Art & engineering

[Ruey <tmi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I have one more set of thoughts to throw out for consideration and 
comments. Something similar to the rift between art and science exists 
with Native Americans. They really distrust any Gringo way of doing 
anything ... and obviously have good reason. But their dislike of 
science is especially interesting to me. I would love to get to teach 
science and math at a pueblo here and see if it was possible to get over 
the hump so to speak. I had a friend who taught at Rough Rock 
Demonstration School on the Navajo Res in the 1970s. He did teach about 
biology and zoology. They had an elder attend the classes to be there 
and explain the Navajo version of reality. Navajos grouped animals by 
their movement. A lizard was similar to a ground squirrel because both 
moved quickly across ground. If you used an atlatl or bow and arrow to 
hunt them I guess that way of science makes pretty good sense. If you 
are not familiar with Navajo beliefs I will say they have some of the 
spookiest witchcraft beliefs I know of and when you live among them 
these beliefs, no matter how scientific you imagine yourself, begin to 
be your reality. I was in nine bad ambushes and more firefights than I 
can remember in Nam but there was a night in northern Arizona when we 
came around a bend in dirt road and encountered an old  Navajo woman 
with a sheep and a large fire that was the most scared I have ever been. 
We had been reading a book on Navajo witchcraft and the sight of that 
old woman was as frightening as anything I ever experienced. So frame of 
reference has much to do with your perception of reality. I have also 
been fascinated by technologies that Native Americans developed and 
think some of them to be as clever as say anything that exists in a 
digital camera. I wonder if Native American dislike of science and math 
is all related to things like the Sand Creek Massacre or our shoving our 
"reality" upon them or what? I really don't know for certain. I always 
have a sense living here near Taos Pueblo that they are biding their 
time and waiting for us to self destruct. Several times they have ridden 
and hiked around the neighborhood as if preparing to retake the land, 
scowling at us as they passed by. Other times, like if you talk to them 
at the Post Office they are pretty friendly and considerate but always a 
little distant.

In earlier days Adolf Bandelier stayed at Cochiti Pueblo, learned the 
language, was told a number of oral tradition tales and wrote "The 
Delight Makers" based upon these experiences. This was the 1880s.  He 
explored Bandelier NM ruins with Charles Loomis, who also lived at 
Isleta Pueblo and was told oral tradition tales and recorded them. Later 
in the 1930s, a woman came here named Elsie Clews Parson. She recorded 
an enormous amount about pueblo sacred beliefs as an anthropologist. 
Often she paid informants for their information. Partly I think because 
she disclosed the secret, sacred beliefs of kiva ceremonies that were 
owned by men, she became more despised than perhaps anyone ever has here 
and poisoned the well for all subsequent anthropologists. Both Pueblo 
men and women despised her about equally. For years colleges and 
universities had to lock up her books because they would be stolen or so 
many pages ripped out as to be worthless. She wrote her books as science 
or absolute fact and that also seems to have been part of the problem 
for people here who take some delight at pointing out things she got 
wrong. Bandelier never was anywhere near so despised for his book and 
yet in many ways I think he actually revealed more of interest about 
Pueblo Indians as beings. He wrote his book as historical fiction but 
reading Cochiti oral tales you can see that his book must be quite an 
accurate interpretation of Cochiti beliefs overlaid upon historical 
events. I think because he wrote it in a form that was not unlike an 
oral tradition tale, that perhaps it was not so offensive. Both were 
scientists. I would say that Bandelier would have been the far more 
interesting person to meet and talk with - he knew many languages and 
was such an observant person who dabbled in anything that interested 
him. He was an archaeologist though his most significant scientific 
contribution had to be that novel which even today all anthropology 
students read. You would study Elsie's work too but have to be very 
interested in anthropology to get through much of it. Her book is very 
dry and methodical. I have a sense though I know of no art he produced 
other than that novel, that he was a person who felt comfortable in art 
and science and that Elsie though she admired many aspects of their art, 
was not someone who felt comfortable unless describing what she saw in 
strictly scientific terms. Today, because so much of pueblo beliefs and 
knowledge are slipping away some Pueblo Indians have taken to consulting 
her books to revive their beliefs and ceremonies but I think she is 
still strongly despised here.

Amazingly no one has ever made a feature film of Bandelier's novel. If 
it were done well it would have to be among the most interesting of 
American films ever made - a film about America before any Europeans 
arrived and based upon oral tradition tales. The book almost begs to be 
a movie even though Bandelier wrote it at the time Edison was inventing 
film and Bandelier had certainly never seen a movie. I started 
converting the dialog to script format just to see how easy it would be. 
I doubt anyone could ever get Cochiti Pueblo to cooperate in making the 
film and without them I am sure any film would be a disaster. I have 
thought the best hope for encouraging the making of it would be to teach 
film making to youth at Cochiti or one of the other Queres speaking 
pueblos. I wonder if anyone on this list teaches photography or film on 
a res? I have also thought that teaching about imaging might be a way to 
sneak in a little painless math or science along the way.  I hope this 
random collection of thoughts gives some sense of the similarities that 
exist with the one now between art and science and apologize for how 
long it has gotten.

Ed