dominant culture individuals want to disenfranchise a powerful native american speaker and thinker by disputing the authenticity of the words of Sealth's speech, but I have nothing more than the sense of violation that accompanies the disenfranchisement. 

I would understand if you choose not to respond and in any case, I wish you and your families well. 

Sincerely,

Mike
»

Ever get the feeling that any minute now...

...comments will go bye-bye

»

too bad if we don't give the Suquamish Tribe time

to respond, but yes, I have that feeling also. 

Is conflict hyperlocal? 

»

Mike,

Please walk away from this thread. More than one of your comments here violate the social contract, and you put yourself at risk of a suspension if you continue on this track. Perhaps taking a walk and reading some Basho would help.

image
»

I agree with Rob.


> It's OK to be nice. <
enpen's social contract
»

Basho is good. Thanks

nt
»

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

OlyBlog.net

OlyBlog is devoted to citizen journalism, including hyperlocal news and discussion specifically about Olympia, Washington. If you care about this community and are tired of corporate media, then this is the place for you.

If you'd like to contribute, please register for an account. Here is a list of local news beats that need to be covered. You can post your news as a personal blog entry, and it will be reviewed (and possibly edited) for promotion to the front page. Once you've established a record of responsible blogging, you can become an autonomous user. You can also send news via email. All members of OlyBlog agree to abide by our comment and fair use policies. If you are frustrated about something said in a comment thread, go here.

Now playing at:

Latest Classified Ads

Get Firefox!


More Flickr photos tagged with "olympia" and "washington"

OlyBlog is a site for news and discussion about Olympia, Washington.
free hit counter