| http://www.facebook.com/ashleyjeanette?v=app_2392950137#!/video/video.php?v=333552560701 I have a bit of Cherokee ancestry and the Native Americans have always held a special place in my heart. The readings and discussion on the Indians last week have really stuck with me and in lots of ways bugged me as well. The above video is a project I did for my Dance History class a couple of semesters ago. These natives were once a beautiful simple-life people who knew how to live, etc.... I just randomly searched on youtube "native american" and this next video was one of the first to come up. I'll warn you that the language is very dirty but you don't have to watch the whole thing to get the point..... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Teq8-3Xitxc Is this what the once beautiful culture of American Indians have come to? Is this what we "Americans" think of them? Is it really necessary? I don't understand making fun of them in this way when we "Americans" were the ones who did this to them. I don't believe their history to be understood well enough to make comments like those..... Thoughts......? |
Monday, October 18, 2010
American Indians Then and Now
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Your post deserves more comments than it has received, and perhaps my thoughts will be insightful and thought-provoking...I’ll leave more than one comment, since what I have to say doesn’t fit in just one, hopefully this is a good thing!
ReplyDeleteFirst, I want to say that I find it interesting that you state that you have some Indian ancestry, but later on in your post you refer to Indians as "them." Is this because you don't identify yourself as one because of your blood-quantum level? I'm not looking to nit-pick, it was just something that stood out and I'm curious as to your reasoning behind it...
In response to Dave Chappelle’s routine on Native Americans.
Chappelle’s routine is considered funny to some because it has what makes most comedians comical—a sense of reality in it.
Consider how he states that they made him live in a tipi, while they were in the house. Is this something that, perhaps, some Indians are guilty of—living in the past? Perhaps, yet why is this? Indians are not a majority, and typically over the years have not made their voices heard as much as other minority groups (consider Hispanics, Blacks, etc.), except maybe with AIM years ago (circa Wounded Knee 1973).
Because of this, what most people know about Indians comes from history books—and, for some Indians, this is because what is contained in the history books are tales of what used to be, and even though a lot of it is tragic, there are still significant stories of uprisings, triumphant over-comings, etc.
In any event, I think comedy routines such as Chappelle’s are a lot deeper than one might think. You have some Natives who feel that it is reprehensible—how dare someone poke fun at Indian society who is an outsider.
Yet others find it funny.
This reminds me of the responses I received when I queried a few people I know about Russell Means, AIM activist and co-founder. Some, such as Larry Echohawk, felt that his intentions were good, but misguided. Others felt that he was full of nonsense, and became quite passionate about the fact that Means does NOT represent all Indian nations, and people.
ReplyDeleteComparing this to Chappelle’s routine, one can make a case either way—that his act is ignorant and does nothing to help society view Indians as a modern people; or, that it is merely comedic relief, and there are some elements, no matter how negative, of truth.
It reminds me of the ongoing debate about Native American mascots in schools. FSU and Utah are both approved (according to my knowledge) by the tribes they are located near, whereas other schools, such as North Dakota “Fighting Sioux” do not have the tribes approval.
Basically, there is not one pan-Indian agreement as to what is or is not appropriate, and this, perhaps, makes it harder to distinguish if what Chappelle has done is ethically right or wrong.
So, perhaps, would it be better for Chappelle to not call his routine “Native Americans,” but instead make it people specific? Maybe say “Dine,” or “Lakota”? Just a thought.
One of the best things I have seen done recently (as in the past few years) to help the cause of making Native Americans more modern, instead of just living on the plains in tipi’s, is to have Adam Beach, in his role on Law and Order SVU, actually NOT be playing an Indian. What I mean, of course, is that his Indianness is not central to his acting, but, rather, he is a detective who happens to be Indian, not an Indian who happens to be a detective. Most of his other roles are Indian specific, such as a code talker, or Plains Indian in Bury my Heart…
Do I find the routine funny? Well, some of it is funny, sans the swearing. Making an outsider live in a tipi while they live in a house IS funny, because it is going against the stereotype that all Natives used to live in tipis (which isn’t true) AND that all Natives CONTINUE to live in tipis (which also isn’t true). Could it be that Chappelle has stumbled onto something much deeper than perhaps even he realized—that HE is being placed in a tipi to show that America still has Indians living in tipis, while actual contemporary Indians have moved into more “modern” housing? Perhaps this is even more significant than, at first glance, the idea that he is made to live in a tipi.
Consider also that Chappelle’s father was a professor at Antioch University, and his mother is a minister…so maybe he IS more educated, and therefore could know more about social issues? Or, perhaps not…
Would it be more or less funny if Chappelle was Native American? Consider Smoke Signals—that movie pokes some fun at Rez culture (consider KREZ broadcasting from a van)…
So, some Natives will find the routine derogatory, and others will not. For instance, while growing up, I had some friends who were half Navajo (and perhaps this is a blood quantum issue?) who cheered for Chief Wahoo and the Cleveland Indians, and who also supported the Washington Redskins, etc. So, it simply depends on who you ask…just like it depends on who you ask if AIM was a good movement or not…
This reminds me of the responses I received when I queried a few people I know about Russell Means, AIM activist and co-founder. Some, such as Larry Echohawk, felt that his intentions were good, but misguided. Others felt that he was full of nonsense, and became quite passionate about the fact that Means does NOT represent all Indian nations, and people.
ReplyDeleteComparing this to Chappelle’s routine, one can make a case either way—that his act is ignorant and does nothing to help society view Indians as a modern people; or, that it is merely comedic relief, and there are some elements, no matter how negative, of truth.
It reminds me of the ongoing debate about Native American mascots in schools. FSU and Utah are both approved (according to my knowledge) by the tribes they are located near, whereas other schools, such as North Dakota “Fighting Sioux” do not have the tribes approval.
Basically, there is not one pan-Indian agreement as to what is or is not appropriate, and this, perhaps, makes it harder to distinguish if what Chappelle has done is ethically right or wrong.
So, perhaps, would it be better for Chappelle to not call his routine “Native Americans,” but instead make it people specific? Maybe say “Dine,” or “Lakota”? Just a thought.
One of the best things I have seen done recently (as in the past few years) to help the cause of making Native Americans more modern, instead of just living on the plains in tipi’s, is to have Adam Beach, in his role on Law and Order SVU, actually NOT be playing an Indian. What I mean, of course, is that his Indianness is not central to his acting, but, rather, he is a detective who happens to be Indian, not an Indian who happens to be a detective. Most of his other roles are Indian specific, such as a code talker, or Plains Indian in Bury my Heart…
ReplyDeleteDo I find the routine funny? Well, some of it is funny, sans the swearing. Making an outsider live in a tipi while they live in a house IS funny, because it is going against the stereotype that all Natives used to live in tipis (which isn’t true) AND that all Natives CONTINUE to live in tipis (which also isn’t true). Could it be that Chappelle has stumbled onto something much deeper than perhaps even he realized—that HE is being placed in a tipi to show that America still has Indians living in tipis, while actual contemporary Indians have moved into more “modern” housing? Perhaps this is even more significant than, at first glance, the idea that he is made to live in a tipi.
Consider also that Chappelle’s father was a professor at Antioch University, and his mother is a minister…so maybe he IS more educated, and therefore could know more about social issues? Or, perhaps not…
Would it be more or less funny if Chappelle was Native American? Consider Smoke Signals—that movie pokes some fun at Rez culture (consider KREZ broadcasting from a van)…
ReplyDeleteSo, some Natives will find the routine derogatory, and others will not. For instance, while growing up, I had some friends who were half Navajo (and perhaps this is a blood quantum issue?) who cheered for Chief Wahoo and the Cleveland Indians, and who also supported the Washington Redskins, etc. So, it simply depends on who you ask…just like it depends on who you ask if AIM was a good movement or not…
***I meant to say that what I have seen in the past few years to make Native Americans appear more modern, and a relevant people today, not in the past, in regards to media portrayals, is in how Adam Beach was portrayed in Law and Order SVU...Just wanted to clarify
ReplyDelete