This paper takes up as its task an interpretation of the response of tribal members of the Delaware Tribe of Indians of Bartlesville, OK, to what they perceive as ongoing cultural decline and malaise. In doing so, this paper shall utilize the work of German philosopher Martin Heidegger, particularly his seminal Being and Time, to recontextualize these responses within the domain of ontology with special attention to the notion of authenticity. The underlying questions motivating this work are: What does it mean “to be” in the midst of this Being’s disappearance? Is it even possible to be “authentic” in such a context, or are there only varying grades of what may be called inauthenticity?
This paper draws from ethnographic fieldwork currently in progress, within which informants, both young and old, traditionalist and not, have anxiously expressed the belief that Delaware cultural ways are threatened by an impending disappearance. This ‘threat’ is not characterized as any particular “outside” agent but rather the product of some internal error or communal failure. Delawares today, according to one of the last few traditionalists, are “eager to be proud of being Delaware,” but, yet, they “never come around, never get in touch,” and seemingly “no one has time anymore” to learn the skills, practices, and, most critically, the language necessary to uphold traditional ways. Indeed, such traditionalists often express skepticism that this thing called “Delaware culture” will survive their eventual passing. Rather, following Heidegger, most Delaware seem content with an undifferentiated existence, growing into an identity of “Indian” that is relatively disconnected from being “Delaware,” but instead rather a pastiche or public persona cobbled together from notions of “Indianness” disseminated by pop culture. Even those who are more ‘conscious’ of their indigeneity lapse into what may be called ‘inauthenticity,’ in that many, especially youth, adopt a pan-Indian identity with attendant signs, symbols, and discourses that, while being an active choice, is no less ultimately “foreign” to being ‘Delaware’ than that undifferentiated mode. In taking on this pan-Indian identity, they believe they have chosen themselves and won themselves, but this, it would be argued, is a mistaken belief and that they turn away from a more ‘Delaware’ specific articulation of identity because of the inherent friction in the task, that is, “being Delaware” is not a static state achieved, but a perpetual unfolding or becoming that is never in a final sense “accomplished.” This friction, the particular form of labor and diligence it necessitates, likewise helps situate this phenomenon as being part of broader social processes in America today; it is no mere particular ill of this Indigenous community but rather a magnification of problems inherent in contemporary culture as such. Lives have become increasingly lubricated, such that one need no longer undertake the work of actively being Delaware and all that it demands; they can simply ‘be’ Indian, something final and misapprehended, therefore as concrete.
In taking up this problem, this paper makes two interventions. The first being in the study of the Delaware or Lenape people, also known as the “Grandfather tribe,” who are deserving of much greater scholarly attention, and as such, this paper provides a necessary and modern addition to the study of a small but growing tribe in Northeast Oklahoma (Complementing Obermeyer, 2009; Roark-Calnek, 1977; Weslager, 1972). In doing so, it seeks to illuminate helpfully a contemporary cultural problematic of late capitalism that is by no means limited to the Delaware alone but a problem for both Indigenous peoples generally and settlers alike ((Han, 2017, 2020, 2022; Kornbluh, 2024). Secondly, this paper will assess the viability and utility of Martin Heidegger's philosophy for social theory and the study of Indigenous peoples, building on work already done in this regard (Maldonado-Torres, 2007; Mika, 2015; Segovia, 2021; Hernandez, 2022; Lucero, 2023). It will be demonstrated that Heidegger’s philosophy is far from exhausted and is, in fact, a highly productive and insightful source of thought that behooves further engagement from the discipline.
In sum, this paper analyzes the erosion and disappearance of a culture, and how the members of this culture have responded to the impossible situation thrust upon them by settler colonialism. Further, it does so by contextualizing these responses within the domain of ontology, that is, the study of “being,” and what it means “to be” and to be “authentically” at precisely the historical moment in which they are thrown into this world. I want to demonstrate the relevance of Martin Heidegger's philosophy to the study of the culture and traditions of Indigenous peoples and the value of engaging with his work.
This paper examines the question of ‘Being’ as it pertains to the cultural life of the Delaware Tribe of Indians. A cultural life that many in the tribe feel is at the precipice of dissolution as a unique, coherent entity. It seeks to understand the ‘authentic’ and ‘inauthentic’ responses to this existential situation and the manner in which Delaware people variously either express their ontological make-up qua Indigenous Delaware and (attempt to) uphold attendant commitments or, conversely obscure their ontological make-up in falling back upon and conforming to popular public settler-colonial representations of “being Indian” or subscribing to a homogenizing pan-Indianism. These issues, while intensely local, mirror broader social trends in Euromerican consumer societies, and, as such, the question of being Delaware provokes the question of what it means, once again, “to be.”