Recovering the Sacred - Part I

Winona LaDuke illustrates through part I of her book, “Recovering the Sacred,” how Native American sacred spaces have been infiltrated by non-Native Americans and used in order for monetary gain. LaDuke’s words mesh together to voice a grand passionate plea for Native American sacred spaces to be returned and for their spirituality to have weight in society. For instance, LaDuke begins by illustrating the controversial topic of the University of Arizona’s observatory on Mt. Graham. LaDuke describes how the Apache’s were forced to obtain a “permit to pray” because Mt. Graham is located on private land and therefore to reach their sacred space atop the mountain they are forced to go through legal and logistical formalities. The fact that the Apache religion and its sacred areas are not fully acknowledged and accommodated inevitably implies that the Apache and Native American culture is also not recognized or valued in the dominant society. It is placed as subordinate to any type of economic pursuit. Furthermore, LaDuke refers to a local newspaper who explains that “the project has turned the University of Arizona into a ‘star-whore’” (21). The University solidifies this position when they described themselves as building “the Harvard of the West” (27). Although I highly value academia, I think that blatantly disregarding a religious area without any intention to compromise or even take into consideration their position is not appropriate. LaDuke describes the University of Arizona’s actions as “self-aggrandizement” and I agree that creating a bigger and better observatory in order to increase the University’s power and prestige is a grand act of selfishness. And I am made to wonder if education and research can ever compliment religion? LaDuke quotes a “New York Times” writer Jack Hitt who stated that “if Galileo shocked the old order by stating that the earth is not the center of the solar system, the environmentalists and the Apaches are asserting that man is no longer at the center of nature” (32). I think this is the main conflict between Native American spirituality versus education. The University’s intrinsic focus is toward the individual and their pursuit for education while the Apache’s high value of nature places man and the individual on the peripheral.

The second chapter I experienced much more skepticism toward the position that LaDuke takes regarding the Black Mesa coal mine. Although I agreed that the coal mine was definitely attempting to abuse and misdirect the Hopi tribe, I found some of the information beyond believable. For example, LaDuke explains that the “attorneys representing the tribes were also, secretly, on the payrolls of the mining companies” (36). I am not positive, but I would believe that would be illegal and a form of malpractice if the lawyers did not inform both sides of their conflict of interest before proceeding. Perhaps through convoluted language and careful wording the lawyers were able to slip this fact under the radar, but I find it hard to believe that the lawyers could secretly be on the payroll of the mine without the Hopi being properly informed. Furthermore, LaDuke explains that the Hopi unwittingly signed the lease agreeing to the slurrying of the coal using the ground water (37). One the one hand these acts are not entirely smart business managing, however, on the other hand, should we hold the Hopi accountable when they are only trying to maintain their way of living while compromising and incorporating non-Native influences? Capitalizing on their traditional way of living does not make it alright to take economic advantage of the tribe. Furthermore, I do not agree that businesses should be able to use natural resources without any kind of consequence or without a neutral party examining the environmental impact on the project. I think that businesses tend to overlook water issues and shrug them off as inane formalities when in truth they are highly important and they immensely impact both Native American communities as well as the general population as a whole. LaDuke explains that “water levels in some Black Mesa wells have dropped more than 100 feet, and many springs are dry” (39). She also explains that “the combination of massive mining development, with the use of water from the aquifer, has been a huge blow to the ecology of the region” (28). Therefore, LaDuke implies that if the mining company continues to use the water to slurry the mines, eventually the water will be overused and will dry up leaving the mining company, the Native American villages, Arizona developments and the surrounding nature void of water. It seems as though the mining company’s main concern is in the here and now without concern for the future or the surrounding area that is dependent on the water. This is also illustrative of the United States as a whole. Our consumption of natural resources is grossly impacting the entire world as we are depleting precious resources. In Quinn’s “Ishmael” this is reiterated throughout the entire novel - this idea that since it is working today we will not worry about tomorrow. Ishmael explains that the rule of the Leavers is “take what you need, and leave the rest alone” (127). However, in this dominant society, as illustrated with the Black Mesa mining, the mentality is take everything you want in order to make it more productive, beneficial and easy on the company. This is the same with Mt. Graham. LaDuke states that the University of Arizona does not need to alter the top of the mountain because “there are 37 better observatory sites in the continental United States” (30). However, as Ishmael describes we do not follow this Leaver rule. Instead, we take in the attempt to accumulate everything and gain the most power.

The third chapter illustrates the depletion of another resource in Oregon, the Klamath River Basin. LaDuke notes with great sadness that the suckers and the salmon population have dwindled leaving the Klamath tribe economically and spiritually crippled and without the support of the government. Reading today’s newspaper I came across a similar situation that is occurring in Sacramento regarding the Chinook (king salmon). The Press Democrat states that this week the state Fish and Game Commission will vote to close recreational fishing on the Sacramento River. The article states that commercial and recreational salmon fishing is already closed “in federal waters off California.” Inevitably the article asserts that this closure could cost “$255 million this year and 2,263 jobs.” These imbalances in nature and with fish cause economic hardships because the cycle has broken and it is no longer cyclical in the give and take. LaDuke quotes one Klamath tribe member saying, “we have lived there since time began and so have the fish. Our dependence is reciprocal. The fish and the river have provided for us for all those years. Now it is our turn to pay them back” (63). This is definitely a step in the right direction. In order to prevent these closures and population decreases in the rivers and nature, we need to learn how to maintain a balance. I feel that LaDuke uses these situations to illustrate that we cannot afford to take, take, take, without looking at the larger picture and seeing everyone and everything that is affected (whether spiritually, economically, and/or socially) with a single action.