Sad tumtum kopa quanice, kopa solleks wawa (one last time)

[Mike Cleven]

(Didn't want to use "sick tumtum".  Seems like maybe the *.tumtum verb form
might be adapted to other adjectives, e.g. happy tumtum, etc......)

I just wanted to put in my last two bits worth on the reaction to my
original rather brief comment in reaction to the posts about the Makah
whale hunt - which was meant only as a light rejoinder, and not an
invitation to argument.  But a few things have been said which have rather
stung and were more than a bit unfair, so I must reply this one last time.
And I do hope that CHINOOK might return to its subject matter without
further acrimony, although my words here are a bit lengthy and admittedly
quite sharp.

I must take exception to being accused of "white paternalism" for daring to
speak my mind on this issue, as anyone who knows me understands that I am
not paternalistic in the slightest, and extremely aware and conscientious
about the legacy of white colonialism and the tragic history of my native
neighbours and friends.  Nor do I think that suggesting that if I cared
about "wildlife" I should do penance for my white skin by trying to stop
suburbanization or weekend car washes or the use of fertilizer.  It is not
fair or right to condemn someone for the colour of their skin or the legacy
of their "race" or the workings of modern society of which they are
supposedly a guilty party, no matter what history lies behind the colour of
their skin.  Collective guilt has no place in a world where what is
supposed to matter more is individual responsibility for change and for
self-knowledge and self-action.  The right to speak truth or make fair
comment is a duty, and it was only fair and right to remind people that the
whale might have seen differently than as suggested by the comment I was
responding to - that the whale swam willingly to its death in tribute to
the Makah whalehunt.

For myself, I believe (as indicated by science and by native mythology
alike) that whales are intelligent, and it is no more right to kill and eat
them than it is to kill and eat monkeys, chimpanzees, and other primates.
I have heard that orangutan, dog and cat are quite tasty - but this does
not mean that I would eat them, or support their killing for food; nor
would I wish to eat a parrot or an eagle.  Times has changed, and we know
that quanice tumtum, quanice kumtux, and that it is wrong to kill
intelligent beings.  I know why the Makah want what they want (and have
achieved), but it is for the cause of Makah culture, but certainly NOT for
the good of the whales, who have no voice of their own (none that we can
understand, not even the Makah whaling shamans).  I was not glad to hear of
the dying whale's mouth being sewn shut to keep it from sinking - no small
irony in that deed - or believe that it was not in agony for the four hours
it apparently took to die, or to hear that its carcass has been left to be
"naturally scavenged" in preparation for its display in a display
celebrating the restoration of the hunt.  If this is cause for joy, then
indeed something in my white skin must make me unable to recognize it.  If
only I had the genetic superiority of a native inheritance by which I might
appreciate such a death as a cause for celebration, or embrace the belief
that the whale was glad to meet the hunters and offered itself to the
harpoon - "as it should be".

Blanket dismissal of discussion on such issues based on "you have white
skin and have no right to say" is at its very root a pretension to native
primacy in issues of what is right and wrong.  Like it or not, this is "One
World" now and we ALL share it, and condemning someone for what others of
their ethnicity have done in the past is a formula for hatred that in other
lands has led to horrors of the most evil intercommunal kind - the latest
of which are Bosnia, Rwanda, and the present tragic war in Kosova and
Serbia.

I'm not saying that such deep-developed and nourished hatreds will develop
here; but their seeds must be recognized before they sprout.  Because
others of "my kind" once whaled in gory splendour (I _am_ half-Norwegian,
no doubt, and my family's home island no doubt produced many great whaling
captains over the centuries) is no reason to tell ME that I have no right
to speak.  Or that because natives have known about the intelligence and
soulfulness of whales for longer than white men (as alleged by someone in
this discussion) justifies the right of the natives to decide what is best
for the whales.  Since natives DO know and have known of cetacean
intelligence  I am not a slave of the mainstream media, NOT AT ALL, and did
not make my original statement based on cheap "yuppie backpacker"
eco-philosophy or New Age spiritual mumblings, or from superficial sympathy
with nature or any kind of insensitivity towards native culture and
aspiration.  I made it from sympathy for the whale - and indeed meant it in
the manner only of a light retort - and was more than a bit taken aback at
the hostility of the public and private replies I received, and the
suppositions made as to my views and share in "white guilt" they contained.

Those of you who had your whale, I truly hope you enjoyed its taste if that
is what you need to make you feel happy and proud of your culture.  But do
not condemn people critical of your choice based on THEIR culture and
beliefs and tribe.  Sensitivity to others and other communities (one is led
to believe) is supposed to be part of native culture and spirituality.  In
a changed and difficult world, can you not understand there is wisdom in
hsaring native knowledge of whales with non-natives, and that there are
other ways to celebrate your histories as whaling nations that do not
involve provoking the public, or alienating the many allies of the native
cause there are among environmentalists, scientists, and even New Agers?

I am among those of the new peoples who have sought to learn about and
learn from native culture, and who are careful to appreciate the prejudices
of our own cultures' world views.  To be accused of being ignorant of
native values was truly hurtful, although I am used to worse from similar
invective in such arenas as talk.politics.tibet and alt.native.  To be
associated with the fault for the impact of suburbanization  I understand
better than most "white people" the glorious history of the coastal peoples
and the richness of their traditions and the meaning of such matters as the
whale hunt.  But I think that if the well-being and prosperity of the
community truly is at stake, there will be much more value - cultural,
spiritual, AND commercial - in appreciating the parallel interest of those
interested both in local native history AND in such bourgeois pasttimes as
whale-watching.  I am not, as someone said, "demanding" that natives
perform "circus sideshows for the gratification of others", nor should I be
accused of racism for suggesting that native whaling history might best be
adapted to the modern "white man's view" (ahem) by promoting native-based
whale-watching instead of native-centred whale-hunting which will bring
opprobrium upon the Makah and their neighbours where there had been NONE.
As for tradition, here in BC loggers have learned (from native politicos)
the use of the word "tradition" in their pro-clearcut "community agenda"
and "traditional industry" and "woods culture"........

The Makah, Ditidaht, Tlah-o-quiat, Mowachaht and other coastal nations
indeed had a great and glorious history, and it is indeed something to be
proud of, but something that need not be reinstated for the purely human
cause of cultural self-definition.  My pagan ancestors ritually killed and
ate horses and ponies, but although I am enriched by the knowledge of their
culture I have acquired a deep understanding of - and even honour the
ancient gods in those lands when I am there - I will not engage in the
horse sacrifice for the cause of my own pride; travelling in Greece I was a
celebrant at temples of Apollo, Zeus and Dionysos (no kidding), but I would
not butcher a bull or a sheep for the sacred hekatomb that the ancient
practices prescribe; wine and music sufficed.  Mercifully, the celebrants
of the great goddess Kali in India (the thugee) no longer strangle their
unknowing victims from behind with the sacred red cord, nor do cascades of
blood flow down the steps of the Great Temple in Tenochtitlan to appease
Huitzilopochtli, Tezcatlipoca, and Tlaloc the Black.  Nor is there any more
slave-killing at great potlatches, or cannibalism for ritual and war among
the Fijians and Tahitians and other Oceanic nations - not that cannibalism
in the South Seas isn't a huge tourist draw, or that the great urns at the
finish of the route through the Museum of the Great Temple in Mexico City
that once held human hearts by the hundreds don't give the rubes a thrill...

I will indeed be among those in the broader public who will celebrate when
the Whalers' Shrine is returned to Friendly Cove, and I believe that native
lore concerning the whales and other creatures is a valuable knowledge
worth learning about and sharing with the rest of the world.  But I do not
believe that a public kill was a good way to venerate and honour this
tradition, or to encourage the sympathy of others for natives (by the way,
if "circus shows" aren't what you wanted, you seem to have gotten one
anyway).  Wouldn't great whale-dances and other manifestations of "potlatch
tourism" (which is working quite well for those nations who are doing it,
such as the Cowichan and Squamish) do more to show veneration for nature -
and for whales as the great and mysterious creatures they are - as well as
encourage (rather than discourage) knowledge and respect for the glorious
legacy of the northwest coast whaling nations?  Terry said to me in a
private communique something to the effect that while it is true that other
nations must perforce leave their traditions aside in this "New World"
(such as the campaign against animal parts in traditional Chinese medicine,
which is estimated to be a major cause of the decline of the BC bear
population), this is not something that can be asked of the First Nations
because of their past and their primacy here.  I guess I don't understand
_why_, even if you _were_ here first.  There is still such a thing as right
and wrong, and such values are not defined by skin colour or cultural
inheritance.

"We didn't kill off the whales - you guys did, so that makes it OK for us
to" is not a valid argument, nor is "we knew they were smart before you did
- that makes it OK for us to kill them".  You might not think that's what
you're saying, but that's what people are hearing.  And "you have white
skin, so shut up" doesn't wash either.  Like the elder Alberta (now in
exile in Seattle), I too am from a whaling nation with just as long a
history and tradition (nika tillikum chako kopa normanna illahee) - but
that doesn't mean I have to agree with my cousins (if indeed the residents
of Skudeneshavn are pro-whaling, which they may not be; mind you, they've
got oil), or that I have no right to speak for the whales - whose tongue we
do not understand (klaska lalang nsaika wake kumtux, nah?), and for whose
souls and spirits and intelligence I, for one, do not doubt.  Because my
ancestors saw fit to kill them does not mean that _I_ should......

Kloosh nsaika wawa kopa wawa, wake kopa quanice.  Sad tumtum kopa konaway
nika mahsh kopa okook, pe sad tumtum kopa solleks wawa kopa msaika konaway.
 Nika normanna (Norw. for Norw.), ahnkuttie nika tillikum mamook memaloose
hiyu quanice, hyas hiyu.  Pe kopa okook, nika sad tumtum.  Nika ticky
ahnkuttie tillikum wake mamook memaloose konaway hyas quanice tillikums.
Hiyu sad tumtum.  Wake klee, wake tanse, kopa konaway memaloose quanice
kopa hyas mama chuck........

Alta, nika quanice wawa kopet.

Mike