A review by miocenemama
Black Elk Speaks by John G. Neihardt

3.0

This book is something I have heard about for years being published first in 1932. I have been curious to read it, but I have a few reservations about this book. It is supposed to be the memoir of an Oglala man, but it was written by a non-Indigenous person who did not speak the Lakota language. Black Elk did not speak English so his son, Ben, translated for him. I find that sad in and of itself. I doubt that Ben is the name he was given at birth. He spent 2 years at the infamous Carlisle boarding school where the motto was "Kill the Indian to save the man." Children were routinely abused and forced to cut their hair and punished for speaking their native language. This is not addressed in the book, but I couldn't help but think about it as Black Elk talked about all the treaties that were broken and how they were fed lies when they were promised food. It talks a lot about encroachment on their traditional lands and about the annihilation of the bison that the Lakota had always depended on. Black Elk was 13 years old when he was at the Battle of Little Bighorn. It didn't discuss a lot of what led up to that battle, but it did talk about later incidents where soldiers shot into tepees without regard for who might be in there. It also describes the massacre at Wounded Knee after what has become known as the Ghost Dance. The historical parts of the book seemed to fit what I know about the history of the Lakota people and the Western expansion. However, I am skeptical about other parts of the book. I know the book has been somewhat controversial, and that it has been seen as questionable by members of the Lakota nation. The bulk of the book was about Black Elk's great visions and the miraculous powers he was endowed with. The problems that I have are with the great detail that the author has gone into about the visions and the ceremonies they inspired. I question that Neilhardt was able to understand so much detail, especially since he admits to adding what he considered to be chronological coherence and clarity. It seems he also left out about 40 years of Black Elk's life and the fact that the recollection of his great vision was now in light of his conversion to Catholicism. Some Lakota people say it is not a true representation of their beliefs. I wondered about that since the book always speaks highly of Catholic representatives in spite of the contention that sometimes occurred between Natives and the church. I also question why this book claims to teach truths as universal as those taught by Christ, Buddha, various saints, and other religious leaders. I kept trying to see what was universal about the vision to protect the Lakota nation from colonial encroachment. I would like to know more about Black Elk's life and not as much as the possibly elaborated mystical experiences portrayed in this book. I'm not sorry that I read this book, but I would certainly take a lot of it with a grain of salt