The Wacky World of TV Tropes

What makes all the mythical, romantic, and stereotypical notions about American Indians so potent and wide spread in modern America?

While there are many answers to this question, one of the most important is simply this: sheer and utter ubiquity.  In almost every form of popular media from television to film to literature to advertising, we are constantly being bombarded with the same creative devices over and over again.  Over time they work their way into our brains and take on a whole new life as tropes.

One of the best websites out there for understanding the power of popular media in shaping the American consciousness is TVtropes.org.  This website is a constantly expanding wikipedia style encyclopedia of tropes from creative works as diverse as video games, theater, music, and new media.  It's tongue and cheek brand of humor and casual tone certainly makes for some entertaining reading.

tvtropes.org

But what exactly is a trope you ask? Here is the working definition from the website:

"Tropes are devices and conventions that a writer can reasonably rely on as being present in the audience members' minds and expectations. On the whole, tropes are not clichés. The word clichéd means "stereotyped and trite." In other words, dull and uninteresting. We are not looking for dull and uninteresting entries. We are here to recognize tropes and play with them, not to make fun of them."

The website includes innumerable examples relevant to Drawing on Indians and I have excerpted some of them here.  Be sure to click on the link and  scroll down to see just how ubiquitous these tropes are across the media world (and feel free to add any new ones):



Indian Burial Ground

"A common cause for supernatural goings-on in America, commonly seen in movies: A house is haunted or Cursed due to being built on an Ancient Indian Burial Ground. The disturbed spirits of the ancients of the land then enact their bloody vengeance against those who wake them by turning off the lights, making hooting noises, creating flies and maybe, if they feel up to it, killing people."

Noble Savage

"A character who is portrayed as nobler or of higher moral fibre than the norm, due to their race or ethnicity, which is that of a barbaric or savage tribe. (Often regarded as living the Good Old Ways). The savages in question are quite often American Indians, so you could probably call them Mary Sioux. Rare nowadays, except as a Sci Fi alien- though it has made something of a comeback with the idea of Magical Native American people being more in tune with nature than the greedy white people."

Going Native

"There are plenty of people who believe that modern life is rubbish and would like to escape it and go live off the fat of the land. The Going Native trope plays to this fantasy by having a character lifted out of his typical environment and thrust into a new one, only to become a part of that new world. "

Injun Country

"American Indians (also Red Indians, Native Americans, Amerinds, or First Nations) discovered America by walking across a gigantic land bridge from Russia into Alaska. For a few thousand years they just took up space until Europeans rode massive wooden buckets across the ocean and crashed into the eastern shore. After a friendly 'getting to know you' dinner party, the killing started, and lines were drawn between the Civilized World and Injun Country."

Magical Native American

"After centuries of various atrocities (smallpox, Columbus, Custer, the Trail of Tears) perpetuated against "the savages", white people finally came to realize that Native Americans have rich identities and cultures. Furthermore, Native American tribes have their own rich and varied beliefs, many of which hold close to the idea of the value of everything on the earth...Of course, many non-Natives, especially those Hollywood types, saw a complex faith with a focus on ritual and spirits and broke it down to "magic." So, whenever someone needs to bring in a spirit guide, or magical superpowers, they bring in the Magical Native American."

Badass Native

"Indigenous people tend to be, well, poor. Indigenous people also have a tradition of war, unlike the rest of the world. So of course they're badasses. No matter what era, you're in, if you live in the United States, Canada, New Zealand, or Australia, indigenous people will be badasses. Rarely seen in the rest of the world, though. The American version of the Badass Native has costuming and prop elements as well. Note that this is Always Male, will often be magical. Overlap with Noble Savage."

 Mighty Whitey 

"A common trope in 18th and 19th century adventure fiction, when vast swathes of the world were being explored and properly documented by Europeans for the first time, Mighty Whitey is usually a displaced white European, of noble descent, who ends up living with native tribespeople and not only learns their ways but also becomes their greatest warrior/leader/representative. Extra points if he woos The Chiefs Daughter along the way."

The Chief's Daughter

"Even in Darkest Africa, Injun Country, or the land of Wild Samoans, Everythings Better With Princesses. The Chief's daughter, in her Fur Bikini or Braids Beads And Buckskins, is often the first to greet or trust Mighty Whitey during his visit to the strange new land. She'll be inexplicably beautiful by Western standards with just enough racial traits to be exotic, and will be a Noble, Nubile Savage compared to the rest of her Barbarian Tribe, and a Friend To All Living Things."

Mayincatec

"Under Hollywood History, all historical Central/South American nations are lumped into one exotic and barbaric people: the Mayincatec, featuring aspects of the Maya, Inca and the Aztecs, plus many others. It's a salad of exciting bits from all their histories, with a topping of myth and fiction. And the dressing is blood."

Pocahontas

Want to see these TV tropes in action?  Well, there isn't a better example out there than the famously flawed 1995 Disney animated film Pocahontas.

One of the best critiques is from regular TVtropes.org contributor The Nostalgia Chick.  Her silly comments and sharp wit add a touch of humor to what could otherwise be a very dry subject.  She also created a video critique of Pocahontas which you will find below:



Part 1 of 2:




Part 2 of 2:  (scroll ahead to 3:38 for the most disturbing Disney movie line ever)




To conclude as only The Nostalgia Chick can:

"And hopefully now we're all a little less educated on our own history. And the movie leaves us with questions like, 'Why are there moose in Virginia? Where did all those majestic cliffs go in the interim 500 years? Why doesn't listening with one's heart bridge language gaps anymore? Why does Pocahontas lack a real nose — was she really fathered by Lord Voldemort?' Really, it's best not to think about it — the great mouse in the sky certainly doesn't want you to."

For more on Pocahontas, check out this previous post:

Portraying Pocahontas: or the Not-So-Modern Origins of the "Sexy Indian Princess"


 <>

Hunting the Rez Magazine

 I stumbled on a fascinating new magazine called Hunting the Rez

http://www.huntingtherez.com

"Welcome to Hunting the Rez Magazine, a magazine that is written with the non-enrolled sportsman in mind. Hunting the Rez is a quarterly publication, its aim is to provide the general public with a directory to 52 million additional acres of hunting and fishing opportunities right here in the United States. With hunting grounds getting harder and harder to find due to a myriad of reasons, we believe that Indian country is the biggest best little secret hot spot for sportsmen all across the globe."

The magazine provides all the essential information for the sportsman looking for that unique hunting or fishing trip that one cannot get on other lands.  The website notes many of the unique benefits of planning your next trip in Indian Country...

"...for example; many tribes have rifle seasons during bugling season as opposed to the states. Some tribes even offer extended seasons for non-enrolled sportsmen.

Many tribes are reintroducing animals on our respective lands, such as wild turkey, big horn sheep, buffalo and moose, a management strategy that serves as a base from which we can build and sustain a renewable natural resource."

The magazine especially emphasizes the quality experience available only through sound management techniques:

"Native American tribes have the resources and management means to realize the responsibility that stewardship of these lands carry and work with wildlife biologists for quality game management, and are implementing sound strategies for protection and promotion of resident wildlife."

If done right, I think this magazine and the resulting interest in hunting and fishing on tribal lands for non-enrolled members could prove a great new source of income and job creation for the tribes.  It's certainly a different crowd than the casino folks!

I especially appreciate the design of the magazine as it clearly steers away from any stereotypical Indian symbolism or design.  The magazine is professionally done with its focus squarely on hunting (albeit on tribal lands).  This is probably due to the fact that it is published by Jason Belcourt from the Rocky Boy Indian Reservation in Montana.

This is in stark contrast to many of the survival schools I profiled here:


Cody Lundin and Surviving like an Indian


Many of these schools are run by non-Natives who liberally sprinkle Native symbolism and spirituality throughout their programs and websites.  Then again, I think these schools attract a different crowd than the high-end sportsmen group.  Your average primitive living enthusiast or survival skills junkie would probably prefer a more rugged, earthy adventure in the outdoors than what I expect Hunting the Rez magazine promotes.  (But maybe I'm wrong)

As I argued in the "Cody Lundin" post, it's often hard to gauge the motivations of anyone who appropriates Native skills, culture, or spirituality.

A good example of how to appreciate Native skills in the outdoors is this article:


Native Americans Designed First ''Deer Drives''


It is a straightforward piece that describes Native corralling techniques for hunting deer.  It makes distinctions between tribal groups (Menomoni, Iroquois, "some western tribes") and doesn't indulge in any fluff language about Indians "living in harmony with the land" or their "superhuman" hunting skills.  It could make mention of modern Native hunting techniques but the piece does make it clear it's looking at historical trends.  Otherwise, it's a great informative piece that puts it all in perspective when it says:

"Much of what we use today in our tactical strategies to drive deer we have learned from the first Americans... I think our knowing how this hunting technique of man-drives has evolved is important. It's another part of the rich history of the sport of deer hunting."

<>

American Indians in the Civil War?

Who's ready for five years of politicized, polarized, misinterpreted, and misinformed Civil War sesquicentennial fun?  (No, well you better get ready cause it starts on Monday!)

(Source: www.soldierstudies.org)

December 20th, 2010 marks the start of six years of anniversary celebrations for the American Civil War.  Exactly 150 years ago, the state of South Carolina voted to secede from the Union.  Within two months, the Confederate States of America were formally established, eventually growing to eleven states.

Why did they secede?  I'll let Confederate Vice-President Alexander Stephens do the talking.  Here is the famous excerpt from the cornerstone speech which puts it pretty bluntly (hint: slavery):

The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution — African slavery as it exists amongst us — the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution. Jefferson in his forecast, had anticipated this, as the "rock upon which the old Union would split." He was right. What was conjecture with him, is now a realized fact. But whether he fully comprehended the great truth upon which that rock stood and stands, may be doubted.

(Jefferson's) ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. ... Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner–stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery — subordination to the superior race — is his natural and normal condition.

I was reminded of this ensuing anniversary thanks to an article over at National Parks Traveler:


American Indians in the Civil War? Petersburg National Battlefield is Part of the Story


Here is a brief excerpt:

The 150th Anniversary of the Civil War is nearly here and a recent event at Petersburg National Battlefield underscored a bit of history that often escapes much notice—the role of American Indians in the conflict.

Estimates of the number of American Indians who fought for either the Union or the Confederacy vary widely; several sources cite numbers ranging from about 6,000 to over 20,000 men. One example occurred at Petersburg, Virginia, and that story has recently received some renewed attention.

The article goes on to describe Company K of the First Michigan Sharpshooters who fought at Petersburg.  Company K consisted entirely of American Indians from Michigan who enlisted in the Union Army.

According to information from the park, "The 1st Michigan Sharpshooters fought valiantly in every major battle in the Petersburg campaign. The American Indians were a memorable presence at the Battle of the Crater, where they were noticed for their composure under adversity. A Union officer described watching a group of them pull their jackets over their faces and sing their death chant when trapped in the crater under Confederate fire. 

The Park Service realized many of the dead from Company K were buried at the local cemetery and decided to contact the "the tribes to arrange a nation to nation consultation on how to move forward with the cemetery restoration project under the provisions of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act."

Eric Hemenway, a tribal repatriation specialist who works with the Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians, was one of several Native representatives who traveled to Petersburg.  Hemenway noted:

“We want to have Company K’s story told from our perspective... It’s been a local legend passed down in our community but outside of our community, it’s like a secret.  No one really knows about Company K...

Their rights aren’t fully recognized, yet they voluntarily go and fight.  They weren’t drafted or forced.  That’s kind of amazing.  In 1820, the United States Army tried to push them out of Michigan, but 40 years later, the men of Company K joined that same Army.  They went above and beyond the normal call of duty."

Hemenway finished saying:

“We’re just happy the park is being proactive and asking input from the tribes to tell their story.  We’re still here and we have a story to tell.”

This is a great article for several reasons:

1. It shows just how far the National Park Service has come in its relations with Indian people.  What was once a relationship of mistrust and hostility is slowly transforming into one of cooperation and understanding.

2. It reminds us that Indian people in the 1860s were not all stuck on the plains playing charades with Kevin Costner but rather lived side by side (and fought side by side) with a diverse lot of Americans from all backgrounds.

3. And despite this interaction, Indian people maintained and lived out their own culture and traditions within the bloody battlefields of the Civil War.

4. Lastly, it's a great reminder that Indian people not only fought in the Civil War but fought on both sides.  Just as brother fought brother in the Civil War so did Native brother fight Native brother.

Stand Watie, Principal Chief of the Cherokee Nation (1862-1866)

Confederate Brigadier General
(Source: www.scv357.org)

For more on this topic check out the corresponding Wikipedia article which also contains a photo of Company K:

Native Americans in the American Civil War

<>

"My Indian name is..." T-shirt Holiday Shopping Reminder

T-shirts with supposedly funny or witty tag lines that are in fact utterly demeaning are nothing new.  Take the following examples:

Source: My Indian Name is...T-shirt

What is new is seeing a prominent government body call these things out for what they are...


The Michigan Department of Civil Rights released the following holiday shopping reminder on December 15:

The Michigan Department of Civil Rights reminds both retailers and shoppers that what may be funny to one person, can be offensive to another. We ask that companies refrain from selling, and that shoppers refrain from buying such items. Of particular concern are items of clothing emblazoned with messages intended to be fun, that are in fact no more than bad jokes told at the expense of others.

We ask that anyone who has already bought such an item for themselves, or who receives one as a gift, consider the effect it will have on others before wearing it in public.

One particular line of products being promoted this season is the “My Indian name is...” t-shirts and related items. While such a shirt could be worn with pride by an American Indian who has been given such a name, this clearly is not the intent of those marketing these items. Companies are suggesting such “Indian” names as “runs with beer,” “drinks like fish,” “chief of remote,” and “bets on horse.” At best, this trivializes a proud tradition of America’s Native peoples. In many instances it also promotes inaccurate and unacceptable stereotypes.

And, of course, this is by no means a uniquely American Indian issue. Too often, individuals wear something on a shirt that they would never say out loud in public. Ethnic jokes are no more appropriate when worn in public than they would be if piped in on a public address system. “Humor” that denigrates or maligns people has no place in society.

Whatever one thinks of this sort of humor, there is one inescapable fact. Many people, particularly those targeted by the message, find it to be offensive. No considerate person would promote or purchase such items for wear in public.

The Michigan Department of Civil Rights simply asks that, in this season of peace, joy, and goodwill, everyone take care to ensure that their holiday cheer is not achieved at the expense of others. After all, the spirit of the season demands no less.

Thank you Michigan Department of Civil Rights for having the political guts to put out this statement and tell it like it is.

I do have one question though: Why do they keep insisting you have to be the target of the message to be offended?  I'm offended and I'm not Native.

It's also strange that they went with a "psuedo non-apology apology" reasoning for why these t-shirts are wrong.  I don't really "find it offensive" but rather think the t-shirt is itself offensive.  They seem to think it's the act of being offended that makes it wrong and not the inherent message of the t-shirt.

So does that mean if I wear it in private and not out in the public it is no longer offensive?  I suppose the Department doesn't want to get too involved in dictating personal behavior.

Then again, the problem with such a t-shirt is that it does have an impact on the non-Indian wearer.  It reinforces common stereotypes about Indian people.  It also trivializes a very serious and often misunderstood custom.  Yes, it is just a t-shirt, but all these subtle negative messages over time build up and have very real consequences.

Source: http://www.duluthnewstribune.com/event/article/id/127103/

Image: Bob King / Duluth News

Here's the contact info if you want to fire off an angry e-mail:

http://www.personalcreations.com/CustomerService-ContactUs.aspx

For more on Indians and clothing check out:

Indians and Knights T-Shirt

For another perspective check out this Newspaper Rock post:

Zazzle's "Indian name" t-shirts

<>

Tribal Chic: Native Appropriation Appropriation?

Who wouldn't want to live in a psychadelic post-apocalyptic techno-colored tribal music scape?

Seriously who?

Because if this video appeals to you then you need to check yourself before you wreck yourself!

I've learned a few things since I started this blog of mine over 8 months ago.  First and foremost, there is a ton of stuff out there to fill the endless digital pages of Drawing on Indians.  People just can't seem to get enough Indian!

Second, it's almost impossible to separate the aesthetic and the ethnic.  True originality is damn near impossible to achieve so we are instead forced to draw upon all the various pre-existing aesthetics to construct something new.

But when you combine all these elements together you are not just mixing color and fabric and shape, you are also combining meaning, symbolism, and culture.  You are inherently bringing into the equation your own impression of that culture, whether you are conscience of it or not.

Most people don't stop to think about the deeper meaning inherent in all the aesthetics around us.  It can be a personal memory or feeling imbued in the touch of a soft blanket or the taste of a favorite meal.  Or it can be a collective or cultural memory of a national tragedy or a communal triumph.

For the sake of academic soundness, I must give credit where credit is due.  A few weeks ago I stumbled on this tumblr post:

One question for fans of the “hipster indian” look


The author goes on a rant questioning the aesthetic of the "hipster indian" look in so many current photo shoots.  And I quote:

My theory? Its because the culture being appreciated is not any particular Native American culture. It is the culture of middle class America from 30 years ago, back when if you dressed your kid up as an “indian princess” for Halloween no one would think twice about it (I’m looking at you, mom.)

You can tell because all these pictures also often exhibit artifacts of the 70s, like feathered hair and tube socks pulled up to your knees, or have orangey red faded color palettes or excessive lens flare like a flashback in a Wes Anderson movie or something.

The “more innocent time” these images are hearkening back to is not to some imagined time of pre-colombian noble savagrey but the time from my childhood when middle America felt free to stomp all over Native American culture without guilt.

And this brings me full circle back to the video.  Is the tribal chic aesthetic of the Hot-n-Fun video a true appreciation/appropriation of Native culture or just an attempt to connect with an earlier era of appropriation when playing dress up was still groovy, cool, and not only acceptable but encouraged?

What does it say about our current state of affairs if young people today are grasping for this earlier innocence?

Such is the power of memory.  If Mad Men has taught me anything, it's that earlier eras only seem happier and saner in retrospect when in fact they were just as dysfunctional as today!

I just don't understand why these young people don't complete the appropriation.  What about the violence and the oppression and the historical reality of being Native in America?

Oh yeah, that wouldn't be very "hot-n-fun."
 


For more on the Hipster Headdress check out this earlier post:

Hipster Indians

For a thoughtful write-up on vintage fashion check out:

On the Politics of Vintage


<>