North American Indians: a step by step guide to "playing Indian"
“I finally started going through my classroom’s library and was pretty appalled to find this book (along with the typical Indian the Cupboard and Little House on the Prairie-esque books). I teach 4th grade on the Rosebud Reservation; 100% of my students are Lakota. The book purports to give a history of Native Americans and a guide to Native crafts, but what it ends up being is a veritable handbook for white kids to “play Indian.” All the photos are of white kids dressed up as Indians! I can’t find one picture (other than the historical ones, of course) of a Native American child. Even more disturbingly, the descriptions make it sound as if these white kids are authentic representations of Indian clothing, etc. The worst thing is that this book is (now was, ugh) in the library of a classroom full of Lakota children. It’s like hey kids, these pictures of white kids can teach you how to be Indian better than your own people!”
Katie pointed out that the caption with the boy reads: “Plains warriors carried spears and hide shield and wore elaborate headdresses for ceremonial occasions”, implying that he IS a “plains warrior”.
Really, Dictionary.com? Definition of "Indian Country"
I’m writing a paper, and was looking for a clear way to define “Indian Country” for my non-Native professor who is not well versed in Indian issues, so I googled.
Dictionary.com told me:
Indian country:
–noun (esp. during the U.S. westward migration) any region where one was likely to encounter Indians, esp. hostile Indians.
“especially hostile Indians”? Seriously? in 2010, the accepted definition of “Indian Country” is a place where one is likely to encounter hostile Indians? The use of past tense is nice too, since we all know Indian Country is a mythical place that only existed during westward expansion. Really?
wow.
Dictionary.com definition of Indian Country: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Indian+country
We’re Still Here!: explaining Native persistence through Indigenous archaeology
Full disclosure: Mike was my undergraduate advisor, but I’ve been anxiously awaiting his book for a while now, and I think the themes resonate very well with the topics discussed on the blog.
Professor Michael Wilcox is one of the three Native faculty members at Stanford, and his research focuses on the Pueblo Revolt of 1680, and re-examining conquest narratives of Native peoples in the US. In doing his analysis, he also argues for a new way of looking at archaeology and Native populations, what he terms “Indigenous Archaeology”. The Stanford Report wrote a great article about his book (with a video! and pictures!) that can be found here.
after the jump, video, quotes, and a discussion of the “ooga booga syndrome” (yes, that is a technical, scholarly term).
Here is the video of Professor Wilcox talking about his work:
I love how he ties it back to modern day conquests and regime changes (Iraq, etc).
I really want to quote the entire article here, but I’ll resist. The article defines Indigenous Archaeology as:
understand[ing] Native American history by seeing the connections between artifacts and other scientific evidence and the narratives of living indigenous peoples. In doing so, he argues, archaeologists could better explain why indigenous populations persist.
This is a response to the constant narratives that Indians are disappearing and will cease to exist–we must “save” the cultures! Professor Wilcox notes that there needs to be a focus on persistence, rather than disappearance:
“I always joke that Indians have been disappearing longer than almost any group in history,” said Wilcox. “The presence of four and a half million Native Americans in the United States is a complete mystery to most people. There is no story that explains what they are still doing here.”
He said, “What if archaeologists were asked to explain the continued presence of descendent communities 500 years after Columbus instead of their disappearance or marginality? That’s a much more interesting story.”
He also discusses how the Pueblo people were in stark contrast to the Indians-scared-of-colonizers narrative presented in popular culture, calling it the “ooga booga syndrome”:
The Puebloan people, he said, were hardly reflective of what he calls the “ooga-booga syndrome” popularized in Hollywood films. He explains the syndrome this way: “Indians are depicted as horrified and fascinated by the presence of unfamiliar clothing and light skin and run in horror from their sight shouting, ‘Ooga-booga!’ It’s ridiculous. Native Americans were surrounded by people who were different from themselves. Europeans may have understood Indians as a single entity, but that is not how Native peoples defined themselves.”
I think that is the best term ever. I plan on using it in a paper in the near future. Finally,a quote that I think spans across disciplines, and is definitely reflected in the content of the blog, discussing the placing of Indians in the historic past:
“The mythology we have created is that Native Americans can never be truly modern, that they are locked in the past and that cultural authenticity is locked in the past, too.”
We struggle against that everyday, and I think that research and work like Professor Wilcox’s will start to chip away at misconceptions and false histories and begin to re-write the widely accepted narratives of conquest.
Stanford Report Article: http://news.stanford.edu/news/2010/march/wilcox-native-american-030310.html
Buy the book! University of California Press: http://www.ucpress.edu/books/pages/10795.php
Indians in the Times today!: Tuba City hospital a "model" for births
U of I "Unofficial" St. Patrick’s Day Shirt: Mascot is far from dead…He is just passed the f**k out
One of my friends pointed me to this shirt produced by students at the university of Illinois for their “unofficial st. patricks day” that is currently being sold through Facebook. The t-shirt text reads:
(front) Unofficial St. Patricks Day 2010
(back) Chief Illiniwek: U of I’s Unofficial mascot is far from dead…he is just passed the f**k out
In quick background, the University of Illinois finally voted to oust their Indian mascot in 2007 after years of struggle, and it continues to be an ongoing fight for Native students and their supporters on campus. The whole controversy can be read about here.
This is what “The Chief” looked like, all dressed up in his “authentic” Indian garb:
and this was the official university symbol:
There are so many campus incidences surrounding the student production of t-shirts for events–I know Stanford has had many issues, as well as Dartmouth, and now U of I. I feel like there needs to be an extension of existing hate crime or hate speech rules on campuses to these types of incidents, because often the university administration just seems to throw up their hands and say “there’s nothing we can do.” I think the Stanford fraternity that produced big game shirts featuring the Indian a few years ago was just asked to meet with Native students and administrators, and eventually they apologized and didn’t use the shirts, but they were not threatened with any negative consequences to make them do so.
I would vote that in these university environments that purport to be promoting and fostering diversity and understanding, there must be consequences.
Original post on American Indian Studies Circle blog: http://aiscircle.wordpress.com/2010/03/02/i-was-stunned-appalling-unofficial-t-shirts-and-the-mascot-controversy/
Chief Illinewek controversy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chief_Illiniwek#Controversy
Info on the “unofficial” st. pattys day tradition: http://www.uofiparentprograms.illinois.edu/feature%20stories/Unofficial_UIPD09.htm
Spool No. 72’s Coyote Navajo Rug Clutch
Another fashion appropriation sent by my sister, this one from the clothing website Spool No. 72. From perusing their website, they seem to be along the lines of Anthropologie, bohemian/vintage chic with maybe a little more “ethnic” flair thrown in there. The clutch description reads:
An exclusive for Spool No. 72. Made from a vintage Navajo rug each of our hand crafted clutches are one of a kind. The Coyote is truly a piece of art and is crafted from a native wool blend rug. Substantial in size the Coyote is adorned in breaided elk leather and a vintage horse blanket pin.
and then, the line below:
Native hand crafted in the US
So does that mean the rug is Native made? or the whole thing is made by a Native person? There isn’t any other information on the site to point one way or the other. I also happened to notice that their logo has an arrow through it :
And, when you click on the homepage of the company, the header reads “Spool No. 72: Rustic Native Inspired Women’s clothing,” but there is no further mention in the body of the page, just on the little blue bar above the browser window.
So I did some clicking, and I found their blog here. Along the right side is an section labeled “Native Inspirations” where I found even more bags:
(more after the jump plus an article I found about the boutique)
Spool No. 72 website: http://host5.shoppepro.com/~spoolcom/
I need some help figuring this one out…
Have you ever seen a real Indian?: AICF’s ad campaign
Nicole Richie’s baby mocs
My fabulous little sister Michele found this from Nicole Richie’s new baby clothes line for Kitson (called “House of Harlow”). Baby moccasins for $225?!