As Kuhn writes, our paradigms are not all the same. When a Native person and an academic refer to that period of Indian history known as allotment or assimilation or urban relocation, for example, they not only discuss it from different perspectives, but also talk about it from fundamentally different worldviews. Even after years of formal learning, field research, and obtaining a terminal degree, I remain a student of the Arizona-Sonora border region (in which I have now spent more than a decade) and of Tohono O’odham history, culture, and views with which I have had contact for more than eight years. My experience in the Sonoran Desert pales in comparison to the Tohono O’odham’s “time immemorial.” My life experiences are different. My academic training makes me even more different. Before becoming a geographer I had a career in intercultural communication, but I still struggle with a full understanding of Native perspectives. I feel I have done a decent job on my dissertation, subsequent publications, and daily interactions, but the real challenge is to bring together the two worlds in which I presently stand: the academy and Native America.
I do not call for more Native research or attempt to facilitate others’ entry into such research with this article; rather I make a case for a greater understanding of such work and how the academy can learn from it to become more sensitive to the concerns of our research constituencies. How we handle the intellectual property that results from our research is also critical. What we make public and what we decide is better not to publish is only a beginning step. Making our efforts something of benefit to research constituencies as well as academia can be self-serving as it protects our interest in future research possibilities, but it is also the right thing to do.
