The Nation’s Four Directions Productions, a 3D animation/HD cinematography studio, won three Best of Show Platinum Aurora awards and one Gold Aurora Award in this international competition highlighting excellence in the film and video industry for regional commercials, as well as entertainment and corporate-sponsored video productions.
The promotional video the Nation produced and aired at Variety magazine’s screenings for major movie openings in New York City and Los Angeles in late 2010 and early 2011 won two Platinum awards in the category of sponsorship commercials. The 45-second spot featuring Ray Halbritter, Oneida Nation Representative and CEO of Nation Enterprises, spoke about the power of film and the goal of getting more “of Indian country’s rich pool of talent” into the mainstream film and television industry. A second video won a Platinum Aurora award in the area of corporate promotion/image category, as well as a Gold Aurora award in the entertainment/amusement category. This 30-second commercial was produced in 2010 to promote the Turning Stone Resort Championship.Comment: The interesting thing is here is Halbritter's talking about "the power of film and the goal of getting more 'of Indian country’s rich pool of talent' into the mainstream film and television industry." Sounds great, but we haven't seen any sign of its happening. Halbritter and company are still talking about Raccoon & Crawfish, a short CGI cartoon they completed in 2008. With their money, they could've completed one or two feature films since then and started developing half a dozen more.
First Nations Juno winners, nominees showcasedWinnipeg's Juno-nominated Eagle & Hawk showed off their alternative rock sound Thursday night at a First Nations showcase of music in Toronto.
The band fronted by Jay Bodner says its foundation is "good old Canadian rock music," but its competition for a Juno Award on Sunday ranges from hip hop to roots music.And:Eagle & Hawk are previous Juno winners (2002) and multiple winners of Canadian Aboriginal Music Awards.
They shared the stage Thursday with last year's Juno winners Digging Roots, Dene singer-songwriter Leela Gilday, folk singer-songwriter Christa Couture and classically trained cello player Cris Derksen, who is half-Cree.Comment: The name Eagle & Hawk sounds stereotypical to me.
Below: "Digging Roots members Raven Kanatakta, centre, and ShoShonna Kish, right, accept the Juno Award for the Aboriginal Album of the Year at the 2010 Junos." (Mike Dembeck/Canadian Press)
It seems reasonably sincere except for one part. Kelly claims this line:Indian tacos? What the fuck are Indian tacos?was an attempt to "criticize what I thought was the misuse of the term Indian" because it's "an outdated racial misnomer as opposed to using Native American."
Really? Kelly thought rudely slamming the concept of Indian tacos would expose "Indian" as a racial slur? Wow, talk about missing the mark. That's such a ridiculous explanation that I think he made it up to excuse his inexcusable vulgarity.
If he really meant what he said, that shows you the difference between an amateur college writer and a professional writer like me. Next time you want to criticize the term "Indian," Kelly, get some help before you do.
Of course, even if he wrote a coherent critique of "Indian," he'd still be flatly wrong. Canadians may feel differently, but there's nothing wrong with using "Indian" in the US. I've discussed this several times--for instance, in:
By Eric LachQuick, which group has the U.S. government helped out the most? Wall Street, maybe? Or the unemployed? Oh, how about all those defense contractors? Wrong, says Fox News contributor John Stossel. As far as Stossel is concerned, it's Native Americans.
Stossel was on Fox & Friends this morning to discuss some high-paying government jobs recently reported in The Daily Caller. The report found that the "Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs needs someone to run the Facebook page for the Dept. of the Interior and they'll pay up to $115,000 a year." Stossel took that as an opportunity to wonder about the entire concept of a Bureau of Indian Affairs.
"Why is there a Bureau of Indian Affairs?" he said. "There is no Bureau of Puerto Rican Affairs or Black Affairs or Irish Affairs. And no group in America has been more helped by the government than the American Indians, because we have the treaties, we stole their land. But 200 years later, no group does worse."
Established in 1824, Indian Affairs is the oldest bureau of the United States Department of the Interior. Among other responsibilities, the Bureau is charged with "maintaining the federal government-to-government relationship with the federally recognized Indian tribes," according to its website.John Stossel: No Group’s Been Helped More By Gov’t Than American Indians
By Shani O. HiltonStossel was attempting to make a small-government argument that federal intervention has actually hurt Native Americans, but instead, he displayed stunning ignorance of history and, well, the Constitution. The BIA exists as a liaison between the U.S. government and the 565 tribes who reside on sovereign land located within the U.S. That’s not to say there aren’t problems with the Bureau and its interactions with its constituents, but boiling the challenges Native Americans face down to a complaint about the existence of the BIA is pretty absurd.Comment: Stossel didn't use the word "moochers," but that's what he meant. He wasn't saying Indians have received more help and that's as it should be, since they gave up their priceless land for perpetual treaty benefits. He was implying that Indians are getting race-based handouts they don't deserve. In other words, that they're worse welfare moochers than their fellow black and Latino moochers.
Stossel follows Rand's lead
Stossel's comments are part of the conservative drive to eliminate the funding for Indians. Or should I say eliminate Indians, period? The most infamous proponent of elimination is libertarian Rand Paul:
By Rob CapricciosoWatch out, Indian programs and all those who depend on them. The toast of the Tea Party, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Kentucky, so desperately wants to cut the federal budget that he’s ready to stomp all over federal trust responsibility and treaty obligations to Indians—even obliterate them, if he must. The good news: The United States won’t be quite so broke. The bad news: The United States will have broken the law in order to balance its books on the backs of Indians.
Think that’s a melodramatic bit of hyperbole? Check out the proposal introduced in Congress Jan. 25 by the newly elected senator. It calls for the elimination of funding to the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), the Department of the Interior agency that oversees a variety of Indian programs. That’s not all. The senator, who is a medical doctor (an eye surgeon, although seemingly myopic), also proposes trimming almost half of the Department of Health and Human Services’ Indian Health Service (IHS) budget this year. Republicans and Democrats don’t tend to agree on much, but one thing they have agreed on over the years is that IHS has been dramatically underfunded. Like them or not, the BIA and IHS are the main agencies of the federal government that have worked with and for Indians, carrying out federal trust responsibility and treaty obligations called for in the U.S. Constitution.
Native Americans will rue Paul's proposals, should the be enacted. “What Sen. Paul is proposing would mean the end of the policy of self-determination and self-governance, among other things,” said Eric Eberhard, a law professor with the Center for Indian Law and Policy at Seattle University School of Law.
“Ironically, even as we see a resurgence of interest and veneration for the U.S. Constitution, there appears to be a blind spot when it comes to the obligations owed Native American Indians in federal treaties solemnly negotiated and ratified as the ‘supreme law of the land,’ ” added Philip Baker-Shenk, a partner in the Holland & Knight firm’s Indian law practice group. “No honest fan of the Constitution can deny that the founders were referring to treaties with the Indians when they wrote the Constitution.”Let's summarize the Rand/Stossel agenda: Eliminate the US treaty obligation to tribes. Eliminate the tribes' sovereignty over their reservations. Heck, eliminate the reservations, period, so we can gobble up their land.
While we're at it, eliminate the tribes' cultures and religions. Let them assimilate into the mainstream like other minorities have done. Let them become good Christian Americans like John Stossel, Bryan Fischer, Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, and other white supremacists in disguise.
That's the Republican Tea Party agenda for Indians in a nutshell. To reiterate what I've said before, it's to demonize Indians and other minorities as evil and un-American. To justify taking their land, resources, and money and redistribute it to society's upper crust. To enrich America's white power elite at the expense of everyone else.
No wonder Indians often say the genocide against them has never ended. Judging by the anti-Indian rhetoric of Rand, Stossel, and Fischer, it hasn't.
The comparison showed up in a case in the U.S. Court of Military Commissions Review. Government lawyers likened the situation to the treatment of two British men who were hanged in 1818 for helping the Seminoles resist the U.S. military.
“Not only was the Seminole belligerency unlawful, but, much like modern-day al Qaeda, the very way in which the Seminoles waged war against U.S. targets itself violate the customs and usages of war," the brief stated.
The argument drew an angry response from the tribe. “To equate the historic struggle of our ancestors in resisting General Andrew Jackson’s unlawful invasion of our homeland to al Qaeda terrorism is a vicious distortion of well-documented history,” general counsel Jim Shore told The Miami Herald.
“The Government’s strained comparison of Native Americans to al Qaeda is disrespectful to our Tribe, all American Indians and our American Indian military veterans, as well as those in active military service,” Shore added.
After the National Congress of American Indians complained, government attorneys submitted another brief in which they said they weren't trying to "equates" the behavior of the Seminoles to those of al-Qaeda. The brief also said the government “in no way questions or impugns the valor, bravery and honorable military service of Native Americans, past and present."In the original article, a professor rips the government's claims:
By Carole RosenbergDavis, the history professor, calls the comparison “ridiculous.”
“One can make the argument that al Qaeda is the aggressors,” he told The Miami Herald from Gainesville, “but the Seminoles were the innocent targets.”
“It was Jackson invading the territory of a sovereign country, Spain, and he’s executing within that territory citizens of another sovereign country, Britain.”Some commenters on Facebook also ripped the government's claims:It is amazing that such terrible acts can be perpetrated against Native Americans and that rights and ways of life can be so profoundly reduced and yet the victims in such circumstances are portrayed as demons. It hurts my heart to think about it too.
Really? I don't get it. Ridiculous. I am less insulted by the blatant disrespect [than] I am by the brutal distortion of logic. A far more fitting comparison to al Qaeda is Andrew Jackson himself. Jackson, Kit Carson, and their compatriots...Manifest Destiny...wtf is that if not a campaign of terror?
Absurd how settler societies create discourses of criminality against those very same people they victimize. Israel constantly uses this same al Qaeda script against the Palestinians.
Interested parties are doing the same thing to the history of labor. When someone takes all your stuff and forces you into poverty, fighting back gets you labeled a terrorist. This is the logic of the folks in power in so many of our states now.Comment: So the comparison isn't only insulting, it's factually wrong. Florida was part of a foreign country when Jackson invaded it in 1818. When you invade and occupy foreign territory (e.g., Israel in 1967, Bush in 2003), you don't get to dictate your foe's defensive strategy. You're at fault and you deserve whatever punishment you get for your aggression.
David Grann's book The Lost City of Z centers on the British explorer Percy Fawcett. Here's what he and other Victorian-era thinkers believed about Indians:
Percy FawcettColonel Percival Harrison Fawcett (18 August 1867–in or after 1925) was a British artillery officer, archaeologist and South American explorer.
Along with his eldest son, Fawcett disappeared under unknown circumstances in 1925 during an expedition to find "Z"—his name for what he believed to be an ancient lost city in the uncharted jungles of Brazil. John Hemming, the Canadian explorer and historian of the Brazilian Indians, declared Fawcett a “Nietzschean explorer” spouting “eugenic gibberish,” although the writer David Grann also believes that Fawcett showed enlightened traits.Finding the lost city
Does the Amazon jungle conceal a vanished empire?
By David GrannIn the mid-16th century, Juan Ginés de Sepúlveda, one of the Holy Roman Emperor's chaplains, argued that the Indians were "half men" who should be treated as natural slaves.
At the time, the most forceful critic of this genocidal paradigm was Bartolomé de Las Casas, a Dominican friar who had traveled throughout the Americas. In a famous debate with Sepúlveda and in a series of treatises, Las Casas tried to prove, once and for all, that Indians were equal humans ("Are these not men? Do they not have rational souls?"), and to condemn those "pretending to be Christians" who "wiped them from the face of the earth." In the process, however, he contributed to a conception of the Indians that became an equal staple of European ethnology: the "noble" savage. According to Las Casas, the Indians were "the simplest people in the world," "without malice or guile," who are "totally uninterested in worldly power."
Although in Fawcett's era both conceptions remained popular in scholarly and popular literature, they were now filtered through a radical new scientific theory on the origins of humankind: evolution. Victorians now attempted to make sense of human diversity not in theological terms but in biological ones. A popular anthropology manual, which Fawcett studied, included chapters on "Anatomy and Physiology," "Hair," "Colour," Odour," "Physical Powers," "Senses," and "Heredity." The Victorians wanted to know, in effect, why some apes had evolved into English gentlemen and why some hadn't.
Fawcett was deeply influenced by such racist ideas; his writings are rife with images of Indians as "jolly children" and "ape-like" savages. And he constantly struggled to reconcile what he saw with everything he had been taught. The only thing he was certain of was that the Amazon and its people were not what everyone assumed them to be. Too much evidence indicated that the jungle had once been the center of a great civilization.Comment: I think Grann claims that Fawcett's views were complicated, but no worse than the views of his contemporaries. Indeed, they may have been better than average.
On the positive side, Fawcett respected the Indians he met, deeming them intelligent, industrious, and so forth. He especially admired their ability to survive in the jungle and heal maladies with herbal medicines. The further he got from civilization, the more he recognized their ability to farm and provide for themselves. He blamed their "savagery" toward white men on the latter's depredations. He was appalled by the atrocities the rubber gangs committed, and vowed never to kill or harm the Indians himself.
On the negative side, Fawcett believed the Indians he hadn't met were as cruel and vicious as people said. He thought the successful Indians must be the remnants of a vanished civilization, perhaps Phoenicians or the Lost Tribe of Israel. As evidence of this, he and others pointed to light-skinned or albino Indians and claimed they were descended from white men. Eventually he came to imagine his "Z" was some sort of mystical, otherworldly city a la Brigadoon, Shangri-La, or Atlantis.
These views may be better than those of predecessors such as Charles Darwin, Mark Twain, or Theodore Roosevelt. They may be similar to those of the anthropologists who studied Ishi around the same time. But they're definitely a mixed bag for Indians.
By Jillian RayfieldBryan Fischer, the "Director of Issues Analysis" for the social conservative group the American Family Association, says that when it comes to Islam, the First Amendment is a privilege, not a right. "Islam has no fundamental First Amendment claims, for the simple reason that it was not written to protect the religion of Islam," Fischer wrote today.
"The First Amendment was written by the Founders to protect the free exercise of Christianity. They were making no effort to give special protections to Islam. Quite the contrary," Fischer wrote on his Renew America blog.
He continued: Islam has no fundamental First Amendment claims, for the simple reason that it was not written to protect the religion of Islam. Islam is entitled only to the religious liberty we extend to it out of courtesy. While there certainly ought to be a presumption of religious liberty for non-Christian religious traditions in America, the Founders were not writing a suicide pact when they wrote the First Amendment.Fischer took it a step further, calling Islam a "treasonous ideology" and adding that "from a constitutional point of view, Muslims have no First Amendment right to build mosques in America. They have that privilege at the moment, but it is a privilege that can be revoked."Comment: A "suicide pact"? That would be relevant only if most of the world's Muslims were terrorists. Since that's obviously false--to everyone except bigots like Fischer--his assertion is ridiculous.
The Founding Fathers were well aware of the existence of Judaism, Islam, and other non-Christian religions. They explicitly wrote "religion" rather than "Christianity" in the First Amendment. Yet Fischer thinks they crafted it to protect only Christianity? How goddamned stupid can you get?!
Fischer must be the biggest bigot among mainstream public figures today. If he isn't, I don't know who is.
It's scary that someone so ignorant and prejudiced has the ear of millions of conservative Christians. As the posting goes on to note:[H]is show is a frequent stomping ground for conservative politicians, including potential 2012 presidential candidate Mike Huckabee, and actual 2012 candidate Tim Pawlenty.Why aren't these candidates distancing themselves from Fischer the way they do from David Duke, Bob Jones University, and other purveyors of prejudice? Are they bigots too? I'd love to hear their excuses for palling around with Fischer the Islamophobic and homophobic hatemonger.
The 1986 movie The Mission covers some of the events noted in The South American Genocide. Here's the story on it:
The Mission (1986 film)The Mission is a 1986 British drama film about the experiences of a Jesuit missionary in 18th century South America. The film was written by Robert Bolt and directed by Roland Joffé. It stars Robert De Niro, Jeremy Irons, Ray McAnally, Aidan Quinn, Cherie Lunghi and Liam Neeson. It won the Palme d'Or and the Academy Award for Best Cinematography. In April 2007, it was elected number one on the Church Times Top 50 Religious Films list.The Wikipedia entry gives a lengthy summary of The Mission's plot. You can read it, but basically a Jesuit priest and a soldier try to protect a band of Guaraní Indians from the slave-trading Portuguese.
By Steven D. GreydanusThe Mission tells the story of one company of missionaries who defy the order to leave their mission, defending the right of their converts to remain in their new home. Some of these priests, led by a novice named Mendoza (De Niro), even actively lead the Guaraní in guerrilla warfare against the Portuguese forces who eventually arrive to expel them—despite bitter opposition from their own leader, Fr. Gabriel (Irons), who insists on a path of peaceful disobedience and spiritual devotion. Inevitably, "neither approach is effective," as Ebert sees it; and the conclusion is as tragic as it is inexorable.
This bare-bones sequence of events is not a film plot, only a history lesson. Examining the plot of The Mission, we find that the story divides readily into three acts, each with its own moral crisis. First, there is Mendoza’s personal struggle between despair and redemption. Then comes the sad, foregone investigation of Cardinal Altamirano (Ray McAnally), a papal legate nominally sent to inspect the work of the Jesuits in South America, but whose de facto mission is to rubber-stamp established plans to abandon the missions. Finally, there is the crisis between Fr. Gabriel and Mendoza over the issue of guerrilla resistance.
The whole film is tied together with scenes of the guilt-ridden Cardinal Altamirano dictating a barbed letter to Rome conveying both assurance and disapproval. These scenes seem to place Altamirano’s moral crisis at the heart of the drama. Yet Altamirano is the least developed and least interesting of the three key figures, more a symbol of the failure of ecclesiastical officials than a dramatically or morally interesting character that we really care about one way or the other.I agree with this analysis. The Mission is really three loosely connected stories: Mendoza's enlightenment, the political wrangling, and the final battle. You start off thinking Mendoza's transformation will be the central story, but it's over after the first third of the movie.
By Vincent CanbyThough played with self-effacing earnestness by Mr. Irons and Mr. De Niro, neither character has any dramatic identity. Each is a pre-set attitude. Mr. Irons looks saintly and speaks in the cultivated English of the West End theater. Mr. De Niro, who was very fine as the street-wise priest in "True Confessions," is all right here until he opens his mouth. His New York accent doesn't easily fit lines like "Leave, priest" or "So me you do not love" (after he has been given the gate by a woman).
The film's most interesting, most complex character is Altamirano, the Pope's envoy, the only person in "The Mission" who fully understands the implications of the moral choices being made. Altamirano is played as well as possible by the Irish actor Ray McAnally, though Mr. Joffe treats him as a stock figure, even down to that obligatory close-up of the large, jeweled ring on his fat finger.
The Indians, about whom the film seems to care so much, are condescended to as mostly smiling, trusting, undifferentiated aspects of Eden--innocents with sweet singing voices and a lot of rhythm.
"The Mission," which was awarded the grand prize at this year's Cannes Film Festival, is a singularly lumpy sort of movie. The film's most riveting sequence comes at the very beginning, when we see a crucified Jesuit missionary being tossed--cross and all--into the river and carried over the spectacular Iguassu Falls. Nothing that follows, including more pretty scenery and quaint costumes, comes close to equaling the drama of that one sequence--about a character who remains forever anonymous.Rob's review
Yes, the Indians are played as "noble savages." When they first meet Fr. Gabriel, one wants to kill him, but he plays his flute and...voilá. The chief spares him and the Indians are peaceful and loving for the rest of the movie.
The "king" (chief) is the only Indian who has any individuality. When the Pope's envoys come to negotiate with him, they tell him they're speaking for a distant king. The chief retorts that he's a king too. That doesn't sway anyone in the movie, but pro-Indian viewers get the message.
The Mission shines a light on an important but little-known period of (South) American history. Indeed, the political section in its center is probably the best part. With its lack of negative stereotypes and lush cinematography, it's a good movie overall. Rob's rating: 8.0 of 10.
Reading David Grann's book The Lost City of Z made me curious about the history of the Amazon. Here's a bit about the legend that launched countless European expeditions into the jungle.
By David GrannEver since the Spanish conquistadores descended the Amazon River, in 1542, perhaps no region on the planet had so ignited the imagination--or lured so many men to their death. For centuries, the conquistadores had searched the jungle for the glittering kingdom of El Dorado. The kingdom, which the conquistadores had heard about from Indians, was said to be so plentiful in gold that its inhabitants ground the metal into powder and blew it through "hollow canes upon their naked bodies." (El Dorado literally means the Gilded Man.) Thousands had died looking for this golden realm.Google Earth helps find El Dorado
For nearly 500 years, explorers have hunted in vain for a lost city—now with Google Earth, it may have been found
By Ed CaesarThe dream of finding lost civilisations in South America has persisted for centuries, largely because of a couple of earth-shattering early successes. As John Hemming, a former director of the Royal Geographical Society, recounts in his 1978 book, The Search For El Dorado, it was the conquistadors who started the craze. In 1519 Hernan Cortes and his soldiers discovered the Aztec city of Tenochtitlan, in Mexico. In the early 1530s, Francisco Pizarro conquered the Incan empire, in what is now Peru. The idea of a “golden city” somewhere deeper in the unexplored wilds was lodged in the European imagination and never released its hold.
Grann notes that in 1753 a Portuguese bandeirante—a soldier of fortune—emerged from the Amazon jungle and described how, “after a long and troublesome peregrination, incited by the insatiable greed of gold,” he had seen the ruins of an ancient city from a mountain top. The man walked into the city, discovering “stone arches, a statue, wide roads and a temple with hieroglyphics.” The bandeirante wrote: “The ruins well showed the size and grandeur which must have been there and how populous and opulent it had been in the age in which it flourished.”What the early explorers actually found:
By Alex ShoumatoffThe first Europeans to penetrate the Amazon basin was a Spanish expedition led by Francisco de Orellana in 1542. Hoping to find the fabled lands of El Dorado and La Canela, Orellana and his men set out from Quito, Ecuador, and descended the Napo River to its confluence with the Solimões, the Amazon’s upper section, and continued down the river for 1500 miles to where it pours into the Atlantic. At that time, several million people were living in the Amazon Valley. They belonged to some two hundred tribes and ethnic groups in four linguistic families—Gê, Tupi, Carib, and Arawak. Starting with the Omagua, an intelligent, orderly people of the Solimões, who farmed river turtles and wore cotton robes, the expedition passed one prosperous community after another along the banks of the river. So rich were the resources of the várzea, or floodplain, that some of the close-packed lines of houses went on without interruption for days, and the level of civilization of some of the riverine tribes was on a par with the Incas’, although the materials they built and worked with were perishable, and few artifacts, besides their extraordinarily refined ceramics, survive.And what it all means:
By Mark MedleyWhat is it about these lost societies--El Dorado, Atlantis--that intrigue us?
The fascination with lost cities seems eternal. I suspect that part of it, like the earlier searches for mythical kingdoms, such as Prester John, reflects a longing to find some place that is better or richer or more fabulous than the one we inhabit. In 1928, after tens of thousands of people volunteered to search for Fawcett and his missing party, an American newspaper marveled, "Perhaps if there were a sufficient number of jungles available and enough expeditions to go round, we would see the spectacle of our whole population marching off in search of lost explorers, ancient civilizations, and something which it vaguely felt was missing in its life." I also think there is a deep curiosity about how real civilizations, such as the Incas or Mayans, once flourished and eventually died out. Some of this interest is practical: What did these people accomplish that might help us navigate our way? And some of the fascination is simply wonder at how others lived in different places and ages.Comment: The legend of El Dorado continues to influence us--and not in a good way. It's the inspiration for many racist or stereotypical movies: from The Road to El Dorado to National Treasure: Book of Secrets to Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.
The common theme is that Indians used to be smart and civilized, but now they're stupid and savage. A related belief is that they couldn't have been that intelligent so they must've had the help of "ancient astronauts."
If you think the North American genocide of Indians was bad, the South American genocide was arguably worse. The decrease in numbers--several million to a couple hundred thousand--was roughly the same, but the South American decimation seems more calculated and cruel. Here are some of the lowlights:
By Alex ShoumatoffOrganized campaigns to exterminate the Indians, sponsored by the colonial administration and carried out by Portuguese colonists, had been taking place in northeastern Brazil, to the east, since 1500, and as colonists began settling the lower Amazon in l620, campaigns were carried out there. These “ransoming” expeditions were in fact slaves raids under the pretext of rescuing captives from tribes that were supposedly planning to eat them (and in some cases actually were). In the absence of gold, the colonists went after “red gold”--the forced labor of Indians. The “ransomed” Indians were “descended” down the river and kept, packed like sardines, in riverine pens called caiçaras, sometimes for months, while the colonists were off capturing more slaves.
The Indians’ only champions were the Jesuits, who gathered them into missions that were organized along military lines to keep them from being dragged off into slavery. David Putnam’s film, The Mission, portrays the heroic efforts of the Jesuits to protect the Guarani Indians in the Paraná-Paraguay basin, south of the Amazon. The Jesuits in the Amazon were more exploitative, however, and the Indians in their aldeias, or mission villages, on Marajó Island, at the mouth of river, became peons who took care of their vast herds of cattle. Their wards were forcibly baptized and catechized and became detribalized “shirt Indians.”
Starting in 1850 rubber became a hot new commodity in the industrializing countries of Europe and North America, and the Amazon’s monopoly on “black gold” tapped from Hevea brasiliensis trees scattered in the rainforest spawned what the contemporary Brazilian writer called “the most criminal organization of labor ever devised.” A Peruvian rubber baron named Julio Arana founded the Peruvian Amazon Rubber Company and grew fabulously wealthy by exploiting the Bora, Witoto, Andoke, and Ocaina Indians on the Putumayo River, which forms the border between Peru and Colombia. Reports of systematic torture, an orgy of sadism, the perverted mutilation of men, women, and children, women being kept as concubines by the Indian and Barbadian muchachos or captains, of the rubber gangs, reached Roger Casement, who had exposed similar atrocities ten years earlier in the Congo. By the time Casement got there, three-quarters of the population on the Putumayo had been wiped out in the previous six years, and there were only 8000-1000 left.
On the Amazon’s southern frontier, colonists hired professional Indian killers, or bugreiros, who presented ears instead of scalps for payment, adorned their Winchester carbines with Indians’ teeth, and poisoned the drinking pools in Indian villages with strychnine. By 1910 the remaining Indians had been reduced to a pathetic minority on the fringes of a burgeoning postcolonial society.Comment: Tribal organization may have been the big difference between North and South America. In North America, the Euro-American invaders faced several groups of semi-organized resistance: the Powhatan confederacy, the Haudenosaunee League, Tecumseh's Shawnee confederation, the "Five Civilized Tribes," the Great Plains tribes, the Comanche empire. In South America, the hostile geography kept tribes smaller and more dispersed.
David Grann's The Lost City of Z tells some of the rubber barons' atrocities. They sound like the equivalent of a few dozen Wounded Knees to me. While Americans were waging war on Indians in the latter part of the 19th century--which was bad enough--Brazilians were torturing, mutilating, and poisoning Indians.
Who wants an anarchy?
This reminds me of my Is the "Nanny State" Bad? posting. The above should serve as a warning to anyone who thinks a libertarian state (i.e, anarchy) would be ideal. When government is nonexistent, people slaughter people without compunction. That was the case with the conquistadors in Mexico and Peru and the rubber gangs in the Amazon.
When government is moderately strong, it's like a traffic cop. It directs the flow of people, speeding it up or slowing it down, but not really impeding it. Like a traffic cop, it tries to impose order, but since it can't arrest everyone, it's largely ineffectual.
That was the case in America for most of its Indian-eliminating history. The US signed treaties with its Indian nations but treated them like traffic lights. Initially the light was red, but then it turned green and the settler traffic resumed. The US shrugged as if it had done all it could. "We set up a stop light but no one obeys it. What are we supposed to do...enforce the law?"
Now we have a strong central government and I'm glad of it. These days the main people committing murder are lone gun nuts, not lynch mobs or armed militias or the US Cavalry. As I suggested in Name America's Golden Year, if you think the days of yore--of bigotry against women and minorities--were great, you're not thinking. You must be a white Anglo-Saxon Protestant property owner and a greedy, selfish bastard.
By Paul DavisJohn Brown, the director of historic preservation for the Narragansett Indians, has asked the state to rethink plans for a historic plaque dedicated to the relationship between Roger Williams and the tribe.
On Friday, Brown said he objects to the proposed content, which focuses on the sale of Native Americans into slavery at the end of King Philip’s War.
The focus should be on the tribe’s early peaceful relationship with Williams, who started the Providence colony in 1636 on tribal land, he said.
No matter what happened later, “those early dealings were honorable,” said Brown. “We’re not going to be involved in any character assassination.”And:Brown said Friday that a first-ever plaque about the tribe and the Colonists should start at the beginning of the story, when the dealings between the two parties were “honorable,” he said.
“The tribe’s history should start from a point of strength, not weakness,” he said.
The tribe, he added, provided Williams—banished from Massachusetts—with land, and offered to protect the early Colonists.
By Paul DavisSince he first trudged through the woods to found Providence, Roger Williams has been variously called an American statesman, a canny trader and a champion of religious freedom.
Julianne Jennings, a Native American, would like to add a few more labels to the list.
Indian fighter.
Slave trader.
“We have to stop the lying,” says Jennings, 48, an author and adjunct professor of anthropology at Rhode Island College.
In her Non-Western Worlds Native Americans class, Jennings offers what she says is a “more balanced” view of New England’s feel-good, Indian summer past. Her goal? “To decolonize America’s classrooms.”
As part of her effort, she’s urging the state Department of Transportation to erect a plaque on South Main Street, one designed to give Rhode Islanders a new––and darker––picture of the state’s founder.
Relying on 17th-century letters and town hall records, Jennings says that Williams sent Indian prisoners from King Philip’s War to the Caribbean, Portugal, Spain and Africa, where they were sold as slaves.
He was also a steely strategist during the bloody Pequot War, argues Jennings. At one point, she says, Williams told Massachusetts Gov. John Winthrop to attack a Pequot fort in Mystic, Conn., at night, so that the “English, being armed, may enter their houses and do what execution they please.”
In May 1637, a band of New England Colonists did just that. They set Pequot dwellings on fire and shot the natives as they fled from their homes, killing hundreds of Indian men, women and children.
Not everyone is comfortable with the new picture.
“It’s certainly not the portrait we paint of Roger Williams,” says Mary A. Channing, president of the Roger Williams Family Association.
“To call Williams an Indian hater is just plain wrong,” adds Rhode Island author and historian J. Stanley Lemons. In fact, Williams was responsible for 40 years of peace with the Narragansett Indians and other tribes. “Rhode Island did not have an Indian problem” until a Colonial militia from Connecticut, Plymouth and Massachusetts attacked the Narragansetts during King Philip’s War, he said. “Until then, Rhode Island was neutral.”
Williams did participate in the sale of Indian captives, but the money was used by the Colonists to rebuild Providence, largely destroyed in the war. Although the Narragansetts did not harm Williams, they burned down his home, Lemons said. “He was a man of his time. There wasn’t anyone who didn’t believe in slavery” in the 1600s, he said. When he referred to Indians as “barbarians” and “savages,” he was only using the language of the time.
“I’ve had people scream at me, ’How dare you do this!’” says Jennings, who is a member of the Cheroenhaka Nottoway tribe from Virginia.Comment: I like the line about "the money was used by the Colonists to rebuild Providence." When Rhode Island sold human beings like cattle, they didn't blow the proceeds on opium or orgies. They used it productively. Well, that explains everything!
So Williams believed in slavery and considered blacks and Indians subhumans. In short, he was a racist. But other than that, he was a great guy? Thanks for clearing that up.
Plaques should tell truth
So this would be the first plaque telling the history of Williams and the Narragansetts? And the Indians want it to be positive? This has nothing to do with the Narragansetts' desire to placate Rhode Island officials so the officials will let them open a casino, right?
If you're not a Williams family member or apologist, who cares whether the first plaque is positive or negative? That's a trivial detail--if not a stalling technique or an underhanded dodge. People aren't going to read the plaques in chronological order and learn history that way. A plaque is a reminder of a particular event in a particular time and place, not a beginning-to-end textbook.
The only question that matters is whether the plaque is historically accurate. If it is, then post it. If people can't handle the truth, too bad. With thousands of statues, monuments, and pageants reminding us how the Indians helped the colonists conquer them, we don't need more Pollyanna plaques.
I came across this series on PBS a few months ago. The first three episodes featured Native Americans.
Taste of Louisiana with Chef John Folse & Co.: Our Food HeritageIn this new series, world-renowned Cajun and Creole chef John Folse examines Louisiana’s culinary history and celebrates the French, English, Spanish, German, Italian, American Indian and African influences on Louisiana’s cuisine. Filmed before a live audience, the program combines music, history and of course, great cooking.
Native America: Poverty Point #1101 At the time Ramses II was ruling Egypt, Moses was leading the Israelites from bondage and the Phoenicians were trading along the Mediterranean, Native Americans were thriving at Poverty Point in northeastern Louisiana. Jon Gibson, an expert on the Poverty Point settlement, introduces us to this unique civilization. David Griffing of Poverty Point explains how these early Americans were ingenious in their "hot rock" cooking and demonstrates how to prepare steamed fish. Donna Pierite performs Native American songs during the show.
Native America: Sportsman's Paradise #1102 Before agriculture, hunting and fishing were the primary food sources for the Native American tribes of Louisiana. While they hunted deer, game birds and small animals, they also enjoyed a bountiful harvest of fish and shellfish. David Griffing, a Louisiana park ranger and Native American expert, gives us insight on our first Americans. Bertney Langley and his mother, Loris, of the Coushatta tribe, demonstrate how to make fry bread, a traditional Native American food. Hazel Dardar performs Native American songs during the show.
Native America: Native Plant Foods #1103 The Lower Mississippi Valley provided over 250 natural herbs for the Native Americans. Kim Hollier and Dr. Charles M. Allen of the Louisiana State Arboretum in Ville Platte give us a firsthand look at these wild edibles. Dr. Alma Blanchard, a "traiteur," explains the art of this alternative medicine practice and even treats Chef Folse for an old injury. Hazel Dardar performs Native American songs during the show.Comment: Chef John Folse is so relentlessly upbeat that he almost sounds insincere. But I must give him credit for doing his shows right. Even though they're cooking shows, he spends the first 10 minutes of the half-hour learning about and sharing Native cultures. Back in the studio, he has a couple of Native guests who answer questions or perform songs.
The message is one of continuity. Not only did Natives produce great civilizations, but their descendants are still with us. These cultures aren't dead, they're a vibrant part of the American tapestry.
Anyway, the shows are good, but they're mainly about cooking, not Natives. If you want to see them, you can buy the DVD here:
Whenever we discuss Depp on Facebook's NativeCelebs page, people rush to his defense. He's an Indian because he's part Cherokee, they'll say. He starred in Dead Man and The Brave, so he can play Indians. Let him play Tonto in The Lone Ranger and he'll show us his stuff.
But we don't have to imagine Depp's sensitivity to Native portrayals in film. He already has a notable track record in this area:
Strike two: Public Enemies co-stars Marion Cotillard as John Dillinger's Menominee girlfriend. Depp did nothing to get a Native actress hired for the role.
Strike three: Rango features Gil Birmingham as Wounded Crow, a stereotypical stoic Indian type. Depp did nothing to make this character more three-dimensional.
Three strikes and you're out, Johnny.
To those who say Depp is only an actor, not a producer, I say rubbish. Arguably none of these movies would've been made without Depp's participation. The Pirates sequels certainly wouldn't have been. He had the clout to ask for changes, at least. Whether they were made or not, he would've been on record advocating accurate representations of Indians in Hollywood.
Instead he did nothing. But he's the great red hope who'll make Tonto a hero and role model for a generation of Natives? Somehow, I doubt it.
In short, what has Johnny Depp done for Indians lately? Not much.
Navajo and Apache youth, ages 6 to 18, who participate in the second annual youth art contest, hosted by the Navajo County Drug Project in collaboration with Apache County Drug Free Alliance, will create artwork with this anti-underage drinking (UAD) slogan.
You can submit multimedia artwork including the awareness slogan: “Got Death? Drink, Drive & You Will.” The winning pieces of artwork will be printed on T-shirts or on pages of a 2011-12 school calendar. Winners can receive cash prizes of $100 for first place (plus t-shirt placement), $50 for second place (plus calendar placement), and $25 for third place (plus calendar placement).Comment: For more on Indians and alcohol, see AIM Fights "Runs with Beer" T-Shirt, Inuk Hockey Player Enters Rehab, and Historic Prejudice Caused Paul's Death.
The TV show Parks and Recreation has stereotyped Indians before. In last week's episode, titled Harvest Festival (airdate: 3/17/11), a "Wamapoke Indian" finally appears on-screen. The town of Pawnee is about to hold its Harvest Festival and the local Indians aren't happy.
Of course, there are no federally recognized tribes or tribal casinos in Indiana. Tecumseh's Shawnee tribe and others were forced out after the War of 1812. But let's pretend the fictitious Wamapoke tribe exists.
Leslie explains to camera how the Harvest Festival is the biggest thing in her career and if it fails the Parks Department will be eliminated. Dun dun dun!
She, Ben, and Tom discuss the nerdiness vs. non-nerdiness of Star Wars (Tom and Leslie: nerdy; Ben: not-nerdy) while they wait for Ken, the leader of the Wamapoke tribe, who is sporting a slicked-back ponytail, a bolo tie and a festival-related grievance. Tom gets in a “Dope bolo” before Leslie addresses Ken in his native language. But this does little to assuage Ken’s grievance: the “carnival” is being held on the site of the Battle of Indian Hill, and its shooting galleries and fried dough stands need to be moved.
That Pawnee would hold a festival on a historic battlefield is hard to believe. Battlefields are treated as "hallowed ground" almost everywhere in the US. Moreover, the battleground is a potential tourist attraction for the cash-strapped town. The smart move would be to hold the festival near the battleground and urge people to see both.
The Wamapokes supposedly lost the battle because they didn't have any weapons, which is a bit insulting. Describing them as hapless children isn't much better than describing them as savage killers. Actually, as Allan W. Eckert's A Sorrow in Our Heart makes clear, Indiana's Indians were sophisticated defenders of their rights and cultures.
Leslie holds her ground—literally—going to the Map of Pawnee Settler Atrocities Against the Wamapoke (99% blue with “atrocities” in blue) for backup for the fact that given its history, Pawnee has a hard time not being offensive. Ken resignedly leaves, throwing a “I just hope that the souls of my ancestors don’t put a curse on this festival…” over his shoulder, then tells camera in confidence that white people's fear of curses is equal only to their love of Matchbox 20.The Indian's name is Ken Hotate, is which is better than Brave Eagle or Running Bear. But "hotate" is a Japanese name for plain scallops, not an Indian word.
Clearly Hotate has invented the "curse" to achieve his political goals. The idea that an Indian would place a curse in 2011 is silly. It would be like accusing someone of being a witch--a practice that died out centuries ago. But it's also silly that most of the townspeople believe him. The joke is primarily on them, not on him.
The "curse" takes hold
Things start to go wrong the day before the festival:
An emergency meeting is called. As Ron devises the mini horse recovery mission, April hurls the first of many passive-aggressive anti-Andy comments. The news of the curse spreads throughout the fairgrounds: Ann’s “beefy dude” patient is talking about it; Ken Hotate’s on the news talking about it; the Tawainese animators were inspired enough by the drama to create one of their masterpieces! The end screen of which is a representation of Leslie’s head turning into a skull with flaming red eyes.The TV news presents a CGI recreation of the meeting in which Hotate announced the curse. The video shows him grunting and dancing like a gorilla while a drum plays in the background. Ghosts fly about and Leslie's CGI head turns into a glowing skull.
That seems offensive to me. Even in this fictional context, it shows non-Indians conveying their stereotypical beliefs about how Indians act. In the real world, people would condemn this as a racist depiction of Indian spirituality.
Ron rethinks his tactics—the ground mission has failed, and it’s time for an air strike. He, April, Andy, Tom and Jerry mount the beautiful spinning beast. Meanwhile, the news media has flocked to the fairgrounds. Leslie addresses the ravenous crowd, clearing up rumors like a Roomba clears up so many dust bunnies (“At no time was any parks department worker quote feasting on petting zoo animals”), offering concessions to the Wamapoke tribe, and dismissing claims of a curse. Cue the grounds-wide power outage. Crap on a spatula.Hotate wanted the whole carnival moved and Leslie says she's moved the shooting gallery. It doesn't seem to be enough, which may explain why Hotate isn't around.Leslie learns that the generator is shot because the TV crews plugged in and overloaded it. Guess who has the only nearby generator? The Wamapoke casino. Leslie successfully barters with Ken, who lifts the “curse” on camera via a “sacred ceremony” crowned by the nonsense words “Doobee doobee do.”
For starters, the show has never mentioned that some Wamapokes survived. It definitely hasn't mentioned that there's a Wamapoke Casino in Pawnee. The casino doesn't fit with some of the previous claims made: that the town is broke, that its biggest attraction is a giant turnip or whatever, etc. A cash cow like a casino would be a major factor in the government operations of a town like Pawnee. See the Agua Caliente Casino Resort Spa in Palm Springs or the Chumash Casino in Santa Ynez for examples.
To obtain the generator, Leslie offers to "put the Wamapoke history exhibit inside the carnival grounds, right past the entrance turnstyle, so that you have to look at it before you start having fun." Funny, but the white folks still haven't addressed the Wamapokes' demands. Except for the shooting gallery, the bulk of the carnival still sits on the burial ground.
Clearly no one is taking the Indians' spirituality seriously. Not even Hotate, who finds Leslie's offer "interesting" and agrees to lift the curse. It's as everyone knows the white man's wishes trump the Indians', and all that matters is how to pay off a special interest group.
In the Wamapoke "ceremony," Hotate's Native song is subtitled in English. "I am not saying anything," he intones. "No one can understand me anyway. Doobee. Doobee. Do." Even though Hotate's actions are a spoof--he's lifting the "curse" he made up--this is really a slam against Native ceremonies. "We" don't understand what "they" mean, so perhaps the Indians are babbling nonsense. Perhaps their religious beliefs and ceremonies are nothing more than stunts to impress gullible non-Indians.
Enter Joss, who is the potential fly in the ointment. The McCollum High graduate plays a local casino host and Wamopoke tribal leader who places the event in jeopardy when he threatens to put a curse on it. The festival carnival, you see, is taking place on sacred burial grounds--namely, the site of a seven-day battle that the Wamopoke lost. It would be offensive, he says, "to have shooting galleries and fried dough stands" there.
Whoops. Once the muckraking host of a local newsmagazine (Mo Collins) gets wind of this development, it quickly explodes into a huge story.
What a great role for Joss, marked by lots of fun, hilarity--even snappy clothes.
"I got to wear a suit," Joss said. He also spouts choice lines. For example: "There are two things I know about white people. They love Matchbox Twenty, and they're terrified of curses."
Joss said he was thrilled to work again with executive producer Greg Daniels, who co-created King of the Hill "And I really liked that they put so much thought into my story line," he said, adding the show was careful not to offend Native Americans. When his character performs an over-the-top ceremonial bit, for instance, the prop master brought over a bag to sprinkle over the crowd and "took care not use any actual ceremonial ingredients."
The producers may have been "careful not to offend Native Americans," but they could've done more. There were a few things Indians might find offensive.
Despite these criticisms, the episode is decent overall. The details--particularly the depictions of Indian ceremonies--are stereotypical, but the main points are solid. The producers cast an Indian to play an Indian. He's wearing a suit and tie, not some sort of costume. He has a normal name, not a funny Indian name.
Other than the phony curse, he doesn't offer any "wise" or "mystical" nonsense. He pulls the wool over the white man's eyes, but not in a "shifty casino owner" kind of way. Nothing about him suggests he's savage, uncivilized, or anything but a solid businessman and community leader.
The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors objected to omitting the American Indian from the redesign.
By Cody Lowe"Ralph Cherokee," welcome to the 21st century.
With the launch of its new, redesigned website last week, Roanoke County also reached into its past.
The board of supervisors decided to give new prominence to the county seal, which is dominated by an American Indian image affectionately known as "Ralph."
"Ralph" and the seal were hardly visible anywhere on the old site, and a countywide Web redesign team had recommended not using him at all. That group wanted to "brand" the site with a "contemporary" Web logo featuring stylized mountains--no Indian.
The entire board of supervisors last summer took umbrage with that proposal, however. The mountain logo looked too much like Roanoke's symbol, they decided. "I like the seal," Supervisor Charlotte Moore said.
"This is not broken," supervisors Chairman Butch Church said at the time, predicting that county residents would resent the Indian's absence online, even if the seal did continue to be used on paper documents.
Consequently, the county got a slightly revised seal still featuring a bright red "Ralph" on its new website, which had a "soft launch" last weekend with little fanfare at www.roanokecountyva.gov.Comment: The seal looks kind of "broken" to me. Here's the old seal:
And the new one:
Let's see...the skin color has gone from a slightly unnatural orange to a very unnatural brick red. The image is of a generic Indian, not a Cherokee. And the name "Ralph" is belittling; it treats the Indian as a mascot or pet, not as someone with a rich history and name of his own.
Tribes in Western Virginia
Most of the Cherokee lived south or west of Virginia, not in Virginia. So why not "honor" an actual Virginia tribe on the seal?
According to Wikipedia, here's who lived where Roanoke County is located:
[A] Monacan tradition holds that, centuries prior to European contact, the Monacan and the Powhatan tribes had been contesting part of the mountains in the western areas of today's Virginia. The Powhatan had pursued a band of Monacan as far as the Natural Bridge, Virginia, where the Monacan ambushed the Powhatan on the narrow formation, routing them. The Natural Bridge became a sacred site to the Monacan known as the Bridge of Mahomny or Mohomny (Creator). The Powhatan withdrew their settlements to below the fall line of the Piedmont, far to the east.
The Piedmont and area above the fall line were occupied by Siouan groups, such as the Monacan and Manahoac; Iroquoian peoples of the Cheroenhaka and Meherrin lived in what is now Southside Virginia. The region beyond the Blue Ridge (including West Virginia) was considered part of the sacred hunting grounds. Like much of the Ohio Valley, it had been depopulated by the Five Nations during the later Beaver Wars (1670–1700); its previous occupants are known from French Jesuit maps to have included the Siouan "Oniasont" (Nahyssan) and the Tutelo or "Totteroy," the former name of Big Sandy River—actually another name for the Yesan or Nahyssan.
The Cherokee may have lived in the western tip of Virginia that abuts Kentucky, but Roanoke County is close to the center of Virginia. I don't think it was Cherokee territory.
The Cherokee aren't all-purpose substitutes for "any Indian in the Southeast." If the seal has to "honor" someone, it should be "Mike Monacan" or "Ned Nahyssan," not "Ralph Cherokee."
By Laura RuizThe Union Weekly issued an apology yesterday for a highly criticized review of the 41st annual Pow Wow American Indian gathering, stating that it was "meant as an unflattering view of the event itself" and not "an assault on an entire culture."
The article titled "Pow Wow Wow Yippee Yo Yippy Yay" was written by the publication's campus editor, Noah Kelly, and published on March 14 in last week's issue of the Cal State Long Beach student publication funded by Associated Students Inc.
The Union published several disapproving letters from the community, and apologies from Kelly and Editor-in-Chief Kevin O'Brien.And:In a letter addressed to the CSULB administration, the American Indian Student Council "[demanded] that the university and Union Weekly officials condemn the ignorance and racism shown in the article."
They also called Kelly's article derogatory, racist and ignorant, stating it was clear that he had no real interest in learning about the event and calling the review biased against the American Indian community.And:President F. King Alexander responded to the article, saying CSULB does not "support the insensitivity nor the opinions" of the Union Weekly writer, but the writer is protected under the First Amendment.
Kelly said he received death threats in response to the article.Comment: Death threats are way over the top for something like this. Kelly's article was nothing compared to, say, Bryan Fischer's columns justifying America's genocidal actions against Indians.
I just watched The Son Also Draws episode of Family Guy again. It also was much more offensive than this article. Let's keep these things in perspective, people.
On the other hand, the newspaper's rationalization--it was "meant as an unflattering view of the event itself"--sounds disingenuous. Kelly didn't write that other powwows are impressive but this one seemed shabby. Moreover, he attacked Indian tacos and frybread in general. Since they're a staple of Indian events, insulting them is equivalent to "an assault on an entire culture."
Let's sum it up: Kelly wrote an ignorant and insulting column. Indians took him to task for it. Kelly and the newspaper apologized. So the system worked the way it's supposed to. Everyone learned a lesson about attacking minorities and their cultural traditions without cause.
We can hope these people have begun to rethink their ignorant views. If not, we've taught them to keep their ignorant views to themselves. That's all you can do sometimes.
An old episode of The Simpsons has a Native reference I hadn't noticed before:
Brother's Little Helper"Brother's Little Helper" is the second episode of the 11th season of The Simpsons. It aired on October 3, 1999. The title refers to an early Rolling Stones song, titled "Mother's Little Helper," which is about stressed housewives abusing prescription drugs.
Plot
Principal Skinner introduces a fire safety skit to the students. When Ned Flanders catches on fire, the fire department tries to extinguish him. It doesn't work because Bart is pulling a prank with the fire hose, though water crashing out of the gym saves Flanders anyway. Skinner has Homer and Marge come to the school, where they learn Bart has been diagnosed with Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD). Principal Skinner tells Marge and Homer that Bart must take a radical, untested new behavioral medicine called Focusyn or Skinner will have to expel him.
After several failed attempts by Homer (including naming several celebrities on drugs, such as Motley Crue's Tommy Lee, sitcom actress Brett Butler, and actor/comedian Andy Dick, and offering Bart taffy laced with several Focusyn pills sticking out), Marge convinces Bart to take the medication. His behavior immediately improves. He begins paying attention in school and being respectful to his parents (even tutoring a Navajo boy in his spare time). However, side effects soon occur, as Bart becomes paranoid that Major League Baseball is spying on the town using satellites. The doctors recommend that Bart go off Focusyn, but he refuses. Before anyone can stop him, he swallows several handfuls of Focusyn and runs away.Comment: In a brief scene, Bart asks a Navajo boy the meaning of the "Humpty Dumpty" nursery rhyme. The boy comes up with a correct answer.
"The film plays like a classic Sergio Leone Spaghetti Western crossed with a Nickelodeon kid's comedy with a little Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas thrown in as well. As a Western, the movie has everything from high noon gun battles to bitter fights over water rights to the stereotypical stoic Indian who once again seems incapable of speaking in complete sentences."
That last part refers to the character Wounded Bird.In the film, Wounded Bird plays a bit part as the token town Indian. He's quiet, mystical, and knows exactly how to track in the wilderness, just like the classic Hollywood Indian.
That being said, he is the source of some comic relief with his one-liners and ends up being a clearly heroic figure in the end. Then again, the bad pun where Rango refers to Wounded Bird's "ingenuity" only to say "no pun intended" put a bad taste in my mouth.
The official film website over at http://www.rangomovie.com includes this description of Wounded Bird:
"A solid creature of the Crow Nation. Wounded Bird draws his inspiration from Native American Indian principles of harmony and quiet observation. His tracking skills are legendary and he's big in Finland for some reason."
I disagree. Wounded Bird draws his inspiration directly from the scores of Indian depictions in countless Hollywood Westerns. Rango is filled with every other Western cliche--saloon brawls, corrupt mayors, spineless townfolk, a mysterious stranger--so why not the quiet mystical stereotypical Indian! It wouldn't be a true homage without one!
Personally, I'm a fan of subverting tired cliches and stereotypes to challenge our expectations and get those cerebral juices flowing. Rango does just that when the Beans character (voiced by Isla Fisher) subverts the traditional female role to become a gun-slinging, posse riding hero in her own right.
By Judy BurgeronAs producer and director, [Tika Laudun] was out to tell the Chitimachas’ story for the Louisiana Public Broadcasting documentary “Native Waters: A Chitimacha Recollection.” Laudun grew up in that area, and spent much time at her grandfather’s camp not far from the Chitimacha reservation at Charenton.
“I knew it was a very special place, because I loved being there with him. It was sort of like a little bit of a spiritual renewal for me to be back there, but to be there with someone who had such a greater depth of knowledge of these ancestral areas than I had as a child,” Laudun said. “This was a way of going home and looking at it through the eyes of someone who had this knowledge of 8,000 years or more.”
The area and its people have changed much over these 8,000 years. Known as “the people of Many Waters,” the Chitimachas’ sacred hunting and fishing areas are now dwindling, thanks to the Atchafalaya River levees and the increased sediment and plant life that are swallowing up lakes including Fausse Pointe and Grand Avoille. The tribe now has about 1,000 members.
“This is the story of the thin places, the fragility of a land, the fragility of a culture, and how thin that is and how we live in such a liminal world because of all the influences around us, that we don’t always take the time to sit back and open ourselves up to these more spiritual, more intense experiences that are around us,” Laudun said. “We just don’t listen to it anymore. Sometimes, not intentionally, but I think we lose, as he (Stouff) says, our belief in these places, and they go away.”
On the plus side, the documentary explains that the school on the reservation has received a grant from Rosetta Stone to allow the tribe to revive its almost forgotten language and teach it to their young students. A Cultural Center has also been established, so the tribe can document many of its historical artifacts including unique, handmade basketry.Comment: For more on the subject, see Native Documentaries and News.
Below: "Author Roger Stouff works at his laptop in a scene from the Louisiana Public Broadcasting documentary Native Waters: A Chitimacha Recollection." (Tika Laudun)
