Winged monkeys = Indians?

Winged MonkeysAccording to some writers, the Winged Monkeys of Oz represent Native Americans in the West in the late 1800s. Baum himself had clear attitudes toward American Indians and some of his earlier writings about Indians are very similar to his descriptions of the Winged Monkeys found in Oz. These selections included on this page are all from Ritter’s 1997 article about Oz.

When they are introduced in the book, the Winged Monkeys appear as a fierce fighting band that destroy the Scarecrow, damage the Tin Woodman, and capture Dorothy and the Cowardly Lion. Later, when the monkeys are no longer under the control of the Witch and are helping Dorothy and her group, the king monkey explains their origin to Dorothy:

“Once,” began the leader, “we were a free people, living happily in the great forest, flying from tree to tree, eating nuts and fruit, and doing just as we pleased without calling anybody master. Perhaps some of us were rather too full of mischief at times, flying down to pull the tails of the animals that had no wings, chasing birds, and throwing nuts at the people who walked in the forest. But we were careless and happy and full of fun, and enjoyed every minute of the day.”Another posting sees the analogies differently:

Indian-Hating in “The Wizard of Oz”

By Thomas St. JohnThe Winged Monkeys are the Irish Baum’s satire on the old Northwest Mounted Police, who were modelled on the Irish Constabulary. The scarlet tunic of the Mounties, and the distinctive “pillbox” forage cap with the narrow visor and strap are seen clearly in the color plate in the 1900 first edition of “The Wonderful Wizard of Oz”. Villagers across the Dakota territory heartily despised these British police, especially after 1877, when Sitting Bull retreated across the border and into their protection after killing Custer.And:The Wicked Witch of the West is illustrated in the 1900 first edition as a pickaninny, with beribboned, braided pigtails extended comically. Baum repeats the word “brown” in describing her. But this symbol’s real historic depth lies in the earlier Puritans’ confounding of European witches with the equally heathen American Indians.

The orphan Dorothy’s violent removal from Kansas civilization, her search for secret and magical cures for her friends, her capture, enslavement to an evil figure–and the killing of this figure that is forced on her–all these themes Baum takes from the already two hundred year old tradition of the Indian captivity narrative which stoked the fires of Indian-hating and its hope of “redemption through violence.”Comment:  For more on the subject, see The Indian-Oz Connection.

L. Frank Baum's mother-in-law

The recent Michelle Williams controversy has rekindled talk of the Indian-Oz connection. In that context, someone mentioned that L. Frank Baum's mother-in-law was a Native rights activist.

Hard to believe, but it's true. Here's the story:

Matilda Joslyn GageMatilda Electa Joslyn Gage (March 24, 1826–March 18, 1898) was a suffragist, a Native American activist, an abolitionist, a freethinker, and a prolific author, who was "born with a hatred of oppression."

Gage became involved in the women's rights movement in 1852 when she decided to speak at the National Women's Rights Convention in Syracuse, New York. She served as president of the National Woman Suffrage Association from 1875 to 1876, and served as either Chair of the Executive Committee or Vice President for over twenty years. During the 1876 convention, she successfully argued against a group of police who claimed the association was holding an illegal assembly. They left without pressing charges.

Gage was considered to be more radical than either Susan B. Anthony or Elizabeth Cady Stanton (with whom she wrote History of Woman Suffrage). Along with Stanton, she was a vocal critic of the Christian Church, which put her at odds with conservative suffragists such as Frances Willard and the Woman's Christian Temperance Union. Rather than arguing that women deserved the vote because their feminine morality would then properly influence legislation (as the WCTU did), she argued that they deserved suffrage as a 'natural right'.

Gage was well-educated and a prolific writer—the most gifted and educated woman of her age, claimed her devoted son-in-law, L. Frank Baum.And:Works about Native Americans in the United States by Lewis Henry Morgan and Henry Rowe Schoolcraft also influenced Gage. She decried the brutal treatment of Native Americans in her writings and public speeches. She was angered that the Federal government of the United States attempted to confer citizenship (including suffrage) upon Native Americans (who, Gage argued, opposed taxation, and generally did not seek citizenship) while still withholding the vote from women. She wrote in 1878:That the Indians have been oppressed--are now, is true, but the United States has treaties with them, recognising them as distinct political communities, and duty towards them demands not an enforced citizenship but a faithful living up to its obligations on the part of the government.

--"Indian Citizenship," page 2In her 1893 work Woman, Church and State she cited the Iroquois society, among others, as a 'Matriarchate' in which women had true power, noting that a system of descent through the female line and female property rights led to a more equal relationship between men and women. Gage spent time among the Iroquois and received the name Karonienhawi--"she who holds the sky"--upon her initiation into the Wolf Clan. She was admitted into the Iroquois Council of Matrons.Matilda Joslyn Gage: forgotten feminist

By Sally Roesch WagnerAs a child during the 1830s, she circulated anti-slavery petitions. Gage's entire life was spent within a thirty mile radius of Syracuse, New York, and her home, like that of her parents, was a station on the underground railroad. As a young wife and mother in 1850, Gage signed a petition stating that she would face the penalty of a six month prison term and a $2,000 fine rather than obey the newly enacted Fugitive Slave law, which made criminals of anyone assisting slaves to freedom anywhere in the United States.

During the 1870s, Gage wrote a series of controversial articles decrying the brutal and unjust treatment American Indians had received. Having already broken numerous treaties, the government was trying to force citizenship upon Native Americans, she argued, thus destroying their independent nation status, and further opening "wide the door to the grasping avarice of the white man." Gage, who was adopted into the wolf clan of the Mohawk nation and given the name Ka-ron-ien-ha-wi (Sky Carrier), wrote of the superior form of government practiced by the Six Nation Iroquois Confederacy, in which "the power between the sexes was nearly equal." This indigenous practice of woman's rights became her vision.

Gage never fragmented her beliefs about changing the world. To her, all freedoms hung together on the same thread and the struggle for them could not be separated. Still, there was one goal that became her life's work and that was the struggle for the complete liberation of women.As for Matilda's daughter Maud, who married Baum:

Maud Gage BaumAberdeen, South Dakota (1888–1900)

Maud's two sisters and brother were in the Dakota Territory. Because Maud wanted to be near them, she insisted over Frank's vacillations that they move there. Maud, Frank, and her two sons moved to Aberdeen, South Dakota, on September 20, 1888, because Frank believed there would be better business opportunities in the West. Frank started a dry goods store, Baum's Bazaar, on October 1, 1888, to make a stable living for his family. However, because he granted too much credit to his destitute customers, his store went out of business.

The family moved to Chicago, and Frank found a job as a newspaper reporter.

Maud's mother Matilda frequently spent the winter at their house, as she did when Maud and Frank were residents of Aberneen. Maud cherished her mother's visits, especially when Frank traveled for his job.Comment:  I posted about the connection between feminists and Indians in Women and Indians as Peacemakers and Indians Inspired Feminism. But I didn't realize Gage was Baum's mother-in-law.

So Baum was devoted to Gage the Native rights activist. She stayed with him and Maud during the Aberdeen winters.

This was when he wrote two virulently anti-Indian editorials for the Aberdeen Saturday Pioneer. I wonder what they said to each other the day after the editorials appeared.

For more on Baum and Indians, see Indians = Flying Monkeys? and Lakota Protest Baum's Editorials.

Michelle Williams as a Native woman?

Why Is Michelle Williams in Redface?

By Ruth HopkinsNow I've really seen it all. Michelle Williams is on the cover of AnOther Magazine, in apparent Redface. Michelle burst into the spotlight when she was nominated for a Best Supporting Actress Oscar for her role in Brokeback Mountain (2005). Later, she was nominated for Oscars for her work in Blue Valentine (2010) and Marilyn (2011). She is now starring as Glinda The Good Witch in Oz: The Great and Powerful (now in theaters).

Dressed in a braided wig, dull beads, and turkey feathers while sporting a decidedly stoic expression, AnOther Magazine and company ups the ante by putting Michelle in a flannel shirt, jeans, and what appears to be some sort of academic or legal robe. I smell an attempt to portray reservation nobility. Are they endeavoring to capture the spirit of the American Indian Movement (AIM) circa 1973? Is this an ad for the Native American Rights Fund (NARF) or the American Indian College Fund (AICF)? Nope. It's a 33 year old white actress hyping her latest Hollywood project by wearing a cheap costume designed to make her look like she's the member of another race.Native Americans Are Not Munchkins: An Open Letter to Michelle Williams

By Aura BogadoDear Ms. Williams,

I cringed when I saw that you “dressed up as a Native American.” While some have called your decision “risqué,” I’d call it deeply offensive. Still, I was going to ignore your foolish costume until I saw a recent interview in which you shared your inspiration for Oz the Great and Powerful. In it, you compared Natives to Munchkins, and I knew then that this letter was necessary. What you’ve said and done is not only disrespectful—it’s dangerous. I hope you’ll read through this letter and think twice before once again choosing to participate in actions that preserve deeply racist convictions in popular culture.

By wearing a braided wig and donning feathers, and calling that “Native American” in a photo shoot, you’re perpetuating the lazy idea that Natives are all one and the same. Because you were born and spent your childhood in Montana, I expected more from you. Montana is home to seven reservations, where Natives from more than a dozen state or federally recognized tribes and nations reside—each with its own history, culture and language.

From what I can tell, the AnOther magazine cover doesn't include any claim that Williams has "dressed up as a Native American." That seems to comes from the Holy Moly site, which reposted the cover image and added a caption. If I'm right, Holy Moly is to blame for the claim, not Williams or AnOther magazine.

A commenter on the first column offered an obvious rejoinder:Um, the picture is in black and white, how can you tell it is redface? And do you mean just wearing a feather and braiding your hair is by itself offensive? Beyond that she's dressed basically like a hipster, it's in no way a Native American "costume." This is on a completely different level from blackface.Maybe, but Williams has said she researched L. Frank Baum and his thoughts on Indians:

‘Oz the Great and Powerful’: Michelle Williams on Glinda inspiration

By Steven ZeitchikTo prepare for the role in the film, the actress read both a biography of Baum and nearly all of the author’s 14 “Oz” books, even keeping a “Glinda notebook.”

Williams said she was initially concerned that all the homework wouldn’t pay dividends.

“You don’t know if you’re going to find anything when you do all that geeky research,” she said, offering a small laugh.

But in learning of Baum’s interest in the suffragette movement as well as in Native American rights, she ultimately found herself opening a window onto characters she might otherwise have found unrelatable.

“Quadlings, Tinkers and Munchkins didn’t mean much to me; it wasn’t my language,” Williams said of the groups of misfits her character benevolently rules over. “But when I thought of them as Native Americans trying to inhabit their land or about women getting the right to vote, it made a lot more sense.”Comment:  Baum was "interested" in Indian rights only to the extent of extinguishing them, along with the Indians themselves. He was no advocate for Indians. See The Indian-Oz Connection for details.

I've never heard anyone say the "native" people of Oz were supposed to represent Indians. Williams may have come up with this notion on her own, while reading about Baum. I doubt her sources said that Dorothy or the Wizard were trying to protect indigenous rights.

Anyway, it's possible Williams was trying to look Native, or at least "ethnic," to show solidarity with the Munchkins and other Ozians. Even though she played a witch and not one of the "natives." Or she may just have thought it was a cool "tribal" look.

I should note that AnOther magazine and its fashion editor may have come up with Williams's look. Williams went along with it, but she may not have originated it. If so, the magazine deserves most of the credit or blame.

Without more information, I wouldn't condemn this image as "redface." Even if Williams was trying to "play Indian," it's a pretty mild case. It's nothing like the hipster starlets and models who dress up as a sexy "Pocahontas" or Plains Indian chief.

For more on hipsters playing dress-up, see Crystle Lighting in a Headdress and Aubrey O'Day as Indian Princess.

Indians = flying monkeys?

Oren Lyons on The Wizard of OzOren Lyons retells the classic story "The Wizard of Oz," from an enlightening (and very different) Native America perspective.

Comment:  Compare this with the other viewpoints I posted in The Indian-Oz Connection. According to Geoff Ryman's novel Was, the "lost race" of Indians were the inspiration for the fantasy lands of Oz. According to Thomas St. John, the Wicked Witch of the West represents the Indians. She and they supposedly opposed the civilized people of Oz and the USA, respectively.

Now Lyons the spiritual leader says the Wicked Witch of the West represents...the West. I don't get this. Why would Baum see the West as evil when Americans traditionally have viewed it as the promised land? How exactly was the West trying to harm the rest of the US in 1900?

If you buy that the Witch represents the Western states, I guess the flying monkeys as Indians makes sense. But I'm not buying Lyons' basic premise. Curious idea, but no sale.

For more on L. Frank Baum, see Happy Presidents Day 2011! and Lakota Protest Baum's Editorials.

Happy Presidents Day 2011!

Two weeks ago some Lakota Indians protested a "Wizard of Oz" play because of L. Frank Baum's editorials 120 years ago. Their goal is apparently to banish The Wizard of Oz from our culture to teach Baum a lesson. Too bad he's been dead for 96 years and probably won't get the message.

In their honor, I posted the following suggestion on Facebook for Presidents Day: Let's also remove the anti-Indian presidents from our currency, Mt. Rushmore, the history books, etc.This led to a brief discussion:Rob, let's not forget that the slaughter of indigenous peoples, or the slavery of "lesser" people has been the cornerstone to this fine democracy--which recognizes the rights of all men (women excluded for obvious reasons...wink wink).That's why we need to eliminate these presidents!While you're at it let's not forget those 38 warriors who died by hanging in the largest mass hanging in the history of the US, their death warrant signed by none other than "Honest" Abe Lincoln.I'm including Washington, Jefferson, Jackson, Lincoln, and T. Roosevelt among the presidents to be eliminated along with Baum.OK. Can we then replace Andrew Jackson on the twenty with Richard Nixon?Yes, we can put Nixon on the $20 for his support of indigenous rights. Right after we remove The Wizard of Oz from every bookstore and DVD store.

For more on the subject, see Liberation Day, not Presidents Day and Fun Fourth of July Facts.

P.S. Needless to say, neither the presidents nor Baum's beloved children's story are going anywhere anytime soon. Protesting them is roughly equivalent to protesting the ocean's tides.

Lakota protest Baum's editorials

Native Sun News:  Lakota protest set at Wizard of Oz performance

By Evelyn BroecherThe United Urban Warrior Society will conduct a peaceful protest this week at the Civic Center’s presentation of The Wonderful Wizard of Oz.

The author of the book, L. Frank Baum is still widely known for the Oz books he wrote in the early 1900s. Little known are the editorials he published in Aberdeen Saturday Review which called for the extermination of the Lakota people six days after the Massacre at Wounded Knee in 1890.

James Swan said the Society will protest at the Broadway play which is scheduled to open on Friday, Feb. 11 at 7:30 p.m. The play runs through Saturday at the Rushmore Plaza Civic Center.Comment:  The article doesn't state the point of this protest. To get an apology from the Baum estate? To raise awareness of Baum's editorials? I don't think either goal is worth the effort.

One of my Facebook friends offered this objective for the protest:Folks can send an email to the civic center:

http://www.gotmine.com/contact.php

[Sample]

"I am extremely displeased that Rapid City Civic Center is hosting the Wizard of Oz. The writer was terribly racist and advocated the extermination of American Indians. This is unacceptable and shows poorly on your business that you will host a known racist and advocate of genocide."I still don't buy it. Are we going to censor or ban every American who advocated the killing of Indians? Or the owning of slaves? Or support for cruel tyrants, or illegal wars? That would include most Americans, including the presidents from George Washington to Andrew Jackson to Teddy Roosevelt to George W. Bush. And censoring or banning the dead ones won't change what they said or did. I'm not sure what it'll do except make the protesters feel good.

If the goal is to educate, then educate. Write a letter to the editor or post the info on your blog. Then move on to a more substantial issue. Baum's editorials haven't hurt anyone in more than a century, and his Oz books haven't hurt anyone, period. So they're not an issue worth fighting over.

For more on the subject, see Indians in Top 100 Children's Novels and The Indian-Oz Connection.

Indians in Top 100 Children's Novels

Elizabeth Bird of the School Library Journal recently conducted a poll of the top 100 children's novels. Here are the results.

The top three are:

1) Charlotte's Web by E.B. White
2) A Wrinkle in Time by Madeleine L'Engle
3) Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone by J.K. Rowling

I've read fewer than 20 books on this list, but the ones I've read probably belong there. These books include:

The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe by C.S. Lewis

Holes by Louis Sachar

Anne of Green Gables by L.M. Montgomery

The Phantom Tollbooth by Norton Juster

The Hobbit by J.R.R. Tolkien

Bridge to Terabithia by Katherine Paterson

Charlie and the Chocolate Factory by Roald Dahl

Hatchet by Gary Paulsen

Winnie-the-Pooh by A.A. Milne

The Wonderful Wizard of Oz by L. Frank Baum

Island of the Blue Dolphins by Scott O'Dell

The Borrowers by Mary Norton

and the Harry Potter books. The only one I'd say doesn't belong there is the grossly overrated Alice in Wonderland.

Of course, I'd put them in a different order. My top 5 probably would look like this:

1) The Wonderful Wizard of Oz by L. Frank Baum
2) Anne of Green Gables by L.M. Montgomery
3) The Hobbit by J.R.R. Tolkien
4) Holes by Louis Sachar
5) Hatchet by Gary Paulsen

The Native aspect

Educator Debbie Reese reports that only one of the authors has any Native heritage. Wilson Rawls, who wrote Where the Red Fern Grows, said his mother was part Cherokee. He didn't claim to be Cherokee himself.

Reese probably would like to see several Native authors on the list. That may be unrealistic. Since Natives make up only 1% of the US population, getting one of the 100 slots would be fair. Rawls and maybe one other Native author would fill the Native "quota."

But as Reese goes on to note:Sherman Alexie, Joseph Bruchac, Louise Erdrich, Cynthia Leitich Smith, Richard Van Camp---none of the more successful Native writers are on the list. But overall, it does not lack for portrayals of American Indians.

I say that in jest, of course, because most of those portrayals are in some way, stereotypical or biased. If you are a librarian, and you use this list to build your collection, you will not be providing your readers with a single worthy image of American Indians. A few of them are innocuous---like the Indian blanket in Charlotte's Web---but most are problematic. From "Honest Injun" to sitting "Indian style" to hunting Indians, there's a lot to say.According to Reese, 23 of the books mention Indians at least once. Perhaps eight of them have substantial Indian references, including the three by Laura Ingalls Wilder.

Reese lists many of these references. I'd say more of them are benign than Reese did. An Indian quiver, the plant known as Indian paintbrush, children playing cowboys and Indians...I'd call these innocuous, not problematic.

To be clear, I don't think kids should play cowboys and Indians, but it's a fact that they did and still do play it. I wouldn't put it in a book today, but in a book written 50 or 100 years ago, I don't consider it a problem. It's an accurate description of what children played then, not a conscious attempt to demonize Indians.

It appears three of the books--Island of the Blue Dolphins, Walk Two Moons, and The Indian in the Cupboard--are about Indians. All of these are problematic. So are Little House on the Prairie and its sequels. And others on the list have clearly problematic references.

Basically, there are no good books by or about Indians on the list. And few if any good books by or about other minorities, either. Whether the participants intended it or not, this is a white person's list of the best children's novels.

For more on the subject, see Portrayals of American Indians in SLJ's 2010 "Top 100 Children's Novels"--compiled by Elizabeth Bird--PART ONE and The Best Indian Books.

Ozians just like Indians

In A Barnstormer in Oz, Philip José Farmer gives us a "realistic" Oz tale in which America's military is poised to invade Baum's magic kingdom. Here's how one Amazon.com reviewer describes it:
The Not-so-wonderful Land of Oz, July 10, 2000
By Dave Deubler (Pennsylvania)

This book's subtitle unabashedly proclaims it to be "A Rationalization And Extrapolation Of The Split-Level Continuum", a bit of obfuscation which prepares us for this attempt to bring logical scientific analysis to the astounding world of Frank L. Baum's beloved Oz books. Whether such a thing should actually have been attempted is clearly a matter of taste, but it seems likely that fans of the Baum books who also enjoy science fiction will find this novel an amusing blend of wild fantasy and desperate rationalization. The hero is Hank Stover, a World War I veteran flier and barnstormer (and coincidentally, son of the legendary Dorothy), who flies his Jenny (a Curtiss JN-4H biplane) into a mysterious emerald haze and comes out in the wonderland described by his mother many years before.What's interesting is how Farmer identifies America's invasion of Oz with Europe's invasion of America. Here's Glinda the Good Witch discussing the problem with Hank:She paused, looking as if she were contemplating the past. Then she said, “It was very fortunate that neither you nor your mother were carrying any diseases when you came here. But I know that these foulnesses sicken and kill many of you. And if these are brought in, well...”

She grimaced as if she were seeing visions of hell.

“My people would be defenseless. They would be swept away by the thousands, perhaps all or almost all would die. Be honest, wouldn't that happen?”

Hank thought of the American Indians who had died from the diseases contracted from the whites. He thought of the Polynesians who had been struck down by tuberculosis, smallpox, scarlet fever, and syphilis when the whites came.

“I don't think they'd be wiped out. Your Witchness,” he said. “But the results might be horrible. Devastating.”But that isn't the only problem the Ozians face. As Glinda explains:“There is more than disease to it. Even if there were none, you people would destroy our society. You'd bring in your religions, your customs, your institutions. You'd change us for the worse.

“And we have so much gold and silver, so many precious stones. Your greed would ravish the land. But, in order to make your piracy lawful, to make the robbery accord with your images of yourself as honest and lawful and God-fearing, you'd find a pretext for declaring war on us. You'd send in your armies and conquer us. Then you'd start the rape.”Comment:  Yes, if Oz were real and America could invade it, I bet that's what would happen.

As for the rest of the book, it's full of interesting ideas--some better than others--but the execution is only average. Rob's rating: 7.0 of 10.

For more on the subject, see The Indian-Oz Connection.