The
Bull Who Would Not Sit
While there are many
history books we study today who tell a tale of the Battle of Little Big Horn
from the side of the United States and its loss, there are few who tell the
side from the victor who refused to stand down, Sitting Bull. Gary C. Anderson’s biography entitled Sitting
Bull and the Paradox of Lakota Nationhood might just fill in this gap. The title of the book would suggest this book
is not just about Sitting Bull, but suggests an interesting paradox will be
illuminated. Anderson details for the
reader the contradictions regarding how hard and long the Lakota had to fight
to be established as independent from the government, and the contradictions
that are visible when they are finally pronounced as a “nation.” Even though the government eventually made
this pronouncement, they historically continued to fail to recognize them as
such. They actually withheld the
pronouncement until such a time when the Lakota Nationhood was least capable of
acting as a nation. Thus, the paradox. Anderson felt there was much sentimentalism
already surrounding Sitting Bull, which wasn’t his goal. He wanted to tell a less biased account of
his rise to chiefdom and what was accomplished under his leadership of his
people to attempt to simply survive as they always had.
As the U.S. government
used its army to attempt to reign in the “hostile” members of the Lakota people
and bully them into adapting to their own culture, Sitting Bull refused to
allow this to occur. He fought against
the U.S. Army in many battles as a result of the attempts to use Manifest
Destiny to claim the lands moving west.
The U.S. wanted gold, they wanted to expand their railroad, and the
Indians were in their way. By the
massive slaughtering of the buffalo, the tribes were depleted of their food
source and died off. By the use of
Manifest Destiny to take over the lands and their treaties forcing them to
register or be considered hostile, the government continued to press west, with
no concern for the claim of the land the Indians had always populated. Most tribes refused to fight against the
government and were unable to defend themselves against their overtaking of
their lands. While others were sitting
down and allowing this to occur, one leader refused to comply. Sitting Bull used his strong, spiritual
leadership abilities to battle against the U.S. and their forceful ways of
taking the land belonging to his nation.
He refused to sit back and allow this to occur. Anderson stresses the historic Battle of the
Little Big Horn was won not so much as a mishap by Colonel George Armstrong
Custer, but more so due to the past successes of the Lakota Nation and the
leadership of Sitting Bull, himself. Finally,
a story told from the other side. Anderson
stresses how Sitting Bull’s stand against the American government and its
armies has left an impact that has shaped the culture of many Native Americans’
way of life. While he does not give an
in depth look at the life of Sitting Bull, he provides many highlights which
make the reader want to know more. While
his political and cultural sides are discussed, there are many areas left
unexplored in this short, quick read.
While that may be a
plus if you are looking for just an overview or what occurred during a specific
time period, it could be a negative for many readers. Some readers who may not be well-versed in
American history may feel as if they are missing the background necessary to
get a full understanding of the ideas Anderson is attempting to convey. The condensed life of the Lakota Sioux during
the time of Sitting Bull’s leadership is only covered. This leaves the reader having to possibly
refer to other references in order to get a full understanding of what happened
before and after. Many areas are only
touched on by Anderson and not explored as in depth as some readers may
desire. As the title encourages someone
to wonder what the “paradox” is going to be, Anderson does not get to that
subject until the very end. This leaves
the reader wishing they had that information at the beginning so that they are
better able to relate it to all of the material they are reading. Some may have to go back and re-read the book
to get a better understanding of this issue in Anderson’s layout of this
writing.
Whereas individual
readers have various purposes for the desire to know more about Sitting Bull,
this short read is a start to get an overview and a thirst to know more about
his leadership and his attempts to lead his people to independence. Highlights of his relationship with the U.S.
government and his battle to defend their land are covered well, while Anderson
also discusses aspects of their culture, such as the Ghost Dance, and Sitting
Bull’s importance in that culture. This
biography discusses a crucial conflict in history, the Battle of Little Big
Horn, from a new and different interpretation as normally seen. Anderson felt Americans should acknowledge
the willpower, leadership, determination, and courage of a man like Sitting
Bull before he and his impact on Native American and American history are
forgotten and lost, like much of other history.
This book would be recommended for the reader who wants to know more
about the specific time period of the reign of Sitting Bull and the story of
his people from their view point. It is
not recommended for the reader desiring an in depth look at the overall life of
Sitting Bull. The reader might want to
have other resources available to understand many issues only touched upon, and
explore those as well.
No comments:
Post a Comment