Marie And Mather Analysis

Marie and Mather's debates over cultural authenticity suggests that dominant cultures may appropriate because they think that by appropriating the culture, they are understanding better, and thus helping the oppressed culture when personal gain is too often a more primary motive. They validate cultural appropriation in pursuit of beauty and meaning found in the appropriated culture. In class, Mather is frustrated with the activism of Marie because he believes that it attacks his uplifting portrayal of Native Americans as he responds, "There you go again, creating an antagonistic situation. Don't you understand what I'm trying to teach? I'm trying to present a positive portrait of Indian peoples, of your people. Of you. I simply cannot do that …show more content…
He is understating the significance cultural appropriation. Mather defends what he teaches the class from Marie because he believes that through the "positive portrait" of Indians which he presents, he is helping them but Mather is wrong. His words are actually harmful to Native peoples, because he is not teaching the ways that Indians are still suffering. He is creating a single story, without complexity, failing to share the ongoing struggles of the Indians. By choosing to teach a "positive portrait of Indians" Mather, because he is in a superior position, dictates how the culture is conveyed even if it isn’t true. He goes onto exclude Marie and native people from connecting to the other students in his class by saying "your people" or "of you", he is creating a cultural divide in a negative way. He then goes onto play himself as victim. By saying "confrontational relationship" Mather is the peacemaker who wants to do a so called positive thing for the native peoples and Marie is the negative rebel who is getting in the way of his great actions. However, this conflict cannot be defined in positive