Sutton (2010) brings up the 'Disneyisation' of Aboriginal
spirituality in the new age media. He uses this term in conjunction with a kind
of vulgarization, or something that is complex, subtle and multilayered
(Sutton, 2010). Although this author utilized this term to signify
misinterpretations and simplifications of these religions within the mediated
forms of television and film, it is interesting to consider the Disney movies
in themselves. Take for instance, the animated film titled Pocahontas. This children's film highlights the prejudiced
relationship between the Powhatan, or Native Americans, and the oncoming
Europeans, marginalizing the actual events that would've taken place at this
moment of history, as many 'Indian and Cowboy' movies concurrently do. Instead,
it places an emphasis of the indigenous character's relationship with Mother
Nature. This American-created film thus foregrounds a classical Aboriginal
religion and a foreign tradition such as Mother Earth. Within the movie Pocahontas
explains to a European the importance of nature and respecting the earth after
he details his prejudice against her people. He finally sees the ill of his
ways and consequently falls in love with the Disney princess. Therefore, even
this children's animated film marginalizes the true history between the natives
and the settlers, like many others do.
By neutralizing indigenous and native people, racist and
dominant ideologies are maintained. However, this is not right or fair. It
results in a loss of identity and cultural heritage for these aboriginal
people. It is interesting to think that filmmakers can create these racist
movies without thinking about the implications they hold for the people
positioned negatively in them. These people have feelings. They can be
offended. For instance, Nanook of the
North portrays the Inuit community to be unfamiliar with western technology
and primitive. Instead of using this fact as a cultural identity to reflect
upon, the characters are depicted as awkward and lacking in intelligence when
compared to the world of the trader and the white men. Just because a community
is different to our western civilisation does not give us the right to make
racial mediated representations of them. Each culture is different and unique and
has the right to tell their story, their way.
A fundamental way to break down racial discourse in the
media is through self-representation. Two films that aim to portray the true
Aboriginal spirituality through this self-representational identity include Atanarjuat, and Ten Canoes. To begin, Atanarjuat,
or the fast runner, was the first full length feature film to be directed by an
Inuit (Raheja, 2011). It privileges the right the indigenous people have to
represent themselves and their story. Being self-determined, through media,
this film raises awareness of culture by addressing both Inuit and non-Inuit
audiences for two different aims (Raheja, 2011). It helps the aboriginal, Inuit
people search for a pure and uncontaminated past, to help keep their traditional
way of life alive to future generations to make them see how their ancestors
truly used to live. As Raheja (2011) foregrounds, “the film excited great pride
in the strength and dignity of their ancestors, and they want to share this
with their elders and children” (p. 196). It is not racist. It is an accurate
portrayal of a community, as they deserve. This helps the people reclaim their
personhood, dignity and land connection (Raheja, 2011). Here, they are no
longer ill-presented. It aids to rebuild a social and spiritual capacity, with
dignity and consciousness. Therefore, this film aims to operate in the service
of their home communities to keep their traditional way of life alive, whilst
forcing non-Inuit viewers to reconsider mass-mediated images of the Native
Arctic people (Raheja, 2011).
Like Atanarjuat, Ten Canoes also helps to create a true
indigenous identity. This film forces people to learn indigenous ways and
perceptions. For example, the filmmakers and directors would have had to use an
indigenous way of seeing, and thus this would affect their decisions. It
foregrounds a strong mythical past and present. Originally, the elder’s accused
the filmmakers of using the indigenous people, invoking a long history of
non-Indigenous exploitation of their people (Davis, 2007). This serves as a
reminder of how people have voiced their opposition and objections to this
exploitation (Davis, 2007). However, the Ten
Canoes has been praised as an exemplary collaborative film (Davis, 2007).
This notion of people, in this case the elder, speaking out and opposing to the
racial discourses of indigenous people in films foregrounds a learned society
whom wants to know the truth. This film takes viewers back to the past in order
to integrate it into the present and the cultural future (Davis, 2007).
Indigenous people should be able to tell their story, their
way. Racist discourses and stereotypes in media need to be stopped. People are
speaking out, and filmmakers should listen. Every culture has the right to the
truth. No culture should be misinterpreted, marginalised, crudely
sentimentalised or falsely universalised.
References:
Davis T. 2007. Remembering Our Ancestors: Cross-cultural Collaboration and the Mediation of Aboriginal Culture and History in Ten Canoes (Rold de Heer, 2006). Studies In Australasian Cinema 1(1): 5-14. (RL).
Raheja M.H. 2010. Visual Sovereignty, Indigenous Revisions of Ethnography, and Atanarjuat (The Fast Runner). In Reservation Reelism: Redfacing, Visual Sovereignty, and Representations of Native Americans in Film. University of Nebraska Press. Ch. 5, Ebook.
Sutton P. 2010. Aboriginal Spirituality in a New Age. The Australian Journal of Anthropology,
21(1): 71-89. RL.
Image Source:
My own drawing.
No comments:
Post a Comment