Reply to comment

I find how this class had changed my point of view very, very interesting. I like thinking about my first reactions to a reading and then comparing them to how they might have been different before this seminar. For example, in the first paragraph of this reading, the author talks about how important speaking in the moment is: “Where I come from, the words most highly valued are those spoken from the heart, unpremeditated and unrehearsed.” My very first reaction was, “Where does that expression ‘words from the heart’ come from? Is our unconscious the same as our heart? As our emotions? Maybe we just think it is difficult to access our unconscious, like some people find it hard to access their emotions… “ Just a crazy little train of thought that went through my head.

I think one of the most interesting things that I read in this first article was the idea that a written speech is highly suspect because that means the words that this person speaks are not “from the heart” and that they are detached from the occasion. As someone who is very interested in theater, this made me wonder if the Pueblo Indians viewed theater as something not truly from the heart since it was already written down and not improvised. And that also makes me wonder about how much they value storytelling. Isn’t storytelling a “premeditated” and “rehearsed” form of expression? I’m by no means trying to discredit the Pueblo Indians, though. In retrospect, it seems like I’m out to disprove them or something--which I am not!

The other fact that stood out to me was when the author discussed the importance of remembering and retelling all stories—both positive and negative. This part especially stood out me because the author describes this as an important practice because, “If others have done it before, it cannot be so terrible. If others have endured, so can we.” I found this mentality very interesting