O’Brien, Susie. “‘Please Eunice, Don’t Be Ignorant’: The White Reader As Trickster In Lee Maracle’s Fiction.” Canadian Literature 144.(1995): 82-96. MLA International Bibliography. Web. 8 Aug. 2015.
In her article, O’Brien uses Lee Maracle‘s cannon or work to elucidate the changing perception of native writing in contemporary discourse, and to articulate the place in which Metis authors locate themselves, or are located, within this frame. She draws from tropes and elements such as the Trickster, as well as engages in other author analysis of the nature of the value of native writing on a national scale. O’Brien notes a salient fixture of native writing comes in the form of the Trickster, and Maracle is not immune to that- “ Maracle undermines the freedom to the reader to ‘become the trickster’ by emphasizing the reality of a world so rigidly and unequally divided” (82). Unequally divided. Sound familiar?
Maracle also plays with the idea the Trickster himself is ..” often tricked, usually through an attempt to overreach capabilities” (83). We can therefore use the trickster as a metaphor for the European, or white ethnocentric lens that literature, even world literature (in most cases, especially) is viewed, and how native writers are not ignorant to that. One strategy we see used in a lot of native writing is postmodernism. Gerald Vizenor claims that this literary culture can help First Nation literature as it “ liberates imagination and widens the audience for tribal literatures”. Indeed, by breaking works down into story, therefore stripping back the anthropology readers preconceive “ frees up a much needed space for compelling narratives” (87). In this way, native writing can become more digestible, and act as a catalyst for the movement of native writing for public consumption and credibility. It is said that the writer “ trust [the audience] will draw useful lesson from this story” (88) and, native writers are no different. As the title of the article suggests, the fact the Maracle puts the average white reader in a trickster position is indicative of an attempt at social didacticism. Usually, Tricksters are led to demise through “…their own image and reflection the see and love” (87). This can suggest the negative aspects of a history of colonialism, xenophobia and appropriation, and “ may be seen as a metonymic of the subsumption of native culture into European..literary theory” (88).
I found this article particularly applicable to our topic as it showcases strategies used by Metis writers to get their voices heard, not just for them, but for First Nation artists and other artists that challenge to white washed libraries the still prevail today. By blending magical realism, postmodernism and gumption, Maracle is able to locate herself in a domain overpowered by many Tricksters. I’ll leave you with this quote, that I think O’Brien uses to perfectly highlight Maracle’s intention: “ In order to become empowered by Maracle’s writing, the reader, too, has the relinquish the comforts of safety” (94).
Works Cited
“Gerald Vizenor.” Poetry Foundation. Poetry Foundation. Web. 8 Aug. 2015.
Gruber, Eva.”Humor in Contemporary Native North American Literature.” Google Books. Web. 9 Aug. 2015.
Hancock, Brendan. “An Interview with Lee Maracle.” CWILA Canadian Women In The Literary Arts. 23 Mar. 2015. Web. 8 Aug. 2015.
Lavoie-Mathieu, Genevieve. “CANADA’S FIRST NATIONS: A HISTORY OF INEQUALITY.” The Media Co-op: Independent Local News. Web. 8 Aug. 2015
“Poem | Lee Maracle | Aboriginal Apology | Residential Schools.” YouTube. YouTube, 11 Apr. 2014. Web. 9 Aug. 2015.
I appreciate where you’re coming from in response to this article- many of the points you made are exactly what drew me to it and made it so applicable in the first place! Many might say Maracle’s work is audacious at times (many people might not appreciate being seen as an “experiment”, if you wanna call it that) but for me it just shows that to be heard and gain a voice in such a crowded market you have to get ingenuous and a little creative at times- and postmodernism seems to be the perfect vehicle for that: they say that it is only safe for a fool to tell the truth, so I definitely see this “trick” as Maracle’s way of getting us to examine ourselves by making us part of the story, as you pointed out.
I totally agree with you on problem solving leading to a reader’s relationship with a text- reader’s aren’t dumb, and authors like Maracle ( and Palahnuick as you mentioned, whom I love) don’t treat them as such. This is also a great strategy that I see cropping up as a trend in native writing: getting us to understand their story by inviting us into their world!
I really like the approach Lee Maracle is using in order to get people to become interested in Metis and First Nation work. Flipping subject-positions, like having the reader become the “Trickster”, is such a postmodernist feat. Though I would argue that messing with identity politics (as Maracle seems to do a lot in her books according to O’Brien) can sometimes kill the enjoyment of reading. As you state, such a strategy can be didactic. I think in some cases it has the potential to overwhelm the reader.
I like the idea that features of postmodernism in Native literature makes Native literature more digestible. I think it gives readers more agency to decide for themselves what a certain text means, etc. That is the point of postmodern literature/art/film anyways, right? Maracle argues that readers are challenged to work through the dilemmas posed by postmodernism. In my opinion, when readers do work through the problems created by postmodernist work, the morals, values, themes and general ideas embedded in the work are more likely to make an impact on them; that’s because they were forced to work through it and it wasn’t just handed to them.
When I think about the best and most influential pieces I’ve read/watched/listened to I think about postmodern novels and films. Books like Thomas Pynchon’s Crying of Lot 49, movies like David Fincher’s Fight Club (1999) or Wong Kar-wai’s Chungking Express (1995). Postmodernist work gives their audiences agency, and that’s what I think makes it fun. Yes, some works (like the ones mentioned above) can, at certain points, be a headache to get through but the discussions that arise afterwards are sooo fun since postmodernist work is meant to be open-ended.