Naturalism Napush Summary

In her paper “American Literary Naturalism: Critical Perspectives,” Donna Campbell writes that “the history of American naturalism is far from a completed chapter in literary history” (511). Naturalism has indeed come a long way since its emergence in the late nineteenth century. As a movement initially dominated by men, it has grown to include women and their versions of naturalism and continues to expand by including African, Native, and Ethnic Americans. Still more impressively, recent scholarship has helped “to shape a new and more inclusive conception of naturalism,” with some works focusing on “naturalism as a theme rather than as a time-defined movement (thereby extending the possible range of texts that could be considered as naturalistic)”

Erdrich writes that “power travels in the bloodlines, handed out before birth” (Erdrich 31). This idea of power is important in Native American culture. In the case of the Pillagers, Erdrich states that their power “comes through the eyes, too, belligerent, darkest brown, the eyes of those in the bear clan, impolite as they gaze directly at a person” (31). Fleur draws her power from her land at Matchimanito and from her Pillager name, which is represented by the bear, a creature regarded as symbolizing “strength and courage” in Chippewa culture (Vidmar). The significance of this Native American idea of power is better seen when comparing Fleur and Pauline. In another of her visits to the lake, Pauline tells Fleur and Eli, “I have no family. […] I am alone and have no land. Where else would I go but to the nuns?” (Erdrich 142). This lack of connection to her Chippewa culture is ultimately what leads Pauline to discard her name completely, an act which neither Fleur, Nanapush, and Margaret would do themselves: “I asked for the grace to accept, to leave Pauline behind, to remember that my name, any name, was no more than a crumbling skin” (Erdrich 205). The history of the Native American relationship to their lands within the context of American history is indeed

Sophie clearly serves as an example in naturalism of one of the “three forms of spectacle featuring women’s bodies,” that of the “motionless body, often of a violated woman” (Campbell 509). This in turn leads to a discussion about the “abandoned or abducted children” who serve as “the waste products of desire” in naturalism (Campbell 3). This is certainly the case of Pauline, who abandons the daughter (Marie) she created with Napoleon. Marie is symbolic of a time in which Pauline was without land, family, and love. To a certain extent, this symbolism is re-created with the supposed abandonment of Lulu by Fleur, but Fleur’s decision reveals a greater truth. If in ecocritical terms a society’s alienation from the land results in “a worldless dimension and in potential self-destruction,”