Part II, “Reclaim,” brings with it additional narrative lines and a progression of some of the initial concepts that we encountered in the first part.  As with the first discussion prompt, you certainly are welcome to comment on particular passages (or characters, etc.) that you find particularly compelling outside of what this prompt highlights–feel free to comment on passages and concepts that the following prompt does not address.  However, to start, what I’d like to offer initially is a consideration of the way(s) that Part II returns repeatedly to the idea of stories and storytelling—and how these reflections on storytelling ultimately intertwine with conceptualizations of each individual’s identity and what it means to be Native. Dene Oxendene is developing an oral history, and the conversation he has with Calvin Johnson is quite compelling.  On page 148 Calvin states that “My dad never talked about being Native and shit to the point that we don’t even know what tribe we are on his side. Our mom has Native blood on her Mexican side too, but she doesn’t know much about that either…So I don’t know, I feel bad sometimes even saying I’m Native.  Mostly I just feel like I’m from Oakland.”  Dene reflects upon Calvin’s thoughts and thinks, “Sometimes not having a story is the story” (148).  Of course there is a lot more to Dene and Calvin’s discussion in the chapter, but this excerpt is one of several points in Part II where the idea of storytelling arises.  In your reading of the text up to this point, what do you feel the narrative suggests about storytelling?  What does it suggest about the relationship between storytelling and self-identification?  About Native identity?  Now that we’re halfway through the narrative, it’s an appropriate point to think carefully about what the text has conveyed to us–to consider the foundation that the second half of the text will either reinforce or complicate. 

Since this is your first venture into examining a novel this term, it’s interesting to consider the different ways that Tommy Orange establishes a foundation for his narrative in Part 1.  We of course encounter myriad characters in this first part—many of whom are not only “characters” per se, but also serve as narrators. These differing narrative perspectives and voices certainly are a unique element within There There.  Likewise these first 80 pages or so establish the context for our narrative—we encounter urban Oakland; we encounter individuals who speak in colloquial terms; we encounter the individual and collective issues that these individuals struggle with.  Accordingly, for this initial discussion on There There let’s think about this beginning and the framework that Orange develops. 

You are free to reference excerpts on your own, but I’d like to highlight two in particular. First, before “Part I: Remain” we actually encounter the Prologue.  How would you characterize the 9 pages of the Prologue?  How does the Prologue influence our reading Part 1 (and of course, beyond)?  What is the narrative effect of it? 

Second, in Dene Oxendene’s first chapter we encounter a reference to the title of the text, as Dene reflects upon Gertrude Stein’s description of Oakland—“there is no there there” (38).  How do you interpret Dene’s exposition on Stein’s quote?  What is the significance of the quote with regard to Native culture and history?  Similar to the questions posed above regarding the Prologue, how does Dene’s reflection on “there is no there there” influence our reading of the narrative as a whole? 

Again, you certainly are welcome to reference other passages from Part 1; I offer these two particular elements to get our discussion started. 

Additionally, since you all normally respond to each other’s presentations, you also are welcome to reflect upon the biographies of Tommy Orange that your peers have generated for this particular lesson.