The Nuance of Indigeneity within the Academic Sphere

The following was originally meant to be a portion of the first chapter of my thesis. Since writing it, I have been able to read more, learn more, and find more mentors. I decided to include this chapter because it still says many things I agree with, but I also feel it demonstrates the compromised work that comes from having biased professors attempt to hold your ideas and potential hostage. The professor in question was removed from her post shortly after i turned this paper in due to widespread displeasure with her methods. Part of the mission of this project is to show that there is always room for growth. not everything can be perfect at first, but there will always be chances to improve. This chapter makes me grateful that this is a living project and that i can continue to document my ever-changing views.

Table of Contents:

• Indigenous Studies: A complicated history with Anthropology at the Center

• Indigenous Space and Place within Academia

  • Indigenous Faculty

  • Indigenous Students

  • Indigenous Space

• Endnotes

Indigenous Studies: A complicated history with Anthropology at the Center

At the center of this thesis lies the question, “Why should Indigenous knowledge matter to Eurocentric institutions?” This question tends to be looming and unspoken at the negotiation table between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people as they attempt to determine what university spaces will be formed to cater to Indigeneity and what resources should be allocated to fund these spaces. Traditionally, Indigenous studies has been left as a niche subject for anthropologists, historians, and archaeologists alike, all observing as outsiders the “spectacle” of Indigenous ways of being. The history of Indigenous studies within higher education is complicated to say in the least, yet, it is important to begin to answer the question of the value of Indigenous knowledge in higher education by first examining this complicated history.

The most instrumental discipline in this history would be anthropology. Anthropologists have been such a presence in Indigenous communities that much of our notable writing as Indigenous people, has been commentary on the interaction between young, curious academics visiting Indigenous communities periodically to learn about our ways, only to misrepresent our cultures upon returning to their home institutions. This in turn has created an atmosphere of distrust within Native communities. In response to this, Native American academic, Vine Deloria Jr., wrote a chapter on the issue within his piece, Custer Died for Your Sins, which has since been hailed as one of the most influential pieces of Native American literature.1 Furthermore, this chapter on Anthropologists has been the most debated, inspiring other books and articles from academics responding to the biting commentary on the strained relationship between Indigenous people and anthropologists. One of these books I have been using as reference within my research is Indians and Anthropologists. The book is comprised of a series of articles written by various academics in response to the Deloria chapter, and proves helpful in looking into the variety of perspectives concerning the phenomenon. Within the introduction, a passage from Deloria is referenced which perfectly describes the relationship.

Perhaps we should suspect the real motives of the academic community. They have the Indian field well defined and under control. Their concern is not the ultimate policy that will affect the Indian people, but merely the creation of new slogans and doctrines by which they can climb the university totem pole. Reduction of people to ciphers for purposes of observation appears to be inconsequential to the anthropologist when compared with immediate benefits he can derive, the production of further prestige, and the chance to appear as the high priest of American society, orienting and manipulating to his heart’s desire.

This passage encompasses the current relationship between academics, anthropologists to be exact, and Indigenous communities precisely. Ideally there would be an exchange between the two, but instead we often find non-Indigenous people able to build their entire academic career off of the observation of a culture that is not their own, they apply inaccessible terms to describe what they have observed, and in the end, nothing of substance is returned to the community. While this rhetoric may sound incredibly biting, it is important to keep in mind that anthropology has very tangible consequences within Indigenous communities, especially in respect to settler states that create policy for their Native populations. Historically, anthropologists have been seen as the “experts” though they are merely outsiders, and they are called upon to testify on the “Indian problem” and matters of Indigenous relations. Specifically, anthropologists have been called to testify before the Indian Claims Commission which was established in 1946 to hear Indian claims against the U.S. The anthropologists were considered experts on Indigenous social structures and comprehension of treaties previously signed with the U.S.2 These testimonies heavily affected Indigenous policy which in turn affects the current livelihoods of Indigenous people.3

It could be argued that there is still hope for anthropology as a discipline. Exceptions can be found in the rare anthropologist that chooses to dedicate their life’s work to a community and make a commitment to allyship. Anthropological allyship can take many different forms, from powerful testimony in favor of Indigenous communities when they are inevitably called upon to practical research that aids communities in cultural preservation with resources that may not be readily available except through academic funding. Tangible examples can be found in the revision of cultural heritage practices by museums and the creation of accessible archives and language resources. This allyship does much to reverse the legacy of anthropology, but there is a way to transform it even further before we do away with the discipline as a whole in favor of decolonization: through Indigenous anthropologists. As a means of attempting to reverse the legacy of anthropology, there have been a handful of Indigenous people who have decided to go into anthropology as a way to represent themselves, myself included. The Indigenous anthropologist marks a shift in the way the discipline handles the “other.” While white anthropologists have been known to have freedom as to who they were able to study, brown and black populations have predominantly been the observed, not the observer. There was no balance in the perspectives presented to Academia. With Indigenous anthropologists, balance is given. Furthermore, with the proliferation of media forms, Indigenous academics are able to deliver their perspectives in ways that they see fit, not simply through “traditional” essays. In essence, anthropology is being fused with non-Eurocentric ways of knowing to give more context and depth to the depiction of Indigenous ways of life. While this is not a final solution to addressing Indigeneity in Academia, there is no denying the importance of centered Indigenous voices.4

Indigenous Space and Place within Academia

To begin this section, I feel it is important to be blunt: Eurocentric academic institutions were not created to be safe spaces for Indigenous people or knowledge. So, while it is all very well and good that Indigenous people are pursuing careers in academic disciplines, it would belittle the work we do to not acknowledge Academia as hostile. Rather than being immediately recognized as a necessary form of study, institutions have had the legacy of offering minimal resources to Indigenous courses of study and only attempting to improve these conditions after Indigenous scholars and activists have put in significant lobbying time. There are three distinct areas of concern I would like to focus on: Indigenous faculty, Indigenous students, and Indigenous space itself, both physical and academic.  

Indigenous Faculty

One of the most significant difficulties faced by Indigenous Studies programs within the U.S. is the lack of Indigenous faculty retained by universities. While there are exceptions- primarily in Indian Country- most Native and Indigenous studies programs do not control large budgets, promotion, hire, or tenure over core faculty members.5 The simple fact is, Indigenous faculty is needed for Indigenous Studies. Sure, schools can utilize non-Indigenous faculty that may specialize in Indigenous Studies, but the core faculty and leadership for these programs would ideally be qualified, available, and Indigenous, lest Academia remain in the age of non-Indigenous “experts” as was highlighted in the previous section. It is truly surprising, however, how difficult this is to implement in comparison with other generalized demographic departments. For example, no one would ( or should) stand for the majority of an African American Studies department to be comprised of people of non-black people, yet with concern to Indigenous Studies, universities are complacent in having majority non-Native operated Indigenous Studies programs.  There are multiple factors that feed into this: 1) Native and Indigenous populations are seen as depleted, extinct, and of the past, 2) Native and Indigenous populations are seen as undereducated, 3)These universities more than likely already have tenured faculty, especially within Anthropology, History, and Archaeology, that specialize in Indigenous populations, therefore it is not worth expending the extra effort to court Indigenous faculty. As a student activist for Indigenous studies at NYU, this is something I have encountered first-hand even as I am one of three Indigenous people currently sitting on the steering committee for the new Native American and Indigenous Studies minor. While we try to consolidate all of the university’s Indigenous resources, there remains the underlying issue that there simply are not enough Indigenous people in paid positions, most importantly academic faculty.

There is no easy or even quick solution to this. Yes, Indigenous faculty is needed, but the path to this is not easily navigated. Universities in the U.S. have to be in compliance with labor laws, so, while a specific Department can put out a line for faculty hire, there is no guarantee that an Indigenous hire will be made though they can be given priority as minorities in the process. To be clear, this marks one of the clear differences between Indigenous ways of knowing and Eurocentric ways of knowing.  Whereas the laws must be followed and must begin from a point of seeing every candidate as equally capable of delivering Indigenous knowledge within a classroom, Indigenous knowledge within Indigenous communities is traditionally passed down from community members, not those from the outside who simply have a degree and not the personal experience or even, at times, permission to share Indigenous knowledge within a classroom. This feeds into issues of access. Eurocentric knowledge systems emphasize access to knowledge for the “greater good,” this is why we have museums, libraries, and public parks. Indigenous knowledge systems, while each unique, tend to have constraints on what knowledge is accessible and who is responsible for keeping it safe. Part of this is the general understanding by all Indigenous people, that Indigenous people are the inside experts of their own cultural knowledge and heritage. Sure, you can look at knowledge learned within Eurocentric institutions and attempt to compare faculty candidates, but nothing learned within an institution  outside of an Indigenous community can be deemed as substitute for the actual lived experience of an Indigenous person. This, however, should come as no shock. To pull again from my earlier reference concerning African American Studies programs, who is better to teach on the African American experience and African American knowledge than African American faculty? It must be acknowledged that there is an edge to faculty being from the demographic they are educating on, and this is especially true within the Indigenous community. Positionality is everything within Indigenous communities. Readily making personal affiliations known is a common Indigenous practice on a global scale, we put our tribal/community affiliations next to our name wherever published, we acknowledge the land we are on before we speak publicly, and most importantly, we yield to the communities whose land on which we are guests as they are seen to be the keepers of the ancestral knowledge tied to the place. In other words, it is common practice for us to rank who is positioned best to impart knowledge on any given subject, given that they are comfortable with sharing of course. In all honesty, it is not terribly different from common academic practices. We give credit where credit is due. The primary difference comes from how the knowledge is obtained, and once again, issues of who should have access to certain types of knowledge. Finally, in leading into the next section, Indigenous faculty and administration are an invaluable resource to Indigenous students. While I can attest to the fact that not all Indigenous faculty will feel comfortable with being seen as a resource and some would rather keep to themselves, I cannot stress enough how vital available and qualified Indigenous faculty are to the wellbeing of Indigenous students and programming.

Indigenous Students

First I would like to start by saying that I intend to go more in-depth into this specific subject in the next chapter, but it is important to also address it at this point in order to convey the relational value between Indigenous students, faculty, and programming. The most common problem we ran into here at NYU, while attempting to get the NAIS minor, was the fact that university administrators were consistently looking for “the numbers.” They were looking for the amount of courses currently offered, amount of faculty ready to teach, but most importantly, they were looking to see how many Indigenous students would be on campus and willing to declare the NAIS minor. This left us with a bit of a chicken and egg situation. Though we are set to have the minor for 2018, there is some question as to whether that minor will ever grow into a major or even its own department at the university. Basically put, the university needs student enrollment in order to justify allocating resources to Indigenous studies programs, assuming that the demographic populating this area will primarily be comprised of those with Indigenous background. In turn, Indigenous students, especially those looking to complete some sort of Indigenous Studies program, will be looking for universities that have established programs of study and ample resources promised to its upkeep. Given current practices within the U.S. higher education system, neither the university nor the students are out of bounds in what they are seeking, it simply becomes an issue of who will make the first move. In the case of NYU, it was Indigenous students already at the university that had to make the first move, which meant many of us had to sacrifice the safety of being guaranteed a major or minor in Native American and Indigenous Studies. My class was extremely fortunate in that we were able to enact change and will be graduating with the new minor as those who put in work before us were not so lucky, but all in all, this shows a fundamental problem with the way an Indigenous knowledge is valued at the university level. It demonstrates that universities should care about Indigenous populations enough to carve out a space where Indigenous students can be able to go deeper in studying their own cultures and ways of being, but instead it is usually Indigenous students themselves being made to do the carving as their demographics seem insignificant within the larger scheme of the university. Furthermore, it points to an issue of universities, such as NYU, feeling removed enough from the evils of settler colonial genocide that they need not make a self-initiated effort to answer for original sins of this nation and the role the academy plays in the ongoing occupation of Native lands.  

So what must be done? In addition to seeing qualified Indigenous faculty, universities need to also seek Indigenous students. But they must not do so unprepared, looking for Indigenous students to provide the labor in starting up programs for Indigenous study. Sure, Indigenous students are already pretty well aware that their time at college will be one of their most taxing experiences and not in the same way it is for non-Indigenous students, but this should not be an excuse to place this burden on Indigenous youth. Rather, this is work that can be guided by paid university faculty which once again points us in the direction of the previous section.

Indigenous Space

Having touched upon issues of Indigenous students and faculty, it’s finally appropriate to look at Indigenous space within the university sphere. The first type of space, academic, fits neatly into what has already been discussed in this chapter. It is the notion that universities should allocate resources toward Indigenous study, programming, and scholars. In other words, universities should nurture contemporary Indigenous scholarship in line with the wishes of Indigenous people just as they nurture African-American Studies, the Sciences, and other fields that are unanimously available. Further, there can be space made for Indigenous scholarship within these other fields as well. The English department can examine Indigenous writers, Astronomy curricula could incorporate traditional navigation methods of Oceanic cultures, and Agriculture departments can look at a variety of Indigenous agricultural methods.  So while a specific space should be dedicated to Indigenous Studies at universities, it is equally as important to ensure that other spaces are also able to recognize Indigenous contributions to their fields as well.

The second type of space I will be looking at is physical space. Universities should also make it a priority to have a permanent location dedicated to Indigenous Studies. This should be a space where Indigenous people on campus can come to gather, hold ceremony, and be in a safe space to heal. I can attest that the lack of a physical space on NYU’s campus has very real and symbolic consequences. What does it mean when the original caretakers of the land must roam from department to department in search of a place where they can meet, unable to find a room on the land of their ancestors? But also, how much energy is being taken away from addressing very real issues at the university level when time must be taken every semester to determine where all the gathering will be held? Yale University currently has a Native American Cultural Center which contains a library, provides space for Native students, and houses multiple Native American and Indigenous clubs, including a drum group and an arts council. This physical space, while seeming so basic, has greatly expanded the breadth of Indigenous knowledge made available on campus and this is merely one example. Making physical, tangible space available to Indigenous knowledge is pertinent to ensuring its cultivation at the university level as Indigenous scholars see fit.

Endnotes

1.  Deloria, Vine. “Anthropologists and Other Friends.” Custer Died for Your Sins: an Indian Manifesto ; with New Pref., Univ. of Oklahoma Press, 1988.

2.  Rosen, Lawrence. “The Anthropologist as Expert Witness.” American Anthropologist, vol. 79, no. 3, 1977, pp. 555–578., doi:10.1525/aa.1977.79.3.02a00020.

3.  Deloria, Vine. “Anthropologists and Other Friends.” Custer Died for Your Sins: an Indian Manifesto ; with New Pref., Univ. of Oklahoma Press, 1988. Pg. 79-80

4.  Smith, Linda Tuhiwai. Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples. Zed, 2012.

5.   Champagne, Duane, and Jay Stauss. Native American Studies in Higher Education: Models for Collaboration between Universities and Indigenous Nations. Altamira, 2002.