The question “Who gets to tell our stories?” is one of the central ethical debates in the literary and academic world. Increasingly, indigenous voices are demanding the right to self-representation and criticizing the centuries of external determination by non-indigenous authors. This discussion touches on deep questions of cultural appropriation, authenticity, and literary justice.
The Historical Dimension: Colonial Narrative Patterns
Since the arrival of European settlers, indigenous peoples have been portrayed predominantly through the lens of colonizers. These external representations have profoundly shaped the image in the non-indigenous world.
- Exoticization: Portrayal as “noble savage” or uncivilized primitive
- Victimization: Focus on victimhood without agency
- Romanticization: Idealization as nature beings without complexity
- Erasure: Erasure of cultural diversity and contemporary existence
The Three Positions in the Current Debate
Position 1: Only Indigenous People May Tell Indigenous Stories
This position is held by many indigenous intellectuals and activists.
- Argument of Authenticity: Only those rooted in the culture can truly understand it
- Historical Reparation: After centuries of external representation, now self-determination
- Cultural Integrity: Protection from distortion and misunderstandings
- Economic Justice: Indigenous authors should benefit from their own stories
- Well-Known Advocates: Tommy Orange, Louise Erdrich, Rebecca Roanhorse
Position 2: Dialogical Collaboration is Possible
A moderate position advocating for collaborative approaches.
- Cultural Bridges: Non-indigenous can act as translators between worlds
- Research Partnerships: Community-based research with indigenous participation
- Ghostwriting with Consent: Non-indigenous help with writing, but content is controlled by indigenous people
- Editorial Support: Assistance with structural and linguistic aspects
- Prerequisites: Deep cultural competence, humility, transparent power dynamics
Position 3: Literary Freedom for All
A liberal position that accepts no content restrictions for authors.
- Artistic Freedom: The right to write about anything that touches the imagination
- Empathy as Bridge: Human experiences are universally accessible
- Research-based Approach: Thorough research can bridge cultural distance
- Market Regulation: The readership decides on quality and authenticity
- Critique of this Position: Ignores power dynamics and historical injustice
Critical Case Studies from Literature
The Case of “The Education of Little Tree”
The book was marketed as an autobiographical narrative of a Cherokee boy until it was revealed that the author, Asa Carter, was a white segregationist and former Ku Klux Klan speechwriter.
- Fraud on Multiple Levels: False identity, romanticized portrayal
- Commercial Success: Remained popular despite exposure
- Harm: Reinforcement of stereotypical images, displacement of authentic voices
- Lesson: The danger of cultural masquerade
The Debate around “American Dirt”
Although not directly indigenous, this case shows similar dynamics: A white author wrote about Mexican migrants but was criticized for cultural appropriation and stereotypes.
- Pre-publication Hype: 7-figure advance, Oprah’s Book Club selection
- #DignidadLiteraria: Latino authors protested against the exclusion of their own voices
- Shifted Debate: From literary quality to questions of representation
- Consequences: Greater awareness of diversity in publishing
Positive Example: “Black Elk Speaks”
The collaboration between Lakota medicine man Black Elk and poet John G. Neihardt shows a possible form of cooperation.
- Transparent Collaboration: Neihardt was translator and editor, not author
- Cultural Humility: Recognition of Black Elk as primary knowledge source
- Complexity: Nevertheless, there was later criticism of Neihardt’s interpretations
- Lesson: Even well-meaning cooperation remains problematic
The Economic Dimension: Who Benefits?
The debate is not only cultural but also economically relevant.
- Advance Inequality: Non-indigenous authors often receive higher advances for indigenous topics
- Publishing Representation: Indigenous authors are underrepresented in agencies
- Market Placement: Books by non-indigenous authors are more heavily promoted
- Prizes and Awards: Indigenous topics win awards, but often for non-indigenous authors
- Statistics: Less than 1% of US published books are written by Native Americans
Cultural Appropriation vs. Cultural Exchange
A central conceptual difference in the debate:
- Cultural Appropriation: One-sided adoption of cultural elements without understanding, consent, or benefit to the culture of origin
- Cultural Exchange: Mutual, respectful dialogue on equal footing
- Cultural Appreciation: Respectful interest and support without adoption
- The Gray Area: When does research become appropriation? When does inspiration become exploitation?
Ethical Guidelines for Non-Indigenous Authors
For those who still wish to engage with indigenous topics, there is growing consensus on ethical practices.
- Prior Informed Consent: Obtain explicit consent from affected communities
- Community-based Research: Indigenous people as active partners, not just informants
- Transparent Positionality: Disclose one’s own cultural position and motivation
- Fair Compensation: Appropriate payment for indigenous collaborators and informants
- Controlled Publication: Indigenous communities have input on content and publication
- Long-term Engagement: No “hit-and-run” research, but sustainable relationships
The Role of Publishers and Literary Institutions
Publishers bear special responsibility in this debate.
- Sensitivity Readers: Indigenous readers for cultural accuracy
- Diversity in Decision-Making Positions: More indigenous editors and agents
- Support Programs: Mentoring and scholarships for indigenous authors
- Transparent Decisions: Disclosure of why certain projects are supported
- Long-term Relationships: Not just “one indigenous book” per year, but continuous engagement
The Academic Dimension: Research and Teaching
Similar debates are taking place in academia.
- Indigenous Studies: Should the field be dominated by indigenous people?
- Community-based Research: New paradigms of collaboration
- Decolonizing Methodology: Critique of Western research paradigms
- Ethics Committees: Stricter guidelines for research with indigenous communities
- Co-authorship: Acknowledge indigenous informants as co-authors
Indigenous Literary Movements and Alternatives
Parallel to the criticism, powerful indigenous literary movements are emerging.
- Indigenous Publishers: Theytus Books, Kegedonce Press, Red Hen Press
- Literary Festivals: Indigenous Voices Awards, Returning the Gift
- Writing Workshops: Institute of American Indian Arts, Indigenous Writers’ Circle
- Digital Platforms: IndigiReads, Indigenous Literatures
- Genre Expansion: Indigenous science fiction, fantasy, crime (e.g., Rebecca Roanhorse)
International Perspectives
The debate is taking place worldwide, with country-specific differences.
- Canada: Strong indigenous literary presence, but continued dominance of non-indigenous authors
- Australia: Debate about “Aboriginality” and who may identify as indigenous
- New Zealand: Māori writers establishing strong own tradition
- Scandinavia: Sami voices gaining visibility
- Latin America: Complex questions about mestizaje and indigenous identities
The Future of Storytelling: Possible Ways Forward
What might a fairer literary space look like?
- Parity Representation: As many indigenous as non-indigenous authors on indigenous topics
- Collaborative Models: True partnerships with shared creative control
- Editorial Support: Non-indigenous as editors, not authors
- Genre Expansion: Indigenous stories beyond trauma and tradition
- Reader Education: Awareness of the significance of author identity
- Institutional Change: Reforming publishers, universities, funding institutions
Conclusion: From Appropriation to Partnership in Storytelling
The debate “Who can tell our stories?” is not a simple question with a simple answer. It touches on deep historical wounds, current power imbalances, and visions for fairer literary spaces.
One thing is clear: The time of unreflective appropriation of indigenous stories by non-indigenous authors is over. The future lies in respectful partnerships, the strengthening of indigenous voices, and critical reflection on who benefits from which stories.
As readers, authors, and publishers, we face a choice: Do we want to continue consuming stories about indigenous people, or are we ready to hear stories from indigenous people – on their own terms, in their own words, in their own time?
The answer to this question will decide not only the future of indigenous literature but whether we can create a truly decolonized literary landscape.