In the novel The Inconvenient Indian: A Curious Account of Native People In North America by Thomas King, the narrator dwells on the way that history is presented to Americans. Throughout the novel Thomas King challenges the ideals of history with an ironic tone. This tone helps readers better comprehend the true meanings of his main argument. King makes his passions clear as he formulates an argument regarding Indian-Indian and Indian-White relations. The point about these relationships that King conveys is that the internal relationships between Indians have altered, but the Indian-White relations have not in comparison to the past. Throughout the first chapters of the book, King made an effort to show readers the internal relationship
…show more content…
According to King instead of the prevailment of past relationships between Indian-Indians there has been three counter-narratives for them: the Dead, the Live, and the Legal Indian. Dead Indians are described by King as the, ‘‘stereotypes and cliches that North America has conjured up’’ (53). These are the types of Indians that are portrayed by Hollywood, these are the Indians that North Americans find fascinating. On the other hand, the Live Indians are the less popular Indians as described by King, ‘‘Live Indians, from an Old World point of view, were an intriguing, perplexing, and annoying part of life in New World’’ (59). The Europeans wanted these types of Indians to die off as they were seen as inconvenient. Live Indians did not die off and in fact King states that ‘‘All Native people living in North America today are Live Indians’’ (61). The third category Aboriginals are placed in was Legal Indians. Legal Indians are known as Status Aboriginals and are recognized by the Canadian and U.S. government. King explains that, ‘‘Legal Indian[s] [are] a by-product of the treaties that both countries signed with the Native nations’’ (69). Legal Indians were created by treaty agreements of the Europeans. King also adds that only Live Indians can be Legal Indians, conjuring more hate towards the Legal Indians. This is indisputable evidence that the change of relationships between …show more content…
In the past, Aboriginals communities were separated and they were forced onto reserves. At the moment nothing seems to have changed, as King currently points out that, ‘‘In order to maintain the cult and sanctity of the Dead Indian, North America has decided that Live Indians living today cannot be genuine Indians’’ (64). By using the words dead Indian, cult, sanctity and genuine King explores the idea that North Americans again are trying to degrade and bring in the version of Indigenous people that they want. In this case Canada wants the Dead Indians, while in the past they wanted Christianity converted Aboriginals. Notwithstanding the fact that in the past Christopher Columbus came to Canada and claimed this land to be his own disregarding the reality that the land was already populated with people. King again claims the cultivation of land in the past and present are fairly similar stating that: ‘‘North America no longer sees Indians’’ (53). North Americans are ignoring the Aboriginals currently (specifically their rights by treating past signed treaties), just as Columbus ignored them. However, King does not blame this lack of change on specific Americans. He blames it on the communic aspects of the American society stating, ‘‘race was a divine sanction, a scientific certainty, and an economic imperative’’ (29). This shows that in the
According to King instead of the prevailment of past relationships between Indian-Indians there has been three counter-narratives for them: the Dead, the Live, and the Legal Indian. Dead Indians are described by King as the, ‘‘stereotypes and cliches that North America has conjured up’’ (53). These are the types of Indians that are portrayed by Hollywood, these are the Indians that North Americans find fascinating. On the other hand, the Live Indians are the less popular Indians as described by King, ‘‘Live Indians, from an Old World point of view, were an intriguing, perplexing, and annoying part of life in New World’’ (59). The Europeans wanted these types of Indians to die off as they were seen as inconvenient. Live Indians did not die off and in fact King states that ‘‘All Native people living in North America today are Live Indians’’ (61). The third category Aboriginals are placed in was Legal Indians. Legal Indians are known as Status Aboriginals and are recognized by the Canadian and U.S. government. King explains that, ‘‘Legal Indian[s] [are] a by-product of the treaties that both countries signed with the Native nations’’ (69). Legal Indians were created by treaty agreements of the Europeans. King also adds that only Live Indians can be Legal Indians, conjuring more hate towards the Legal Indians. This is indisputable evidence that the change of relationships between …show more content…
In the past, Aboriginals communities were separated and they were forced onto reserves. At the moment nothing seems to have changed, as King currently points out that, ‘‘In order to maintain the cult and sanctity of the Dead Indian, North America has decided that Live Indians living today cannot be genuine Indians’’ (64). By using the words dead Indian, cult, sanctity and genuine King explores the idea that North Americans again are trying to degrade and bring in the version of Indigenous people that they want. In this case Canada wants the Dead Indians, while in the past they wanted Christianity converted Aboriginals. Notwithstanding the fact that in the past Christopher Columbus came to Canada and claimed this land to be his own disregarding the reality that the land was already populated with people. King again claims the cultivation of land in the past and present are fairly similar stating that: ‘‘North America no longer sees Indians’’ (53). North Americans are ignoring the Aboriginals currently (specifically their rights by treating past signed treaties), just as Columbus ignored them. However, King does not blame this lack of change on specific Americans. He blames it on the communic aspects of the American society stating, ‘‘race was a divine sanction, a scientific certainty, and an economic imperative’’ (29). This shows that in the