By Katie Curran
(Longer Web Version)

Sherman Alexie’s fame originated with his poetry, short story collections and novels. But these days he is the talk of the Sundance Film Festival. Alexie’s  The Business of Fancydancing  premiered Jan. 14 at the festival, just four years after the successful debut of  Smoke Signals,  based on Alexie’s screenplay. 

The Business of Fancydancing  finds the Spokane/ Coeur d’Alene Indian behind the camera as director for the first time. The protagonist of Sherman Alexie’s new movie is a gay American Indian poet, estranged from his reservation until the suicide of a childhood friend forces him to leave the white world and return home.  The Business of Fancydancing  forces the audience to struggle and contend with its complex issues of racism, sexual identity, the painful history of American Indians — in short, the pain of being human.

Sherman recently spoke in Flagstaff to an overflow crowd of what he fondly termed, “all those white liberals and Indians mixed together. His presentation was stand-up political commentary and off the cuff poetry improv. The crowd went crazy. His unique charisma extends from the written word to the big screen, and his success affords and forces him to act as spokesperson for the quiet minority of Indian America.

In a recent phone interview, I fulfilled Sherman’s notion that 82 percent of the interviews he conducts are with white women. The conversation started out rough. My predictable probes regarding the heightened spirituality of Indians and the messages of his work seemed only to bore him. But Alexie’s interest peaked when I asked his opinion of the war — and what similarities he saw between the U.S. treatment of American Indians and countries like Afghanistan. As Sherman talked about his views on peace and the rights of homosexuals, among other things, he soon had me laughing out loud at his compassionate irreverence and gifted word.

 KC: Are you happy with the movie?
SA: Yeah, mostly. I'm never completely happy with anything. I mean, the thing about movies as opposed to novels — novels you keep writing till you're done. Movies, you can't just sit down and write it and make it happen. You can edit so easily with writing. So, the financial constraints of filmmaking bug me.

KC: How much of the movie was your story, and if so, was it difficult to use material that was personal?

SA: Well, it’s personal in the sense that I’m a successful writer from a reservation, but I’m not nearly as estranged as Seymour is. I’m not nearly as disconnected. I mean he’s a version of me that’s very exaggerated.

KC: Do you find out about yourself as you write these characters?

SA: I don’t know. I mean I could lie, and tell you all sorts of you know — it’s a process of discovery all the time, you never know what’s going to happen. I don’t have any answers, I just like asking questions.

KC: Why did you make the main character gay?

SA: Evan, the actor, is gay, so I thought that was an interesting part for him to play. I mean, I wanted to make all of the characters have a lot of autobiographical detail of the actors. I figured, the less metaphors they had to play, the more real the performance would be.

KC: Do you have a different kind of message for a white audience to take away than an American Indian audience?

SA: I have no messages.

KC: Is it just art to you?

SA: You know, there’s no way, there’s no way you can control an audience response, and once you start manipulating an audience response that’s when you make crap, that Planet of the Apes. So, I just want the audience to be continually surprised. That would be my wish. I don't want them to know how it's going to end. Or even if they think they know I want to make sure it
doesn't end the way they think it was going to.

KC: I know you’re often viewed as speaking for the American Indian population as a whole, but I’m very interested as to what issues you’re most concerned with in general and specifically regarding American Indians?

SA: Well, you know, I certainly have specific political and social issues regarding Indians but my politics and my philosophies and my art are all you know, championing the oppressed, whoever they may be. So it’s not just about Indians. My politics reflect lefty-socialist, progressive, communist, bleeding-heart Indian boy’s politics. So it’s about all oppressed people. It’s about bringing comfort — comforting the oppressed and oppressing the comfortable. That’s my job. To challenge power structures wherever they exist. So, telling the assholes they’re assholes. That’s my job.

KC: Do you think there are similarities between the United States’ treatment of American Indians and the treatment of countries like Afghanistan?

SA: (Sighs).Oh, I think the U.S. is very hypocritical in speaking about the human rights practices of any other country. That said, I wouldn’t want to be indigenous anywhere else. We’re the greatest country, probably the greatest civilization in the history of the world, within our borders. Outside of our borders the U.S. practices third world banana dictatorship politics. And because we are protected here we don’t notice or we don’t care or we don’t believe it. Our international politics can be truly, truly evil. And in that sense, the way we treat third world countries really parallels the way Indians were treated here before. And things are better now, not greatly better, but they’re better. So I think there are definite parallels.

KC: Are you in favor of the war?

SA: No. I’m not in favor of any war, anywhere. War is always the end result of failed policies.

KC: What should the U.S. have done instead, in response to September 11^th?

SA: Well, it goes back to not having trained bin Laden in the 80s.that’s where it started. Not getting involved in the Cold War. That’s where it starts. The bombing of the trade centers began in the Gulf of Tonkin. Began when we decided we were afraid of Russia in the aftermath of World War II. That’s where the bombing of the World Trade Centers began. It’s not an isolated event. History connects to history. So, if we want to talk about that, we shouldn’t have escalated the arms race, we shouldn’t have built a military industrial complex to be so large. We shouldn’t allow our corporations to go into countries where there are not democracies. You put a capitalistic corporation and a dictatorship together and you’ve got the Khmer Rouge. You’ve got the Taliban. And so I think we must force our corporations to behave in other countries the way they behave here. They can still make their money and they can still profit, but they at least have some measure of control. That’s what our policies need to be about. It’s about making moral decisions in our international policy rather than decisions that benefit us. And making a moral decision might actually hurt us, might actually cost us money or influence or power, but still we need to make moral international policy decisions. We all need to stop driving our cars tomorrow. So all of us pacifist liberals, we all need to stop driving our cars. Because the second we get into our car we’re supporting oil corporations which supports our interests in the Middle East which contributes to the subjugation of those countries in the Middle East. So every time one of us pacifist liberals drives a car we’re being an awful hypocrite.

KC: So what should we do?

SA: Stop driving our cars.

KC: Did you?

SA: Nope.

KC: Me neither. So, what should we do?

SA: You make individual decisions not to participate and not to support.

KC: You do it in other ways?

SA: I don’t participate in violence. I don’t support it, you know? In my own life or in national policies. And that’s all I can do. And I can be vocal about it. But in the end, how do I affect George W. Bush? We didn’t even elect the guy and he’s in charge.

KC: Have you met him?

SA: No.

KC: What would you say to him if you met him?

SA: I wouldn’t want to. This is a guy who I’m sure could not have found Afghanistan on a map before this happened. So, you know, how you doin’ there?

KC: When you talk about the impact of history, do you recommend certain authors or books to better educate ourselves?

SA: All of them, everything. Read rush Limbaugh and Howard Zinn. Read G. Gordon Liddy and Ralph Nader. Read Al Gore and George W. Bush. Read everybody. Because the thing is, nobody has a monopoly on the truth. Nobody’s philosophies or politics are right. Everybody has kernels of truth and everybody has at least some measure of imagination. Rush Limbaugh connected with so many people. Not because he’s a liar but because he appealed to some emotional need. So, if you haven’t read Rush Limbaugh or listened to him, than you have no idea what millions of people in this country are feeling. So, read everything. Read everybody. I subscribe to 85 magazines from the far right to the far left and People magazine in between. So, be an information junkie. Be a voracious intellect. And don’t trust anybody. Any institution. The greatness of this country has always been that individuals have made great changes. Our institutions have never done it. It’s always been individuals that lead individualistic movements. And as soon as great things are accomplished those individualistic movements became institutions that became corrupted. So, you know, don’t pledge allegiance.

KC: When you take an issue like child hunger in the U.S., what do you think is the solution—lobbying the government or changing individual beliefs? Or both?

SA: It’s both. But the thing is you can only deal with child poverty in your own town. So make sure you’re giving money and food to the food bank. Make sure you’re lobbying the local school board to institute after school food times. I mean, I think there should be three meals a day at school. You know, no matter what happens outside of school, the kid knows there’s three meals. So it’s always locally. Think locally, think locally.

KC: Throughout history there has always been hunger and inequality. Is oppression or inequality natural? Is it worth fighting for?

SA: We are animals and there’s always going to be those with more and those with less. But . the reason why we have thumbs and brains is that those of us with more can care about those with less. Tigers don’t establish food banks. Deer don’t give a shit about raccoons. You know, I was watching on the news up here the other night. This huge effort of all these people scientists and civilians and coastguard and all these people getting together to save this orca whose child had beached itself and died and she wouldn’t leave. And she kept beaching herself and all these people, dozens of people, were trying to get this orca out to water again. And they did it. And I thought, you know, that’s greatness. So, because we are animals, because we’re part of nature there’s always going to be divisions. Whether you call them class or social or economic or racial, there’s always going to be levels, there’s always going to be a class system in some form. But where we can be great, is by those of us who have power and have obtained power or were born with power, using that power to help those without. And, you know, I came from nowhere. I wouldn’t have been able to do that without the kindness of people who had power along the way. And whether that was access to education or money or books, somebody was always there to help. And, it’s the ability of people to see past their class, that distinguishes us.

KC: Do you think world peace is possible?

SA: Nope.

KC: Why not?

SA: It’s DNA stuff. The basic animalistic desires — plants, animals, humans, is to continue. You know? And for any of us individuals to continue, to have our ideas or our lineage continue, it’s always going to be competing with somebody else’s idea of what to continue.

KC: But does that necessarily mean we’re going to have to use violence to continue?

SA: (Sighs) Oh, God. I think it’s inevitable. I mean if you want to get real, you know, if there was world peace the world would end cause there wouldn’t be any mass wars to control the population. Maybe wars are a natural function. We haven’t had a big one in a long time, you know? The planet is overpopulated.

KC: Well, maybe there’s an increase in homosexuality to facilitate world peace.

SA: Well, yeah, I was talking about that the other night. You know, people keep talking about homosexuality as being unnatural. Maybe it’s the most natural thing there is. However you want to talk about it, perhaps scientifically, it’s a good thing. Simply because, it helps the planet. Homosexuality might be the most ecological way of getting laid there is. Recycle, be gay! (Laughs.)

KC: Sounds like a good bumper sticker. In Flagstaff we have one going around that says “Peace Please.”

SA: Instead of peace, maybe it’s “less war.” Less war, let’s be realists. Peace. Less war.

KC: Yeah, I’ll see how that goes down at the peace rallies.

SA: (Laughs. Less war, less war! I can see all the people at the rally. But see, a rally is a violent act.

KC: Well, we call it a peace vigil.

SA: But it is. It’s a violent act. Peace activists are telling military people that they’re wrong. So we are saying that everything they believe in, every way in which they live their lives is wrong. And the anger and hatred and frustration we’re expressing towards them is the same thing they’re giving back to us. If we can’t understand why the soldier would want to do what a soldier does, if we can’t have any empathy or admiration for that. I mean, the way in which a soldier wants to serve this country is admirable. And the second we start saying that’s wrong, wrong, wrong, there’s another form of violence as well. We’re telling them how to live their lives.

KC: So you’re saying words can be violent?

SA: Yes. This all starts because of words. This all starts because of the metaphor of the afterlife. It all comes down to religion.

KC: Ok, why don’t you explain that a little more.

SA: Well, we all have ideas about how we should operate. We all have moral systems and we all believe that everybody should live by our moral systems. Otherwise, you know, what’s the point? I mean, that’s what a moral system is. It’s about instructing people how to live. And we all think we know the way other people should live. And that’s all wrapped up in religion. And that’s new agers, to fundamentalist Christians, to Islamists and Buddhists, its human beings. Forcing their moral systems on other human beings. And that’s what we’re all doing. A pacifist is just as religious as Jerry Fallwell. Howard Zinn is just as fundamentalist as Osama bin Laden. They’re all trying to tell everybody else how to live. And that’s never going to end. The only thing we can do is perhaps change the way we fight. You know? We haven’t used nuclear weapons, I hope we don’t.

KC: Your new film discusses some disturbing statistics regarding the reservation and alcoholism — that 60 percent of Indian men on reservations are alcoholics. Is that alcoholism caused by genetics or a painful history?

SA: It’s all wrapped up in that. The sad history and oppression and pain — it’s not a stereotype. Don’t let anybody tell you alcoholism among Indians is a stereotype. It’s a hard, cold, moist reality. I mean, out of my uncles, aunts, mother, father, siblings, cousins—we’re talking a couple hundred people—two people don’t drink. And I know my experience is not atypical. So, whatever it is and whatever caused it and whatever continues to cause it, it’s a reality.

KC: Same with the statistic that the number one cause of death among Indian men is suicide?

SA: Yeah.

KC: Does Indian culture have things to teach white culture to change things for the better?

SA: Oh. That falls into the trap of colonial thinking and post-colonial thinking. And all that crap. That we’re somehow superior because we got our ass kicked. You know? No culture is in possession of any secret knowledge that others don’t already have.

KC: I didn’t really mean it that way.

SA: Everything good in the Indian world is also good in every other culture. Every life lesson, every moral lesson, it’s the same basic beliefs. So, whatever non-Indians think they can find in Indian culture is already in their cultures.

KC: Have you heard about the recent Indian lawsuit against the Department of Interior?

SA: Against Gail Norton, right?

KC: Yeah. What do you think about that?

SA: Fun! The Indian wars — our lawyers fight the Indian wars now. But Gail Norton does not represent white people and the government doesn’t represent white people. In my experience most of the people in this country are on our side.

KC: Is that because you’re in the liberal art/literary world?

SA: No, I also grew up in Redneckville. Everybody identifies with Indians. Everybody admires Indians. White supremacists admire Indians.

KC: Why?

SA: Cause we got fucked by the government. And that’s their whole religion, that’s their theology. It’s about how the government fucks people regularly. And who has been more fucked than Indians?

KC: Yeah, I was thinking that if art is born of pain, Indians are an untapped resource.

SA: Yeah, exactly. You know, professional boxers and poets. That’s where Indians are really going to make an impact in the next 20 years.

KC: Why boxing?

SA: Cause professional boxing and poetry both come out of the same horrible, painful sources. And in some sense, even as we’re sort of assimilating and disappearing — Indians, culture —we’re also getting stronger. So that as we’re assimilating we’re bringing into it particular stories and talents as Indians. So we’re sort of these hybrid, werewolf type shape changers who are coming in and able to tell these stories in a way that everybody wants to hear, but with this new material. It’s a great time to be Indian. Especially an Indian artist. You’re instantly unique and original and eccentric.

KC: Do you try and encourage some of that in the younger generation?

SA: I visit rezes, I visit rez schools. I just try to be present.

KC: Do you think your new movie will be as well received as  Smoke Signals? 

SA: Well,  Smoke Signals  is a very simple movie. This is not. And  Smoke Signals  is much more obviously funny. And its characters were, I don’t want to say 2-dimensional, but 2 and a quarter? This movie doesn’t always portray its characters in a flattering light. And that usually is hard for certain people to take. We all want somebody to root for, we all want somebody to identify with. We want ideal visions of our self up on screen. We want to identify with the hero. The man or woman who will guide us through this journey.  The Business of Fancydancing  is more complicated than that. I wanted it to feel like you were sitting around with people you know. That you can love them and admire them and also beat them and detest them. And whenever you put that in a book or up on a screen or in music, you’re preventing yourself from becoming something that a mass audience can get into. But, I make a great living and I live an incredibly artistic life appealing to 100,000 people. And if I continue to appeal to those 100,000 people, whoever they are, and 82,000 are college educated white women, that’s fine. I’m happy with that. I like white women.

KC: I guess I fall in that category.

SA: There you go. I mean, 82 percent of the interviews I do are with white women.

 KC: Why?

SA: You’re smarter!

KC: Smarter than white men or …

SA: Smarter than all of us. (Laughs.) You get to be women and you get to be white.

KC: When do you think you’ll be heading back to Flagstaff?

SA: Oh, I don’t know. I love it there. The best audience in the world is in Flagstaff. All those white liberals and Indians all mixed up together.

KC: Anything you want to say to the white/ Indian population of Flagstaff?

SA: I love Flagstaff. I love Flagstaff. I would marry Flagstaff.

KC: Do you have any comments regarding the Navajo and Hopi conflicts?

SA: I have nothing to say about that! They’re sovereign nations. Let them fight their sovereign battles. There’s a lot of Navajos and very few Hopis. I’ll just say that oppression comes in all forms.

KC: Well, thanks for talking with me. You’re one of my favorite authors and I know you’re loved by many people—not just white women!

SA: There’s that other 18 percent!

 Katie Curran is an Arizona Native and Northern Arizona University graduate who currently teaches music in the Flagstaff Public Schools. Over the past year she has designed Web sites for several national parks and interned for the investigative team at ABC News in Chicago.