News

Philip, Neil The Great Circle: A History of the First Nations Clarion, 2006 153 pages, b/w photos grades 7-up

Neil Philip has made a name for himself in certain circles. In The Great Circle: A History of the First Nations, he attempts to explain the ethnic cleansing of North America by attributing it to a clash of cultures: “The Indians thought of the world as a great sacred circle; the whites thought of it as a straight line like a railroad track, gathering pace on the journey…”

Philip’s latest work abounds with patronizing text (“Far from being ferocious warriors, the hunter-gatherer tribes of California were distinguished by their gentleness”), outlandish interpretations of creation stories (“The Yana believed that the first Yanas were created from buckeye sticks by Jupka, the butterfly of the wild silkworm or, in another version, by Lizard and Cottontail Rabbit”) and ceremony (“The Deerskin Dance of the Hupa…enabled the dancers to display their wealth in the form of elaborate dance costumes”), excusing the unconscionable (“In retaliation, the British adopted a policy of genocide”), and photos with long captions, many of which are only tangentially relevant. For instance, under a photo of Little Six: “Little Six was among those hanged at Mankato, Minnesota, as leaders of the 1862 Sioux Uprising. His name survives in the Little Six Bingo Palace on today’s Shakopee Mdewakanton Reservation in Minnesota. The gambling hall opened in 1982 and grossed over 9 million dollars in its first year.”

In page after page, Philip places emphasis on the physical features and the spiritual beliefs of the Indian peoples (as interpreted by non-Indians). Since white people are the norm, they, of course, are not treated to such anthropological dissection. Writing such as this, for young non-Indian readers, dehumanizes the “other,” to be gawked at rather than to be empathized with—or understood. And terms such as “warriors,” “hostile,” “fierce,” “angry,” “resentful,” “fired up,” “revenge,” “aggressive,” “warpath,” and “killing spree” only add to this distancing.

Derogatory—and flat-out inaccurate—descriptions of entire cultures pervade this book: “Lakota boys…learned early both to endure and to inflict pain. A young man of the Lakota was not thought fit to marry until he had killed an enemy; bravery and skill in warfare were the measure of a man, and the primary source of status in Lakota society. For gentler souls there was an alternative: They could become winkte, wearing women’s clothing and sharing the women’s chores, but with the status of a medicine man. This warrior culture made the Lakota formidable enemies.” This kind of writing is more reminiscent of Stanley Vestal’s exaggerated fantasies than it is of anything real.  And Philip does not hesitate to slander the great leaders, either: “Crazy Horse…did not dance the Sun Dance, he did not take scalps, he did not count coup—instead, he killed his enemies, with ruthless, intense efficiency.”

Starred reviews and comments about Philip’s sensitivity notwithstanding, The Great Circle seems to have been designed to convince young readers—and apparently, librarians and book reviewers as well—that, while unfortunate events may have happened, they were all because of unfortunate misunderstandings, unfortunate culture clashes if you will, and, besides, Indians are still alive and today, “celebrate the past,…help in the present, and…plan for the future.” Philip should be ashamed.

—Beverly Slapin