In-class writing

I think a major theme is what appears to them as the white man's unappreciation of nature as opposed to the Native American's perspective where nature is something sacred. Standing Bear talks about literally loving the Earth because of it's mothering nature. It is true that without the Earth and it's environment, humans would not be able to survive. I like how Standing Bear refers to the Earth as a caregiver because I like imagining the Earth as supporting all life including human life. The Earth, Gaia, our mother earth, does not pick favorites and that is why humans should appreciate nature because without it, we would be nothing.


Chief Seattle's speech refers to the land as something that has become part of his culture, his identity. It is the land that his ancestors were buried and for that reason the land is sacred to him. Seattle has a bond with the land because it is the land he's known all his life and the land his ancestors before him knew as well. His bond includes all of nature, not just the land because the trees, the rocks, the sky have been there living life along with Seattle as he lived his.

http://scholar.googleusercontent.com/scholar?q=cache:WM4iF_6rRQoJ:scholar.google.com/+chief+seattle+speech+authenticity&hl=en&as_sdt=0,34
 
The link leads to an article by Noel Gough with an interesting title of "chiefly Protestant propanda?" referring to how the speech can be traced to a 1970s television movie produced by the Southern Baptist Radio and Television Commision. Gough states that "the accuracy of this translation is a matter of speculation, but nineteenth century folklorists are notorious for censoring  and sanitising native American stories," further throwing into question the authenticity of the speech. It might not even be characteristic of Native American sentiments toward the subject and merely a white man's, an outsider's perspective on what they may think.