Blog Post #4

“And I was personally really surprised that I hadn’t heard about it before. Part of the reason I hadn’t was because it was so quiet. And there really was not a lot of risk taken in how it was delivered.”

What is Layli Long Soldier referring to at this moment? Why is it important to note that she hadn't heard about it before?

When Long Soldier says, “And I was personally really surprised that I hadn’t heard about it before. Part of the reason I hadn’t was because it was so quiet. And there really was not a lot of risk taken in how it was delivered,” she is talking about the congressional resolution of apology to Native Americans, which was signed under the Obama administration in 2009. When she first heard about it, she was shocked. It is important to note that she hadn’t heard of it before to show how the government kept the signing of this resolution so secretive. She mentions how the signing wasn’t talked about, and even how Native American chiefs weren’t even invited to the signing. This shows the rift that still exists between the US government and the Native American people. It is important to note how she doesn’t really talk highly about this official apology, as she mentions that the language used is, “careful.” This shows that she believes that the US government’s apology tiptoes around the causation of the Native American-US government rift.

"So even the phrasing of “the arrival of Europeans opened a new chapter for Native People” — that’s crazy. It wasn’t opening a new chapter. That’s almost poetry. I mean, that’s a very interesting way to look at what happened. And going further into the document, just the idea — for example, they never mention genocide. Things are phrased as “conflicts,” “lives were taken on both sides,” and things like that."

What phrasing is Long Soldier referring to here? Why does she point to the specific phrasing? What is so important about the details of phrasing?

Long Soldier is referring to the phrasing included in the congressional resolution of apology to Native Americans. She points at specific phrasing to show how the US government writes there version of what happened on paper, but never mentions some of the horrors the Natives had to face. The importance of the details of the document lies in the fact that this isn’t a true apology. Never once does the document apologize for causing mass casualties and tumultuous times for the Native American peoples.

Why is specificity so important in this podcast? Why is it important in your writing?

Specificity is so important in this podcast because the topics being covered are sensitive. It is best to be specific in what you are saying so you don’t group many different groups together when you are only speaking of one. Specificity is important in writing we perform because it helps us get our point across and establish what we are talking about. If you aren’t specific with who/what you’re talking about, the things you say may be wildly and widely interpreted.

What is the structure of this interview? The tone? What can you take from this interview to incorporate into the ones you have to do for your research paper?

The interview was very structured. Ms. Tippet would voice her opinion and throw in some compliments towards Long Soldier and finish her part off with a question. Long Soldier would answer with her opinion and sometimes lines from her book. Once the conversation about a topic began to dwindle, Ms. Tippet would proceed to the next question. The tone of the interview was laid back, as there was a conversational aspect. I can borrow some of the strategies used by Ms. Tippet (the interviewer), such as the structured interview and conversational flow, and use them as strategies of my own.