Home >> Movies >> Dirty Redskin Devils

Dirty Redskin Devils

by Gena on October 6, 2010

I have a confession to make: I am addicted to Disney. I think it would be difficult to have been a child of my generation and not been, considering I spent all of my pre-adolescent years in the company’s “Renaissance” period. For every year of my childhood, from my toddler years well into my early teens, there is a Disney memory there. And like most people, especially women, and especially people of color, the relationship I have with Disney is… complicated. I don’t know how many of you have written hateful essays about Disney and contacted them about Song of the South, but– oh! Just me? Hahahahaha! Wacky. So maybe I’ve got a few issues with Disney. Maybe. I’ll try not to be too biased against them for not returning my calls. I think I’m pretty fair here.

My biggest bone to pick is with Pocahontas. My relationship with Pocahontas has been complicated as well, thanks to my childhood urge to inform clearly confused people, who I truly, truly believed, deep in my heart of hearts, had just made a mistake with their histories! Picture me, at six years old: “Do you wand me do dell you aboud da real Pocahondas?” (I was congested a lot as a kid.) Cue semi-informed speech that the audience tuned out halfway through. It’s like I was going door to door in a Girl Scout uniform without any cookies. Yet still, I maintained hope. LOL OPTIMISM!! That’s why my sisters and I have a long series of inside jokes that specifically reference this movie. “Wingapo, bitch!” I have a whole Thanksgiving Pocahontas skit.

Yeah, no.In any case, Pocahontas, released the summer of 1995, is Disney’s 33rd feature-length animated picture, and one of some significance when Disney’s handling of race is brought up. It’s, um, a… flawed movie. There’s several reasons for this, the least of which is that Mel Gibson’s casting as John Smith, is, in retrospect, a bit cringe-worthy. The big, main, monster issue– the elephant in the room– is that Pocahontas was a real person.

CliffNotes time! In the Disney version, Pocahontas, the adult daughter of the Chief of the Powhatan tribe, finds herself reunited with her absent father, due to be married to a man she does not love (Kocoum), and set to be tied down to a life she does not want. Then the Virginia Company shows up, and Captain John Smith and Pocahontas get to talking aided by, presumably, tree-spirit Grandmother Willow’s advice to Pocahontas to “listen to her heart,” which works out for them way better than Google Translate ever has for me. Just saying. Through the power of song and, giving credit where credit is due, some absolutely gorgeous animation, Pocahontas demonstrates to the very blond, white-toothed John Smith that cultural differences don’t have to be a pissing contest between SUPER SPIRITUAL and have-I-mentioned NATURE LOVING indigenous groups and the city-boy Brits.

Meanwhile, Governor Ratcliffe (one of the more subtly named Disney villains) and the British settlers, after declaring that everything they’re willing to build on top of is now called Jamestown, proceed to dig the shit out of everything looking for gold. While Smith was away, a Newsies-era Christian Bale (no, really– and this movie was actually released the same weekend as Batman Forever) accidentally shoots at some Powhatan scouts (no, really) who want to check out these funny hairy guys with the guns, and kills one of Kocoum’s comrades. The scouts retreat, and Ratcliffe plans an epic showdown.

Pocahontas gets back to her village just in time to sneak back out again when John Smith follows her home. Nakoma, her BFF, covers for her by lying to Kocoum even though she’s really worried about this whole interracial relationship thing. During the secret rendesvous, Pocahontas reveals “Gold? Um, we’ve got maize, I guess?” (oops) to John Smith before he and Pocahontas have to sneak back to their respective homes, only for reals this time. However, the Chief and Kocoum have been planning an epic showdown of their own, and in desperation, Pocahontas tries to convince her father to talk things out with the English. Which doesn’t work. And a suddenly self-righteous, holier-than-thou John Smith declares to Ratcliffe, “[b]ut this is their land!” …Which also doesn’t work. Um, spoiler alert?

Pocahontas sneaks out AGAIN, and meets John Smith, but both of them have been tailed by Kocoum (per Nakoma’s request) and Christian Bale (per Ratcliffe’s request), who shoots at Kocoum, but on purpose this time, and kills him. John Smith is captured and set to be executed ritualistically at sunrise, but Pocahontas meets him in the POW tent, where they declare their love for each other. The rest of the night is spent alternating between shots of the Native Americans and the English preparing for battle and both singing the (incredibly triggering) “Savages”. (Starting at the third song from the bottom. The one with the raccoon.)

Meeko stares on, aghast, at the changes made to the 'Have it Your Way!' campaign.Come morning, Pocahontas throws herself in front of a bound John Smith just as her father is about to deliver the killing blow, convincing him to free John Smith. The settlers are actually pretty cool with this plan, except for Ratcliffe, who has decided to shoot Chief Powhatan anyway. Smith jumps out and takes a bullet for the Chief and Ratcliffe is sort-of arrested by the other settlers, and everybody present learns a Lesson about Differences. John Smith goes back to London, along with the chained up Ratcliffe and some cargo that I think might be slapping the whole “stealing resources from Native peoples is wrong” message right in the face. Pocahontas says she will always be with John Smith in her heart and watches the ship sail away.

…Until 1998, when Pocahontas II: Journey to a New World was released (direct to VHS!), and Pocahontas and John Rolfe (who OMG hate each other! due to being a crappy romantic plotline where they are SO ALIKE and LEARN TO RESPECT EACH OTHER, etc.) meet up when she stows away on his ship to be an ambassador to England, since King James is going to send out an a war armada otherwise. She dresses up in English clothes and makeup, and meets the King, who thinks she’s the bee’s-knees until she criticizes his hobby of bear-baiting. She and her bodyguard are arrested on Ratcliffe’s recommendation, then busted out of jail by Rolfe and… presumed-dead John Smith! Awkwaaaard. Pocahontas goes before the Queen and explains that Ratcliffe is a lying liar who lies, then goes with Bodyguard, Smith, and Rolfe to crash some English ships together, have a swordfight, and get Ratcliffe arrested again.

Everybody has to choose to stay in England (Pocahontas’s bodyguard, for some reason) or leave England (everybody else), but Pocahontas also has to choose between John Smith and worldwide travel and adventure, and politician John Rolfe. She picks Rolfe, who wasn’t around for that news, I guess, but reveals he’s snuck aboard Pocahontas’s ship sailing back for America! Sort of a ballsy move if you didn’t know she wouldn’t be going with Smith, huh? According to Wikipedia, they proceeded to “kiss as the ship sail[ed] into the sunset.” Blech.

Okay. Now for some music-devoid facts. It’s been a long time since I read a book about Matoaka, the real name of the child called Pocahontas, so I’ve refreshed my memory with Wikipedia and a response to the film that was issued by the Powhatan Renape Nation.

What a charmer!Not-Captain John Smith, mercenary, one-time slave, colonist, and kind of shitty settler (yeah, they did actually NEED that corn) would have been in his late twenties to early thirties when he came to America, and apparently was such a dick that if the Actual-Captain Christopher Newport had gotten his way, John Smith wouldn’t have gotten any older. Also, when John Smith went back to England from getting shot? It was because a spark from his own gun landed in his powder keg. John Smith accidentally shot himself. This is the man we’re talking about. Pocahontas (a nickname essentially meaning “brat”) would have been around 12 years old in the winter of 1607, when John Smith & Co. met the Powhatans. Smith’s writings are the major source of information on Pocahontas, and she’s definitely mentioned as “a child of tenne years old” who apparently hung around Jamestown a lot to play with the kids there and bring the starving settlers all manner of tasty goodies. What’s that? Kids, you say? Yes, when a country is being colonized, you bring the women and children with you, because you’re moving in. Didn’t you know that?

Some more different English settlers and some Patawomecks kidnapped Matoaka a few years later around 1611 and held her for ransom. Chief Powhatan didn’t pay up to the English settlers’ liking, so they kept Pocahontas until 1614– when she had been converted to Christianity, taken on a Christian name (Rebecca), and allegedly told Powhatan off for not paying up in full, saying she was going to stay with the English. Presumably this is because she met John Rolfe, tobacco man. He is said to have loved her very much, despite his “agoniz[ing] over the potential moral repercussions of marrying a heathen,” though Rebecca-formerly-Matoaka’s feelings are unknown, and she may have done it to form a political alliance; in 1615, the same year her son, Thomas, was born, Ralph Hamor wrote that there were no further troubles with the Powhatans since the marriage of John and Rebecca Rolfe. In favor of this logic is the evidence that she had not only turned her back on her father and tribe, but also on her own family– a husband, Kocoum, who she married in 1610, and potentially (though it is unknown) children from that first marriage, to live with the people who kidnapped her. That, or Stockholm Syndrome.

OMG Becky you're sooooo prettyThe children might have been erased because Virginia Colony sponsors decided Pocahontas would be a great mascot for their tourism department and a nice way to hook new investors to boot. She was paraded around England from 1616-1617, meeting the King and Queen and generally being the good-PR poster girl the English wanted her to be. In 1617, the Rolfes boarded a ship to return to Virginia, but the ship didn’t even make it beyond the Thames before Matoaka-now-Rebecca grew sick and died.

Additionally, the whole “saved John Smith from being clubbed to death” incident wasn’t brought up at all until John Smith wrote a letter to Queen Anne asking her to be nice to “Rebecca” when she visited. Some historians theorize that Smith just hadn’t written anything about how “at the minute of [Smith's] execution, she hazarded the beating out of her own brains to save [his]; and not only that, but so prevailed with her father, that [he] was safely conducted to Jamestown” before because it was irrelevant, while others theorize that Smith was generally full of shit, but at least he might have been trying to help a sister out. Also, it was pretty convenient to make the “Civilized Savage” look that much more awesome to English people at the same time as promoting your book. Smith met with Pocahontas once more in the last few months before she died.

Defenders of the Disney Pocahontas films (including Russell Means, who starred in it as Powhatan, and Irene Bedard, Pocahontas) say they are stories for children. Their argument is that the world is ugly and harsh enough as it is, and telling children a romantic story where the characters do what is right and good is harmless, and actually beneficial to children’s morality. While I can understand the mindset of wanting to preserve a child’s ignorance (which has been placed on a pedestal as “innocence,” and is a whole other issue)– and even understand the viewpoint, for Means and Bedard in particular, that they need to keep their employers happy– I do not empathize with it, nor do I agree with it. Showing a child a story set in the real world that does not reflect the real world is deliberately misinforming them and blinding them to a reality that they have to live in and deal with every day, just like everybody else does. The only thing is, a child doesn’t have a frame of reference for the world around them like an adult does– they don’t have experiences to draw on.

Pictured: History?Not to mention that the history of marginalized peoples was hardly brought up that often in the history/social studies classes I attended when I went through K-12. I can’t speak for what’s being taught now, but as of this time 4 years ago, I went to a high school history class where the students were being taught the Civil War wasn’t actually fought over slavery. I’ve only once heard Pocahontas referenced in a history class, or even as a real, historical figure, when it wasn’t me bringing her up. What children are told and shown may well be what they believe, and when they can’t separate reality from fiction because they’re not dealing with fiction, you end up with a generation of children whose only experience with Native American history is Pocahontas until they’re old enough for Dances With Wolves.

What about my reality? What about being the only kid in your class who doesn’t want to be part of the Thanksgiving play? What about having to watch Peter Pan over and over and over again at friends’ houses, or at school? What about my great-grandfather, who went through Indian school? What about my grandmother, on terrorist watch lists for her involvement in the American Indian Movement? What about getting tired of drums and chanting and recycling (and drinking and gambling) every time a Native character or storyline is introduced in any popular media?

Or how every other girl in pigtail braids is a little “Pocahontas”? What about knowing your own history, and knowing not only will it never be acknowledged in school, but knowing it’s possible no one you know will ever be told by the adults whose job it is to tell them? What about growing up listening to non-Native people claim partial “Indian princess” heritage– and enforcing their legal rights to do so and still remain “white”?? All when my family can’t even get CDIBs.

Is my reality too tough for you to handle? Am I too real for you?

Roy Disney himself said, at the same link as the above Means quote, “We went and did our research,” adding, “[t]his is our version, our interpretation of what we see to be the really important points about what this legend told.” (Emphasis mine.)

There is a fundamental difference between reinterpreting a legend, a fairy tale, or a myth to suit you, and reinterpreting history, because you’re reinterpreting people. You erase their existence to replace it with one that you prefer. You edit and cut and trim the celluloid, and pretend it’s a real life and a true story. This is an issue with most historical movies, it’s true. But for 12 years of public school education, American children have the state-approved “truth” shoved at them, too, and as they say, history is written by the winners. When a group of people is systematically pushed out of the history books, treated as a “campy”/”kitschy” cultural phenomenon, and regarded collectively as something for consumption, that can be bought and sold and used to play dress-up– and that same group, historically, has rarely even been portrayed by themselves in the mainstream media– there’s something wrong with pretending everything worked out okay in a “historical” film. There’s something wrong with that if anyone does it, but especially a company like Disney, the trusted, go-to name for quality children’s entertainment. That’s not okay. It undermines history, it undermines the people involved, and it undermines the real messages and stories that these people have by presenting a backdrop of falsehoods that looks too much like what people have been trained to think is “real” for them to tell the wolf from the sheep.

It’s not okay.

{ 87 comments… read them below or add one }

31
Nonny (like) (flag)
October 6, 2010 at 9:31 pm

I’ve had a love/hate relationship with Disney movies even since I was a little girl. After I saw (and loved) the movie, I found a biography of the real history of Pocahontas. I was horrified, that the movie was so terribly far from the truth. I could understand the change of some details, like making her a bit older, but the Disney version was so wildly invented that I just… I don’t have words for how shocked I was.

And it struck me hard. And I think that’s the first time that it struck me how the dominant culture appropriates even history for tales that put them in a better light, that make them feel better about themselves. It disgusted me, and it still does, even though I enjoy the movie and music on a cinematic/musical level.

I was a kid who grew up hearing stories about her Cherokee great-grandfather, but was told never, ever, ever to tell ANYONE that we had Native ancestry, because we’d be treated differently. I didn’t quite believe my dad at the time, but the movie and its shoddy treatment of history… really brought it home how true it actually was.

  (Quote)  (Reply)

32
Scarlett (like) (flag)
October 6, 2010 at 11:43 pm

Ugh, I HATE the argument of ‘it’s just kids entertainment, it’s not SUPPOSED to be real, don’t get on our case for wanting to keep our kids innocent’. It crap likle that that makes kids first think in such atrocious steretypes. Is it really THAT hard to create a few rounded female/POC characters? And if they didn’t want to address any Serious Issues in Pocohontus, they shouldn’t have tcouhed it.

I went to a high school history class where the students were being taught the Civil War wasn’t actually fought over slavery.

I know this is nit-picking, but wasn’t the civil war actually fought over the right to seceed? I know slavery was BEHIND the south wanting to seceed, but it was my understanding that the south wanted to seceed and that’s what they went to war over.

  (Quote)  (Reply)

33
Gena (like) (flag)
October 7, 2010 at 4:10 am

I really, really never understood why, beyond laziness and low standards, it was rare to even have female/POC characters in the types of stories I was interested in, let alone well-rounded characters. It’s not that it’s so hard– if you’ve really got that mental block, pretend you’re writing everybody as a white male, and go from there. It would be flawed, but better than some of the other tripe I’ve sat through.

The Civil War reference was to illustrate how even “history” differs based on where you are and who you talk to– there’s a lack of open discussion or acknowledgment of another side to an argument. When revisionist history kicks in to decide who’s “right,” and cover up or edit timelines based on how good or bad PR is for those occurrences, there’s an issue.

I was lucky in that my first high school had a really kickass history program, but my second (we moved) high school’s history class really shocked me. Up north for K-8, the rudimentary US History we’d been taught re:the Civil War was “the South wanted slaves and to maintain a culture wherein slaves were ‘necessary’ to maintain a standard of living for the Southerners making those decisions, and the North thought that was really bad and also kind of Luddite, and we fought them, and we won, and we freed the slaves to boot.” Down south, it was, “the South wanted stronger states’ rights and less federal meddling in state affairs, and industrialization blows for xyz reasons, and btw it was just a lot of radical folks that wanted slavery ended, most everybody was cool with it.” And the thing is, the South did lose the Civil War, so most people hear the first version of history, but just because something’s culturally agreed upon as true, doesn’t make it the accurate– or whole– truth.

It’s not just the Civil War, though, even though that’s a really dramatic example. In-class, I didn’t learn extensively about the Vietnam war until high school, largely due to the Afro-Asian World 9th grade required history, and the sizable Hmong population in the area I was living. I never had a single history teacher even mention the Korean War until high school, either, which probably just indicates how shitty public school history is generally. Unless you assume that every time my family moved, that was going to be the year US History class didn’t involve memorizing Christopher Columbus facts!

  (Quote)  (Reply)

34
SunlessNick (like) (flag)
October 7, 2010 at 4:11 am

What about their perspective?

What about the “perspective” that historical events are legends that can be rewritten rather than facts?

  (Quote)  (Reply)

35
SunlessNick (like) (flag)
October 7, 2010 at 4:16 am

Down south, it was, “the South wanted stronger states’ rights and less federal meddling in state affairs, and industrialization blows for xyz reasons, and btw it was just a lot of radical folks that wanted slavery ended, most everybody was cool with it.”

One thing I often hear is that the South was on the verge of abolishing slavery anyway, so obviously that couldn’t have been the real cause of the war.

  (Quote)  (Reply)

36
SunlessNick (like) (flag)
October 7, 2010 at 4:17 am

Oh, I should specify that I’m quoting this as an example of bullshit, not neglected fact.

  (Quote)  (Reply)

37
Gena (like) (flag)
October 7, 2010 at 4:27 am

Thanks! Disney was actually participating in a sort of cultural tradition of writing Pocahontas as a tragic little savage princess with a heart of gold who helped settlers struggling to survive. Tragic! Yeah, but not in the same way people were thinking in the 1880s. Depending on when you’re talking about, she would then either be put in a love triangle, star-crossed romance, or a promiscuous nymphet. :P (I refuse to call her a Lolita, because I’ve read Lolita and I’m all, “You keep using that word! I do not think it means what you think it means.”)

Also, according to the IMDB, there were lyrics changes made for the VHS release, but not extensive ones:

(1) “What can you expect/ from filthy little heathens?/ Their whole disgusting race is like a curse!” was changed to “What can you expect/ from filthy little heathens?/ Here’s what you get when the races are diverse!”
(2): “Let’s go kill a few, men!” was changed to “Let’s go get a few men!”
(3): “Dirty redskin devils, now we sound the drums of war!” was changed to “Dirty shrieking devils, now we sound the drums of war!”

Yeaaaaah, that whole song shouldn’t have made it through editing, IMO. Those are the quotes that stuck out to you most as needing to be changed? BRB, watching unedited Aladdin to wash my brain.

  (Quote)  (Reply)

38
Gena (like) (flag)
October 7, 2010 at 4:28 am

Ohhhh. That emoticon is unfortunate. I meant to have the face with the grossed-out tongue, not the face with the sexy flirty tongue. Disregard plz!

  (Quote)  (Reply)

39
Gena (like) (flag)
October 7, 2010 at 4:33 am

Yeah, I got it. It’s one of those things that as soon as we moved down here, I called bullshit, but found it interesting that there was another side of the Civil War making the rounds– and by “making the rounds,” I mean indoctrinating the youth to a particular mindset by repetition over the course of a decade-plus.

Not that indoctrination wasn’t done up north either, but because it’s a different POV, the things taught differed in some ways. Also, states pick their own textbooks for public school, so. WHAT THE WHAT.

  (Quote)  (Reply)

40
Gena (like) (flag)
October 7, 2010 at 5:07 am

I love the artistry of Disney animation. My current “experiment” in getting off the Disney crack is checking out other animation companies and artists, but it hasn’t been super effective or anything, it’s just made me more obsessed with animation in general.

…the dominant culture appropriates even history for tales that put them in a better light, that make them feel better about themselves.

YES. This. This exactly!

The thing of it is, though, is that because the revisionist-history style of bigotry is a cultural practice, and not “just” prevalent in popular media, you have the really screwed up viewpoints of the past being carried through to the future. When they’re presented to children, you have the same situation, only little to no critical analysis of those viewpoints at all, esp. because of the association of those ideas with an idyllic childhood experience.

It doesn’t help that Disney being a household name synonymous with quality (their animation is gorgeous, and their songs are catchy as hell) makes them, insidiously, have the monopoly on what children believe and believe in. When they hold that much cultural and social power, and their bottom line is the almighty dollar, that’s blood-chillingly terrifying.

  (Quote)  (Reply)

41
Gena (like) (flag)
October 7, 2010 at 5:12 am

I think they just wanted a more balanced paper, or an acknowledgment that Disney wasn’t evil, just, like… irresponsible, lazy, shiftless bastards, or something. I guess.

But I really did not have it within myself to put those sentences together. I was just all, “RARRRGH ARE WE LOOKING AT THE SAME MOVIES?!” *froth, twitching* “DO YOU SEE THE FUCKING ILLITERATE ATLANTEANS?”

  (Quote)  (Reply)

42
Patrick McGraw (like) (flag)
October 7, 2010 at 7:11 am

If it weren’t for the dubbed Sailor Moon, I would never have gotten into the original series.

  (Quote)  (Reply)

43
Patrick McGraw (like) (flag)
October 7, 2010 at 7:15 am

The line that really stuck in my mind was “I wonder if they even bleed” because nobody in the movie bleeds.

  (Quote)  (Reply)

44
Patrick McGraw (like) (flag)
October 7, 2010 at 7:19 am

What I find so aggravating about that is that it requires that you ignore pretty much everything written by Confederate leaders and the declarations of secession. There was no question among the leaders of the Confederacy that it was about slavery, and they were quite explicit about it.

  (Quote)  (Reply)

45
Jennifer Kesler (like) (flag)
October 7, 2010 at 8:31 am

No, Scarlett, because they didn’t just wake up one morning and feel like seceding. The rest of the country was trending toward abolition, and they seceded to protect their “rights” to maintain slaves.

My schooling was similar to Gena’s.

In West Virginia (which went Union in the war) schools, I had been taught that the Union’s position wasn’t about *freeing* slaves, and that I believed. Slavery gave the South a big economic advantage and North didn’t like.

In TN, I was taught the South went to war over states’ rights and economic issues, not the right to keep slaves, oh goodness me no. But it was the states’ right to define who was chattel, and the economic benefits of unpaid labor! It’s a real stretch to try to convince yourself it wasn’t about slavery. I mean, if you remove the contentious issue of slavery, you can’t imagine a reason for the South to cut itself off and try to go it alone.

It’s definitely revisionist history to make white people feel better about themselves.

That’s why I liked what I learned in WV – WV broke off from VA for the purpose of going Union. Sounds awesome, right? Truth is, slavery wasn’t doing WV any good – WV was full of white settlers working their OWN asses off and being looked down on for it. WV simply say no reason to help VA maintain its slaving lifestyle at the cost of lives and money they didn’t have to spare. WV is now home to some of the most virulent racists in the country, because at no point for them was it ever about concern for black people, and I’m glad I was taught that humbling lesson, or I might’ve mistakenly thought I was descended from above-average humans instead of typical, self-interested ones.

  (Quote)  (Reply)

46
M.C. (like) (flag)
October 7, 2010 at 9:47 am

Oh, Disney. I still occasionally rant about what’s wrong with their version of The Little Mermaid.
I mean the original version is problematic enough, but at least it makes it clear that the mermaid totally ruined her own life when she gave up everything she had just to be with a guy whom she didn’t even know.
But Disney butchered that lession with their happy ending saying: Go on, little 16-year-old, leave your family give up your culture and dramatically change your teenage body to be sexually desireable for an older man. Argh, I hate Disney!
And yet there are pictures of me as a 5-year-old dressing up as Ariel. And I still listen to that beautiful music every now and then…

I believe the only non-offensive Disney film ever is Enchanted. (Though this might have to do something with my celebrity crush on Idina Menzel – I just have to love every film that turns her into a fairytale princess.)

Now as for the race issue: I’m a white girl and I’m not American, so please tell me if I’m being ignorant or stupid. But are there actually any films that show what really happened? Because there’s so much stuff I’ve never seen.
For example I didn’t know until a few months ago that almost every tribe of Native Americans had members calles two-spirits (transgender or transsexual people) who were butchered by the colonists. Never seen that part of history in Hollywood media…

  (Quote)  (Reply)

47
Gena (like) (flag)
October 7, 2010 at 11:50 am

I remember being really scandalized by all the comparisons to demons and devils, but the song upsets me WAY more now than it did in ’95. Disney’s full of metaphorical deaths and not-bleeding, but they’re REALLY big on semi-religious imagery.

In a way I get where they were going with SOME of the lyrics; “They’re different from us/ Which means they can’t be trusted” reminds me of the mob song from Beauty and the Beast, and I guess? kinda? sorta?? says not to judge others based on appearances…

Completely ignoring the entire course of the movie that happened beforehand. One of the Englishmen had a throwaway “comedic” line about the Powhatans, y’know, being justifiably pissed, but it was played for laughs.

  (Quote)  (Reply)

48
Gena (like) (flag)
October 7, 2010 at 12:34 pm

I looooove Idina Menzel. I saw her in concert earlier this year, and she’s amazing! But there are a few other Disney movies I really like– The Incredibles, Winnie the Pooh, Fantasia 2000, Lilo and Stitch… um. Hmmm.

I like Sleeping Beauty just for passing the Bechdel test, and for being GLORGEOUS to look at, but there’s problems with that movie too. And for what it was, the Little Mermaid TV show was unexpectedly entertaining and gave Ariel a friend! A triplicate token minority friend, but hey. And there’s no way in hell I’m giving Disney credit for Studio Ghibli’s work, or for the butcher job they did on The Thief and the Cobbler. Mary Poppins was alright, but significantly watered down from the books. I can’t speak for the Tinkerbell movies besides that I despised Peter Pan, or for Kim Possible…

As for accurate historical movies– obviously you’ll never get 100% accuracy, but some movies are going to be better than others. To be completely honest, I can’t recall ANY good “period pieces” with any degree of accuracy regarding indigenous peoples. I haven’t seen, like, any of the movies on it, but Rob of Blue Corn Comics made a list of good Native films. I’m on my iPod or I’d look for more, but you’re absolutely right about the damn near 100% ommission of fact in “historical” Hollywood productions, generally speaking. I wouldn’t mind as much if those movies weren’t marketed to children, or if they were released explicitly as fiction vs. “inspired by true events,” “the true tale of x,” “the history of y,” “diary/memoir/firsthand retelling of z,” etc., or if American culture didn’t treat historical fiction as history and books as what you go to when there ISN’T a movie.

  (Quote)  (Reply)

49
Maria (like) (flag)
October 7, 2010 at 12:46 pm

Don’t forget Gargoyles! Or Aladdin: The Series — I think both of those pass the Bechdel Test and the latter gives Jasmine a lot more agency.

  (Quote)  (Reply)

50
Gena (like) (flag)
October 7, 2010 at 12:57 pm

Oh, man, Gargoyles was my SHIT!! I didn’t even think of it as Disney because I mentally file it as an offshoot of Star Trek.

But the Aladdin TV show was MORE racist, even though as an adult it’s got some insanely entertaining moments. Also Sadira, who is awesome. But, Sultan Pasta Al Dente? Like, when is Abiz Mal coming back on? Or Mozenrath?? Or that one cat lady who made Jasmine a Naga that one time?

Disney owns Marvel now, too, but even though they’ve been showing older Marvel stuff I don’t think they should get props for something they didn’t make.

  (Quote)  (Reply)

51
Casey (like) (flag)
October 7, 2010 at 1:56 pm

For me, I got one of those pajamas when the movie first came out. I had the temerity/ignorance/naivete to wear it when we went camping so I could “role-play” as Pocahontas (ugh) and my mom even tried brushing my hair out with one of those weird bristle-y plants whose scientific name escapes me but we all called it an “Indian Hairbrush”….BOOOO! BOOOO! *booing past self*

That’s probably worse than my Weaboo phase.

  (Quote)  (Reply)

52
Brand Robins (like) (flag)
October 7, 2010 at 3:59 pm

So I’m at work with a guy I know once upon a time. He happens to be Cherokee, something I’d never really thought much about until this night. He’s working as a volunteer in a tourist information center and the place is abandoned, as usual, and we’re hanging out when a bus full of tourists stops in.

Most of them ignored us. Then a lovely couple of semi-liberal white folks comes over and is asking about the history of the area. My friend tells them about how his family came here after the trail of tears, and they say (maybe not word for word, but close enough) “Oh… wow, you’re a really Indian?!”

He confirms that he is, and they make a little bit of a deal of it. They then go and get their 8 year old daughter and bring her over and introduce my friend as “a real Indian!”

The girl looks up at my chubby, sweet faced friend and bursts into tears. She cries and cries and tries to get her parents away from us. Her parents are red-faced, flustered, shamed. But while they try to calm her down, they aren’t successful and end up more or less fleeing from the building because the girl won’t stop crying and telling them variations on not wanting to be scalped, that he’ll steal her or her mom, etc.

I am TOTALLY freaked by this. He isn’t. He’s just tired and tells me it happens a couple times a year — not often that spectacular with the screaming and wailing, but something where a little girl won’t be in the same room with him because he’ll scalp her. And more or less every day he gets told he doesn’t look like an Indian, or that someone tells him they thought all the Indians were dead, or something like that.

I told me once that his mother was working at the center, near the diorama of the first nations, when a class on a field trip came through and the teacher said to the kids “And then all the Indians died, and white people settled here.”

Not, you know, “then the white people killed as many Indians as they could.” Not “then some white folks intermarried with the local indigenous tribes and became the Latino people who still live here to this day.” Nope, the Indians just magically died. All of them. So there were none left. Not even that nice lady cleaning the floor over there. She doesn’t exist.

  (Quote)  (Reply)

53
Casey (like) (flag)
October 7, 2010 at 4:16 pm

YEESH! She was afraid he’d scalp her? If I was that kid I’d be wailing and screaming and crying because we white people raped his land and his culture and killed everybody, that’s what I grew up learning. (plus I was uber-sensitive about everyone’s suffering…didn’t stop me from playing “Cherokee Princess” though! >_>V)

  (Quote)  (Reply)

54
Jennifer Kesler (like) (flag)
October 7, 2010 at 5:32 pm

I… Casey covered my reaction to the scalping fears, but they thought “all the Indians were dead”??? How can anyone possibly not know better than that? That is some aggressive ignorance going on. I mean, you have got to work at being that uninformed.

  (Quote)  (Reply)

55
Nonny (like) (flag)
October 7, 2010 at 6:15 pm

@Casey

That’s what I grew up learning too. I was homeschooled, so my education about the Native Americans was probably very different than what most people my age learned. I learned about the atrocities that were committed against the tribes.

I always hesitate to bring up my Cherokee great-grandfather, because I don’t want to get classified as one of those “Cherokee princess” types, but my Dad talks about him a lot (he sadly died before I was born) and a lot of what he taught me, which extended to some amount of shamanistic beliefs about spirits and the world, came from my great-grandfather. NA history has always been very personal for my family.

  (Quote)  (Reply)

56
Casey (like) (flag)
October 7, 2010 at 7:01 pm

That sounds as aggressively ignorant as a 60-something-year-old retired Republican couple asking my friend if “all the Hippies died out” in the region where we live to make sure it’s “safe to move there”.

  (Quote)  (Reply)

57
GardenGoblin (like) (flag)
October 7, 2010 at 7:15 pm

The Cherokee Princess thing is one of my pet peeves.

1) If you are going to claim native American ancestry, do a tiny bit of research first.

2) Some of us are descended from tribes among other things and loathe the attitude some folks have of ‘oh, just another wanna-be trying to claim native ancestry to feel special’ whenever we try to do any research in that area.

It’s like a catch 22.

I have an ancestor who claimed to be Cherokee though we are reasonably certain he was of a different tribe based on his place of birth (we are also reasonably certain he was a horse-thief, rapist, and murderer, but that’s a whole other story. Suffice to say his eventual death by multiple and slightly excessive bullet wounds came well-earned). The Cherokee were ‘civilized’ though and thus tolerated where others weren’t. I also have a legitimately Cherokee ancestor.

I have an ancestor who was the child of an escaped slave who ‘passed’ and did her best to hide her true heritage. And then on my father’s side we have an ancestor who was put down as both ‘Ojibme’ and as ‘Iyinwoka’. We can guess what those meant (Chippewa and Cree, respectively) but aren’t sure which (or if both/neither were accurate). My father’s ancestors didn’t exactly tend towards the well-educated or meticulous when it came to making notes.

  (Quote)  (Reply)

58
Casey (like) (flag)
October 7, 2010 at 7:24 pm

I wasn’t homeschooled (nor do I have any Amerindian ancestry, to my knowledge) but my mom would always try to “smarten me up” on these sorts of issues…like when I went through a “ZOMG! POCAHONTAS!” phase, she told me “you know that movie is a lie and the Indians got fucked over, right?” Then she’d let me go on my problematically merry way. :P

She’s also the type of person who said “Happy 9-11! We deserved it!” every Patriot day…>_<V

  (Quote)  (Reply)

59
Djiril (like) (flag)
October 7, 2010 at 7:32 pm

I don’t think I have much to contribute to the discussion besides agreeing that kids’ movies shouldn’t lie about history. I did want to point out, though that John Ratcliff was also a real person and not just a villain made up by Disney.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ratcliffe

  (Quote)  (Reply)

60
Casey (like) (flag)
October 7, 2010 at 7:48 pm

LOL yeah. From what I’ve read he was slightly LESS of a dickhead than John Smith. XD

  (Quote)  (Reply)

Leave a Comment

READ THIS FIRST: By submitting a comment, you agree you have read our Discussion Guidelines and understand we reserve the right to post only those comments we see fit to post. If you want to submit a link or inform us about something you feel needs editing in the article, please use the email form.

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.

{ 2 trackbacks }

Previous post:

Next post: