Regular price: $31.49
Buy Now with 1 Credit
Buy Now for $31.49
What would have made Woman Walking Ahead better?
A better, more objective investigation into the woman, Catherine Weldon, and a bit more professionalism in the presentation would have gone a long way. I consider myself a liberal, and can reasonably expect a fairly liberal rendering of stories involving native peoples and Euro-Americans. But this, as the saying goes, is beyond the pale.
It's so conjectural, so lacking in anything remotely scholarly in research, it becomes hard to believe anything the author writes. Beyond that, it's infused with the most cynical of guilty liberalism. The author never misses an opportunity, upon meeting a black person, or entering minority communities to pontificate about racial inequity. Rather than praise multi-culturalism, or positive aspects of primarily minority communities in New Jersey and Brooklyn, she stoops to the commentary that it's "the kind of place white supremacists fear". What? Where did that come from?
Similarly, she presumes that a waitress treats her in a surly manner because following her Sundance experience her skin is several shades darker, and her hair is matted down with oil. It's abundantly clear to the author that the waitress believes her to be Lakota and treats her in a racially discriminatory way. The tone-deaf narcissism of the author is astounding.
In Bismarck, she "felt the self-conscious isolation that comes to anyone who is not a light-complected, blond Christian in a city where most people are." I'm no religionist myself, but it's fairly obvious that the author brought her own prejudices into this adventure.
Without a hint of irony, she bemoans the fact that a proposed Hollywood movie of this story will be yet another tale told through the racially insensitive eyes of white people. While that is almost certainly true, she utterly fails to see her own guilt in that arena.
What was one of the most memorable moments of Woman Walking Ahead?
The aforementioned Sundance experience had to be the most ridiculous effort at creating a harrowing drama out of what was essentially a camping trip. Unless she feared reprisals from angry Lakota, it's hard to see where the danger really existed. The whole account reeks of condescension.
What did you like about the performance? What did you dislike?
Insofar as the narrator captures the holier-than-thou egocentrism of the author, it was reasonably accurate. It would have been nice to pronounce words like farcical and places like Bedford-Stuyvesant correctly. But that's minor compared to what's wrong with this book.
You didn’t love this book... but did it have any redeeming qualities?
It had the makings of an interesting story, finding about a woman who was a major connection between two very different worlds. It might have been nice to hear her opinions. But that is lost in all the idle speculation and conjecture. Most of the author's guesses are wrong, and those that are correct are hardly worth the house of cards she builds on them. Hence the reason for the headline, just make it fiction and the sketchy scholarship disappears.
Any additional comments?
I've never not finished a book. And I was determined to finish this one, if only in the hopeless anticipation of a redeeming end, which never came. There's a brief "come-to-Jesus" moment near the end, but it falls flat.
I love anything to do with native cultures, particularly the Lakota, Sitting Bull, Crazy Horse, etc.... This was just ruined by the author's inability to set aside her righteous indignation.