(CHADRON STATE COLLEGE

Tracking a Lost Family with Marxism

Kelsey Empfield


Professor Thomas Tucker
Literary Criticism
04 December 2013












Empfield 1


Abstract

The causes of a destructed family are explored in this critical essay on Louise Erdrichs novel,
Tracks. Through a Marxist criticism, the essay investigates the cultures shift to a capitalistic
socioeconomic society and its effect on the Anishinabe tribes core values, particularly their
reverence for land.
Empfield 2

Kelsey Empfield
Professor Thomas Tucker
Literary Criticism
28 November 2013
Tracking a Lost Family with Marxism
The dynamic between the elite social class and the oppressed class is blatantly exposed in
Louise Erdrichs Tracks. Erdrich exposes the of exploitation the Anishinabe tribe experiences in
the early twentieth century due to the shift from a traditional Anishinabe culture to a capitalistic,
money-driven society. One of the central characters of the fictional story, Fleur, survives an
enormous weakening and depletion of her tribe, the Anishinabe. Fleur is one of the few surviving
members of her Pillager clan and the novel follows the issues she confronts due to society
shifting away from traditional Anishinabe values. At the core of the story, Fleur copes with the
loss of her family when the United States government partners with a logging company and takes
claim to Fleurs sacred land. The novel addresses issues that the governments allotment acts
caused by bringing the readers attention to the clash between the capitalistic interests and the
traditional Anishinabe core values. As one of the few remaining traditional Anishinabe, Fleur
fights opposing capitalistic interests by making herself a family on the Anishinabe land with her
daughter Lulu and Eli Kashpaw despite capitalistic threats to take her land. Yet, regardless of
Fleurs defiance and resilience, even she cannot stop the inevitably strong force of the capitalists.
In the end, the shift towards a capitalist socioeconomic society proves too vast for Fleur to fight
alone and the logging company destroys her Pillager land. When the logging company destroys
her land, Fleurs ideal family deteriorates before the readers eyes. Societys shift from the
Anishinabe traditional culture to a capitalistic socioeconomic culture causes Fleur to lose her
Empfield 3

family as her tribe dies, as she loses claim to her land, and as her family itself falls prey to
capitalistic interests.
The deterioration of Fleurs family is at the heart of the novel. The deterioration can be
traced to the clash between social classes in the new capitalistic culture. She loses her family
when her tribe dies off. Fleur is the last of the Pillager clan. She is saddened that her tribe has
died from European diseases but she is devastated when the remainder of her tribe falls prey to
capitalistic interests. Because the mixed-bloods of the tribal government view the capitalistic
society as an opportunity for selfish gain, the tribe as a whole rapidly declines. The second way
in which Fleur loses her family happens as she loses her land. The Anishinabe value ones sense
of home and Fleur viewed her land as an extension of herself and of her family. Because her
tribe no longer lives, the land is all that she has left of her people. Throughout the novel, the
upper class works to remove the land from Fleurs possession and, in the end, they are
successful. Fleur loses her third sense of family as she is forced to create a makeshift bourgeoise
family unit. Facing a hard winter, three clans of Anishinabe cannot survive independently so they
must conform to bourgeoise ideology in order to remain independent of the capitalistic interests.
In all three instances, the rise of the capitalistic socioeconomic culture causes the downfall of
Fleurs family.
Fleurs first sense of losing her family occurs as her Anishinabe tribe deteriorates. In the
opening scenes of the book, the traditional Anishinabe narrator, Nanapush, details the context of
the novel as he tells of the numerous deaths within the Anishinabe tribe: We started dying
before the snow, and like the snow, we continued to fall. It was surprising there were so many of
us left to die (Erdrich 1). Deaths plagued the Anishinabe and the harsh winter months worked to
further deteriorate the tribe. The irrepressible diseases brought by Europeans, causing sickness,
Empfield 4

death, and starvation among the tribe, are the central causes of the tribes fragmentation. By
spring, Fleur and Nanapush found themselves among very few surviving Anishinabe. Once Fleur
and Nanapush realized the magnitude of the situation, they mourned the immeasurable losses of
their tribe: Their names grew within us, swelled to the brink of our lips, forced our eyes open in
the middle of the night (Erdrich 6). Both Fleur and Nanapush suddenly found themselves
displaced and without their once strong sense of family.
Although the deaths were largely attributed to diseases brought by Europeans, disease
and starvation only initiated the fragmentation of the tribe. Once the Anishinabe were whittled
from a strong tribe to slim numbers and diseased members, the capitalistic forces could easily
penetrate the tribe for their own gain. The widespread diseases allowed the capitalists to swindle
the few remaining natives by trading food for sacred Anishinabe land. Unfortunately, the
capitalistic force worked to completely wipeout the Anishinabe and the Indian people were
coerced into giving up their land because they would die if they did not trade for food (Larson
4). Because the land was all they had to trade, the capitalistic interests pervaded and succeeded.
In order to survive, some members of the already wounded tribe surrendered to the capitalistic
force and sold their land for one hundred poundweight of flour (Erdrich 8). While the land
once provided their food, the European destruction eliminated their once plentiful land. The
economic conditions the natives experienced caused the government to impose their vision for a
capitalist socioeconomic society, thus causing the band of united Anishinabe to deteriorate as a
whole. The once sacred land that held the tribe together was diminished to an object for trade.
The shift to a capitalistic socioeconomic culture further fragmented the Anishinabe by
creating a conflicting tribal government. Once the Anishinabe began trading their land for food,
the tribal government began to breakdown. The mixed-bloods in the tribal government did not
Empfield 5

revere land in the same way the traditional Anishinabe did. Because of this, the mixed-bloods
viewed their land as an object to trade for food. On the other hand, the traditional Anishinabe
wanted to keep their sacred land. The capitalistic interests knew of the tribal conflict and used it
to further their cause. For example, the traditional members were consistently opposed to giving
up tribal land[and] European administrators often turned to the mixed-blood population as a
means of gaining enough support to obtain concessions (Larson 3). The elitists could easily
influence the mixed-blood tribal members and the mixed interests of the Anishinabe government
provided enough conflict among itself to work in favor of the ruling class. The tribal government
vehemently disagreed with each other so that community cooperation - - once a cornerstone of
Anishinaabe life - - has disintegrated (Jepson 27). Without a cohesive tribal government
working together to oppose the capitalistic influence, the logging company could easily penetrate
the fragmented tribe. Although the deterioration of the tribe deeply affects the remaining
Anishinabe, Nanapush notes that a few people like Fleur were desperate to hold onand buy
back our land, or at least pay a tax and refuse the lumbering money that would sweep the marks
of our boundaries off the map (Erdrich 8). Fleur is one of the few tribe members to not treat her
ancestors land as an object to trade.
Fleurs motivation stems from her passion to carry on the traditions of the Anishinabe,
particularly the reverence for their sacred land. Fleur spends the duration of the novel fighting for
her land and working to counter the initial displacement she experienced as her first family died
before her own eyes, leaving her among the few who work to fight the ever-growing ruling class.
From the beginning of the novel, the oppressive ruling class works to completely destroy the
traditional Anishinabe culture and move towards a capitalist socioeconomic society in order to
Empfield 6

create a capitalistic-driven society. As a result of the oppression, Fleurs initial sense of family,
the Anishinabe tribe, is destroyed.
The second way in which Fleur loses her family relates to the loss of her land. Fleurs
sense of family extends to her body as well as to the land. For instance, that Fleur is deeply
connected to the land is indisputable (Jepson 31). Fleur is the epitome of nature and, to the
Anishinabe, home is every persons physical dwelling, the body. More importantly, the
Anishinabe view home as a physical place and a network of belonging and history (27). In
many ways, Nanapush and Fleur define home as the physical body and as the surrounding
landscape. Thus, Fleur views her Pillager land as a piece of her family. Fleur belongs to the
Anishinabe tribe as she also belongs to her land. Because she is one of the only surviving
Pillagers, the land is all that remains of her family. As Nanapush speaks to his granddaughter,
Lulu, he shares the traditional Anishinabe view of their sacred land: Land is the only thing that
lasts life to life. Money burns like tinder, flows off like water (Erdrich 33). Nanapushs words
hold true to the traditional Anishinabe culture; land is of greater significance than money or food.
To the traditional tribe members, land is sacred and should not be treated as an object to simply
barter for food like so many tribe members already had done. In many ways, the tribal
governments immense conflict reflects the clash of two cultures: the traditional Anishinabe
culture and the capitalistic culture. However, Fleur and Nanapush view their land as a living
piece of their history. To them, land is the piece that connects the generations. Because of this
important connection, Nanapush takes the time to pass down the unique tribal view of money
and land to Lulu.
The loss of land is at the core of the novel because it reflects two opposing classes, the
ruling class and the lower class. In fact, the control of land...[is] at the crux of Tracks (Jepson
Empfield 7

30). Tracks exposes the infringing control of the capitalists to pressure the surviving Anishinabe
to conform to their ideology. The class that controls the land controls so much more. For
example, Karl Marx based his theory of Marxism around the premise that the whole of society
must fall apart into the two classes the property-owners and the propertyless workers (Marx,
Economic and Philosophic 652). The class that controls the land controls the culture. Because
Fleur had the right to the Anishinabe land, she struggles with the strong opposing forces that
want to gain the control she possesses through her land. Because Fleur controls the land, she also
controls the culture. If the elitists control the land, the capitalists control the society.
The entire novel illustrates the clash between inherited wealth and capitalism with the
battle for the land. Similarly, Fleurs wealth and the capitalistic wealth are like comparing a
feudal system of power based on inherited wealth and status to a capitalist system based on the
ownership of private property. This shift entails innumerable changes in a societys laws,
customs, and religions (Bressler 168). The entity that inherits or owns the property controls
numerous facets of society such as the laws, customs, and religions. Because Fleurs land was
passed down to her just as her Anishinabe culture was also passed to her, the shift from the
traditional Anishinabe culture vastly differs from the infringing shift to a capitalist
socioeconomic culture Fleur confronts in the novel. In order to gain control of the land, the
government implemented a land allotment system: [A]lthough the Anishinabe have been given
individual parcels of land by allotment, those parcels are still being taken away for failure to pay
taxes (Larson 8). Through the land allotment, the elite class gains the rights of the land. Because
money is at the heart of the capitalistic society, the allotment system allows the elitists to give
gifts of land to the Anishinabe with a price tag attached. In order to generate more funds, the
government swindles the natives and turns their sacred land into an income.
Empfield 8

Fleur fights the ever-growing capitalistic forces until the conclusion of the novel. Fleur
fights to maintain her familys land while the opposition continues to grow stronger. Because the
Anishinabe tribal government possesses two visions of how land should be used (Jepson 30),
the forces against traditional people like Fleur and Nanapush prove too strong by the end of the
novel. The mixed-bloods buy into the bourgeoisies ideology, thus weakening the Anishinabe
opposition to the ruling class. The dynamic between the two ideologies grow throughout the
novel and as white financial interests encroach upon their land, the Anishinaabe families fight
about whether the land should be sold or kept (27). While the tribe battles each other they do
not realize the greater capitalistic force gaining momentum. At the end of the novel, Nanapush
reflects on the moment that Fleur loses the fight and her land is overrun by loggers:
With one thunderstroke the trees surrounding Fleurs cabin cracked off and fell
away from us in a circle, pinning beneath their branches the roaring men, the
horses. The limbs snapped steel saws and rammed through wagon boxes. Twigs
formed webs of wood, canopies laced over groans and struggles. Then the wind
settled, curled back into the clouds, moved on, and we were left standing
together (Erdrich 223)
In this scene, nature and industrialism intertwine while Fleur loses herself and her sense of
belonging as her land crashes in around her. Moreover, Fleur loses the only piece of her family
she had left, her land.
Fleur loses her third and final sense of family as she is forced to create a typical
bourgeoisie family unit with three clans of Anishinabe people. In order to survive free of the
capitalistic society, Fleur must buy into the capitalistic culture in order to survive the harsh
winter. Yet, even her newly created bourgeoisie family unit collapses underneath the pressure of
Empfield 9

the newly-founded capitalistic socioeconomic culture. Fleur begins to develop her new family
unit with Eli. Although Eli and Fleur never marry, they become partners and create a family for
themselves on Fleurs Pillager land. Although Lulus biological father is unknown, Eli takes her
in as his own child and works with Fleur to raise her, binding Fleurs Pillager clan with Elis
Kashpaw clan. When economic times become harder, Nanapush joins them, adding the
Nanapush clan into the mix. The family unit is completed when Elis mother, Margaret, and his
brother, Nector, come to live with Fleur on her Pillager land, adding more Kashpaws to the
family. Thus, a new family unit is created among the clans of the Pillagers, Nanapush, and
Kashpaws. The three diminished clans rely on each other to survive the harsh winter; however,
the opposing elitist force becomes irrepressible when the government demands taxes for the land.
Inevitably, the family must face the capitalistic reality when Father Damien arrives with
ungraspable numbers and figures:
Then he pulled out the annual fee lists and foreclosure notices sent by the Agent
and showed us how most families, at the end of this long winter, were behind in
what they owed, how some had lost their allotments. We traced the list until we
found the names we sought Pillager, Kashpaw, Nanapush. All were there,
figures and numbers, and all impossible. We stared without feeling at the amounts
due before summer. (Erdrich 172-173)
Fleur and her new family had no means to pay the taxes for the land. Fleur knew that she must
conform to the capitalists in order to keep what was hers. Because of this, the entire family
worked to scrape enough funds together to stay on Fleurs Pillager land. Miraculously, there
was enough [money] (Erdrich 191) to pay for both the Pillager land and the Kashpaw land. Elis
brother and mother, Nector and Margaret Kashpaw, delivered the money to the government
Empfield 10

agent, bringing a temporary period of peace to the makeshift family. For that moment, Fleur
avoided conforming to the new capitalistic society.
Yet, it was only a matter of time before Fleur could no longer avoid the shifting society.
A short time after the money was delivered, Fleur and Nanapush noticed the logging company
moving in on Fleurs land. Nanapush went to inquire and the government agent said about
Fleurs land: We had a very good bid on the land, a lumber company. The government is
obliged to take an offer of that sort when the taxes are unpaid (Erdrich 207). Confused,
Nanapush explains that Nector delivered the money to pay the taxes. The agent explains that the
money Nector delivered was paid only on the Kashpaw allotment (207). Hence, the Kashpaws
took the money that the entire family worked to make and deceived everyone in their new family
unit. Fleur is devastated that her family would disregard her: It is not the inability to pay that
defeats Fleur but the betrayal of a member of her family (Jepson 27). In this one moment,
Fleur loses her family in two ways. First, her makeshift family is destroyed with the Kashpaws
trickery. Second, her land is gone.
Fleur is hurt when her new family unit deceives her. However, what family she had left is
completely destroyed when Eli sets out to prove his loyalty to Fleur by conforming to the
capitalistic oppression. Because he truly wants to continue life with his family and stay with
Fleur and Lulu on the Pillager land, he helps in the only way he can. He promises to buy the land
back from the capitalistic forces so he ran straight to the lumber camp. Panicked to keep his
word and repurchase the land, he hired onto a crew for a daily wage (Erdrich 213). Eli thinks he
can help Fleur by conforming and participating in the capitalist socioeconomic society that the
elitists have created. However, Eli does not realize the detrimental ramifications his choice to
join the loggers creates. By conforming to the opposition, Eli joins the propertyless workers
Empfield 11

(Marx, Economic and Philosophic 652) and wholly conforms to their entire ideology: The
working people themselves give their consent to the bourgeoisie and adopt bourgeois values and
beliefs (Bressler 168). The bourgeoisie not only controls the wealth that produces timber from
Fleurs sacred land, it also controls and exploits the working class that Eli has joined.
Although Eli sees his new job as a means to save Fleurs land, he becomes a puppet to
the capitalistic force: This social elite inevitably forces its ideas on the working classes
(Bressler 172-173). Eli joins the society that Fleur has persistently worked to avoid. Eli abandons
traditional Anishinabe values and partakes in the capitalistic societys new creation: Capitalist
accumulation [and] the extraction of laborare not natural facts of life but socially conditioned
practicesthat block the free development of individuals (McLaren 202). By abiding by the
capitalistic status quo, Eli conforms to a system that lacks room for individuals. This ideology
directly contrasts with the traditional Anishinabe values that Fleur fights to keep intact. Eli
becomes submissive to the restraint enforced by the capitalists and Fleur knows that his decision
to conform is detrimental to their relationship. Fleur cannot bow down to the same forces that Eli
so easily conformed to. Because of this, Fleur cannot be with Eli.
Fleurs family comes crashing down around her just as the trees of her land come
crashing down around her cabin. Nanapush reflects on the day that the capitalistic ruling class
won the fight:
Then one day we could hear them clearly. Ringing over the water and to our shore came
the shouts of men, faint thump of steel axes. Their saws were rasping whispers, the turn
of wooden wheels on ungreased axles was shrill as a far-off flock of gulls. (Erdrich 206)
Nature and synthetic creations intertwine as the nature on the Pillager land gives its last breath.
As the trees fall down on Anishinabe land, Fleurs family falls to ruins. Eli joins the opposing
Empfield 12

force and was even appointed to talk [Fleur] into leaving her cabin peacefully (Erdrich 221).
This scene demonstrates Elis complete assimilation into the capitalistic socioeconomic culture.
He provides the labor that provides the use-value which the worker has to offer to the
capitalist (Kordela 45). Because of the value Eli offers the logging company, capitalism thrives
and, as the industrial proletariat, Eli obliterates Fleurs sense of family. Not coincidentally, the
bourgeoisie has torn away from the family its sentimental well, and has reduced the family
relation to a mere money relation (Marx, Communist Manifesto 659). When Eli buys into the
bourgeoisie ideals, he can no longer be a part of Fleurs family. Fleur loses all sense of family as
her land is destroyed by Eli.
Regardless of Fleurs defiance and resilience, in the end, even she cannot stop the
inevitably strong force of the capitalists. The shift towards a capitalist socioeconomic society
proves too vast for Fleur to fight alone and the logging company destroys her land and every
sense of family she had. When the capitalists overrun her land, Fleurs ideal family deteriorates
before the readers eyes. Societys shift from the Anishinabe traditional culture to a capitalistic
socioeconomic culture causes Fleur to lose her family as her tribe dies, as she loses claim to her
land, and as her family itself falls prey to the capitalistic interests. Erdrich exposes the
exploitation the Anishinabe experience in the early twentieth century due to the shift to a
capitalistic, money-driven society. The dynamic between the elite social class and the oppressed
class is blatantly exposed in Louise Erdrichs Tracks.


Empfield 13

Works Cited
Bressler, Charles . Literary Criticism: An Inroduction to Theory and Practice. 5th ed. London:
Pearson Education, Inc. , 2011. 165-180. Print.
Erdrich, Louise. Tracks. New York: HarperCollins, 1988. Print.
Jepson, Jill. "Dimensions of Homing and Displacement in Louise Erdrich's Tracks." American
Indian Culture and Research Journal 31.2 (2007): 25-40. Rpt. in Contemporary Literary
Criticism. Ed. Jeffrey W. Hunter. Vol. 327. Detroit: Gale, 2012. Literature Resource
Center. Web. 4 Nov. 2013.
Kordela, A. Kiarina. "Marx's update of cultural theory." Cultural Critique 65 (2007): 43+.
Literature Resource Center. Web. 4 Nov. 2013.
Larson, Sidner. "The Fragmentation of a Tribal People in Louise Erdrich's Tracks." American
Indian Culture and Research Journal 17.2 (1993): 1-13. Rpt. in Contemporary Literary
Criticism. Ed. Jeffrey W. Hunter and Timothy J. White. Vol. 120. Detroit: Gale Group,
1999. Literature Resource Center. Web. 4 Nov. 2013.
Marx, Karl. "From Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844." Trans. Array The Norton
Anthology of Theory and Criticism. . 2nd ed. New York: W. W. Norton & Company,
Inc., 2010. 651-655. Print.
Marx, Karl. "From The Communist Manifesto." Trans. Array The Norton Anthology of Theory
and Criticism. . 2nd ed. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc., 2010. 657-660.
Print.
McLaren, Peter. Capitalists & Conquerors A Critical Pedagogy Against Empire. Lanham:
Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2005. eBook.
Empfield 14

Bibliography
Bressler, Charles . Literary Criticism: An Inroduction to Theory and Practice. 5th ed. London:
Pearson Education, Inc. , 2011. 165-180. Print.
Erdrich, Louise. Tracks. New York: HarperCollins, 1988. Print.
Jepson, Jill. "Dimensions of Homing and Displacement in Louise Erdrich's Tracks." American
Indian Culture and Research Journal 31.2 (2007): 25-40. Rpt. in Contemporary Literary
Criticism. Ed. Jeffrey W. Hunter. Vol. 327. Detroit: Gale, 2012. Literature Resource
Center. Web. 4 Nov. 2013.
Kordela, A. Kiarina. "Marx's update of cultural theory." Cultural Critique 65 (2007): 43+.
Literature Resource Center. Web. 4 Nov. 2013.
Larson, Sidner. "The Fragmentation of a Tribal People in Louise Erdrich's Tracks." American
Indian Culture and Research Journal 17.2 (1993): 1-13. Rpt. in Contemporary Literary
Criticism. Ed. Jeffrey W. Hunter and Timothy J. White. Vol. 120. Detroit: Gale Group,
1999. Literature Resource Center. Web. 4 Nov. 2013.
Lynch, Michael J., and Paul B. Stretesky. "Native Americans And Social And Environmental
Justice: Implications For Criminology." Social Justice 38.3 (2011): 104-124. Criminal
Justice Abstracts with Full Text. Web. 4 Nov. 2013.
Marx, Karl. "From Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844." Trans. Array The Norton
Anthology of Theory and Criticism. . 2nd ed. New York: W. W. Norton & Company,
Inc., 2010. 651-655. Print.
Marx, Karl. "From The Communist Manifesto." Trans. Array The Norton Anthology of Theory
and Criticism. . 2nd ed. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc., 2010. 657-660.
Print.
Empfield 15

McLaren, Peter. Capitalists & Conquerors A Critical Pedagogy Against Empire. Lanham:
Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2005. eBook.
Teale, Tamara M. "The Silko Road From Chiapas Or Why Native Americans Cannot Be
Marxists." Melus 23.4 (1998): 157-166. OmniFile Full Text Select (H.W. Wilson). Web. 8
Nov. 2013.
Trudell, Scott. "Critical Essay on 'Fleur'." Short Stories for Students. Ed. Ira Mark Milne. Vol.
22. Detroit: Gale, 2006. Literature Resource Center. Web. 4 Nov. 2013.
Veneziani, Roberto. "Analytical Marxism." Journal Of Economic Surveys 26.4 (2012): 649-673.
Business Source Premier. Web. 4 Nov. 2013.