Darwinism at work.

Social-Darwinism - I'm a fan, generally. It'll probably get some folks fired up, but I honestly believe that it does more harm than good. Even so there are times when I question the rightness of progress at the expense of tradition. Reading this speech was one of these times.

 Chief Seattle saw the continued downfall of his people coming, knew that it was inevitable, and approached the problem pragmatically. “It matters little where we pass the remnant of our days. They will not be many.” He realized that his audience - much like I- would hold little sympathy for the plight of his people if presented in a light of self-pity, instead he appealed to the sense of awe associated with things beyond complete human comprehension – nature and deity. His use of imagery is beautiful – though to echo Spencer Muir, I’m not sure how much of that is his original work – and evokes the awe one feels in the presence of nature, as his final overture was directly tied to a sense of something greater.  

He appeals to deity, without falling into a begging stance – again attempting to evoke a contemplation of something greater – “Your God makes your people wax stronger every day.” Furthering this with references to those who have passed on “Your dead cease to love you and the land of their nativity.” Ultimately he collects all the threads in his final words, offering a request to the Whiteman, and a sort of consolation to his people. “There is no death, only a change of worlds.”

The speech was beautiful to read, and even though I was reading it for analysis I felt my emotions swell: respect for a man who saw what was coming and didn’t shy away from the reality, sorrow for the passing of a great people who knew and lived and were so much. He made even me, a staunch supporter of social-darwinism, question my views.

Manifest Destiny-ism

I chose to read Chief Seattle’s speech because I feel like that aspect of American history is often overlooked. We talked about nationalism in class yesterday; I feel like a more appropriate “ism” for the United States is manifest destiny-ism. Some positives came from that belief, but negatives did as well, about 250,000 of them. That’s a guestimate of how many Native Americans were killed to further manifest destiny. When put into that particular rhetorical situation, one can understand why Chief Seattle sounds downtrodden and skeptical in his speech.

Chief Seattle's Similes and Metaphors

                As I served my LDS mission nearby and on many of the reservations that may have been part of the offer which Chief Seattle addresses in his speech, I thought it was more than appropriate for me to do some rhetorical analysis on his words.

                Chief Seattle’s address is chalked full of beautiful metaphors and similes. Because this document was not only translated twice before making it to English I am not sure how much of these wonderful sayings are in an essence the original words of the Chief, but it is certainly the foundation of how he builds his argument. He does a great job at analyzing the past and building his speech to the current moment giving his speech both a judicial (review of the past) and epideictic (present issue) feel.

The name of Chief Seattle's Tribe

          He touches on some of the ideas of “self-development without interference” which we discussed in class the other day, in regards to his people and the new settlers in his area. He uses these liberalistic ideals to compare and contrast his argument, to make a list of pros and cons, and to eventually state what it would take for him to agree to the terms of the reservation deal. It is evident more than anything else at these points that Chief Seattle paid good attention to the Kairos of the situation at hand. There were likely many opinions as to what should be done with regards to the offer from the “white men”, and it is clear from this speech that the Chief was very tactful and careful to not step on anyone’s toes, or rather not include any possible thoughts that his tribe may have had. 

"Chief Seattle's Speech" to Americans: Transliterating the Translation (30 Years After Delivery)

~This link is for Americans with an accurate sense of humor: Meaningful Native American Tribal Song~

  What is the criterion to call a literary work “historically accurate” (in good conscience)? For Dr. Henry Smith, a “pioneer who heard [Chief Seattle’s] speech but who waited until 1887, more than thirty years later, to publish it in the Sunday Seattle Star,” the criterion seems loose (to put it delicately). Smith, a Conservationist, supposedly transcribed a translation of Seattle’s powerful speech, which speech was delivered by Chief Seattle to “the white man.” This speech, in spite of being packed with admirable sentiments (sentiments that were likely shared, maybe even said, by Native American chieftains), contains a laughable amount of Anglo-American tropes and references that indicate an American appropriation of a culture, and/or speech, in order to fulfill its “white man’s burden” to the Native Americans. The concept of a “white man’s burden” has no grounding in reality (save to exist in the wake of racism and racial inequality). That which is human doesn't need to be humanized!

The Fate of the Red Man

Chief Seattle's speech in 1854 uses some of the best rhetorical strategies in calling for justice towards his Native American people. He immediately poses himself as a very authoritative and wise figure through his use of his cautionary tone towards the Americans.  The purpose of his speech is to call for his people to be treated justly and fairly, and to describe the fate of the Native American people if they are not treated in the same manner. He uses a lot of pathetic appeal, appealing to emotion. His tone is very ominous as he describes the sad fate of the Indians. He also uses a lot of rhetorical tools to drawn attention to this idea of his people being a poor, and forgotten civilization. This places even more emphasis on his pathetic appeal. In terms of his rhetorical strategy and the tools he uses to accomplish this, the Chief's speech is full of figurative language and imagery. In the very first sentence out of his mouth, he personifies the "yonder sky" which "has wept tears of compassion."

He uses a lot of comparisons and simlies. He says, "My words are like the stars the never set." He is establishing that you can rely on him as a leader and a speaker, just as one relies on the stars for direction. But his stars never set. He relates the white men "to grass on the vast prairies," while the red men are few, "resembling the scattering trees of a windswept plain." He also uses a lot of parallel structure to prove his point and show the truth of his words: "every moon, every valley," "a few more moons, a few more winters." I think it is interesting how all of his figurative language is related to nature. The Native Americans are known for having a culture that is deeply and religiously connected to Mother Earth and nature around us. I thought the imagery he chose to put in his speech was very indicative of this spiritual connection the Indians have with nature - that they relate their own people to it.

It's up to you now

Pictured is the treaty with the Delaware Indians

Chief Seattle gives his address shortly before the purchase of his tribe’s lands and territory by the United States of America.  He reminds his people of the overwhelming tide of the ‘palefaces’ sweeping over their lands with powerful imagery.  His most commonly used tool in his rhetoric is imagery and simile.  He connects the powerful struggles in nature with his own people’s trial as they are overcome by the invading white men.  With these natural and even elemental comparisons, it is easy to relate with the native tribe as they are overpowered by these forces. 

Colors of the Wind. I mean. War.

"Let him be just and deal kindly with my people, for the dead are not altogether powerless."

I love the style of Chief Seattle's speech. There is a beautifully stabbing irony between his words and his real tone and intention. In response to the greetings and pleasantries of the President (who he entitles "the great...white chief"), he says, "This is kind...This indeed appears generous..." As the time-machine listeners, we think, My! what a civil man we have here. 

The real deal is laid down, however, as we read closer and further. Chief Seattle can only "presume" the white chief to be good as well as great; after all, his people "no longer ha[ve] rights" respected by the white man; though, the Chief's people could own the blame of this "somewhat." Clearly, Chief Seattle isn't so pleased as his pastry-sweet compliments may imply.

Then, he launches into this idea of the DEAD. DEAD, DEAD, DEAD, everywhere we turn. But boy, does it help his argument. We've declined so much in numbers, he mourns. But guess what? We respect our ancestors. We want to be able to visit their burial grounds.

And you?

Well, you left England and all your ancestry behind "seemingly without regret." Nice goin' there. Joke's on you, though, because "the dead are not altogether powerless."

How his speech relates to the day! Not only is he addressing the absurd type of imperialism going on within his own country, but he also presents ideas contrary to nationalism and militarism (at least those of the white man).


With NATIONALISM: At this time, America was expanding completely separate to native America. Their "nationalism" didn't include the red man. Chief Seattle's solution is leveling in more ways than one: not only does the same fate await all of America, but all the world--we are all brothers in death.

With MILITARISM: "Revenge is considered gain" the Chief wisely proverbises, but old geezers know the truth--war is anything but the romantic heroics that this generation believes in.

Are we brothers?

Chief Seattle was given a decision. He could peacefully accept the white man's invitation to live on a reservation with his people or decline and possibly ignite a conflict. As a wise leader whose primary concern was his people's well-being, Chief Seattle spoke well about the white man. He recognized the power the settlers had over his people and foresaw the growth of the foreigners.

Analogies were used extensively. The natives' ties to nature probably had a large influence on their speech and logic. Chief Seattle described the white settlers as grass that covered the land and his own people as sparse trees. His most dramatic comparison was the flight of the red man from the white man as the mists on the mountain flee before the sun. "Can we be brothers?" was the underlying message that was emphasized by the analogies.

The style of Chief Seattle's speak provokes thought. He reasoned with the idea that the white and red man could be brothers but decided not to take a stance. Not taking a stance displayed more rhetorical power in this case, because he throws the question to the other side. "We shall see" is his way of saying, "We see you as potential brothers but we are waiting to see how you truly see us." The style and tone seem to try and attract some sympathy. He especially appeals to pathos when after talking about the settlers so well, he makes one simple request to have access to the ancestral burial grounds.

Chief Seattle appeared to have the goal of maintaining as much of his people's culture and identity as possible. His choice of rhetoric show his compromising nature as he allows the less important to be taken (land) but requests the more important to remain (burial grounds). He lets the other party feel in control as he expertly weaves his language to influence their emotions and decisions.

All Things Share the Same Breath

Chief Seattle gave a famous speech in January 1854 in what is now downtown Seattle, when he was in his late fifties or early sixties. Dr. Henry A. Smith, a settler and amateur poet who was present and detailed notes at the time, transcribed it. But Smith didn’t speak Lushootseed, the language in which Chief Seattle gave the speech, and he waited 30 years before he transcribed his notes about the speech. Smith’s “Chief Seattle” speech, as he rendered it from his notes, contains 19th-century rhetorical elements that make it sound like he created some of it. Smith admitted in his introduction to the speech that his version of it was “a fragment of [Chief Seattle’s] speech, and lacks all the charm lent by the grace and earnestness of the sable old orator, and the occasion.”

Although Chief Seattle directs his speech at the “white man,” his audience for his speech can be found to also be for his people as well. He tells his people to not fight, for “[they] would have everything to lose, and nothing to gain.” Chief Seattle uses many persuasive techniques in his speech including powerful imagery, striking similes, cautionary notes, and an ominous tone conveyed in parallel structure.

An example of power imagery and a simile is found when he compares the roles of the white men and his people: “Some grim Nemesis of our race is on the red man’s trail, and wherever he goes he will still hear the sure approaching footsteps of the fell destroyer and prepare to meet his doom, as does the wounded doe that hears the approaching footsteps of the hunter.” This creates a greater sense of vulnerability for his people, and makes the white man sound incredibly dangerous.

Many genocides and wars contributed to the 19^th-century era that possibly could have led to this cautionary speech. He was well aware that Native American Tribes were not surviving well amongst others in the US, and he wanted to change that. Through his ominous tone, he conveys his message well and his speech becomes famous for providing his views on how all men should live, share, and survive in the natural world.

Seattle and His Chief Audience

Chief Seattle must have had ideas of the genocides occurring throughout the world when he delivered this speech. Considering that Native American tribes were being obliterated by the United States, and many other nations were being wiped out by other imperialistic world powers, no hope existed for Chief Seattle to fight. The only hope he had was to try to get the “white people” to have enough fear and respect for the natural world so that they might allow the “red people” to live on in peace.

One of the most effective rhetorical strategies Chief Seattle uses is to utilize similes to connect his people to the natural world. Phrases such as “our people covered the whole land as the waves of a …sea cover its shell floor,” and “our people are ebbing away like a fast receding tide” help the audience to connect this tribe to the natural world, something that the chief is trying to get them understand.

Chief Seattle recognizes that the end is near for his people, and his audience is not just the white people. He is considering making a peace treaty with them even though some of his people want to fight on. He is trying to teach them that they can live on through this natural world too. Indeed, he uses antanaclasis to show those who would fight what will happen to them—that their hearts will turn as black as the paint on their faces.

In the process of trying to convince the white man to let them live in peace, he is also convincing his people to allow themselves to live in peace. This was a man who knew how to control his audiences.