"I'm going to draw little daisies on the dress and call her 'Likes to Shop a lot Girl'," she said to me.
"How about you teach your students about genocide and forced assimilation, instead of shopping" I replied.
"Relax, it's just a doll."
As a child, I thought for sure I had come from a long line of blood thirsty, vengeful people who didn't know enough to recognize the U.S. government had only their best interests in mind and as a result the government had no choice but to use force, deadly force. Today I know that these feelings, this subconscious learning, are wrong, but I also know that millions of other students and adults, native and non-native alike, don't know that, and may never know that.
4 comments:
Writerfella here --
This is a refreshing change from the ordinary de rigeur of this website, recognizing that stereotypes and wrong-headed ideas are transmitted mostly by culture and not merely by symbols and icons alone. Teacher indeed do communicate their own cliches and cultural misconceptions in exactly the same manner that such misinformation was communicated to them. In fact, writers in the film and TV industry do much the same thing, using existing past films and TV episodes as their resource material. How to break such chains is not an easy matter to consider, except that one certainly should try, given the chance.
In late 2002, Steven Spielberg held the 25th anniversary celebration of CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE THIRD KIND in the same airplane hanger where the last third was filmed on Brookley AFB near Mobile, AL. I was visiting a cousin in Mobile who was a photojournalist for WPMI-TV and he took me along when he went to cover the party at the air base. And I actually got to meet Steven Spielberg at the press hospitality tables during the showing's intermission.
I shook his hand and he said, "You're Indian," the both of us a little tipsy. And I said, "Yes, Kiowa from Oklahoma. I wrote a lot of TV in the 70s and 80s."
"Well, we've got a historical miniseries about Indians on the boards for shooting in 2004 and early 2005. What do you think of that?"
And I said, "Do it like you did SCHINDLER'S LIST, and it can't miss. Now, the Native Americans should talk in their own languages. Or if they speak English, remember they talk like anybody else and not like it's some Shakespeare play. No 'many moons' or 'happy hunting grounds,' and they don't say 'squaw', 'papoose', or 'wampum', which are Eastern tribal words." He laughed, then had to answer a cell phone call. My cousin and I saw the rest of the movie, had a few more drinks, then headed back to Mobile before the bars closed.
In 2005, along comes INTO THE WEST and it stayed fairly clear of cliches and stereotypes and used all the right words. Then, near the end was a character who was a writer and I just had to laugh and laugh. Strange things happen to me and I hope they don't ever stop.
All Best
Russ Bates
'writerfella'
I'm not sure how you distinguish between the stereotypical symbols and images and the people and institutions that purvey them. They're all part of the same problem, as far as I'm concerned. A mascot doesn't exist as an abstract symbol in isolation, for instance. It's embedded in the subculture of a school and reflects that subculture's thinking toward Indians.
In my Stereotype of the Month contest, I report on stereotypes no matter who or where they come from. The originator can be the media, a corporation, a politician or pundit, or an educator. It can even be an Indian. The source makes no difference to me and I cover every source equally.
By the way, I reviewed Into the West when it came out in 2005. It avoided the most blatant stereotypes of the kind you listed, but it had many subtler problems. In terms of stereotyping, I'd say it was worse than average. Productions such as Dreamkeeper and the Hillerman movies did a much better job of avoiding stereotypes.
Writerfella here --
And what stereotypes did you detect that were its 'subtler problems'? Yes, I know it was not quite 'Gone With The West Wind', but then what is? The reviews you quoted (with attributions, thankee kindly) showed me that it got mixed reviews and, by writerfella's Three-Quarter Dozen Writing Principles, mixed reviews means you're doing something right because it doesn't mean the same things to each and every viewer.
DREAMKEEPER was one of those Robert Halmi miniseries based on classical and not-so-classical mythologies. Hallmark did its usual good job of production but NBC decided not to air it during a sweeps period as had been promised. Instead, it was aired a few days short of Xmas when most of the television audience is travelling or shopping or visiting and certainly is not at home to watch TV. It virtually went unseen. Good job or no, it played mostly into the ether.
And while I like the Hillerman film adaptations, the novels themselves have a taint that escaped the audience for the books, one that I mentioned in a long-ago article. In one early book, Jim Chee constructs a sand painting out of doors near his trailer. Navajo and Hopi people read the advance text and told him that it just isn't done. Such paintings always are made indoors, out of the sun. Hillerman thanked them and the book then was published exactly as he had written it. A later book also was still in galleys when Hillerman hosted one of his monthly poker and drinking parties for his rancher friends and old newspaper buddies. One of them went into the office and read the first few pages of the new book. Hillerman asked him how he liked it, and the man replied, 'Well, Tony, there's quite a few cuss words in that first chapter. I hate to think that librarians in Iowa and Massachusetts are going to pass up that book because of those words.' And Hillerman spent the entire morning rewriting that first chapter until his friend was satisfied with the text.
What does it say about an author who won't change a word of his work for the people about whom he is writing, but that he would rewrite an entire chapter of his work for an old drinking buddy?
All Best
Russ Bates
'writerfella'
See my comments on Into the West at the end of the page in question.
I'd definitely respond if a Native found cultural mistakes of that type ("sand paintings must be indoors") in my work. My problem is getting people to give me that kind of criticism, not ignoring it.
Post a Comment