ADV: Powwow (native american) dances on dancilla.com
Mario Herger
dancilla.com Server. The dances are from the native american tribe of
the Powwow in North-America.
The dances were taped by me on May 11th, 2003 at the 32nd Annual
Stanford Powow in Stanford, California.
Jingle, Grass, Fancy, Southern & Northern Traditional, Southern
Straight
http://www.dancilla.com/search.asp?crit=powwow
The number of available videos on the Dancilla.com-Server is currently
517, corresponding to 5,5 GB and ca. 31 hours of video. 420 videos
show dances, 71 comments, 21 others.
Mario
Peter D
Aboriginal woman, a great dancer partner and my closest friend. It
seemed both appropriate and timely.
Never forget SuAnne Big Crow!
SuAnne led Pine Ridge to a State "A" Championship in 1989, making Pine
Ridge the only native american girls team to win a state championship in
South Dakota. Here is a story of her leadership.
In the fall of 1988, the Pine Ridge Lady Thorpes went to Lead to play a
basketball game. SuAnne was a full member of the team by then. She was a
freshman, fourteen years old.
Getting ready in the locker room, the Pine Ridge girls could hear the
din from the fans. They were yelling fake-indian war cries, a
"woo-woo-woo" sound.
The usual plan for the pre-game warm-up was for the visiting team to run
onto the court in a line, take a lap or two around the floor, shoot some
baskets, and then go to their bench at courtside. After that, the home
team would come out and do the same, and then the game would begin.
Usually the Thorpes lined up for their entry more or less according to
height, which meant that senior Doni De Cory, one of the tallest, went
first. As the team waited in the hallway leading from the locker room,
the heckling got louder. The Lead fans were yelling epithets like
"squaw" and "gut-eater." Some were waving food stamps, a reference to
the reservation receiving federal aid. Others yelled, "Where's the
cheese?"the joke being that if Indians were lining up, it must be to get
commodity cheese. The Lead high school band had joined in, with
fake-Indian drumming and a fake-Indian tune.
Doni De Cory looked out the door and told her teammates, "I can't handle
this." SuAnne quickly offered to go first in her place. She was so eager
that Doni became suspicious. "Don't embarrass us," Doni told her. SuAnne
said, "I won't. I won't embarrass you." Doni gave her the ball and
SuAnne stood first in line.
She came running onto the court dribbling the basketball with her
teammates running behind. On the court, the noise was deafeningly loud.
SuAnne went right down the middle. But instead of running a full lap,
she suddenly stopped when she got to center court. Her teammates were
taken by surprise, and some bumped into one another. Coach Zimiga at the
rear of the line did not know why they had stopped.
SuAnne turned to Doni De Cory and tossed her the ball. Then she stepped
into the jump-ball circle at center court, in front of the Lead fans.
She unbuttoned her warm-up jacket, took it off, draped it over her
shoulders, and began to do the Lakota shawl dance. SuAnne knew all the
traditional dances. She had competed in many powwows as a little girl
and the dance she chose was a young woman's dance, graceful and modest
and show-offy all at the same time.
"I couldn't believe it she was powwowin', like, 'get down!'" Doni De
Cory recalled. "And then she started to sing." SuAnne began to sing in
Lakota, swaying back and forth in the jump-ball circle, doing the shawl
dance, using her warm-up jacket for a shawl. The crowd went completely
silent.
"All that stuff the Lead fans were yelling it was like she reversed it
somehow," a teammate said. In the sudden quiet, all you could hear was
her Lakota song. SuAnne stood up, dropped her jacket, took the ball from
Doni De Cory, and ran a lap around the court dribbling expertly and
fast. The fans began to cheer and! applaud. She sprinted to the basket,
went up in the air, and laid the ball through the hoop, with the fans
cheering loudly now. Of course, Pine Ridge went on to win the game.
"It was funny," Doni De Cory says, "but after that game the relationship
between Lead and us was tremendous. When we played Lead again, the games
were really good, and we got to know some of the girls on the team.
Later, when we went to a tournament and Lead was there, we were hanging
out with the Lead girls and eating pizza with them. We got to know some
of their parents, too. What SuAnne did made a lasting impression and
changed the whole situation with us and Lead. We found out there are
some really good people in Lead."
-----------
From one of the many pages that speak so well of this amazing Aborignal,
woman, youth, peace-maker:
"A star athlete, she set several state records. She led her team to a
state championship, scoring the winning basket as time ran out. Big Crow
also finished first academically in her class and spoke across the
country against drug and alcohol abuse. She confronted bigotry and
worked toward reconciliation between races."
SuAnne Big Crow did all this by the early age of 17. One wonders what
more she would have accomplished had she lived longer.
Mario Herger wrote in message
<79276feb.03052...@posting.google.com>...
Gene E. Bloch
Crow's that you have just given us.
Gino
--
Gene Bloch
Handle: gino37; ISP: earthlink; Domain: net
--
David Rintoul
change the world.
--
David Rintoul
david....@sympatico.ca
http://www3.sympatico.ca/david.rintoul
"In prosperity, our friends know us. In adversity, we know our friends."
J. Churton Collins
"Gene E. Bloch" <gin...@nowhere.none> wrote in message
news:bagred$esv$1...@slb9.atl.mindspring.net...
Victor Eijkhout
> What a world this would be if it were full of more stories like SuAnne Big
> Crow's that you have just given us.
What a world this would be if "sports fans" were not so that this sort
of story would be necessary.
Cool story, still.
V.
--
email me: first name at last name dot net
Matt Griffin
Pine Ridge, entitled "On The Rez", I believe. If you want to know more
about SuAnne, and more about Pine Ridge Reservation, that would be a good
source.
Though it seems Peter knew SuAnne, so maybe he has more to share as well...
Peter D
>Much of this post seems plagiarized from Ian Frazier's recent book
about
>Pine Ridge, entitled "On The Rez", I believe. If you want to know more
>about SuAnne, and more about Pine Ridge Reservation, that would be a
good
>source.
"Plagiarized"? What exactly are you implying? If you believe the message
I passed on was "plagiarized" from his book, please provide the chapter
and page numbers. You do have a copy of the book in front of you, don't
you? You have read the book, yes?
>Though it seems Peter knew SuAnne, so maybe he has more to share as
well...
Not I. I have never made such a claim. I wish I had known her, but I
didn't -- except through my friend's recounting of her story. And I'll
quickly add that I don't think she knew her personally either.
Martin Banks
p...@se.ask (Peter D) wrote:
> >Though it seems Peter knew SuAnne, so maybe he has more
> to share as
> well...
>
> Not I. I have never made such a claim. I wish I had known
> her, but I
> didn't -- except through my friend's recounting of her
> story. And I'll
> quickly add that I don't think she knew her personally
> either.
well, I can see where the suggestion comes from. You did
write:
"While not totally about dance, I wanted to share this story
from an Aboriginal woman, a great dancer partner and my
closest friend."
It seems a reasonable supposition following on from `my
closest friend', which had no attribution to anyone else.
Peter D
Only lazy reading and/or a lack of comprehension skills would lead
anyone to that conclusion. Had I said "about an Aboriginal woman, a
great dance partner, and my closest friend" one could reasonably
conclude I was saying SuAnne Big Crow was the Aboriginal woman
referenced.
With "from" instead of "about" one can only conclude that the _source_
of the story is the Aborignal woman referred to as "a great dance
partner, and my closest friend". She shared the story with me recently.
It made a great impression on me, and then I read the pow-wow message
and thought it would be both inspirational and appropriate to pass it
on.
HTH - YMMV
Rilla Heslin
Rilla
Rilla Heslin
can't imagine what an honor it must have been to known such an
incredible Native Woman. I'm sure she would have gone on to become one
of the revered elders of her tribe. What a tragic loss.
Thank you so much for sharing her story. I will honor her name at the
next PowWow I attend.
Rilla
Paul Burke
>
> Matt Griffin wrote in message <3ECCC621...@earthlink.net>...
> >Much of this post seems plagiarized from Ian Frazier's recent book
> about
> >Pine Ridge, entitled "On The Rez", I believe. If you want to know more
> >about SuAnne, and more about Pine Ridge Reservation, that would be a
> good
> >source.
>
> "Plagiarized"? What exactly are you implying? If you believe the message
> I passed on was "plagiarized" from his book, please provide the chapter
> and page numbers.
Poor Peter. Shouldn't have posted to UKMF, the Brits are impossibly
cynical when faced with good news stories. Talking of shutting them up
reminds me of man years ago, the British National Party (Nazis) were
standing at an election in Coventry. They held a rally in the shopping
centre. While it was in full swing, this guy who I new vaguely stood up
on the rostrum and started laying into them big time... he was a Jewish
bloke from Eastern Europe, somehow survived the war.. stunned the goons
into silence for about 5 minutes. They were just recovering enough to
eat him alive when a crowd of IMG (Trotskyists if you must know) burst
into the centre, all wearing crash helmets and chanting slogans the
length of Das Kapital. The Nazis dispersed, well outnumbered, leaving
the old Jew in possession of the field.
A Tory acquaintance later described it to me, not knowing I had seen it,
as though a column of Soviet tanks had broken up the Coventry Spring.
Paul Burke
Dominic Cronin
<ri...@windbourne.com> wrote:
>That is a fantastic story. I looked up her story on the web, and I
>can't imagine what an honor it must have been to known such an
>incredible Native Woman. I'm sure she would have gone on to become one
>of the revered elders of her tribe. What a tragic loss.
>
>Thank you so much for sharing her story. I will honor her name at the
>next PowWow I attend.
>
I Don't Understand Why This Is Cross-Shared To uK.mUSIC.fOLK. It Seems
To Be A Story About An American Woman Doing Something Completely
Unrelated To The Folk Music Traditions Of The uK. Can Anyone Explain?
--
Dominic Cronin
Amsterdam
Bob Wheatley
message news:1phucvcekku4mlhbd...@4ax.com...
Apparently, you have a low tolerance for "folk dancing" from other cultures.
If physical borders in folk dancing are so important to you, why are you
posting from Amsterdam?
Additionally, why do the readers of rec.arts.dance have to read your
whining?
Can you explain?
( You don't really need to. The rest of us are smart enough to see this is
being cross posted. I just wanted to point out how anal you are coming
across and to let you know there is medication for that)
---
Bob Wheatley
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.483 / Virus Database: 279 - Release Date: 5/19/2003
Peter D
The reason why the story -- posted by me -- was cross-posted to
rec.folk-dancing, rec.music.folk, rec.arts.dance, and uk.music.folk was
because the original message re the powwow was posted to all of them as
well. I simply failed to check and verify with each group and their
protectors of urity and on-topicness before posting.
I fell into that awful trap of having an e-mail open in front of me that
inspired me and gave me a better sense of the world we live in. At that
fateful moment I decided to share it with others, "peers" if you like,
in the hope that it would inspire them. It was introduced as not quite
on-topic but related.
It was rash of me, I know. I heartily apologize to all offended,
discomforted, and inconvenienced by my thoughtless action.
I'd like to especially plead the forgiveness of Dominic of Amsterdam
(the one with the wOnky Caps LocK kEy). I Do hOpE That mY EplanAtion haS
AlleViaTed yOur ConcErns aNd Helped To Mend SoMe of The HOrror CauseD By
My aCtioNs.
As for Terry (do you still call people a "yob" in UK?), it's "SuAnne Big
Crow". Reading and comprehension not your strong suit, eh? And you do
get Aboriginal Dancers on your side of The Pond. They're the ones that
look like Morris Dancers but have lots of feathers. <lol>
HTH
Mikkalai
"Dominic Cronin" <dom...@ReplaceThisBitWithMySurname.co.uk> wrote in
message news:1phucvcekku4mlhbd...@4ax.com...
Do you REALLY Absolutely Want To Know or What?
People (an computers (and people armed with computers)) make mistakes.
Do you think someone consciously decided to educate UK folk in native
American folk dancing?
Relax.
;mikkalai
''''
Bob Wheatley
"Terry" <tink...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3ecf...@news1.homechoice.co.uk...
>
> "Bob Wheatley" <a.xcw...@verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:dLJza.5583$8i4....@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
> > Apparently, you have a low tolerance for "folk dancing" from other
> cultures.
> > If physical borders in folk dancing are so important to you, why are you
> > posting from Amsterdam?
> > Additionally, why do the readers of rec.arts.dance have to read your
> > whining?
> > Can you explain?
> >
> >
> > ( You don't really need to. The rest of us are smart enough to see this
is
> > being cross posted. I just wanted to point out how anal you are coming
> > across and to let you know there is medication for that)
>
> unreasonable. Amsterdam is closer to London than Dallas is to Washington
and
> I believe you've got a Texan working there?
>
Texas is still within the borders of the country he's working for.
Are you geographically challenged too?
If Dominic thinks this is off topic, he should try reading RAD for a while.
> Dominics question wasn't 'Is it being cross posted?' but 'WHY is it being
> cross posted?' and the question was posted to all groups so the original
> poster had a chance to see it. >
Duh!!!!
The O/P cross posted it, so every reply has been to the same news groups.
Work on your comprehension skills. This is the reason WHY.
>He obviously DOESN'T subscribe to
> uk.music.folk or he'd have known that the subject of ANY other dance style
> is rarely touched on.
>
Hmm....
Are you losing your place?
It seems to me that was what he was whining about.
> But if you are dumb enough to leap to wrong conclusions and fire off
those
> kinds of cheap shots I guess you missed the point of the story and behaved
> in the same manner as the audience quelled by SuAnne Red Crow.>
How funny...
You question my intelligence, and you repeatedly illustrate your inability
to read and comprehend. You may want to read that story a few more times
until you get it right.
SuAnne Big Crow
George Hawes
"Bob Wheatley" <a.xcw...@verizon.net> wrote:
> "Dominic Cronin" <dom...@ReplaceThisBitWithMySurname.co.uk> wrote in
> message news:1phucvcekku4mlhbd...@4ax.com...
> > I Don't Understand Why This Is Cross-Shared To uK.mUSIC.fOLK.
> Apparently, you have a low tolerance for "folk dancing" from other cultures
No, he has the not unreasonable expectation that a post to a newsgroup
should conform to the charter of that group . .
> If physical borders in folk dancing are so important to you, why are you
> posting from Amsterdam?
Err . . . is there some logic lurking behind that remark? No, I thought not!
> The rest of us are smart enough to see this is being cross posted.
A point which Dominic clearly indicated . . .
> I just wanted to point out how anal you are coming across
Do you also have the ability to communicate in English?
At least Dominic knows what he's talking about - whether it's on the
subjects relevent to uk.music.folk, or on the USENET conventions which
reasonable folk continue to follow . .
Regards
George
--
George Hawes (george...@orange.net)
and Sawston Arts Festival
Bob Wheatley
news:19ccd5f74...@onetel.net.uk...
> In message <dLJza.5583$8i4....@nwrddc02.gnilink.net>
> "Bob Wheatley" <a.xcw...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > Apparently, you have a low tolerance for "folk dancing" from other
cultures
>
> No, he has the not unreasonable expectation that a post to a newsgroup
> should conform to the charter of that group . .
>
No one really knows or gives a shit about anyone's "charter", K?
The O/P cross posted it, Dominic asked a stupid question, you are
perpetuating his ignorance.
If off topic threads bother you that much, then I suggest you either grow
thicker skin or stop reading news groups.
Peter D
<snip>
>Work on YOUR comprehension.- the OP just threw the subject to anyone he
felt
>should be interested.
If by "OP" you mean me (the person who posted the SuAnne BIG Crow
story), I didn't just throw the subject at anyone who I felt should be
interested. As I've already stated, I simply made the appallingly
grevious and mortal sin of not checking the cross-posted groups before
intruding my message into your tiny and parochial world. For that great
offence I beg your forgiveness, O Great And Shining Example Of All That
Is Tolerant and Defender of Enormous Manhood.
<snip>
>What's to get right? Without detracting from the character of SuAnne
Big
>Crow face some facts.
>At the time of the incident she was in NO physical danger.
>She was in good physical health, well fed, athletic and in full time
>education.
>Each of those points made her better off than 75% of the rest of the
world.
>Her early death was the result of an accident that was in no way the
result
>of her beliefs..
Who has even suggested her death had anything to do with beliefs. Her
"beliefs" were that being a peace maker was better than being a warrior.
Her death was because of an auto accident. Comprehension really isn't
your strength is it?
The rest of your further off-topic anti-SuAnne BIG Crow rant deleted.
You need to get out more often. Head for the hills. Have a walk. Go
fish.
Dick Gaughan
+0100, George Hawes <george...@orange.net> wrote:
>No, he has the not unreasonable expectation that a post to a newsgroup
>should conform to the charter of that group . .
George, old son, you and Dominic are doing the utterly
unforgiveable - questioning the absolute, inalienable,
constitutional right of the most intellectually disadvantaged
Merkins to shit on whatever carpet they please regardless of the
wishes of others already using said carpet. The correct approach
is to pull your forelock, grovel, thank them for their wisdom and
apply pursed lips to their posteriors. That way you will avoid
being branded a commie towelhead terrorist[1] who would benefit
greatly from a good bombing.
Do try to keep up.
[1] Anyone defined as such by Shrub's puppetmeisters.
--
DG (exits singing Ochs' "We're the cops of the world, boys")
Maggie Davey
news:dLJza.5583$8i4....@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
> message news:1phucvcekku4mlhbd...@4ax.com...
> > I Don't Understand Why This Is Cross-Shared To uK.mUSIC.fOLK. It Seems
> > To Be A Story About An American Woman Doing Something Completely
> > Unrelated To The Folk Music Traditions Of The uK. Can Anyone Explain?
> > --
> > Dominic Cronin
> > Amsterdam
>
> Apparently, you have a low tolerance for "folk dancing" from other
cultures.
> If physical borders in folk dancing are so important to you, why are you
> posting from Amsterdam?
> Additionally, why do the readers of rec.arts.dance have to read your
> whining?
> Can you explain?
>
> ( You don't really need to. The rest of us are smart enough to see this is
> being cross posted. I just wanted to point out how anal you are coming
> across and to let you know there is medication for that)
I also wondered why this was being cross-posted - not so much the original
post, since that was just a point of information in which umf readers
*might* be interested, but the rest of this thread seems to be pretty
irrelevant to umf generally. After considering it for about 3 seconds, I
decided that there are people who simply don't think to delete irrelevant
newsgroups from the "To" box when replying.
Now I'm trying to figure out what part of Dominic's post constitutes
"whining" - unless it's something to do with idiosyncratic use of caps??
[Wanders off muttering to herself, must look out charter and see if it says
anything about gratuitous rudeness with no amusement value...]
Maggie
--
"I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." - Mark Twain
Matt Griffin
Peter D wrote:
> Matt Griffin wrote in message <3ECCC621...@earthlink.net>...
> >Much of this post seems plagiarized from Ian Frazier's recent book
> about
> >Pine Ridge, entitled "On The Rez", I believe. If you want to know more
> >about SuAnne, and more about Pine Ridge Reservation, that would be a
> good
> >source.
>
> "Plagiarized"? What exactly are you implying? If you believe the message
> I passed on was "plagiarized" from his book, please provide the chapter
> and page numbers. You do have a copy of the book in front of you, don't
> you? You have read the book, yes?
>
Check pp. 208-209. There are a couple of things snipped out of the version
you posted, but what's there is pretty much word for word.
>
> >Though it seems Peter knew SuAnne, so maybe he has more to share as
> well...
>
> Not I. I have never made such a claim. I wish I had known her, but I
> didn't -- except through my friend's recounting of her story. And I'll
> quickly add that I don't think she knew her personally either.
>
> >Peter D wrote:
> >
> >> While not totally about dance, I wanted to share this story from an
> >> Aboriginal woman, a great dancer partner and my closest friend. It
> >> seemed both appropriate and timely.
> >>
> >> Never forget SuAnne Big Crow!
My quibble is that your post sounded like first-hand knowledge and was
nothing of the kind. Yes, the story of SuAnne is very inspiring (and not
just that one incident. I will once again refer you to Mr. Frazier's book,
which is not specifically about Ms. Big Crow, but does tell her story in
detail) but why was it important to give yourself a part in it?
Dominic Cronin
<rjmd...@onetel.net.uk> wrote:
>Now I'm trying to figure out what part of Dominic's post constitutes
>"whining" - unless it's something to do with idiosyncratic use of caps??
>
Just for the record. It wasn't me that started it.
--
Dominic Cronin
Amsterdam
Dominic Cronin
>
>It was rash of me, I know. I heartily apologize to all offended,
>discomforted, and inconvenienced by my thoughtless action.
>
>I'd like to especially plead the forgiveness of Dominic of Amsterdam
>(the one with the wOnky Caps LocK kEy). I Do hOpE That mY EplanAtion haS
>AlleViaTed yOur ConcErns aNd Helped To Mend SoMe of The HOrror CauseD By
>My aCtioNs.
>
Apology accepted.
>As for Terry (do you still call people a "yob" in UK?), it's "SuAnne Big
>Crow". Reading and comprehension not your strong suit, eh? And you do
>get Aboriginal Dancers on your side of The Pond. They're the ones that
>look like Morris Dancers but have lots of feathers. <lol>
>HTH
>
Hmm. Not sure where you're going with this one. Although you seem to
be making a joke, but I can't figure out at whose expense.
For what it's worth - of course we have aboriginal dancers in the UK.
Among these, I would definitely include morris dancers. There's often
discussion about the relative credibility of 'revival' teams and those
with a direct tie to a geographically located tradition whose origin
is lost in the mists of time. I dare say that happens with North
American aboriginal culture too, from time to time.
All the same, I'm having trouble figuring out whether morris dancers
who sport feathers should be more offended than those who don't. or
vice versa.
So there you go - it's as easy as that - in one fell swoop we're back
on topic for all the groups. All the same, with this level of
cross-posting, it'll be weeks before the traffic on this thread drops
back to a sensible proportion of uk.music.folk's overall traffic.
Maybe I should just shut up. ;-)
--
Dominic Cronin
Amsterdam
Martin Banks
a.xcw...@verizon.net (Bob Wheatley) wrote:
> Texas is still within the borders of the country he's
> working for.
> Are you geographically challenged too?
> If Dominic thinks this is off topic, he should try
> reading RAD for a while.
Interesting. There was I thinking that it was called the
United States of America because it was made up of a bunch
of *states*, which is why they have their own laws,
cultures, Governors, legislatures etc.
Bob Wheatley
news:memo.2003052...@banksie.compulink.co.uk...
Yes, you just seem to be overlooking the *United* part.
What defines the borders of the United States?
Peter D
>On Sat, 24 May 2003 16:23:48 GMT, "Peter D" <p...@se.ask> wrote:
>Apology accepted.
You're welcome. :-)
<snip>
>>get Aboriginal Dancers on your side of The Pond. They're the ones that
>>look like Morris Dancers but have lots of feathers. <lol>
>Hmm. Not sure where you're going with this one. Although you seem to
>be making a joke, but I can't figure out at whose expense.
Terry's. Nice catch re my misuse of "Aboriginal". Although, wasn't
"Indiginous" what you were thiinking when I said "Aboriginal"?
Here in Canada, "Aboriginal" is used to best describe the First People
of this continent in preference to "Indian" (shows European ignorance).
By "Aboriginal Dancers" I meant the dancers that were from those First
People of this continent we now call "North America". Teams often tour
Europe, and England graciously hosts these dancers as they share their
culture and dance in an effort to alleviate ignorance and foster
tolerance.
Not "Morris Dancers with feathers". Rather "look like Morris Dancers but
have lots of feathers." Quite different, you see. :-)
Peter D
<snip>
>> >Peter D wrote:
>> >
>> >> While not totally about dance, I wanted to share this story from
an
>> >> Aboriginal woman, a great dancer partner and my closest friend. It
>> >> seemed both appropriate and timely.
Matt Griffin, after a lazy gloss of a message ASSumed something:
>> >Though it seems Peter knew SuAnne, so maybe he has more to share as
>> well...
Peter D, wondering about the level of English Comprehension in the
workplace these days, clarified:
>> Not I. I have never made such a claim. I wish I had known her, but I
>> didn't -- except through my friend's recounting of her story. And
I'll
>> quickly add that I don't think she knew her personally either.
>>
>
>My quibble is that your post sounded like first-hand knowledge and was
>nothing of the kind. Yes, the story of SuAnne is very inspiring (and
not
>just that one incident. I will once again refer you to Mr. Frazier's
book,
>which is not specifically about Ms. Big Crow, but does tell her story
in
>detail) but why was it important to give yourself a part in it?
Dear Matt, I didn't. Remember "from" v "about"? No? Memory also a
problem, eh? Why is it important for you to pick over this already
dealt-with issue. I've clarified it for you. If you don't understand
English, not my problem. Deal with it. Go back to school. Take a
Remedial English Class. Whatever you need, my son. Just stop humping my
cyber-leg over this one, OK?
Here's the clarification from three days back in the thread. Maybe you
missed it. Maybe you glossed it. Who knows? Who cares?
Peter D was quoted as saying: "While not totally about dance, I wanted
to share this story from an Aboriginal woman, a great dancer partner and
my closest friend."
He then further clarified for the Comprehension-Impaired:
"Only lazy reading and/or a lack of comprehension skills would lead
anyone to that conclusion. Had I said "about an Aboriginal woman, a
great dance partner, and my closest friend" one could reasonably
conclude I was saying SuAnne Big Crow was the Aboriginal woman
referenced.
"With "from" instead of "about" one can only conclude that the _source_
of the story is the Aborignal woman referred to as "a great dance
partner, and my closest friend". She shared the story with me recently.
It made a great impression on me, and then I read the pow-wow message
and thought it would be both inspirational and appropriate to pass it
on."
Ans -- as I've already stated -- I do not believe that the Aboriginal
woman who gave me the story had any firsthand or personal knowledge of
SuAnne Big Crow. She simply passed on a story/e-mail she
heard/received.
There, Matt. Are we all done now? Good. You are dismissed.
NEXT!!!!!!!!!!
Dick Gaughan
2003 16:35:58 GMT, "Peter D" <p...@se.ask> wrote:
>Here in Canada, "Aboriginal" is used to best describe the First People
>of this continent in preference to "Indian" (shows European ignorance).
"I prefer the term American Indian because I know its origins. The
word Indian is an English bastardization of two Spanish words, En
Dio, which correctly translated means in with God. As an added
distinction the American Indian is the only ethnic group in the
United States with the American before our ethnicity."
"At an international conference of Indians from the Americas held
in Geneva, Switzerland at the United Nations in 1977 we
unanimously decided we would go under the term American Indian.
'We were enslaved as American Indians, we were colonized as
American Indians and we will gain our freedom as American Indians
and then we will call ourselves any damn thing we choose.'"
- Russell Means, January 16, 1998
--
DG
Dominic Cronin
>Dominic Cronin wrote in message ...
>>On Sat, 24 May 2003 16:23:48 GMT, "Peter D" <p...@se.ask> wrote:
><snip>
>>Apology accepted.
>
>You're welcome. :-)
>
><snip>
>>>get Aboriginal Dancers on your side of The Pond. They're the ones that
>>>look like Morris Dancers but have lots of feathers. <lol>
>
>>Hmm. Not sure where you're going with this one. Although you seem to
>>be making a joke, but I can't figure out at whose expense.
>
>Terry's. Nice catch re my misuse of "Aboriginal". Although, wasn't
>"Indiginous" what you were thiinking when I said "Aboriginal"?
>
>Here in Canada, "Aboriginal" is used to best describe the First People
>of this continent in preference to "Indian" (shows European ignorance).
>By "Aboriginal Dancers" I meant the dancers that were from those First
>People of this continent we now call "North America". Teams often tour
>Europe, and England graciously hosts these dancers as they share their
>culture and dance in an effort to alleviate ignorance and foster
>tolerance.
The racial heritage of the UK has been a melting pot for so many
centuries that we don't usually single out any specific racial group
to describe as aborigines. How would you tell, eh? OTOH it does make
sense to describe morris dancers as aboriginal dancers. As far as I
know there is no historical way of fixing a time prior to which we can
all agree that morris dancing, or some precursor of it, didn't exist.
>
>Not "Morris Dancers with feathers". Rather "look like Morris Dancers but
>have lots of feathers." Quite different, you see. :-)
>
But still - what about the morris dancers with lots of feathers?
--
Dominic Cronin
Amsterdam
Molly
on Sun, 25 May 2003, Peter D <p...@se.ask> wrote:
>Here in Canada, "Aboriginal" is used to best describe the First People
>of this continent in preference to "Indian" (shows European ignorance).
>By "Aboriginal Dancers" I meant the dancers that were from those First
>People of this continent we now call "North America". Teams often tour
>Europe, and England graciously hosts these dancers as they share their
>culture and dance in an effort to alleviate ignorance and foster
>tolerance.
You have to realise that different terms are in use in different
cultures. What you refer to as "Aboriginal" people, we in the UK would
refer to as "native Americans". Nothing to do with the United States;
it's a reference to the continent - both halves of it. Incidentally,
the few native Americans I know all prefer that general description to
any other - so presumably it is in regular use elsewhere in your
continent, even if not in Canada.
What we in the UK would mean by "Aborigines" would be the indigenous
population of Australia, and nowhere else.
You don't have to go about re-naming the original people of your country
just because Canadians don't like being confused with people from the
United States. (And that comes from a Scot who dislikes being assumed
to be English, so I know what I'm talking about in that respect.)
--
Molly
Sarchasm: The gulf between the author of sarcastic wit and the person
who doesn't get it.
Peter D
>In <Oh6Aa.66347$3C2.1...@news3.calgary.shaw.ca> on Sun, 25 May
>2003 16:35:58 GMT, "Peter D" <p...@se.ask> wrote:
>
>>Here in Canada, "Aboriginal" is used to best describe the First People
>>of this continent in preference to "Indian" (shows European
ignorance).
>
>"I prefer the term American Indian because I know its origins. The
>word Indian is an English bastardization of two Spanish words, En
>Dio, which correctly translated means in with God.
Really? And here was I rhinking that it was because Columbus, believing
himself to have reached the "Indies", called the people he found living
their "Indians". I never knew it was because they were being referred to
as "En Dio". Slap me with a wet towel!
<an "A" for creativity though>
>As an added
>distinction the American Indian is the only ethnic group in the
>United States with the American before our ethnicity."
And what of the First People who are not from the United States? -- yes,
there are others you know, both south and north of you.
According to their descendants:
"Indian" show our ignorance -- geographically, historically, and
culturally.
"Native American", "Ameri-Indian", "Native" excludes the Northern People
and Métis.
"First Nations"excludes the Métis.
"Aboriginal" includes all -- that is the Northern People, the Southern
People, and the Métis.
>"At an international conference of Indians from the Americas held
>in Geneva, Switzerland at the United Nations in 1977 we
>unanimously decided we would go under the term American Indian.
>'We were enslaved as American Indians, we were colonized as
>American Indians and we will gain our freedom as American Indians
>and then we will call ourselves any damn thing we choose.'"
>
>- Russell Means, January 16, 1998
Hmmm. Our Aboriginal people in Canada have already done it. "First
Nations" has been in common currency since the early 80s. "Indian" is
offensive/derogatory in Canada and has been since before the 80s. "First
People" is used to de-politicize the similar "First Nations".
HTH
Peter D
Seriously? I had no ideas Morris Dancers had lots of feathers. All the
ones I've seen and photographed didn't.
BTW, if anyone knows the "Seven Saxons" in Kingston, near Rickmond, back
in the 70s I took a lot of slides of a local Morris group (troupe?)
performing outside. They are quite good. I forget the exact place or
reason. It was a pedestrian/mall area IIRC and the occasion was a
national or local holiday, sometime in the summer. Anyway, if anyone
knows of the group, the pub, a local society, I'd like to give them a
good home.
PS Dominic, if you'll tell me which ng you're posting from, I'll wander
over so as not to burden the other ngs with the conversation. :-)
Peter D
>Peter D <p...@se.ask> wrote:
>>Here in Canada, "Aboriginal" is used to best describe the First People
>>of this continent in preference to "Indian" (shows European
ignorance).
>You have to realise that different terms are in use in different
>cultures. What you refer to as "Aboriginal" people, we in the UK would
>refer to as "native Americans". Nothing to do with the United States;
>it's a reference to the continent - both halves of it. Incidentally,
>the few native Americans I know all prefer that general description to
>any other - so presumably it is in regular use elsewhere in your
>continent, even if not in Canada.
>
>What we in the UK would mean by "Aborigines" would be the indigenous
>population of Australia, and nowhere else.
Actually, Molly the word I used was "Aboriginal". "Aborigine"? Not I.
:-)
>You don't have to go about re-naming the original people of your
country
>just because Canadians don't like being confused with people from the
>United States. (And that comes from a Scot who dislikes being assumed
>to be English, so I know what I'm talking about in that respect.)
That's not the reason "Aboriginal" is used. The reason has nothing to do
with demonstrating non-USness, only with including all the groups that
have a specific status. See other message for explanation and
definitions.
HTH
Tony Quinn
<nos...@mockfords.clara.co.uk> writes
>In article <Oh6Aa.66347$3C2.1...@news3.calgary.shaw.ca> at 16:35:58
>on Sun, 25 May 2003, Peter D <p...@se.ask> wrote:
>You have to realise that different terms are in use in different
>cultures. What you refer to as "Aboriginal" people, we in the UK would
>refer to as "native Americans". Nothing to do with the United States;
>it's a reference to the continent - both halves of it. Incidentally,
>the few native Americans I know all prefer that general description to
>any other - so presumably it is in regular use elsewhere in your
>continent, even if not in Canada.
On a very serious note. In my opinion, the use of the term
'foo-american', or 'american-foo' does, in my opinion, degrade the
status of the person to whom it is directed - surely you're 'american'
or 'not american'. It's like being a bit pregnant or slightly dead.
Once you're past a couple of generations the ethnic origin SHOULD become
irrelevant in terms of where you're from! It seems, however, whilst
there are grants to be had it doesn't.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tony Quinn --- The Voice Of Insanity
replies to to...@sixpints.demon.co.uk
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Julian Flood
Does anyone know the chords for 'I'm a troll, folderoll, etc'?
JF
I want to sing it, not feed them.
David Rintoul
Indians.
--
David Rintoul
david....@sympatico.ca
http://www3.sympatico.ca/david.rintoul
"In prosperity, our friends know us. In adversity, we know our friends."
J. Churton Collins
Terry
"Julian Flood" <j...@floodsclimbers.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:bar7j4$h69$1...@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk...
>
> Does anyone know the chords for 'I'm a troll, folderoll, etc'?
>
> JF
> I want to sing it, not feed them.
LOL.
Not quite, but you might be able to figure it from here - have your audio on
though!
Terry
Terry
Here's the url!
http://www.sterlingtimes.co.uk/bill_goats_gruff.htm
Terry
Rilla Heslin
>
> On Thu, 22 May 2003 23:52:59 -0700, Rilla Heslin
> <ri...@windbourne.com> wrote:
>
> >That is a fantastic story. I looked up her story on the web, and I
> >can't imagine what an honor it must have been to known such an
> >incredible Native Woman. I'm sure she would have gone on to become one
> >of the revered elders of her tribe. What a tragic loss.
> >
> >Thank you so much for sharing her story. I will honor her name at the
> >next PowWow I attend.
> >
> To Be A Story About An American Woman Doing Something Completely
> Unrelated To The Folk Music Traditions Of The uK. Can Anyone Explain?
> --
>
> Dominic Cronin
> Amsterdam
This story has "everything" thing to do with folk music, be it American
or U.K. It is a tell of peace through folk music, and I see no reason
why it shouldn't be shared with people who are into folk music any where
in the world. If you oppose peace through music, why are you on a folk
group at all?
There are some people who think that Celtic music is the only kind of
folk music that there is. But this is as bogus as saying that they are
the only "people" who's music should be recognized. By definition, Folk
Music is music of the common people. Native America music is as much
folk music as Celtic, Hawaiian, African, Russian, Israeli, or any other
"Peoples'" music.
In the story, the Native American girl came out on to the basket ball
court amidst terrible racial jeering from the audience. But through
this girls quick thinking and dignified actions she turned a very bad
situation into a good situation by singing a "Native American Folk Song"
and doing a traditional dance.
She used "her Folk Music" and dance to stop a "possible" riot and to
turn the people's attitude from racial ignorance to a peaceful
understanding. One young girl, alone, through her music and dance.
It has everything to do with rec.music.folk and I see nothing wrong with
the U.K. folk group recognizing this message anymore than I see a
problem with us recognizing the U.K. folk music group. But that of
course is my opinion.
Rilla
Molly
on Sun, 25 May 2003, Peter D <p...@se.ask> wrote:
>Seriously? I had no ideas Morris Dancers had lots of feathers. All the
>ones I've seen and photographed didn't.
Oh, c'mon. Anybody who's seen a side of Morris Dancers who have just
finished dancing and are heading for the bar can tell that they all seem
to have a mouthful of feathers...
Molly
on Sun, 25 May 2003, Peter D <p...@se.ask> wrote:
>Molly wrote in message ...
>>Peter D <p...@se.ask> wrote:
>>You have to realise that different terms are in use in different
>>cultures. What you refer to as "Aboriginal" people, we in the UK would
>>refer to as "native Americans". Nothing to do with the United States;
>>it's a reference to the continent - both halves of it. Incidentally,
>>the few native Americans I know all prefer that general description to
>>any other - so presumably it is in regular use elsewhere in your
>>continent, even if not in Canada.
>>
>>What we in the UK would mean by "Aborigines" would be the indigenous
>>population of Australia, and nowhere else.
>
>Actually, Molly the word I used was "Aboriginal". "Aborigine"? Not I.
>:-)
Which is why I said 'What you refer to as "Aboriginal" people...'. I
included the reference to "Aborigines" in order to make clear the
possible confusion between the terms.
Now, if you had said "aboriginal people" rather than "Aboriginal
people", there would have been far less possibility of confusion.
>>You don't have to go about re-naming the original people of your
>country
>>just because Canadians don't like being confused with people from the
>>United States. (And that comes from a Scot who dislikes being assumed
>>to be English, so I know what I'm talking about in that respect.)
>
>That's not the reason "Aboriginal" is used. The reason has nothing to do
>with demonstrating non-USness, only with including all the groups that
>have a specific status. See other message for explanation and
>definitions.
Nothing I have read in this thread so far gives any clear explanation
why there is anything wrong with "native American", the description of
choice used by the only people I know who fall into that category.
I do feel we should perhaps be shifting this discussion into uk.culture.
language.english/alt.english.usage/alt.usage.english - but that would
end up swamping ucle even more than this is swamping umf, so I haven't.
Molly
25 May 2003, Tony Quinn <to...@sixpints.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>On a very serious note. In my opinion, the use of the term
>'foo-american', or 'american-foo' does, in my opinion, degrade the
>status of the person to whom it is directed - surely you're 'american'
>or 'not american'. It's like being a bit pregnant or slightly dead.
>
>Once you're past a couple of generations the ethnic origin SHOULD become
>irrelevant in terms of where you're from! It seems, however, whilst
>there are grants to be had it doesn't.
I'd go along with what I think you're saying, if it were not for the
fact that it appears that everyone who chooses to describe themselves as
solely "American" actually means "citizen of the United States"[0].
I've never come across the term used in reference to the continent which
bears the name America. I don't know any people from Canada, or Chile,
or Mexico, who would ever dream of describing themselves as "American".
Hell, it's hard enough to get anyone in the UK to admit that they are
"European".[2]
[0] And most who so proudly proclaim themselves seem to be white,
Protestant, Republican, in-favour-of-war-against-non-Judeo-Christian-
nations type citizens of the United States[1] :-( The sad thing is
that the soi-disant "Americans" that one tends to meet over here are by
and large excellent people. It's only on certain Usenet groups (and I'm
not talking about those in this thread - I have in mind particularly
some of the alt.* groups) that one encounters those who are so
incredibly arrogant and insular that one wonders what they were taught
at school, and by whom. Double :-(
[1] The equivalent of our British National Party, who have hi-jacked the
Union Flag to the extent that normal people are embarrassed to use it in
any shape or form.
[2] To many Brits, "Europe" is a landmass which starts south of the
English Channel.[3]
[3] It doesn't help, of course, that the Eurovision Song Contest
includes the likes of Russia (one-seventeenth in Europe) and Israel
(quite some distance from Europe).[4]
[4] Those who know my posting style, which is basically those in umf and
none of the other groups, will know full well where I'm coming from when
I start to spawn footnotes like nobody's business.
Molly
2003, Rilla Heslin <ri...@windbourne.com> wrote:
>There are some people who think that Celtic music is the only kind of
>folk music that there is. But this is as bogus as saying that they are
>the only "people" who's music should be recognized. By definition, Folk
>Music is music of the common people. Native America music is as much
>folk music as Celtic, Hawaiian, African, Russian, Israeli, or any other
>"Peoples'" music.
I knew we wouldn't have to wait long for a horse!
Dick Gaughan
2003 19:21:55 GMT, "Peter D" <p...@se.ask> wrote:
>Really? And here was I rhinking that it was because Columbus, believing
>himself to have reached the "Indies", called the people he found living
>their "Indians". I never knew it was because they were being referred to
>as "En Dio". Slap me with a wet towel!
><an "A" for creativity though>
You're the one who's been berating others for their supposed lack
of English comprehension skills; the quotation marks and the
attribution at the bottom would clearly indicate to a reader of
average skill that my remarks were not original but were a
quotation from someone who can speak with authority on the
subject.
--
DG (Who's recovering from lower jaw surgery and is in the mood for
a bit of mild entertainment. Bait me another hook, Jeeves.)
Dick Gaughan
+0100, Molly <nos...@mockfords.clara.co.uk> wrote:
>[4] Those who know my posting style, which is basically those in umf and
>none of the other groups, will know full well where I'm coming from when
>I start to spawn footnotes like nobody's business.
Say goodnight, Molly :)
--
DG
Peter D
>2003 19:21:55 GMT, "Peter D" <p...@se.ask> wrote:
>
>>Really? And here was I rhinking that it was because Columbus,
believing
>>himself to have reached the "Indies", called the people he found
living
>>their "Indians". I never knew it was because they were being referred
to
>>as "En Dio". Slap me with a wet towel!
>><an "A" for creativity though>
>
>You're the one who's been berating others for their supposed lack
>of English comprehension skills; the quotation marks and the
>attribution at the bottom would clearly indicate to a reader of
>average skill that my remarks were not original but were a
>quotation from someone who can speak with authority on the
>subject.
Whoever you quoted spoke for him/herself and those who agreed with
him/her. Whether you like it or not, that group doesn't speak for
Aboriginal people in Canada.
Besides what did the speaker you quoted say on the matter of "Indian"
deriving from Spanish "En Dio"?
(You made it up, didn't you?)
Chris Rockcliffe
real American Indian and in recent discussion I asked him about this...
"Well I'm an American... and a 'natural, born in the USA, American National'
and 'a USA citizen' and 'a USA Passport holder' and 'a US Taxpayer' and a
former citizen of Minneapolis.
I'm also an 'American Indian'; I can also be an 'American Sioux Indian' or a
'Native American' (although I hate that native term). I'm also a 'North
Dakota Indian', and a 'Badlands Sioux' and a 'Lakota Indian'...
Don't call me an 'Aboriginal' like they do in Canada - I hate that - and
they might think I'm Australian over here.
You can call me 'Jack' or 'bartender!', if you like, but if you ever call me
'Hey, Geronimo!!' I'll have to take you outside. :-)
I said, "Would that be a term of abuse?" "No... he said, "...it would be
showing your ignorance - wrong tribe!" :-)
I said, "Cool! - as long as you promise to do me one favour while you're
here in Buxton...". "What's that?" he replied... I said, "Don't go doin'
that 'rain dance'... we've got enough bloody rain up here already!" :-)
I spent a little time many years ago on a Navajo reservation in Utah and
they have a hard life scratching a living on small plots. (regular
sandstorms there can literally take the skin off your face and damage eyes).
Gambling businesses on some reservations has helped boost the economy in
recent years. Wouldn't want to trade places though.
CR
David Rintoul
'Indian' is a misnomer for the native peoples of North America, having
arisen from the mistaken belief of Christopher Columbus and other Europeans
in the 15th - 18th centuries that they had reached part of India by a new
route. The term is considered to convey an offensive stereotype by some.
However, it is used by many native North Americans as a term of pride and
respect. The full form 'American Indian' (and in Canada, 'Canadian Indian')
are unambiguous alternatives."
Source: Oxford English Dictionary
Julian Flood
"Dick Gaughan" wrote
> Bait me another hook, Jeeves.)
<shimmers in> Very good, sir. I have found in these circumstances that
boiled goat is very effective. I trust this will meet with your approval.
But will sir really be troll-baiting in those trousers? Perhaps the tweed
suit, sir? <shimmers out>
JF
Daniel R. Reitman
<di...@dickalba.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>You're the one who's been berating others for their supposed lack
>of English comprehension skills; the quotation marks and the
>attribution at the bottom would clearly indicate to a reader of
>average skill that my remarks were not original but were a
>quotation from someone who can speak with authority on the
>subject.
True, but it's probably a folk etymology, so to speak.
(While we're on this, can someone please write a song about SuAnne Big
Crow that this will be on topic in r.m.folk and uk.m.folk?) :-)
Dan, ad nauseam
Daniel R. Reitman
<david....@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>Most First Nations/Aboriginal/Native American people I know call themselves
>Indians.
I've heard both Native American and Indian south of the 49th.
Dan, ad nauseam
Christopher C. Stacy
Peter> According to their descendants: "Indian" show our ignorance --
Peter> geographically, historically, and culturally. "Native
Peter> American", "Ameri-Indian", "Native" excludes the Northern
Peter> People and Métis. "First Nations"excludes the Métis.
Peter> "Aboriginal" includes all -- that is the Northern People, the
Peter> Southern People, and the Métis.
I don't know who it is that you suppose speaks for
"their descendants", and maybe it's a generational thing.
But my tribe always just said (and says) "indians"
and we had no problem with that whatsoever.
Not that this has anything to do with dancing...
Dick Gaughan
2003 01:00:05 GMT, "Peter D" <p...@se.ask> wrote:
>Whoever you quoted spoke for him/herself and those who agreed with
>him/her.
*Whoever* I quoted? ROFL! You really know a lot about all this
stuff you're spouting about, don't you?
> Whether you like it or not, that group doesn't speak for
>Aboriginal people in Canada.
They don't need to - the numbers of Cree people lying in the
gutters of downtown Edmonton speak more than eloquently of the
wonderful successes regarding Indian matters your smug
self-congratulatory attitudes have achieved. As did Chief Dan
George at the bicentennial.
So, just to clarify - having invaded and occupied their continent,
slaughtered masses of them, destroyed their way of life and their
environment, you are now telling them who they're allowed to speak
for, that the arbitrary lines you drew on the map decide what the
various bits of their continent are, that they should restrict
their activities to the bit you've decided they live in, and that
they ahould be called whatever you've decided they should be
called? And in return you'll tell nice heartwarming wee Forrest
Gump stories about how noble they are?
As the man said, "Ya gotta hand it to the white folks, they got
balls".
Or, to put it another way, beware of the colonialist mindset -
especially when it's masquerading as enlightened liberalism.
>Besides what did the speaker you quoted say on the matter of "Indian"
>deriving from Spanish "En Dio"?
>(You made it up, didn't you?)
Were you born arrogant, pompous, patronising and ill-mannered or
have you just practised hard? I know it's not a geographical thing
- I've been to Alberta many times and most people were courteous
and friendly. Must be a genetic defect. Or maybe I just spent too
much time talking with Indians and got a distorted view.
I don't have to make up quotes, I know how to do elementary
research. It's not hard, even someone with your intellect could
learn to do it. Free Clue: do a Google on "Russell Means", "Pine
Ridge", "Wounded Knee" and "American Indian Movement" and you'll
find the page I cut and pasted it from. (I confess that the
quotation marks and attribution line were my modest contribution.)
You appear to have serious difficulties with the concepts
"discussion" and "exchange of views". Interesting that you take
any comment other than cloying sycophancy as a criticism
warranting schoolboy-level yah-boo-sucks foot-stamping. Tends to
indicate a borderline personality disorder with mild paranoia and
infantile grandiosity. Take several aspirin and lie down in a
darkened room for a few months, avoiding all communication -
especially written - with sentient life forms.
<Follow-ups set so I won't have to read any more of this genius's
ill-informed haverings.>
--
DG
Dick Gaughan
04:15:05 +0100, "Julian Flood" <j...@floodsclimbers.freeserve.co.uk>
wrote:
><shimmers in> Very good, sir. I have found in these circumstances that
>boiled goat is very effective. I trust this will meet with your approval.
>But will sir really be troll-baiting in those trousers? Perhaps the tweed
>suit, sir? <shimmers out>
Isn't tweed getting a bit proletarian these days, old boy? What
about that denim kilt with the turquoise and rhinestone sporran
that we got for Felicity Smotherington-Fythe's debut? Went jolly
well with the monocle, I thought.
--
DG
Mario Herger
generated. Even if it was perhaps not directly related to
uk.music.folk my thoughts were more that this kind of information
might be interesting there too, as I have actually on the same website
also videos (Morris-, Molly-, Clog-, Contra-dances) related to uk-folk
and therefore show the variety of the website.
I regret that my posting made some people "sneak" over to other
newsgroups and post very rude and intolerant messages to other
opinions. Such rude behaviour seems to be a speciality for people in
rec.arts.dance, where some people regularly go crazy with off-topic
postings and insults.
My apologies to everbody who feels offended by or finds my original
posting off-topic and shame on those people who personally insult
other posters, seem to have lost all the manners and forgotten the
netiquette.
Mario
Maggie Davey
news:3ed1...@news1.homechoice.co.uk...
Wonderful! Did you follow the link to the "Frightening Troll Picture"? Looks
like a dress-down-Friday Robin Cook!
Maggie
--
"I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." - Mark Twain
Maggie Davey
"Dick Gaughan" <di...@dickalba.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:nn73dvgn1nsj7bhv1...@4ax.com...
> In <bas0t5$93c$1...@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk> on Mon, 26 May 2003
> 04:15:05 +0100, "Julian Flood" <j...@floodsclimbers.freeserve.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
> >But will sir really be troll-baiting in those trousers? Perhaps the tweed
> >suit, sir? <shimmers out>
>
Denim with turquoise and rhinestones? That is soooo last year.
Maggie
[First I wander into rec.pedantry x soc.culture.wars, now it's
misc.fashion-tips. Must get a current map.]
Martin Banks
p...@se.ask (Peter D) wrote:
> There, Matt. Are we all done now? Good. You are dismissed.
> NEXT!!!!!!!!!!
>
>
>
Just curious, do you write for a living - as in novelist,
journalist, technical author?
Martin Banks
j...@floodsclimbers.freeserve.co.uk (Julian Flood) wrote:
Any variation on C and G (ie A and E, D and A etc) that
suits your voice.
One line on C, one on G, one on C, and the last line G for
`summer' which resolves back to C
Martin Banks
ri...@windbourne.com (Rilla Heslin) wrote:
I don't think there is too much argument about the validity
of the story, or the place of the music. It is more about
the ambiguous use of language which is now being
unnecessarily defended. We all write badly at times, even
professionals - that's why sub-editors are so important in
the newspaper trade.
For my part I apologise for pointing out the potential point
of ambiguity which is now being so vigorously defended. I
shall bow out, now.
Matt Griffin
Yes, your post was carefully worded to sound like one thing but give you
plausible deniability if you needed to parse it. In fact, it certainly
didn't take much prodding to turn that denial up to 11.
I think my post was perfectly reasonable in tone, and asked a valid
question. Check your head, Wannabi.
Matt Griffin
Peter D wrote:
>
> Whoever you quoted spoke for him/herself and those who agreed with
> him/her. Whether you like it or not, that group doesn't speak for
> Aboriginal people in Canada.
>
> Besides what did the speaker you quoted say on the matter of "Indian"
> deriving from Spanish "En Dio"?
> (You made it up, didn't you?)
You really ought to learn a little bit more about what you're talking
about. I'll take anything Russell Means says over everything you know on
the subject. The first paragraph is part of the quote. Here's another
good read for ya: "Where White Men Fear To Tread", Russell Means'
autobiography.
George Hawes
"Bob Wheatley" <a.xcw...@verizon.net> wrote:
> No one really knows or gives a shit about anyone's "charter", K?
Ah, another moron who belives that the ideal USENET consists of a single
ubiquitous newsgroup . . Now I wonder which side of the Atlantic he's
posting from?
> If off topic threads bother you that much,
Actually, they don't, as a rule. I just enjoy winding up the more
stupid posters in these parts - those who folow the good old US tradition
of believing that rules/laws are for everyone but his/her self!
Regards
G.
--
George Hawes (george...@orange.net)
and Sawston Arts Festival
Peter D
>Yes, your post was carefully worded to sound like one thing but give
you
>plausible deniability if you needed to parse it. In fact, it certainly
>didn't take much prodding to turn that denial up to 11.
And now you are arrogant enough to suppose you can tell me what I was
thinking. It was a simple error on your part, Matt. Deal with it. Not
everyone knows the difference between "from" and "about". No big deal.
You read hastily, responded without engaging your brain, and got called
on it. Live with it. Don't keep making yourself look even more stupid.
What exactly is it that's bugging you so much, Matt? I've never met you,
yet you persist in forcing this issue. Maybe this is your way of marking
territory. Maybe you think I'm cute and humping my cyber-leg on this is
your way of telling me. Maybe -- as I suspect -- it's a personality
flaw. Whatever it is, please let it be.
>I think my post was perfectly reasonable in tone
You wouln't know reasonable in tone if it came up beside you and smacked
you in the head with a dead salmon.
You're dismissed!
HAND
Peter D
>Peter D wrote:
>> Besides what did the speaker you quoted say on the matter of "Indian"
>> deriving from Spanish "En Dio"?
>> (You made it up, didn't you?)
If you are saying that the above explanation of why Columbus called the
people he met "Indians" is another person's and you are simply quoting
that person, I apologize. _He_ made it up. _You_ were stupid enough to
believe the fairty-tale. There, that's that sorted out.
>You really ought to learn a little bit more about what you're talking
>about.
English? Etymology? No problem. I'll raise you my OED and see your
revisionist writer.
Peter D
cross-posting :-)>
Martin Banks wrote in message ...
Some. I use the likes of MG for the occasional target practice and when
I feel the need for some Roasted Fool. I find though that the calibre of
those you can flame on Usenet isn't what it used to be. <sigh>
<pining for the good old days of worthy opponents and the slow roast
that took at least a fortnight>
Bob Wheatley
news:1c6760f84...@onetel.net.uk...
> In message <qmTza.6396$8i4....@nwrddc02.gnilink.net>
> "Bob Wheatley" <a.xcw...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>
> > No one really knows or gives a shit about anyone's "charter", K?
>
> Ah, another moron who belives that the ideal USENET consists of a single
> ubiquitous newsgroup . . Now I wonder which side of the Atlantic he's
> posting from?
>
Well.... I don't know id I'd call you a moron or not, but you do need to
realize there are thousands of news groups.:>) Each with their own
"intended" subject. You either learn to deal with off topic posts or
moderate your group. If you're too lazy to moderate and your tolerance level
is too low, all you do by whining about off topic threads is to _contribute_
to those off topic threads.
Hell, on second thought....
You are a moron.
---
Bob Wheatley
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.483 / Virus Database: 279 - Release Date: 5/19/2003
Dominic Cronin
>Dominic Cronin wrote in message ...
>>On Sun, 25 May 2003 16:35:58 GMT, "Peter D" <p...@se.ask> wrote:
>>
>>>Dominic Cronin wrote in message ...
>>>>On Sat, 24 May 2003 16:23:48 GMT, "Peter D" <p...@se.ask> wrote:
>>><snip>
>>>>Apology accepted.
>>>
>>>You're welcome. :-)
>>>
>>><snip>
>>>>>get Aboriginal Dancers on your side of The Pond. They're the ones
>that
>>>>>look like Morris Dancers but have lots of feathers. <lol>
>>>
>>>>Hmm. Not sure where you're going with this one. Although you seem to
>>>>be making a joke, but I can't figure out at whose expense.
>>>
>>>Terry's. Nice catch re my misuse of "Aboriginal". Although, wasn't
>>>"Indiginous" what you were thiinking when I said "Aboriginal"?
>>>
>>>Here in Canada, "Aboriginal" is used to best describe the First People
>>>of this continent in preference to "Indian" (shows European
>ignorance).
>>>By "Aboriginal Dancers" I meant the dancers that were from those First
>>>People of this continent we now call "North America". Teams often tour
>>>Europe, and England graciously hosts these dancers as they share their
>>>culture and dance in an effort to alleviate ignorance and foster
>>>tolerance.
>>
>>The racial heritage of the UK has been a melting pot for so many
>>centuries that we don't usually single out any specific racial group
>>to describe as aborigines. How would you tell, eh? OTOH it does make
>>sense to describe morris dancers as aboriginal dancers. As far as I
>>know there is no historical way of fixing a time prior to which we can
>>all agree that morris dancing, or some precursor of it, didn't exist.
>>
>>>
>>>Not "Morris Dancers with feathers". Rather "look like Morris Dancers
>but
>>>have lots of feathers." Quite different, you see. :-)
>>>
>>But still - what about the morris dancers with lots of feathers?
>
>Seriously? I had no ideas Morris Dancers had lots of feathers. All the
>ones I've seen and photographed didn't.
>
>BTW, if anyone knows the "Seven Saxons" in Kingston, near Rickmond, back
>in the 70s I took a lot of slides of a local Morris group (troupe?)
>performing outside. They are quite good. I forget the exact place or
>reason. It was a pedestrian/mall area IIRC and the occasion was a
>national or local holiday, sometime in the summer. Anyway, if anyone
>knows of the group, the pub, a local society, I'd like to give them a
>good home.
>
>PS Dominic, if you'll tell me which ng you're posting from, I'll wander
>over so as not to burden the other ngs with the conversation. :-)
>
I'm in u.m.f
fu set
--
Dominic Cronin
Amsterdam
Peter D
>On Sun, 25 May 2003 19:26:55 GMT, "Peter D" <p...@se.ask> wrote:
>>PS Dominic, if you'll tell me which ng you're posting from, I'll
wander
>>over so as not to burden the other ngs with the conversation. :-)
>>
>I'm in u.m.f
See you over there.
>fu set
"folow up", right? :-)
Julian Flood
"Dick Gaughan" wrote
> Isn't tweed getting a bit proletarian these days, old boy? What
> about that denim kilt with the turquoise and rhinestone sporran
> that we got for Felicity Smotherington-Fythe's debut? Went jolly
> well with the monocle, I thought.
<materialises by the chaise longue, carrying a large leather suitcase and a
hat box> I am afraid, sir, that the kilt has proved the proverbial straw,
which sir may recall was loaded onto an already overstressed bactrian. Spats
sir, I could just tolerate, even <shudder> in Eton colours, but not the lack
of suitable gentleman's trouserings. Mr Fink-Nottle has been kind enough to
offer me a position. Our third best suit, sir, is at the dry cleaners. The
sporran is being fed by the janitor's youngest son. Good day, sir. <vanishes
in a swirl of minute champagne bubbles>.
JF
Who doesn't mind the other stuff, but found the original story cloying
beyond belief.
Martin Banks
p...@se.ask (Peter D) wrote:
> <Howdy, all. Thought I'd drop in for a spell and
> stop/slow the
> cross-posting :-)>
>
> Martin Banks wrote in message ...
> >In article
> <Lx6Aa.75500$Vi5.2...@news1.calgary.shaw.ca>,
> >p...@se.ask (Peter D) wrote:
> >
> >
> >> There, Matt. Are we all done now? Good. You are
> > dismissed.
> >> NEXT!!!!!!!!!!
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >Just curious, do you write for a living - as in novelist,
> >journalist, technical author?
>
> Some. I use the likes of MG for the occasional target
> practice and when
> I feel the need for some Roasted Fool. I find though that
> the calibre of
> those you can flame on Usenet isn't what it used to be.
> <sigh>
> <pining for the good old days of worthy opponents and the
> slow roast
> that took at least a fortnight>
>
>
>
Ah, that sort of writing. I'll be off then, to communicate
with those that still can, rather than view it as a chance
to play at egotistical blood sports.
Gene E. Bloch
I have to admit that I agree with Matt Griffin on this whole argument.
The story of SuAnne remains inspiring, but your later responses on this
thread aren't inspiring me in any positive way.
Gino
--
Gene Bloch
Handle: gino37; ISP: earthlink; Domain: net
--
Maggie Davey
> I am somehow surprised of what kind of discussion my posting
> generated. Even if it was perhaps not directly related to
> uk.music.folk my thoughts were more that this kind of information
> might be interesting there too, as I have actually on the same website
> also videos (Morris-, Molly-, Clog-, Contra-dances) related to uk-folk
> and therefore show the variety of the website.
Personally, I have little interest in the folk dancing of any culture,
despite the fact that I play jigs, reels, polkas, strathspeys, etc.
However, there are plenty of people who do have such an interest, and
a fair few of them read uk.music.folk, so your post was not at all out
of order.
> I regret that my posting made some people "sneak" over to other
> newsgroups and post very rude and intolerant messages to other
> opinions. Such rude behaviour seems to be a speciality for people in
> rec.arts.dance, where some people regularly go crazy with off-topic
> postings and insults.
rec.arts.dance does not have a monopoly in this.
> My apologies to everbody who feels offended
It is most gracious of you to apologise, but I don't think you have
offended; other people have used your post as an excuse to offend.
You should not apologise for other people's bad behaviour.
> and shame on those people who personally insult
> other posters, seem to have lost all the manners and forgotten the
> netiquette.
Agreed, absolutely. But some people appear to have been brought up in
a barn, and have no manners, and know no etiquette, on or off the net.
There is not much you can do about such people.
Keep dancing,
Maggie
David Rintoul
Besides what did the speaker you quoted say on the matter of "Indian"
deriving from Spanish "En Dio"?
(You made it up, didn't you?)
--------
I don't suppose Dick made that "En Dio" thing up, but I'm inclined to think
Russell Means did. He keeps going around spreading that word origin in
speeches but he never gives a source for it. He used to say it was Spanish.
I guess someone pointed out to him that the correct Spanish would have been
"En el dios". So, now he tells people it's Italian. "In dio" would be
correct grammar in Italian and we all know Columbus was born in Italy,
right?
The trouble is, it doesn't make any sense. Europeans wouldn't think of the
people they met in North America as being "in God". Since they weren't
baptized or instructed in the Christian Faith, they would have been
considered heathens, separated from God, and in urgent need of salvation,
assuming they had a soul worth saving at all.
On the other hand, Indos is the Greek word for the Indus river. It would
have been used all over Europe long before Columbus was born. Columbus was
on a mission to find a sea route to the Orient. If he wanted to keep
getting funding for his voyages, he needed to give people back home the
impression that he was succeeding. So, he had to tell them all stories
about how he well he was doing with the "Indians" he was running into,
whoever they really were.
Here's a web page where you can learn more about this from Dr. David
Yeaghley, who is a professor of Humanities at the University of Oklahoma,
and a member of the Comanche Nation.
http://www.theamericanenterprise.org/hotflash020813.htm
Oh, and just to pay lip service to staying on topic, Buffy Sainte Marie
wrote a great song about the mixed messages Indians get from well meaning
but ill-informed white people in her song, "Now that the Buffalo's Gone."
Here's a link to the words to it...
http://w1.314.telia.com/~u31420880/rec/buffy.html
"Although the use of 'Indian' has declined because it is thought to reflect
Columbus' mistaken idea that he had landed in India in 1492, it is common in
the usage of many Aboriginal people and embedded in legislation that is
still in effect. It is also the only clear way to distinguish among the
three general categories of Aboriginal people (Indians, Inuit, and Metis.)
Middle English "India" ultimately from Greek 'Indos' the Indus river from
Persian 'Hind'."
Source: Canadian Oxford Dictionary
--
David Rintoul
david....@sympatico.ca
http://www3.sympatico.ca/david.rintoul
"In prosperity, our friends know us. In adversity, we know our friends."
J. Churton Collins
Chris Rockcliffe
> Oh, and just to pay lip service to staying on topic, Buffy Sainte Marie
> wrote a great song about the mixed messages Indians get from well meaning
> but ill-informed white people in her song, "Now that the Buffalo's Gone."
>
> "Although the use of 'Indian' has declined because it is thought to reflect
> Columbus' mistaken idea that he had landed in India in 1492, it is common in
> the usage of many Aboriginal people and embedded in legislation that is
> still in effect.
My Sioux friend living here in the UK still prefers 'American Indian', hates
'Aboriginal'. I don't blame him - it even sounds insulting.
> It is also the only clear way to distinguish among the
> three general categories of Aboriginal people (Indians, Inuit, and Metis.)
'Inuit' is only one of the several eskimo tribes is it not? The last time
this was discussed in ukmf, we had a Canadian Inuit Indian saying that he
and many 'Inuits' preferred the term 'Eskimo Peoples' as the inclusive
generic term. He even went into the origins of the term Eskimo and why it
was acceptable.
And while we're on the subject of ill-informed white people...
Do white middle class Luvs sit round tables discussing which names will
least upset their intellectual sensibilities or are politically and
historically 'correct' for ethnic tribes of people to use?
Sometimes this nonsense disappears up its own ridiculous arse.
CR
Mikkalai
"Maggie Davey" <rjmd...@onetel.net.uk> wrote in message
news:6b1e3c58.03052...@posting.google.com...
> mhe...@mherger.com (Mario Herger) wrote in message
news:<79276feb.03052...@posting.google.com>...
> > I am somehow surprised of what kind of discussion my posting
> > generated. Even if it was perhaps not directly related to
> > uk.music.folk my thoughts were more that this kind of information
> > might be interesting there too, as I have actually on the same website
> > also videos (Morris-, Molly-, Clog-, Contra-dances) related to uk-folk
> > and therefore show the variety of the website.
>
> Personally, I have little interest in the folk dancing of any culture,
> despite the fact that I play jigs, reels, polkas, strathspeys, etc.
> However, there are plenty of people who do have such an interest, and
> a fair few of them read uk.music.folk, so your post was not at all out
> of order.
>
> > I regret that my posting made some people "sneak" over to other
> > newsgroups and post very rude and intolerant messages to other
> > opinions. Such rude behaviour seems to be a speciality for people in
> > rec.arts.dance,
Now, Mario, THIS is the real time for you to apologize.
> where some people regularly go crazy with off-topic postings and insults.
:
"Some", see?
> rec.arts.dance does not have a monopoly in this.
:
Some think that dancers are supposed to be refined folk, hence too high
expectations.
> > My apologies to everbody who feels offended
:
Accepted. :-)
> Agreed, absolutely. But some people appear to have been brought up in
> a barn, and have no manners, and know no etiquette, on or off the net.
:
And some find it sporting to offend you most graciously and elegantly, with
manners and in complete observance of (n)etiquette.
That's their way to kick your ass and rightfully recognized as such.
> There is not much you can do about such people.
:
Very much, believe me. Still others simply llllove a good brawl :-)
Any Irish folk here? I mean folk dancers, of course :-)
;mikkalai
''''
Mikkalai
"Chris Rockcliffe" <chrisro...@scripto99.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:BAF871C9.22304%chrisro...@scripto99.demon.co.uk...
> Do white middle class Luvs sit round tables discussing which names will
> least upset their intellectual sensibilities or are politically and
> historically 'correct' for ethnic tribes of people to use?
>
> Sometimes this nonsense disappears up its own ridiculous arse.
:
And sometimes it is ridiculous indeed and funny indeed (black humor).
On rec.music.afro-latin I've read a history of a Brazilian guy (or girl, I
don't quite remember) who was called "white" in his home country and this
was considered derogatory in his surrounding. Then he emigrated to the US
only to find out that he is "black" :-) :-(...
Unfortunately sometimes there is a need in generic terms for peoples. And
indeed, it is quite often it is dufficult for a non-etnologist to match the
context and the term correctly. After all, who (an average 'who') would have
thought that such a seemingly homogeneous nation as Japanese have their own
Ainu? And in which exactly way are Ainu offended if someone calls them
'Japs'?
;mikkalai
''''
David Rintoul
--
David Rintoul
david....@sympatico.ca
http://www3.sympatico.ca/david.rintoul
"In prosperity, our friends know us. In adversity, we know our friends."
J. Churton Collins
"Chris Rockcliffe" <chrisro...@scripto99.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:BAF871C9.22304%chrisro...@scripto99.demon.co.uk...
David Rintoul
Do white middle class Luvs sit round tables discussing which names will
least upset their intellectual sensibilities or are politically and
historically 'correct' for ethnic tribes of people to use?
-----
Yup! In Canada it's called the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs,
and that seems to be how they seem to spend the better part of their work
days. I've hear a lot of Native Canadians say they wish it would just go
out of business altogether.
Peter D
>Ah, that sort of writing. I'll be off then, to communicate
>with those that still can, rather than view it as a chance
>to play at egotistical blood sports.
You do that, Martin. Don't trip over your tail, it being between your
legs and all. :-)
Rilla Heslin
>
> Most First Nations/Aboriginal/Native American people I know call themselves
> Indians.
> --
> David Rintoul
> david....@sympatico.ca
> http://www3.sympatico.ca/david.rintoul
> "In prosperity, our friends know us. In adversity, we know our friends."
> J. Churton Collins
"Hi!" I'm Native American and that's what I refer to myself as when I'm
not stating the name of my tribe. That's what most of the Natives that
I know refer to themselves as when not using their tribal name and tribe
of origin.
Rilla
Rilla Heslin
Molly wrote:
>
> In article <7S8Aa.66661$3C2.1...@news3.calgary.shaw.ca> at 19:31:15
> on Sun, 25 May 2003, Peter D <p...@se.ask> wrote:
>
> >Molly wrote in message ...
> >>Peter D <p...@se.ask> wrote:
>
> >>You have to realise that different terms are in use in different
> >>cultures. What you refer to as "Aboriginal" people, we in the UK would
> >>refer to as "native Americans". Nothing to do with the United States;
> >>it's a reference to the continent - both halves of it. Incidentally,
> >>the few native Americans I know all prefer that general description to
> >>any other - so presumably it is in regular use elsewhere in your
> >>continent, even if not in Canada.
> >>
> >>What we in the UK would mean by "Aborigines" would be the indigenous
> >>population of Australia, and nowhere else.
> >
> >Actually, Molly the word I used was "Aboriginal". "Aborigine"? Not I.
> >:-)
>
> Which is why I said 'What you refer to as "Aboriginal" people...'. I
> included the reference to "Aborigines" in order to make clear the
> possible confusion between the terms.
>
> Now, if you had said "aboriginal people" rather than "Aboriginal
> people", there would have been far less possibility of confusion.
>
> >>You don't have to go about re-naming the original people of your
> >country
> >>just because Canadians don't like being confused with people from the
> >>United States. (And that comes from a Scot who dislikes being assumed
> >>to be English, so I know what I'm talking about in that respect.)
> >
> >That's not the reason "Aboriginal" is used. The reason has nothing to do
> >with demonstrating non-USness, only with including all the groups that
> >have a specific status. See other message for explanation and
> >definitions.
>
> Nothing I have read in this thread so far gives any clear explanation
> why there is anything wrong with "native American", the description of
> choice used by the only people I know who fall into that category.
Only complaint I have is that we usually capitalize the word "Native" as
the complete title, "Native American"
Rilla
>
> I do feel we should perhaps be shifting this discussion into uk.culture.
> language.english/alt.english.usage/alt.usage.english - but that would
> end up swamping ucle even more than this is swamping umf, so I haven't.
> --
> Molly
>
> Sarchasm: The gulf between the author of sarcastic wit and the person
> who doesn't get it.
Chris Rockcliffe
> "Hi!" I'm Native American and that's what I refer to myself as when I'm
> not stating the name of my tribe. That's what most of the Natives that
> I know refer to themselves as when not using their tribal name and tribe
> of origin.
If the vast majority want to use 'native American'. or 'Native American'
then that is what you should settle on. It seems to me the best of the
bunch.
Sorry Canada, but IMO, 'aboriginal', is just plain awful and I cringe when
my BC friends use it. (I don't care what the dictionary says). By finding
the generic name most acceptable to most North American Indians, there could
at least be a stronger unified political voice.
Nearly 30 years ago, I attended a big exhibition in London, England, called
'3000 Years of North American Indian Art'. It was a wonderful show covering
history, art and artefacts. Very un-PC title though.
It represented all the indigenous tribes of North America from the Arctic
Circle to Mexico, from Canada, Alaska and the Lower 48. It included fixed
and nomadic peoples and tribes now extinct.
It was a truly fantastic display... a real education for me and a truly
incredible feat of logistical planning for its organisers - precious
artefacts being gathered from every corner of that massive continent.
What would you call it now though - in these very PC days? '3000 Years of
Native American, Aboriginal and Inuit (and other one-time US tribes wiped
out) of the North American continent. Snappy. Ideas?
There's still tremendous prejudice, ignorance and hatred for Native North
Americans (I witnessed some first hand) and seems to have worsened recently.
Separation, poverty, discrimination and alcoholism don't help. No amount of
discussion on language semantics or what's politically correct really does
anything to combat that. That takes a REAL will - and a change of heart.
CR
Peter D
I'll keep it simple/straighforward...
"Native American" is not the same as "North American Indian". The first
usually refers to a group of people originating from the area we now
refer to as USA. The latter probably refers to a group originating from
the NA continent, sufficiently inclusionary to be useful. No? Call a
Dene a "Native American". Or the Inuit. And then there is the Metis. How
do they fit into your better phrase?
"Aboriginal" is used to include the three groups originally named (you
did check the thread, right?)
What a group of people decide to call themselves is much more important
than what others think they should call themselves. It's not about
PC-ness. it's about respect and politeness. You might consider that the
next time you feel the need to cringe.
If it's a political statement you are looking for, "First Nations" is
more powerful -- especially re establishing certain self-government
rights.
HTH
Dominic Cronin
<ri...@windbourne.com> wrote:
>Dominic Cronin wrote:
>>
>This story has "everything" thing to do with folk music, be it American
>or U.K. It is a tell of peace through folk music, and I see no reason
>why it shouldn't be shared with people who are into folk music any where
>in the world. If you oppose peace through music, why are you on a folk
>group at all?
>
In short:
rec.folk-dancing, rec.music.folk, and rec.arts.dance are international
groups.
uk.music.folk is specifically dedicated to the traditions of the UK.
Many people subscribe to more than one of these, indicating their
personal choice regarding the material they are interested in. The
usual convention on usenet is to respect this choice by selecting the
appropriate newsgroup for your posting, based on its charter.
I don't oppose peace. The reason for not posting the story in umf
would be that however worthy the message, umf is the wrong place for
it. Apart from anything else umf is pretty much a quiet backwater
compared to the big rec. groups. The amount of traffic generated by
all this cross-posting is pretty much swamping all other business for
the time being.
I will admit that this situation, while less than desirable is
certainly better than the spam content of some of my email accounts:
"Pack of weasels", "Get rich quick", "Grow hair now", "Grow other body
parts now", "Get the houses of people who couldn't pay their mortgages
cheap" etc. ad nauseam.
I hope this makes it clear.
--
Dominic Cronin
Amsterdam
Dominic Cronin
I'm native English, or it that Native English?
--
Dominic Cronin
Amsterdam
Chris Rockcliffe
> I'm native English, or it that Native English?
No yer not lad, yer a bloody 'Makem'! (a Durham tribe).
Gan canny,
CR :-)
Chris Rockcliffe
> Dear Chris
Hi Peter,
> I'll keep it simple/straighforward...
That's good, 'cos I'm a simple and straight forward kind of a chap.
> "Native American" is not the same as "North American Indian". The first
> usually refers to a group of people originating from the area we now
> refer to as USA.
Yes, I'm with you...
> The latter probably refers to a group originating from
> the NA continent, sufficiently inclusionary to be useful. No?
I'm still hanging in there...
> Call a Dene a "Native American". Or the Inuit. And then there is the Metis.
> How do they fit into your better phrase?
Yes, yes, but I was replying to the 'native American' who posted. You fail
to make clear here that you are Canadian and this particular sub-argument of
yours is whether the accepted Canadian or American term be used in
preference to either being used in parallel - as they currently are - No?.
Or are you just saying, "our Canadian 'aboriginal' name for 'native
Canadians' is much better and more correct than your 'native American' name
for them"?
> "Aboriginal" is used to include the three groups originally named (you
> did check the thread, right?)
Yes, I did check most of the thread.
In Canada I understand it is. I also understand that it is not widely liked
in the USA - either by native American 'Indian' tribes or the Eskimo tribes
in the north etc and liked even less by the other Canadian and American
folks who also obliged to use 'aboriginal'.
>
> What a group of people decide to call themselves is much more important
> than what others think they should call themselves.
No, it seems to me - and IMO - that any newly adopted or contrived generic
collective name used by everyone to distinguish this group of Americans or
Canadians from the rest of those two populations, should have positive
connotations for EVERYONE - or at least as many as possible.
> It's not about PC-ness. it's about respect and politeness. You might consider
> that the next time you feel the need to cringe.
I don't use 'Aborigine (al)' except to describe native Australians. My
white Canadian friends don't like the term either but are required to use
it; and are fully in support of the aspirations of native Canadians.
'Aboriginal' IMO hardly fits the bill, although it is in common use. How
about 'native Canadians' or 'Native canadians' or more colloquially -
'Native Canucks' then?
'native Canadians' surely makes more sense sitting nicely alongside 'native
Americans'. upper or lower case Ns. However my Sioux friend doesn't like
the word 'native'.
> If it's a political statement you are looking for, "First Nations" is
> more powerful -- especially re establishing certain self-government
> rights.
Sure, sounds great in some ways, but I can see problems. Is it 'First
Nationals';'First Nation People'; or First Nation citizens, or First Nation
persons? How is that used in regular speech? i.e. "The third 'First
Nations' bus has just arrived for the 2nd First Nationals' Annual
Conference?"
I'm trying to learn something here. I'm also questioning the thought
processes that lead up to such choices of names and words. PC rationale or
committee-led compromises are not the same as clear practical thinking or
all round acceptability and appropriate usage.
Don't people avoid words they don't like?
CR
Peter D
>Peter D27/5/03 2:42 PM
>
>> Dear Chris
>
>Hi Peter,
>
>> I'll keep it simple/straighforward...
>
>That's good, 'cos I'm a simple and straight forward kind of a chap.
>
>> "Native American" is not the same as "North American Indian". The
first
>> usually refers to a group of people originating from the area we now
>> refer to as USA.
>
>Yes, I'm with you...
>
>> The latter probably refers to a group originating from
>> the NA continent, sufficiently inclusionary to be useful. No?
>
>I'm still hanging in there...
>
>> Call a Dene a "Native American". Or the Inuit. And then there is the
Metis.
>> How do they fit into your better phrase?
>
>Yes, yes, but I was replying to the 'native American' who posted. You
fail
>to make clear here that you are Canadian and this particular
sub-argument of
>yours is whether the accepted Canadian or American term be used in
>preference to either being used in parallel - as they currently are -
No?.
Nope. My part in the thread has been the use of "Aboriginal". The use of
other terms arrived later. Maybe the Russell whathisname quote started
it ("En Dio", eh?) Still chuckling over that one.
>Or are you just saying, "our Canadian 'aboriginal' name for 'native
>Canadians' is much better and more correct than your 'native American'
name
>for them"?
Nope. As I've said before, if a group decides they want to be called "X"
and "X" is descriptive of them, who am I to tell them they have to be
called "Y"?
>> "Aboriginal" is used to include the three groups originally named
(you
>> did check the thread, right?)
>
>Yes, I did check most of the thread.
>
>In Canada I understand it is. I also understand that it is not widely
liked
>in the USA - either by native American 'Indian' tribes or the Eskimo
tribes
>in the north etc and liked even less by the other Canadian and American
>folks who also obliged to use 'aboriginal'.
Which "other Canadian folks" are you referring to?
>> What a group of people decide to call themselves is much more
important
>> than what others think they should call themselves.
>
>No, it seems to me - and IMO - that any newly adopted or contrived
generic
>collective name used by everyone to distinguish this group of Americans
or
>Canadians from the rest of those two populations, should have positive
>connotations for EVERYONE - or at least as many as possible.
Then use "Aboriginal". it's the most inclusionary of words to describe
ALL the groups that were living on the whole of the continent prior to
the arrival of Europeans -- and their descendants.
>> It's not about PC-ness. it's about respect and politeness. You might
consider
>> that the next time you feel the need to cringe.
>
>I don't use 'Aborigine (al)' except to describe native Australians. My
>white Canadian friends don't like the term either but are required to
use
>it; and are fully in support of the aspirations of native Canadians.
"Aborigine" is an English(UK) word for the descendants of the people who
lived on the land now called Australia prior to the arrival of the
Europeans. It may be acceptable to you to describe what I call
"Aboriginals" thus, but not in Canada (probably not is US either).
Whether your white Canadian friends agree with "Aborigine" or not is
inconsequential.
>'Aboriginal' IMO hardly fits the bill, although it is in common use.
Well, you excuse me if I defer to the Aboriginal people who have been
using the terms for several decades. As I said, respect and politeness.
And, as it turns out, an accurate word.
>How
>about 'native Canadians' or 'Native canadians' or more colloquially -
>'Native Canucks' then?
>
>'native Canadians' surely makes more sense sitting nicely alongside
'native
>Americans'. upper or lower case Ns. However my Sioux friend doesn't
like
>the word 'native'.
"Native Canadian" describe a person born in Canada. It's not a term I've
ever heard used to describe an "Aboriginal" person. What they use in the
USA is up to them, not me or you.
>> If it's a political statement you are looking for, "First Nations" is
>> more powerful -- especially re establishing certain self-government
>> rights.
>
>Sure, sounds great in some ways, but I can see problems. Is it 'First
>Nationals';'First Nation People'; or First Nation citizens, or First
Nation
>persons? How is that used in regular speech? i.e. "The third 'First
>Nations' bus has just arrived for the 2nd First Nationals' Annual
>Conference?"
Your mockery aside, it's "First Nations People".
>I'm trying to learn something here. I'm also questioning the thought
>processes that lead up to such choices of names and words. PC rationale
or
>committee-led compromises are not the same as clear practical thinking
or
>all round acceptability and appropriate usage.
Again, if a group of people want to call themselves "X" and "X" properly
describes them, who cares what another group who have spent centuries
dominating them think they should be called?
Think of the common use of "Black" or "Nigger" (= 'black') and it's
derivatives and how the people thus described have chosen other terms
that serve to describe them properly. Or "Colored". The dominant culture
may argue that "Black"/"Nigger"/Nigra"/"Nigre"/"Colored" is the right
word, but they will soon correct you if it isn't. And rightly so.
>Don't people avoid words they don't like?
Yes. Probably explains why tens of thousands of "Aboriginals" choose
that word (along with "First Nations") and want the (Canadian)
"Department of Indian and Northern Affairs" to change it's name.
You can say "tomato" all you want in UK, but when you visit here, we say
"tomato". :-)
Ed Jay
>... ("En Dio", eh?) Still chuckling over that one.
"The word Indian is an English bastardization of two Spanish words, En Dio,
which correctly translated means "in with God". " -- Russell Means
>
<http://www.antimoon.com/forum/posts/2255.htm>
<http://www.angelfire.com/ct/deerwhorns/lakota.html>
<http://www.nemasys.com/ghostwolf/Native/wai.shtml>
Now apologize, Peter, and thank the man for the education. :-)
Ed Jay (No X to reply)
Julian Flood
"Chris Rockcliffe" wrote
> > I'm native English, or it that Native English?
>
> No yer not lad, yer a bloody 'Makem'! (a Durham tribe).
Aha! The Rockcliffe bid for high office, using the usual principle of divide
and rule.
Support regional government! What this country needs is more politicians!
JF
Paul Burke
> "Native American" is not the same as "North American Indian". The first
> usually refers to a group of people originating from the area we now
> refer to as USA. The latter probably refers to a group originating from
> the NA continent, sufficiently inclusionary to be useful. No? Call a
> Dene a "Native American". Or the Inuit. And then there is the Metis. How
> do they fit into your better phrase?
I'll put in a plug here for Asana. It's an acronym for "Abriginal Sub-
Arctic North Americans".
However, I think I prefer Red Indians. Even if some people find it
insulting, at least everyone knows who it refers to.
Paul Burke
Ed Jay
Russell Means said it all when he wrote, "I Am an American Indian,
Not a Native American!" It may be found at
<http://www.nemasys.com/ghostwolf/Native/wai.shtml>
While surfing the Net to learn more on the subject of my early neighbors, I
came across the following posts.
<http://www.blackwebportal.com/forums/viewmessages.cfm?Forum=12&Topic=2030>
Pete Young
>My apologies to everbody who feels offended by or finds my original
>posting off-topic and shame on those people who personally insult
>other posters, seem to have lost all the manners and forgotten the
>netiquette.
You may reduce the likelhood of outbreaks of crossposting wars by
setting a 'Followup-To:' line pointing to the most appropriate group,
and indicating that you've done so in the message.
As in : followups set to uk.music.folk.
ObUKMF : Excellent weekend at Chippenham. Besides missing the
Eurovision song contest, I got to see some marvellous bands:
much respect to Random, Jabadaw and Hecate.
Pete
--
____________________________________________________________________
Pete Young pe...@antipope.org
"Just another crouton, floating on the bouillabaisse of life"
Any mail from aol.com or yahoo.com addresses is discarded unread
Chris Rockcliffe
> Chris Rockcliffe wrote in message ...
>> Peter D27/5/03 2:42 PM
(snipped)
> "Native Canadian" describe a person born in Canada. It's not a term I've
> ever heard used to describe an "Aboriginal" person. What they use in the
> USA is up to them, not me or you.
I don't know what percentage of 'Canadian Indians' or native Canadians' in
Canada wish to be; or are glad to be called 'aboriginals'. has anyone ever
bothered to find out?
But I understand that many millions of Canadians of all origins, colours and
races don't like the name 'aboriginal'; thinking it an ugly word; worse -
thinking it counter productive to 'Indian' emancipation; and has negative
affects on race relations.
> Think of the common use of "Black" or "Nigger" (= 'black') and it's
> derivatives and how the people thus described have chosen other terms
> that serve to describe them properly. Or "Colored". The dominant culture
> may argue that "Black"/"Nigger"/Nigra"/"Nigre"/"Colored" is the right
> word, but they will soon correct you if it isn't. And rightly so.
And what is the 'right' word Peter? "I'm black and I'm proud!" or "Yo
Nigga!
The word 'nigger' is much less common these days, shunned by everyone except
self-confessed racists. However the relatively recent derivative 'nigga',
has appeared and is a 'cool' term - used almost exclusively and widely by
young 'black Americans' or 'Afro-Americans' (depending on your
sensibilities) or Afro-Caribbeans in the UK.
Strange thing language and word attribution.
>> Don't people avoid words they don't like?
>
> Yes. Probably explains why tens of thousands of "Aboriginals" choose
> that word (along with "First Nations") and want the (Canadian)
> "Department of Indian and Northern Affairs" to change it's name.
What actual percentage of all 'aboriginals' is that then?; what percentage
of Canadians is that?; who exactly wants to change it?. Shouldn't all
'aboriginal' Canadians have a say, or better still find a suitable term
which WILL not itself become a term of abuse?
Words - despite the semantics - do not change peoples' minds - and poorly
chosen words even less.
> You can say "tomato" all you want in UK, but when you visit here, we say
> "tomato". :-)
In the UK, we use the English spelling, 'tomatoe' (and UK pronunciation
too). 'Tomatoe' (GB Eng.) and 'Tomato' (US Eng.) - are both derivations of
the Spanish 'Tomate', which in turn, is a derivation of the original
Uto-Aztecan word, 'tomatl', of the Nahua of S. America. Some people insist
on the use of the generic (Latin) horticultural name, 'Lycopersicon
exculentum', but they're only a minority.
Hope this helps :-)
CR
Peter D
Yup, the Beotuk (sp?) who once inhabited the area now known as
Newfoundland. :-)
The rise of "Red Indian" as a term is interesting. It came into use to
distinguish all the original inhabitants of what we call North America
from the inhabitiants of what we call India (once it was realised it was
a seperate continent).
See, if they'd chosen any of the alternative terms that were accurate we
wouldn't have "Red Indian" today. :-)
Peter D
>> "Native Canadian" describe a person born in Canada. It's not a term
I've
>> ever heard used to describe an "Aboriginal" person. What they use in
the
>> USA is up to them, not me or you.
>
>I don't know what percentage of 'Canadian Indians' or native Canadians'
in
>Canada wish to be; or are glad to be called 'aboriginals'. has anyone
ever
>bothered to find out?
Based only on my personal observation and the expressed desires of my
Aboriginal friends, speeches and writings by Aboriginal leaders, press
reports, a few courses I've taken, and its constant and general usage
I'd say a sufficient number for it to be used. It's also accurate.
>But I understand that many millions of Canadians of all origins,
colours and
>races don't like the name 'aboriginal'; thinking it an ugly word;
worse -
>thinking it counter productive to 'Indian' emancipation; and has
negative
>affects on race relations.
Never heard any of the above. I have heard "Indian" used by some
non-Aboriginals to negatively sterotype and insult Aboriginals. FYI,
Canada actively promotes multi-culturism and promotes and protects pride
in ethnic origins. For example, it is common practice to describe
oneself as "English-Canadian", "German-Canadian", etc.I understand that
in the US this isn't the case, but my US friends can better speak to
that -- "melting pot" v "mosaic" and all that.
>> Think of the common use of "Black" or "Nigger" (= 'black') and it's
>> derivatives and how the people thus described have chosen other terms
>> that serve to describe them properly. Or "Colored". The dominant
culture
>> may argue that "Black"/"Nigger"/Nigra"/"Nigre"/"Colored" is the right
>> word, but they will soon correct you if it isn't. And rightly so.
>
>And what is the 'right' word Peter? "I'm black and I'm proud!" or "Yo
>Nigga!
Ask them. I'd take an educated guess and suggest "Afro-American". If it
helps, you saying "Yo Nigga" will probably get you a negative reaction.
As it should be.
Gene E. Bloch
news:msa8dv0dlq6rq5edt...@4ax.com:
Well, one of the above says "gentre" is Spanish for "people" and all
three say "Dio" is Spanish for "God".
I'd be more likely to believe them if they said "gente" and "Dios",
which are correct.
Look up "folk etymology".
Gino
--
Gene E. Bloch (Gino) phone 650.966.8481
Call me gino37 find me at earthlink whose dot is net