FACULTY OF EDUCATION AND BUSINESS STUDIES
Department of HumanitiesAn Ecofeminist Reading of Louise Erdrich’s
Novel Love Medicine
Stina Tirén
2021
Student thesis, Level: 15 Credits English
Teacher Education Programme English for Teacher 61-90cr
Abstract
Louise Erdrich's novel Love Medicine presents a variety of voices that depict the truths of Chippewa life and how they as a group are victims of a society that authorizes oppression and domination. Studies show that Chippewa tribes have a close connection to nature and with each other as people. Ecofeminist critics draw analogies between the exploitation of nature and the oppression of groups such as those based on race, class, and sexuality, which results in a distortion of Native people's identity and connection to nature. Since the characters and nature are both oppressed and exploited by the U.S government, it becomes relevant to draw parallels between Erdrich's characters and nature with ecofeminism. The analysis concludes that ecofeminism can be applied to Erdrich's novel because they share some values such as the importance of striving for interconnection between humans and nature to free both from the power structure. The Chippewa characters and the U.S government can be identified in ecofeminist discourse as a set of dualisms. However, there are also some differences between ecofeminism and the way in which Erdrich depicts her Chippewa characters and nature. Erdrich’s story shows that both female and male characters of Chippewa origin possess a sacred relationship to Mother Earth, not only women, as ecofeminists would suggest.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.Introduction ... 1
2. Theoretical Background. ... 2
2.1 Introduction to Ecofeminism ... 2
2.2 Native Americans and their relation to the Earth ... 5
2.3 Deprivation of Native Americans land and identity ... 6
3. Analysis ... 7
3.1 The Chippewa’s connection with nature ... 7
3.2 The Chippewa’s loss of identity and culture ... 12
1 1.Introduction
The pursuit of recreation is undoubtedly prominent in contemporary society, and people's materialistic tendencies have developed just as the expansion of
industrialization has made a radical change. A result of this modernization of society is its negative impact on the earth and everything that lives on it, both humans and non-human beings. Forests become deforested, many species are closer to extinction, the sea-level is rising because of shrinking polar ice caps, and humans are suffering the outcomes of environmental change. Tribal cultures are facing the negative outcomes of the exploitation of the non-human biosphere. Contemporary Native American writer Louise Erdrich presents a variety of voices in her novel Love Medicine, voices of survival who represent Native American life within the United States of America. The story of Love Medicine tells of the intertwined fates of four Chippewa families, the Kashpaws, Morriseys, Lamartines, and Lazarres, who all experience individual forms of alienation, which is the result of their separation from their tribal roots. The story is about four Chippewa families: the Kashpaws, Morriseys, Lamartines, and Lazarres. The connection between humans and nature has an undeniable influence on the characters' sense of self, a sense of self threatened because of the impacts of cultural destruction and exploitation. In Erdrich's story, the U.S government represents the dominant culture, whose interest is to claim land that belongs to the Chippewa people. The contrasts between the U.S government and tribal cultures create a separation from each other and to nature.
Ecofeminist critics draw analogies between the exploitation of nature and oppression, such as those based on race, class, gender, and sexuality. The signification of
ecofeminism is diverse, however, one aspect that seems to be common among
2 In order to not generalize the view on Native Americans, it is important to clarify that all Native American tribes do not have spiritual beliefs and values like the
characters in Erdrich’s novel who represent the Native tribe of Chippewa. Therefore, the essay focuses on the Chippewa tribe, who are also known as Ojibwa or Anishinaabe. If the essay mentions Native Americans in general, then it is because some authors do not always refer to a specific tribe when discussing about spirituality and their connection to nature.
After this introduction, there will be a brief description of ecofeminism and its main principles, and a presentation of different perspectives of ecofeminism will be taken to account since there are many ways of applying ecofeminism. Then there will be a brief presentation of Native Americans' connection to nature and how the colonial era and the U.S federal policies forced aboriginal cultures to assimilation and alienation. The
analysis will focus on the Chippewa characters' behavior, beliefs, and experiences in relation to nature and their suffering due to the patriarchal system.
2. Theoretical Background. 2.1 Introduction to Ecofeminism
To analyze how ecofeminism is presented in Erdrich's work, it is essential to account for its significance. As the name implies, ecofeminism brings together the insights and concerns of ecology and feminism, and just like with other theories, there are many perspectives regarding what ecofeminism entails. Ecofeminism has its conceptual beginnings in the French tradition of feminist theory, and its name was coined by French feminist Françoise d'Eaubonne in 1974 (Miles). The basic premise for
ecofeminism is that oppressions, such as those based on race, class, gender, sexuality, physical abilities, and species, are the same that authorize nature's oppression (Gaard 1). Ecofeminists tend to focus on the oppression of women and other oppressed groups, and while some tend to have radical views where they see men alone as responsible for all sorts of oppressions, there are also more balanced views with respect to equality
3
patriarchal society has associated nature and women with negative attributes, while men have been seen as capable of establishing order (Miles). On the other hand, cultural ecofeminism encourages the association between women and nature, claiming that both women and nature have an innate relationship due to their shared abilities to produce life. Cultural ecofeminism also has roots in nature-based religions and worships nature to redeem both the spirituality of nature and women (Miles). Radical ecofeminists claim that women have a biological connection to nature and that men cannot possess such connections. As stated by Greta Gaard, such radical claims should not be common in the name of ecofeminism (Gaard 22). Radical ecofeminists claim that climate change is a "man-made problem" that only feminists can solve. Such radical values make room for an inequality However, Gaard argues that women also can be a part of a power structure, whereas men can be caring and non-dominating. She says: "[…] men can subscribe to ecofeminism, and in fact, their cooperation is necessary if we are to save the planet" (Gaard 23).
Ecofeminists like Maria Mies and Vandana Shiva believe that the common root of nature and women's oppression is the patriarchal capitalist power structure. In their work, they refer to men, especially white men, as having a colonial relationship with nature, claiming that "in order to maintain such relationships, force and violence are always essential" (Mies & Shiva 56). They believe that women have a close relationship with nature because of their shared experience of being oppressed by patriarchy. By interpreting Mies and Shiva's views of ecofeminism, one might argue that Mies and Shiva's statements are examples of essentialist and radical thinking. In Beyond
Mothering Earth, Sherilyn MacGregor mentions the Berkeley historian and pioneering ecofeminist Carolyn Merchant, who claims that she does not support essentialist
thinking and explains that she wants to be gender inclusive, saying that men can also be earth-carers (MacGregor 4). Indeed, men can also serve as carers for the earth while women may participate in patriarchy and its oppressive practices. MacGregor states that an ecofeminist approach recognizes care as a form of work and a moral orientation that has been "feminized and privatized in Western societies and must be distributed fairly within and between societies if gender equality and sustainability are to be realized" (MacGregor 7). MacGregor emphasizes that if women continue to “save the world” while accusing men of endangering it, it will be hard for men to take ecofeminism seriously if it relies on "us versus them" (MacGregor 9).
4 the earth and that men do not possess this kind of "biological power." However, Gaard points out that "the very idea of one group of persons being “closer to nature” than another is a “construct of culture” meaning that it presupposes the legitimacy of the patriarchal construct that sees nature as separate from culture (Gaard 22). She believes that such a concept is not relevant for ecofeminism and quotes ecofeminist Ynestra King, according to whom "all life is interconnected" (Gaard 22). Cultural/spiritual ecofeminists tend to manipulate Native American's traditions in order to support their ecofeminist arguments that women possess a biological relationship to the earth. Author and field researcher Kathi Wilson explains that spiritual ecofeminists have strategically used indigenous cultures to support their claims that women have unique biological connections to nature (343).
For Native Americans, the earth is an integral part of their identity, and the connections between them and nature are respected and celebrated (Wilson 388). Ecofeminist Mary Mellor contradicts the belief that women possess a biological
connection to nature, as she states that "women are not closer to nature because of some elemental physiological or spiritual affinity, but because of the social circumstances in which they find themselves" (MacGregor, 4). Mellor's argument might apply to non-native people, who do not generally share cultural and spiritual traditions as aboriginal cultures do. However, Mellor's observation cannot apply to Native Americans because their traditional practices and philosophies are based on a spiritual affinity in which women, as well as men, are considered to have a sacred relationship with “Mother Earth”. Even though women within tribal cultures are perceived as having a more natural connection to the earth, it does not mean that men are separated from it. Noel Sturgeon asserts that ecofeminism has been primarily a white women's political identification, and he considers that the movement cannot be truly antiracist because it has mostly white participants. Even if Sturgeon's claim is relevant, voices of other ethnicities or cultures can be important in the sake of making room for aboriginal voices and their perspective that humans and non-humans are living in harmony and balance.
5 "literally feel with all living beings on the Earth" (Gaard 309). Gaard explains that ecofeminist spirituality is ecofeminist politics, which, combined, result in the ideology of ecofeminism. Native American cultures and ecofeminism may share some values, however, it is essential for ecofeminists to avoid committing cultural imperialism in order to respect Native American’s culture and beliefs . Ecofeminists must resist their tendency of appropriating parts of other cultures and traditions and instead offer their own explanations of what ecofeminism entails.
2.2 Native Americans and their relation to the Earth
In Love Medicine, the reader encounters the interconnected Ojibwa families living on reservations in Minnesota and North Dakota in the United States. As mentioned in the previous section, many ecofeminist authors have divergent perspectives regarding the innate connection between women and nature. For the sake of the analysis, it is relevant to include aboriginal people's thoughts regarding how they portray their relationship to nature. Kathi Wilson has interviewed contemporary Ojibwa people who discuss their relationship with earth and how their roles differ if they are women or men. The Ojibwa tribe, like many other tribal cultures, regard the earth as a female entity that is respected and seen as a provider of all necessities in life, such as water, air, nature, and animals.
6 together. Their differences are rather celebrated than despised, which is a more common feature in modern societies bent on gender equality. The Ojibwa people believe that their culture allows for a balanced relationship between humans and the non-human world, instead of a relationship based on dominance: "The European based point of view is that you can rape the land, mine all of the ore, catch all of the fish, and cut down all of the trees. That is not very traditional. Anishinabek live in balance with the land" (Wilson 346).
2.3 Deprivation of Native American’s land and identity
For two centuries ago, the Civilization Fund Act of 1819 was founded by the United States Congress, with an intention to assimilate Native Americans to Western culture. Even though one may refer these dark times as history, one should know that the assimilation of Native Americans' culture resulted in a historical trauma that has
7 military leaders, and violence against women and children was an uncommon
phenomenon (Warren 22). However, domestic violence in pre-colonial tribal communities is a controversial issue. Some authors believe that gender-based dominance issues existed in some tribal communities, while others believe domestic violence was not a concern in pre-colonial times.
3. Analysis
3.1 The Chippewas’ connection with nature
Louise Erdrich's novel Love Medicine is a story of the Native American families of Chippewa origin, also known as Ojibwa or Anishinaabe. The novel includes various narrators who share their own stories through different times in life, and each story gives a greater understanding that ties all of the stories together. The story of Love Medicine occurs on a fictional reservation in North Dakota, and the narrated stories take place between 1934 and 1984. However, the narrated stories are not told in
8 interests of big business rather the interests of Native people at large (Warren 35). Native reservations are targeted in many ways. For example, toxic waste is dumped on Native lands, leaked radiation and production of coal, oil, and uranium, and as well military and nuclear testing takes place on Indian lands (Warren 23). Gaard explains that the government’s control over nature and indigenous people construct the notion of a nature/culture dualism and that ecofeminists challenge such dualistic constructions (Gaard 113). The federal government’s “right” to appropriate the land makes humans separated from each other and the land. Warren states that the federal government is self-centered, distorted, and very much out of balance (Warren 123-124).
Humans are viewed as part of nature in Native American traditions. Thus, all forms of life are related to humans and should be treated with respect. Many characters in Erdrich’s novel share a reciprocal relationship with nature, as they find nature to be a part of them; they live in a spiritual symbiosis. This spiritual connection between humans and nature is portrayed in the character Lulu. who shares a strong connection to nature and her Native roots when she leaves boarding school:
I saw the leaves of the poplars applaud high in wind. I saw the ducks barrel down, reaching to the glitter of the slough water. Wind chopped the clouds to rolls that rose and puffed whiter, whiter. Blue Juneberry, tough diamond willow. I watched my own lace float over the grass, traveling alongside me in the dust of the bus window, and I grinned, showed my teeth. They could not cage me anymore (Erdrich 69).
9 However, Lulu’s connection with nature does not necessarily mean that ecofeminists have the freedom to claim her as an ecofeminist. According to Sturgeon, there are problems in claiming Native American women as ecofeminists; instead, ecofeminists should learn from the Native American concept of nature and their examples of more equal relationships between women and men (Sturgeon 121). However, if one does not have such a Native heritage to rely upon, then ecofeminism has much to offer.
The characters in Love Medicine represent their Native roots on different levels. They all share a strong bond with nature, though some characters tend to be closer to their origins and therefore have a stronger relationship with nature. Moses Pillager is a Chippewa who lives a traditional Native American lifestyle on an island beyond the reservation's bounds. Moses’ closeness to his origins and nature is visible in the passage when Lulu tries to convince him to leave his life in the cave and instead live at the reservation with her:” [I] saw fear empty out his eyes. He was not able to leave-I’d always known that. He was his island, he was me, he was his cats, he did not exist from the inside out but from the outside in” (Erdrich 83). This quote exemplifies Moses' closeness to his Native roots and the understanding that his cave is not only a home but also a part of him. One would argue that Moses has an “awareness of oneness that transcends mere ego identity” (Gaard 308). Erdrich’s depiction of Moses Pillager and his interconnectedness with everything weakens ecofeminists’ focus on Native women and their connection to nature. Wilson mentions that spiritual ecofeminists have used indigenous cultures to support their ecofeminists' claims, which usually leaves “little or no room for men to occupy any part of the nature side of the dualism” (343). Just as non-native men and their relation to nature are rarely mentioned within the scope of ecofeminism, the same goes for Native American men. Instead, ecofeminists tend to focus on Native women and their connection to nature, and in doing so, they contradict their depiction of what feminism alone means, namely, to advocate for equality between the sexes. Native Americans are an oppressed group of people who influence non-native people to strive for a life where all living and non-living beings live in balance and harmony. Wilson states that “the oppression of nature is generally based on a worldview in which men occupy a position that is separate from, and above nature” (Wilson 35). However, the Chippewa world views do not result in a separation of men from nature, which is seemingly in the male character of Moses Pillager, who shows a strong connection to nature.
10 away from the boarding school. Eli’s closeness to his Native origins is visible when Gordie states that Eli is the only one on the reservation who can “snare himself a deer” (Erdrich 29). Eli decided to take care of June Kashpaw when no one else did it, and he raised her like she was his own daughter (Erdrich 23). Eli is portrayed as an unselfish man who chooses to take care of June out of altruism. In the framework of ecofeminism, “altruism implies that ego sacrifices its interest in favor of the other […]. The requisite care flows naturally if the self is widened and deepened” (Gaard 49). According to ecofeminists, altruism is a difficult concept for the “Manstream” since it cannot be put into the “masculine” model of Man. Instead, altruism is more common in women who put their own interests behind those of their families, children, and the environment (Gaard 49). However, Gaard states that “morality and gender are social constructions; if women can be socialized to take pleasure in the happiness of others, men must likewise be capable of these sentiments” (Gaard 49-50). Surely men can take care of others, though it might challenge the masculine role that exists within patriarchal cultures. However, one must move beyond these conceptions of masculine and feminine in ourselves and our societies. Every individual has feminine and masculine qualities, such as being caring and responsible for childcare. Children are not just the responsibility of their mothers (Warren 113). Eli’s care for June might be considered a “feminine principle” within the logic of patriarchy. Instead, it is important to emphasize that men are capable of caring for others just as much as women, and that their altruistic attributes do not mean that they possess “feminine principles”, which is shown in the male character of Eli.
In one passage, Gordie Kashpaw turns to alcohol to dampen the memory of June, with whom he had a relationship with from time to time before she died. In the following quote, it is visible that Gordie is trying to reduce the sounds of nature that he is hearing:
He stood in the middle of the room, he was “listening to everything too closely. […] He locked each window and door. Still he heard things. The waves rustled against each other like a woman’s stockinged legs. Acorns dropping on the roof clicked like heels. There was a low murmur in the breeze (Erdrich 217).
11 dead. When Gordie sees that the deer has awakened, he panics and hits the deer’s head with a tire iron, which eventually leads him to believe that he had just killed June: “In that clear moment it came to his attention that he’d just killed June. She was in the backseat, sprawled, her short shirt hiked up over her hips. The sheer white panties glowed. Her hair was tossed in a dead black swirl” (Erdrich 222). One may argue that Gordie’s drinking makes him hallucinate, but it is also possible to believe that he senses June's presence due to his spiritual affinity to feel with everything. His glimpses of June and his sensitiveness of the sounds that he hears of nature might be understood through the ecofeminist principle that “everything is connected” (Gaard 291). As stated by Gaard, “the fundamental principle of ecofeminism is the interconnectedness of all life” (308), and Gordie’s sensitivity and closeness to nature might be interpreted as an interconnection that he has due to his Native origin. The Chickasaw poet and novelist Linda Hogan explains that there is an “inner language” within Native American traditions. “It is a language that passes between us and the rest of nature… an inner language” (Hogan 57). Native Americans share this inner language with the world of nature, a spiritual affinity that illustrates the connection between humans and non-humans. Non-native people might believe that Native Americans’ words articulate “psychological” or imagined reality, captured metaphorically in an attempt to fuse thought and feeling. However, Native American Paula Gunn Allen’s claim confirms that everything is interconnected, as “thought and feeling are one, where objective and subjective are one, where speaker and listener are one, where sound and sense are one” (158). Spirituality is an essential part of Native American philosophy, and the same goes for ecofeminism. According to Gaard, “Spirituality does not separate heaven and earth, spirit and matter, human and animal” (306), and with that said, it allows one to believe that Gordie can sense the presence of June through the sounds of nature even though she is not clothed in a physical body.
12 valuable than loving on “white time.” Erdrich portrays Nanapush as an elder who is very close to his Native roots, and it is what makes him stay true to himself even though he has experienced the government’s dominant practice that has caused devastation upon his people’s history and culture. Nanapush tells Lulu that when it is time for him to die, he wants to be buried “high in a tree” (Erdrich 71), where he can see his
“enemies approach in their government cars” (Erdrich 71). The traditional Chippewa of Nanapush represents an identity that is close to his Native origins, and it makes him not only respectful of nature but also a stronger individual. Even though Nanapush has experienced the government’s oppression and exploitation from the past, he does not give way to their domination and assimilation. Nanapush and his strong relation to others and himself may be consonant to Val Plumwood’s claim that distinct selves are necessary for situations in which one cares for others rather for oneself (Warren 379). She explains that one central question in environmental ethics, which is empathized by ecofeminists, is the appropriate account for the self in ethical and environmental theories and the appropriate relation of one’s self with others, community, and nature (Warren 379).
3.2 The Chippewa’s loss of identity and culture
The destruction of the non-human environment does not only affect nature, but it also contributes to the loss of aboriginal people's identity. The loss of identity can be seen through the male character King, who is violent towards his wife Lynette. For instance, King uses verbal abuse towards Lynette as he states: "Bitch! Bitch! I'll kill you! Gimme the keys!" (Erdrich 34) when Lynette locks herself in with the keys to his Firebird. However, he does use not only verbal abuse, but also physical violence as he tries to drown Lynette: "He was pushing her face in the sink of cold dishwater: Holding her by the nape and the ears. […] She struggled powerfully, but he had her" (Erdrich 42). King's verbal and physical violence might indicate that he is struggling with himself. It is worth claiming that the U.S government should be held responsible and that their appropriation of tribal lands also affects the Chippewas’ lives and minds through assimilation and alienation. To understand King's loss of identity, ecofeminist Gaard explains that aboriginal people have a sustainable relationship with the non-human environment that results from a collective locus of identity. This collective locus of identity is strong and serves to keep the group in a homeostatic relation to its
13 from other lands, their traditions and practices encounter social change within their tribal community (Gaard 96). While the women of Love Medicine are undeniably strong, several are still forced to endure men's violence, which is an injustice Erdrich repeatedly draws attention to. In one passage, Gordie explains that his hands do not longer represent his time of boxing, but rather the times when his hands struck June: "He'd been a boxer in the Golden Gloves. But what his hands remembered now were the times they struck June" (Erdrich 213). That both Gordie and King are violent might because of the U.S government forced assimilation of the tribe's culture. However, it is important to state that abuse might as well have appeared before indigenous people came into contact with Europeans. In one passage, the male character Lipsha Morrissey questions what made Chippewa people change from being kind-hearted to becoming violent:
I looked around me. How else could I explain what all I had seen in my short life- King smashing his fist in things, Gordie drinking himself down to the Bismarck hospitals […]. How else to explain the times my touch don't work, and further back, to the old-time Indians who was swept away in the outright germ warfare and dirty-dog killing of the whites. […] I'm bitter as an old cutworm just thinking of how they done to us and doing still (Erdrich 236).
Lipsha's statement reveals that he is aware of the domination that has led to a distortion of their identification with the Chippewa culture. King's physical violence and Gordie's alcohol abuse are due to their non-recognition or misrecognition of their true identities. Weaver explains that "this misrecognition has oppressed indigenous people and has imprisoned them with a 'false Indian' identity'” (243). Indeed, this “false Indian identity” is recognized in Gordie and King, who both show that they are mentally unstable and uprooted Chippewa men.
14 [Henry] it would keep on going” (Erdrich 185). Also, Henry’s mother Lulu finds it hard to see her son doing the wrong thing when he first had made everything right: “All his life he did things right, and then the war showed him right was wrong. Something broke in him. His mind gave way” (Erdrich 288). Not only is it hard enough for Henry to be at war, but also that he fought for the government that has stripped him and his tribe’s history and identity. Tom Holm (9) explains that many minorities who joined the
Vietnam war began to question the idea of joining the military to fight for a country that essentially kept them on the periphery of society, despite their best efforts to integrate. Indeed, it is possible that Henry questioned himself why he fought a war where he represented his common enemy, namely the U.S government. Like Gordie and King, Henry’s collective locus of identity is confronted by the Euro-American culture. Since Henry and his people experience oppression, exploitation, and discrimination, one may argue that Henry decided to join the U.S army in order to prove himself worthy as a full-fledged American citizen. As stated by Gaard, men are considered to be “macho and reckless” and is going to war to “prove themselves” (Gaard 35). Maybe Henry wanted to prove himself as a “macho” man since the training in the army where men are taught to despise and distance themselves from their “feminine” side, or their emotions and feelings: “The experience of basic training traditionally implants Patriarchal values (Gaard 35). The military manipulates sex roles to benefit the war business and does so very well. Militarists use notions of femininity and masculinity to manipulate both soldiers and citizens. In the context of ecofeminism, it can be suggested that Henry committed suicide due to military manipulations, which may have led him to abandon his cultural beliefs for the sake of the patriarchal system. However, it is difficult to know the actual cause for suicide since it is not further explained. The reason behind his suicide may as well have been because of other factors.
15 ones, that they dislike English since it has taken over the “old language,” namely the Chippewa language. In the novel, one understands that Nector went to boarding school, and when he came home, he had learned “white reading and writing” (Erdrich 19). Ecofeminist Paula Gunn Allen states that the American practice of forbidding Indian children to speak their own language forced them into isolation from their sense of belonging or created a split in their perception of wholeness (Allen 148). Indeed, the United States government has an imperial mindset, dividing the world into superior and inferior beings, where the white Euro-Americans are the superior, and the Native Americans are the inferior. Karen Warren explains that sexism is usually not the primary reason for the oppression of Native women; instead, it is foremost colonization that is the cause for the oppression. Warren argues that “with colonization begins the domination of women and the domination of nature” (22). However, Warren does not mention Native men when she discusses the colonization of Native Americans, which might be seen as inappropriate because both Native women and men experienced white domination due to colonialization.
16 main tasks of ecofeminism is to expose dualistic categories such as woman/man and culture/nature. Merchant and other ecofeminists argue that maintaining a hierarchical dualistic structure reinforces differences between ‘good and evil,’ wild and cultivated, red and white, and animals and humans,’ the colonizers could simultaneously possess and oppress indigenous peoples and nature (63). In this case, Nector would probably be considered a wild animal compared to Euro-American people, who instead might be portrayed as cultivated, white humans.
17 made choices influenced by social, economic, and political factors. A climate filled with discrimination may lead an individual to reject a Native identity (Weaver 244).
An essential part of ecofeminism relies on the philosophy that “everything is connected”. Francoise d’Eaubonne claims in Le Feminisme ou la Mort from 1974 that the survival of the human species relies on interconnectedness to each other, to
everything (Glazebrook 12). According to Nancy Chodorow and Carol Gilligan, it is more common among men to have a sense of self that is separate while women tend to have an interconnected sense of self (Gaard 2). Such statement may be useful when looking at certain kinds of texts, however, it is less useful in discussions of universal value. However, Chodorow and Gilligan also mentions that both men and women can access both types of these two different ethical conceptions of self (Gaard 2). Their statement can be drawn to the relation between Nector’s mother and his wife, namely Rushes Bear and Marie Lazarre. At first, they have a tense relationship, but when it is time for Marie to give birth, then Rushes Bear is there to assist. This childbirth
experience created a strong bond between Rushes Bear and Marie, a bond that Rushes Bear does not turn out to share any longer with her son, Nector. When he offers her some money, however, not only does she reject his money, but she even rejects Nector as her son. Rushes Bear says the following to Nector: “’You shame me,’ […] ‘You never heard any wail out of her [Marie], any complaint. You never would know this birth was hard enough for her to die” (Erdrich 104). Marie realizes that she is in the state of being connected with Rushes Bear, since they have created an
interconnectedness with one another: “I never saw this woman the same I had before that day. […] I never saw her without knowing that she was my own mother, my own blood. […] because we shared the loneliness that was one shape, because I knew that she was in that boat, where I had labored” (Erdrich 104-105). Marie and Rushes Bear have created a mother-daughter relationship that acknowledges the essential connection between two women who understand each other. They do not only share the same loneliness, but they also share the experience of giving birth and being mothers.
18 biologically determinist arguments about the connection between women and nature in the case of Native American women” (119). Further, he points out that one may learn from indigenous cultures to make positive connections between nature and the feminine as well as between nature and the masculine (Sturgeon 119). Indeed, one may instead find inspiration within Native cultures who purpose that both women and men have a connection to Mother Earth. Erdrich’s female and male characters of Native origin are seemingly close to nature, and therefore, are vulnerable when the U.S government possess their Chippewa lands. Erdrich’s story shows that both female and male characters of Chippewa origin possess a sacred relationship to Mother Earth, and not only women as some ecofeminists would suggest.
4. Conclusion
To sum up, the purpose of the analysis was to investigate whether the Chippewa characters and nature can be viewed as representative of certain ecofeminist values and principles. Erdrich portrays her characters as survivors of the downfall of their own Chippewa culture that is being replaced with white American culture through assimilation. The destruction of the reservation is well presented by Albertine’s reaction, who mourns the loss of tribal lands that was “sold to whites and lost forever” (Erdrich 11). Albertine and other characters in Love Medicine disapprove of the government’s action of depriving their lands. The tribal lands are not just Indians’ home, but they also symbolize a connection to nature and their culture. Ecofeminists want to challenge dualistic constructions, and such constructions are well presented through the Chippewa characters’ lives and nature who endure the government’s dominance through assimilation and oppression. Ecofeminism can therefore be seen as a support the oppressed ones, namely the Chippewa characters, and challenge the oppressors, who are the U.S government. Evidently, if the tribal lands are taken from the Chippewa people, then they become separated from their lands, and not only physically but also mentally. The analysis shows that Lulu’s connection with nature, does not make give ecofeminists the right to call her an ecofeminist or that she could be considered a role model within the scope of ecofeminism.
19 Nanapush shows that he is close to his Chippewa origins, and therefore, he shows a strong connection to nature, just like Moses Pillager and Eli. The fundamental principle of ecofeminism is that everything is connected, which can be seen through the
20 The oppression upon the Chippewa tribe is well presented in the novel through the characters lives and experiences. Not only can they lose a part of their identity, but they can also loose themselves completely. Henry Junior Lamartine committed suicide, however, the reason behind his action is up to the reader to interpret since it is not clearly stated. However, a possible reason for his actions is that he might have questioned himself why he fought on the same side as his enemy, namely the U.S. government, which made him abandon his cultural beliefs. Also, discrimination is part of everyday life for the Chippewa people, which is seen especially in the character of Nector. Since Nector is a Chippewa, Euro-American people exploit him due to his cultural origin. Here it is possible to apply an ecofeminist point of view in order to expose such dualistic structures, where Nector is oppressed and the Euro-Americans are the oppressors.
Erdrich’s novel provides a story that consist of oppressors and oppressed, where the former is the U.S government and the latter is the Chippewa tribe. Ecofeminists claim that the ultimate cause of both women’s oppression and the domination of nature is due to the patriarchy. However, the Chippewa characters, both women and men, endure the government’s domination. Ecofeminists tend to focus on analyzing women and their connection to nature and how the patriarchy oppresses women. Gaard stated that ecofeminists call for an end to all sorts of oppression, including oppressed groups. Oppressed groups consist of both women and men, which is evident in Love Medicine since it consists of both Chippewa women and men. Some tribal cultures do not separate women and men while others do, and if non-Native ecofeminists rely on Native
American traditions and rituals, then it is essential to include men in discussions of ecofeminism. However, ecofeminists say that they want to end all forms of oppression, yet they tend to rely on Native American traditions to strengthen their own essentialized view that it exists a “woman-nature connection”. If ecofeminists are up to “stealing” Native American’s traditions, then they constitute an appropriative silencing of Native Americans while idealizing them. Both females and males share a strong bond with nature, not only women, as ecofeminists often claim.
Ecofeminism relies on the belief that everything is connected, and some
21 form a strong connection with each other due to their shared experience of being lonely and caring mothers, while Nector’s absence and drinking problem demonstrate that he is more of an individualist who cares more about himself. However, Nector’s abuse and drinking may be the result of the oppressions that he and his tribe has undergone through the years. Cultural ecofeminists claim that women have an innate closeness to nature, which is an essentialist’s point of view. It is important that ecofeminists do not use aboriginal people’s culture and values in order to avoid cultural imperialism. After all, ecofeminism calls for an end to all oppressions, and therefore, it is essential to also be respectful to other cultures’ traditions. Relying on an ecofeminist philosophy, Erdrich creates a human and non-human relationship where both are oppressed by the U.S government. Both female and male characters show a strong connection to nature, which to some extent contradicts some ecofeminists’ perspectives that women alone have an innate relationship to nature that men do not possess. The traditional Chippewa characters represent the “Indian time” which could be considered a time where
22 Works cited:
Bubar, Roe & Thurman, Pamela Jumper. (2004). Violence Against Native Women. Social Justice. Vol. 31, No.4 (98), Native Women and State Violence pp. 70-86. Social Justice/Global Options.
Erdrich, Louise (1994). Love Medicine. London: Flamingo.
Gaard, Greta. (1993). Ecofeminism: Women, Animals, Nature. Temple University Press Philadelphia.
Glazebrook, Trish. (2002). Karen Warren's Ecofeminism. Ethics and the Environment. Vol. 7, No. 2, Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Hogan, Linda (1996). Dwellings: A Spiritual History of the Living World. Touchstone Books. New York: Norton.
Holm, Tom. (1996). Strong Hearts, Wounded Souls: Native American Veterans of the Vietnam War. University of Texas Press, Austin.
Macgregor, Sherilyn. (2006). Beyond Mothering Earth: Ecological Citizenship and the Politics of Care. Vancouver: UBC Press.
Merchant, Carolyn (1989). Ecological Revolutions: Nature, gender and science in New England. Chapel Hill, University of North Carolina Press.
Mies, Maria & Shiva, Vandana. (2014) Ecofeminism. Critique Influence Change, Vol.5. 2nd ed. Zed Books: London.
Miles, Kathryn. “Ecofeminism”. Encyclopedia Britannica. October 09, 2018 https://www.britannica.com/topic/ecofeminism
23 Weaver, Hilary. N. (2001). Indigenous Identity: What Is it, and Who Really Has It? American Indian Quarterly, Vol.25, No.2 pp.240-255. University of Nebraska Press.
Wilson, Kathi (2005). Ecofeminism and First Nations Peoples in Canada: Linking culture, gender and nature. Gender, Place & Culture, 12:3, 333-355. DOI:
10.1080/09663690500202574.
-I find the conclusion to be in need of further structure and clarification.
-There are also structural problems with the entire discussion, where I feel that the theory and the close reading are superficial, that is to say, I do not see the analysis progressing.
-There is a need to remove the generalizations,
