Sherwood - Densmore's Ghost: Examining the History and Literarization of an Ethnographic "Text"

Imagism and Densmore's Ghosts: Examining the History and Literarization of an Ethnographic "Text"

Draft for XCP[KS1]

"The theme of the vanishing primitive, of the end of traditional society (the very act of naming it 'traditional' implies a rupture), is pervasive in ethnographic writing. Undeniably, ways of life can, in a meaningful sense, 'die'... But the persistent and repetitious 'disappearance' of social forms at the moment of their ethnographic representation demands analysis as a narrative structure.... Ethnography's disappearing object is, then, in significant degree, a rhetorical construct legitimating a representational practice: 'salvage' ethnography in its widest sense. The other is lost, in disintegrating time and space, but saved in the text" (Clifford, "On Ethnographic Allegory," 112).

"Ethnography in the service of anthropology once looked out at clearly defined others, defined as primitive, or tribal, or non-Western, or pre-literate, or nonhistorical--the list, if extended, soon becomes incoherent. Now ethnography encounters others in relation to itself, while seeing itself as other" (Clifford, "Introduction: Partial Truths," 23)

One can feature multiple voices, or a single voice. One can portray the other as a stable, essential whole, or one can show it to be the product of a narrative of discovery, in specific historical circumstances" (Clifford, "On Ethnographic Allegory," 115).

A self-conscious turn towards textuality has produced a major shift in the theory and practice of ethnography in the last twenty years. As James Clifford articulates it in "Partial Truths," the introduction to the influential Writing Culture: The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography: "Ethnography in the service of anthropology once looked out at clearly defined others, defined as primitive, or tribal, or non-Western, or pre-literate, or nonhistorical... " (Clifford, "Introduction: Partial Truths," 23). Subject to the critique of new ethnography was the methodology of participant-observation in which "writing [is] reduced to method: keeping good fieldnotes, making good maps, 'writing up' the results" (Clifford, "Introduction: Partial Truths," 1). According to Clifford, "now ethnography encounters others in relation to itself, while seeing itself as other" (Clifford, "Introduction: Partial Truths," 23); it values a dialogical practice in which "Anthropology no longer speaks with automatic authority for others defined as unable to speak for themselves ('primitive,' 'pre-literate,' 'without history')" (Clifford, "Introduction: Partial Truths," 9-10).

This ethnographic paradigm-shift raises interesting questions about the translation and interpretation of oral poetry. Through the middle 20th-century [KS2]

, anthropology approached oral art as privileged cultural content, collecting "tales" as though the were physical artifacts rather than poetic manifestations of an expressive verbal culture. The aims of anthropology in treating oral poetry can be summed up in terms of four predispositions: 1.) oral historical, for the gathering of information which is nevertheless presumed distorting; 2.) social dimension, as though "this story is some kind of an operating manual for this society ... or like their Constitution"; 3.) psychological insight, revealing culture and personality, as if the work were a "projective test for the whole society;"; or 4.) structuralism, looking to works insofar as they reveal a symbolic logic (Tedlock "Toward" 122-3).

In the late 1960s and 1970s, Ethnopoetics, brought together anthropologists, linguists, poets, and literary scholars, producing a heightened awareness of: the artfulness of oral poetry, the importance of theorizing transcription and translation, the existence and substantiality of oral traditions (often counter to the Western canon), and the ways in which peoples' verbal arts illuminate their cultures. Within literary studies, the recognition that traditions of oral poetry were more than simply primitive precursors to written literature spawned concentrated efforts to acknowledge, understand, and adequately represent oral poems and poetics.

In this essay, I want look at how an oral poem is textualized, processed through the anthropological and literary domains to become a virtually canonic "Chippewa Song." I want to consider "the question of who writes (performs? transcribes? translates? edits?) " (Clifford, "Introduction: Partial Truths," 17). The methodology of ethnopoetics will be relevant, yet I also want to consider how the practice of ethnopoetics might be informed by subsequent the dialogical concept of culture: "'culture' is always relational, an inscription of communicative processes that exist, historically, between subjects in relations of power. (; Dwyer, Tedlock).

Literary representations and criticism of oral art in the early 20th century seem also to partake of the ethnographic assumptions of "unquestioned rights of salvage: the authority long associated with bringing elusive, 'disappearing' oral lore into legible textual form" (Clifford, "Introduction: Partial Truths," 17). Native American language art was presented in an essentially primitivist fashion, with an emphasis on indigenous spirituality and the image of the noble savage.[1] The misperceptions that inspired many translations and "interpretations" proceed in predictable fashion in part because indigenous forms were rarely translated or transcribed with any fidelity. Furthermore, just as "the predominant metaphors in anthropological research ... presuppose a standpoint outside," the representation of Native American oral art in literary contexts takes the position of "looking at, objectifying, or, somewhat closer, 'reading,' a given reality" (Clifford, "Introduction: Partial Truths," 11)

The mainstream of Anglo-American literature can be said to have rediscovered Native American verbal arts in 1917 with the special February issue of Poetry: A Magazine of Verse.[2]

The discovery replicates the kind of profound irony Clifford describes: "The other is lost, in disintegrating time and space, but saved in the text" (Clifford, "On Ethnographic Allegory," 112). The poem that introduced this issue of the magazine well conveys the attitudes and preconceptions informing interests in Native Americans at that time.

DRUM-BEAT, beat of drums,

Pebble-rattle in the gourd,

Pebble feet on drifting sand . . .

Drum-beat, beat of drums -

I have lost the wife-made robe of bear-skin . . .

Take the prize mine the loss.

Have I lost too the courage of the black bear -

His power, his thunder?

Lul-la-by,

Games' queer lullaby . . .

O robe of mine!

O luck of mine! . . . . (Poetry 221)

It will come as no surprise that this poem seems actually to be a sort of imitation authored by Frank S. Gordon, a New Jersey medical doctor who travelled in the southwest. With ceremonial percussion, robes, rattles and other markers of tribalism, the poem is representative of the problems of literarizations and their projections of a noble savage (which Ethnopoetics would subsequently try to correct). An appended statement of purpose confirms the sense that in the context of Poetry, the word "aboriginal" connoted a tragic, foregone conclusion:

"I want to do my bit," he [Gordon] writes, "for a vanishing and noble race." In The Tom-tom an aged warrior is beating out once more the rhythms of his life living over his loves, dreams, battles, and the tragedy of his race. (Poetry 275)

The period context of "Aboriginal Poetry" can be adduced from the examples above. The thematic emphases and style, especially the characteristic repetitions and awkwardly "translated" coinages persist throughout the special issue of Poetry and the Path on the Rainbow: An Anthology of Songs and Chants from the Indians of North America[3] which followed in 1918, as well as editorial comments by Harriet Monroe and Mary Austin. In particular, the notion of "rhythm" functions as a romanticization of primal culture rather than as a sign that the poetry has a distinctive artfulness. While lauded for very specific qualities, this cultural material is not seen as being on the same plane as Western literature.

Anglo-Americans readers of poetry characteristically looked toward some projected image of indigenous art for precedents upon which to establish or against which to validate contemporary writing. In its tortured approximation of an imagined Indian other, the excerpt from "Tom-tom" rather too handily illustrates the dangers of appropriation, misrepresentation, and the charges of exoticism which subsequently emerged. In the "Editorial Comment: Aboriginal Poetry" following the collection, Monroe writes:

Vivid as such work is in its suggestion of racial feeling and rhythm, it gives merely a hint of the deeper resources it is a mere outcropping of a mine . . . the danger is that the tribes, in the process of so-called civilization, will lose all trace of it; that their beautiful primitive poetry will perish among the ruins of obliterated states. (251)

The romantic tonality of Monroe's appreciation and the excerpts above exemplify the kinds of distorting interests into which Native American cultural production was received. If we inquire as to "who writes (performs? transcribes? translates? edits?)," we may begin to wonder if indigenous song was regarded as a natural resource or raw material, from which literature might be molded. The problems associated with a representation of Native American oral art are many and of varying degrees, including an overwhelming interest in the spiritual other and an agenda interested in flushing out primitive precursors for contemporary Imagist poetry. A concrete consequence of these particular interests--the form itself of songs and stories was regularly distorted in translations/transcriptions into English; at root are outright ignorance of the importance of form in traditional song and the powerful but primitivizing appreciation for the seemingly archetypal qualities of Native oral poetry.

Native American poetry versions like those in Poetry were beginning to gain appreciation at the turn of the century, and the work of early ethnographers gained the notice of some in literature, it was not until the late 1960s that a full awakening to Native American literary production came about.[4] At the textual level, poems and stories from traditional contexts were consistently approached as though they were poorly written texts. The way the texts were edited to eliminate what was termed "redundancy" is one indicator. Other features characteristic of performance, such as parallelism or vocables, were commonly dropped out of the written record through the silent emendation of editors. This occurred partly as a lapse of judgement, which is to say, a failure to appreciate these features as meaningful; but it is also a predictable consequence of the methods of collection of the earliest of these texts, which were usually laboriously hand-transcribed, often by an ethnographer minimally trained in the language.

An aesthetic predisposition to devalue the oral features of the text and a method of collection which would have made registration of these elements nearly impossible conspired to effect a powerful effacement of the poetic dimensions of Native American verbal art.

The climate of reception and uneven editorial procedures in the first half of the century contributed to a failure to appreciate oral aesthetics or even to recognize the need to come to terms with it[KS3] .[5]

Looking [KS4] at the representations of the Chippewa/Ojibwa song "My Love Has Departed" will give a picture of the problematic representations of oral texts and the need for an Ethnopoetics approach[6]. This particular piece has been reprinted in variant forms in four major anthologies between 1934 and 1991; it also exemplifies some of the preconceptions which have shaped the ready appreciation and the terms under which oral poetry has been assimilated into the larger literary culture of the United States during this century. "My Love Has Departed" first appears in a form widely available to the public when Carl Sandberg singles it out in the "Editorial Comment" section of the special, "Aboriginal Poetry" issue of Poetry: A Magazine of Verse. Sandberg presents it as a poem that causes "suspicion ... that the Red Man and his children committed direct plagiarism on the modern imagists and vorticists" (255).[7] The irony of this affirming comment reveals both the expectations non-Indian editors and writers brought to their appreciation of "primitive" texts and the ways in which problematic textualization practices (both in terms of translation and transcription) abet the mystification of these texts. In short, this song is nothing at all like an Imagist poem.

It may be symptomatic that Sandberg and other readers of translated poems felt it sufficient to judge the fidelity of recreations on the basis of their "sense of the English [its aesthetic aptness] and ethnological appropriateness of the translation . . ." (Hymes, Symposium 345).[8] In his own corrective discussion of the general unreliability of translations from oral sources, Dell Hymes asserts that serious problems continue to go unrecognized because of several generally accepted but "effectively untrue" assumptions, including that:

(a) ethnologists who collected the material must be relied upon for the validity of the translations, and can be; (b) literary versions are to be preferred to literal ones; (c) the style, or structure, of the originals is accessible in significant part through the best translations. (346)

I hope to show that a misplaced confidence in the ethnographic text, as well as assumptions about the relation to Imagist and Asian aesthetics, breeds and perpetuates an eggregiously bad text. The text presented in the special issue of Poetry reads:

My Love Has Departed

A loon

I thought it was

But it was

My love's

Splashing Oar.

To Sault Ste. Marie

He has departed.

My love has gone on before me.

Never again can I see him. (25)

The stimulus to those who would remark the resemblance to Imagist verse is clear enough in the first stanza of this translation. But to assess its reliability and discern the extent to which Imagist values are immanent or have been imposed upon it, we might look behind the present version to its ethnological source in Frances Densmore's Chippewa Music (Bulletin 45).

Densmore collected many Chippewa songs at three Ojibway reservations between 1907 and 1909 making use of a gramophone.[9] Her interest in musical analysis led her to musically notate the rhythm and melody of many of the songs, along with line-by-line transliteration of the untranslated lyrics. Whatever weaknesses may be reflected in Densmore's practice, the songs published in Chippewa Music Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 45 (1910) and Chippewa Music (II) BAE Bulletin 53 (1913) present a great deal of information. Available in libraries but not widely published or distributed to this day, Densmore's collection is the primary source for the Chippewa "poetry" translated and published in widely available editions; numerous other Chippewa songs from these collections have been widely published and could equally well have been used in this analysis.

In addition to the English language text quoted in Poetry, Densmore here has taken the trouble to present the Chippewa words and an elaborate musical transcription of the song. The transcription of rhythm, melody and lyric an immediate visual challenge complicates any easy sense of the analogy between the Chippewa song and the stripped down, free-verse text offered in Poetry. As in many cases, what is presented as traditional Native American "poetry" has its apparent genesis in sung rather than spoken performance. Here is one point against the argument of plagiarism. Looking more closely for the "source" of the "Imagist" text in English (Bulletin 45, 151), we find it following the full page of music in a section entitled "Words":

Part 1

Mangod win A loon

Nn dnen dm I thought it was

Mi gwenawn But it was

Nin muce My love's

ni wawasa boyezud Splashing oar

Continuing to the top of the facing page, we read:

Part 2

Ba witng To Sault Ste. Marie

Gi nma dja He has departed

Nin muce My love

A nima dja Has gone on before me

Kawn inawa Never again

Nndawa bama si Can I see him

Part 3 is similar to part 1. (151-2)

A cursory consultation of the ethnographic text given the heading "No. 135. 'My Love Has Departed (Catalogue no. 101.) Sung by Mrs. Mary English" by Densmore in BAE Bulletin 53 establishes the source of the ready-made imagist poem and immediately raises problems. Densmore notes: "Part 3 is similar to part 1," indicating that there is extensive repetition, but the third part is not spelled out in English. Such repetition is common to Native American songs, but less so in characteristically compressed Imagist poems. While those familiar with oral song traditions will not be surprised at this repetition, in fact, not one of the five subsequently published versions of the poem I have identified so much as alludes to the repetition. Further, what we took for poetic lines may be better described as mere divisions in a word list, a gloss following the fuller native-language text which has been transcribed along with the melody and timing.

Before reformulating a transcription based on these observations, let us first survey the range of presentations offered by other editors in widely accessible anthologies.[10] As printed in the more widely available Path on the Rainbow edited by George Cronyn, the poem is properly titled "My Love Has Departed" (25).[11] The words and linebreaks are retained (with one exception) but the visual layout of the text and punctuation are altered. An impressionistic scheme indents lines 2-5, 7, and 10; initial letters are capitalized in lines 1,2,6,8,9; the period is omitted after "departed" in line 7; the period is replaced with a comma following "me" in line 8; and the final line is broken so: "Never again / can I see him." The third stanza is silently elided. The name of the singer is omitted.

Only the first English stanza, prefaced by the altered title "Love Song," is reprinted in the 1970 American Indian Prose and Poetry: An Anthology (Astrov 79). In this case, neither the singer's identity nor the latter two-thirds of the lyrics are acknowledged. In place of any ethnographic context and the second stanza of the poem, the reader is offered an editorialization:

This lovely poem, composed of but a few words, though full of overtones and hints of things unsaid, bears such a strange resemblance to those exquisite little poems of classic Japanese literature that I cannot refrain from calling the reader's attention to this fact. In order to understand part of the American Indian's poetry one must be well trained in swiftly reacting upon the faintest suggestions, intimations, and symbols. He [sic] very often gives only the mere outline of a fleeting mood or of the lasting impression of an experience opening in himself or in the listener a train of thoughts and emotions: just what makes Japanese poetry on a different level, to be sure stand out so vividly from the more eloquent ways of the western poets. (79)

What becomes apparent to us is that, even as it effaced in these printings, it is not the "American Indian" at all, but an editor or translator "who . . . gives only the mere outline of a fleeting mood." They render the song terse by stripping it of its eloquence--an eloquence better characterized in terms of oracular elaboration than Imagist minimalism.

Even Jerome Rothenberg, who will emerge among the more powerful critics calling for attention to performance and voice in traditional oral poetries, publishes an incomplete text in his anthology Technicians of the Sacred (202). Presented as the first of "Ten Chippewa (Ojibwa) Songs," only the first stanza is reprinted; authors or singers are credited but no titles are included. The text presented mirrors Densmore's word list except that all letters are lowercase and, closer at least to Densmore's transcription and the condition of oral performance, no punctuation is arbitrarily introduced. In the notes to his republication of the poem in Technicians of the Sacred, Rothenberg partly acknowledges the problem of mistaking what is effectively only a lineated glossary for a free-verse poem

The lines of Densmore's translations correspond to single words in the Sioux [and Chippewa]; thus each word of Sioux [or Chippewa]=a line of English. The result, accidental or otherwise, is to isolate the poem's structural properties (of stops & starts, disjunctions, etc..) as basis for a new music of utterance in the translation, providing a notation . . . that closely parallels . . . the sound of much contemporary poetry in English . . . . (474-5)

Despite the uncanny parallel to modern poetic lines in the first stanza, it is difficult to see how the procedure of translating a word for a line accounts for the structure of the performed song. Rothenberg's own subsequently developed practice of Total Translation--a fascinating and liberally creative translation methodology--suggests a far more defensible approach for determining linebreaks than simply following the accident of word boundaries.[12] While this format does result in an interesting poem in its own right, it largely reflects the reader's or editor's sense of aesthetic aptness--a move Dell Hymes critiques above. The approach misleads by using translation to project preformulated, if not exactly dominant, modernist aesthetics onto art that very well might offer an alternate aesthetics if properly attended.

Among its republications in Poetry and the anthologies edited by Cronyn, Astrov, and Rothenberg, the third "stanza" is neither reproduced nor even alluded to; the singer is rarely named. In a more recent collection, American Indian Literature: An Anthology (Norman: U Oklahoma P, 1991 [1979]), editor Alan R. Velie reproduces Densmore's musical notation (a melodic/rhythmic score with Chippewa lyrics) to emphasize its origin in song (78). Short of venturing a fuller retranslation, only presenting Densmore's score is a more defensible procedure than those of the examples cited above. If the reader follows the musical transcription, the extent of repetition becomes clear. Unfortunately, Velie diminished the likelihood of such an attentive reading by neglecting to reprint the note indicating that a third verse repeats the first with variation.

The active reshaping of Native American performances so as to project putative precedents to Modernist American poetry: falsely justifies Modern practice and dramatically distorts Native practice. But even in the interest of presenting readable, aesthetically powerful poems in English, this approach is undesirable since it nullifies the possibility of admitting oral artists have their own culturally or perhaps even personally specific aesthetics. "One can feature multiple voices, or a single voice. One can portray the other as a stable, essential whole, or one can show it to be the product of a narrative of discovery, in specific historical circumstances" (Clifford, "On Ethnographic Allegory," 115). In the versions above of "My Love Has Departed," the other is presented as restricted, limited to a timeless past.

One wants to turn now to the classic Ethnopoetic task of recovering this poem, but there remains the question of how to do so in a way that does not replicate the patterns of salvage ethnography. We have already observed that Densmore's notes indicate the second stanza should be followed by a third, that is, if we are content that division into stanzas is an adequate textual representation of some analogue in Chippewa song performance. So certain "corrections" seem justifiable. At the same time, Clifford has cautioned:

"our own 'full' versions will themselves inevitably appear partial; and if many cultural portrayals now seem more limited than they once did, this is an index of the contingency and historical movement of all reading. No one reads from a neutral or final position. This rather obvious caution is often violated in new accounts that purport to set the record straight or to fill a gap in 'our' knowledge" (Clifford, "Introduction: Partial Truths," 18)

Comparing the lyric/music transcription with the bi-lingual word list, it turns out that what subsequent editors have taken for poetic "lines" are merely divisions in a word list. The patterning of the original is only available to those readers with musical training. Furthermore, it requires a rather complex kind of reading to scan this musical notation in real time and match the elongated Chippewa words with corresponding English in the glossary. The arbitrary lineation and decision not to translate stanza three suggest that Densmore is not offering a deliberately structured imagist translation but a word-list or gloss with each Chippewa word given a line. Despite the misleading tendency of the English gloss, Densmore's apparently scrupulous transcription provides the opportunity for a fuller English-language reconstruction. In short, Densmore provides us not with a readable/useable score but with the information from which to construct one.[13]

Returning to the lyric/music, and with the simple key Densmore provides to the words, I will construct an alternate text with lines and stanzas that more nearly reflect the structure of the song sung for Francis Densmore by "Mrs. Mary English."[14] Now it should be noted that the retranslation about to be offered is not produced by a native speaker. In fact, I have almost no knowledge of the Objibwa language; in no way authoritative, this reconstruction was accomplished without extensive knowledge of Chippewa/Ojibwa. However, the feasibility of producing such an improved translation simply by attending more closely to Densmore's transcriptions and with the aid of dictionaries should make all the more clear the flaws in previous presentations and what extended ethnopoetic work by native speakers or language specialists might accomplish. Densmore's own analysis suggests the value of these transcriptions, even while noting their limitations:

It is acknowledged that ordinary musical notation does not, in all instances, represent accurately the tones sung. . . . Thus far, observation indicate that the rhythm is the essential part of the Chippewa song. The words of a song may be slightly different in rendition, or the less important melody progressions may vary, but a corresponding variation in rhythm has not been observed. A song, when sung by different signers, shows an exact reproduction of rhythm. (BAE Bulletin 45, 3, 6)

Following the indication of the centrality of rhythm, a text transcription/translation might benefit from a lineation which telegraphed significant rhythmic patterns. In order to determine an organization of lines and stanzas based on a consistent structural principle, we will allow the musical phrasings, as transcribed by Densmore, to key them. Without trying to convey the melodic contours of the song, a temporal approximation in English can be ventured for the page.

Words ending with a prolonged note of two beats or more will be marked with a line break in the retranscription below; the third part will be presented in full; and stanza breaks will indicate points where the downward tending melody signals a new phrase by terminating its descent and starting on a note an octave higher:

1 a loon

2 I thought it was a loon

3 I thought it was

4 but it was

5 my love's

6 splashing oar

7 to Sault Ste. Marie

8 he has departed

9 my love

10 has gone on before me

11 never again can I see him

12 hmm

13 a loon

14 I thought it was a loon

15 I thought it was

16 but it was never again love's

17 splashing oar[15]

The stanzas here correspond to those in Densmore's English gloss but are now more clearly reflective of the structural moves in the original. In the first and third stanzas, the doubling of "a loon / I thought it was" is written out fully, as it is not in the word list. In the second instance, "I thought it was" is run into "a loon" to reflect the tie or slur indicated in the transcription a repetition with a difference. The repetition of si in line 12 marks a doubling of the last particle in the previous word-phrase, which is prolonged for an entire measure and its pitch, dramatically, the lowest in the song.

The third stanza, neglected in nearly all the published translations, is indeed similar to the first but with differences of two sorts. The penultimate line 18 is both new and repeated. It seems to consists of words already introduced but in a new configuration: "Mi-gwe - na-wn ka - wn -i-mu-ce, -ni-wa-wa - sa - bo - ye-zud." Using Densmore's own key it might be rendered something like "but it was never my love's / splashing oar."[16] A guesswork translation, it nevertheless conveys the important facet of the closing stanza that it is a repetition with a difference. And of course it closes also on the low A-pitch, the same note as the earlier repetition of "si," translated as "hmm" (to duplicate the sound echo and give a corresponding hint of lexical meaning in English.)

It is fortunate that Densmore's interest in the music of these songs leaves us with a fair record of the language, including repetitions and variations, fit to the transcription of the melody. In summary, the retranslation above presents an altered lineation (which introduces variation into the repetition), a doubling of initial phrases in several verses, inclusion of a seemingly untranslatable vocable, redetermination of stanzas as reflected by performance patterning, and inclusion of an additional stanza which repeats the first with variations. Meticulous for its day, Densmore's text requires one to quite laboriously combine song transcription and word list to gain any sense of the formal shape of the song. More commonly, the practice as with the reworkings in the Poetry issue and those presented by earlier ethnographers such as Henry Rowe Schoolcraft has been to utterly downplay the formal structure in presenting a poeticized original which most often, as Castro argues in a different context, tells us more about contemporary anglo-ideas about the "Indian" and about poetry than it does about actual Native American cultural production.[17]

This case suggests that when what emerges in translation is a minimalist approximation of an Imagist poem it may well have been produced by miniaturizing a song which itself was characterized less by abstraction and compression than by extension and elaboration through variation. While more contemporary translations presented in the anthologies above may seem less obviously poeticized than those of Schoolcraft or Gordon, their method seems similarly problematic. Perhaps, in hindsight, they too will appear hopelessly dated, revealing more about the stylistic preoccupations of late-20th century literary culture than the oral traditional cultures from which they emerge. "Any history of translations from the various Native American languages into English," observes Arnold Krupat, is "a history also necessarily of transcription, of the transformation of oral literatures into textual literatures. . . "(Krupat, in Swann On the Translation 3). Karl Kroeber makes a similarly point in noting that Native American texts were collected, transcribed, and archived by ethnographers from "hundreds of different languages, for many of which there are neither grammars nor dictionaries and often no longer any native speakers." Kroeber worries about the skill of translators and the difficulty of assessing the fidelity of translations but adds that:

We are faced, moreover, by double translation: not only the Englishing of a foreign language but also a written text representing an oral recitations, since none of the native peoples of North America depended on writing. (Kroeber, in Kroeber Traditional 1-2)

Translation adequate to this doubleness must consequently recognize and reflect differences between oral and written language use. And one sign of having achieved a dialogic relation might be if performativity can be conveyed.

Various scholars engage the question of what constitutes performance within and for a given culture as a way around this problem. Dell Hymes develops the distinction between knowledge of tradition and actual performance of that tradition (In Vain 132). Certain formal devices may mark oral poetry in some Chinookan traditions, such as vocalizations (translated as expressions such as "oh," Gee," "oh gee," "Yeah, well," oh! oh!") and direct speech (245); for Hymes these features empirically mark performance, if not actually constituting it. The clearest summation of the developing conceptualizations which undergird Ethnopoetic attention to performance is provided by Richard Bauman in Verbal Art as Performances. Bauman moves away from the position that "the nature of verbal art is . . . part of the essence of poetic language that it is somehow deviant from normal language" (Verbal 17), drawing on the work of Gregory Bateson (Steps Toward an Ecology of Mind) and Erving Goffman (Frame Analysis). Instead, he prefers to analyze an event and classify it as performance by those features which "key" it (framing or marking it for an audience) as performance.[18] Features that key performance, according to Bauman, include "special codes; figurative language; parallelism; special paralinguistic features (e.g. speaking tone, volume, style); special formulae; appeal to tradition; disclaimer of performance" (16).[19] Of the modes in this catalogue, paralinguistic features are of special note because only they are properly exclusive to oral (as opposed to textualized) performance. Bauman explains that:

Paralinguistic features, by their very nature, tend not to be captured in the transcribed or published versions of texts, with the exception of certain aspects of prosody in clearly poetic forms. The reader is consequently forced to rely on the incidental comments of the occasional sensitive observer who does note paralinguistic features of delivery style. These will generally take the form of descriptive notes, such as, 'the Mohave have a traditional staccato, strongly accented and rather rapid manner of delivering texts' (Deveruex 1949: 269). It is not only that recorded texts do not readily reflect paralinguistic features, but that in many cases, especially before the ready availability of tape recorders, the conditions of recording artistic texts required that conventional paralinguistic patterns be distorted . . . . (19-20)

Sound recordings are key to addressing the issue of the exclusion of paralinguistic features from transcriptions/translations. These extraneous elements in some performance traditions may be exactly what constitutes the telling of a story or poem as verbal art in the eyes of the culture. At the same time, these features along with other markers such as parallelism, serve as more than simple frames of performance. They play a powerful role in the casting of the form of the art. In this sense, one might argue that they are as crucial to the poetics of the oral poem as is end-rhyme in an English sonnet.

The most significant point in Bauman's Verbal Art is the emphasis on the emergent quality of oral performance; despite performance conventions and the systematizing tendencies of analysis, individual performances are necessarily varied and unique. Bauman credits Albert Lord with being one of the first to recognize this emergence in oral formulaic poetry. (39)

The point is that completely novel and completely fixed texts represent the poles of an ideal continuum, and that between the poles likes the range of emergent text structures to be found in empirical performance. The study of the factors contributing to the emergent quality of the oral literary text promises to bring about a major reconceptualization of the nature of the text, freeing it from the apparent fixity it assumes when abstracted from performance and placed on the written page . . . . (Bauman 40)

The concept of emergence invites a major reconceptualization of the performance text, although the dominance of post-structuralist approaches to textuality may have partially occluded this need. As formulated, the issue pertains to transcription and translation of oral literary texts; but awareness of this dynamic is equally relevant to appreciating the way in which, through an inversion, performance keys can be utilized in textual poetry to metonymize/actuate oral performance.[20]

Considerable work will be required to retranslate the Chippewa songs from Densmore into more adequate, structurally congruent and performative English poems. As a healthy habit, we might develop a suspicion of purportedly Native American "poems" which reflect the minimalist, haiku-like aesthetic. A general, comprehensive characterization of "oral poetry" is unachievable, as Ruth Finnegan, Dennis Tedlock and other scholars caution; but Densmore's textualizations suggests that Chippewa songs at least are less minimalist works of linguistic concentration than they are performances in time, elaborated through a balance of repetition and variation. Recognizing this fact and registering it upon the page brings us closer to an oral poetics.

In many Native American traditions, the typical form of oral songs seems to include multiple repetitions and perhaps one phrase of difference.[21] Another Chippewa example is "No. 88. Song of the Owl Medicine" (Densmore 45, 105), for which the reduced English reads as follows in Densmore's word-list:

I am the one

Who is trying to fly

He is making it (the medicine)

A simple reconstruction from the untranslated lyrics transcribed along with the melody suggest it would better be rendered:

I am the one who is trying to si

fly, I am the one who is trying to si

fly, He is making it (the medicine)

gi we da ni no gi

I am the one who is trying to si

fly, I am the one who is trying to si

fly, I am the one who is trying to si fly

Presenting this song on the page as a two-line poem imposes distorting assumptions. While the minimalist reductions convey the binary juxtaposition that defines its semantic structure, the manner in which oral poetry plays out over time is neglected; in the performed approach to "He is making it (the medicine)," anticipation builds. Representing the song completely, that is with full iteration rather than shortcut allusions to repetition, conveys part of the effect of performative repetition to readers. The consequent defamiliarizing effect should be welcomed, insofar as the salutary poetic translation requires retaining something of the otherness of the original language.

For James Clifford, in the best ethnographies, "the question of who writes (performs? transcribes? translates? edits?) cultural statements is inescapable.... Here the ethnographer no longer holds unquestioned rights of salvage: the authority long associated with bringing elusive, 'disappearing' oral lore into legible textual form" (Clifford, "Introduction: Partial Truths," 17). The pastoral allegory entails the "relentless placement of others in a present-becoming-past" (Clifford, "On Ethnographic Allegory," 114). To avoid this pastoral approach requires serious revising of ethnographic practice since "allegories of salvage are implied by the very practice of textualization ....

Whatever else an ethnography does, it translates experience into text.... One can construct an ethnography composed of dialogues. One can feature multiple voices, or a single voice. One can portray the other as a stable, essential whole, or one can show it to be the product of a narrative of discovery, in specific historical circumstances" (Clifford, "On Ethnographic Allegory," 115).

"...dialogical textual production goes well beyond more or less artful presentation of 'actual' encounters.... In this view, 'culture' is always relational, an inscription of communicative processes that exist, historically, between subjects in relations of power. (Clifford, "Introduction: Partial Truths," 15; Dwyer, Tedlock).

Where Clifford may seem to minimize the importance of presentation--and, by extension, the necessity for the kind of textual refinements advanced above--I want to argue that attention to these qualities also serves to retain a kind of intersubjective dialogue.

In the literary assimilation of oral poems produced within non-Western contexts, the poetry is subsumed into dominant literary styles. To a degree this is an unavoidable dimension of translation; it underscores the need for generational retranslation. The specific assimilation of Chippewa/Ojibway song into the Imagist frame of Euro-American modernism has a more specific ideological taint. The orientalizing comments put forth by Astrov are a case in point. But further, it represents a resistance to registering a prominent difference in the poetics of the songs. In the cases of the two songs analyzed above, the signal formal quality is not the compression and minimalism of an Imagist aesthetics. The tendency to extend, to ellaborate a modest amount of verbal material into lengthier compositions needs to be studied for what it implies about the centrality of performance context, attitudes about the relation of language and world, and the kind of interpretive fluidity the repetition calls up.

Works Cited

Astrov, Margaret, ed. American Indian Prose and Poetry: An Anthology. Gloucester, MA: Peter Smith, 1970.

Baraka, Amiri. "Expressive Language," Home: Social Essays by Leroi Jones [Amiri Baraka]. New York, Apollo Editions, 1966.

Bauman, Richard, ed. Folklore, Cultural Performances, and Popular Entertainment: A Communications Centered Handbook. NY: Oxford U P, 1992.

Bauman, Richard. Verbal Art as Performance. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press, 1977.

Bernstein, Charles. "Poetics of the America's," Modernism/Modernity, 3.3: 1-23.

Bevis, William. "American Indian Verse Translations" College English 35: 693-703.

Bhabba, Homi K. The Location of Culture. London: Routledge, 1994.

Bierhorst, John. "Incorporating the Native Voice: A Look Back from 1990," On the Translation of Native American Literature. Ed. Brian Swann. 51-63.

Brathwaite, Edward Kamau. Roots. Ann Arbor, MI: U Michigan, 1993.

Burnett, Paula. The Penguin Book of Caribbean Verse in English. London: Penguin, 1986.

Castro, Michael. Interpreting the Indian: Twentieth Century Poets and the Native American. Norman, OK: U Oklahoma P, 1983.

Clifford, James. "Traveling Cultures" Cultural Studies, eds. Lawrence Grossberg, Cary Nelson, and Paula A. Treichler. NY: Routledge, 1992. pp. 96-116.

Clements, William M. Native American Verbal Art: Texts and Contexts. Tucson: U Arizona P, 1996.

Cronyn, George, ed. Path on the Rainbow: An Anthology of Songs and Chants from the Indians of North America. NY: Liveright, 1934. Reprinted as American Indian Poetry: The Standard Anthology of Songs and Chants. NY: Liveright, 1962.

Deleuze, Gilles and Félix Guattari. Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, 1983.

Densmore, Francis. Chippewa Music. Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 45, 1910.

Densmore, Francis. Chippewa Music (II). Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 53, 1913.

Douglass, Frederick. Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglas. In Classic Slave Narratives. Ed. Henry Louis Gates, Jr. NY: Penguin, 1987.

Drucker, Johanna. The Visible Word: Experimental Typography and Modern Art, 1909-1923. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995.

Eagleton, Terry. Literary Theory. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1983.

Eklund, Coy. Chippewa (Ojibwe) Language Book. (n.p.) 1991.

Fanon, Frantz. Black Skin White Masks. NY: Grove Press, 1967.

Finnegan, Ruth. Oral Poetry: Its Nature, Significance and Social Context. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1992.

Glissant, Edouard. "Free and Forced Poetics" Alcheringa/ Ethnopoetics: A First International Symposium. (Vol 2:2) Eds. Michel Benamou and Jerome Rothenberg. Boston University, 1976. pp. 95-101.

Glissant, Edouard. Caribbean Discourse: Selected Essays. Caraf Books. Charlottesville: U P of Virginia, 1989.

Harrison, Regina. Signs, Songs, and Memory in the Andes: Translating Quechua Language and Culture. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1989.

Higgins, Dick. "Intermedia," Sound Poetry: A Catalogue. eds. Steve McCaffery and bp Nichol. Toronto: Underwhich Editions, 1978.

Hymes, Dell. "Some North Pacific Coast Poems: A Problem in Anthropological Philology," Symposium of the Whole: a Range of Discourse Toward and Ethnopoetics. Jerome Rothenberg and Diane Rothenberg, eds. Berkeley: U California P, 1983.

Hymes, Dell. In Vain I tried to Tell You: Essays in Native American Ethnopoetics, Philadelphia, 1981.

Kroeber, Karl ed. Traditional Literatures of the American Indian: Texts and Interpretations. 2nd ed. Lincolin: U Nebraska P, 1997.

Kroeber, Karl. "An Introduction to the Art of Traditional American Indian Storytelling." In Kroeber, Traditional. 1-24.

Lieberman, Leonard and Fatimah Linda C. Jackson. "Race and Three Models of Human Origin" American Anthropologist, Volume 97:2, June 1995; pp. 231-42.

Lord, Albert B. The Singer of Tales. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1960.

Monroe, Harriet. "Editorial Comment: Aboriginal Poetry," Poetry. 251.

Ong, Walter. Orality and Literacy: The Technologizing of the Word. London: Routledge, 1988.

Ortiz, Simon. "Song/Poetry and Language Expression and Perception." Symposium, eds. Jerome Rothenberg and Diane Rothenberg. 399-407.

Philip, Marlene Nourbese. "Ignoring Poetry" Chain: Documentary (Spring 1995) pp. 184-7

Philip, Marlene Nourbese. She Tries Her Tongue Her Silence Softly Breaks. Charlottetown, PEI: Ragweed Press, 1989.

Philip, Marlene Nourbese. Frontiers: Essays and Writings on Racism and Culture. Stratford, Ontario: Mercury Press, 1992.

Phillips, J.J. "Introduction," The Before Columbus Foundation Poetry Anthology: Selections from the American Book Awards 1980-1990, eds. J.J. Phillips, Ishmael Reed, Gundars Strads, and Shawn Wong. NY: W.W. Norton, 1992.

Poetry: A Magazine of Verse, February 1917: XI: 5. 221-275.

Pratt, Mary Louise. "Arts of the Contact Zone," Ways of Reading: An Anthology for Writers. Eds. David Bartholomae and Anthony Petrosky. Boston: Bedford Books, 1993.pp. 442-456[ reprinted in Imperial Eyes: Studies in Travel Writing and Transculturation, 1992.]

Rhodes, Richard A. Eastern Ojibwa-Chippewa-Ottawa Dictionary. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 1993.

Rothenberg, Jerome, ed. Technicians of the Sacred: A Range of Poetries from Africa, America, Asia, and Oceana. NY: Doubleday, 1968.

Rothenberg, Jerome. "Total Translation: An Experiment in the Presentation of American Indian Poetry." Symposium of the Whole: a Range of Discourse Toward and Ethnopoetics. Jerome Rothenberg and Diane Rothenberg, eds. Berkeley: U California P, 1983. Pp. 381-393.

Rothenberg, Paula S, ed. Racism and Sexism: An Integrated Study. NY: St. Martin's Press, 1988.

Saussure, Ferdinand de. Course in General Linguistics. Roy Harris, trans.La Salle, IL: Open Court, 1983.

Scholes, Robert. Structuralism in Literature: An Introduction. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1974.

Sollors, Werner, ed. The Invention of Ethnicity. NY: Oxford U Press, 1989.

Strauss, Lévi. Structural Anthropology. Garden City: Anchor Books, 1967.

Swann, Brian ed. On the Translation of Native American Literatures. Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1992.

Swann, Brian and Arnold Krupat eds. Recovering the Word: Essays on Native American Literature. Berkeley: U California P, 1987.

Swann, Brian ed. Coming to Light: Contemporary Translations of the Native Literatures of North America. NY: Random House, 1994.

Tedlock, Dennis and Jerome Rothenberg, general eds. Alcheringa / Ethnopoetics. Special Issue: Alcheringa: Ethnopoetics: A First International Symposium, Eds. Michael Benamou and Jerome Rothenberg. Boston: Alcheringa, Boston University, 1976. NS 2.2.

Tedlock, Dennis. "Ethnopoetics" in Folklore, Cultural Performances, and Popular Entertainment: A Communications Centered Handbook, ed. Richard Bauman, NY: Oxford U P, 1992, 81-85.

Tedlock, Dennis. "Toward A Restoration of the Word in the Modern World," Alcheringa NS 2.2, 1976, pp. 120-132.

Tedlock, Dennis. The Spoken Word and the Work of Interpretation. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1983.

Velie, Alan R., ed. American Indian Literature: An Anthology. Norman: U Oklahoma P, 1991 [1979].

Vicuña, Cecilia. "Thread of the Voice: Myth for us is Language" Rif/t [transcript of a talk]4/1 1995.

Vicuña, Cecila. Ceque Fragments/Fragmentos de un Ceque: The Center for Contemporary Arts Presents Cecilia Vicuña: Mixed Media Installation, June 24-July 29, 1994. [Exhibition pamphlet] 1994

Vicuña, Cecilia. "Purmamarca" in Chain, Spring 1995. Pp. 231-235.

Vicuña, Cecilia. LINEbreak: Interviews and Performances From the Literary Edge. [Audio cassette of radio broadcast interview with Charles Bernstein.]

Vicuña, Cecilia. PALABRARmas. A morning star folio 5/2 April 1994.

Vicuña, Cecilia. Unravelling Words and the Weaving of Water. Eliot Weinberger and Suzanne Jill Levine, trans. Saint Paul, MN: Greywolf, 1992.

OUTLINE and NOTESS

Ethnographic/Ethnopoetic Notes

1. Textualization - a key emphasis in postmodern ethnography, defusing the conceit that the ethnographer might transparently (objectively, empirically) record experience; self-consciousness about the rhetorical dimension of the ethnography itself highlights the "translation" from speech to writing; Clifford cautions against forgetting the Derridean insight into the "written" quality of speech.

2. New ethnography investigates the historical and ideological contexts within which a text is produced, seeing it as the product of a dialogical situation with "informants" speaking to the institutional context.

3. Ethnocriticism (Krupat): differnance must be maintained, i.e. the foreign-ness

4. In the transcription/translation processes of Ethnopoetics, these critical questions raise issues for the practice; the foregrounding of translation has included expectations of creating improved, more faithful, mimetic representations of oral performances; this aim is vulnerable to some of the same criticisms as the realist ethnography.

4.1. Self-consciousness can lead to a dangerous cul de sac in which the adequacy of translation is so undermined that it begins to seem impossible;

5. Densmore - my method, to revisit the text - retranslate the text with an eye to performance while also reading it in light of the disciplinary and cultural expectations that produced Densmore's text and the subsequent publications of it as it moved from the sphere of anthropology into literary anthologies.

6. A postmodern ethnopoetics must incorporate the insights of current anthropology while resisting the silencing of texts

6.1. Trace the history and misrepresentations of "My Love Has Departed

6.1.1. Analysis of what institutional/cultural expectations shaped this

6.2. Produce a new translation that acknowledges the textualization process and the transposition of the text from cultural performance to ethnographic artifact to literary text

6.2.1. Maintain elements of Otherness, performativity, i.e. heterogeneity

6.3. A postmodern ethnopoetic text of Densmore's-Mary English's-Ojibway song must

6.3.1. reflect the emergent quality of a traditional oral performance

6.3.2. signal the ellaborative qualities that resist containment and that distinguish it from those modernist, lyric aesthetics to which it has previously been assimilated....

1. "Participant-observation, the classic formula for ethnographic work, leaves little room for texts" [or textuality] (Clifford, "Introduction: Partial Truths," 1).

2. "No longer a marginal or occulted, dimension, writing has emerged as central tgo what anthropologists do both in the field and thereafter. The fact that it has not until recently been protrayed or seriously discussed reflects the persistence of an ideology of representation and immediacy of experience. Writing reduced to method: keeping good fieldnotes, making good maps, 'writing up' the results." (Clifford, "Introduction: Partial Truths," 1).

[Densmore's work at least equal to early 20th c ethnography in these expectations, with her phonograph and use of musical notation]

3. A self-reflexive attention to "text making and rhetoric serves to hilight the constructed, artifical nature of cultural accounts. It undermines overly transparent modes of authority, and it draws attention to the historical predicament of ethnography, the fact that it is always caught up in the invention, not the representation, of cultures. . . . (Clifford, "Introduction: Partial Truths," 2).

4. Ethnography "makes the familar strange, the exotic quotidian"

[the familiar strange: a subtitle?

the exotic quotidian:?]

5. "...what has emerged from all these ideological shifts, rules changes, and new compromises is the fact that a series of historical pressures has begun to reposition anthropology with respect to its 'objects' of study. Anthropology no longer speaks with automatic authority for others defined as unable to speak for themselves ('primitive,' 'pre-literate,' 'without history')" (Clifford, "Introduction: Partial Truths," 9-10)

7. "Ethnography in the service of anthropology once looked out at clearly defined others, defined as primitive, or tribal, or non-Western, or pre-literate, or nonhistorical--the list, if extended, soon becomes incoherent. Now ethnography encounters others in relation to istelf, while seeing itself as other" (Clifford, "Introduction: Partial Truths," 23)

8. The pastoral allegory entails the "relentless placement of others in a present-becoming-past" (Clifford, "On Ethnographic Allegory," 114). To avoid this pastoral approach requires serious revising of ethnographic practice since "allegories of salvage are implied by the very practice of textualization .... Whatever else an ethnography does, it translates experience into text.... One can construct an ethnography composed of dialogues. One can feature multiple voices, or a single voice. One can portray the other as a stable, essential whole, or one can show it to be the product of a narrative of discovery, in specific historical circumstances" (Clifford, "On Ethnographic Allegory," 115).

CUTS

With roots in the beginning of the century, a crystallization of dispersed interests in indigenous poetries and oral cultures brought together anthropologists, linguists, poets, and literary scholars in the late 1960s and 1970s. Ethnopoetics produced a heightened awareness of: the artfulness of oral poetry, the importance of theorizing transcription and translation, the existence and substantiality of oral traditions (often counter to the Western canon), and the ways in which peoples' verbal arts illuminate their cultures. Precipitating a near paradigm shift in literary studies, the recognition that traditions of oral poetry were more than simply primitive precursors to written literature spawned concentrated efforts to acknowledge, understand, and adequately represent oral poems and poetics. As a literary project, Ethnopoetics begins with an acknowledgement of the limitations of a western model of literature and the particular texts celebrated in the terms of that model. It revalues rich, traditional poetries in formal, philosophical and spiritual terms thereby enhancing the domain of poetry. As a derivative of anthropology, Ethnopoetics marks a returning to texts particularly those which had been collected for purposes of linguistic research so that they might be reevaluated as aesthetic, as well as culturally informative, works.

In order to establish a context for Ethnopoetics, this chapter will briefly look to the earlier part of the century before the intervention of Ethnopoetics to address the status of traditional oral poetry within anthropology and literary studies. This survey will be followed by discussion of an exemplary text; the publication history will be revisited and a retranslation along ethnopoetic lines will be ventured. Following this, the emergence and primary features of Ethnopoetics will be discussed, along with some of the exemplary anthologies and translations produced as a consequence.

"The word is short"

With respect to music, the value of listening and the need for adults (without formative musical experiences) to learn how to truly hear music has generated enormous attention and sympathy in the popular press. Ethnopoetics' lasting legacy might be in teaching literates to hear the poetry of other traditions, and even, poetry closer to home. Those involved in Ethnopoetics implicitly reject the discreteness of oral and literate art. They build bridges across the great divide the irreversible teleology of progress from orality to literacy implied in the work of Ong, Lord, and Havelock. The reconstitution of an ethnopoetic ear, a process of listening, would begin in performance and, recalling Zora Neale Hurston's ethnographic method of learning "informants'" songs by ear, foreground the aural aspects of sound through the transcribed and translated text.

One motivation for an extensive re-tuning of the ethnopoetic ear in such a fashion is the increasing number of contemporary poets from both literate and oral traditions perhaps influenced by Ethnopoetics who are publishing written poetry with such strong oral/aural components that it cannot possibly be fully appreciated in written form alone or through conventional reading strategies. Cecilia Vicuña is a prime example, but Edward Kamau Brathwaite, Jerome Rothenberg, Nathaniel Mackey, Ann Waldman, Amiri Baraka, among others are writing in ways that confound simple opposition between oral and literate tradition.

The Ethnopoetics influence upon the audible components of their work is registered in many ways, often through textual means and, often, with the complement of highly performative voicings of the poems. Oral tradition manifests itself: as a formal compositional device (through means of parallelism and other aural structuring); through voice as a metaphysical principle; as a means of spatializing performance; as a connection to non-linguistic sound in the natural world; and through association with speech rhythms and vernacular language. As this partial catalogue suggests, the full measure of many contemporary written poetries cannot be taken when considered only in the conventional terms of literature (if those terms remain unchanged by Ethnopoetics).

Recalling again Weinberger's suggestion that Vicuña's poems must be approached by "thinking first of their performance," one notes that this begs the question of whether readers know how to think of, or, more accurately, hear performance. The growing body of work which draws on "oral" tradition and poetics (written amid a multilingual vortex that Ethnopoetics first dipped into) but is at once highly 'literary,' begs for the application of an ethnopoetic ear, one which understands sound performance as a medium for poetry and not just a secondary mode of presentation, the 'poetry reading.'

Turning an ear tuned by Ethnopoetics to the airing of contemporary poetries, particularly those from cross-cultural contexts, might finally seem an unremarkable technical adjustment, an employment of new critical close-reading practices to the audio channel. Yet Ethnopoetics has the potential to bring more than the trained ear; drawing on the practical and metaphysical significance of sound in traditional oral poetries, it could lead to a full-fledged paradigm shift in the understanding of sound in poetry.

A dialogic approach implies the ethnographer is also involved in textual production and the recognition that:

"Ethnography's disappearing object is, then, in significant degree, a rhetorical construct legitimating a representational practice: 'salvage' ethnography in its widest sense. The other is lost, in disintegrating time and space, but saved in the text" (Clifford, "On Ethnographic Allegory," 112).

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Among the elements common to much oral poetry which ethnopoetic texts often register, we might discuss parallelistic structuring and the use of "nonsense" vocables.[22] Parallelism is identified as the formal repetition of "phonic, grammatical, semantic, or prosodic structures" (Bauman 18), but is not simply a formal device.[23] Repetitions with usually slight variations occur in pairs, but extend as well to triplets and lengthier repetitions in traditions from Hebrew, Greek, Chinese, North American, South American, Russian etc. oral poetry. And while it is not exclusive to oral art or verse, its role there has been significant. Some attention has been paid to the practical mnemonic contribution of parallelism in a performance tradition, aiding the performer in speaking with fluency, aiding the audience in understanding.[24] In Mayan verse, Tedlock argues for parallelism as a formal effect that structures "by recurrent figures of meaning [rather] than by recurrent figures of sound" (Tedlock "Hearing A Voice, in Sherzer and Woodbury 146). While parallelism is seldom employed with the strictness of rhyme and metrical schemes in written European poetry of the last centuries, it often operates as a strong formal principle. For Tedlock, writing of Mayan verse, "the net effect of variation in ... verse forms is probably on the side of the material [referential] imagination rather than the formal, causing the attention to hesitate a little over the question of meaning" (Spoken Word 230).

As a special case of repetition, parallelism usually represents an interrelation of aesthetic and referential functions. A similar interrelation has been observed in instances of "nonsense" vocables. Such syllable sound patterns, often thought of as magic words or an ancient language (and sometimes actually a borrowed language, ie. from the language of a neighboring group), can comprise an entire song. More often they are interspersed among intelligible phrasings. Vocables "carry the melody" or "modify textual materials in order to allow them to coincide with the melody and rhythm of the song proper."[25]

William Powers makes the crucial point that Lakota vocables are not casually improvised: "once a song has been composed, the relationship between the vocables and texts remains fixed for the life of the song" (298). Structurally, then, they have significance within the whole. In addition, "vocabalic phrases. . .[themselves] have structure." Vocables play roles in patterning through rhyme, meter, and alliteration, while serving a larger structural role by marking parts of the song and setting its pitch, "and their phonemic characteristics are somewhat constrained by the language of the people who sing them" which is another way of saying that vocables are composed of the speech sounds common to the language (Powers 294-5, 297).

In an essay entitled "Discovering Oral Performance and Measured Verse in American Indian Narrative," Dell Hymes perceives a structural function in the repetition of initial particles in Chinook oral poetry. Hymes shows how "initial elements" corresponding to English expressions such as "now," "then," "now then," and "now again" regularly "recur in structurally significant roles" in some Native American oral traditions, effectively constituting the "aspects of the measuring that makes the material verse." (In Vain 318). His particular analysis of the repetition of initial particles similar to the English "now" or "then" leads to a more general recognition of the "covariation between form and meaning" in oral poetry, a notion that puts linguistic weight behind Ethnopoetics efforts to register elements of oral performances (including vocables, repetition, and voice shaping) through careful transcription (318).

[1] Michael Castro emphasizes the identification with the"holistic awareness" of Indians in his useful study Interpreting the Indian: Twentieth-Century Poets and the Native American (5).

[2] John Bierhorst writes that the emergence of the native voice comes "in just three waves of influence that have actually touched on the mainstream" of American literature and culture. These are the 19th century works of Longfellow, drawing on Schoolcraft; the "primitivist ripples heard in the 1920s" and associated with Pound, Eliot, Austin, Lowell, Mário de Andrade, and Lawrence, and the "third wave" beginning in 1960 and including Snyder, Merwin, Paz, Ribeiro, Momaday, Silko, Cardenal, Cuadra, Rothenberg, Gunn Allen, Fuentes, Waldman, Le Guin, and Steuding"("Incorporating" 52, 61-63). The present study pictures the configuration of the so-called waves somewhat differently, but is in accord with Bierhorst's general sense of three significant periods. Jerome Rothenberg's essays and anthologies sketch a more complicated equation in which a continuity of mainstream interest in indigenous arts characterizes the 20th century in the Americas and Europe.

[3] This volume was reprinted in 1934 and appears as American Indian Poetry: The Standard Anthology of Songs and Chants, ed. George W. Cronyn. NY: Liveright, 1962. See Interpreting the Indian: Twentieth-Century Poets and the Native American, by Michael Castro, for detail on the issues surrounding representation and appropriation of Native American literature, including the major anthologies addressed here.

[4] Brian Swann in the "Introduction" to Coming to Light: Contemporary Translations of the Native Literatures of North America gives a useful rendering of European-American engagements with Native North American language and verbal arts, from the publication of the first grammar (Timucuan, north-east Florida) in 1534 through the present day bilingual presentations of Yaqui Deer Songs by Evers and Molina; he quite usefully contextualizes in terms of social and political history. Michael Castro's Interpreting the Indian: Twentieth Century Poets and the Native American, (Norman: U Oklahoma P, 1991) gives a comprehensive reading of twentieth-century representations of Native American literature.

[5] Castro provides additional information on the connections between Modernist poetry and Native American song, surveying various publications and translators. Mary Austin's "emphasis on [Indian songs'] superficial similarities to imagism and free verse" (25) is critiqued, but his emphasis is less textual and more toward the cultural imposition and appropriation of white writers.

[6] Dell Hymes has written at great length about the presentation and translation of Native American texts collected in the early part of this century, particularly those from among language groups since become extinct. As an example of faulty translation/transcription, Hymes analyzes the problems of Henry Rowe Schoolcraft's "Chant to the Fire-fly" which is typically presented in a terribly distorted form. A readily accessible version of this text is presented in the American Poetry: The Nineteenth Century: Volume Two (Library of America) which also includes a representative selection of 19th century renderings, including others of Schoolcraft, which give a good sense of Native American poetry representation at that time. Sources for the anthology vary from popular publications to specialized ethnological reports, most of which would not have been available to the general public. Hymes goes back to native language transcription from which he deliberately reconstructs a translation, word by word, demonstrating the errors and distortions of prior versions. My own method retranslation owes much to his model.

[7] Kenneth Rexroth takes a similar stance in his 1961 Assays; his interest in Densmore's translations leads him to propose the analogy with classical Japanese poetry; as Hymes notes, Rexroth does signify some awareness of the danger of simplification in eliminating repetitions and vocables but does not question the fitness of the comparison. (Symposium of the Whole, fn. 8, p. 366.)

[8] This key text "Some North Pacific Coast Poems: A Problem in Anthropological Philology" appears in American Anthropologist, v. 67.2, April 1965, pp. 316-339; Rothenberg, Symposium of the Whole, 343-365; and In Vain I tried to Tell You: Essays in Native American Ethnopoetics, Philadelphia, 1981.

[9] "Chippewa" is retained in this study although "Ojibwa" is now preferred for the Native American people and the Algonquin language spoken in and around Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Ontario to avoid confusion, since Densmore and nearly all subsequent anthologists use the former term.

[10] For an evaluation of the major anthologies of Native American oral poetry, see William Clement's self-described "rogues gallery" in Native American Verbal Art: Texts and Contexts. Emphasized are the degree to which each anthology registers cultural background, presents performance context, and allows in license in translation.

[11] Path on the Rainbow: An Anthology of Songs and Chants from the Indians of North America. NY: Liveright, 1934 is reprinted as American Indian Poetry: The Standard Anthology of Songs and Chants in 1962 and American Indian Poetry: An Anthology of Songs and Chants NY: Fawcett, 1991.

[12] A rationale for treating Ojibwa words as congruent with English phrases can be imagined (on the basis of different grammatical resources and expectations available to each language), but this should not necessarily lead to marking these segments with linebreaks. Moreover, no such logic or defense is raised by any of the anthologists.

[13] A reader familiar with Western musical notation and practiced in Ojibwa phonetics could sing the song from the transcription but it is neither performable nor readable in English.

[14] In footnote form, Densmore provides the following information, to which none of the anthologies refer, about Mary English: "The singer of this song is a sister of William Warren, the historian of the Chippewa. Her family lived on Madeline Island when she was a child, and this song came from there. It is a strange experience to talk with one who remembers when there were only one or two boats on Lake Superior, and who stood on the present site of Duluth when it was peopled only by a few Indians. On one occasion Mr. Warren and his sister, with a party of Chippewa, camped where Duluth now stands. As they were taking their departure Mr. Warren stood beside his canoe on the shore, stretched out his hand over the water, and said, 'Some day this lake will be a highway of water where hundreds of boats will come and go;' then he pointed to the little group of tipis and said, 'My brothers, you and I will never see it, but some day a great city will stand there.' The Indians pointed significantly to their foreheads. Their brother had been too long in the hot sun, and even his sister entered the canoe with a heavy heart" (150). The insight provided by this sort of information, however oblique, helps establish a cultural and performance context. Its suppression seems accessory to the decontextualizing accomplished through comparison to haiku or Imagism.

[15] Bilingual word list for "My Love Has Departed" of Mary English, including the previously untranslated part 3. : 1. Mangod g win (a loon) 2. Nn dnen dm (I thought it was) 1. Mangod g win (a loon) 2. Nn dnen dm (I thought it was) 3. Mi gwenawn (but it was) 4. Nin muce (my love's) 5. ni wawasa boyezud (splashing oar) 6. Ba witng (to Sault St. Marie) 7. Gi nma dja (He has departed) 4. Nin muce (My love's) 8. A nima dja (has gone on before me) 9. Kawn inawa (never again) 10. Nndawa bama si (can I see him) 10a. Si (hmm) 1. Mangod g win (a loon) 2. Nn dnen dm (I thought it was) 3. Mi gwenawn (but it was) 9a/4a. Kawn muce (never again love's) 5. ni wawasa boyezud (splashing oar).

[16] The only word appearing in the lyrics alongside the musical transcription without being glossed is Kawn muce ; Densmore renders similar words: Kawn inawa (never again) and Nin muce (my love's). Extrapolating from Densmore's glosses, Kawn muce might be rendered as a compressed conjunction of the two words: "never again my love's" or, better: "never again love's." At this point, it is useful to consult basic Ojibwa linguistic sources. Two dictionaries confirm ka-wika (never) mi.nawa (again); niinmoshenh (my lover, my sweetheart) (Elkund, 1991 and Rhodes, 1993). This conjectural translation is offered as an example of how ethnopoetic work ought to begin.

[17] The false poeticization noted above has become a much less common problem; however, the obverse distortion the rendering of oral performances simply prose legends still frequently appears. This method of presentation "seems" to validate the cultural wisdom of a people but does so at the expense of recognizing the aesthetic production. Erdoes and Ortiz's 1984 American Indian Myths and Legends is a recent example of this error. See Dell Hymes "Anthologies and Narrators" in Recovering the Word for an analysis of this collection in particular and prosification in general.

[18] Bauman moves in a direction somewhat different to that of Ethnopoetics, coming to see performance itself as the determinant of oral art, as opposed to any particular poetic qualities, such as those rendered in anthologies of minimally-performative "poems". He writes: " . . . performance is a mode of language use, a way of speaking . . . it is no longer necessary to begin with artful texts . . . . Rather, in terms of the approach being developed here, performance becomes constitutive of the domain of verbal art as spoken communication" (Bauman Verbal 11).

[19] Bauman elaborates the necessity of attending to paralinguistic features such as "rate, length, pause duration, pitch contour, tone of voice, loudness, and stress" with special reference to Tedlock's Zuni transcription (20).

[20] In an extremely brief conclusion, Bauman alludes to the association between the emergent aspects of performance and Raymond Williams' use of the term for the revolutionary edge of dominant culture, thereby raising if not developing the additional implications at the social level (47-48).

[21] A partial catalogue of Ethnopoetic translations that support this would include: Yaqui Deer Songs in the volume of the same title by Evers and Molina; Nigerian "Songs of Ritual License" in Alcheringa New Series 2.1; the Horse Songs of the Navajo, translated by David McAllester. Oral narrative shows a markedly different structure, although one might argue that parallelism involves a similar procedure of elaboration.

[22] Examples of these two phenomena of course can be found outside of traditional oral cultures. The poetry of Walt Whitman is strongly parallelistic; fifties popular song and jazz scat-singing both feature vocables. Yet both are

dramatic formal features which textualization has often omitted in the presentation of oral works.

[23] See Bauman, Verbal Art as Performance (18-20); Jakobsen, Language in Literature (especially, Ch. 9., "Poetry of Grammar and Grammar of Poetry"; Finnegan, Oral Poetry (98-109, 126-133) and also Tedlock, "Hearing A Voice in an Ancient Text: Quiché Maya Poetics in Performance," in Sherzer and Woodbury, Native American Discourse: Poetics and Rhetoric and The Spoken Word and the Work of Interpretation (especially 216-230).

[24] See Walter Ong, Orality and Literacy (33-42) for an emphasis on the "redundancy" and "copiousness" in oral tradition with respect to mnemonics and Ong's symptomatic concern for cultural conservation in oral culture. Ong writes that, "the more sophisticated orally patterned thought is, the more it is likely to be marked by set expressions skillfully used" while there are ". . . .abundant instances of thought patterns of orally educated characters who move in these oral, mnemonically tooled groves" (35). Throughout, the weakness of Ong's treatment is a generalizing perspective on oral cultures which cannot quite admit the notions of individual, creative artistry in oral culture into its narrative of progress culminating in literate culture. Indeed, he writes "In an oral culture, to think through something in non-formulaic, non-patterned, non-mnemonic terms, even if it were possible, would be a waste of time, for such thought, once worked through, could never be recovered with any effectiveness, as it could be with the aid of writing." (35)

The work of the "oralists" Ong, Jack Goody, Eric Havelock, and Albert Lord is not entirely commensurate with the concerns of Ethnopoetics. The oralists share in a tendency to approach oral cultures as preliterate instances in the context of a general (salutary) western advance toward literacy; in contrast, Ethnopoetics practitioners tend to operate under the counter-assumption phrased by Rothenberg in this way "Primitive means complex." The operating

premise of Ethnopoetics allows it to approach non-literate forms on their own terms, recognizing their sophisticated dimensions, rather than comparing them in a usually unfavorable light to the capacities of literate culture.

[25] William K. Powers discusses the employment of vocables within a specific context and proposes for their proper transcription in "Translating the Untranslatable: The Place of the Vocable in Lakota Song," On the Translation of Native American Literatures.