The title of the next story in Great short stories by contemporary Native American writers is almost as long as the story itself. Well, not quite, but, occupying just two pages in the anthology, it is a short short story. It was first published the same year, 1983, as the previous story, “Turtle meat” by Jospeh Bruchac III, but is very different in tone.
(I apologise to those of you who were expecting my next post to be on Chris Flynn’s Here be Leviathans. It is coming, soon, but I had to put it aside for my end-of-July reading group book, and I do want to do it justice.)
Jack D. Forbes
Again, I’m using anthology editor Bob Blaisdell’s intro and, mostly, Wikipedia to introduce the author. Forbes (1934-2011), says Wikipedia, was an historian, writer, scholar and activist who “identified as being of Powhatan-Renapé and Lenape descent”. He is best known for his role in establishing one of the first Native American studies programs at the University of California Davis. He also cofounded D-Q University, “a prominently Native American college in Davis, California”. His activist career started in the early 1960s, when he became involved in the Native American movement, which, Wikipedia explains, “asserted the rights to sovereignty and resisting assimilation into the majority culture”.
Blaisdell introduces his story with this: ‘”Only approved Indians can play made in USA” is almost too sad to be funny, but funny it is’. Or, is it?
“Only approved Indians can play made in USA”
I enjoyed this story because of the way it addresses that issue that can dog First Nations peoples in colonial settings, that of proving indigeneity, which feeds into ideas about identity. It’s an issue I’ve discussed here before, including in First Nations writer Anita Heiss’ Am I black enough for you (my review), and in the essay “Channelling Mannalargenna” (my review) by the non-Indigenous journalist Kathy Marks.
In her book, which is a few years old now, Heiss shares the working definition of an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander person used by Australia’s Federal Government:
An Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander is a person of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander descent who identifies as an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander and is accepted as such by the community in which he “or she” lives.
I share this purely for background purposes to this story. I am not going to get into the Australian situation because it’s not an issue I have followed recently. It was particularly problematical in Tasmania in recent decades, but I believe that much of that has now been resolved, to the extent that self-identifcation and community recognition are the accepted criteria.
Meanwhile, though, Heiss’s comment is relevant to Forbes’ story which concerns an All-Indian Basketball Tournament, and the two teams that are about to play, one from Tucson and one from the Great Lakes. Many people had come to watch, “mostly Indians” we are told, with many being relatives or friends of the players. There was betting, and “tension was pretty great”. The issue is that the Tucson players are, in general, much darker. Many also have long hair, and some have goatees or moustaches. A rumour starts from the Great Lakes camp that they are Chicanos, not Indians. (If you know your American geography, you will know that Tucson is in southern Arizona, so not far from Mexico, while the Great Lakes are up there near Canada.)
Anyhow, this is a serious point because, as the story goes, the Indian Sports League’s rule is that “all players had to be one-quarter or more Indian blood and that they had to have their BIA [Bureau of Indian Affairs] roll numbers available if challenged”. The Great Lakes players, coming from a big Midwestern city, are all over this:
they all had their BIA identification cards, encased in plastic. This proved that they were all real Indians – even a blonde haired guy. He was really only about one-sixteenth but the BIA rolls had been changed for his tribe so legally he was one-fourth.
You can feel the tongue firmly planted in the cheek – the satirical tone – here can’t you! They challenge the Tucson players, many of whom, as it turns out, can speak their language. None of the urbanised Great Lakes players could, but they claim this proved nothing. Only the BIA card did! The story is short and you can read it at the link below.
“Only approved Indians can play made in USA” is a clever, and oh-so succinct story that draws on recognisable conventions of competitive sport to produce a satire that explores the role of regulation and law in people’s lives, the way power can be wielded, and its potential for destabilising cultural heritage and disrupting solidarity. The ending is particularly biting because after the Great Lakes team has had its way, the last word is given to a white BIA official. That tells you all you need to know about this story.
Jack D. Forbes
“Only approved Indians can play made in USA” (orig. pub. 1983; also published in Forbes’ collection, Only approved Indians: Stories, 1995)
in Bob Blaisdell (ed.), Great short stories by contemporary Native American writers
Garden City: Dover Publications, 2014
pp. 57-58
ISBN: 9780486490953
Available online at genius.com
Whispering Gums 
“Only approved Indians can play made in USA” by Jack D. Forbes offers a thought-provoking exploration of identity and cultural heritage. How does the story use satire and competitive sport to shed light on the issues faced by First Nations peoples? Does the tale resonate with the broader theme of proving indigeneity in colonial settings? Have you encountered similar issues in other works of Native American literature?
Have you read the story? I’d be interested in your thoughts.
I understand all your questions, and appreciate that I could have written a longer and more detailed post. However, right now I am aiming to introduce some of these ideas and get to know them myself, particularly in relation to raising my awareness of First Nations issues and writing around the world. Meanwhile, I hope I have highlighted rather than explained in detail how some of these issues about identity, culture and power are explored in this story.
I read this story because you said it was short, and I think my favorite part was the satire of the characters feeling like America won SOMETHING just by throwing the Mexicans out. Except their Native peoples of Mexico who don’t ascribe to any white man’s government, and the Great Lakes team is so thrilled that they can prove they exist, because the white government said they do. It’s an excellent piece of commentary in such a short amount of space. It reads like a folk tale.
Thanks Melanie … and it was the white BIA official saying they’d won which adds another layer to the commentary about who is really in control and pulling the strings!
So much bite in a bite-size story!
Well said Angela!
I will say first that scrutiny of origins tends to relax when it’s a matter of sports. It might be invidious to mention the number of Americans from Major League Baseball or the National Basketball Association whose tenuous connections to the Old Country have placed them on this or that national team. At the same time, the US has happily accelerated citizenship for at least one East African distance runner I can think of. (Not that he wouldn’t have been naturalized, just that it might not have been in time for a particular competition.)
Second, I’ll say that ethnic descent is not always obvious. I know someone who moved to the US southwest to take advantage of tribal benefits. In her looks–coloring and frame–he takes after her father’s side of the family, which is mostly German. But she can prove her descent. A friend can prove Choctaw ancestry, though I don’t think you’d spot it in his appearance.
Thanks George … re the second, yes I think that’s part of the point the story was making. People rely too much on looks and when “winning” might be involved it can become nasty. There’s a whole issue here about First Nations people not “looking” Indigenous.
As for the first, the US is not the only place to expedite citizenship for sports glory!
The Australian Indigenous people I read on the app formerly known as Twitter get pretty angry about being asked to ‘prove’ their Indigeneity, and I get that. If a US First Nations person felt the need to write this story, then there must have been questioning going on within the community. The problem of course is that it provides ammunition for racists . Remember all the criticism Michael Mansell used to get for having blue eyes.
I think it’s a complex issue Bill, within and without First Nations communities, as far as I can tell, but certainly a big problem is that it provides ammunition for racists. Lighter skinned FN people still get questioned regularly, not just Mansell.