Happy Friday everyone! Thanks to my friend (and amazing internet browser) Scott for finding this one–perfectly sums it up, I think.
Are we finally witnessing the death of the hipster headdress?
Cartoon can be found on http://adverbemonade.tumblr.com, and check out how many people have re-blogged it!
Earlier: But Why Can’t I Wear a Hipster Headdress?
The newest accessory for your already perfect nursery? A tipi of course! Eagle-eyed readers Andrea, Laura, and Mieko spotted these “adorable” tipi’s all over tumblr last week. Most of the pictures are from Design Chic, and here’s how the author sets up a slew of tipi-pics:
Grown-up or child, we all need a little bit of space that is all ours. Last week, I was looking for the perfect gift for my nephew’s two-year-old birthday. I wanted to give him a cute tent to put in the yard, but Mom suggested a teepee instead. What a perfect gift! He loves it, learned a great, new, easy-to-pronounce vocabulary word, and, most important, it looks adorable in the house but can go outside at any time. Definitely a winning combination. These teepees are not only the perfect place for a child’s imagination to run wild, but also add a whimsical design touch to the room (or yard). We hope you love them as much as we do!
Um, yeah. I laughed out loud at Julia’s commentary on her tumblr (she blogs at A’allure Garconniere as well), and I really don’t think I can say it any better:
Teepees are great because they are whimsical! (as opposed to tents, those are just boring) teepees are great because it’s a new, simple, easy to pronounce vocabulary word for a two year old! (because “tent” is just so overly complicated). teepees are great, because as a rich white privileged person, they allow me to relegate western plains native people to this archaic, whimsical, historical vestige of the past, instead of confronting my nation’s history of colonization and acknowledging native people’s lives and ways of living as complex and multifaceted. this new teepee trend is just so great, because now expensive design companies can make a buck by selling western plains native iconography as playtime places for kids in the suburbs!
I’m so happy incorporating teepees into my home decor allow my child the opportunity to erase my nation’s history of violence and cultural genocide by encouraging his imagination run wild about the ways he, too, can be cultural appropriative when he grows up.
Love it! Whenever I post about tipi’s, like when I talked about the Glastonbury music festival in the UK last year, I tend to get push back. “It’s just a tent!” people say. “We’re not allowed to appreciate Native technology?” they protest. My problem is that the tipis I see and the discussions around them always seem to involve some level of fantasy play, you’re not just hanging out in a tent that looks like a tipi. At the music festival it was adding to the whole free-rugged-in-nature-wild-thing athestic, these kid-tipis are encouraging “playing Indian” in the most literal way possible. I don’t know if you can have an innocent usage, because I feel like no matter what there’s a fetishization of “how Indians lived before”–and it continues the stereotypes that we all live/lived in tipis. I don’t know. I’ll ruminate as we look at a bazillion more pictures:
I’m fully aware of the fact that if it weren’t for intermarriage between Natives and non-Natives, I wouldn’t exist. I’m proud of all of my heritages, and proud that I can be unique in my Cherokee/Armenian/Irish/Welsh/German-ness (though, apparently Cher is Cherokee/White/Armenian, so maybe not so unique). I love that my family traditions and holidays are imbued with Armenian food and traditions, but that I can go to stomp dances in Oklahoma and feel equally connected. But when I think about my future, and my future children, the whole thing gets complicated.
I’ve written before about blood quantum, and some of the issues surrounding tribal membership and identifying as Native. I also allude, often, to my own identity struggles of being really mixed and coming from a suburban environment. Recently, since the 2010 Census data has started to trickle out, there has been some discussion about the interracial marriage rates among various ethnic groups. The NYtimes has a chart that shows Native have the highest rate of intermarriage, and they also recently published an article that quoted statistics showing Natives as most likely to identify as more than one race.
Debbie Reese over at American Indians in Children’s Literature looked more closely at the idea of a “multi-racial” identity presented in the Times article. She says that when people identify as simply “multi-racial” and claim that individual races don’t matter, they obscure what it really means to be an American Indian in today’s society. She says:
The students interviewed for that Times article mean no harm when they say their Indian identity doesn’t matter. It doesn’t matter—to them. But it does to me, and it does to Native Nations. The students’ well-meaning embrace of a mixed identity, in effect, obscures a lot, and in that obscurity, it does do harm. It contributes to the lack of understanding of who American Indians are… And it takes the US down a merry melting pod road where we all hold hands and smile in ignorance.
In addition to Professor Reese’s breakdown of the issue, NPR had a segment on intermarriage in Native communities, and they bring in the blood quantum issue. The piece focuses on a woman from the Wind River Reservation in Wyoming, and her fiance, a Mexican-American. In her community, members must possess 1/4 blood quantum for tribal enrollment, and while her children would make the cut, if they then choose to marry non-Indians, their children (her grandchildren) would no longer be tribal members.
NPR kinda misses the point, and focuses on “benefits” her children could miss out on (the article is called “Native American Intermarriage Puts Benefits at Risk”). They quote a professor of American Indian law who says:
“This becomes significant because it can affect child custody cases, access to free health care, education and land ownership. For many tribes, continuing high rates of intermarriage could become a huge issue in the future, since to remain as fully functioning nations, with governments, they need to have a population.”
Of course, there are MANY issues with this quote, and the article does point out that some tribes don’t have a blood quantum requirement for enrollment, but the bottom line is they make it seem like tribal membership is about having “benefits” from the federal government, not about culture, community, or anything else. The article also doesn’t really problematize the notion of blood quantum at all, it’s just taken as a given.
So, I say all this as a Native woman in her mid-20’s, who is thinking about (at some point) settling down, having a family, raising kids, etc. I think about these issues constantly. I am lucky that my children will be able to enroll in the Cherokee Nation no matter what, since we don’t use blood quantum for membership, but I worry about how they will be perceived if they want to be involved in Native community activities if they are even more mixed than me. I get crap constantly for the way I look and not being “Native enough”–even when the work I do is completely for Native communities and all about giving back. I think I’ve cried more tears in graduate school over identity politics than anything else, and I can’t bear the thought of my future (albeit fictional at this point) children dealing with that pain. I know they will be culturally connected no matter what, but what does that mean for my future mate?
I joke that I look at potential partners as a series of punnett squares, those genetic calculator grids you used in high school biology to determine whether your fruit flies would have messed up wings or something. But I wonder if my light eyes would be dominant or recessive, if my light skin would make it through the maze of alleles to end up on my child. I realize it’s sad, but I just want my kids to be able to be ethnically ambiguous enough to “pass” as Native. Is this internalized colonialism and bowing to stereotypes and misconceptions about Natives? Maybe. But it’s reality.
I would absolutely love to end up with a Native man. But you need to find me one first. My friends and I joke that educated, motivated Native men are like unicorns…magical, mystical creatures that you’ve heard of, and special enough that if someone gets one, they’re holding on and not letting go. This is not to seem like I’m hating on the Native men of the world. I just don’t come into contact with them that often in my whitewashed East Coast world. The draw of a Native guy is simple: I don’t want to have to explain everything all the time. I want someone who “gets it.” I want to make cultural references and jokes, I want someone who understands what it feels like to be invisible, marginalized, and silenced, I want someone who supports my activism and social justice work. Can I find that in a non-Native guy? Yes, and I have. Though they tend to be other people of color.
These discussions also made me think of Lisa Charleyboy’s post about dating over at Urban Native Girl Stuff. She breaks down the types of non-Native guys she’s encountered into three categories:
1) “Inattentive Skeptics” who are uninformed about Natives2) “Cultural Romantics” who appreciate native art and culture, but are unlikely to know any actual aboriginals (usually found in Toronto)3) “Connected Advocates,” on the other hand, are most likely to support the achievements of Aboriginals, and to understand the role discrimination plays
I think those categories pretty much cover it all. Lisa says she’s had some success dating the “inattentive skeptics,” but personally I find it really, really tiring to constantly explain everything. My preference is definitely for the third category (duh). She also dealt with many of these same struggles I have, and decided to only date Native men for a period of time.
Add all of these layers of complication surrounding identity to the fact that I’m almost 5’10, in a PhD program at an elite institution, and am kinda loud and opinionated…I don’t date much. ha. This is not to be a woe-is-me-I’m-so-lonely-and-oppressed post, but more of a personal reflection to bring to light some of the issues that 500+ years of colonialism have added onto an already complicated world of dating and courtship. I know that my non-Native friends don’t have to think about blood percentage or tribal identification when they’re out at a bar scoping out attractive coeds, and sometimes I wish I didn’t have to either. But as Debbie Reese says in her post:
Identity matters for those of us who are raised Indian. We work very hard at maintaining our nationhood and our sovereignty, and, we work to protect the integrity of our traditions from being exploited by people who don’t understand them.
I’m working my butt off here, and is it selfish that I don’t want it to be for nothing?
Feel free to disagree with me in the comments, and if you know of any attractive, tall, educated, single Native guys who want a date, let me know (I’m only half kidding…).
NYTimes: Who is Marrying Whom
NYTimes: Census Shows Rise in Number of Multiracial Children
American Indians in Children’s Literature: “Multiracial” Identity and American Indians
Urban Native Girl Stuff: I am Not Your Pocahontas
Urban Native Girl Stuff: Bloodlines
NPR: Native American Intermarriage Puts Benefits at Risk
Reader Winter Fox sent this over–apparently there are 100 secret Indian Prophecies (that will change your life forever!) out there, and The Sun has tracked them down. So exciting! We all know that every Indian is a magical shaman with mystical powers, so I’m glad The Sun has finally recognized that fact. ha.
Also, note that it’s right above “Elvis Coma Shocker”–it’s great that sacred religions and traditions are on the same level as this sort of investigative reporting. Gotta love tabloids.
Hi Friends,
Yes, it’s been over a month since my last post, I’m really sorry! I’ve had some family stuff going on, and was back in California for a bit, and have been trying to catch up since then. I have an inbox that is bursting with great (if by great I mean maddening and cringe-worthy) tips, so I’ll try to work through them in the coming weeks.
Big things happening in the news that we didn’t get to talk about (tomorrow we’ll look at some other more appropriation-y things):
Thanks to everyone who’s been posting all the fantastic links over on the Native Appropriations Facebook page, definitely check it out if you haven’t been over there recently!
As always, keep the tips coming, nativeappropriations@gmail.com
Everyone knows the photographs of Edward S. Curtis–they are the “iconic” Indian pictures you see in coffee table books, on postcards, even on wall hangings at Ikea. They’re the images people most often associate with Natives: Indians on horses, Indians in headdresses, Indians riding off into the sunset never to be seen again…
At the time he was working, Curtis was convinced that the Native population was about to disappear forever, so he took it upon himself to photograph as much of this “vanishing race” as he could. He amassed an amazing body of work, but he definitely had an idea of what he thought “real” Indians looked like.
Edward Curtis is a bit of a running joke in my family, since both my sister and I focused our senior theses on his photographs. I argued that his images created a false authenticity from which contemporary Indian artists struggle to break free. It came to light later that he was a fan of doctoring images (erasing signs of “modernity”), providing costumes for his subjects, and trying to make Native peoples fit his notion of Indianess. My sister talked about those issues too, but also looked at how contemporary Natives are using the images as a way to have a tangible connection to family and ancestors, and how Native artists are beginning to reclaim the images and use them as a starting point to re-imagine Native photography.
The common theme throughout Edward Curtis’s portraits is stocism. None of his subjects smile. Ever. Check out this gallery or this gallery if you don’t believe me. To anyone who has spent anytime with Indians, you know that the “stoic Indian” stereotype couldn’t be further from the truth. Natives joke, tease, and laugh more than anyone I know–I often leave Native events with my sides hurting from laughing so much.
So in response to the sad-stoic-angry Indian images of Edward Curtis, we’ve got this awesome video by Sterlin Harjo (the man behind Four Sheets to the Wind and Barking Water) and Ryan RedCorn (the man behind Demockratees and Buffalo Nickel Creative). Simple but powerful, and showcases the diversity of Indian Country too!
Every Wednesday (well, almost every Wednesday) for the past year and a half, a group of my cohort-mates and I have played trivia at an Irish pub in Harvard Square. It’s our weekly tradition, and we’re pretty good. Like we place first, a lot. But that’s just an aside. 😉
Anyway, in the course of our trivia history, there have officially been two questions about Natives, and we have officially gotten both of them wrong. Quite embarrassing, considering we have not one, but two Natives on our six-person team. (The first one was asking which state has the highest number of Natives, and they said the answer was New Mexico, but I still assert it’s Alaska. or Oklahoma.)
The question this week was:
Name two of the three Native Americans currently playing professional baseball.
But the announcer added this clarification, “We’re talking full blood, folks. Real, verifiable, Native Americans.” He then repeated the question, adding “full blood” to the description.
As my team looked to me, it took me way too long to think of Jacoby Ellsbury–the athlete crush of many Native women–but then I had no idea about the other two. We ended up putting Shane Victorino of the Phillies, who’s Native Hawaiian (it should count!).
Turns out the other two are Joba Chamberlain (Ho-Chunk), who plays for the Yankees, and Kyle Lohse (Nomlaki) who plays for the Cardinals.
When the host read the answers, he said, “Ok, so we were looking for two full blood, verifiable Native Americans who are current major league baseball players. And sorry, whoever put ‘Johnny Trueblood’, that doesn’t count. (everyone laughs)” He then gave the correct answers, with tribal affiliations, and moved on.
I was pretty taken aback by the whole exchange. It’s amazing to me how ingrained the blood-quantum narrative is in our society, to the point that it’s perfectly acceptable to differentiate based on blood in a trivia game. I just want to put this in perspective a little bit, so let’s pick a setting where African Americans are sorely underrepresented, like, say, the US Senate. What if the question went like this:
“Name 3 of the 6 African Americans who have been US senators. We’re talking full-blood Black folks guys, real, verifiable, African Americans.”
Sorry Barack Obama, you wouldn’t count. and then there was the whole “Johnny TrueBlood” comment too–what if someone had just made up a terribly stereotypical and borderline offensive African American name, and put that as an answer? Would the host have read it out loud? Would the audience have laughed?
The hilarious part of all of this is none of the three Native players named are full blood. They’re all mixed. but they are all “real, verifiable” Indians–citizens of their tribal communities.
Interactions like these make me so angry, because they continue to reinforce the colonial concept of blood quantum (“how much” Indian you are) as the only method of determining a “real” Native person. Blood quantum was introduced by colonial powers as a method of erasing Native people–“breeding out” the Indians until they no longer existed. This is not a concept that comes from within our communities or traditional cultures, and it’s frustrating how much it still dominates conversations in Indian Country. These players are “real” Indians. But, according to Stump trivia, the only “true, verifiable” Indians are full-bloods.
No one in the bar would have looked at our team and realized that there were two Native Americans sitting there, since we’re both light skinned and have light eyes. As long as these conversations continue to dominate the narrative of Native identity, we will never be seen as Indian–despite our cultural, community, and family connections, not to mention tribal citizenship. And that sucks.
Happy Valentines Day everyone! Last year I posted a bunch of vintage valentines with Native imagery, and the Vintage Valentine Museum has a bunch more that are worth a click. This year I thought I would share the “art” of Lee Bogle, whose images have become synonymous with “Native American Love” (just google it, you’ll see).
My friends apparently find it entertaining to send me postcards with these paintings on them, I’ve definitely opened up my mailbox more than once to find a Lee Bogle original staring back at me.
So where to even start with these ridiculous romance-novel-esqe images? I mean, clearly, they eroticize and sexualize Native peoples, but they also rely on the ubiquitous stereotypes dark skin, long hair, images of nature, feathers, fur, buckskin, headbands, etc. I picked out the ones that are supposed to represent “love”, but there are many others that highly sexualize Native women alone.
Most people can look at these and see them for their ridiculousness, but the problem is that they are reproduced millions of times all over the internet, with “Native American Blessings” or “Native American Love Poems” emblazoned across them. There are entire websites dedicated to e-cards, desktop backgrounds, cards, and t-shirts of these images.
If it weren’t obvious, Lee Bogle isn’t Native. He’s a white guy from the Pacific Northwest. His official website says this about his use of Native imagery:
Collectors know him for his images of Native Americans, often solitary figures of women. “I try to convey a spirituality in my art that the viewer must interpret for himself,” Bogle says, “I want my paintings to show a peaceful contemplation and express a depth of serenity that comes only with quiet inner peace”
Since all Natives are innately spiritual and have a “quiet inner peace,” right? But this by all means is not an isolated artist or isolated incident. There are hundreds of non-Native artists that make their livings off perpetuating stereotypes about Native people and preying on mainstream romanticized and idealized notions of Natives. Contemporary Native peoples don’t look like something out of a crappy romance novel, and images like Lee Bogle’s perpetuate stereotypes and erase our current existence and diverse and real people.
So with that, wishing you lots of Native love this Valentines Day!
A study of the color and design preferences of local and Southwest Native Americans resulted in vivid colors and intricate patterns. Trade expanded from the Nez Perce nation near Pendleton to the Navajo, Hopi and Zuni nations. These Pendleton blankets were used as basic wearing apparel and as a standard of value for trading and credit among Native Americans. The blankets also became prized for ceremonial use.
It’s almost a symbiotic relationship–they saw a market in Native communities, and Native communities stepped up and bought, traded, and sold the blankets, incorporating them into “traditional” cultural activities. Pendleton has also maintained close ties with Native communities and causes, making commemorative blankets for organizations like the National Museum of the American Indian and the National Indian Education Association. They work with Native artists to design the special edition blankets, and even donate some of the proceeds to the causes.
But then, on the other hand, they go off and do things like design a $5000 blanket with White Buffalo hair, which many tribes consider extremely sacred and definitely off-limits to commercial sale.
I do appreciate Pendleton’s relationship with Native communities. I love my blankets, and love even more what they represent.
However, seeing hipsters march down the street in Pendleton clothes, seeing these bloggers ooh and ahh over how “cute” these designs are, and seeing non-Native models all wrapped up in Pendleton blankets makes me upset. It’s a complicated feeling, because I feel ownership over these designs as a Native person, but on a rational level I realize that they aren’t necessarily ours to claim. To me, it just feels like one more thing non-Natives can take from us–like our land, our moccasins, our headdresses, our beading, our religions, our names, our cultures weren’t enough? you gotta go and take Pendleton designs too?
Then there’s the whole economic stratification issue of it too, these designs are expensive. The new Portland collection ranges from $48 for a tie to over $700 for a coat, the Opening Ceremony collection was equally, if not more, costly. It almost feels like rubbing salt in the wound, when poverty is rampant in many Native communities, to say “oh we designed this collection based on your culture, but you can’t even afford it!”
So I don’t know. Are all of these designs cultural appropriation? Should I ignore the twinge in my stomach every time I see a Pendleton pattern in the Urban Outfitters window? Should I embrace it as the mainstream fashion scene finally catching up with what we Natives have known since the 1800’s?
Personally, the bottom line is that I would rather associate Pendleton with Native pride and commemorating important events…
…than with hipsters, high fashion, and flash-in-the-pan trends. But I’m obviously conflicted. What do you think? Are these designs and trends ok, or do I have a right to be upset?
