In Qwo-Li Driskill’s poem, “Cherokee Love Haiku,” they offer the same poem in three different forms; the first is in their language, the second is transliterated, and the third is in English. In class we talked about how Driskill’s use of a haiku was significant because of how highly structured they are. The haikus also take up the page in an interesting way. The poem in the indigenous language is first; then the transliterated one, which is also intended; and lastly, all the way on the left again, is the one in English. I think this feeling of structure could connect to the institutions that forced indigenous people to assimilate to white society. However, the transliterated haiku being indented gives the page an illusion of movement and the passage of time, like each poem flowing into the next. This feeling is also strengthened by the fact that there’s a transliterated poem, which seems to represent a transition period/the process of assimilation, but also resistance. Resistance comes from the easy, wavelike movement of the poems within such a strict structure. Also, though, Indigenous children were forced to learn English, usually at the expense of their native language, and Driskill’s use of the English alphabet and (I’m assuming) Cherokee words seems to push back against that. The wave like pattern of the poems also suggest an ebb and flow. If it were read from bottom to top, it could be seen as Indigenous people slowly reclaiming their languages and cultures.
We also talked about Driskill’s use of the word “persimmon,” which is a fruit native to North America. I read the Wikipedia page for the persimmon’s native here, and they don’t seem to be endangered, which I think is interesting. Colonial settlers wiped out/endangered a lot of animals native to North America, but the persimmon made it through alive, and Driskill’s poem seems to argue that their culture did too. Like love and persimmons, Driskill’s culture was able to withstand immense hardships