Julia Hamann
HNRS 401
Memory and Representation
Memory, defined by the Oxford dictionary, is simply “the store of things remembered”
(memory def. 1). Upon further consideration, however, one realizes that remembrance is much more
complicated than it may appear. Every memory has a skeleton of generally agreed upon facts about
past people, places, and events, but what gives these facts meaning lies within each individual’s
personal interpretation of them. As the saying goes, there are two sides to every story. Every human
has different life experiences shaping different personalities and world views; therefore each person
carries varied recollections. When combined, these perspectives culminate to create a broader
collective memory. Because the human faculty for remembrance is far from perfect we must rely on
ethnographic records as evidence to “accurately” recall our history. These records are collected and
represented in archives to create a social memory. “Archives validate our experiences, our
perceptions, our narratives, our stories. Archives are our memories” (Schwartz and Cook, 18).
The creators of records and archives wield a lot of power in shaping collective memory.
Ethnographers determine which facts are preserved, and provide interpretations of those facts in the
records they make. Archivists must then pick and choose which records are saved and which are
forgotten. “The power over the evidence of representation, and the power over access to it, endows
some measure of power over history memory and the past” (Kaplan, 211). Herein lies the threat of
the single story. If there is a disproportionate representation of the same perspective on history we
risk losing alternate perspectives that are equally important parts of history and memory, perspectives
that albeit possible contradictions bring us closer to absolute truth. Dakota history in MN provides as
an exemplary case study of the necessity for multiple perspectives in memory and representation.
Through consideration of the records and archives of Dakota history we can better understand how
single stories come to be and the consequences they entail. Through these understandings we can
Julia Hamann
HNRS 401
Memory and Representation
better conceptualize the vitality of multiple perspectives in the shaping of collective memory and
how memory and representation affect our responses to controversy and conflict.
The single story of the Dakota has been shaped by their lack of power within American
society. Throughout this course we have studied the white mans’ erasure of Native American culture
and history. Rather than making efforts to understand and respect Natives white colonialists
disregarded their equal humanity, seeing them only as uncivilized, ignorant, and godless savages. It
was this stereotype that was recorded and spread to other colonialists further engendering an
atmosphere of misunderstanding shaping the beginning of the single story of Native culture in
America. Through manipulation and lies “Indian people were forced into smaller and smaller
territory…they were cut off from the game and plant resources that sustained their traditional way of
life” (Westerman and White, 136). Dakota population, and therefore power, dwindled as they were
disconnected from traditional forms of sustenance and the land they held so sacred. When those fed
up with the increasing encroachment of white men finally stood up against such injustice in the U.S.Dakota conflict of 1862 they were ultimately defeated and their actions were severely punished and
sensationalized as “tales of Indian butchery” (Wingered 267). As recorded in the video Dakota
Exile, those remaining on the reservations were forced to ship their children off to boarding schools
where their language and culture was literally beaten out of them (1996). With this loss of language
came further disempowerment as their traditionally oral form of historical record keeping was lost in
translation.
Preferring to forget such a history of hostility white Americans use their power to further
mold a more romanticized single story of the Dakota. “In the popular imagination, if the likes of
Hiawatha or Minnehaha had ever roamed the woods and prairies of Minnesota, it was long before the
real stuff of state history began. The state seal codified this harmonious passing of the torch in its
Julia Hamann
HNRS 401
Memory and Representation
depiction of an Indian peacefully riding into the setting sun, observed by an industrious farmer
leaning into his plow” (Wingerd, xii). Until relatively recently there has been little record of Dakota
before the settlers came and when any mention of the 1862 conflict is raised it is generally framed in
a manner that makes the actions of the Dakota appear unjustified.
Through repeated representation of stories and images such as these the Dakota role in
Minnesota history was severely simplified and much of their story forgotten; “that is how to create a
single story, show a people as one thing, as only one thing, over and over again, and that is what they
become” (Adichie). After being systematically disempowered and disconnected from their traditional
form of record keeping the Dakota had little control over which records of their history were created
and maintained. Although they played a much larger role in Minnesota history than popularly
acknowledged they had no voice with which they could make their greater history known; they had
little control over records archived and disseminated. Instead Dakota were left to be misinterpreted
through the stereotypes and single story presented by the white American majority in power.
Author Chimamanda Adichie clearly portrays the danger of single stories: “The single story
creates stereotypes, and the problem with stereotypes is not that they are untrue, but that they are
incomplete. They make one story become the only story… The consequence of the single story is
this: It robs people of dignity. It makes our recognition of our equal humanity difficult. It emphasizes
how we are different rather than how we are similar” (TED, 2009). The single story of Dakota
history in Minnesota has done just this. Although their legends say they are the first people born of
this land, long before the first settlers set their sights on America, they were not even recognized as
equal citizens until the early 20th century. The single story of the Dakota has left them without an
identity leaving them depressed, impoverished, and virtually ignored my mainstream society, that is
aside from profit making for companies such as Land o’ Lakes butter that only further engender
Julia Hamann
HNRS 401
Memory and Representation
misunderstood stereotypes. When we only have a single lens through which we shape our memory of
history our conception of truth is incomplete. “If the diverse Dakota perspectives are not
acknowledged or accepted as additional truths to the fabric of history, then that history is limited.
Finally, whether we are Dakota or Minnesotan, if we continue to accept only partial histories we will
continue to limit our understanding of them and their effects on us” (Westerman and White, 222).
The single dominant perspective of the Dakota exemplifies the affect memory and
representation have on our responses to controversy and conflict. A clear example is seen in the lack
of respect for sacred places observed in the Coldwater Spring and Carvers Cave controversies
(Westerman, and White, 211-219). If multiple perspectives were represented in our collective
memory people would have been more understanding of the Dakota perspective and these sacred
sites would have been treated with the respect that they deserve. Unfortunately the lack of Dakota
perspective in memory and representation resulted in an inadequate response to these conflicts and
further marginalization of the unrepresented side of the story.
“Stories matter. Many stories matter. Stories have been used to dispossess and to malign, but
stories can also be used to empower and to humanize. Stories can break the dignity of a people, but
stories can also repair that broken dignity…Start the story with the arrows of the Native Americans,
and not with the arrival of the British, and you have an entirely different story” (Adichie). In our
attempt to contribute an unearthing of forgotten perspectives of Dakota-U.S. history Sara, Haiyang,
and I proposed a collage entitled “Absolue TRUTH!” inspired by Ken Wilber’s Integral Theory.
Integral Theory is a philosophy that seeks a synthesis of pre-modern, modern, and post-modern
reality. It is portrayed as a “theory of everything” and offers an approach “to draw together an
already existing number of separate paradigms into an interrelated network of approaches that are
mutually enriching” (Wilber). The idea is to represent all perspectives, even contradicting ones, as
Julia Hamann
HNRS 401
Memory and Representation
partial truths that culminate to bring us closer to the bigger picture of Absolut Truth. Our collage
would focus on U.S. – Dakota History comparing and contrasting White perspective, Dakota
perspective, the media’s perspective, and cultural perspective. Each perspective represented shares a
partial truth of U.S.-Dakota history which culminate to create the entire story. The collage would
include images, phrases, and quotes to represent each of these perspectives. The circular shape of the
piece symbolizes the continuous connection of these multiple perspectives that culminate to make a
whole. The concept of oneness is also represented by the rotating aspect of the piece; when spun fast
enough the collection of images becomes one.
Through analysis of the single story mainstream white America has maintained about Dakota
history in Minnesota and the negative consequences it has produced for these people we can better
understand the importance of multiple perspectives in the shaping of collective memory. When only
a single story is maintained there is the risk of too much power being vested by a single group
leading to marginalization of other cultures and a lack of respect for equal humanity. Furthermore, it
stifles the ability of those who are fed these single stories to learn from the mistakes of history and
appreciate what other cultures have to offer as there is no recognition of mistakes made in the first
place and stereotypes are based off of what is already known by those who create them, or rather
what they think is known. It is time we start making representation of all perspectives a priority in the
shaping of collective memory through projects such as the proposed “Absolute TRUTH!” collage.
When all of humanity comes to the realization that multiple perspectives are vital to perceiving
reality and remembering history we will be a step closer to a complete vision of history fostering true
equality. “When we reject the single story, when we realize that there is never a single story about
any place, we regain a kind of paradise” (Adichie).
Julia Hamann
HNRS 401
Memory and Representation
Works Cited
Adichie, Chimanda. “Chimamanda Adichie: The Danger of a Single Story.” TED Conference
July. 2009. Lecture. TED: Ideas Worth Spreading. TED, July 2009. Web. Oct. 2009.
Dakota Exile. Dir. Kristian Berg. Twin Cities Public Television, 1996. DVD.
Kaplan, Elisabeth. "Many Paths to Partial Truths’: Archives, Anthropology, and the Power of
Representation." Archival Science 2.3 (2002): 209-220. Web.
“Memory" Def. 2. The Oxford New Desk Dictionary and Thesaurus. 3rd ed. 2009.
Schwartz, Joan and Terry Cook. “Archives Records and Power: The Making of Modern
Memory.” Archival Science 2.1-2 (2002): 1-19. Web.
Westerman, Gwen and Bruce White. Mni Sota Makoce: The Land of the Dakota. St. Paul:
Minnesota Historical Society Press, 2012. Print.
WIllber, Ken and Robb Smith. Integral Life+. Version number. Integral Life, Inc., 2012. Web. 12
December 2012.
Wingerd, Mary. North Country. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2010. Print.
Julia Hamann
HNRS 401
Memory and Representation