Introduction
Drew Hayden Taylor’s play alterNatives, first published in 2000, is a comedic exploration of intercultural relationships, cultural appropriation, and Indigenous identity in contemporary Canada. Set during a dinner party hosted by a mixed Indigenous and non-Indigenous couple, the play delves into tensions arising from personal and cultural clashes. As an Ojibway playwright from Curve Lake First Nation, Taylor uses his work to highlight Indigenous experiences, often blending humour with sharp social commentary. This essay focuses on the role of humour and rhetoric in the play, arguing that Taylor employs these elements not only to entertain but also to critique and challenge societal norms around Indigenous culture, stereotypes, and authenticity. By analysing key scenes and character interactions, the essay will demonstrate how humour softens serious critiques, while rhetoric exposes hypocrisies, ultimately encouraging audiences to reflect on broader issues of cultural exchange and respect. This analysis draws primarily on the play itself, supported by scholarly insights into Taylor’s stylistic approach, to provide a sound understanding of how these devices function within the narrative.
The Use of Humour to Subvert Stereotypes and Cultural Appropriation
Humour serves as a central tool in alterNatives for subverting common stereotypes about Indigenous peoples, making complex issues more accessible to a diverse audience. Taylor, known for his comedic style, uses situational irony and wordplay to highlight the absurdities of cultural appropriation. For instance, the play’s title itself is a pun on “alternatives” and “Natives,” signalling from the outset Taylor’s playful yet pointed engagement with identity politics (Taylor, 2000). This humour is evident in the dinner party setting, where non-Indigenous characters like Colleen, a Jewish academic, and her friends enthusiastically adopt what they perceive as Indigenous practices, such as serving moose meat to a vegan Indigenous guest, Angel. The resulting chaos—marked by awkward misunderstandings and exaggerated reactions—exposes the superficiality of such appropriations.
A key example occurs when characters debate the authenticity of Indigenous spirituality. Yvonne, a white character fascinated by Native culture, attempts to engage in what she calls “spiritual” practices, leading to comedic confrontations. Taylor’s humour here is not merely for laughs; it critiques the fetishization of Indigenous traditions by outsiders, a phenomenon often discussed in Indigenous studies as a form of neo-colonialism (Appleford, 2005). By presenting these moments comically, Taylor avoids alienating non-Indigenous audiences, instead inviting them to laugh at the ridiculousness before reflecting on the underlying harm. This approach aligns with a broader understanding of Indigenous humour as a survival mechanism, where laughter diffuses tension while underscoring resilience (King, 2013). However, the humour also has limitations; it risks reinforcing stereotypes if not interpreted critically, though Taylor’s script carefully balances this by giving Indigenous characters like Angel the last word in many exchanges, asserting agency.
Furthermore, the play’s comedic elements challenge societal norms by humanizing Indigenous characters beyond typical portrayals. Angel’s veganism, for example, clashes with stereotypes of Indigenous people as inherently tied to traditional hunting, creating humorous yet insightful dialogues that question essentialist views of culture. Through these instances, Taylor uses humour to address larger issues, such as the pressure on Indigenous individuals to conform to external expectations, thereby promoting a more nuanced view of cultural identity.
Rhetoric in Character Dialogues and Its Role in Exposing Societal Hypocrisies
Rhetoric, particularly through persuasive language and debate, is another key element Taylor employs to challenge societal norms in alterNatives. The characters’ dialogues are laden with rhetorical strategies—such as irony, sarcasm, and hyperbole—that reveal hypocrisies in intercultural interactions. For example, Colleen’s academic rhetoric often positions her as an authority on Indigenous issues, yet her arguments are undercut by her own cultural insensitivities, like insisting on a “traditional” meal that ignores her guests’ preferences. This ironic use of rhetoric highlights how well-intentioned but misguided allyship can perpetuate norms of dominance (Taylor, 2000).
In one pivotal scene, a heated discussion erupts over the ethics of non-Indigenous people adopting Native names or practices. Bobby, an Indigenous character, uses sarcastic rhetoric to counter the white characters’ defenses, pointing out the double standards in cultural exchange. His lines, delivered with biting wit, serve as a rhetorical device to dismantle romanticized views of Indigeneity, forcing the audience to confront uncomfortable truths about authenticity. Scholars note that Taylor’s rhetorical style draws from Indigenous oral traditions, where storytelling and debate are used to educate and persuade (Appleford, 2005). This is particularly effective in addressing larger issues like the commodification of culture, as seen in debates about “playing Indian,” which echo real-world controversies over cultural respect.
Moreover, rhetoric in the play misfires intentionally to show its misuse, such as when characters withhold truths or lie to maintain facades, leading to comedic yet revealing breakdowns. This misuse underscores the play’s theme of flawed communication, challenging norms that prioritize polite avoidance over honest dialogue. By weaving rhetoric into the narrative, Taylor not only engages the audience but also prompts evaluation of how language shapes power dynamics in society. Arguably, this makes the play a rhetorical act itself, using the stage to advocate for genuine cultural understanding.
The Combined Impact of Humour and Rhetoric on Audience Reflection
The interplay between humour and rhetoric in alterNatives amplifies Taylor’s message, addressing larger issues like reconciliation and cultural hybridity while challenging entrenched societal norms. Humour acts as an entry point, making rhetoric more impactful by disarming defenses; together, they create a space for critical reflection. For instance, the escalating absurdities at the dinner party culminate in revelations that blend laugh-out-loud moments with profound insights, leaving audiences pondering the blurred lines between appreciation and appropriation (King, 2013). This combination is especially potent in a Canadian context, where reconciliation efforts often grapple with similar tensions.
Taylor’s approach demonstrates an awareness of humour’s limitations— it can sometimes soften critiques too much—but he counters this by ensuring rhetorical elements provide analytical depth. Indeed, the play’s resolution, where characters confront their biases amid lingering humour, encourages viewers to apply these lessons beyond the theatre. This reflects a sound application of dramatic techniques to real-world problems, showing Taylor’s skill in using art for social change.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Drew Hayden Taylor masterfully integrates humour and rhetoric in alterNatives to critique societal norms surrounding Indigenous identity and cultural appropriation. Through comedic situations and persuasive dialogues, the play addresses serious issues in an engaging way, fostering audience reflection on themes of authenticity and respect. While humour makes these topics palatable, rhetoric ensures a deeper analytical layer, highlighting hypocrisies and promoting empathy. Ultimately, the play leaves audiences with a message of cautious optimism about intercultural relationships, urging a reevaluation of how cultures interact in contemporary society. This analysis underscores the play’s relevance in Canadian literature, contributing to ongoing discussions on Indigenous representation. By challenging norms through these elements, Taylor not only entertains but also educates, demonstrating the power of theatre in fostering social awareness.
References
- Appleford, R. (ed.) (2005) Aboriginal drama in Canada. Playwrights Canada Press.
- King, T. (2013) The inconvenient Indian: A curious account of Native people in North America. University of Minnesota Press.
- Taylor, D.H. (2000) alterNatives. Talonbooks.
(Word count: 1124, including references)
