The title page of William Apess’s conversion narrative insists
twice that the landscape where the author was born determines his identity: the
book is titled A Son of the Forest
and subtitled The Experiences of William
Apes, a Native of the Forest. Initially, Apess’s forest may seem to be a
familiar nineteenth-century topos, the generic home of the savages, noble or
otherwise, who were the subjects of colonialist narratives of extermination,
disappearance, or assimilation. Indeed, after his work was rediscovered, some cultural
historians represented Apess as a Christianized Indian who adopted the
language, ideology, and identity of his oppressors. Other readers, though, have demonstrated convincingly that
Apess strategically adapted and redeployed early national political and
religious discourses in order to condemn Jacksonian Indian policy, protest conditions
on New England reservations, and lay the foundations for a radical pan-Indian
political consciousness. I hope to contribute to the developing appreciation
for Apess’s rhetorical “in-genuity” (21) by showing how his autobiography materializes
the primitive forest of early national political discourse, evoking rural New
England woodlands that were the physical environment Apess’s Pequot ancestors inhabited
as common property before they were uprooted by racist settlers. By insisting
on the forest’s materiality as the foundation of collective bodily life, Apess
also gives it a new symbolic meaning, transforming it from a primeval wilderness
into the homeland of an indigenous republicanism that he articulates in the
language of anti-racist Methodism. Moreover,
I hope to show that Apess redirects the Methodist discourses of temperance and
steadiness in order to stage both his own embodiment and his survivance of what
he implies is the common material inheritance of all natives in the early
national period: both alienation from the land and bodily contamination by
white blood and toxic alcohol.
Hi Lance. This seems like a really compelling project. I'm interested in hearing more about the idea of "property" you're working with here, in light of indigenous ideologies of land, ownership, and kinship. I'd like to hear more about how Apess negotiates competing ideologies about this physical environment, and to what purpose.
ReplyDeleteIn addition, I'd like to hear more about what you mean by "bodily contamination by white blood" in light of notions of biological vs. cultural kinship. How do Pequot and English settler-colonist structures of kinship inform Apess' discourse, in light of the metaphor of racialized "blood"? Does this metaphor function any differently here than it does in other (legal, governmental) contexts, for example?