The Future of Native American Literature: A Conversation with John E. Smelcer

Certainly the popularity of multiculturally based literature has enriched, broadened, and challenged traditional Western understanding of the human condition, particularly in the relationship between humans and the physical and spiritual world. This popularity does, however, raise a number of issues. In particular, the increased visibility of literature by Native American authors poses difficult critical and ethical questions. For example, how does western literature position itself relative to the diversity of Native American cultures and literature, a genre that has historically been marginalized? What vocabulary do we use to describe literatures that have been deeply interwoven with the cultural and spiritual lives of a people, and only recently included written texts as part of that tradition? Who has the right to critique the works? As nonnative readers, can we critique the literature at all? Perhaps the most contentious issue centers on our notion of the "Indian author" and how this authorship is validated as being "authentic." This discussion is important for two reasons. First, defining who is an "Indian author" has a direct bearing on the shape of the discourse of American Indian literature and its expression of Native American culture. Historically, this discourse has been shaped by non-Indians. Second, the narratives of Native American peoples are inextricably interwoven with the meta-narratitve that America uses to describe itself. While an in-depth exploration of these questions is beyond the scope of these prefatory comments, some mention of the issues involved is helpful in contextualizing the following interview. From a historical/traditional perspective, the very concept of individual "Indian authorship" within a communal tribal setting is problematic. In this context, what would be understood as individual creative expression, in Western terms, would be considered part of the communal cultural and spiritual fabric of a tribe or clan. The "ownership" or "authorship" of those expressions, be they stories, songs, dances, or objects, often belonged to the tribe or clan from where they emerged. Indian authorship is a phenomenon of the shift from a strictly oral-based culture to one that includes written texts. Crow-Creek-Sioux author and scholar Elizabeth Cook-Lynn suggests that we "challenge the generic development of what is called Native American fiction by using the idea that there are such concepts as (1) moral fiction and (2) indigenous/tribally specific literary traditions from which the imagination emerges" (131). The concept of moral fiction as suggested by Cook-Lynn implies that works of native authors bear some responsibilities to their respective communities and that these works should avoid introspection and self-promotion in deference to the communal good of the tribe. Similarly, the forms and traditions adopted by the native author should be tribally specific and reflect those traditional forms. These standards do not, however, reflect the "authority of experience," which is a criterion of authenticity favored by native authors of mixed blood and those who grew up in urban environments separated from their traditional lands. These authors represent new voices, and their position in the canon of Native American literature is unclear. How do we understand the importance of such things as blood quantum, participation in traditional activities, living on tribal lands, the use of traditional language, utilization of tribally specific literary forms, and the creation of fiction that is morally responsible to the tribal community from which it emerges? The works of poet, author, and scholar John E. Smelcer (born 1963) can provide us with insights into these and other issues that surround the lives and works of authors and creative artists generally described as working within a Native American cultural heritage. …