>SB> I remain suspicious of anyone teaching a general class in native
  >SB> spirituality.  What folks in the southeast believe is not exactly the
  >SB> same as what folks in the northwest believe, for example.  By the way,
  >SB> what makes Dennis and Barbara Tedlock, Paul Walla, and Jack 
eatherford
  >SB> qualified to speak on native spirituality?
DM>Suspicions are always good, but it's best to learn from the best available
  >source of information.  An example, would you be willing to travel to the
  >Cherokee Nation in Oklahoma to study the Lenapi?  That's their tribal
  >headquarters.
I'm not telling you not to read them.  I think it's important, however,
to develop an attitude of skepticism about anthropolgists and about
folks claiming to know Indians.  I read their works too; and sometimes
there really is no other way to get info, but i remain ready to hear
other facts from other sources.
DM>As I said, I can understand your reluctance to accept a class or 
nstructor
  >talking about "Native American Spirituality", but the class studies groups
  >independenty, rather than as a whole.
Studying them independently *is* a good sign, since the groups *were*
different.  That gives me more respect for the course.
                   Sondra
-*-
 þ SLMR 2.1a þ A confident manner is important. Computers can sense fear
--- Opus-CBCS 1.7x via O_QWKer 1.7 
---------------