Tracking Down Maturity

What does Louise Erdrich have to say about maturity in her book Tracks?

Author Louise Erdrich presents a unique view on maturity when considered in light of the other three books discussed. East of Eden, Oedipus Rex, and King Lear are all similar in that each of these novels carries the perspective of a white culture, whereas Erdrich’s Tracks is written from a Native American perspective. When I first started this novel, I was excited to see what awaited me. Would her illustrations of maturity be different from those of the other two authors? Does Native America see maturity in a different light than predominantly White cultures? And what similarities would there be between the four? What about maturity is universal?
Well, I was not met with disappointment. Erdrich paints a complex view of maturity in her novel Tracks, which tells the story of a Native American tribe that is being taken over by white people. Specifically, it is the story of the Anishinabe tribe told by two members of that tribe: Nanapush; an older member of the tribe and grandfather to Lulu (who he tells the story to), and Pauline; a half-Canadian Native American who detests the culture which she was born into. Through these two characters, the reader witnesses firsthand the pain, conflict, and struggle that comes when one’s way of life slowly fades, at the same time gaining a deeper insight into Native American culture and its values.

Erdrich seems to use Nanapush as a significant picture of what it looks like to be “mature” throughout her novel, especially in contrast to Pauline. The audience picks up on Pauline’s unreliability as a narrator from the very beginning, but Nanapush “was never one to take notice” of the gossip of those who “fattened in the shade” (9). Here, Nanapush is referencing town gossips- one of which is Pauline- and how he does heed anything they say as factual. The fact that Nanapush is completely indifferent to the drama and false stories of local gossipers- he does not even notice them- demonstrates a maturity and reliability to the reader, in that he does not exaggerate stories for selfish purposes. We can trust what he’s saying- he does not take notice enough to make them up. Pauline however depends heavily on the opinions of people, and is known to “improve the truth”, as Nanapush says at one point in the book. This parallel of the two narrators is significant. Maturity includes a security enough in one’s self, that he does not rely upon the opinions or attention of others to uphold his identity. Nanpush criticizes his son-in-law who struggles with a wrong act he committed: “that’s all you think about! You!” (99). Nanapush is not phased when Eli confesses his unfaithfulness to his wife, and is irritated when Eli spends so much time in self-pity and hatred. Maturity is trustworthy, accountable, and authentic, just as Nanapush demonstrated through his narrations. It also has the depth of vision to see one’s wrongdoings in their full weight, without becoming absorbed in them. Maturity sees a situation for what it is and takes action, which Nanapush urges Eli to do.

Not only is maturity reliable-- it also stands for something. Nanapush always has an opinion and knows where he stands, regardless of whether his opinion is more right or more wrong than another’s in the reader’s eyes. Nanapush has convictions, and he backs them up in action. This is a significant message to the audience that mature people stand for something. They have opinions about subjects that matter, and their opinions are realistic and stem from more than emotion. Nanapush comments that “a strong heart moves slowly” (102). Strength of heart to me demonstrates maturity, and his comment about “moving slowly” is fascinating, because it goes completely against human nature. When we feel something, we want to act on it: immediately. Nanapush urges that a strong heart waits- it takes its time- to sift through the emotions and the truth of the situation, so that a foundation may build for a real conviction. Maturity is reliable, authentic, truthful, and has a strength to it. It is not formless, but rather, it stands for something. Something well-thought out.

As Erdrich paints her pictures of maturity, one thing she demonstrates more than the other authors is the inherent imperfections within people. Nanapush is undoubtedly the most mature character. He demonstrates reliability, wisdom, has more life experience than any other character, and yet the audience views him in his full humanity. Nanapush lusts for women, acts out of carnal desire at times, is inconsiderate, and demonstrates many more actions that are not so impressive. He admits it too. When reflecting on the entire situation- how the white people attained power over the Anishinabe tribe and how much of the culture was lost- he admits “I should have tried to grasp this new way of wielding influence, this method of leading others with a pen and paper” (210). So stuck in his traditions, Nanapush refused to sign contracts or protest through petitions on pen and paper, because pen and paper are more a part of White culture than the Native American tribe at this point.  He stood for something. Mature. And when looking back, he saw how he could have handled the situation better, how he was not so right as he thought. Mature. Maturity accepts his own faults, and does not expect perfection from others. Maturity is constantly exercising and growing, and does not pretend to be perfect and complete. Erdrich introduces a deep and complex truth: maturity includes inherent brokenness. Because people are broken. But although it is broken, that does not mean it is not powerful. Maturity is needed in this world, and those in his tribe needed it in Nanapush, who many looked to for counsel.