Studio D'artisan

[TheIntelligentHoodwinker]

^ sounds like something SDA would put on their tees...

 

Actual LOL

[Blue Nemo]

This is also why I feel like it's difficult for me to really buy into items that have Native American imagery on it because even if we may think that it's not really that offensive, coming from a position of privilege, we can't really say if they should be offended or not. I really wish I knew where to read more about the Native American products that are offered by Japanese companies and whether or not we're crossing the line on cultural appropriation when we do so. 

 

Obviously wearing a Native American headdress is not a good thing. But is it fine to buy tees with these Native American prints on them? I also think this is the problem when taking from the past because of the general insensitivity and ignorance of the past. Just like with the Mister Freedom Saigon Cowboy, there are some things that are present in the past that generally isn't appropriate for wear today. What we need to do is to be able to discern between the two.

 

i really embrace that statement, its way more eloquent than my post.

 

i am no expert, and i will not judge anyone.

 

my perspective on that matter relies wholly on what i have read on various blogs, sites, etc. about native american symbols in fashion, sports, etc. - and the consensus is, using any NA symbol without being a NA is racism and exploitation/abuse. easy as that. and especially because this feather head is holy to them, we have no right to wear it, especially not as part of something worthless as fashion.

 

i try to find some useful blogs or info on that matter. as i feel this is important and i am not suited of being an advocat on that matter:

 

http://mycultureisnotatrend.tumblr.com/

 

https://www.facebook.com/nativeappropriations

 

http://apihtawikosisan.com/hall-of-shame/an-open-letter-to-non-natives-in-headdresses/

 

http://racerelations.about.com/od/diversitymatters/a/Native-American-Influences-In-Fashion.htm

 

http://nativeappropriations.com/

 

 

that is just what i found in 5 minutes, there is a whole lot more out there.

[FreeCharlesManson]

Hmm I live around plenty of native peoples i wonder what they would have to say about it. i do find the message on the shirt funny, but i wouldn't buy it for the reasons you guys bring up(and i don't like the colour options)

[itsbenhere]

I think if you read enough about anything on the internet you can find posts that describe something as insensitive, yes don't wear headdresses, but it's a simple (unfortunate?) fact that America is an amalgam of cultures and therefore things are adopted into common society that are devoid of their original meaning/use.

Ive also noticed it seems Europeans are more sensitive to these issues than Americans...

[clt3]

i really embrace that statement, its way more eloquent than my post.

 

i am no expert, and i will not judge anyone.

 

my perspective on that matter relies wholly on what i have read on various blogs, sites, etc. about native american symbols in fashion, sports, etc. - and the consensus is, using any NA symbol without being a NA is racism and exploitation/abuse. easy as that. and especially because this feather head is holy to them, we have no right to wear it, especially not as part of something worthless as fashion.

 

i try to find some useful blogs or info on that matter. as i feel this is important and i am not suited of being an advocat on that matter:

 

http://mycultureisnotatrend.tumblr.com/

 

https://www.facebook.com/nativeappropriations

 

http://apihtawikosisan.com/hall-of-shame/an-open-letter-to-non-natives-in-headdresses/

 

http://racerelations.about.com/od/diversitymatters/a/Native-American-Influences-In-Fashion.htm

 

http://nativeappropriations.com/

 

 

that is just what i found in 5 minutes, there is a whole lot more out there.

 

I agree with all the Native American symbols that are sacred to their culture and not to be used lightly. However, I think the line that I'm afraid that comes with liking the culture is the possibility of stereotyping that comes with it. Being Asian, it gets tiresome having to deal with people just assuming certain things based on your race. That's why it makes me wonder if just placing Native American faces with headdresses are actually tasteful and trying to celebrate a culture instead of making it a one-dimensional caricature that we use to sell things. It's why it makes me a bit iffy about buying Japanese made stuff that have a lot of Native American elements to it, without actually having anyone Native American to look on it and provide some perspective on whether or not it's right.

 

It also goes into jewelry and how there are a lot of Native American inspired jewelry which is a big thing among the Japanese market, made by Japanese people, which I'm not completely sure that's okay. It is nice seeing Self Edge's jewelry being made by people who actually have lived and participated in the culture. Then again, I'm also not one to judge because I really don't know much. It would be nice if someone was actually knowledgable or Native American and could actually provide some perspective on this.

 

 

I think if you read enough about anything on the internet you can find posts that describe something as insensitive, yes don't wear headdresses, but it's a simple (unfortunate?) fact that America is an amalgam of cultures and therefore things are adopted into common society that are devoid of their original meaning/use.

Ive also noticed it seems Europeans are more sensitive to these issues than Americans...

 

I don't think that it's because America is an amalgam of cultures but generally because of ignorance and apathy that people just decide to use these important symbols without respect for the original context. Which might be a result of the shallow culture that not only America has but also most of the world. 

 

I hope I'm not derailing the SDA thread too much.

[FreeCharlesManson]

On another note i bought my girlfriend a pair of SDL-703's i'll (probably) post pics here when they arrive.

[bradl]

Native Americans have better things to get angry about, if it had the government chastising native Americans now that would be a different t story.

[Blue Nemo]

I think if you read enough about anything on the internet you can find posts that describe something as insensitive, yes don't wear headdresses, but it's a simple (unfortunate?) fact that America is an amalgam of cultures and therefore things are adopted into common society that are devoid of their original meaning/use.

Ive also noticed it seems Europeans are more sensitive to these issues than Americans...

 

 

you just have to browse through the various native american blogs, sites and communities, paper magazines and so on and you will see that it is quiet an issue in america, far greater already than any european activist could make it up.

maybe the majority of the us citizens do not have this on their radar, but that only proves the point that there is a huge ignorance out there towards native american appropriation, or better, that it is quiet common to still exploit their culture.

 

and yes, obviously america is an amalgam of all the different races & cultures, the melting pot, whatsoever, but it's also a fact that this was build on a genocide, and further, that the natives never really had a saying in all of this.

 

in the end, sensitivity towards some aspects of life, circumstances, or people in generell should proof not to be that bad at all.

 

this whole thing is not an all-american issue, today europe/EU is as xenophobic as ever, or as ignorant as ever regarding people from foreign places, their culture and rights as human beings.

 

my last sentence is maybe derailing this thread, but overall this discussion is doing quiet fine in the SDA thread, and i think its good to discuss about this as long as we don't start to throw stones. and yes, having an actual native american join this discussion would be great!

 

edit: bradl, just swap government and society and you got your issue. society can be as cruel as any bad government.

 

edit2:

 

Edited August 27, 2015 by Blue Nemo

[dwilson123]

Most Americans are well aware of the issues regarding Native Americans.  There are tons of news stories and documentaries about the rampant alcoholism on reservations due to there being absolutely no jobs for these people to go to and all they get is a government check which immediately goes to the liquor store.  We are aware of the horrible living conditions on the reservations.  We're aware there is even a complete lack of public utility and reservations look more like a 3rd world country than part of the USA.  We're aware of the history and brutality our ancestors (using "our" loosely since many Americans can't trace their heritage that far back as being even in America) showed towards the people.  These are the actual serious issues that go beyond cultural appropriation and hurting feelings.  It is just much easier to make mainstream headlines as "Native Americans hate the name Washington Redskins" or "Native American's don't care about the name Washington Redskins."  I think if you talked to real life Native Americans the issues highlighted above take a dramatic front seat to anything about "Should an SDA pig be wearing a head dress?"

[Maynard Friedman]

this whole thing is not an all-american issue, today europe/EU is as xenophobic as ever, or as ignorant as ever regarding people from foreign places, their culture and rights as human beings.

Not sure I agree with this. Where do you think is a more tolerant, cosmopolitan place to live that ready accepts others?

[chicote]

Given that my work has to do with indigenous peoples I feel obligated to explain a bit about why a shirt like that is offensive.

 

Firstly, here is a link to the blog of a friend of a friend, a Métis woman who really knows her stuff. Within this post are a number of links to other sites which can further explain cultural appropriation, give examples, show debates, etc. http://apihtawikosisan.com/2012/01/the-dos-donts-maybes-i-dont-knows-of-cultural-appropriation/

 

One of the most offensive things you can do as far as cultural appropriation goes is take a piece of sacred iconography (for example, a feather headdress, which contrary to your claim, dwilson, is an intensely spiritual item, something that was never even shown to outsiders until bands of European settlers came across them in scientific study or in their settling of the West, both of which are mired in torture and genocide) and make it a fashion statement, in effect stripping it of any of its cultural value. To see something like this used in popular culture, whether on a T-shirt from Japan or the head of a drunk white girl at Coachella, is horrifying and offensive because it is a literal representation of more than five hundred years of indigenous relations with the Western world: explorers coming in, taking what they like, and destroying everything else.

 

This particular SDA shirt brings into cheerful light the entirety of native peoples' subjugation in that last statement. The same thing applies to the Flat Head's "Frontier Spirit" line, in my opinion. The idea of the "frontier" is inextricably tied with the idea of manifest destiny (read this for an explanation-->)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manifest_Destiny#Native_Americans, the idea that white settlers were destined to move into and conquer the entirety of the North American continent, regardless of the rights of the people who were already living there. What followed has been a genocide, plain and simple. No, it's not taught in history books in US public schools, nor is it ever brought up in popular culture. Why would it be? Relatively few privileged people feel themselves obligated to learn about the imperialistic history of their ancestors, and even fewer take any interest in learning about indigenous history and culture, and because native people are systematically denied access to education, land and socioeconomic opportunity--in essence, any of the ways they could integrate into broader society and spread this message themselves--ignorance becomes the order of the day.

 

I'll recommend two books really quickly. Mark Dowie's Conservation Refugees is a worldwide look at the effects of the "frontier" mentality on indigenous people, especially as it manifests in areas of ecological conservation, i.e. national parks, wildlife sanctuaries, and the like--it is far and away one of the most powerful books I've ever read and I can't recommend it highly enough. Eduardo Galeano's masterful book Open Veins of Latin America boils down much of the history of those American countries that lie south of the United States, where 100% of the population was (and in many countries, over 50% still is) indigenous.

 

--

 

 

 

Seeing a mascot wearing them I don't view as offensive.  They take offense when certain sports teams take their imagery and slap offensive names or use obviously racist cartoon imagery.

 

A good friend of mine has countered this point of view very eloquently: "It doesn't matter if you don't find appropriating our culture offensive; what does matter is that we do." I don't mean to single you out, though, dwilson, especially as you said this in the same post:

 

 

 

But possibly it would be smart to err on the side of caution and respect even if I don't personally feel it offensive.

 

I believe that is exactly what most native activists would encourage us (non-native people) to do.

 

That being said, there are plenty of ways to wear clothing influenced by Native American culture and tradition in a respectful way. This blog http://alagarconniere.blogspot.com/2010/04/critical-fashion-lovers-basic-guide-to.htmlgets right to that, and a link on the sidebar of the first blog I linked goes to a number of sites where you can buy clothing that directly supports indigenous artisans.

 

I suppose the bottom line is that any non-native sporting tastelessly made Native-themed clothing is going to be offending indigenous people. But not all Native-themed clothing is tasteless, and most indigenous clothing manufacturers have no problem selling their goods to non-indigenous customers as long as the wearer acknowledges the history and significance of whatever they're wearing. I'd actually be really interested to hear from aho what the discussion is regarding cultural appropriation in the Navajo silver jewelry industry. Given that most of it is made by indigenous people themselves, it might be one of the more ideal ways to use native fashion in a supportive manner.

 

edit: great post above Blue Nemo!

 

And to respond to your last post dwilson, the fact that indigenous people have larger institutional problems than an offensive t-shirt or football logo doesn't mean that cultural appropriation isn't a big issue. I have seen women from a Canadian indigenous community crying while watching a "native-themed" Alexander Wang runway show. Afterwards, one expressed to me: "It is horrible that you can spend four hundred years telling us our culture is worthless, only to turn around and make millions of dollars selling it in shows like this." In essence, the SDA shirt we have been discussing is capitalizing on the same thing.

Edited August 27, 2015 by chicote

[bradl]

I don't want to turn this into a debate, but do you really feel natives are denied all those things? It seems that they have every opportunity to go forth and run with it but the generational shit fall holds them back. Coming from Calgary, the natives aren't viewed the best so maybe my pov is skewed, but i would like to hear why you think that. Can PM me if you don't want to clog this thread up

[Blue Nemo]

Not sure I agree with this. Where do you think is a more tolerant, cosmopolitan place to live that ready accepts others?

 

 

right now we have more than only one burning refugees shelter in germany.

during the last week nearly every day the scum of the earth attacked refugees personally and their places in germany.

 

and you just have to read about the work of Frontex, the different coast guards of the mediterranean sea, etc. etc. to get the impression, that there is something entirely wrong going on in the EU!

 

a buddy of mine is from egypt, he is a surgeon with more than 5 years of well-documented-practice, and here in germany there is no single hospital willing to give him a job. even though there is a huge lack of specialized physicians..... its grotesque, so tell me what is cosmopolitan about that?

[Maynard Friedman]

You have given a very misrepresented view, quoting a few examples and extrapolating it over a whole continent, nonsense. It certainly isn't like that in London where there are millions of immigrants. The NHS here is reliant on foreign health professionals too. I also asked where you think is better. Anyway, you can PM me if you want as this is a thread about clothing.

[cmboland]

Whoa guys. I just want to see some pigs

[Frost]

Am I the only one who loves these discussions? Great stuff everyone, especially chicote. Props for talking about such a difficult topic in connection to clothing.

[Blue Nemo]

You have given a very misrepresented view, quoting a few examples and extrapolating it over a whole continent, nonsense. It certainly isn't like that in London where there are millions of immigrants. The NHS here is reliant on foreign health professionals too. I also asked where you think is better. Anyway, you can PM me if you want as this is a thread about clothing.

 

 

pmed, and I really don't know where it is better. not really

[Maynard Friedman]

I agree on the cultural appropriation issue, great post chicote.

There may be something sinister going on too.

Jeans are an American cultural icon and therefore possibly representative of the USA.

Comedy pigs are a representative icon of SDA.

SDA jean patches show comedy pigs attempting to pull a pair of jeans (cleverly obscured behind Mt Fuji) apart.

Are we to infer that SDA is attempting to (literally) rip apart the fabric of American society?

Edited August 27, 2015 by Maynard Friedman

[chicote]

Brad, here are some articles specifically relating to indigenous people in Canada:

 

http://docdro.id/gLlRjcI"The Criminalization of Indigenous People" (Cunneen, 2007)--looks at incarceration rates for indigenous people across various provinces and offers some insight into the horrific biases affected upon the Canadian justice system. What it doesn't mention is the apathy of law enforcement; specifically, the thousands of indigenous women (4,000+ on the Sea to Sky highway alone, in between where you and I live) that have disappeared in the past two decades and have not been acknowledged or searched for in any way by the provincial or federal governments, despite much of the indigenous movement repeatedly petitioning the government on the issue.

 

http://docdro.id/gCMfl3z"The State and the Contradictions of Indian Administration" (Wotherspoon and Satzewich, 2000)--explains why indigenous governance is so ineffective at actually bettering the lives of indigenous people...

 

http://docdro.id/x9qQNFG"The White Problem" (Lutz, 2005[?])--a brief economic overlook of white-indigenous relations in Canada from the 1800s to today.

 

Also, I would very strongly recommend the film "We Were Children", which tells the stories of two indigenous people who were students in one of the last residential schools in Canada. In my opinion, the residential schools are one of the most brutal and inhumane methods ever used to subjugate a population, and the film makes very clear why. Just as a warning, there are a few scenes of sexual violence.

 

Finally, just for general awareness, this is a excerpt from Tim Wise's brilliant book White Like Me, without a doubt one of the most powerful and challenging books I've ever read. In this chapter he uses some very powerful anecdotes to explain why racism is as damaging to whites as it is to everybody else. http://docdro.id/Zd1JnlE

[Foxy2]

I find it difficult as a German to discuss these issues, Ward Churchill or the Vietnam War with my non-native American wife. There is a different mentality in rationalization, dealing and discussing these issues - maybe in my upbringing there was a constant exposure to similar discussions in German history (ancient & more recent).

Edited August 27, 2015 by Foxy2

[FreeCharlesManson]

I agree on the cultural appropriation issue, great post chicote.

There may be something sinister going on too.

Jeans are an American cultural icon and therefore possibly representative of the USA.

Comedy pigs are a representative icon of SDA.

SDA Jean patches show comedy pigs (cleverly obscured behind Mt Fuji) attempting to pull a pair of jeans apart.

Are we to infer that SDA is attempting to (literally) rip apart the fabric of American society?

a conspiracy 30 years in the making japan waging their own psychological warfare against the US. this is the beginning of  WWIII. They aren't obsessed with america because they like them, they're obsessed because they hate them. Still angry about being nuked, they take their revenge with expensive jeans draining the american economy until the citizens are so poor that the Japanese swoop in and take control. 

 

These jeans are the end of america as we know it 

[bradl]

I have heard about all of the native females disappearing, but totally forgot about that. That is disgusting that shit like that happens to them. My friends grandfather was part of the Catholic church schooling abuse that went on 60 or so years ago and hearing what he went through was just horrifying and I couldn't imagine having to live through anything like that.

But why are they stuck in such a rut? A female native with a child has all the benefits, breaks, and support that anyone could ever want. It seems like they focus on everything negative happening with their race, but don't want to put the next foot forward to move on. I worked with a native who came from the states and he was absolutely floored and everything that is provided to them here, and how they still seem to struggle. It's hard when your parents and their parents all have such a negative outlook on society, to really break out and change from that.

Sorry, I'll post some pics of my jawnz later to contribute to actual denim

[itsbenhere]

Given that my work has to do with indigenous peoples I feel obligated to explain a bit about why a shirt like that is offensive.

 

One of the most offensive things you can do as far as cultural appropriation goes is take a piece of sacred iconography (for example, a feather headdress, which contrary to your claim, dwilson, is an intensely spiritual item, something that was never even shown to outsiders until bands of European settlers came across them in scientific study or in their settling of the West, both of which are mired in torture and genocide) and make it a fashion statement, in effect stripping it of any of its cultural value. To see something like this used in popular culture, whether on a T-shirt from Japan or the head of a drunk white girl at Coachella, is horrifying and offensive because it is a literal representation of more than five hundred years of indigenous relations with the Western world: explorers coming in, taking what they like, and destroying everything else.

 

This particular SDA shirt brings into cheerful light the entirety of native peoples' subjugation in that last statement. The same thing applies to the Flat Head's "Frontier Spirit" line, in my opinion. The idea of the "frontier" is inextricably tied with the idea of manifest destiny (read this for an explanation-->)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manifest_Destiny#Native_Americans, the idea that white settlers were destined to move into and conquer the entirety of the North American continent, regardless of the rights of the people who were already living there. What followed has been a genocide, plain and simple. No, it's not taught in history books in US public schools, nor is it ever brought up in popular culture. Why would it be? Relatively few privileged people feel themselves obligated to learn about the imperialistic history of their ancestors, and even fewer take any interest in learning about indigenous history and culture, and because native people are systematically denied access to education, land and socioeconomic opportunity--in essence, any of the ways they could integrate into broader society and spread this message themselves--ignorance becomes the order of the day.

 

--

 

 

A good friend of mine has countered this point of view very eloquently: "It doesn't matter if you don't find appropriating our culture offensive; what does matter is that we do." I don't mean to single you out, though, dwilson, especially as you said this in the same post:

 

 

I agree frontier is *linked* to manifest destiny, but I really don't think that having "frontier spirit" on clothing = agreement with the idea of manifest destiny. Look at Flat Head's concept page: "At The Flat Head, we preserve the spirit of the “good old days†of America: the independent spirit, the thirst for adventure" If this doesn't perfectly describe the Frontier spirit of those that struggled to even survive where no settler had been before, well I guess I can't convince you.

 

Additionally, I realize that feathers and all that jazz are sacred. What do you say to this though?

 

 

Seems to me that the pechanga native american's are using feathers/heritage/etc to further the image of their captalist casino.. that doesn't seem like the proper use of sacred symbols to me? If the argument was "only native american's should be able to use these symbols" I wouldn't say this, but as I see it the argument is "these sacred symbols needed to be treated with respect"

Edited August 27, 2015 by itsbenhere

[chicote]

"At The Flat Head, we preserve the spirit of the “good old days†of America: the independent spirit, the thirst for adventure" If this doesn't perfectly describe the Frontier spirit of those that struggled to even survive where no settler had been before, well I guess I can't convince you.

 

I don't disagree with you that The Flat Head's website offers a good description of the "Frontier Spirit" as they see it; most settler journals and historical references from the time use nearly the same words to talk about their lives and journeys, and I would venture to say that these are the words that come up in the mind of the average North American when asked about the period of the frontier, the settlers, the pioneers. That being said, I believe this perspective obfuscates a number of other aspects of the "frontier spirit" of the time.

 

One of the most common tropes of indigenous people from the Americas is that they were/are "savage", "animal", "bloodthirsty", "ruthless", yada yada. History textbooks describe bands of roving natives who attack and scalp settlers, rustle horses, destroy pioneer caravans, the whole lot. And sure, there are certainly accounts of these things taking place. But to say that the violence and, indeed, "savagery" of the time was exclusively, or even mostly, on the part of the indigenous people is to completely misunderstand the history of the time.

 

 

I guess I can start with Christopher Columbus, as he is who most people think of as the "first settler" of the now-US anyway. The above picture depicts Columbus and some of his fellow travellers feeding a number of native people to their hunting dogs, which Columbus not only did often but bragged about in his journal and reports to the Spanish royalty. Given that Columbus has been looked up to by most US Americans since his first voyage until, well, now, elements of his mindset towards native people have existed ever since. Here is an infographic that pretty accurately depicts Columbus' relations with the native people of the Americas, using excerpts from his journal and the reports of historians he travelled with: http://www.cleancutmedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Christopher-Columbus-Day-Infographic-.png

 

 

Of course, there were hundreds of massacres that took place between Columbus' time and the 17th century period of post-Mayflower early colonialism, but the Pavonia massacre of 1643 provides a good example of how history generally played out both before and after. In 1638, William Kieft assumed governorship of New Netherland, the Dutch colony that encompasses present-day New York state. His policies toward the formerly peaceful natives living on the colony's territory, including extreme physical intimidation and brutally high tax rates, led to an Indian killing a member of the colony in protest after five years of continually worsening subjugation. In response, Kieft organized a band of 129 soldiers to cross the Hudson River by night and attack the encampment the native was supposed to have come from; by the morning, they had massacred over a hundred natives without regard to age or sex, most of them in their sleep.

 

 

I'm sure you have heard of the Trail of Tears, which took place in the 1830s. Native relocations had been happening for hundreds of years already as a result of colonists' massive population growth and land grabs across the Atlantic coast, and as settlers began moving further across the country the natives that formerly occupied that land were forced to move further and further west. If they stayed and fought, they were either killed or taken as slaves. If they tried to assimilate, they were often forced into positions of extreme poverty due to pro-settler policies and a culture of institutional racism.

 

Anyway, the Trail of Tears resulted in the movement of over 17,000 natives from their ancestral lands across 1,000 miles of unfriendly territory. Obviously there was not enough food for everybody along the way, and disease and starvation ran rampant. The entire journey took more than six months, including a long stay through one of the harshest winters of the 19th century for which few natives were prepared. As a result, nearly one in four natives died along the trail, and the ones remaining lost over 90% of their new territory over the next hundred years as settlers pushed further and further west. (For more: http://www.warpaths2peacepipes.com/history-of-native-americans/trail-of-tears.htmor read A People's History of the United States by Howard Zinn, which is free here: http://www.historyisaweapon.com/zinnapeopleshistory.html )

 

Moving on to 1864 now...

 

 

The Sand Creek massacre is very similar to the Pavonia massacre mentioned earlier, except that it was completely unprovoked. I'll quote a bit from another website as I'm tired of writing: http://www.lastoftheindependents.com/sandcreek.htm

 

"Black Kettle was a peace-seeking chief of a band of some 600 Southern Cheyennes and Arapahos that followed the buffalo along the Arkansas River of Colorado and Kansas. They reported to Fort Lyon and then camped on Sand Creek about 40 miles north.

   Shortly afterward, Chivington led a force of about 700 men into Fort Lyon, and gave the garrison notice of his plans for an attack on the Indian encampment. Although he was informed that Black Kettle has already surrendered, Chivington pressed on with what he considered the perfect opportunity to further the cause for Indian extinction. On the morning of November 29, he led his troops, many of them drinking heavily, to Sand Creek and positioned them, along with their four howitzers, around the Indian village."

 

"The colonel was as thourough as he was heartless. An interpreter living in the village testified, "THEY WERE SCALPED, THEIR BRAINS KNOCKED OUT; THE MEN USED THEIR KNIVES, RIPPED OPEN WOMEN, CLUBBED LITTLE CHILDREN, KNOCKED THEM IN THE HEAD WITH THEIR RIFLE BUTTS, BEAT THEIR BRAINS OUT, MUTILATED THEIR BODIES IN EVERY SENSE OF THE WORD." By the end of the one-sided battle as many as 200 Indians, more than half women and children, had been killed and mutilated. 

   While the Sand Creek Massacre outraged easterners, it seemed to please many people in Colorado Territory. Chivington later appeared on a Denver stage where he regaled delighted audiences with his war stories and displayed 100 Indian scalps, including the pubic hairs of women."

 

This last part importantly shapes my view of the pioneers. Note that though the easterners (mostly earlier colonists) were outraged, the people in Colorado Territory (who had to have been pioneers themselves) were "pleased". I can link to some pieces later that describe the differences in mindset between the settlers and pioneers, but the above quote more or less sums it up really: pioneers were far, far more violent than former settlers had been, which is saying a lot.

 

--

 

While we're on the topic of scalping, the idea that it was only (or even mostly) practiced by Indians is not at all accurate. From http://www.hawthorneinsalem.org/ScholarsForum/MMD2263.html :

 

"John Brown, who is tribal historical-preservation officer for Rhode Island's Narragansett Indians, said that bodily mutilation [sic: i.e. scalping] was considered "dishonorable" until it was "learned" from Europeans in the mid-17th century."

 

There are a number of books and articles I can recommend that describe the complex role that scalping played in shaping the subjugation of Native Americans during the 17-19th centuries. Basically, once native people were introduced/forced into the money economy, they began to need some source of income to stay alive. Colonists (who not only didn't want to give jobs to natives, but had vendettas against most tribes) realized this, and began to promote scalping among the tribes they were allied with. They offered bounties to their allies for the scalps of their tribal enemies, then went and did the same thing with the tribe they had just set bounties upon. What followed was a very effective means of decreasing the native population: natives, desperate for some way to make a living, attacked and killed one another mercilessly, populations decreased, and when all was said and done settlers would move in and force the remaining Indians off their land. The bounties paid them for their scalps didn't even come close to equaling the value of their territories, of course. This way the settlers accomplished three tasks. They decreased the native population, increased their territory, and used stories of the Indian wars they provoked to further the idea that all natives were bloodthirsty savages.

 

"The idea of scalping continues to have powerful effects on the culture, particularly in its exclusive association with Indian warriors.

"Most people have bought into the concept that Indians are savages," says National Park Service archeologist Sam Ball.

"Prejudice over this sort of thing is just plain enormous," he says. "And it is being reinforced, rather than getting a clear, rational evaluation of what the evidence is and what reality is."

Calloway feels the misconceptions are part of a "complex process of dehumanizing Indians to justify taking away their land and culture, and attributing the brutality of frontier race wars to the `other side.' ""

 

I know all of this doesn't completely answer your question, Ben, but I hope that it starts to explain the weird feeling that I get when I see something that uses Native American cultural artifacts in a way that disregards the entirety of the historical context of the Americas. I agree that the frontier spirit embodies great individuality, adventure, and struggle in the experience of European settlers, but cannot forget that the "good old days" also encompass what is, to me, the worst human and cultural genocide in all of history, something that not only has been historically overlooked but that continues today in the forms of physical separation, denial of education/healthcare/access to media and the intense socioeconomic exclusion that comes as a result. I will get to the second part of your post later, right now i need to go think about something else.

Edited August 27, 2015 by chicote

[SuperJackle]

The "Frontier Myth" as it is known, is so deeply ingrained in our culture, technology, media, policy, etc. It's basically the romanticization of the western frontier, which has so many implications it could fill a semester( it was a large part of an American Studies class I took). Natives and Blacks have been poorly portrayed or misrepresented in contemporary media and it lends a poor perspective. I am 99% sure SDA had no intention to offend, but offense often comes from the unintended. Now if American culture wasn't so deeply ingrained with a white hetero-normative vision of the west, then it's likely these motifs would not be present in many Japanese garments.

 

Also, I realize we live in an era of what seems like political correctness overload, but we just gotta be sensitive to culture as portrayed by another culture, and all the implications that comes with.

Edited August 27, 2015 by SuperJackle

[bradl]

Holy Fuck, I never would have thought I would learn so much about native American history on Sufu. Incredibly informative and we'll written chicote.

[itsbenhere]

Chicote, I agree that everything you've described is terrible... Hopefully all of the atrocities that occurred are not news to anyone.

 

I suppose my argument hinges on the assumption that you can enjoy and admire some of the aspects of a certain time/civilization without necessarily endorsing everything that happened at that time. It's the same reason why I enjoy Flat Head's obsession with the 50's... I love the clothing, big cars, opulence, cockeyed optimism if you will... but I also recognize that it was a really crappy time for a lot of people. But I don't let the presence of bad things affect my love for the good stuff.

[Aries]

Great posts Chicote. 

 

It's sad in a way that we live in the age of simulacra, copies of things that never existed; once heavily symbolic, now sanitised and denatured for easy consumption.

 

We see it with nationality ("Irish Pubs", don't get me started), culture (the tourism industry), history (your posts) and so much else. I'm just waiting for wedding rings to start being sold as fashion items.

 

As Ben says though, we can love something and still be critical of it. I love Japanese denim, but some of it is utterly ignorant and that should be called out.

[Iron Horse]

Hm, it's obvious that white guilt and PC-induced SJWism has set in here, a denim discussion forum, and that's a shame. 

 

As someone who is half-Mexican (and not Chicano or some kind of Mexican-American with only a semblance of ties to Mexico), I can probably comment on this a bit. If someone from Spain, for example, wants to wear a T-shirt with a Maya or Aztec image on it, or a photo of Emiliano Zapata or Pancho Villa, I don't care. Why? They're likely not doing it as cultural genocide, or to become the authority on that culture (both false claims made by feminist typists these days about cultural appropriation). Odds are, they just like the image, and the romanticism of what it represents (I think most people will agree that the noble savage and the western gunslinger are appealing characters and good vehicles for escapism). 

 

Identity politics has become a dangerous thing in the West these days. It's funny to go to places like Kyoto, though, where Japanese people will let tourists rent yukata and kimono to wear and walk around town in. They don't get offended by this form of "cultural appropriation": they embrace it, because they know that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery (and they make money off it). Political correctness has no power here. They know that this is a way for people to market their culture for them. 

 

That's not to say things can't go too far or be done in poor taste (i.e. the Cleveland Indians' logo, or the Redskins team name). However, it seems everybody's looking to be offended about something these days. 

 

P.S. Perhaps someone will be offended by my avatar and ask me to change it? 

[Foxy2]

I'm familiar with a lot of the events Chicote has brought up because these things were on the agenda at home when your dad is an anthropologist/ethnologist.

Also, I have the feeling that SJW is not always used as an acceptable description and that Chicote has done nothing on this forum that would cause me to call him out in such a way.

I know for sure that a proper discussion of these issues is often too much for people's comfort zone and does not belong here.

It's not that I don't have an opinion, but there is little point in discussing it in SDA thread.

I usually stay away from SDA tees with Indians, but I like them when the pigs are dresses up as Cowboys or drive beatles & Fiat 500's.

Edited August 27, 2015 by Foxy2