Yaqui Indigeneity: Epistemology, Diaspora, and the Construction of Yoeme IdentityOur War Paint Is Writers’ Ink: Anishinaabe Literary TransnationalismStoking the Fire: Nationhood in Cherokee Writing, 1907–1970
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Book Review| March 01 2021 Yaqui Indigeneity: Epistemology, Diaspora, and the Construction of Yoeme IdentityOur War Paint Is Writers’ Ink: Anishinaabe Literary TransnationalismStoking the Fire: Nationhood in Cherokee Writing, 1907–1970 Yaqui Indigeneity: Epistemology, Diaspora, and the Construction of Yoeme Identity. By Tumbaga, Ariel Zatarain. Tucson: Univ. of Arizona Press. 2018. 215 pp. Paper, $35.00; e-book, $35.00.Our War Paint Is Writers’ Ink: Anishinaabe Literary Transnationalism. By Spry, Adam. Albany: SUNY Press. 2018. xx, 234 pp. Cloth, $95.00; paper, $32.95; e-book available.Stoking the Fire: Nationhood in Cherokee Writing, 1907–1970. By Brown, Kirby. Norman: Oklahoma Univ. Press. 2018. xx, 292 pp. Cloth, $39.95; paper, $24.95; e-book available. Kathryn Walkiewicz Kathryn Walkiewicz Kathryn Walkiewicz is assistant professor of nineteenth-century American literature and culture at the University of California San Diego. She coedited The People Who Stayed: Southeastern Indian Writing after Removal with Geary Hobson and Janet McAdams (2010), and her work has appeared in NAIS: Native American and Indigenous Studies Association, J19: The Journal of Nineteenth-Century Americanists, Walt Whitman Quarterly Review, and elsewhere. She is currently working on a book manuscript about Indigeneity, territory, and states’ rights in the nineteenth century. Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google American Literature (2021) 93 (1): 151–153. https://doi.org/10.1215/00029831-8878578 Cite Icon Cite Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter Email Permissions Search Site Citation Kathryn Walkiewicz; Yaqui Indigeneity: Epistemology, Diaspora, and the Construction of Yoeme IdentityOur War Paint Is Writers’ Ink: Anishinaabe Literary TransnationalismStoking the Fire: Nationhood in Cherokee Writing, 1907–1970. American Literature 1 March 2021; 93 (1): 151–153. doi: https://doi.org/10.1215/00029831-8878578 Download citation file: Zotero Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search nav search search input Search input auto suggest search filter Books & JournalsAll JournalsAmerican Literature Search Advanced Search Ariel Zatarain Tumbaga, Adam Spry, and Kirby Brown situate their studies within specific Indigenous contexts that affirm the continued vibrancy of Indigenous peoples and lifeways and the importance of story to self-determination and decolonial futures. Read in conversation, the texts baldly demonstrate that the eradication of Indigenous nations was a central tenet of Indian policy across Mexico, the United States, and Canada in the long twentieth century and moreover that literature played an important role in these projects. The shape of these colonial efforts varied, but there is disturbing consistency in North American colonial states’ vigilant attacks on Indigenous self-determination and reliance on displacing living Indigenous peoples and reifying fictionalized “Indians.” While much has been written about nineteenth-century colonial cultural production in this regard, there has been less scholarly attention on the significance of twentieth-century literature. More importantly, however, Tumbaga, Spry, and... Copyright © 2021 by Duke University Press2021 Issue Section: Book Reviews You do not currently have access to this content.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».