Who reads Navajo poetry and what are they reading? Exploring the semiotic functions of contemporary written Navajo

Abstract

This paper analyzes contemporary written Navajo in public signs, newspapers, and poetry. While the number of public space displays of written Navajo has increased in recent years, this has not met with an increase in either Navajo literacy or in the number of Navajo speakers. This paper argues that much written Navajo is read not for semantico-referential content, but either as icons and indexes of Navajo spaces and identity or as icons and indexes of fidelity to an orthographic norm. Contemporary written Navajo poetry is not normally read as poetry but as a success or failure to align with the orthographic norm. This mirrors nothing so much as how many Navajos were taught English literacy in the boarding schools.

Keywords:

• Navajo
• literacy
• poetry
• orthographic norms
• iconicity

Acknowledgements

Research for this paper was conducted primarily on the Navajo Nation in 2000–2001 and again in the summers of 2007–2011. The research was conducted under permits from the Navajo Nation Historic Preservation Office. The author thanks them. Funding for this research was provided by Wenner-Gren, the University of Texas at Austin, Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, the American Philosophical Society, and the Whatcom Museum, Jacobs Fund. The author thanks them. The author would also like to thank the numerous Navajos, both poet and non-poet, who have taken the time to talk with him over the years. This paper greatly benefited from the comments of two anonymous reviewers for Social Semiotics. The author thanks them. The author thanks Aimee Hosemann for comments on an earlier version of this paper. Mistakes are, however, still the author's mine. Finally, the author thanks Blackhorse Mitchell for his guidance over the years.

Notes

1. The role of educational institutions in the stigmatization of both indigenous Englishes and in the devaluing of Native languages has been expertly analyzed by Rosina Lippi-Green (1997), Ruth Stack (2002), and Barbra Meek (2011). See also the valuable articles in Paul Kroskrity and Margaret Field (2009).

2. This is not to say that Navajos have only written in an alphabetic writing system. For example, the events from the Long Walk of 1864–1868 were inscribed as petroglyphs on rocks after the Navajo return to their homeland (Webster 2009, 155). Also, David McAllester (1970) remarks on a Navajo medicine man creating mnemonic pictographs to aid in recalling a newly learned chant in 1950. As I note later on, one critique of the contemporary Navajo writing system is that it looks like the English writing system. McAllester's discussion of the use of pictographs to write a chant also resonates with a question posed by a reviewer concerning Navajo songs. In general, Navajos that I have worked with classify poetry as hane’ [“story, narrative”] and not as sin [“song”] (Webster 2009). Although some poets – Luci Tapahonso, for example – often insert songs into their poetry. This practice, of inserting songs into a narrative, resonates with Navajo oral tradition (see Webster 2011b). Tapahonso does not, however, normally write the songs – often in Navajo – in her poetry. Rather the songs are a part of her poetry performance (Webster 2009). Other poets like Tacey Atsitty, for example, who also breaks into song when she performs her poetry, writes the song lyrics (mostly in Navajo) and vocables in her poetry. Songs – especially Christian hymns – are written in Navajo and hymnals can be found at churches and sold at flea markets (in Gallup, NM, for example). McLaughlin (1992) notes that songs were one of the kinds of writing the Navajos in the community he worked in engaged in. Outsiders, of course, have long documented Navajo songs.

3. I borrow the notion “orthographic norm” from Blommaert (2008). I return to this topic below.

4. On Navajo nationalism, see Jennifer Denetdale (2009) and Lloyd Lee (2007).

5. It is still the case that some Navajos consider linguistic diversity in Navajo the norm and take great pleasure in describing how Navajos speak in other regions of the Reservation. I have also been told that, in the “old days,” you could tell somebody's clans by how they spoke. Specific linguistic features concerning clan dialects have been hard to document, however. Other Navajos that I have worked with or heard speak have criticized linguistic diversity as linguistic deficiencies. Young and Morgan's (1987) work, which is largely associated with what some Navajos call the “Chinle Valley dialect,” does include some examples of dialect variation (e.g. zas and yas [“snow”]). Some Navajos that I have worked with, who have spoken fondly of the old clan dialects and of the linguistic diversity in speaking, are resistant to non-alignment with the orthographic norm in writing Navajo. For them, it appears, diversity in speaking is appropriate, but one should not diverge from the orthographic norm. This echoes a prevailing language ideology in the United States (see Lippi-Green 1997).

6. While it is outside the scope of this paper, let me say a couple things here about bilingual children's book in Navajo and English. First, the history of bilingual children's books coincides with the emergence of the current orthographic norm. One of the first examples that I have is the 1949 Coyote Tales (Morgan 1949), authored by Morgan and translated by Young and Morgan and “adapted” into English by Hildegard Thompson. The book (a blue cardboard cover with the pages stapled in) also included the art work by Navajo artist Andrew Tsihnahjiniie. The written Navajo used in this book was clearly in alignment with the orthographic norm. The book was published by the US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, as part of their “Navajo Life Series.” Lomawaima and McCarty (2006) have discussed the role of the Life Readers among Navajos and other Native peoples. They analyze the subtle and not-so-subtle difference between the Navajo and English versions of the Navajo Life Reader, Flag of My Country. As Lomawaima and McCarty (2006, 106) note: “The English is unrelenting, almost strident, in its essentialized patriotism, asserting one-to-one connections between homeland and family, possessions, and personal identity … the Navajo texts lacks all connotations of patriotism … several Navajo words and phrases utilized throughout the text, however, are deeply evocative of a Navajo sense of identity and sacred landscape as homeland.” More recently, Salina Bookshelf, Inc. of Flagstaff, AZ has published a number of glossy bilingual children's books authored by, for example, Navajo writer/educator Evangeline Parsons Yazzie (2005) (among others). Yazzie is also co-author of the Navajo-language textbook also published by Salina Bookshelf, Inc., Diné Bizaad Bínáhoo'aah: Rediscovering the Navajo Language (Yazzie and Speas 2007). The children's books are often illustrated by Navajo artists as well and the production value of these books is quite good. Thus, unlike the examples discussed by Meek and Messing (2007), they do not iconically reinforce an association of indigenous language with economic inequality. However, they are still invariably bilingual in Navajo and English and thus the books can be read without any knowledge of Navajo. The books are sold at a number of venues on the Navajo Nation, including NACE stores, but, again, in conversation with one of the women who works at the NACE store in Shiprock, she suggested that the books were sold primarily to non-Navajo tourists. More work on Navajo bilingual children's books seems warranted.

7. See http://nv.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%8Diyis%C3%AD%C3%AD_Naaltsoos. I thank an anonymous reviewer for suggesting inclusion of this reference. As an aside, Kevin Scannell runs a blog concerning indigenous language on “Twitter” and has compiled data on the percentage of “tweets” in those indigenous languages (http://indigenoustweets.blogspot.com/). Here is the link to the data on Navajo: http://indigenoustweets.com/nv/. As can be seen, while there are four Navajos who “tweet,” the use of Navajo language in those “tweets” account for 0.9%, 0.2%, 0.3% and 0.6% of their “tweets” (accessed 4 July 2011). Thus the “tweets” are predominately not in Navajo. In contrast, one Anishinaabe “tweeter” comes in with 24.3% of their “tweets” in Anishinaabe (http://indigenoustweets.com/oj/). I thank Corin Pursell for telling me about this website.

8. I use “emergent spelling” practices instead of “easy phonetics” because of its resonance with Paul Hopper's (1987) concern with “emergent grammar.” Like the emergent grammar described by Hopper, emergent spelling practices are always partial, in process, and socially located. I thank an anonymous reviewer for challenging me to think more carefully about my use of “easy phonetics.”

9. atsi˛’ is not equivalent to “meat.” –tsi˛ “meat, flesh” is an inalienable noun stem (i.e. it must have a possessive prefix) and ‘a- is the indefinite pronoun possessive prefix “someone”. The form glosses, then, as “something's meat”.

10. Diné College was founded as Navajo Community College at Many Farms, AZ in 1968. It moved to new campus in Tsaile, AZ in 1969. The name was changed from Navajo Community College to Diné College in 1997 (for a discussion of Diné College, see House 2002). When I did fieldwork on the Navajo Nation in 2000–2001, Navajo students often complained that various buildings still had NCC painted on them.

11. On the other hand, some Christian Navajos (including some Navajo poets) do support written Navajo. And, of course, saying “Christian” Navajo obscures a number of denominational differences as well. Not all Christian denominations agree on whether or not all parts of the Bible should be translated. Webster (2009, 106–107) discusses something of the complexity of writing Navajo by various Christian denominations. For a related case, concerning the language ideologies of various Christian denominations among Western Apaches, see David Samuels (2006).

12. As one reviewer noted, there has been ongoing discussion in western circles concerning whether or not “expressive forms” like weaving and sandpaintings can being read. As that reviewer notes, Susanne Langer (1957, 79–102), for example, distinguishes between “discursive” (alphabetic writing) and “presentational” (expressive forms like weaving and sandpaintings) forms of communication. However, some of the Navajo poets I have worked with do not make a distinction between these kinds of reading. When they say that Navajos have writing in sandpaintings, weaving, and petroglyphs, they are arguing against a view that suggests that they “lacked” writing. They are, instead, suggesting that “white people” have misrecognized and misunderstood the inscriptive practices of Navajos (much as they have misrecognized and misunderstood other aspects of Navajo culture, see Denetdale 2007). As one Navajo said to me: “Navajos have always had writing.” He was talking about sandpaintings and he went on to note that most “white people” cannot read Navajo writing. In fact, they are arguing against the very dichotomy suggested by Langer. As Salomon (2001, 1) notes about Andean knotted-cord “writing,” what is needed is a more inclusive “ethnography of inscriptive practices” that does not exclude certain inscriptive practices a priori. Finally, Navajo poet Orlando White's (2009) poetry takes the forms of English letters as an entry point into understanding the social and emotional relationships between those letters. In this way, English letters can be read in a similar (although not identical) manner to Navajo visual arts.

13. A fair amount of ink has been spilled trying to translate this important concept in Navajo. Here I yield to the translation offered by Jim (2000, 232). See also House (2002).

14. Speaking Navajo is also dangerous in ritual where exact repetition – given the contingencies of the world – is needed for chants (hatáál) to be efficacious. On this point, see James Faris (1994). Also, as Mitchell and Webster (2011) note, one should speak in a controlled manner and not say uncontrolled things (see also Witherspoon 1977; Toelken 1987; Rushforth and Chisholm 1991).

15. A distinction is sometimes made among some Navajos between Diné bizaad [“Navajo language”] and Dinék'ehjí yáłti’ [“he/she is speaking the Diné way”]. Speaking Diné bizaad does not necessarily entail speaking in a controlled and respectful manner (i.e. Dinék'ehjí yáłti’). Conversely, one can Dinék'ehjí yáłti’ without speaking Diné bizaad. Field (2001) describes how one controlled way of speaking has persisted in use in local ways of speaking English (see also Webster 2011). The priest, while speaking Diné bizaad, was not speaking in a controlled manner.

16. This story can also be read as a critique of hubris and reveals a central tension for many Navajo poets. As a number of Navajo poets noted, calling attention to oneself is an un-Navajo way of behaving and suggests a lack of proper control and restraint. In signing his name, the Navajo sand artist appeared to be calling too much attention to his own achievements. He lacked control (see Mitchell and Webster 2011). Many Navajo poets seek to mitigate their own importance when performing poetry before an audience by placing themselves within the Navajo clan system (Webster 2009). One reviewer suggested that it may be “possible that the signature on the sand art was intentionally spelled ‘incorrectly’” so as an “ingenious way … of keeping their culture from being taken away.” This is a possible interpretation of the story, but it was not the view given by my Navajo consultants. They focused on the young man's hubris (or lack of control) in writing his “Navajo name” “incorrectly.” The young man is as unaware of what he has written as are the tourists in this case. Like the example from Ft. Defiance above, this is an unintentional pun that suggests a too eagerness to use Navajo (either spoken or written) (see Webster 2010b).

17. Jim is now (in 2011) Vice President of the Navajo Nation.

18. Although, to be sure, some of Jim's books can be found at the libraries of Diné College. According to a catalog search of the Diné College library system, the Shiprock campus has Jim (1989) and the Tsaile campus has Jim (1998). The book of poetry by Jim at Tsaile is for Library use only. Neither campus has Jim (1995). On the other hand, a catalog search of the library at the Navajo Nation Museum in Window Rock, AZ, on 11 July 2011 turned up no entries for Rex Lee Jim.

19. The accumulation of things is often looked down on by any number of Navajos. Such accumulation of things is seen by these Navajos as an indicator that a person is not behaving in a Navajo way; that is, being generous and sharing. The accumulation of books, much appreciated in western academic circles, is understood instead as an indicator that a person is “stingy.” Scott Rushforth and James Chisholm (1991) outline the various contours of Athabaskan (including Navajo) beliefs and values concerning this point. On the other hand, economic realities also factor in here as well. More than one Navajo has told me that they cannot afford to buy various books of Navajo poetry. Poverty is endemic on the Navajo Nation.