Talk:Turtle Island/Archive 1

Lots of clarification needed
I just made these changes in the intro in order to better represent the original Native version of the story, that the older version of this article seemed to alienate. Gary Snyder is obviously not the first to coin the concept... perhaps he just did with the English language, that's all. Don't wanna discredit him, just remove some of the inflated credit that was all over this article. Both the terms "turtle" and "island" exist in Ojibwai and Anishinaabe speech. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Christhi (talk • contribs) 18:51, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Hold on- the term 'Artichoke' and 'Spaceship' both exist in my language, but neither I nor anybody in my culture had repeatedly referred to any landmass as 'The Artichoke Spaceship'. Do these terms just *exist* in the languages, or were they actually used to refer to North America?--Crawdaddyjoe (talk) 07:44, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

I always wondered
"Turtle Island" can have several meanings in English: island inhabited by turtles, island whose shape suggests a turtle, island which is a turtle (with elephants on its back?) ... anyone know which it is? —Tamfang (talk) 07:10, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

It would be really nice if someone could *name* a few native NA languages that have this usage. I'm not familiar with it at all. (Anonymous Coward) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.23.73.85 (talk) 20:35, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

This seems to be mostly a newage construct. There are hundreds of different tribal groups over North America and while some do in fact have creation stories that involve a turtle, this is in no way a 'Native American' belief nor are there Native American words that translate as 'Turtle Island'. There are no Native American words at all since there is no singular Native American language. There are hundreds of different languages. While the person that coined the term in 1974 may have had good intentions, or not, the lasting effect is detrimental to Indigenous Peoples because it presents a fake concept and attributes it to a stereotype. It implies all Indians are the same and all believe the same things and all share the same creation story. Even Indians who have lost their ways and culture are adopting this newage construct and trying to force fit it after the fact by saying North America is shaped like a turtle. Qureus1 (talk) 13:21, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
 * No, Turtle Island is a hardly a New Age construct. I went and added references about how the concept is from Haudenosaunee oral history. -Uyvsdi (talk) 17:02, 1 May 2011 (UTC)Uyvsdi

Lots of clarification needed
Alright, look- I understand most of this article, because, hey, I'm the kind of person who would read the sort of articles that gets one to stumble across this term. But couldn't we clarify things a bit, or at least add some decent citations? If I weren't a critical-race-studies-loving, post-colonial-cultural-theories-reading sort of person, this would honestly read like a parody of what it really is. For example, what in what way does re-introducing the American continent from an admittedly constructed [by a white, Deep Ecologist poet] Native-centered term ALSO imply a re-understanding of the continent in socio-ecological terms, unless we're just wholeheartedly indulging in the myth of the ecological saint native and assuming that anything vaguely but not really Native, even if constructed by a non-Native, is automatically filled with hidden ecological understanding by virtue of its allegedly indigenous cred? I mean, seriously. This article needs work. Will somebody who owns a copy of the book please clarify this? --Crawdaddyjoe (talk) 06:03, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Just adding references and info about the term in Iroquois oral history. -Uyvsdi (talk) 17:03, 1 May 2011 (UTC)Uyvsdi

Turtles all the way down
I removed and 7&6=thirteen re-added this sentence from the "influence" section:


 * The expression "turtles all the way down" has entered popular culture as an expression of infinite regression.

While the origin of the expression is not entirely clear, there is no evidence presented that it is related to the name "Turtle Island", or to North American culture. It might warrant a brief "see also", but it is certainly not an "influence" of the name "Turtle Island", so doesn't belong in that section, unless a reputable source can be found asserting that connection.

I would argue that it doesn't belong in this article at all, but in the more general World Turtle article (which already lists it under See Also). This article should focus on a) myths specific to North American peoples, and b) the use of the term as a name for North America. The link from here to World Turtle could perhaps be more prominent in order to encourage readers to explore the wider connections. - IMSoP (talk) 11:46, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
 * As I wrote in my edit summary, "See also" sections are a handy guide for readers, which suggest other related articles. In my opinion, we should err on the side of too much of the irrelevant, rather than too little of the relevant.  We disagree.  7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 13:26, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I can see an argument for including it as a See Also (although we can't list every connected concept, else there'd be more links than articles), but the sentence I removed is not in the "See Also" section. Since putting it there seems like a reasonable compromise, I'll go ahead and move it. - IMSoP (talk) 14:47, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Agreed. 7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 14:50, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Can somebody include the "retroconning" of the expression
I have heard multiple advocates in speeches say things along the line of "Before Europeans arrived, North America was unified and all the cultures knew it as Turtle Island." This is obvious historical misrepresentation (on a few levels), and seems now to be such a common conceit that it merits mention.


 * Peace and Passion &#9774; ''("I'm listening....") 23:32, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

"I've heard..." - WHO said this? I'll clarify - who, of any actual merit, said this? No semi-respectable academic expert on indigenous American cultures has ever suggested there was any type of political or tribal unity encompassing North America. The Turtle Myths being a common cultural expression does not in anyway suggest some great "before-fore time" where the many diverse cultures inhabiting the americas were ever fully unified. Maybe some crackpot acid tripping hippy with a PhD in metaphysics...

Attribution
Text and references copied from Turtle Island (Native American folklore) to World turtle, See former article's history for a list of contributors. 7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 16:08, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

"Folklore" name change
Ethnocentrism at work. I can only assume that no Indigenous people weighed in on the decision to move this page from Turtle Island (North America). Referring to this traditional knowledge as "folklore" is a denigration. By the same logic, perhaps the religious texts and philosophical treatises should be relocated accordingly. ~ Frank Finklestein (talk) 18:29, 13 February 2021 (UTC) i agree. tpk (talk) 22:37, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Calm down white man, no sane person has a problem with calling it folklore... the problem is with not referring to your religious texts as folklore as well. I know of no sane person who literally believes the world was created on the back of a turtle - it's a story and has always been told as such - it was told to children as truth, and marked their passage into adulthood as it became metaphor. Its not something that sane grown people would ever believe. There are people - people considered perfectly sane - who believe the world was created in a week roughly 6000 years ago by a guy who loved his creation so much he destroyed most of its people in a flood, allowed a few of them to live so they could repopulate the earth through incest, loved his only child so much he condemned him to a brutal, tortuous death. That's the difference between religion and folklore - folklore is a term rooted in honestly assessing tradition. Religion is a term describing a socially acceptable form of insanity, madness, and justification for bad behavior under the thin guise of population control.

Philosophy is another thing entirely, and that is where your logic breaks down. Philosophy is basically the study of thought. It's whole purpose is to be speculative. The point of philosophy is not to get you to behave better due to fear of an irrational god, nor is it a story meant to teach multi-layered concepts in varying degrees of complexity through the use of a relatively simple metaphor. The point of philosophy is to examine how the human mind works in relation to determine what actions are good, or bad, or if these concepts exist. If your philosophy is lying to you, it's not philosophy. It's Folklore... or worse, religion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.183.40.186 (talk) 05:53, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

'Folklore' is a racist term to describe anything which does not match the religious or political canon of eurocentrism (ie, 'we get to name everything we want to using our language, our people & our terms'). tpk (talk) 14:49, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
 * See Folklore. More general meaning, I think.  It is true it could be used by racists, but labeling it as indicated above seems to be an overreaction.  But we are all bound to our personal experiences and viewpoints.  One culture's victiory is another's loss.  Depending upon point of view, the Battle of Fallen Timbers was a part of a tragedy and extirpation/genocide, or the triumph of Manifest destiny.  We should report both sides, as there are WP:RS for them.  Cf., WP:Truth.  7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 14:22, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
 * @7&6=thirteen Hello sir, sorry for the alert, but I would like to raise this issue again. Could there not possibly be at least some sort of move discussion to remove "folklore" from the title? When was this first moved anyways? I couldn't see it in the page history or anywhere else, but I vaguely remember it under the other title Frank mentioned in February. Dismissing spiritual beliefs and culture as "folklore" seems more than a little offensive and imperialistic. I largely agree with what you had written in your comment, and I will acknowledge that yes, we are bound by our own viewpoints–that was all well said. Does it really take away from the article to remove "folklore"? I do not understand how removing it violates the imperative to report both sides. Goddale120 (talk) 16:15, 4 April 2022 (UTC)