In the latest issue:

Real Men Go to Tehran

Adam Shatz

What Trump doesn’t know about Iran

Patrick Cockburn

Kaiser Karl V

Thomas Penn

The Hostile Environment

Catherine Hall

Social Mobilities

Adam Swift

Short Cuts: So much for England

Tariq Ali

What the jihadis left behind

Nelly Lahoud

Ray Strachey

Francesca Wade

C.J. Sansom

Malcolm Gaskill

At the British Museum: ‘Troy: Myth and Reality’

James Davidson

Poem: ‘The Lion Tree’

Jamie McKendrick

SurrogacyTM

Jenny Turner

Boys in Motion

Nicholas Penny

‘Trick Mirror’

Lauren Oyler

Diary: What really happened in Yancheng?

Long Ling

Not Altogether LostJames Hamilton-Paterson
Close

Terms and Conditions

These terms and conditions of use refer to the London Review of Books and the London Review Bookshop website (www.lrb.co.uk — hereafter ‘LRB Website’). These terms and conditions apply to all users of the LRB Website ("you"), including individual subscribers to the print edition of the LRB who wish to take advantage of our free 'subscriber only' access to archived material ("individual users") and users who are authorised to access the LRB Website by subscribing institutions ("institutional users").

Each time you use the LRB Website you signify your acceptance of these terms and conditions. If you do not agree, or are not comfortable with any part of this document, your only remedy is not to use the LRB Website.


  1. By registering for access to the LRB Website and/or entering the LRB Website by whatever route of access, you agree to be bound by the terms and conditions currently prevailing.
  2. The London Review of Books ("LRB") reserves the right to change these terms and conditions at any time and you should check for any alterations regularly. Continued usage of the LRB Website subsequent to a change in the terms and conditions constitutes acceptance of the current terms and conditions.
  3. The terms and conditions of any subscription agreements which educational and other institutions have entered into with the LRB apply in addition to these terms and conditions.
  4. You undertake to indemnify the LRB fully for all losses damages and costs incurred as a result of your breaching these terms and conditions.
  5. The information you supply on registration to the LRB Website shall be accurate and complete. You will notify the LRB promptly of any changes of relevant details by emailing the registrar. You will not assist a non-registered person to gain access to the LRB Website by supplying them with your password. In the event that the LRB considers that you have breached the requirements governing registration, that you are in breach of these terms and conditions or that your or your institution's subscription to the LRB lapses, your registration to the LRB Website will be terminated.
  6. Each individual subscriber to the LRB (whether a person or organisation) is entitled to the registration of one person to use the 'subscriber only' content on the web site. This user is an 'individual user'.
  7. The London Review of Books operates a ‘no questions asked’ cancellation policy in accordance with UK legislation. Please contact us to cancel your subscription and receive a full refund for the cost of all unposted issues.
  8. Use of the 'subscriber only' content on the LRB Website is strictly for the personal use of each individual user who may read the content on the screen, download, store or print single copies for their own personal private non-commercial use only, and is not to be made available to or used by any other person for any purpose.
  9. Each institution which subscribes to the LRB is entitled to grant access to persons to register on and use the 'subscriber only' content on the web site under the terms and conditions of its subscription agreement with the LRB. These users are 'institutional users'.
  10. Each institutional user of the LRB may access and search the LRB database and view its entire contents, and may also reproduce insubstantial extracts from individual articles or other works in the database to which their institution's subscription provides access, including in academic assignments and theses, online and/or in print. All quotations must be credited to the author and the LRB. Institutional users are not permitted to reproduce any entire article or other work, or to make any commercial use of any LRB material (including sale, licensing or publication) without the LRB's prior written permission. Institutions may notify institutional users of any additional or different conditions of use which they have agreed with the LRB.
  11. Users may use any one computer to access the LRB web site 'subscriber only' content at any time, so long as that connection does not allow any other computer, networked or otherwise connected, to access 'subscriber only' content.
  12. The LRB Website and its contents are protected by copyright and other intellectual property rights. You acknowledge that all intellectual property rights including copyright in the LRB Website and its contents belong to or have been licensed to the LRB or are otherwise used by the LRB as permitted by applicable law.
  13. All intellectual property rights in articles, reviews and essays originally published in the print edition of the LRB and subsequently included on the LRB Website belong to or have been licensed to the LRB. This material is made available to you for use as set out in paragraph 8 (if you are an individual user) or paragraph 10 (if you are an institutional user) only. Save for such permitted use, you may not download, store, disseminate, republish, post, reproduce, translate or adapt such material in whole or in part in any form without the prior written permission of the LRB. To obtain such permission and the terms and conditions applying, contact the Rights and Permissions department.
  14. All intellectual property rights in images on the LRB Website are owned by the LRB except where another copyright holder is specifically attributed or credited. Save for such material taken for permitted use set out above, you may not download, store, disseminate, republish, post, reproduce, translate or adapt LRB’s images in whole or in part in any form without the prior written permission of the LRB. To obtain such permission and the terms and conditions applying, contact the Rights and Permissions department. Where another copyright holder is specifically attributed or credited you may not download, store, disseminate, republish, reproduce or translate such images in whole or in part in any form without the prior written permission of the copyright holder. The LRB will not undertake to supply contact details of any attributed or credited copyright holder.
  15. The LRB Website is provided on an 'as is' basis and the LRB gives no warranty that the LRB Website will be accessible by any particular browser, operating system or device.
  16. The LRB makes no express or implied representation and gives no warranty of any kind in relation to any content available on the LRB Website including as to the accuracy or reliability of any information either in its articles, essays and reviews or in the letters printed in its letter page or material supplied by third parties. The LRB excludes to the fullest extent permitted by law all liability of any kind (including liability for any losses, damages or costs) arising from the publication of any materials on the LRB Website or incurred as a consequence of using or relying on such materials.
  17. The LRB excludes to the fullest extent permitted by law all liability of any kind (including liability for any losses, damages or costs) for any legal or other consequences (including infringement of third party rights) of any links made to the LRB Website.
  18. The LRB is not responsible for the content of any material you encounter after leaving the LRB Website site via a link in it or otherwise. The LRB gives no warranty as to the accuracy or reliability of any such material and to the fullest extent permitted by law excludes all liability that may arise in respect of or as a consequence of using or relying on such material.
  19. This site may be used only for lawful purposes and in a manner which does not infringe the rights of, or restrict the use and enjoyment of the site by, any third party. In the event of a chat room, message board, forum and/or news group being set up on the LRB Website, the LRB will not undertake to monitor any material supplied and will give no warranty as to its accuracy, reliability, originality or decency. By posting any material you agree that you are solely responsible for ensuring that it is accurate and not obscene, defamatory, plagiarised or in breach of copyright, confidentiality or any other right of any person, and you undertake to indemnify the LRB against all claims, losses, damages and costs incurred in consequence of your posting of such material. The LRB will reserve the right to remove any such material posted at any time and without notice or explanation. The LRB will reserve the right to disclose the provenance of such material, republish it in any form it deems fit or edit or censor it. The LRB will reserve the right to terminate the registration of any person it considers to abuse access to any chat room, message board, forum or news group provided by the LRB.
  20. Any e-mail services supplied via the LRB Website are subject to these terms and conditions.
  21. You will not knowingly transmit any virus, malware, trojan or other harmful matter to the LRB Website. The LRB gives no warranty that the LRB Website is free from contaminating matter, viruses or other malicious software and to the fullest extent permitted by law disclaims all liability of any kind including liability for any damages, losses or costs resulting from damage to your computer or other property arising from access to the LRB Website, use of it or downloading material from it.
  22. The LRB does not warrant that the use of the LRB Website will be uninterrupted, and disclaims all liability to the fullest extent permitted by law for any damages, losses or costs incurred as a result of access to the LRB Website being interrupted, modified or discontinued.
  23. The LRB Website contains advertisements and promotional links to websites and other resources operated by third parties. While we would never knowingly link to a site which we believed to be trading in bad faith, the LRB makes no express or implied representations or warranties of any kind in respect of any third party websites or resources or their contents, and we take no responsibility for the content, privacy practices, goods or services offered by these websites and resources. The LRB excludes to the fullest extent permitted by law all liability for any damages or losses arising from access to such websites and resources. Any transaction effected with such a third party contacted via the LRB Website are subject to the terms and conditions imposed by the third party involved and the LRB accepts no responsibility or liability resulting from such transactions.
  24. The LRB disclaims liability to the fullest extent permitted by law for any damages, losses or costs incurred for unauthorised access or alterations of transmissions or data by third parties as consequence of visit to the LRB Website.
  25. While 'subscriber only' content on the LRB Website is currently provided free to subscribers to the print edition of the LRB, the LRB reserves the right to impose a charge for access to some or all areas of the LRB Website without notice.
  26. These terms and conditions are governed by and will be interpreted in accordance with English law and any disputes relating to these terms and conditions will be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales.
  27. The various provisions of these terms and conditions are severable and if any provision is held to be invalid or unenforceable by any court of competent jurisdiction then such invalidity or unenforceability shall not affect the remaining provisions.
  28. If these terms and conditions are not accepted in full, use of the LRB Website must be terminated immediately.
Close
Invented Eden: The Elusive, Disputed History of the Tasaday 
by Robin Hemley.
Farrar, Straus, 352 pp., $25, May 2003, 0 374 17716 3
Show More
Show More

In June 1971 it was learned that a hitherto unknown tribe had been found living in the dense rainforest of Mindanao in the southern Philippines. Reportedly, the group consisted of 27 members, spoke an unknown tongue and wore only leaves. Tentatively named Tasaday after a nearby mountain, they seemed to be exclusively hunter-gatherers who knew nothing of agriculture and used stone tools to dig for wild yams. In keeping with the Edenic simplicity of their long hair and near-nudity, they were credited with having no knowledge of war or aggressiveness. At the time – pretty much the hippy high noon of flower-power and anti-Vietnam protest – the Tasaday’s punctuality seemed as impeccable as their unspoilt innocence was chastening. Anthropologists and news teams began converging on Manila.

From the first, two men were prominent in the Tasaday story and it was through them that much of the information was channelled. One was John Nance, an Associated Press combat photographer who had been wounded in Vietnam and recently posted to head AP’s Manila bureau. It was largely through Nance’s books, such as The Gentle Tasaday, together with National Geographic’s idyllic pictures (‘First Glimpse of a Stone Age Tribe’), that images of the Tasaday became internationally familiar. Later, Nance was to become controversial, though never with the notoriety of the other protagonist. This was the Filipino millionaire who credited himself with the tribe’s discovery, Manuel (‘Manda’) Elizalde.

Manda was the son of a Spanish businessman and a Boston Brahmin: parents who between them represented both the Philippines’ colonial rulers. He grew up in ravaged postwar Manila as a beneficiary of the vast Elizalde business empire: an excellent tennis player, a spoilt playboy, a youthful alcoholic. Some said marriage obliged him to turn over a new leaf, others that he needed to travel further afield to indulge his erotic tastes. In any event he became interested in tribal minorities, the less clad the better. The Elizaldes were one of the few elite families to support rather than fall foul of President Marcos, who had come to power in late 1965 intent on settling some old scores. By the time of his Tasaday discovery, Manda was head of PANAMIN (Presidential Assistance on National Minorities), the organisation charged with the protection of the Philippines’ ethnic minorities: some 44 tribal groups. He had reformed his drinking habits and become a ubiquitous figure, dropping godlike into rural backwaters in his private helicopter, strewing food and favours. A flamboyant and complex character, often moody and sometimes violent, he was also capable of being strangely sympathetic. A mutual friend once told me that if Manda didn’t shoot your socks off first he would probably charm them off. No one who visited his Manila mansion ever forgot the experience, nor the extensive garden where he required tribespeople to live in exact replicas of their huts wearing nothing but tribal costume. The visitor was struck by a preponderance of women, a good few of whom were little more than children.

This was the man who in 1971 announced his discovery of the Tasaday, and whose PANAMIN organisation controlled access to them from the outset. Carefully selected film crews, journalists and scientists made the trip down to South Cotabato and were arduously choppered into dense jungle to view the tribe. Imelda Marcos visited and declared herself a changed person; so did Gina Lollobrigida and Charles Lindbergh. National Geographic came and went twice. Everyone who visited the Tasaday was ravished by the remote setting and touched by the group’s affectionate spontaneity. For their part the Tasaday became deeply attached to John Nance and positively idolised Manda. In 1974, President Marcos, having basked in the favourable attention the group had brought to an Administration that had turned into a dictatorship, ordered a 45,000-acre patch of jungle closed as a reserve for the Tasaday. Nobody was to have access. For twelve years the group faded from view, until the Marcoses were ousted by Cory Aquino’s ‘People Power’ uprising in 1986 and sent into exile in Hawaii. At this point some Tasaday, by then wearing jeans, reportedly confessed to a Filipino journalist that they were actually local farmers who had been ordered to impersonate an imaginary tribe and had been carefully coached in their roles. Within a week two German reporters from Stern tracked down the same Tasaday informants, who were now wearing leaves over glimpses of cotton underwear. There had been sceptics and cynics right from the start, but now the rumours that had been held in whispered abeyance during Marcos’s time surfaced loudly. The Tasaday were a complete hoax. Scientific reputations crumbled overnight; John Nance was pilloried for gullibility or worse; journalistic careers (including Nance’s) were destroyed; Manda had already fled the Philippines. And yet the Tasaday – whoever they are – are there to this day, living in what remains of their jungle. Manda himself is dead but John Nance is still in regular contact and continues to maintain that they are genuine, a story from which he has never wavered for over thirty years. Linguists have identified their dialect as a distinct offshoot of Cotabato Manobo, a language unrelated to T’boli, the tongue of the surrounding area.

Robin Hemley’s book is a brave and wholly convincing attempt to find the truth concerning the ‘anthropological fraud of the century’. These days, and certainly in the Philippines, the received opinion is that the Tasaday were unquestionably a hoax – dreamed up by Manda Elizalde purely for personal aggrandisement (his discovery brought him international celebrity) or else in cahoots with Ferdinand Marcos. By 1971, Marcos’s second term of office (he had been re-elected in 1969) was going badly. There had been destabilising attacks by Maoist guerrillas of the New People’s Army and increasingly violent protests from leftist students; unrest was to escalate until Marcos declared martial law in September the following year. This was highly damaging to his Administration’s image, not least because in the American view the Philippines had long been ‘the showcase of American democracy’. Ferdinand and Imelda had been given the red-carpet treatment by President Johnson on a state visit to Washington in 1966 and the US had been fully supportive of Marcos ever since: it needed his country as a loyal, stable aircraft carrier moored within easy reach of Vietnam. Domestic unrest in the Philippines looked almost as bad for Washington as for Marcos, and by mid-1971 there was an urgent need for some favourable news to counteract the damaging stories in the international press.

Against this background the Tasaday appeared as a godsend. The images of innocent leaf-clad forest dwellers still living a palaeolithic dream probably did help to put a more human face on Marcos’s regime for a while – or at least to distract the world’s attention away from his political prisons. The Tasaday became exhibits required to perform for the camera. Here, Hemley might have broadened his thinking about the exhibiting of ‘primitive’ tribal groups. The largest single exhibit at the St Louis World’s Fair of 1904 was the Philippines pavilion, intended to display the archipelago lately taken beneath the United States’ colonising wing. Some 1200 Filipinos were shipped over to be exhibited as examples not merely of the variety of tribes and traditions scattered over the 7200 islands, but also of the uplifting influence of American tutelage. There were tableaux vivants of natives doing their native thing: carving wood, dancing tribal dances and exposing a good deal of titillating flesh – much like Manda Elizalde’s garden on a grand scale. The Fair’s twenty million visitors may have arrived in a state of complete ignorance, but having watched the antics of the captive Filipinos they presumably went away feeling virtuous that their country had brought belated civilisation to these savages. Filipinos still shudder at the memory of the World’s Fair. You would have thought that the last thing you’d find in any modern Philippines exhibition would be show tribes, but you’d be wrong. At President Ramos’s huge Expo Pilipino of the late 1990s there they all were again: Ifugao, Kalinga and Sama Dilaut people listlessly whittling and weaving and dancing on the airbase the USAF had abandoned after the eruption of Mount Pinatubo.

In the early 1970s the Tasaday had to stand both for the enlightened, magnanimous face of Marcos’s totalitarianism and for a mystical simplicity from which an overcivilised and careworn world could learn. By 1988 they had been reduced to posing in a papier-mâché cave at a cultural festival. The Bureau of Tourism would have been hard-pressed to explain what this exhibit was supposed to signify; the Christian Science Monitor called it exploitation. Was it intended to validate the group’s authenticity, a simulacrum of something too precious to be realised with complete faithfulness? In 1997, the year Manda died of cancer, I had a marathon dinner à deux with Imelda Marcos at which she went out of her way to insist on the Tasaday’s authenticity and the purity of their indifference to materialism. This claim had already broken down badly; various members of the group had long been complaining bitterly about the salt, beads, cloth and torches that Manda had promised them and that never arrived. As for the blissful assertions of Tasaday pacifism, those went quiet within months of their discovery when they were seen scrambling for bows and arrows on spotting an intruder.

Hemley is properly conscientious about placing the Tasaday in their political and geographical context, a vital element in any ‘lost tribe’ story: Eden is always as much about real estate as it is about innocence. An ironic picture emerges of the gentle Tasaday living a forest idyll amid the violent civil war raging all around them in Mindanao; of the voracious people and factions with a stake in their story; of rumours that Manda was ‘really’ using the Tasaday as a cover for a marijuana plantation or as a way of soliciting foreign funds for PANAMIN. Still, Hemley could certainly have justified a digression to recognise that the ‘lost tribe’ is a significant trope in itself, one that has exerted ever greater fascination as the number of locations that might harbour genuinely ‘unknown’ peoples has shrunk. (One tribe to surface recently was in 1998 on the border between Brazil and Peru.) In this sense ‘lost’ has only ever meant ‘hitherto unknown to missionaries, anthropologists and film crews’. Such groups have always been in some sort of contact with other indigenous locals: all peoples have histories and interrelationships, and all – however faintly and indirectly – have been in some way affected by European expansion. Hemley gives a perfunctory overview of anthropology’s recent preoccupations, but seems resistant to the fact that what currently concerns anthropology is precisely this interrelatedness. The sentimental figure of the ecologically noble savage, to which Hemley admits being attracted, has long ceased to interest.

The exact degree of the Tasaday’s ‘lostness’ was always a confounding issue. As early as 1971, experienced anthropologists such as Robert Fox and Zeus Salazar had observed that since the group’s nearest neighbours were barely two and a half miles away it was only reasonable to suppose they must have been having regular outside contact. Others seemed to have a vested interest in proving the Tasaday’s existence to be hermetic. Behind this desire lurked yearnings for what we ourselves have supposedly lost in becoming more developed. If it were not for the lingering mythology of the Fall, it seems doubtful that we would hold lost innocence – or the Edenic primitives of ‘lost’ tribes – in such high regard. When Hemley himself admits to being susceptible to this idealised fiction, he passes up an opportunity to be clear about the political implications for the peoples concerned. He could have taken for granted a certain consanguinity in the area and moved on to point out that the Tasaday are not only ineluctably involved with the local social and political scene, but also with international questions of justice which make it impermissible for ‘lost’ tribes to remain either idealised or artificially sequestered.

This is the moment for a mea culpa. In the mid-1990s I was spending much of my time in the Philippines researching America’s Boy, a book about the Marcos era. Grudgingly, I concluded that I dared not omit the Tasaday because they afforded one of the few stories that everyone knew about the Marcos regime (along with Imelda’s damned shoes). My own view of them was sketchy and conventional, and, realising that the subject probably merited at least a year’s research all to itself I lazily fell back on canvassing the views of people more knowledgeable than I. They included some journalists I trusted, a Mindanao expert or two and faculty members of the Department of Anthropology at UP, where in particular I consulted Arnold Azurin. An overwhelming consensus confirmed what I had already heard: the Tasaday were a scam. Azurin alone had written extensive rebuttals of each claim for their genuineness. That seemed good enough for me, and I wrote accordingly, saying that believers such as John Nance had been left looking particularly silly. When my book was published I received a generous, dignified letter of protest from Nance, correctly pointing out that I had never visited the Tasaday, knew nothing about them other than hearsay, and that my conclusion was quite simply wrong. I replied, saying I would be happy to recant the moment some really good evidence of their genuineness was produced.

Invented Eden now gives me the opportunity to apologise to John Nance and to admit that although faint doubts will always remain, my indolent, secondhand opinion on the Tasaday was almost certainly wrong. For, after laying out his (sometimes exhaustingly) detailed research, including intrepid treks through guerrilla territory to visit the Tasaday, Hemley concludes there was no real hoax. From the outset the Tasaday’s true identity had been obscured by private motives, wishful thinking and journalistic labels such as the ‘stone age’ epithet unfortunately used by Nance himself. They are not a stone-age tribe, but a remnant of a much larger group which at some point during the past centuries (not millennia) fled deeper into the forest to escape a measles epidemic that is still part of their folklore. In this way they became isolated long enough for their language to have acquired mutations and for them to have forgotten their farming habits and reverted to hunter-gathering. When they hit the headlines in 1971, the Tasaday were what Lévi-Strauss calls ‘pseudo-archaics’: true marginals, even slightly feral.

Such are the people whom Nance befriended and whom he has loyally visited and supported ever since. He might not agree with every detail of Hemley’s conclusion, but at last he will surely feel vindicated as well as touched by Hemley’s tribute to him. In his letter to me Nance proposed that the hoax was itself a hoax: that powerful timber and mining interests wanted to get their hands on the 45,000 acres Marcos had awarded the Tasaday, and that declaring them a fake tribe was the surest way to get their reservation annulled and the land back up for grabs. This is all too likely. Hemley’s conclusion squares with my own experience in the Philippine province where I have lived on and off this last quarter-century. There, the original rainforest has long gone, felled by the Spanish to use in their galleon shipyards. But on the steep hills of the interior, amid secondary forest badly scarred by swidden (slash and burn) farming, indigent people scratch a living little better than that of the Tasaday. On a trip last year to see the results of a feeding programme, I encountered a group of 12 children between the ages of two and seven playing naked in some river shallows under the supervision of two nine-year-old girls. They had been left for the day without food, as they were most days, while their parents and older siblings were up in the woods and hills digging for wild yams. The Philippines is full of forgotten citizens, marginalised by isolation and poverty, landlessness and illiteracy, by loggers and prospectors, armed thugs and corrupt local officialdom. In this context, Hemley’s conclusion about the Tasaday’s true status is eminently persuasive. They are not exemplars of unspoiled innocence but victims of circumstance: baffled by duplicity, still poor though mostly clad in rags rather than leaves, and now in possession of tobacco and alcohol.

Victims of circumstance, yes, but Hemley makes the point early on that ‘the story of the Tasaday is as much about us (the industrialised world), who we perceive ourselves to be, as it is about a band of 27 or so souls in the Philippines who became stand-ins for the world’s hopes, dreams and fears.’ The same could be said of all ‘lost’ tribes. Right from the beginning everybody wanted something from these people who owned nothing. Manda wanted limelight; the Marcoses wanted virtue; anthropologists wanted a career exclusive; media folk wanted dewy pictures and stories of prelapsarian free love; depressed townies wanted a frisson of primitive transcendence; missionaries wanted them for Jesus; and a rabble of loggers, prospectors, Islamic and Christian guerrillas wanted their land. They were promised beads, salt and torches; they learned to act themselves with charming smiles. And they were asked countless questions. When professional linguists began learning to speak their language it was an intrusion too far. The Tasaday retreated still further and, like the Mitford sisters, used a private language among themselves. This was nafnaf, in which every word seemed to end in an –uff sound. Nobody outside the group ever understood nafnaf.

Language was always a problem with the Tasaday. They never could comprehend the incessant barrage of questions, neither its meaning nor purpose. They were not great talkers, there in their patch of jungle loud with silence and insect noises. There was little to discuss among themselves but their monumental lack; but they must not have been conscious of this until Manda’s helicopter descended and their lives were suddenly overwhelmed by devouring 20th-century voices. Joseph Roth got this right in his essay ‘Passengers with Heavy Loads’, watching refugees arrive in Berlin from remote rural areas after the First World War: ‘And what do the forest people talk about? They speak in half sentences and stunted sounds. They keep silent not from wisdom but from poverty.’

Send Letters To:

The Editor
London Review of Books,
28 Little Russell Street
London, WC1A 2HN

letters@lrb.co.uk

Please include name, address, and a telephone number.

Letters

Vol. 25 No. 13 · 10 July 2003

Pace James Hamilton-Paterson (LRB, 19 June), I doubt Joseph Roth did get it right when he said that people from the remote German forests typically spoke in ‘half sentences and stunted sounds’ because of their poverty. They were refugees in Berlin around 1920 and were probably laconic because they were stunned by gruelling ordeals and their arrival in a wholly unknown place. When I stayed at the Relax Inn in Winnipeg in the summer of 1988, the hotel rooms and nearby streets were full of speechless Native Americans. The worst forest fires on record had driven them from their home grounds and they had been given temporary accommodation in the city centre. At breakfast they often ate nothing; one evening I saw a man in his seventies staring numbly at an untouched knickerbocker glory. Ten days later the fires had burned out and I shared a railway buffet car with dozens of Cree and Swampy Cree travelling north from Thomson to Hudson Bay. Relieved to be going home, they chattered almost continuously. To assume the inarticulacy of a people is almost always wrong.

David Craig
Burton-in-Kendal

send letters to

The Editor
London Review of Books
28 Little Russell Street
London, WC1A 2HN

letters@lrb.co.uk

Please include name, address and a telephone number

Read anywhere with the London Review of Books app, available now from the App Store for Apple devices, Google Play for Android devices and Amazon for your Kindle Fire.

Sign up to our newsletter

For highlights from the latest issue, our archive and the blog, as well as news, events and exclusive promotions.