Smoke Signals: How Long Will It Take Us To Get There?

Smoke Signals
How Long Will It Take Us to Get There?

[Thomas asks Victor] “How long do you think it’ll take us to get there? Columbus shows up and we start walking away from that beach, tryna’ get away. And then, Custer moves into the neighborhood, driving down all the property values, and we gotta keep on walking. And then old Harry Truman comes and drops a bomb, and we gotta keep on walking somewhere” –Quote from Smoke Signals.

            While on their journey, Thomas asks Victor the central question of how long it will take them to get there. This question in its simplest understanding can be interpreted as an inquiry about the length of time it will take them to actually reach their desired destination. Yet, in a more analytical sense, this question holds a lot of history, and perhaps cynicism behind it. Following this essential question, Thomas demonstrates how his people [the Native Americans] have truly been “walking” for a long time. So, in part this question’s counter-part is in fact inquiring about when his people are going to reach their promise land, and began to receive the rights in which they, as American citizens are entitled to.

            In one’s own opinion, America has obtained its title as a “Super Nation,” and its reputation as being a conqueror through the use of absolute violence. With this use of violence, they managed to rob, steal, kill and conquer assets that weren’t their own. When directly relating this to the question that Arnold asks, it is fair to say that this is what is implied. America conquered his people the same they have conquered many others (like that of the Africans, and the Asians for instance) through acts of inhumane violence, and stealing. Arnold gives not one, not two, but three examples of how his people were abused by American figures of authority, and the irony of it all is that he uses very well-known figure heads such as our 33^rd president for instance. While, it is no secret that Christopher Columbus founded a land that was already (founded) inhabited, and that while discovering this new land and its people, he mistreated and misled them, Arnold further goes on to list other famous figures in history who have committed the same exact crimes: like President Truman and George Armstrong Custer. Through the use of these examples Arnold helps to paint a more vivid picture of America and its leaders. It is leaders such as the ones presented in which the provide the foundation of America, and are the ones in which still, to this day are celebrated by America, disregarding the historical background.

·         On so many occasions Native Americans fell victim to mistreatment, violence and abuse by American authority. Often times their territories, their land, their people and their rights were taken away from them, and so they “kept on walking.” In this dialogue between the two characters, one was able to directly relate and ask similar questions in relation to her own people and race. Similarly to Arnold, one began to ask one’s self: When are African-Americans going to get there? When are we going to reach our promise land, receive our reparations or finally fulfill the pursuit of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness that was promised to every American citizen whether we comprise the minority or majority population?” Likewise to that of the Native Americans, America capitalized on the continent of African, and once again robbed, stole, and killed our people, our rights, and our voices. In the end the product of my people was similar to the product of Arnold’s people, which essentially was that we had to keep on walking. Although this conversation between Arnold and Victor is a brief one, within it contains so much historical context that it in essence speaks volumes. In fully analyzing the dynamics of this dialogue, and its parallel to American values, it has lastly brought one to conclude that my country, America, the conqueror, the “Super Nation” perhaps can also be regarded as no more than thieves.

George Armstrong Custer

Below is a little background information on one of the central American figures mentioned (Custer) during the conversation that will help to further education you on the historical violence committed against Native Americans.

                                             

·         George Armstrong Custer, a U.S. cavalry officer who served with distinction in the American Civil War, is better known for leading more than 200 of his men to their deaths in the notorious Battle of the Little Bighorn in June 1876. The battle, also known as “Custer’s Last Stand,” was part of the Black Hills War against a confederation of Plains Indians, including the Cheyenne and Dakota Sioux. It remains one of the most controversial battles in U.S. history.

In 1868 Gen. Philip Sheridan replaced Hancock and soon arranged for Custer’s reinstatement. That November, after raiding Black Kettle’s Cheyenne village, he was in trouble again for leaving the field without searching for a missing reconnaissance unit that had been ambushed and slain. Among other activities during the next six years, Custer wrote My Life on the Plains in which he attempted to justify his actions, and in 1874 he violated the treaty of 1868 by taking an expedition into the Indians’ sacred Black Hills where gold was discovered. The gold rush that followed

Sandra Cisneros- "My Name"

            Although I am far from being fluent in speaking Spanish, the name Esperanza is derived from the Spanish verb esperar which can be defined as to hope for or to wait for. In relation to Cisneros’ vignette, it is understood that to wait, or the act of waiting is associated with a sense of sadness. “It means sadness, it means waiting” (10). Esperanza, who inherited her name from her great-grandmother describes the story of her great-grandmother, and expresses a sense of despondency from this inheritance. Esperanza is fully aware of the herstory behind her name, and often times wonders in curiosity the way her great-grandmother looked out the window her whole life, on whether her fate will turn out the way her great-grandmother’s did.

            From Cisneros’ work arises a strong sense of feminism and gender role stereotypes. Through our most commonly understood ideologies like the institution of religion as well as the social construction of gender, women are expected to be delicate, patient, and fragile. Ironically, these were all of the characteristics that Esperanza’s great-grandmother was not. “She was a horse woman too” (10). Esperanza’s great-grandmother was a strong woman, and perhaps a rebel. It can be comprehended that because her great-grandfather essentially forced his wife without her consent to marry him, that Esperanza’s great-grandmother was as stubborn as a horse too. In the era in which Esperanza’s great-grandmother lived her life, it was expected for women to marry, have children and inherently become the property of their husbands. “Until my great-grandfather threw a sack over her head and carried her off. Just like that, as if she were a fancy chandelier” (11). Her great-grandmother may have been many things to her husband: fancy maybe, a chandelier perhaps, yet once legal documents were in place, it was now certain too that she was now property. Once married, women like Esperanza’s great-grandmother were nothing more than a possession, and no longer could exercise their own will. Her great-grandmother knew this, thus being the reason why she never forgave him.

            This work offers a lot to its readers on the beliefs of Sandra Cisneros. Although she may or may not call herself a feminist writer, her vignette “My Name” offers a lot on the gender stereotypes in which Chicano women fall victim to in their patriarchal society. Something as simple as a name carries a lot of significance to it because a name is nearly the primary source of our identity. Cisneros demonstrates the power behind a name, moreover on a much grander scale: the power behind the history of a name, and in Esperanza’s case the herstory behind her name. Esperanza’s voice has demonstrated that there are several components that comprise the act of naming- and among the many is a person’s fate. A name truly has the potential to hold a person’s fate.

Family Ties

Baca’s poem, “Family Ties” addresses many complex issues. Perhaps, it is even fair to say that components such as its syntax, imagery and themes are equally as complex as the poem itself. As the title suggest, Baca writes about a middle-aged man with a wife, and two sons attending a family barbeque, in which three generations are comprised from: the young, middle-aged and the elderly. Because there are essentially three different generations, this poem expresses the issues amongst them all, and also allows us as readers to understand the family unit, and how the narrator feels towards them.
            As early as the very first, few lines of the poem we can begin to analyze the three generations of the family that are referenced. “I play with a new generation of children, my hands in streambed silt of their lives, a scuba diver’s hands, dusting for buried treasure” (4-7). In the context of this passage we can comprehend a sense of hope that the narrator has for the youth. The imagery he uses and the scuba diver’s hands digging for treasure perhaps suggest the endless possibilities the youth are entitled to as being American. Like a body of water that is forever flowing, the children and their outcomes are unlimited.  
            For the middle-age Baca explains that their issues stem from their profession on the farms. “Tempers ignite on land grant issues” (14). From this text we can gather that the narrator’s generation of cousins, sisters and brothers feel unhappy with the conditions of which they are subject to work under. Probably they feel entitled to land grants from the governments, while the elderly whom are tossing “horseshoes on the lawn” are content with their circumstances as immigrant Americans  (16).

When carefully scrutinizing this poem, it can be concluded that the syntax creates a lot of meaning. For instance, when referencing the difference in the generations like the children, or the aunts and uncles, we can see that each start a new line. However, when we look at certain lines, there exists different themes, yet they coexist in the same line. “…uncles and aunts surround taco and tamale tables. Mounted elk head on wall, brass rearing horse cowboy clock” (9-11). This passage is critical to analyzing and comprehending because within the context it is referencing both Hispanic/Chicano culture (ex: tacos and tomales), as well as Western American culture (ex: elk head, cowboys). Furthermore, when we look at the syntax, it appears to be blended together in one line, which can symbolize the blending of cultures. For immigrants from another country arriving to America, it is a common thread for them to feel the necessity to adopt the new and abandon some of the old. The syntax of these few lines is representative of this understanding.

I’ve read this poem probably a hundred times in just a few short days and I have constantly had to ask myself why the narrator felt a lack of love and connection with his family. In questioning this theme, it was concluded that perhaps the narrator feels uneasy with the idea of being given a fraction of something by a white man. While the “sons and daughters” become angry over land grant issues, the narrator specifically separates himself and chooses not to include himself in this discussion over government reparations to his people. In fact, all throughout the poem never does the narrator use pronouns like “we or us” when describing his extended family, instead he uses “they and them” (ex: “they arrive…” ). For the readers this directly demonstrates the separation the narrator feels from his family. Perhaps the narrator feels disconnected from his family because he refuses to settle for a false representation of freedom, given to his people by the white man. Maybe, land grants, in the narrator’s opinion do not represent the true definition of freedom. On the contrary, true freedom, real freedom is one that the narrator absolutely “cannot afford” (25). It is the “grass clearing” behind the “abandoned rock cabins in the mountains. It’s the “sunlit pasture” in which his children dream of, where they play tag and run aimlessly and innocently in an open field.