I've watched the half-hour preview of the PBS series We Shall Remain that will debut this month. Here's a brief look at the five episodes:
After the Mayflower, Tecumseh's Vision, and Trail of Tears are a mix of dramatizations and the usual talking heads and archival materials. Chris Eyre directed the three episodes.
Based on the preview, the dramatizations appear to give a genuine Native's-eye view of events. They may be comparable to Terence Malick's take on the Pocahontas story in The New World. I'm guessing they'll set the standard for these stories for years to come.
Geronimo looks like a mix of talking heads, archival photographs, and animation (!), with little or no dramatization. It may be controversial because it presents some Apache criticism of Geronimo's lawless activities.
Wounded Knee looks like a mix of talking heads and archival film. I didn't sense any criticism of AIM or the Wounded Knee occupation. It looks as though Dennis Banks, Russell Means, John Trudell et al. are spinning this incident as a grand gesture of Native power and independence.
The producers apparently are white people who seem sincere in their wish to present Native history from a Native viewpoint. Whether they succeed or not remains to be seen, but my initial impression is a good one.
2 comments:
...spinning this incident as a grand gesture of Native power and independence.
I would argue that incidents like Wounded Knee, the Alcatraz occupation, the Mount Rushmore occupation, and the BIA office takeover were grand gestures of Native power and independence. That is certainly not meant to imply that the actions of AIM, UNA or IOAT were beyond reproach in any way. Many mistakes and missteps were made by many people, both leaders and followers. That however, does not change the fact that these events are now symbols of Native power and independence. If one cares to look deeper into any historical incident or figure, it always becomes quickly apparent that real life events are more complex than the historical symbols they become, and real life human beings are more fallible than the leaders into which they morph in a community's retrospective consciousness.
As such, I think its unfair of you to imply that Wounded Knee could only be a symbol of Native power and independence by way of the deceitful tactics of a spin doctoring.
By all means, say what you will about the reality of any of the aforementioned events in the 60s and 70s. I will personally join you in criticizing the leaders of Native resistance from those years. But I honestly feel that it is unfair of you to dismiss what these events have come to mean in the greater social consciousness.
Wounded Knee saw a group of Indians with hunting rifles standing up against the mechanized armed forces of the United States. The spirit of those Indians is what we value, regardless of the controversial circumstances that brought them there.
I agree with you about the symbolic importance of Wounded Knee. I don't think spinning is necessarily negative. For more on the subject, see Spinning in Wounded Knee.
Post a Comment