Blood Legacies: Pathology and Power in Works by Sherman Alexie and A. A. Carr



In a consensus reached by bands, tribes, and colonizers alike, the sovereignties indigenous people exercise today in the Anglo-European sphere of control have been largely defined as blood sovereignties. As a result, the representation of blood in contemporary literary works has also emerged as a site of contestation, between the promise of consanguinity sustaining indigenous continuity in recognizably sovereign forms on the one hand, as well as the threat of tainted blood, including the corruption of sovereign traditions, coming from exogamous outsiders on the other. A biological commonplace as well as the “proof” of cultural authenticity, blood is a doubled figure within the colonial imaginary. It confers the power of an indigenous people and its proprietary traditions equally, alongside the potential menace of alienation apart from those same traditions. However blood subjectivity has come to be defined, its representations are intimately associated with the problems and potentials of plural sovereignties.


Mental Illness Indigenous People Indigenous Community Indigenous Culture Psychotic Experience 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 2.
    Reading Gilles Deleuze & Félix Guattari alongside Eye Killers makes the return of the capitalist vampire seem the culminating fragmentation of a “primitive” totality: “Primitive societies are not outside history; rather, it is capitalism that is at the end of history…. It cannot be said that the previous formations did not foresee this Thing that only came from without by rising from within, and that at all costs had to be prevented from rising.” See Deleuze and Guattari, Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia (Minneapolis: Univ. of Minnesota Press, 1983), 153.Google Scholar
  2. 3.
    Louis Owens, “The Jailing of Cecelia Capture,” American Indian Culture and Research Journal 8 (June 1984): 56–58. Critics have noted the wide diffusion of Anglo-European, “modernist” styles and techniques toward comparatively “authentic” American Indian narratives, and vice-versa, in the last generation, a development Kenneth Lincoln calls “Renaissance.” See his Native American Renaissance (Berkeley: Univ. of California Press, 1983), 3–5.Google Scholar
  3. 6.
    Sherman Alexie, Indian Killer (New York: Warner, 1996), 220. Subsequent references to the text will be made parenthetically by page number.Google Scholar
  4. 7.
    John Purdy, “Crossroads: A Conversation with Sherman Alexie,” Studies in American Indian Literatures 9.4 (Winter 1997): 9.Google Scholar
  5. 8.
    Louis Owens, Other Destinies: Understanding the American Indian Novel (Norman: Univ. of Oklahoma Press, 1992), 91.Google Scholar
  6. 10.
    Rob Barrett, The Psychiatric Team and the Social Definition of Schizophrenia (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1996), 23.Google Scholar
  7. 11.
    Anne M. Lovell, “‘The City Is My Mother’: Narratives of Schizophrenia and Homelessness,” American Anthropologist 99.2 (1997): 355–56. For a recent and thoughtful elaboration of the constructivist basis of schizophrenia, which uses a “dialogic theory of self” to engage with schizophrenic presence as “an ensemble of dialogues,” seeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. John Lysaker and Paul Lysaker, “Being Interrupted: The Self and Schizophrenia,” Journal of Speculative Philosophy 19.1 (2005): 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 12.
    Clara Claiborne Park, “Canst Thou Not Minister to a Mind Diseas’d?” Rejoining the Common Reader: Essays, 1962–1990 (Evanston, IL: Northwestern Univ. Press, 1991), 221.Google Scholar
  10. 13.
    See Fredric Jameson, Postmodernism or, The Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism (Durham, NC: Duke Univ. Press), 1991.Google Scholar
  11. 19.
    David Harvey, The Condition of Postmodernity: An Enquiry into the Origins of Cultural Change (Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell, 1990), 54–55.Google Scholar
  12. 20.
    Gerald Vizenor, Shadow Distance: A Gerald Vizenor Reader (Hanover: Wesleyan Univ. Press, 1994), 246.Google Scholar
  13. 22.
    Elizabeth Cook-Lynn, Why I Can’t Read Wallace Stegner and Other Essays: A Tribal Voice (Madison: Univ. of Wisconsin Press, 1996), 32.Google Scholar
  14. 26.
    Scott H. Nelson and Spero M. Manson, “Mental Health and Mental Disorders,” in American Indian Health: Innovations in Health Care, Promotion, and Policy, ed. Everett R. Rhoades (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, 2000), 311–12.Google Scholar
  15. 31.
    James Spradley, You Owe Yourself a Drunk: An Ethnography of Urban Nomads (New York: Waveland, 1999), 97–108.Google Scholar
  16. 33.
    Darrell Jesse Peters, “Diving Home: Centering in Louis Owens’s Wolfsong,” American Indian Quarterly 21 (Summer 1997): 471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 36.
    Nelson and Manson, “Mental Health,” 315; Lawrence S. Wissow, “Suicide among American Indians and Alaska Natives,” American Indian Health: Innovations in Health Care, Promotion, and Policy (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, 2000), 260–80.Google Scholar
  18. 37.
    Marlita A. Reddy, ed., Statistical Record of Native North Americans (Detroit: Gale Research, 1993), 717–19.Google Scholar
  19. 42.
    A. A. Carr, Eye Killers (Norman: Univ. of Oklahoma Press, 1995), 3. Subsequent references to the text will be made parenthetically by page number.Google Scholar
  20. 44.
    See Jesse Peters, “A Multitude of Routes, Roads and Paths: Transcultural Healing in A. A. Carr’s Eye Killers,” Paradoxa 6.15 (2001): 184. In his reading of Eye Killers, Peters makes use of Vizenor’s distinction between synecdoche and metonymy, suggesting that metonymy threatens to reduce the diversity of individual sovereign experiences, whereas synecdoche risks unduly homogenizing these same particularities across groups (186–87).Google Scholar
  21. 45.
    That genres, too, impose signatures of purity and uniformity on otherwise heterodox texts provokes Jacques Derrida’s scorn and irony: “Genres are not to be mixed. I will not mix genres. I repeat: genres are not to be mixed. I will not mix them.” See Jacques Derrida, “The Law of Genre,” in Acts of Literature, ed. Derek Attridge (New York: Routledge, 1992), 223. Thanks to Ian Fong for this reference.Google Scholar
  22. 46.
    See Stephen Arata, “The Occidental Tourist: Dracula and the Anxiety of Reverse Colonisation,” in Dracula, ed. Glennis Byron (New York: St. Martin’s, 1999), 119–44. Applying Arata’s framework to Eye Killers, Falke represents the threat of indigenous miscegenation visiting not the metropolitan center (i.e., Bram Stoker’s London in the late Victorian era) but a traditionally indigenous center already penetrated by capital formations.Google Scholar
  23. 48.
    Catherine Rainwater, “Who May Speak for the Animals? Deep Ecology in Linda Hogan’s Power and A. A. Carr’s Eye Killers,” Figuring Animals: Essays on Animal Images in Art, Literature, Philosophy, and Popular Culture, ed. Mary Sanders Pollock and Catherine Rainwater (New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2005), 270.Google Scholar
  24. 49.
    Gerald Vizenor, Fugitive Poses: Native American Indian Scenes of Absence and Presence (Lincoln: Univ. of Nebraska Press, 1998), 15. The term “postindian” speaks to what Vizenor calls “a fugitive pose in national histories; at the same time, the indian was a cultural concoction of bourgeois nostalgia and social sciences evidence” (145).Google Scholar
  25. 53.
    Rebecca Tillett, “Your Story Reminds Me of Something,” Ariel 33.1 (2002): 151.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Stuart Christie 2009

Authors and Affiliations

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations