Narrative Point of View in Louise Erdrich's Tracks - MIUSE
Narrative Point of View in Louise Erdrich's Tracks - MIUSE
Narrative Point of View in Louise Erdrich's Tracks - MIUSE
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
Anthony Piccolo<br />
It Comes Up Different Every Time: <strong>Narrative</strong> <strong>Po<strong>in</strong>t</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>View</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Louise</strong> Erdrich‟s <strong>Tracks</strong><br />
also differentiates Paul<strong>in</strong>e‟s manner <strong>of</strong> narration from that <strong>of</strong> Nanapush‟s as the<br />
difference between a “diatribe” and a “dramatic monologue” (71). Jeanne Rosier<br />
Smith notes that<br />
the narrators <strong>of</strong> <strong>Tracks</strong> are more openly hostile to each other‟s stories (each<br />
claim<strong>in</strong>g the other lies) . . . and their philosophical and social differences reflect a<br />
community <strong>in</strong> the grip <strong>of</strong> spiritual and political crisis. (94)<br />
The crisis confront<strong>in</strong>g the Ojibwe 2 <strong>in</strong> <strong>Tracks</strong> is experienced and responded to very<br />
differently depend<strong>in</strong>g upon who is tell<strong>in</strong>g the story. As Perez-Castillo observes,<br />
Paul<strong>in</strong>e narrates from a place <strong>of</strong> “disease, death, spiritual despair” whereas Nanapush<br />
speaks from the position <strong>of</strong> “courageous and irreverent survivors” (qtd. <strong>in</strong> Smith 97).<br />
Also, as Connie A. Jacobs writes, “the truth <strong>of</strong> events lies somewhere <strong>in</strong> between the<br />
versions <strong>of</strong> these two narrators” (118). The reader does, <strong>in</strong>deed, cont<strong>in</strong>uously need to<br />
“shuttle” between the two versions <strong>of</strong> reality presented by Nanapush and Paul<strong>in</strong>e.<br />
Erdrich presents us with these two essentially hostile, compet<strong>in</strong>g narrators and, thus,<br />
places the reader <strong>in</strong> a position <strong>of</strong> negotiat<strong>in</strong>g between the narrations <strong>in</strong> search <strong>of</strong> the<br />
truth. Although, as we shall see, our sympathies will clearly lie with Nanapush rather<br />
than Paul<strong>in</strong>e, Erdrich ensures that neither narrator is completely unbiased and<br />
trustworthy. What we are f<strong>in</strong>ally left with is a realization <strong>of</strong> the <strong>in</strong>evitable ambiguity<br />
<strong>in</strong>herent <strong>in</strong> any accurate presentation <strong>of</strong> events. This ambiguous nature <strong>of</strong> the truth is,<br />
I believe, the po<strong>in</strong>t <strong>of</strong> the novel. Before, enter<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>to a discussion <strong>of</strong> Erdrich‟s use<br />
<strong>of</strong> these two narrators and the reader‟s confrontation with the ambiguity, it will be<br />
useful to first to discuss the historical background <strong>of</strong> the novel and the significance <strong>of</strong><br />
the moment <strong>in</strong> history when the story opens.<br />
2. <strong>Tracks</strong> and History<br />
- 121 -