Abstract
This essay analyses the frequent portrayal of courtroom scenes by Native American writers in which Native American rhetoric is employed subversively by fictional defendants and witnesses. I argue that these portrayals challenge the assumptions and power of federal legal rhetoric, with an insistence upon the cultural difference between European American and Native American belief systems. By employing Homi Bhabha’s concept of incommensurability in dialogue with Gerald Vizenor’s concept of Native American survivance, the essay proposes that the employment of Native American rhetoric is a performance of cultural difference that challenges dominant American ideology in an act of survivance.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
