In Napoleons Book, when he began to talk about all of the diseases and problems that had spread across Alaska, killing a large percentage of the people, I began to realize how controlling the white people were. I may only be on page 17, but I already have began to feel differently about the history of Alaska, and upset. All the events leading up to Alaska as we now know it, were traumatizing to many of the Native Alaskans who knew Alaska before any white settlers. But what I questioned most about his writing, was how would things have been different if the white man never interrupted the Alaskans way, would the Alaskan Natives eventually have explored the world anyways? And would they be exposed to the rest of the world eventually, or would they have stayed in the barren land of Alaska for good. I believe that the white man could have been way more respectful of the Alaskan ways, but I believe they had the intention of "helping" the native Alaskans to move forward in the fast paced world. This whole story is sad and, and I am excited to finish it.
I thought that it was fascinating to read about all of the ways the Natives treated their sickness. Mostly dancing to please the Spirits, but also using the plants and animals that lived around them. The white settlers brought many diseases that the natives did not have treatments for, but they also helped in other ways. The white people brought different tools. I think that the natives might have explored the land some more if the white settlers had not come, but the whites really encouraged and helped the exploration of the new world.
ReplyDeleteI think this post explains almost exactly how I feel about the book, the only difference is I think the white man came in with more of a negative attitude toward the native alaskans. I think from the perspective of the book the white man didn't care what happened to them, but if they were alive they had to civilized so that they could communicate with them. Not a communication for the native Alaskan benefit, but so the white man could trade in a civilized manner. I believe they only had the intentions of "helping" them to get what they wanted out of the land.
ReplyDeleteReading Danielle's comment made me think about it in a "flipped" sense:
ReplyDeleteThe Alaska Natives used the resources around them entirely and never left anything out; however, they learned so much from the white man. What did the white man learn from the Alaska Natives? Does the white man use nature's resources like the Natives did?
It's interesting to think about it in both directions...
I agree with both Lynn & casavel. Whites did this to many other people and cultures throughout history as well.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Sara J’s question, I do not think that the white man learned nearly as much from the Alaska Natives. If they had, things would be very different. Whites learned a few things, such as subsistence hunting and fishing, but it is nothing like it was. There is no respect for the animals. How many people have animal mounts? Is it a level of respect or just a trophy? Was the entire animal used or were parts left in the field to rot? I think the whites took what they thought would most benefit them. Everything else was pushed aside.
I think if the "white man" hadn't been the people who came in and spread diseases and ripped apart the culture and land and everything, it would have still happened. Some other culture would have explored and found alaska and done the same thing. That was part of how discoveries on our planet went. I'm not saying it's right or that the "white man" should be forgiven for the deaths and things, I'm just saying that it more than likely would have happened one way or another. just a thought.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Christine Butcher. The Russians committed worst if not the same terrible crimes with the Aleuts. I think that if the "white man" hadn't come in and taken over another group of people probably would of. They doesn't like you said make what they did any less worst.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Amanda, the whites did not learn nearly as much from the natives. My family hunts and goes fishing, but we do it for food not sport, and we definitly try to use all of the animal.
ReplyDeleteAlso I agree with Christine that it still would have happened. People are naturally greedy and selfish, wanting what's best for themselves, not necessarily caring what happens to others. And it's terrible what the whites did to the native's culture. Yet it sounds like the survivors are also to blame because they did not teach their children about Yuuyaraq and allowed them to be taught in the ways of the westerners.
How could the survivors teach their children something they were no longer sure if the believed in? They took a staggering loss when the Great Death occured and their medicine men and woman couldn't save them. It was as if the spirit world had turned on them. But that also doesn't mean they should have given up entirely. Yet, I can understand how they wouldn't have taught them. Think about it, if you had been doing something your whole life and it just stopped working for you, then all sorts of people came up and told you that it was the wrong way to do something anyway, would you keep trying to teach it and pass it on? Because that is kind of what happened to the Natives. I said it in very loose terms but you can kind of get the geist of what I'm saying. I hope.
ReplyDeleteIn the small native communities that are in Alaska, do they still use medicine men and women? Or did they convert to store bought medicines like tylenol? Just curious...
ReplyDeleteI bet they must use a lot of bought medicines. Because the "white mans" technology affected everywhere. Totally changed the way of life. Plus, most must think bought medicines are more effective.
ReplyDelete