- Joined
- Jul 1, 2009
- Messages
- 98
- Reaction score
- 38
Hello! I hope this might be helpful. I'm Ojibway (and Lakota, although by our lineal descent traditions Ojibway is the affiliation I identify primarily). I thought maybe I could add some tips for writers who are using Native American topics or characters in their fiction. My last intention is to come off as a know-it-all, so please don't take it that way. I'm offering this advice most humbly to correct some flaws I see recurring in a lot of literature. I'd like to combine some basic Do's and Don'ts so as to avoid cliches, stereotypes, or flat-out offenses.
First of all, "Indian" is a proper term. We call ourselves that. "Native American" is fine, but don't be fooled into thinking it has any preferential status. American Indian Movement, National Congress of American Indians...most tribes also call themselves "so-and-so Indian Nation." So in other words, skip the PC stuff; "Indian" is cool. "Injun," "redskin," and the like are not cool.
On the "blood" issue: We pretty much divide blood into three basic categories. They are Full-blood, Mixed-blood, and non-Indian. In my entire life, I have NEVER been asked by another Indian, "How much Indian are you?" That question is only asked by Whites who are either convinced that blood=authenticity, or who are about to tell me how "Indian" they are too. For us, blood is less significant than cultural activity. One of my best friends is White by blood, but is regarded as a fully-cultural member of the Cheyenne and Arapaho Tribes because he speaks the language and knows the customs thoroughly; our full-bloods often ask him questions. He is also one of the few "Whites" allowed to join in ceremonies, because he is not seen as non-Indian. Let that sink in: blood just doesn't obsess us like it does Whites. The question "how much Indian are you?" is often answered politely, but you ought to know that behind the answer we probably are thinking how stupid the question was.
On "White": we do use the word "White." The term "non-Indian" refers to EVERY person who is not an enrolled and/or recognized Tribal person. But "White" does indeed refer specifically to non-Indians who are White. It also refers to customs, regulations, habits, and mannerisms of people who are not Indian, like the way the Amish use the term "English." For example, "He had to go to the White courts for his ticket."
For Indian people, identity is rooted in your current cultural identification. That seems strange to a lot of non-Indians who think we're all about the past, but the truth is that your cultural identity is determined by YOUR life, not your lineal descent. To give an example, the cliche "My great-grandmother was a Cherokee" is meaningless to us. Not only is it the claim of a gazillion wannabes, but it does not make you an Indian. At most, it makes you the White descendant of a distant Indian! Referencing your great-grandmother does not bring a person into closer affinity with Indians, it does the opposite: it alienates them to us. So when writing your Indian characters, avoid trying to boost their "Tribal cred" by referring to grandparentage.
A common mistake White writers make about Indian characters is making every aspect of that character something relevant to their being Indian. In real-life, the analogue is that we can hardly have conversations with non-Indians without the conversation being ABOUT us being Indian. In fact, non-Indian writers tend to go goofily overboard on decorating their Indian character with constant reminders of his/her Indianness! We don't do that. We don't sit around and go, "What's something Indian I could do right now? Could I be eating this Whopper in a more 'Indian' way?"
Another cliche to avoid: not all Indian stories have to be Westerns. Urban Indians outnumber "Western" (rural) Indians.
Not all Indians are traditional. Sadly, a lot of non-Indian writers don't know how to write Indian characters, so they glue on a bunch of cliches. The Indian lives in the desert, or on a reservation. The Indian is a shaman, or has become estranged from his culture (until the end of the story, when he returns to his traditions to resolve the story's issues). The Indian is constantly droning on about "mother earth" or "the old ways." He has visions, and eagles, wolves, and bears guide him. His name is something mystical. He has transcendent insight that the skeptical urban "modern" characters don't understand. He insists on interjecting his "teachings" about "the ways" into every damned scene. Hell, even hitting roadkill becomes an opportunity to pull over and offer tobacco!
Indian tribes are not homogeneous. Unfortunately, the Plains tend to attract the attention of most writers, who offer a vague "plains culture" to the reader. This is the "Dances with Wolves" phenomenon; the book was written about Comanches, but they couldn't fit that into the movie so they kept the exact same story, and just make them all Sioux! They didn't even change the Comanche names! ("Ten Bears" really WAS a Comanche). The logic was simple: Indians are Indians, and nobody will know the difference. They were right; millions of people left the theatres with a new-found longing to "be Indian", without even knowing they'd been bait-and-switched in an experiment that actually revealed how little distinction people make between tribes.
Indians are not all hunks and sultry maidens, contrary to what you'll see on most crappy website graphics, TV Guide collector's plates, and "Leanin' Tree" cards. Words that are over-used to describe Indians: bronze, sinewy, rustic (seriously!), copper-skinned. None of these words describes any Indian I ever saw, except maybe Rodney Grant. In truth, Indians are notoriously out of shape. We lead the country in rates of diabetes and obesity. Medical and dental care is sparse on reservations. The sexy maiden in slinky buckskin pouring water from a jug while an eagle soars overhead just ain't true.
More to come...
First of all, "Indian" is a proper term. We call ourselves that. "Native American" is fine, but don't be fooled into thinking it has any preferential status. American Indian Movement, National Congress of American Indians...most tribes also call themselves "so-and-so Indian Nation." So in other words, skip the PC stuff; "Indian" is cool. "Injun," "redskin," and the like are not cool.
On the "blood" issue: We pretty much divide blood into three basic categories. They are Full-blood, Mixed-blood, and non-Indian. In my entire life, I have NEVER been asked by another Indian, "How much Indian are you?" That question is only asked by Whites who are either convinced that blood=authenticity, or who are about to tell me how "Indian" they are too. For us, blood is less significant than cultural activity. One of my best friends is White by blood, but is regarded as a fully-cultural member of the Cheyenne and Arapaho Tribes because he speaks the language and knows the customs thoroughly; our full-bloods often ask him questions. He is also one of the few "Whites" allowed to join in ceremonies, because he is not seen as non-Indian. Let that sink in: blood just doesn't obsess us like it does Whites. The question "how much Indian are you?" is often answered politely, but you ought to know that behind the answer we probably are thinking how stupid the question was.
On "White": we do use the word "White." The term "non-Indian" refers to EVERY person who is not an enrolled and/or recognized Tribal person. But "White" does indeed refer specifically to non-Indians who are White. It also refers to customs, regulations, habits, and mannerisms of people who are not Indian, like the way the Amish use the term "English." For example, "He had to go to the White courts for his ticket."
For Indian people, identity is rooted in your current cultural identification. That seems strange to a lot of non-Indians who think we're all about the past, but the truth is that your cultural identity is determined by YOUR life, not your lineal descent. To give an example, the cliche "My great-grandmother was a Cherokee" is meaningless to us. Not only is it the claim of a gazillion wannabes, but it does not make you an Indian. At most, it makes you the White descendant of a distant Indian! Referencing your great-grandmother does not bring a person into closer affinity with Indians, it does the opposite: it alienates them to us. So when writing your Indian characters, avoid trying to boost their "Tribal cred" by referring to grandparentage.
A common mistake White writers make about Indian characters is making every aspect of that character something relevant to their being Indian. In real-life, the analogue is that we can hardly have conversations with non-Indians without the conversation being ABOUT us being Indian. In fact, non-Indian writers tend to go goofily overboard on decorating their Indian character with constant reminders of his/her Indianness! We don't do that. We don't sit around and go, "What's something Indian I could do right now? Could I be eating this Whopper in a more 'Indian' way?"
Another cliche to avoid: not all Indian stories have to be Westerns. Urban Indians outnumber "Western" (rural) Indians.
Not all Indians are traditional. Sadly, a lot of non-Indian writers don't know how to write Indian characters, so they glue on a bunch of cliches. The Indian lives in the desert, or on a reservation. The Indian is a shaman, or has become estranged from his culture (until the end of the story, when he returns to his traditions to resolve the story's issues). The Indian is constantly droning on about "mother earth" or "the old ways." He has visions, and eagles, wolves, and bears guide him. His name is something mystical. He has transcendent insight that the skeptical urban "modern" characters don't understand. He insists on interjecting his "teachings" about "the ways" into every damned scene. Hell, even hitting roadkill becomes an opportunity to pull over and offer tobacco!
Indian tribes are not homogeneous. Unfortunately, the Plains tend to attract the attention of most writers, who offer a vague "plains culture" to the reader. This is the "Dances with Wolves" phenomenon; the book was written about Comanches, but they couldn't fit that into the movie so they kept the exact same story, and just make them all Sioux! They didn't even change the Comanche names! ("Ten Bears" really WAS a Comanche). The logic was simple: Indians are Indians, and nobody will know the difference. They were right; millions of people left the theatres with a new-found longing to "be Indian", without even knowing they'd been bait-and-switched in an experiment that actually revealed how little distinction people make between tribes.
Indians are not all hunks and sultry maidens, contrary to what you'll see on most crappy website graphics, TV Guide collector's plates, and "Leanin' Tree" cards. Words that are over-used to describe Indians: bronze, sinewy, rustic (seriously!), copper-skinned. None of these words describes any Indian I ever saw, except maybe Rodney Grant. In truth, Indians are notoriously out of shape. We lead the country in rates of diabetes and obesity. Medical and dental care is sparse on reservations. The sexy maiden in slinky buckskin pouring water from a jug while an eagle soars overhead just ain't true.
More to come...
Last edited:
