Two different approaches: Charles Eastman Vs. Elias Boudinot

In the reading by Charles Eastman, in which one of the chapters was titled: The Soul of the White Man, Eastman tries to appeal to the "White man" so that he may view Native Americans in a different light than that of savagery and barbarism. However, Elias Boudinot also conducted such a task in his Address to the White man, but there is a striking difference in the way the approach is conducted in each case from these two authors. While Boudinot takes a more "humbling" approach by pleading to the "white man" that Native Americans are not savages and informs his audience of the accomplishments that the natives have done and the possible changes that he/she can achieve with educating the natives of the "white mans" ways. Eastman on the other hand acts as a defendant in a court case, defending the rights of the natives and educating those who have misunderstood the culture of the natives. Eastman even comments on his purpose for writing his text and explains the difference of spirituality between native Americans and the "white man". While the ideas are similar between the two texts, the tone is strikingly different, and that is the most crucial point in deciding which argument exhibits survivance the most.

It is of my opinion that Eastman exhibits survivance in his text ( In both of the chapters, Ghost dance war and the soul of the white man) by telling the events that occurred in Wounded knee so that the painful stories would be documented for the world to read about and not forget the genocide that occurred, while also explaining and defending the cultural and religious rituals of the native Americans. This to me seems to be survivance and in fact when compared to Boudinot's text it exemplifies survivance and defends its right to be Indian rather than lash out at the culture that he belongs to as in Boudinot's case. In fact my favorite paragraph from Eastmans text was the one in which I think it exemplifies the difference between his viewpoint and Boudinots: "I am Indian; and while I have learned much from civilization, for which I am grateful, I have never lost my Indian sense of right and Justice. I am for development and progress along social and spiritual lines, rather than those of commerce and nationalism, or material efficiency. Nevertheless, so long as I live, I am an American."(Page 109 of the class reader). In this paragraph it is clear that Eastman is proud of his heritage despite his newly adopted views and way of life. In Boudinots case that just wasn't there, pride in his Cherokee heritage was non-existent in his text, and that's why I believe it doesn't exhibit survivance. So now I turn to you dear reader, which text do you find exhibits survivance the most?