Remeber This

What I noticed first about Wilsons book is how she introduced her topic and how she made us follow her through the story. I think of myself to be a strong leader and have a hard time following others yet Wilson was so strong with her intentions of Remember This that I had no choice and fell into her story. She clearly situates herself within the indigenous community, she is clear of her intentions, understands her role as a researcher, but not only that, also as a listener and a learner which can be attributed to the role that kin and kinship plays in the Dakota nation.

When I say that she is clear and ambiguous about her intentions - she clearly states these in the first chapter. She identifies who she is, who and what she will be studying and who it will benefit. She is telling the story of Eli Taylor because he wanted to share the story for future generations. She acknowledges this, agrees and then identifies herself as someone who will be able to engage with Eli Taylor and act as a medium for these stories to flow. As she satiates "good minds are useless without good hearts" and I think these are obvious in her the research methods. She suggests that any information on indigenous perspectives that are available should be taken with a grain of salt because they have probably been translated and interpreted by non-indigenous people. Why do you think these would have been altered?

Questions she asked when approaching the reasearch topic..
What are the motivations behind this interest?
How will the information be used, and in what kind of context?
Is enough known about the culture from which the information will be extracted?
Who initiated the topic to be studied, Indigenous people or a scholar interested in a particular aspect of Indigenous history?

I would like to know, because obviously eveyone in here has had experience in the academy.. do you think of these things? Why? Why not? What changed?

She goes on to say that researchers generally attempt to search out stories and provoke responses, memories and motives in order to build their story or case. Just think of a reporter. While this may be perfectly acceptable she suggests that you do not do this with the elders as they know their role within the culture. There role is to tell the stories and yours is to listen. Listen so that you may repeat the story afterwards as it was told to you. Not just the words but the expressions and emotions.. which leads me into the oral history and oral traditions...

Oral history: The stories one generates from their life experiences.

describing the oral tradition as something that is living and ongoing as an individual and communal responsibility. which is reflective as how colonization is the deprivation of experience, Wilson points out how, “not only…personal experiences affect a person’s life, but also how missed experiences equally affect them.” Oral tradition is important than, so that the Dakota people can still pass along messages. Eli Taylor was unable to participate in certain ceremonies but still able to pass down messages and teachings because while they were not party of his oral history, they are imbedded in his oral tradition. While we value the stories of direct personal experience, we also value the stories and teachings that have been passed on and embodied for generations.

Continuing on the notion of missed experiences.. let’s revisit the story of Eli as a young boy playing in the streets. His mother wanted to teach him herself and teach him the traditions and ideals that she had learned growing up. Not truisting the conformist educational system that the province had to offfer. What woudl you do in that situation knowing what you know now.. Would you leave the boy in the care of the mother? Why or why not?