Monday 7 November 2011

Images of Indians and Cowboys


Michael Yellow Bird argued in “Cowboys and Indians: Toys of Genocide, Icons of American Colonialism” that “The colonizer’s falsified stories have become universal truths to mainstream society, and have reduced Aboriginal culture to a caricature.” (Yellow Bird 2004, p. 39.).

I began to deal with this argument by searching on the internet for the term “Cowboys and Indians”. In my searches I found a lot of media and sources (stories, lyrics, movies, comics, etc.), which showed not the real history of Indians and Cowboys, but only a distorted reality.  




The images I found were mostly caricatures, representing stereotypical view of Indians and Cowboys. The Indian has red skin and long black hair, wears a feathered headdress, uses an axe as a weapon, rides a horse, and lives in a tiipii (spelling?) in the wilderness. The Cowboy has white skin, short (and frequently blonde) hair, uses a gun or a lasso, rides a horse, and lives in a town. The descriptions show the differences, but the pictures often represent these two groups as friends. The idea that Cowboys and Indians are friends is seen in comic books, TV shows, and movies like “Winnetou and Old Shatterhand”.

But in the real past, the different groups weren't friends. The Europeans settled in the country and drove the Indians from their land, frequently by violent means. The Europeans and their descendents often saw the aboriginals as savages: they looked different, they spoke different languages, and they lived a completely different way of live. The colonizers of North America enslaved and murdered the Indians, both physically (some aboriginal groups were wiped out completely), and mentally.

Yellow Bird stated that “White domination is so complete that even American Indian children want to be cowboys. It’s as if Jewish children wanted to play Nazis.” (Yellow Bird 2004, p. 33). This comparison shows the extent of the cultural displacement that exists within aboriginal groups and their fights to keep hold of their culture and traditions.

Another indication of the way both groups are caricatured can be seen in the “Cowboy and Indian” costumes worn at Halloween. When I see pictures of these costumes I think about the similarities between these groups and Jews and Nazis. Each pair has one exterminating the other for being “subhuman”, yet few would dress as a Nazi or a Jew for Halloween.

At this point, I want say that many of the “Indians” don’t call themselves “Indians”. Instead they call themselves indigenous inhabitants, Native Americans, aboriginals, or simly humans. While to be a Cowboy was not a heroic position, like is often portrayed, but in reality was a hard, low paying job (Schmidt 2011, p.2).

Today if we hear the words “Cowboys and Indians” we don’t imagine the bloody fighting that occurred, the oppression of the aborignal's culture, or the sad truth about Indian history. Instead we think of the same stereotypes represented in Halloween costumes and the pictures I saw on the internet, or the times in our childhood when we played Cowboys and Indians and were tied to trees. We don’t recognized the people as “real” people, who have their own traditions and cultures, and now live in small reservations, finding it difficult to find work, and being oppressed in their own land.

Yellow Bird said “This distorted reality is one of the most powerful shackles subjugating Aboriginal people. It distorts all Indigenous experiences, past and present, and blocks the road to self determination.” (Yellow Bird 2004, p. 39). I support the argument of Yellow Bird that Indians groups are seldom recognized as real nations. Instead they are seen as caricatures in movies, comics, and other media.  If we don’t see them as humans, who deserve the same respect as everyone else, both they and we will be unable to deal with their oppression.






References


Schmidt, Artur P. (2011) . “Der amerikanische Holocaust” . Wissensnavigator. Retrieved from


Yellow Bird, Michael (2004). “Cowboys and Indians: Toys of Genocide, Icons of American        Colonialism”. Wicazo Sa Review, 33-48.

1 comment: