J.G. Keely's Reviews > The Education Of Little Tree
The Education Of Little Tree
by
by

The closest this book gets to touching nature is the sweet sappiness of the story. Though the author put the story forward as true, he was not actually a Native, but a who fought to keep segregation and was a member of the KKK.
But this revelation shouldn't be that surprising, since the book is hardly insightful or sensitive in its views. Carter's characters are old, romanticized cliches of the colonial --poor Indians beset by the white man's greed trying to eke a peaceful and natural existence out in the wild of nature. It should remind us all that an overly rosy view can be just as racist and condescending as a negative one.
Carter is just another in a long line of people who tried to make themselves more mysterious and interesting by making up a distant Native ancestor and then claiming it gives them some kind of spiritual and moral superiority. I guess I should mention here that it's overtly racist to imagine that a fully-formed culture can be propagated through blood, as if Native peoples were magic elves.
But people like to individualize themselves, and if that means they have to create a culture from whole cloth to belong to, that isn't going to stop them, whether it's someone bringing up their '1/16th Cherokee blood' or a Wiccan who doesn't realize they're following , , and some stuff that was made up by delusionals and con-men.
And if that wasn't enough to tip us off, there's also a lengthy sambo slapstick scene almost as insulting to blacks as Martin Lawrence in a fatsuit. It just goes to show that it's easy to fool people with over-the-top cliches and over-romanticized characters. Even Oprah was taken in, featuring this book in her reading club--but perhaps it shouldn't surprise us that one purveyor of ill-informed saccharine melodrama should be taken in by another.
In the end, we get a sort of literary version of the blackface minstrel show, depicting Native life with a quaint nostalgia that has nothing to do with the real experience of Natives or their history. Instead, everything is boiled down into a simple little story--almost a fable--of how the colonial mindset would prefer to see Natives: as fundamentally separate in vague, mystical ways.
They are so oversimplified (as heroes or villains) that they no longer resemble real people; instead, they are reduced to a subspecies of man defined by a set of universally shared traits. Their identity is primarily communal, primarily traditional, incapable of change, learning, or individuality.
It's hard for me to think of a more pointed definition or racism than 'assuming that a group of people, similar in appearance and ancestry, all share a series of invariable traits which make them fundamentally and inescapably different from every other individual and people group'.
Like 'The Kite Runner', this is just another book that assuages white guilt by making white readers feel that, in just picking up a book, they have become worldly, understanding, and compassionate--despite the fact that neither book really reveals the culture it set out to depict, and could not provide any real insight to anyone who was in the least familiar with how those cultures actually work.
But this revelation shouldn't be that surprising, since the book is hardly insightful or sensitive in its views. Carter's characters are old, romanticized cliches of the colonial --poor Indians beset by the white man's greed trying to eke a peaceful and natural existence out in the wild of nature. It should remind us all that an overly rosy view can be just as racist and condescending as a negative one.
Carter is just another in a long line of people who tried to make themselves more mysterious and interesting by making up a distant Native ancestor and then claiming it gives them some kind of spiritual and moral superiority. I guess I should mention here that it's overtly racist to imagine that a fully-formed culture can be propagated through blood, as if Native peoples were magic elves.
But people like to individualize themselves, and if that means they have to create a culture from whole cloth to belong to, that isn't going to stop them, whether it's someone bringing up their '1/16th Cherokee blood' or a Wiccan who doesn't realize they're following , , and some stuff that was made up by delusionals and con-men.
And if that wasn't enough to tip us off, there's also a lengthy sambo slapstick scene almost as insulting to blacks as Martin Lawrence in a fatsuit. It just goes to show that it's easy to fool people with over-the-top cliches and over-romanticized characters. Even Oprah was taken in, featuring this book in her reading club--but perhaps it shouldn't surprise us that one purveyor of ill-informed saccharine melodrama should be taken in by another.
In the end, we get a sort of literary version of the blackface minstrel show, depicting Native life with a quaint nostalgia that has nothing to do with the real experience of Natives or their history. Instead, everything is boiled down into a simple little story--almost a fable--of how the colonial mindset would prefer to see Natives: as fundamentally separate in vague, mystical ways.
They are so oversimplified (as heroes or villains) that they no longer resemble real people; instead, they are reduced to a subspecies of man defined by a set of universally shared traits. Their identity is primarily communal, primarily traditional, incapable of change, learning, or individuality.
It's hard for me to think of a more pointed definition or racism than 'assuming that a group of people, similar in appearance and ancestry, all share a series of invariable traits which make them fundamentally and inescapably different from every other individual and people group'.
Like 'The Kite Runner', this is just another book that assuages white guilt by making white readers feel that, in just picking up a book, they have become worldly, understanding, and compassionate--despite the fact that neither book really reveals the culture it set out to depict, and could not provide any real insight to anyone who was in the least familiar with how those cultures actually work.
Sign into Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ to see if any of your friends have read
The Education Of Little Tree.
Sign In »
Reading Progress
Started Reading
March 1, 2005
–
Finished Reading
June 11, 2007
– Shelved
June 11, 2007
– Shelved as:
contemporary-fiction
February 27, 2008
– Shelved as:
novel
June 9, 2009
– Shelved as:
reviewed
September 4, 2010
– Shelved as:
america
Comments Showing 1-36 of 36 (36 new)
date
newest »

message 1:
by
Epee
(new)
Dec 05, 2008 09:46AM

reply
|
flag

In addition, Luther's antisemitism was not a case of racism, as he did not care about the Jewish genetic line. If a Jew converted to Christianity, Luther was fine with them, it was the alternative religious practice to which Luther objected. In this sense, it wasn't even ethnocentrism but religious intolerance which Luther suffered from.
Of course, this should come as no surprise, as the man's legacy is nothing more than his strongly dissenting religious opinions.
Smith's racism was a product of its time, a fate not even as powerful a thinker and supporter of emancipation as Thomas Jefferson could escape. The science of the time promoted racism on a fundamental level.
Smith's other delusions seem to align well with Hubbard's, though. Both men found the idea of a private little religion too tempting to overlook, and to judge based upon their writings, neither was inspired either divinely or personally. At least Luther was more theologian than charismatic.
I would not cite Carter as an example of lasting influence, but rather a caution against even the seemingly innocuous and especially the idealistic. Idealism always represents an attractive falsehood, and whether it more closely resembles in scale grand religious escapism or minute romanticism, both may prove equally dangerous to the rational thinking of the individual.
Sometimes the lesser can be a greater threat to skepticism because it passes beneath scrutiny.


But in all seriousness, if you study Native culture, if you read the work of authors like Erdrich, Welch, Alexie, and Momaday, it's easy to see that all of the 'wisdom' in this book is just generic platitudes--it has very little to do with any actual Native culture or tradition. It's just more condescension to the ideal of the , a romantic notion beloved of White folks trying to attach themselves to a more obscure culture.

Also, Alex gave 4 stars to the Holy Bible. Maybe HE'S blind!

Also, there are good reasons to give a lot of stars to the bible, it does have a lot of action scenes, incest, slavery, wizards, and probably the highest body count of any book outside of a space opera, where you'd have guns that blow up planets.







By the way, though I questioned the second sentence, I loved the first one. And your analysis of racism is right on!

Yes, incorrect phrasing on my part, thanks for the heads-up.

Yes, incorrect phrasing on my part, thanks for the heads-up."
Sorry to pick nits, but I knew what you meant, and I just wanted to make sure it was clear for the rest of your readers.

Carter is just another in a long line of people who tried to make themselves more mysterious and interesting by making up a distant Native ancestor and then claiming it gives them some kind of spiritual and moral superiority. I guess I should mention here that it's overtly racist to imagine that a fully-formed culture can be propagated through blood, as if Native peoples were magic elves." So true!





I was as shocked and disappointing as anyone when I found out who wrote it. But I do not believe that a racist monster could have written a story such a this with so much heart, without there being some truth to it. we don't know his full story, or if he had a change of heart somewhere down the line. Regardless, take this beautiful story for what it is- a lesson about how to be kind, less judgemental, and most of all, how to compassion and a Heart towards other people.


Alex said: "racists are made ... And they can be unmade"
Well, I guess the first thing I'd point out is that the treatment of African Americans in the book is still very insulting--there's a whole chapter built around making them look stupid and absurd, where the girl is being dragged around naked through the mud by a farm animal she can't control.
Beyond that, you have to remember that it's possible to represent a race in positive terms and to still be racist--indeed, it's how a lot of modern racism plays out. For example, when people say that African Americans are athletic, good at sports, and natural dancers, while those are all positive traits, they play right into the racist image of Africans as being physical in nature, not intellectual, that they are like animals.
Or conversely, the presentation of Asians as being intelligent, logical, task-oriented, and well-organized plays into the same old racist cliche that they are emotionless and asexual. It's promoting the same racist views that have always been around, it's just expressing it through positive terms instead of negative ones. It's like saying a girl has 'a nice personality'--it should be a compliment, but in fact, it's just a coded sexist insult.
Likewise, in this book, the representation of Natives is so sickly sweet and romanticized that it robs them of their humanity. They aren't presented as real people, with flaws and personalities, they're presented as symbols of nature and peace--it's racist because they aren't allowed to have individual identities, they are defined by the overarching cliches of their race--it's just the old stock character of the .

Just because YOU liked the book, does not mean we have to, and the fact that you are obviously too lazy to even post a correctly spelled sentence makes it even easier to point my fingers at you and label you as at best naive and at worst as someone who is obviously not intelligent enough to realise that we can like books you do not like (and for me, books that are patronising and full of noble savage garbage are an issue). And guess what, I personally would respect you liking this book, but since you do not seem to respect those of us who do not like this book, why should I respect you??


As I was reading the book, I had tried to really digest each and every scene and picture as if they were real life events since it’s introduced as a memoir. I am absolutely disgusted by the author’s history and for fooling the readers; not to even mention for disrespecting the Native Indians & their culture. I wish I had found out about this sooner so I could stop myself from wasting my time.
If you don’t believe his horrible history and about this fraud story, google it. There’s plenty of information.

