This music score was submitted for the Kaleidoscope 2020 Call for Scores, an open access collaboration with the UCLA Music Library.

By 1930, Navajo studies were ready to enter a new era. The first generation of scholars, beginning in 1880 with Washington Matthews, had laid the foundation to the Navajo world. That generation had conducted field work, recorded myths and vocabulary and published some of its findings. Building on that foundation, the second generation, which included four university scholars (Sapir, Reichard, Kluckhohn and Wyman), a trader’s wife (New-comb), a philanthropist (Wheelwright), a novelist-anthropologist (La Farge), and finally, a priest (Haile), discovered the edifice of Navajo culture as we know it today. Much of the work of these scholars has not been placed in perspective, and awaits the assessment of historians. Although these Navajo students communicated with each other, they did so with an uncommon myopic vision, not only in their views of their colleagues, but also in their appreciation of their own place in the history of things. The time has come to assess their significance and the contributions they have made to Navajo scholarship. The most remarkable of these discoverers was Father Berard Haile, whose long career actually spanned the first and second generations, and whose contact with the Navajo world grew so intimate and profound that he became for all the others a great fount of knowledge and wisdom. We need to know the extent of his writings, the fields in which he specialized, the limitations of his scholarship, his academic alliances, his academic controversies, the degree of acceptance of his publications-in short, the significance of Father Berard to Navajo scholarly studies.

The emergence of nongovernmental actors within global politics challenges several of our assumptions about what constitutes a legitimate political actor beyond the nation -state. For many, nongovernmental actors are only a signal of some larger political issue. To some, the new political actors serve as evidence for the status of sovereignty. They either signal a shift to a post-sovereign politics or are trivialized in an effort to reaffirm state sovereignty. To others, nongovernmental actors are seen as laying the groundwork for the coming cosmopolitan global community. Few have considered the practices of nongovernmental actors on their own terms. The emergence of nongovernmental actors within global politics challenges several of our assumptions about what constitutes a legitimate political actor beyond the nation -state. For many, nongovernmental actors are only a signal of some larger political issue. To some, the new political actors serve as evidence for the status of sovereignty. They either signal a shift to a post-sovereign politics or are trivialized in an effort to reaffirm state sovereignty. To others, nongovernmental actors are seen as laying the groundwork for the coming cosmopolitan global community. Few have considered the practices of nongovernmental actors on their own terms. In Part Two, through an examination of Hobbes and Rousseau, I argue that the central difficulty limiting the concept of representation is the focus on mediation, which prevents the consideration of alternative claims to represent. Then, in Part Three, I introduce a rethinking of representation that is anchored in responding to the other, rather than in the total mediation suggested by acting for the other. The incorporation of intersubjectivity leads to an understanding of relational representation. This responsive form of representation, I argue, is the type of representation evident in the practices of nongovernmental actors. They are representative in the sense that they work within a relationship that works to continually re- present the represented as persons increasingly capable of using their agency. This situation generates a standard of accountability that can then be used when assessing the legitimacy of a nongovernmental actor's claim to represent other persons or communities. By connecting the practices of nongovernmental actors to the capacity to engage in relational representation, it is evident that nongovernmental actors practice a new politics. Understanding their practice-based representation is valuable for both lending clarity to our contemporary political experiences and for serving as the catalyst to rethink the concept of representation for new political times