How to use this Page

It is October 26, 2016. There is so much going on. 

#NoDAPL

Very few news outlets are covering Native people who are taking action to protect water from Big Oil. #NoDAPL is a hashtag people are using to write and share news and support of the Standing Rock Nation in its resistance to a pipeline. Early in that pipeline's development, it was supposed to go into the ground near Bismark, but the people of Bismark said no. They didn't want the risks it posed to their water. It was subsequently moved to a location where it is near Native people. Their objections were dismissed. The outcome is a gathering of thousands of Native people from hundreds of different tribal nations, and non-Native allies who are moving there, setting up camp, and using their bodies and presence to say no to that pipeline.

Did you know people who have been arrested are being strip searched? 

Did you know journalists are being arrested? 

Did you know that, early on, a security team hired by the pipeline unleashed attack dogs on people there? Amy Goodman of Democracy Now was there when that happened. Have you seen her news casts? There's a segment in one about a dog whose mouth is dripping with blood of someone it bit. 

Did you know that people gathered there were using drones with cameras to document what is happening there, but that the Federal Aviation Administration has now determined that area is a No Fly Zone? 

You must inform yourself! 

In addition to the Standing Rock website and their page on Facebook, I use two sites that are putting forth information that provides Native points of views, and historical context:

• #StandingRockSyllabus from the NYC Stands With Standing Rock committee. 
• Dakota Access Pipeline: Native American Perspectives from Sarah Kostelecky, Paulita Agular, and Kevin Brown of the University of New Mexico's library system.

You can also get information by using the #NoDAPL hashtag on Twitter. Follow @DemocracyNow and @UnicornRiot. 

Be wary! Don't get duped! There are a lot of pages online where you are invited to purchase items related to #NoDAPL. Those sites say that proceeds will go to #NoDAPL but there's no evidence of that happening. I'm sending my donations directly Standing Rock. They set up a PayPal page. I'm also sending donations to the site raising funds for the Mní Wičhóni Nakíčižiŋ Owáyawa school. On their Facebook page, they tell you how to donate. I know it is tempting to send items but I believe the teachers know best what they need. Sending them funds lets them get what they need.  

Mascots

Across the country, baseball fans are watching and following news about the World Series. One of the teams uses a racist mascot. That mascot is everywhere, doing damage to those who view it. Research studies on the harm of such imagery actually used the one from Cleveland as part of the study. The outcome? Images like that have negative consequences on the self esteem, self efficacy, and "possible self" (what someone imagines they can be as an adult) of Native youth who see them. The study, Of Warrior Chiefs and Indian Princesses, is available for download on line. It was published in a psychological research journal, Basic and Applied Social Psychology. Get it. Read it. Study it. Share it. And, act on what you read! Native people have been objecting to mascots for decades. And yet, many remain. Clearly, there isn't enough of a critical mass to effect change in those mascots. 

Add a Comment

Watch Ruff Life Mascots - Bella & Max's Pesky Moment at Loughborough GCR.

Come and see us at The Solent Shopping Centre Kids Club, Portsmouth, PO6 4TP, Thursday 30/07/2015

Add a Comment

Sorry guys the filming went wonky due to me laughing and Bella's antics.  Even the iPhone had a hard time trying to keep up with her!
Watch what I mean below.

 let me know what challenges you'd like to see the pair do!

Add a Comment

It seems like it's taken ages for the Max and Bella Ruff Life Mascots to arrive, but TODAY is THE DAY!

During our last communication with Vanessa we were told that the plane carrying the Mascots will land in England this morning and, that the long awaited, Max & Bella mascots will be sent by courier for next day delivery.

This means that they will be with us tomorrow morning, in time for their first YouTube video clip before they start their England tour on the Friday.

So come and see them at the

Felixstowe carnival Saturday - 25th July

Teddy Bears Picnic -Loughborough Great Central Railway - Tuesday Wednesday 28, 29th July

Port Solent Shopping Centre, Portsmouth - Thursday - 30th July

Bournemouth Fun Day - Saturday - 1st August

Bella & Max look forward to seeing you there!

Add a Comment

The Ruff Life super,humanoid, canine, secret agent, characters Max and Bella from It;s a Ruff Life will be here next week, then the fun will really begin.

Add a Comment

We can hardly wait for the super hero humanoid, canine mascots Bella & Max to arrive. We've been planning the area and the activities we're going to film first before we leave for our crazy week at the end of July / beginning of August starting off with:

The Felixstowe Carnival - Sat - Sun
Teddy Bears Picnic - Tues - Wed
Port Solent - Marina Shopping Centre - Thursday
Bournemouth Fun Day - Saturday

So if any of you are in the vacinity of theses areas - we'd love you to pop down and day hello to the Ruff Life Mascots.

Add a Comment

Check out my video telling you all about the exciting and fun Ruff Life Mascots YouTube channel that is soon to be launched. You won't want to miss it. It will be great fun family entertainment.

Add a Comment

Last week, Chicagoland geeks were congregating at McCormick Place, enjoying the plethora of pop culture paraphernalia.

This week, Chicagoland geeks are congregating at Grant Park, to experience the NFL Draft.  It’s Chicago’s first draft in 51 years, and the NFL has a “fan experience” set up in the park, complete with a beer garden.

(Side note… I think the worst team in the NFL should host the NFL draft the next year, as a consolation prize to the fans who don’t get to enjoy the post-season.)

So, you ask, aside from the shared geekery, why am I writing about this?

Because graphic designer Justin Kozisek has taken the NFL’s 32 teams’ helmets, and crafted Marvel Comics-themed helmets and mascots for each!  My favorite:

He’s got a store, where it appears you can buy t-shirts and posters of your favorite teams/characters.

It’s doubtful we’ll ever see these used in an actual game, given the hubbub over the Spider-Man 2 baseball promotion. One would hope that Diamond Direct or Nike would create faux jerseys for those fans which geek over sports and comics. (Full disclosure: I own a Drunken Monkeys bowling shirt.)

Meanwhile, if fictitious football teams bore you, there’s always indoor football…

 

Add a Comment

Dear Mr. Arnold,

Thank you for responding to my critique of the "Cherokee" content in Mosquitoland.  No doubt, many people in children's literature are thinking well of you for what you said, but the conversation cannot end there.

With Mim and her "war paint," you--inadvertently--are doing what generations of Native people have fought against for hundreds of years.

Misrepresentations of Indigenous peoples are of such magnitude that, in 2008, the United Nations issued its Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. There are studies of the harm that misrepresentations do to Native and non-Native youth. In 2005, the American Psychological Association issued a statement about stereotyping. Last year, the National Congress of American Indians issued a report on this matter (NCAI's first national campaign took place in 1968).

Yesterday (March 12 2015), I read the USA Today review of Mosquitoland. I trust you did, too. I hope you cringed at the lead. For those who didn't see the review, here's a screen capture of the opening lines:

See "slap on some war paint" in the first line of the review? That is what a major newspaper honed in on: "war paint' and how it can get you through the day. Let's look at what Mim does when she puts on her "war paint" (Kindle Locations 694-697):

I start with the left cheek, always. This habit is king, and it must be exactly the same, line for line. The first stroke is a two-sided arrow, the point of which touches the bridge of my nose. Then, a broad horizontal line across the forehead. The third stroke is an arrow on my right cheek, mirroring the first one. Next, a thick line down the middle of my face, from the top of my forehead to the bottom of my chin. And lastly, a dot inside both arrows.

Now let's look at the finished image, from the trailer for the book:



As you know, Mr. Arnold, people are praising Mosquitoland for its look at mental illness, medications, and Mim's perseverance.

Few people (in reviews or on social media), however, are talking about the stereotypical imagery you deployed for Mim's perseverance. That "war paint" gets her "through the day" (as the USA Today reporter said). Let's look at some of that "war paint" and how it is used to get fans through a game.

This is the mascot at Florida State:



This was the mascot at the University of Illinois. Though it is officially retired, fans continue to paint their faces in the ways that the mascot did:



Here's fans of the Cleveland baseball team:



Here's a fan of the Washington pro football team:



Those four individuals--and thousands of others--stood in front of a mirror, just like Mim did, and picked up the items they used for their "war paint" as they got ready to rally their team against a foe.

I suspect you had none of this in mind as you wrote those words above, describing how Mim puts on her "war paint" or when you and your fellow author (the woman portraying Mim) worked on the trailer. I watched that trailer on your website. It is gone from there, now. I hope you took it down in response to my review. If that is why you took it down, I think I'm right in saying (above) that I hope you cringed as you read what the USA Today reviewer said about war paint.

The question is: what to do now?

In my response to your comment, I suggested that you talk with editors and other writers about stereotyping. Looks like you ought to add others to that list, too. I realize this is awkward. How does an author say "this was probably not a good idea" without hurting the sales of your book? I'm well aware that my criticism leads people to buy the book to see what you did for themselves, thereby elevating its sales, which suggests to the industry that people want MORE books like it.

We definitely need more books about the mental health of young people, but not ones like Mosquitoland that add to the problems of Native people, who--like those with mental health--are misunderstood and denigrated in far too many places.

Given the widespread praise of your book and the fact that you've sold your second book already, I think you actually have a secure platform from which to educate others about the problems in using tribal peoples as you did. You're getting requests for interviews; please use those interviews to educate your readers. I read that there is a possibility for Mosquitoland to become a movie. Please use whatever power you have to keep that stereotyping out of the script.

This, Mr. Arnold, is an opportunity to educate others.

Sincerely,
Debbie

Add a Comment

On Sunday, the American Indian Library Association (AILA) presented its 2014 Youth Literature Awards in Las Vegas, Nevada at the annual meeting of the American Library Association. Choctaw author Tim Tingle was the keynote speaker at the event.

Tingle's How I Became A Ghost won the middle school award. I could not be in Las Vegas but have been following happenings there via social media. On Monday,  American Libraries Magazine posted an article about the AILA event. In it, Michele LeSure included an overview of Tingle's remarks:

Tingle spoke about the trials his family endured being discriminated against for being Choctaw tribal members, and the importance of documenting these types of stories. He said the recent decision to revoke trademark rights to the Washington Redskins team name and logo gives Native Americans a big opportunity to raise these types of issues in public discourse, so “we will never be ghosts.”

Tingle's Saltypie recounts some of that discrimination his family experienced. His note to teachers in that book is exceptional. In his books, Tingle brings forth difficult moments in history in which Native peoples were discriminated against. How I Became a Ghost is about the Trail of Tears, and House of Purple Cedar opens with the burning of a Native boarding school in which Choctaw girls were burned to death. Though we would correctly assume that the characters in his stories would be bitter, they aren't. They recognize the humanity in all people, including those who hurt them. Tingle is a master at giving us history in a way that lets us examine brutality and compassion.

Tingle's keynote remarks indicate his courage in taking up current examples of that discrimination. Specifically, he addressed the Washington football team's racist name. He is absolutely right in saying that the public discourse on mascots creates an opportunity for us to examine all misrepresentations of Native people. One of those misrepresentations is the thought that we no longer exist. Here's a couple of tweets that captured more of Tingle's remarks:




Get his books for your classroom, school, or home library. And get them from small bookstores, too! When you booktalk or introduce them, you can say "Tim Tingle is Choctaw." That two letter word (is) will go a long long way at helping your students and patrons correct the misinformation they may carry about us as being extinct.

Add a Comment

On May 31 of last year (2013), Education Week pointed to a new study of high school graduation rates that reported that the graduation rates of American Indian students had declined in three out of the five years the study examined. In 2010, Susan C. Faircloth and John W. Tippeconnic published a paper in UCLA Civil Rights Project that had similar findings. In their full report, they cite work by previous studies that tries to make sense of why this happens. Some factors are lack of empathy among teachers, irrelevant curriculum, lack of interest in school.

Anyone who follows Native news or political dimensions of sports news knows that for the last year, there has been an increase in the media coverage of the use of Native imagery by sports teams. Some news outlets have decided to stop using some team names in their reporting, and many are critical of Dan Snyder's misguided efforts to garner support from Native people for his entrenched use of "Redskins" as the name of his team.

In 2008, Stephanie Fryberg's research provided empirical data on the damage mascot imagery does to the self efficacy of Native students. Her research was of such import that the American Psychological Association issued statements calling for an end to their use. If her study was replicated with younger children, using images they see in picture books and fiction they read or are asked to read in school, I think the results would be the same.

I am hopeful that increased attention to mascots like the one used by the Washington DC pro football team, or the one used by the Cleveland pro baseball team will bring an end to their use of that imagery. With that increased awareness, I hope that Native and non-Native parents look with informed eyes at images of Native peoples in the books their children read for pleasure or study. The images that adults embrace are images they've seen since they were children. Some of those images were in movies, some on items in the grocery store, and many were in children's books.

On October 19, 2013, I wrote about the Washington DC pro football team and shared images from children's books that are similar to its mascot. Today, I'm showing images that resemble those of Cleveland's mascot.

Here is the "Chief Wahoo" currently in use alongside the image used from 1946 to 1950.

Source: Indian Country Today, June 29, 2013

Here's a page from the 1952 Little Golden Book of Disney's Peter Pan. Is the book on your shelf? Is the CD or DVD amongst your collection?




Those are older books, but I urge you to look on your shelves. If you held on to books from your childhood, the titles I pointed to above (or others with similar imagery) may be among them. You can do one of two things with them. Put them away and use them later with your child when you teach him or her about stereotyping, or, if you're not attached to the book for sentimental reasons, throw it out.

Here's some images from more recent books. You'll find a lot of them if you look in books about Thanksgiving.

This image is from More Snacks! A Thanksgiving Play. It is in the Ant Hill series of Ready-To-Read books published by Aladdin. Written by Joan Holub, illustrated by Will Terry, it came out in 2006.




Here's a character from the popular Amelia Bedelia books. This image is from Amelia Bedlia Talks Turkey by Herman Parish, illustrations by Lynn Sweat. It was published in 2008 by HarperCollins.



Such imagery is also in newer movies made for children, like last year's Free Birds. Here's turkey Indians from it:



The images I'm sharing in this post are a sample. You will find others. Too many others. They are not harmless. They reduce American Indians to detribalized caricatures or props in stories that misinform readers. They affirm stereotypical ideas, and are part of what I believe causes Native students to disengage from school.

As I noted above, I hope that the increased awareness of the harm in mascots used by sports teams can be brought to bear on children's books and media.

If you are getting rid of those books, replace them with better materials! At the top right of this page, you'll see links to lists of books that I recommend. Order them for your home library, and ask your library to get them, too. Give them as end-of-the-year gifts to your child's teachers!

Let's work together and get rid of stereotypical imagery of American Indians, on and off the playing field.

Add a Comment

Monday, March 24th, 2014, Dan Snyder--the owner of the Washington professional football team--announced that he has established a foundation called "The Original Americans Foundation."

I bet he likes the ring of the name he came up with: "Original Americans." The fact is, the "original Americans" were the Brits who lived in the 13 colonies who officially became Americans when they quit being whatever-they-called-themselves prior to the revolution.

The Indigenous peoples of this continent go by our own names. We do that now. And we did that in the 1700s. And the 1600s. And the 1500s...

Snyder visited reservations "quietly and respectfully, away from the spotlight" and learned how poor Native people are...

WTF, Dan Snyder?

With your letter, you thrust them into that spotlight! What happened to quiet respect?! Thanks to Snyder, I bet the people he named in his letter are in the hot seat, fielding calls from the media, asking them for comments.

So what did billionaire Dan Snyder do about all the poverty he saw? He helped buy a backhoe.

WTF, Dan Snyder?

With his millions, he could have bought the whole thing, right? What else did he do? He distributed over 3000 "cold weather coats" to several Plains tribes. I wonder if those jackets have his team's name on them?

Snyder says that he "took a survey of tribes across 100 reservations" so that he could have "an accurate assessment of the most pressing needs in each community" and came up with over forty projects his foundation is going to work on. In his letter, he quotes several Native people. None of them, however, endorse the name. Some say they're grateful for his help.

Why would they need his help in the first place?

Maybe because Congress hasn't acted on its treaty obligations. Snyder could do more for all sovereign nations if he'd put pressure on Congress to fulfill treaty obligations. He is a billionaire, after all. He could do a lot more, couldn't he?

Instead, he has chosen a shameful path. Visiting Native people, "quietly and respectfully" and then shamelessly using them for his own ends. Disgusting.

WTF, Dan Snyder?

Add a Comment

Porter, a regional Canadian airline, has quietly built a unique brand through print and animated ads featuring a jet-setting raccoon named Mr. Porter. I recently flew with Porter for the first time and was blown away by the entire experience; not only are their lounge areas filled with WiFi, free espresso and shortbread cookies, but TV screens display animated clips of Mr. Porter, flying from city-to-city, occasionally stopping to give the weather forecast before picking up his suitcase and heading to another destination.

Mr. Porter debuted in 2006, the work of London-based branding and design agency Winkreative. The graphic, black and white raccoon was just one part of a larger branding identity created to evoke the carefree feeling of retro air travel. Now, Mr. Porter is inseparable from the brand, showing up on the company’s brochures, water bottle labels and in-flight meal boxes. “Raccoons are intelligent, adaptable creatures that succeed in a variety of environments and unfavorable conditions, so our mascot choice was no accident,” said Porter founder and CEO Robert Deluce.

Porter is going against a trend afflicting many major brands; logos and mascots are becoming more and more reductive and impersonal. American Airlines, for example, has slowly transformed its eagle from a stylized illustration to an implied, decorative swoop. Similarly, the Quantas Kangaroo has become almost unrecognizable.

Mascots, whether realistic or graphic in style, definitely matter. When American Airlines recently retired its famous logo that was designed by Massimo Vignelli in 1967, Vignelli revealed that the company wanted a stylized eagle, something he was against—he believed that the eagle should be detailed down to the last feather. “I refused to do it. We started without it, and the pilots threatened to go on strike because they wanted the eagle on American Airlines,” Vignelli told Businessweek.

So why are so many companies shying away from punchy mascots that make a statement?  Perhaps they’re afraid that a personality-driven character makes it more difficult to control a company’s message. Yet in embracing Mr. Porter, Deluce has created a stronger sense of the company’s goals, even among employees, saying, “Everyone at Porter has a clear understanding of the brand.” Mr. Porter is intriguing, mysterious and charming, three very dynamic adjectives that could never be applied to the American Airlines eagle-turned-swoop.

Add a Comment

I was at my local Target the other day, and as I was passing down the cereal aisle, I came across this. General Mills is doing a “retro” promotion for its more popular cereals, like Lucky Charms and Cocoa Puffs, complete with the old designs of their mascots on the boxes.

There’s something undeniably charming about some of these old designs. Although seemingly crude on the surface, the simplicity of it all, from the geometric-like bodies down to the poses the characters are standing in make them more iconic than their current Disney-like proportioned, iris-eyed incarnations. And seeing them literally side by side on store shelves made it all the more jarring to me.

Nearly all advertising mascots have changed over the years: Tony the Tiger, the Vlasic Pickle stork, Scrubbing Bubbles, even a design so deceivingly simple as the Kool-Aid Man has had an overhaul:

Of course, most of these character’s designs evolved over the course of a few decades. Watch a Trix Rabbit commercial from the early 1960s and compare it to one from the 1970s, 80s, 90s and today, and you’ll notice how gradual the changes have been over the course of half a century. Larger commercial budgets, different ad agencies and animation studios, as well as graphic trends and the advent of digital animation have been contributing factors to these alterations.

A lot of characters, like the Keebler Elves and Toucan Sam, have even made the big leap from 2D to 3D. While many people have collectively poo-pooed the CG makeovers of some of these classic characters, I personally find that most of them still retain their traditional charm. Take this new Froot Loops commercial for example:

Some makeovers are a bit harder to digest:

But in this day and age, we seem to be embracing the past more than ever. Childhood nostalgia has become a new marketing strategy for advertising companies, and consumers are eating it up (no pun intended). Why else would General Mills revert to utilizing these vintage designs on their boxes? Some companies are even “re-aging” their mascots, making them look like their former selves, while still refurbishing them for the 21st century.

Who’s your favorite advertising mascot and what do you think of their modern makeovers? Share your thoughts!

Add a Comment

On Wednesday, March 6th, I spoke at Cal State Polytechnic University in Pomona. The next day (March 7th, 2013), I spent the day at Redlands University and Sherman Indian School. My hosts at Redlands were Heather Torres and Nora Pulskamp of the Native American Student Programs office. Here we are at the end of the day:

In the morning, I gave a guest lecture to a Women's Studies class at Redlands University. I talked about depictions of Native women in the media and children's books. The students were engaged and engaging. I showed them "What Makes the Red Man Red" from Disney's Peter Pan. Their response was similar to the ones I get when I ask teachers and librarians to read aloud from selected passages of Little House on the Prairie. Surprise, that is, at how racist the depictions are, and that they do not remember those depictions from when they viewed/read these two items as children. We focused on the sexualization of Tiger Lily, and talked about the Violence Against Women Act.

From there, Heather and Nora drove us out to Sherman Indian School where I spent an hour with Native students. I talked with them about mascots, showing them photos of "Chief Illiniwek" (the former mascot at the University of Illinois) and stereotypes in children's literature. They were very attentive. When I showed them the photo of "Chief Illiniwek" doing the splits in mid-air, they exclaimed aloud at how ridiculous it is.

I also talked about the need to have books about American Indians, written by Native authors. My favorite example is Cynthia Leitich Smith's Jingle Dancer. I love showing that book to Native students, no matter how young or old they are. I was delighted that it slowly made its way through the group of 30 or so students, as they pored over the pages. Clearly, Cynthia's book touched them in a good way. After class was over, one young woman approached me to say she wants to be a writer. Her English teacher was also there and praised her work.

I was inspired by the students on both campuses. From them, I gained a strong sense of optimism and hope for the future.

The public lecture on campus last night reminded me that certain segments of society will not welcome them or the work they wish to do. That lecture drew Native people who live in the Redlands area, and Redlands students who tutor Native youth. All took note of the woman who entered the lecture hall wearing a "Chief Illiniwek" jacket. When she took her jacket off, I noticed she had one of the newer shirts fans of "Chief Illiniwek" wear. When the mascot was retired at Illinois, private vendors designed and sold several different kinds of shirts, including the one she wore. It has the word CHIEF in large bold letters across the front of the shirt. The woman sat alone and quiet throughout the lecture, but at the end, told us she is a Fulbright scholar who studies cultural genocide, and that "Chief Illiniwek" is not a violent mascot like the one at Florida State. She was belligerent and loud and said in her 30 years of being at Illinois, she never saw anything violent about it.

Her decision to be there, to dress as she did, to proclaim her credentials, and argue as she did, was puzzling to me. What motivated her to do that? Hate? Privilege? Both?!

Though I'm certain there are administrators at the University of Illinois who wish the mascot was still there, I think they would have been embarrassed at the behavior of this woman. She is, whether she realizes it or not, the embodiment of racism.

The students at Redlands and Sherman Indian School will encounter people like her. Change--for the better--will happen. It is never easy work, but change does happen. "Chief Illiniwek" no longer dances at Illinois because Native people and our allies fought to get rid of it. I leave California with the faces of the students in my head, inspired by each one of them.

Display Comments Add a Comment

On Tuesday, I flew in to California to give two lectures and visit some classes.

Before the first talk, I had lunch with two groups. One group was comprised of students who tutor Native students, and the other group was Native men and women of the San Manual Band of Mission Indians. We talked about the significance of our nations and identities as Native people, and we talked about how we are misrepresented in the materials our children are given at school. Amongst us are powerful stories of parents who stand by their children.

After lunch we headed over to the student center for my lecture, Native (Mis)Representations, which was primarily about mascots.

It is always heartening to organizers when crowds of people are streaming in and they have to call for more chairs. Irvin Harrison, the Director of the Native American Student Center at Cal State Polytechnic University, organized my two-day visit.

Here's a post-lecture photo of Irvin, myself, and Dr. Joely Proudfit. She's the Director of the California Indian Culture and Sovereignty Center at Cal State University, San Marcos. We had a long conversation, sitting in the warm California sunshine, talking about youth, research, sovereignty and the work we're committed to doing.

In the lecture, I showed many examples in which someone is playing Indian. I started with mascots, pointing out the stereotypical aspects of it. We watched Trail of Cheers and What Makes the Red Man Red, noting stereotypes in it, too. That Disney clip is available online in several different languages, including French, Korean, Arabic, Hebrew, Japanese, and German! Sheesh!

I shifted, then, to playing Indian in a historical context.

Americans have been playing Indian a long time. Primary example: colonists dressing up as Indians at the Boston Tea Party. The thing is, they didn't wear feathers or face paint... but that is how that moment in history is shown. What they did was blacken their faces with soot from the fireplace and wear blankets around their shoulders.

I showed photographs of playing Indian in Thanksgiving reenactments in elementary school, and dressing up like Indians for Halloween and summer camps. For each one, I also showed an illustration from a children's book.

Then I showed a photo of how boy scouts in Order of the Arrow play Indian. THAT, it turned out, was the image that drew the ire of one person in the audience. He came up after the talk and kept trying to get me to say that it was ok for them to do that, because they were honoring and educating others about Native people. He is the perfect example of someone unwilling to consider the research I presented, the voices of Native people, and the misinformation perpetuated by their Order of the Arrow activities.

I asked him some questions about why they do it, and he said something like "because you [Indians] really know how to take care of the earth and do things..." I interrupted him (getting impatient) and said "some of youguys [not-Indians] know how to do that, too. That's not knowledge that belongs or belonged exclusively to us. Why don't you celebrate who you are?" And he said "but more of you do it than anyone else."

He (they?!) clearly have us on a pedestal. He may think that is honoring and respectful, but it is dehumanizing to do that to an entire group of people.

I don't want that kind of honoring or respect. What I'd rather he do is stop playing Indian and seeking ways to justify it, and start lobbying Congress. We've all--Native and not--got to write and call our Senators and Representatives and stop that Keystone Pipeline.

I may add more to this post later. For now, I've got to head off to the Redlands University. Time to start day 2.

Display Comments Add a Comment

This week, I'll be giving two free public lectures in which I'll talk about misrepresentations of American Indians (dates/times/locations listed at bottom of this post). In both lectures, I'll draw connections between the stereotypes of American Indians in children's/young adult literature and mascots.

While I'm out there doing that, the University of Illinois student body will be voting 'yes' or 'no' on this question:

Do you support Chief Illiniwek as the official symbol of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign?

For those of you who are new to AICL, here's "Chief Illiniwek" (I use quotes around that phrase because I do not want to convey any idea whatsoever that I think the mascot ought to have that title):



See the words at the bottom of the photo? The organization "Save the Chief" was active in a campaign to stop the university from getting rid of the mascot. It was/is only one of many similar organizations that, in one way or another, keep up the idea that mascots like "Chief Illiniwek" honor American Indians. They do that in spite of the fact that Native organizations, associations, and tribes have called for an end to the use of Native imagery in this way. And, thank goodness, the university chancellor said that the university will not bring it back because the university wants to go forward in being inclusive, not backward.

It is hard to chip away at the embrace of this kind of stereotyping.

American's are taught to have an affinity for this stereotype. This starts when they're young. Do you remember Clifford the Big Red Dog? Dear, dear, Clifford... I like him, too, but not when Emily Elizabeth thought he could be an Indian for Halloween:



Are you a fan of the Berenstain Bears books? Do you remember the one where Brother Bear and Sister Bear go to camp and listen to Grizzly Bob tell stories dressed this way?



I plan to incorporate research on the harm of such stereotyping in my talk. Research studies show its detrimental impact on Native students, and, its impact on non-Native students, too.

The University of Illinois finally got rid of its mascot, but it wasn't due to any concerns about it as a stereotype. It was retired because if it continued, the university would not be able to hold NCAA championships on its campus. I'm certain that some of the people responsible for actually making the decision to get rid of it understood the harm of stereotyping, but too many people did not, and too many people do not understand it.

I believe that children's books play a role in maintaining the illusion that such stereotypes are honorable.

I hope you can attend one of the talks! Please let your child's teachers know about the talks, too. And the school librarian! Displacing stereotypes with factual information about who American Indians were--and are--is going to require that more people understand stereotyping and its harm.

Wednesday, March 6, 1:00 PM
Bronco Student Center - Centaurus
California State Polytechnic University, Pomona

Thursday, March 7, 6:30 PM
Hall of Letters, 100
University of Redlands

Display Comments Add a Comment

On his blog, Roger Ebert posted a long, thoughtful essay that starts out with him imagining he's a brown-skinned child in Arizona who learns that a mural that reflects his skin will have to be be changed so that the skin of the children in the mural is not so dark.

Ebert grew up in Urbana, Illinois, where the University of Illinois is located (it actually straddles Urbana and Champaign). In his essay, he talks about African American children in his school and in his childhood.

He understands racism where African Americans are concerned, but he seems to be conflicted over stereotyping of American Indians. In a 2009 essay at his blog, he said that "Chief Illiniwek" is "the world's greatest sports symbol". Following his essay is a video of the mascot's "last dance".

In the comments section (he got LOT of comments), he says:

The Chief. *Sigh* I understand intellectually why Chief Illiniwek was retired. I agree with the decision ideologically. But my heart cries out, as in my memory he stands proudly on the 50 yard yard line and the Marching Illini conclude the school Song, Illinois! Illinois! Illinois! He was so much more dignified than a buckeye, a wolverine, a badger, a boilermaker, a spartan. He was greatness. I'm glad I was there.

His emotions and his intellect are at odds.  He can't condemn "Chief Illiniwek". Based on my understanding of all he says in the post itself about African Americans and race, I don't think he'd say that his heart cries out for the old black and white minstrel shows. I wish he had that same insight for American Indians and our objections to stereotypical depictions like "Chief Illiniwek".

-------------------------
Update: I'm adding another comment from Ebert that pre-dates the others above. The comment below is from  "Noble Spirit, More than Just a Mascot" dated 2001 the Chicago Sun Times.

"Chief Illiniwek, for nearly a century the symbol of the University of Illinois, was until recently seen as a positive image of American Indians. The Chief never was a 'mascot,' and indeed goes back so far that he pre-dates the use of "mascots" for most sports teams. ... In recent years, however, Illiniwek has been under attack from a small, self-righteous coalition that wants to wipe him from the university's history."

Display Comments Add a Comment