Identity, Authenticity, Ideology in INDIANS in unexpected places

I found this book very compelling, so much so that I had a difficult time figuring out what to write about. One of the most interesting pieces to me was the section on representation. I was particularly interested in the idea that Indians were made to be “authentic” Indians, ignoring the passing of time and changes to their culture with modernity, so as to fulfill white citizens expectations of what Indians are.

Throughout the discussion of Indians in film, I kept thinking of the Sherman Alexie film “I Hated Tonto (Still Do)” that I have taught in my composition courses. In the essay, Alexie explores, in relation to his own exposure to Indians and film and his upbringing as a Spokane Indian, the “handsome, blue-eyed warrior” in film. He discusses white actors playing Indian roles and says of Tonto: “I was just one little Indian boy who hated Tonto because Tonto was the only cinematic Indian who looked like me.”

We don’t get that bit until the end though, and I was amazed that some of my students did not pick up on the irony in this piece. They said Alexie was being racist or that he didn’t want to be Tonto “just because.” In fact, Alexie offers in his personal reflection a similar argument to that presented in Deloria’s book. The representations are inadequate, inaccurate, and shallow. Films misrepresent, misinterpret and misunderstand Indian culture. And yet, he came to identify with the representation of an “authentic” Indian, embodied by a white actor, in such a way that he was ashamed by his own “inauthenticity.” Alexie writes:

“I watched the movies and saw the kind of Indian I was supposed to be.
A cinematic Indian is supposed to climb mountains.
I am afraid of heights.
A cinematic Indian is supposed to wade into streams and sing songs.
I don’t know how to swim.
A cinematic Indian is supposed to be a warrior.
I haven’t been in a fistfight since the sixth grade and she beat the crap out of me.
I mean, I knew I could never be as brave, as strong, as wise, as visionary, as white as the Indians in the movies.”

One of the most interesting discussions of representation that Deloria offers was the Columbian Exposition and the Cody shows that took place there. The shows and their success relied on the “authenticity” of the Indians and really, the authenticity of the Indians reenacting what their ancestors experienced. Still, it was presented not as an act but as truth. By having the Indians stay in tent communities that were open to spectators all day, they were a living exhibit. He writes, “in the smothering omnipresence of a white racial gaze, show Indians were, in fact, always performing Indianness, whether they wanted to or not, twenty-four hours a day.” However, they were performing Indianness as expected by white spectators even when their Indianness was changing.

I liked the account when an English soldier addressed an Indian in what he thought would be his language: “How! Heavy wet.” Rocky Bear responded in a British accent saying “Yes, it’s rather nawsty, me boy.” In doing so, Rocky Bear thwarted expectations that Indians were suspended in the past. He had spent eighteen months in Europe and had been exposed to experiences in different culture communities. Even if people wanted to treat Indians as if they were anachronistic beings, representations of static figures from the past, that was not the reality of the situation. Even as they “performed” Indian, they were participating in the changes and technological advancements of the national and global community.

I think the most valuable commentary of the book is that history informs stereotypes and stereotypes inform the way history plays out. I also think he shows how ideologies affect the way we perceive truth. He writes, “Ideologies offer both truthful pictures of the world as it exists and falsely prescriptive understandings of the world as it might (or should) be….Ideologies, in other words, are not, in fact, true, but, as things that structure real belief and action in the world, they might as well be. Ideology is not simply an idea reproduced by individuals in and through systems of representation. Rather, it is lived experience, something we see and perform on a daily basis.” In living our ideologies, how much are we willing to shape what we witness to fit into our own perceptions of who people are and how they live? In the case of representation of Indians in films and exhibitions, it seems the effort was made to make that shaping as easy as possible. Viewers did not even have to think about their perceptions but only watch them be confirmed.



~Lisa


p.s.
I also thought about these issues when attending a Yacqui “Gloria” ceremony this past Saturday. How much did the ceremony, the dress, the ritual go along with my conceptions of who Native Americans are and what their rituals are like? I’m still trying to digest this experience, but I thought it was interesting that I had brought this book along to get reading done in the meantime.