Document Type


Publication Date


Publication Source

AURCO Journal



Inclusive pages



Association of University Regional Campuses of Ohio

Place of Publication

Kent State University

Peer Reviewed



Essay covers how teachers can build on O’Brien’s Things to explain Alexie’s strategy in Lone Ranger and Tonto. Sherman Alexie asserts that even though he altered many of the details, names, and events in his various stories, they are still true. In fact, they are “truer” because “they’re in a book” (LRT xx) Despite the insistence on the truth of the stories, Alexie admits that the stories “are the vision of one individual looking at the lives of his family and his entire tribe, so these stories are necessarily biased, incomplete, exaggerated, deluded, and often just plain wrong. But in trying to make them true and real, I am writing what might be called reservation realism.” He continue, asking “What is the definition of reservation realism? Well, I’ll let you read the book and figure that out for yourself” (TLR xxi). Alexie’s statement presents a contradictory definition that is reminiscent of Tim O’Brien’s similarly contradictory attempt to define how to tell a true war story in the Things They Carried. O’Brien’s definition similarly asserts that “a thing may happen and be a total lie, another thing may not happen and be truer than the truth” (TTC 89). The difference, the narrator notes later, lies in the fact that “storytruth is sometimes truer than happening truth” (TTC 203). I contend that O’Brien’s “story-truth” helped Alexie define his concept of “reservation realism,” a realism built of his autobiographical experience but expanded and revised into a “higher” realism.


Sherman Alexie, Tonto and Lone Ranger;Tim O'Brien, Things They Carried; trauma; American Fiction, Twentieth Century; short story sequence


English Language and Literature



Link to Original Published Item