|
Post by tubman13 on Mar 14, 2014 15:55:45 GMT -6
I don't want to but in here regarding CH friends, but I will go with the word of trader Bordeaux. Those most trusted friends, were Hump early and Touch the clouds, late. DC, this guy speaks prior to 1879, and no review that I can produce, from Amazon.
Regards, Tom
|
|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Mar 14, 2014 16:19:52 GMT -6
Hi Mike, you are welcome. This is the link; it’s in Norwegian so I had to get it translated before posting. linkIan.
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Mar 14, 2014 18:29:42 GMT -6
For such a weird loner, Crazy Horse turns out to have a lot of best/close friends and to have been a member of the Rotary and various groups that I myself belong to but cannot reveal because I'd have to kill you. Oh, all right, CH and I - BFF - were Guardians of the Secret Society of.........(thud)....gasp......rosebud........
In Black Elk - via translator, priest, reporter, and censored by family - the author seemed somewhat less blown away than others, and said CH was strange, and he got stranger yet. That's a wrap, I think.
|
|
|
Post by tubman13 on Mar 14, 2014 19:17:12 GMT -6
DC, it was the Lion's Club and Safari Club International. Strange? No, not a member of Odd Fellows.
|
|
|
Post by Margaret on Mar 15, 2014 4:45:17 GMT -6
For such a weird loner, Crazy Horse turns out to have a lot of best/close friends and to have been a member of the Rotary and various groups that I myself belong to but cannot reveal because I'd have to kill you. Oh, all right, CH and I - BFF - were Guardians of the Secret Society of.........(thud)....gasp......rosebud........ In Black Elk - via translator, priest, reporter, and censored by family - the author seemed somewhat less blown away than others, and said CH was strange, and he got stranger yet. That's a wrap, I think. ..quite insulting nonsense from someone who really has no place being on this thread, frankly... you have shown yourself to know and understand little of Indian culture of that time.. ...this is every bit as bad as someone claiming Benteen dawdled, let Custer down, and was a coward... it's just another example of a trumped up writer trying to be clever... and it's time someone told you so... ...weird loner's don't usually get much of a following...in my experience, or want any...
|
|
|
Post by fuchs on Mar 15, 2014 5:30:47 GMT -6
...this is every bit as bad as someone claiming Benteen dawdled, let Custer down, and was a coward... it's just another example of a trumped up writer trying to be clever... and it's time someone told you so... ...weird loner's don't usually get much of a following...in my experience, or want any... You are not the first, and probably not the last to tell him, but you might as well talk to a wall. If you use agressive debate tactics, and have an ego large enough, you can convince an audience of almost any nonsense as long as it sounds plausible on the surface.
|
|
|
Post by tubman13 on Mar 15, 2014 6:13:23 GMT -6
Margaret, fuchs, all of us are entitled to our opinions and we arrive at them in different ways. I have not studied Native American Culture for 30 years as DC purports to have. I first heard the word Akicita from an NA in 1967. He explained it to me in the way he and his people used it. That was warrior or military society. I came here to learn more about the battle, for reasons of my own. I have picked up much in a short period of time, different perspectives, things I had previously read and forgotten, and a much better appreciation of all things LBH. Because of the members here voicing their opinions, sources, and general knowledge. we all learn. When DC voices his opinions as he does it made me go back pull out books I had not read in 20 years, not such a bad thing.
A while ago Chuck said DC and I were pi$$ing up opposite sides of the same rope, as long as DC continues to hit the rope, there is no need to get pi$$ed, as it were. Remember about 50 miles west of where DC lives there is a small town where wild burro's wander the street from time to time.
Regards, Tom
|
|
|
Post by fuchs on Mar 15, 2014 6:41:44 GMT -6
Because of the members here voicing their opinions, sources, and general knowledge. we all learn. The thing is, DC doesn't need to learn anything about Indian society, history etc. because he KNOWS already all there is to know about. Can be generalized to all non straight-up "Western Civilizations", and pretty much any field he puts his superior intellect to work on. And he is on a mission to harass everyone not sharing his personal brand of reality into submission. Oh, and he can review books without having read them (seriously).
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Mar 15, 2014 7:45:59 GMT -6
Tubman, DC has never "studied" what you call "Indian society" whatsoever and has never, ever said that. That was someone else.
I do... - well, let's go Third Person - DC realizes there are many Indian societies that have little to do with one another other than continent location. DC does know some actual Indians, as opposed to most of you, and met more, living as I do in the American West, and they don't consider themselves the repository of their people's heritage or history any more than I do my own.
I don't wither when some European reads a book - especially a coffee table picture book - and suddenly feels as one with the Great Spirit and believes at face value anything good said about 'Indians' and buys into a great deal of nonsense, and this were it applied to any people including American Indians who, by the way, cannot agree on lunch about how their peoples should be presented in history. In this, they're like everybody else as well. Publishers are well aware of the targeted buyer market for such books: they're New Age enthusiasts and devoted to spiritual thought and Europe, Boulder, and San Francisco are crawling with them.
I'm blocks from a major University with a large program, library, and authorities devoted to the American West, although a lot of it is on the web. Denver has even more.
And Margaret, people like and unlike you call me that and worse all the time, have for near a half century, and if you're unaware of that you haven't been in this long. Like you, they're wrong, as I do not remotely present myself as an authority, have said that often, but won't tolerate those who so pretend. You can find no evidence of myself so claiming absent some ironic or attempted humorous remark, and if that.
We know very little about Crazy Horse, and there are contemporary cliques in conflict about being the Correct and Authoritative Defender of His Heritage, not unlike Republicans with Reagan or Democrats with FDR/Kennedy/whoever in this nation. Or east Indians about Gandhi. American Indians are not unique in plight, past, or future.
And yes, you CAN review books about Custerland - which is the only topic I claim this is true for - without reading them and be 80 percent correct. If I'm wrong, find the errors in my reviews that prove it. Nobody has yet. There are no new discoveries. There are sometimes claimed revelations of participant opinion from the past, but not many and most are bogus.
|
|
|
Post by tubman13 on Mar 15, 2014 8:14:53 GMT -6
I have studied Plains Indian culture for more than 30 years, and must agree with the previous reviewer from Montana that this book is riddled with errors from beginning to end. For example, Mails tells us that the Indians made bow cases from the tails of mountain lions. Regarding your last post, I refer you to one of your earlier posts. Please see above. You either have or have not
Regards, Tom
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Mar 15, 2014 8:19:08 GMT -6
Judas. That's a quote from the review by Jeff Pert and clearly designated as such. Read it again and apologize. No excuse for that.
|
|
|
Post by fuchs on Mar 15, 2014 8:21:04 GMT -6
I have studied Plains Indian culture for more than 30 years, and must agree with the previous reviewer from Montana that this book is riddled with errors from beginning to end. For example, Mails tells us that the Indians made bow cases from the tails of mountain lions. Regarding your last post, I refer you to one of your earlier posts. Please see above. You either have or have not
Regards, Tom
That was the Amazon review DC was citing. Might be a good idea in general to try and use the "quote" function if citing material not one's own. Although this board is way better with it than the other one
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Mar 15, 2014 8:33:19 GMT -6
Well, he used the quote function and displayed a falsehood. Thank you for noting it right off, by the way.
It won't compensate for inability or unwillingness to actually read.
|
|
|
Post by tubman13 on Mar 15, 2014 8:41:26 GMT -6
Never to big to apologize, missed quotes, and not being a scholar, the new sentence confused me.
Regards, Tom
|
|
|
Post by tubman13 on Mar 15, 2014 8:48:12 GMT -6
DC, your quotes continue to confound me your last post says "It won't compensate for inability or unwillingness to actually read."
An earlier post says.
"And yes, you CAN review books about Custerland - which is the only topic I claim this is true for - without reading them and be 80 percent correct. If I'm wrong, find the errors in my reviews that prove it. Nobody has yet. There are no new discoveries. There are sometimes claimed revelations of participant opinion from the past, but not many and most are bogus." Regards, Tom
|
|