Reply to Topic
Originally Posted by SamsoniteDelilah
How is it a slap? (I haven't seen it, either.)
In 1995, Roy Disney decided to release an animated movie about a Powhatan woman known as "Pocahontas". In answer to a complaint by the Powhatan Nation, he claims the film is "responsible, accurate, and respectful."
We of the Powhatan Nation disagree. The film distorts history beyond recognition. Our offers to assist Disney with cultural and historical accuracy were rejected. Our efforts urging him to reconsider his misguided mission were spurred.
"Pocahontas" was a nickname, meaning "the naughty one" or "spoiled child". Her real name was Matoaka. The legend is that she saved a heroic John Smith from being clubbed to death by her father in 1607 - she would have been about 10 or 11 at the time. The truth is that Smith's fellow colonists described him as an abrasive, ambitious, self-promoting mercenary soldier.
Of all of Powhatan's children, only "Pocahontas" is known, primarily because she became the hero of Euro-Americans as the "good Indian", one who saved the life of a white man. Not only is the "good Indian/bad Indian theme" inevitably given new life by Disney, but the history, as recorded by the English themselves, is badly falsified in the name of "entertainment".
The truth of the matter is that the first time John Smith told the story about this rescue was 17 years after it happened, and it was but one of three reported by the pretentious Smith that he was saved from death by a prominent woman.
Yet in an account Smith wrote after his winter stay with Powhatan's people, he never mentioned such an incident. In fact, the starving adventurer reported he had been kept comfortable and treated in a friendly fashion as an honored guest of Powhatan and Powhatan's brothers. Most scholars think the "Pocahontas incident" would have been highly unlikely, especially since it was part of a longer account used as justification to wage war on Powhatan's Nation.
Euro-Americans must ask themselves why it has been so important to elevate Smith's fibbing to status as a national myth worthy of being recycled again by Disney. Disney even improves upon it by changing Pocahontas from a little girl into a young woman.
The true Pocahontas story has a sad ending. In 1612, at the age of 17, Pocahontas was treacherously taken prisoner by the English while she was on a social visit, and was held hostage at Jamestown for over a year.
During her captivity, a 28-year-old widower named John Rolfe took a "special interest" in the attractive young prisoner. As a condition of her release, she agreed to marry Rolfe, who the world can thank for commercializing tobacco. Thus, in April 1614, Matoaka, also known as "Pocahontas", daughter of Chief Powhatan, became "Rebecca Rolfe". Shortly after, they had a son, whom they named Thomas Rolfe. The descendants of Pocahontas and John Rolfe were known as the "Red Rolfes."
Two years later on the spring of 1616, Rolfe took her to England where the Virginia Company of London used her in their propaganda campaign to support the colony. She was wined and dined and taken to theaters. It was recorded that on one occasion when she encountered John Smith (who was also in London at the time), she was so furious with him that she turned her back to him, hid her face, and went off by herself for several hours. Later, in a second encounter, she called him a liar and showed him the door.
Rolfe, his young wife, and their son set off for Virginia in March of 1617, but "Rebecca" had to be taken off the ship at Gravesend. She died there on March 21, 1617, at the age of 21. She was buried at Gravesend, but the grave was destroyed in a reconstruction of the church. It was only after her death and her fame in London society that Smith found it convenient to invent the yarn that she had rescued him.
History tells the rest. Chief Powhatan died the following spring of 1618. The people of Smith and Rolfe turned upon the people who had shared their resources with them and had shown them friendship. During Pocahontas' generation, Powhatan's people were decimated and dispersed and their lands were taken over. A clear pattern had been set which would soon spread across the American continent.
Chief Roy Crazy Horse
Source: http://www.powhatan.org/pocc.html ]Powhatan Renape Nation[/url]
We of the Powhatan Nation disagree. The film distorts history beyond recognition. Our offers to assist Disney with cultural and historical accuracy were rejected. Our efforts urging him to reconsider his misguided mission were spurred.
"Pocahontas" was a nickname, meaning "the naughty one" or "spoiled child". Her real name was Matoaka. The legend is that she saved a heroic John Smith from being clubbed to death by her father in 1607 - she would have been about 10 or 11 at the time. The truth is that Smith's fellow colonists described him as an abrasive, ambitious, self-promoting mercenary soldier.
Of all of Powhatan's children, only "Pocahontas" is known, primarily because she became the hero of Euro-Americans as the "good Indian", one who saved the life of a white man. Not only is the "good Indian/bad Indian theme" inevitably given new life by Disney, but the history, as recorded by the English themselves, is badly falsified in the name of "entertainment".
The truth of the matter is that the first time John Smith told the story about this rescue was 17 years after it happened, and it was but one of three reported by the pretentious Smith that he was saved from death by a prominent woman.
Yet in an account Smith wrote after his winter stay with Powhatan's people, he never mentioned such an incident. In fact, the starving adventurer reported he had been kept comfortable and treated in a friendly fashion as an honored guest of Powhatan and Powhatan's brothers. Most scholars think the "Pocahontas incident" would have been highly unlikely, especially since it was part of a longer account used as justification to wage war on Powhatan's Nation.
Euro-Americans must ask themselves why it has been so important to elevate Smith's fibbing to status as a national myth worthy of being recycled again by Disney. Disney even improves upon it by changing Pocahontas from a little girl into a young woman.
The true Pocahontas story has a sad ending. In 1612, at the age of 17, Pocahontas was treacherously taken prisoner by the English while she was on a social visit, and was held hostage at Jamestown for over a year.
During her captivity, a 28-year-old widower named John Rolfe took a "special interest" in the attractive young prisoner. As a condition of her release, she agreed to marry Rolfe, who the world can thank for commercializing tobacco. Thus, in April 1614, Matoaka, also known as "Pocahontas", daughter of Chief Powhatan, became "Rebecca Rolfe". Shortly after, they had a son, whom they named Thomas Rolfe. The descendants of Pocahontas and John Rolfe were known as the "Red Rolfes."
Two years later on the spring of 1616, Rolfe took her to England where the Virginia Company of London used her in their propaganda campaign to support the colony. She was wined and dined and taken to theaters. It was recorded that on one occasion when she encountered John Smith (who was also in London at the time), she was so furious with him that she turned her back to him, hid her face, and went off by herself for several hours. Later, in a second encounter, she called him a liar and showed him the door.
Rolfe, his young wife, and their son set off for Virginia in March of 1617, but "Rebecca" had to be taken off the ship at Gravesend. She died there on March 21, 1617, at the age of 21. She was buried at Gravesend, but the grave was destroyed in a reconstruction of the church. It was only after her death and her fame in London society that Smith found it convenient to invent the yarn that she had rescued him.
History tells the rest. Chief Powhatan died the following spring of 1618. The people of Smith and Rolfe turned upon the people who had shared their resources with them and had shown them friendship. During Pocahontas' generation, Powhatan's people were decimated and dispersed and their lands were taken over. A clear pattern had been set which would soon spread across the American continent.
Chief Roy Crazy Horse
It is unfortunate that this sad story,
which Euro-Americans should find embarrassing,
Disney makes "entertainment" and perpetuates a dishonest and self-serving myth
at the expense of the Powhatan Nation.
which Euro-Americans should find embarrassing,
Disney makes "entertainment" and perpetuates a dishonest and self-serving myth
at the expense of the Powhatan Nation.
Source: http://www.powhatan.org/pocc.html ]Powhatan Renape Nation[/url]
'Pocahontas' is a mean-spirited lie
by Tim Giago
I really didn't want to do it. But since the national media has made such to do about it - and as an American Indian journalist - I feel it is necessary to get my two cents into the hype.
People magazine displayed its special brand of ignorance with a cutline under the photo of Pocahontas that read: "Pocahontas: the squaw that stirs the drink; at last, a heroine who knows the ways of nature and the art of belting show tunes."
There is not an American Indian woman alive in this land who is not immediately repulsed by the word squaw. It is the literal translation of an Algonquin word referring to a woman's private parts. As the mostly male settlers moved west, they brought this word with them and used it to describe all Indian women, relegating them to nothing more than whores.
And yet we have places like Squaw Valley in California and Squaw Peak in Phoenix. The original name of Squaw Peak, and, please forgive me for being so blunt, was Squaw Tit Peak. It seems some Christians were highly offended by the word tit, so they had it dropped from the map. Isn't it strange they left in the other sexually explicit word?
Burger King decided to get into the Pocahontas bonanza with a commercial that went something like this: "After seeing Pocahontas, all kids want to be John Smith."
Interviewed on local television, one Indian woman said, and, I'm sure her simple deductions are accepted by most white and black Americans, "It is only a movie with cartoon characters, not a documentary."
This supposedly explains away the historical inaccuracies and the Hollywoodizing of a real event. Little Black Sambo was just a cartoon character, too, but he was found to be a very repugnant cartoon character by most African Americans. When is the last time you saw this repulsive character on television or in the movies?
Creating a cartoon character based on a real human being, a member of a minority race to boot, does not excuse the historical largesse taken by the Disney people. Is it all right to give children a skewed version of history?
Many Indian women found the cartoon character of Pocahontas very un-Indian like. Her figure was sketched from memories of a white woman's body. Her attire was most suggestive and not accurately based on what the Indian women of that century wore.
As one Hispanic woman put it, "She sees John Smith, pursues him and basically attacks him. She also slithers and crawls around like a sex kitten. What is this telling the general public about Indian women?" It's telling them that Indian women are, indeed, "squaws."
The theme music repeatedly refers to Indians as savages. Savage is a name Indians have had to live with from the day the first book was written about them.
Would any movie made today have a theme song that referred to African Americans as niggers? The word savage has similar meanings to American Indians.
Most Indian people interviewed after emerging from the theater in Rapid City, S.D., were totally turned off by the movie.
It's a travesty that a once-powerful Indian activist like Russell Means touts the movie as the best thing ever done on Indians. Mr. Means has become a typical actor by deed and lifestyle. His main concern today is the bottom line: How much am I going to get paid? When it comes to taking parts in movies, any part, his actions speak louder than words.
Have any of my readers seen him in Wagons East or Natural Born Killers? In one he plays an idiot in a war bonnet and in the other he desecrates a sacred rite of the Navajo people.
Everybody who knew Russell when he was an activist believed he was acting even back then. Now we all know for sure. This is one case of the white man's dollar turning an activist into a pussy cat. Can you see a Huey Newton or a Malcolm X - if they were alive today - selling out to play a stereotypical black man for the sake of a few pieces of silver?
Not in this lifetime.
I know, lighten up, but hey, I guess I'm entitled to say whether I like a movie or not and why. No one has to agree with me because I certainly am not a bona fide movie critic.
No. I'm just an American Indian journalist who detests seeing Indians denigrated in cartoons and history distorted by the Disney folks.
I'll just fade into the darkness as the cartoon characters sing, "I'll kill myself an Indian, maybe two or three." Of course, if the words were changed to, "I'll just kill myself a white man, maybe two or three," the mass media would raise a stink.
Such a wonderful lesson for the little tykes.
(Born on the Pine Ridge Reservation, Tim Giago is publisher of Indian Country Today, where this column originally appeared, as well as a syndicated columnist. He works in Rapid City, South Dakota)
Source: High Country News
by Tim Giago
I really didn't want to do it. But since the national media has made such to do about it - and as an American Indian journalist - I feel it is necessary to get my two cents into the hype.
People magazine displayed its special brand of ignorance with a cutline under the photo of Pocahontas that read: "Pocahontas: the squaw that stirs the drink; at last, a heroine who knows the ways of nature and the art of belting show tunes."
There is not an American Indian woman alive in this land who is not immediately repulsed by the word squaw. It is the literal translation of an Algonquin word referring to a woman's private parts. As the mostly male settlers moved west, they brought this word with them and used it to describe all Indian women, relegating them to nothing more than whores.
And yet we have places like Squaw Valley in California and Squaw Peak in Phoenix. The original name of Squaw Peak, and, please forgive me for being so blunt, was Squaw Tit Peak. It seems some Christians were highly offended by the word tit, so they had it dropped from the map. Isn't it strange they left in the other sexually explicit word?
Burger King decided to get into the Pocahontas bonanza with a commercial that went something like this: "After seeing Pocahontas, all kids want to be John Smith."
Interviewed on local television, one Indian woman said, and, I'm sure her simple deductions are accepted by most white and black Americans, "It is only a movie with cartoon characters, not a documentary."
This supposedly explains away the historical inaccuracies and the Hollywoodizing of a real event. Little Black Sambo was just a cartoon character, too, but he was found to be a very repugnant cartoon character by most African Americans. When is the last time you saw this repulsive character on television or in the movies?
Creating a cartoon character based on a real human being, a member of a minority race to boot, does not excuse the historical largesse taken by the Disney people. Is it all right to give children a skewed version of history?
Many Indian women found the cartoon character of Pocahontas very un-Indian like. Her figure was sketched from memories of a white woman's body. Her attire was most suggestive and not accurately based on what the Indian women of that century wore.
As one Hispanic woman put it, "She sees John Smith, pursues him and basically attacks him. She also slithers and crawls around like a sex kitten. What is this telling the general public about Indian women?" It's telling them that Indian women are, indeed, "squaws."
The theme music repeatedly refers to Indians as savages. Savage is a name Indians have had to live with from the day the first book was written about them.
Would any movie made today have a theme song that referred to African Americans as niggers? The word savage has similar meanings to American Indians.
Most Indian people interviewed after emerging from the theater in Rapid City, S.D., were totally turned off by the movie.
It's a travesty that a once-powerful Indian activist like Russell Means touts the movie as the best thing ever done on Indians. Mr. Means has become a typical actor by deed and lifestyle. His main concern today is the bottom line: How much am I going to get paid? When it comes to taking parts in movies, any part, his actions speak louder than words.
Have any of my readers seen him in Wagons East or Natural Born Killers? In one he plays an idiot in a war bonnet and in the other he desecrates a sacred rite of the Navajo people.
Everybody who knew Russell when he was an activist believed he was acting even back then. Now we all know for sure. This is one case of the white man's dollar turning an activist into a pussy cat. Can you see a Huey Newton or a Malcolm X - if they were alive today - selling out to play a stereotypical black man for the sake of a few pieces of silver?
Not in this lifetime.
I know, lighten up, but hey, I guess I'm entitled to say whether I like a movie or not and why. No one has to agree with me because I certainly am not a bona fide movie critic.
No. I'm just an American Indian journalist who detests seeing Indians denigrated in cartoons and history distorted by the Disney folks.
I'll just fade into the darkness as the cartoon characters sing, "I'll kill myself an Indian, maybe two or three." Of course, if the words were changed to, "I'll just kill myself a white man, maybe two or three," the mass media would raise a stink.
Such a wonderful lesson for the little tykes.
(Born on the Pine Ridge Reservation, Tim Giago is publisher of Indian Country Today, where this column originally appeared, as well as a syndicated columnist. He works in Rapid City, South Dakota)
Source: High Country News
Originally Posted by gummo
I was thinking of this movie because of the issue of whites vs native americans...the unfair treatment of native americans. I saw this movie as more of an issue of ignorance of the whites to the Native community and the portrayal of the Powhatans is the exact ignorance I am talking about. You are right, Lance and Caity, this movie is an inaccurate portrayal, and strays from the "true story". But before watching this movie, tell the people to consider how the movie is depicting the natives inaccurately....do you understand what I mean?
Sorry about the "GG" post...
__________________
You never know what is enough, until you know what is more than enough.
~William Blake ~
~William Blake ~
AiSv Nv wa do hi ya do...
(Walk in Peace)
(Walk in Peace)
re: birth of a nation (not that it isn't valid, i just suddenly got the visuals from school screenings and how extreme they were)
