Heroic Righteousness

Theme in adventure, loyalty, novel, and other educational story base on Western culture try to brainwash the reader by dynamic teller (narrator) Homer about Odysseus heroic fairy tales. In this chapter, Odysseus is the great hero who beats tough, uncivilized race of one eyed giant (by the script), Cyclops. He lies, tricks to accomplish what he wants to get. For example, Odysseus gets a wooden staff in the cave in the fire and when Polyphemus returns, Odysseus tries to make him drunk with delicious wine, and when Polyphemus asks Odysseus his name, Odysseus just replies “Nobody.” It is smart enough to get what he eagerly wanted, if he thinks it is right to do for Cyclops, why does he escape from the cave unseen by the blind? If we interpret the story in Odysseus perspective, yes, it is total successful heroic story, but if we interpret this in Cyclops’ perspective, is it? The only thing that Cyclops did was just staying in his position and did what he had to do. It must be sudden disasters for him. It applies to other books that we are comparing, ‘Jack and the Beanstalk,’ and ‘The Epic of Gilgamesh.’ In the book, ‘Jack and the Beanstalk’ Jack also interpreted as very nice boy who wants to help her mom, but is it really? In the Giant’s perspective he is a jerk thief who stole his account. He supposed to trade cow with money or gold whatever his mom asked, but he traded it with magical beans. From this point, he is not a good boy any more. He looks very adventure and positive of course by his view point, but it is totally offensive to unknown one. Giant who eats human, he lives in the sky: castle. Jack supposed not to have ability to go up there. Giant just did his job and he tried to keep his things, and unfortunately he died. What a sad story it is! Compare one more book, ‘The Epic of Gilgamesh,’ There is one of the main character whose name is Gilgamesh, king of Uruk, who was two-thirds god and one-third man, he also did same things as Jack did. Torturing citizens, cheating, and many other things opposed to the Gods, he deserved killed but Enkidu died for him. (Maybe Enkidu and Gilgamesh were gay. They were together all the time, and they love each other more than his wife in name of friendship)

My Conclusion is what is the exact meaning of the word, ‘savage’ the Western people thought in the past and contemporary? We should determine carefully when we faced these kinds of story.

“It is total violation, not heroic action.” The government or Caesar tries to brainwash citizens (readers) to protect them by dynamic story (contemporary method, maybe newspaper) in the name of ‘hero.’ Now, you think which is right, and which is wrong.

In each of the three stories; Jack and the Bean Stalk, Gilgamesh, and the Odyssey, there is an encounter by a human with a savage. In Homer's, The Odyssey - Book IX, "Cyclops", Odysseus and his men plot to kill Cyclops. In Jack and the Bean Stalk, Jack prides himself into the home of the giant. In Gilgamesh, Gilgamesh finds himself his equal match, who happens to be a wild man.
While we ourselves can most often relate more to the human than we can the savage, it does not mean our sympathy will necessarily be geared towards them. Odysseus and his men were frightened by Cyclops' actions and his loud voice, while none of them felt any remorse for the thievery they had partaken in. Being that Jack is so poor, he too finds it fair for him to steal from a giant. Gilgamesh, being the all-mighty of the land sees no wrong in stealing all the virgins.
While the men in these stories are fearful of their savage opponents, they feel threatened only because they are unfamiliar with their ways. While the men thought the three antagonists to be uncivilized it was only because they were judging them based on the qualifications and standards of their own society. While the three savages most certainly do not fit into those standards, it can also be said that the three men would not fit into their standards either.

The Wild Man: A Tradition of Prejudice

Through the wondrous power of oral tradition, we have learned about the Wild Man since we were kids in Jack and the Beanstalk through high school with the Odyssey and The Epic of Gilgamesh. Having read these stories in sequence now that I’m in college have brought to light some of the extreme ethnocentricities that have previously gone unnoticed.


Although these three “wild men” are seen as foreign peoples to the protagonist, Enkidu, the Cyclops, and the Giant do not possess the same qualities as one another. The only correlation between these characters is the exploitation of them by the leading figure. Together, the three wild men make up characteristics of individuals of dubious origins and cultures to a typical white person. Enkidu’s lifestyle of dwelling in the forest with untamed hair and animal-like tendencies is simply not permissible for modern society and longs to be just like Gilgamesh. Who wouldn’t? The assimilation of Enkidu to civilization reminds me heavily of what the Native Americans were put through during the 1800s in America to help them become more like white people by going to specialty boarding schools. The Giant in Jack and the Beanstalk is also reminiscent of the early relationship of Indians and whites in America. The Indian, the savage (The Giant) has something that is desperately sought after, land (gold coins) and is stolen by America (Jack). Does that sound familiar? Eventually the early settlers end up driving them out or going by way the Cyclops in the Odyssey. The Cyclops remains an enigma to me, but I think this can be attributed to one of the biggest characteristics of the wild man--misunderstood. The Greeks didn’t understand a lot of things so I guess in order to explain a group of people who didn’t follow their gods or traditions; the easiest thing to do is to make them giant and scary. The unknown is always the most frightening and I think even today we push a lot of what we don’t understand about people, religions, and lifestyles to a scary place in our brains.


The storytellers behind these ancient tales are the most confusing of all. Where did these stories come from? Who told these stories first and for what reason? I believe a lot of it stems from oral tradition from the Greeks. Homer could have been any person from antiquity with knack for prose and poetry, but nonetheless he shaped an ancient society with a heavy influence on ethos, instead of pathos. Later on as religion began to spread through the world, Gilgamesh, took its reigns and cuneiform became the method of storytelling; it began to influence other sects like Roman Christians and in fact have similar tales and characters. Jack and the Beanstalk has its origins with the fairytales from the 1640 Brothers Grimm tale, The Valiant Little Tailor. Fairytales were often used to evoke some kind of moral values for children in simple, easy-to-understand terms, and often outlandish events and characters.


Folklore and myths, these three in particular, are used as a vehicle for translating a set of principals for children and later adults to live by. If you want something take it, like in Beanstalk, if someone doesn’t look like you or act like you, try and fix your Enkidu-like friend, or even just get him drunk if he gets in the way of progress like Cyclopes Polyphemus, just poke him in the eye and tell him Noman did it. No, man. No, man.

In reading the three myths, it is clear that the most prominent characteristic of the "wild man" is his independence. Each tale depicts a creature who lives humbly on his own, fully self-reliant. There would be no story, had it not been for the self-righteous human invading the life of the wild man. The human men feel threatened because the wild man lives outside of a context they can understand. The wild man has no religion or laws. However, the wild man is labeled barbaric by other men only because of their specific social and moral norm. The men impose their rules on the wild man. In the case of the Cyclops, Odysseus and his men feel that it is their right to come upon a stranger because of their Gods. Polyphemus, however, does not live by the rules of Gods and this makes the men feel threatened. They feel that they are justified in taking food and shelter from Polyphemus. This is true in the case of Jack and the Giant. Like Polyphemus, the Giant had his own treasures. However, Jack, noticing that the Giant was different, felt that it was acceptable to steal from him not once, but thrice.

When reading the stories, one must consider why and from what perspective they are told. The stories are always beneficial for the nemesis of the wild man. Polyphemus was blinded, the Giant was killed and Enkidu was made to shed his wild man characteristics. The narration of fairy-tales is one-sided and simple; the moral of the story clearly laid out in the end. In the aforementioned cases, the ending is that the "civilized" man will always prevail, and is far superior to that of the wild man.

"I ate his liver with some fava beans and a nice chianti."

What was striking to me about the savages described in Jack and the Beanstalk and in Homer’s Cyclopes was the nice things they owned and the fruitful way they lived. In Cyclopes, Homer tells King Alcinous that the Cyclopes live with no law or hierarchy but live simply in caves in the hills. This way of living,however, does not sound so atrocious when the men walk into Polyphemus's cave and find great stock of cheese and lambs (so much that the Cyclopes was running out of room). In Jack and the Beanstalk, the Giant lives like a king atop the stalk. In a huge castle, the Giant eats well with his wife, contains bags of gold in his pockets, a golden harp and a hen that lays golden eggs.
Another tie between the Cyclopes of The Odyssey and the Giant in Jack is that they eat men, or are cannibals if one considers Cyclopes and Giants to share a race with humans. Odysseus finds much horror, as do the other men that the Cyclopes eat two of the soldiers. And Jack's concern of being in the Giants house is amplified when the Giant rhymes of Englishman being turned into bread. Odysseus,however, coming back from brutally murdering the city of Troy cannot be much better then a hungry Cyclopes. And though Jack’s trespassing does seem less severe in the light of making bones in to bread, that does not necessarily make it ethical.
Many people from both the time periods of these stories and modern day would covet the life styles these savages lead. If it is their actions that lead to the label of savage and untamed, are the heroes, who steal and kill fellow man, any more civilized?
These stories were told in there time for amusement. Tbe Odyssey was meant to tell an epic adventure that is patriotic to their country. Jack and the Beanstalk was told as a children story. And in their respective times, these stories would have no questions about morals. Killing at war is of the greater good for the country and stealing when poor can be justified. In retrospect the ideas and morals of the 21st century vastly differ from when these stories were told. To them Odysseus was right in being pompous with the Cyclopes and if Jack was poor he was just in taking the Giants gold.

Eleanor Barba

Greed vs. The Savage

After I read the three stories I found it easy to find fault among the three savages: the Cyclopes, the Giant, and Enkidu. Cannibalism, lawlessness, closeness to nature, etc. are a few of the obvious traits that make the ‘wild-men’ wild. It is curious that in all three of the myths and fairy-tales there is no mention of the human ever being at fault. It was only after a human had instigated a conflict with the savage that we have any inciting incident at all. Greed among the human characters is common to all three of the stories. In the tale of Jack and the Beanstalk it is Jack who steals from the Giant, not only once but several times. Now I don’t care how poor little Jack is, beyond stupidity it is only greed that drives Jack to return to the cave and steal a gold laying goose and a talking harp. I suppose thievery is justified if you’re stealing from a savage Giant, but I must admit not much has changed today.

It is Odysseus’ pride in “Cyclops” book IX of The Odyssey that is responsible for getting his men killed; Odysseus’ need to seek out ‘uncivilized savages’ and pillage the cave of the Cyclops put him and his men in unnecessary danger. Odysseus was greedy and demanded resources and respect from the Cyclops because he was a mighty warrior. Odysseus was not satisfied with just the few wheels of cheese he could make out with before the Cyclops would return, no, he went against the men’s wishes and ultimately got a few of them killed. In the Epic of Gilgamesh it is Gilgamesh’s greedy lifestyle that incites the story to begin. Gilgamesh must have all the virgins and all the sons. Despite Gilgamesh’s vulgar Las Vegas edge he is still the most widely respected mortal in Uruk. Even Enkidu, created by the Gods to give Gilgamesh a taste of his own medicine is seduced from nature (and godliness) by the mortal indulgences of a weeklong romp with a bare-breasted woman. Honestly, humans never take any responsibility for their actions and it’s always the ‘savages’ fault. So in the savages’ defense, Jack was a little punk, Odysseus was an arrogant ass, and Gilgamesh was a jerk.

Wild Man

Jack and the Bean Stalk, the Odyssey, and Gilgamesh can all be defined as folklore having been passed on for years and years through writing and verbal story telling. Although all three are from differing cultures, each addresses the concept of the “savage” and some even use it as its main theme.

The story of the Cyclops in Homer’s The Odyssey is a prime example of addressing the “savage” form a Western point of view. The savages in this story, the Cyclops, are described by Odysseus as having no government, no central towns, and no farming. Although Odysseus is just describing what he observed to the King, it is said with a demeaning undertone. Homer’s Cyclops’ are giants who are barbaric because they live in caves. Additionally, they are cannibalistic in the sense that they eat humans (if you consider Cyclops being within the human breed). If someone from a non-western culture were to have written this story, it might have been presented in a different way. It might have made Odysseus seem ridiculous for being under control of a king and living in a more organized or rigid way. But, the Odyssey was written by Homer, who was from Greece, which was considered a civilized culture.

Greek culture in this time was known as a civilized culture. It had government, and it was organized. The Greeks were smart and made many technological advances. The Odyssey may have survived all these years and especially in its early years because it was a story that highlighted their beloved culture. The hero in this story is Odysseus, a Greek. The Odyssey may have empowered the people who heard the story in the day because it was celebrating their lifestyle and making it seem like the better way of life. It did not even consider the Cyclops’s way of life as a good one. Odysseus walked into the Cyclops’ territory with the attitude that he was better than them.

Another reason why the Odyssey may have survived as anadmired story is because mythology was an important part of Greek life. They have had many Greek gods with mythological stories around each character.

Mythology may have survived in general in early cultures simply because they did not have explanations for many things but had the questions in their head. These stories, unrealistic as they were, addressed these questions in creative ways.

Caitlyn Bierman

The Wild Man

Most of our discussions this semester will aim to cover three kinds of knowledge at once:
First, the actual content of the works we encounter, which are organized according to major themes in the history of Western ideas about indigenous peoples - for example, the contrast of nature and the wild, or of moral and restricted behavior vs. ungoverned, immoral or amoral lawlessness. This should allow us to analyze and interpret material according to critical themes in culture.
Second, the historical context, such as the background of the classical Greek world that is the setting of the origins of tragedy, or the ancient Hebrew world that gave rise to the Hebrew Bible. This helps us understand the historical and cultural institutions of the productions of culture--for example, the relation of the modern European-American form of slavery to Aphra Behn's novel Oroonoko.
Third, the critical and interpretive methods we use to understand texts, artworks, customs, etc.--whether they survive from cultures of the past, exist in other parts of the world, or are characteristic of the very society in which we live. In other words, we use the same methods to study Greek mythology and the Harry Potter books--the differences depend largely on our relative knowledge of the language, cultural allusions, and belief systems we need to know to understand each example. This reminds us to consider the differences between myths and law codes, philosophy and literature, plays and novels, and so on, as we form hypotheses about interpretation. It also encourages to take seriously how we form interpretations that are both illuminating and well-grounded in logic and fair-mindedness.


This week we'll discuss three works that may be called folklore or perhaps myth. Although they appear in literary forms, each represents a story that has been told in many, many other versions. A large part of the interest in myth and folklore is in exploring why a story is so widely told. How did it achieve the cultural authority it has? Why did this story survive the centuries?

Our study involves the three dimensions stated above:
1. What do these Wild Man stories tell us about some of the themes in popular Western depictions of "savage" peoples? What are the most important actions and characteristics attributed to savages?
2. What do we know about the Greek culture that gave rise to Homer, the Sumerian civilization that fostered the heroic myth of Gilgamesh, and the cultural world of fairy tales?
3. What do we need to know about myth and folklore as a mode of narration to understand stories like these? What does the consideration of narrative tell us about how cultures communicate ideas, and even settle issues of power and authority?

Please think about these aims a little before you offer your own informal comment about the reading for the week. Focus on one story or a common element in all three--and I remind you, interesting as personal associations are, please stick (mostly) to critical thinking about our examples; that is, ideas that come from your analysis (noticing interesting or curious elements of the tales) and your attempts to find meaning in them.

You can post a comment below or create your own post. Please do one or the other by Monday, Sept 28 at 9 am so we can all read them before class.

Scalped

In the few times I have been to The National Museum of the American Indian I have witnessed old relics and ancient artifacts that intrigue and awe the stroller wielding suburban family, but unfortunately they don’t seem to have the same effect on me. In my opinion one of the most interesting things about art is its ability to comment on society and the human condition. Most of the art on display was traditional Native American ceremonial dressings and instruments dug out of the ground only to end up in a glass box. I did not see much of the many pressing contemporary issues that plague the Native American community today. Alcoholism, crime, and poverty are issues I think are as much worth talking about as is history and cultural tradition. I once heard that all fiction is somehow based on fact. In the graphic novel Scalped, by Jason Aarons, about a small town on a Native American reservation about to open a casino. On this reservation there is an abundance of violence, alcohol abuse and mob presence draining the community dry. Stated in the pages of Scalped, the village portrayed boasts a 90% unemployment rate which by many standards might be considered 3^rd world. If any of this information is even remotely true I think seeing it in that museum would be speak volumes more than it does right now.

The NMAI - A digest of your comments

Facing true south are acrylic prisms that catch the sun’s rays and reflect a spectacular light spectrum onto the interior of the museum’s Potomac. This is easily the most aesthetically pleasing aspect of the museum and probably the most symbolic.The sun ‘creates’ a spectacular light show within the Potomac, symbolizing the creation story of many American Indians in which the sun created life. . . . Cardinal successfully addresses the American Indian identity crisis through the galleries at the museum. Cardinal was given a chance to represent the American Indian at the National Mall. He not only succeed in giving the District of Colombia a architectural masterpiece he was also able to educate the general public about what a true American Indian ‘is’.

The ideas of this building are about origins and creation not the history or anthropology.

The design of the interior of the building is entirely confusing. Artifacts from completely different time periods are placed next to each other behind glass- for example, a painting on a hard-hat of betty boop rests naturally next to a thousand year old arrowhead. There are rows of drawers that are barely noticeable but easily opened, and surprisingly, inside each one is an extremely fascinating and priceless Native American artifacts, including dozens of further arrowheads, and many of other older items that have lasted hundreds of years worth of existence. . . . It is apparent that the design of the areas meant to educate about Indians can very easily leave most visitors more confused about the ancestry than when they entered. However, I believe this was intentional. . . . Native Americans know very little about their own history. This is due to the fact that they were nomadic in the days they roamed America, and one tribe would have very rarely met up with another. . . . As nomads, no cities where formed, and therefore leaving nothing to be searched today. Written documents were not in the norm for the culture, therefore history of the Indian clans were passed on by mouth, and over hundreds of years became distorted and unreliable as a reliable account for information. As the museum shows, all that truly remains are hundreds of arrowheads, some pottery, stories, and a few religiously significant creations.

I realized after seeing the photographs just how different the Washington area was before industrialization, and I believe this is a very persuasive media for educating visitors of the extreme changes that occurred as a result of western colonization.

Most impactful were the videos presented on LCD screens in each tribe's alcove of the exhibit. . . . What they communicate most effectively is the struggle for identity and economic trials of American Indian tribes now and over the past few decades. . . . Other parts of the exhibit tell of the identity crisis many American Indians face between preserving tribal life and surviving U.S. culture.

A major message the museum is trying to share is that American Indians are still alive today because of "survivance", or doing what they can to keep their culture alive. . . . The Kumeyaay people have a "star gathering". Young people in the video featuring this celebration explain how it allows them to understand their identity as American Indians as well as learning about their culture, having fun and uniting their people. . . . This museum is made for all audiences. An American Indian can visit, and learn about other tribes, or appreciate the museum's collection of artifacts and artwork. A non-American Indian can visit and learn about this culture that co-exists in their own country.

The best thing about this museum is the structure itself and the surrounding landscape. The building and the site are steeped in symbolism that is seldom seen in other Smithsonian institutions. The planets’ alignment the night Congress approved the museum is etched into the entrance way to the museum, the “grandfather” rocks plotted at each cardinal direction point around the building with plants and topography indicative of its point are just a few, interesting details that go unnoticed at the NMAI. . . . [But] Much of what these tribes stood for—peace, a love of nature, brotherhood, and respect—sadly, gets drowned out by the stereotypical roadside casinos and moccasins.

I can’t help but get caught up in the irony of it all. White people flocking to the NMAI to see what their potential ancestors destroyed, buying “Native American” blankets made in Oregon that was probably once inhabited by Indians in the first place. Native American culture is available and it comes in my size.

Why does the museum exist in the first place? Part of the struggle of indigenous people is dealing with unequal rights and segregation. Why is it that talented, contemporary Native American artists can only have their work housed with that of other Natives? . . . No matter how close one can get to the works, there is still a sense of voyeurism.

Though the museum prides itself on being the first American Indian education facility that works with indigenous people to provide a non-biased and real account of native history and lifestyle, there was a lot of propaganda within the museum. One example of this is in the Our Lives exhibit where the Kumeyaay tribe discusses its casino on their reservation. One tribe member, Nancy, is quoted: “The acorn has been with us for a long time. Our ancestors survived on this resource. Today we have the golden Acorn Casino to reminds us of the past and to provide for the future.” . . . Another issue that the museum just flat out ignores is the Indian Rights acts of the late 20th century. Though there is some examination of racism and broken treaties of the eighteenth and nineteenth century, very little is shown about the governments actions from the last few decades including the pressing actuality of reservation life today.
The American Indian Museum educates visitors from far and wide on past Indian culture and pushes forward the documentation of this culture in modern day. Should they, however, only share some of the more attractive aspects of the present-day Indian and ignore the hardships they still attain? The museum only shows an appealing side of the Indian life tourists want to see, not what is one hundred percent reality.

Although, the museum is very enjoyable and a top on my list, the idea of stereotype and capitalism has poisoned the museum. The first problem I encountered was before I even stepped through the front door. The architecture is supposed to repersent the natural, organic curves of the earth, which I understand but the use of a light color sandstone rocks to create the outer core I am in disagreement with. This portrays the image of the desert or western rocky area, and this being the American Indian museum, it gives off the idea that those tribes in the western region of america are the only tribes being talked about inside. This also pushes the idea of stereotyping or making to please the idea of what we think the native american is, by using nothing but the land to repersent them. . . . The other disease within the museum is the use of the girft shop and profit. To go along with what the museum is teaching us about the native people, with their use of the land and morals, they are once again doing the exact opposite and are jacking the prices on souvenirs and even food skyhigh. This is the prime idea of capitalism, and the knowledge of the majority of visitors being tourists, they are totally taking advantage of them and only see profits in their eyes. I understand the museum is free, but how much is public or government funding is there, how much money is going to these tribes that are featured in the museum, and how much profit is going into the pockets of the higher level of the museum?

An American Indian Identity Crisis

The National Museum of the American Indian is an institution that embodies the “identity” crisis of Native American culture in the 21^st century. The victors in Native American history were the dominating white infiltration of the Europeans and later the Americans and their Western Frontier. Centuries of cultural assimilation and degradation have taken its toll on Native American tribes. An institution such as this is essential in ensuring the survival and accurate portrayal of Native American culture today. Without the museum many Native American customs and art would lose their voice and potency, or may be forgotten altogether. With this in mind, my experience with the museum was an experience confronting Native American identities. Often my perception of traditional values and customs seem paradoxical to existing in a contemporary society, but what the current exhibitions are proving is that Native American traditions are not conflicting or assimilating into the 21^st century but rather evolving with time.

The exhibitions Our Lives: Contemporary Life and Identities and Ramp It Up: Skateboard Culture in Native America exemplify two opposite ends of a bell-curve in contemporary American Indian identity. The overtly non-traditional world of skateboarding becomes a vessel to promote traditional Native American values of work ethic and craft to a youthful generation. Our Lives: Contemporary Life and Identities articulates the struggle amongst eight Native communities—the Campo Band of Kumeyaay Indians (California, USA), the urban Indian community of Chicago (Illinois, USA), Yakama Nation (Washington State, USA), Igloolik (Nunavut, Canada), Kahnawake (Quebec, Canada), Saint-Laurent Metis (Manitoba, Canada), Kalinago (Carib Territory, Dominica), and the Pamunkey Tribe (Virginia, USA)* -- to retain cultural integrity and identity in the world today. The first time I experienced The National Museum of the American Indian was last spring and I was extremely moved by the work in Fritz Scholder’s (1937-2005) Retrospective: Fritz Scholder: Indian/Not Indian. Scholder’s work was exploring the myth of the American Indian and American Indian identity, including his own. Aesthetically Scholder’s paintings embody a sense of post-modern Abstract Expressionism and exploit Native American identity with a Pop-Art flair. Scholder’s controversial depictions of Native American’s appear to be a cultural critique of Native American identity. Scholder is grappling with his own Native American identity and his aesthetic struggle really embodies the Native American “identity” crisis in not only contemporary art but also in contemporary society today. The National Museum of the American Indian is a great arena for these cultural challenges to express themselves in a 21^st century setting while still remaining true to its traditional roots.

My past few visits to the National Museum of the American Indian have been forgettable at best. It’s a shame a museum dedicated to the Native American culture and peoples has become a footnote to the other museums and galleries on the National Mall. I think many museumgoers expect something like they would at other institutes in the District—great artifacts with historical significance, grand paintings and sculptures, and associations with “big names” (artists, etc). But the fact is, the NMAI has none of those things. And I don’t think it needs it or warrants any kind of material possessions to house. Many people miss out on the point of the museum, especially the casual and lazy viewer, just wanting to see something cool. It’s a testament to a culture, nothing more, and preserving their ways of life and ideals. The best thing about this museum is the structure itself and the surrounding landscape. The building and the site are steeped in symbolism that is seldom seen in other Smithsonian institutions. The planets’ alignment the night Congress approved the museum is etched into the entrance way to the museum, the “grandfather” rocks plotted at each cardinal direction point around the building with plants and topography indicative of its point are just a few, interesting details that go unnoticed at the NMAI.

However, these attributes about the museum that make it so much more meaningful pale in comparison to the second-rate attempts to attract visitors, specifically the Ramp it Up exhibit. That’s not to say those showings like Ramp it Up cheapen the experience because there are some exhibits with substance like Fritz Scholder’s pop art last semester. I think the curators at this museum are trying to give people what they want—simply art and artifacts with a Native American twist. As I said before, the museum really isn’t about what’s in it, as much as it is what’s it about; the subject. I guess my skin is too pale to realize the vast importance of the artifacts, but it’s hard to capture and relate these seemingly random tools and apparel of these tribes when they haven’t been in existence in over a century. Much of what these tribes stood for—peace, a love of nature, brotherhood, and respect—sadly, gets drowned out by the stereotypical roadside casinos and moccasins.

I can’t help but get caught up in the irony of it all. White people flocking to the NMAI to see what their potential ancestors destroyed, buying “Native American” blankets made in Oregon that was probably once inhabited by Indians in the first place. Native American culture is available and it comes in my size.



D.C. used to look like this outside the Capitol building in the early 1800s when Native Americans were kicked out and then kicked back in to make a museum to make it look similar to the wetlands before.

I believe the correct term is "Native American"

The Lelawi Theater in the American Indian museum offers an introductory video titled Who We Are that incorporates sound clips and images of different Indians talking about their ways of life. One of the first lines spoken is “We are not living out an ancient fantasy. This is just how it is.” This line summarizes the museums intended message. Through several exhibitions show casing American Indian centuries old culture and how it relates into contemporary times, the museum really pushes a message of how Indigenous heritage is not just sitting in the archives, its still being lived out.
The museum offers 3 permanent displays, Our Peoples, Our Universes and Our Lives. Our Universes focuses on the ancient knowledge, wisdom and beliefs still being practiced in modern day. In Our People Natives tell their own stories and histories. This exhibit, told by the indigenous people themselves, is opposite of the idea of the narrow ideas and information told for centuries by the white man through text books, movies and media. Our Lives shows eight different tribes explaining how they are still supporting their culture and ideas in the contemporary times or how the Natives are holding on to their Native identity.
Though the museum prides itself on being the first American Indian education facility that works with indigenous people to provide a non-biased and real account of native history and lifestyle, there was a lot of propaganda within the museum. One example of this is in the Our Lives exhibit where the Kumeyaay tribe discusses its casino on their reservation. One tribe member, Nancy, is quoted: “The acorn has been with us for a long time. Our ancestors survived on this resource. Today we have the golden Acorn Casino to reminds us of the past and to provide for the future.” There is a large discussion in the museum about tribal independency through casinos and landfills on reservation land. Though this has worked for some, the percentage of successful Indian Casino’s is extremely smaller then the museum leads one to believe.
Another issue that the museum just flat out ignores is the Indian Rights acts of the late 20th century. Though there is some examination of racism and broken treaties of the eighteenth and nineteenth century, very little is shown about the governments actions from the last few decades including the pressing actuality of reservation life today.
The American Indian Museum educates visitors from far and wide on past Indian culture and pushes forward the documentation of this culture in modern day. Should they, however, only share some of the more attractive aspects of the present-day Indian and ignore the hardships they still attain? The museum only shows an appealing side of the Indian life tourists want to see, not what is one hundred percent reality.

National Museum of the American Indian

Allie Nambo


The National Museum of the Native American features the history, lifestyle and art of the Native Americans throughout the Western Hemisphere. Designed by Douglas Cardinal, who is of Blackfoot heritage, the National Museum of the Native American incorporates natural elements like kasota stone within a sleek modern design. The building is filled with symbols and forms that reflect the Native universe. Linking representations of nature, astronomy, and artifacts from the collection.

This museum was made to attract a diverse audience. From people who know very little to people who are of Native American heritage or have studied the Western Hemisphere's indigenous people intensely, this museum is equipped to intrigue, and educate any type of audience. The museum is set up so the viewers can get the best experience possible. Every exhibit has smaller exhibits within that exhibit that engage the audience through visuals of certain artifacts of a tribe, photos, artwork, documentaries, dialogue, and music.

The landscape surrounding the building honors local Native people. Featuring four environments that are native to the Chesapeake bay region. The landscape houses over 33,000 indigenous plants, more than 25 native tree species, and original crops such as, corn, beans, tobacco, and squash.

The National Museum of the Native American shares very unique stories of the indigenous people of the Western Hemisphere. By celebrating these cultures the exhibits help connect the audience with the history and people who are native to our land. When visiting this museum you are bound to have an enjoyable and educational experience, feeling more connected to the extraordinary indigenous people of our land.

NMAI

Caitlyn Bierman

"We're here because we've always been here, and we will always be here," Laura Norton, 2001. As a member of the Kahnawa'ke kehro:non tribe, otherwise known as the Mohawk Indians, Laura sums up in this simple sentence the museum's purpose. This museum exists not only to display the artwork created by the American Indians, but also to share their stories of their history and the present.

The National Museum of the American Indian uses artifacts, current artwork, photos, stories, videos, music and dialogue to tell the story of the American Indian people. Each exhibit is comprised of smaller exhibits each about a different tribe. The museum curators worked with people from these tribes, chosen by their tribes to create the exhibits. The stories, comments, and dialogues are all first person accounts. The videos and first person accounts make this museum interesting because it connects the audience to the American Indians. A major message the museum is trying to share is that American Indians are still alive today because of "survivance", or doing what they can to keep their culture alive. The exhibit "our lives" explores the ways these communities are sustaining their traditions from the past to the current day. The Kumeyaay people have a "star gathering". Young people in the video featuring this celebration explain how it allows them to understand their identity as American Indians as well as learning about their culture, having fun and uniting their people.

This museum is made for all audiences. An American Indian can visit, and learn about other tribes, or appreciate the museum's collection of artifacts and artwork. A non-American Indian can visit and learn about this culture that co-exists in their own country. Some American Indians live in communities together and go to schools where they learn about their own culture and prepare to live in today's world.

This museum is unique and exciting. It is celebrating and highlighting these exciting American people. Their artwork, clothing, dolls, arrowheads, etc are impressive as well as the stories and opinions they have to share.

Savages: Civilization and Its Shadow

Our topic for this semester is Savages: Civilization and Its Shadow. The object of humanities study is to understand society, civilizations, and cultural productions from all available points of view, considering all the interpretative issues they raise. But the term “civilization” itself is notoriously burdened with unproven assumptions: it has often been used to validate one kind of society (or even individual) and disparage another. Alien peoples—often those inhabiting areas subject to conquest or exploitation—have been characterized as lawless barbarians, ruthless and ignorant primitives, or “noble savages.” In this course we examine the terms that have long been used to define humanity, "human nature,” and the social order to justify the power of one kind of society and the disempowerment of another—indigenous peoples through history and in the world today. Examples range from Greek tragedy and the Bible to the contemporary tribal peoples’ use of the Internet to place their issues and concerns before the world. Class discussions and writing assignments in and out of class will give you ample opportunity to criticize the points of view represented in these works and to formulate your own ideas in collaborative exchange with other participants in the course.


Your first assignment this semester is to visit the National Museum of the American Indian on the Mall and consider how it represents the indigenous peoples of North and South America to the general public.

1) Visit the museum.

I recommend you explore the permanent exhibitions treating Native-American cosmology and beliefs, history, and contemporary reality. This should take about three hours if you consider the exhibitions attentively and take notes as you go. Make an effort to arrange to visit the museum with some other members of the class, so you can discuss your impressions right afterwards. (The cafeteria is a great place for lunch.)

2) Think about what you’ve seen. You certainly don’t need to cover all these questions, but consider these points, please:

What messages are sent about indigenous peoples of the Americas, their history, cultures, and present ways of life?

How are these messages communicated?

What objects and media are presented, and why?

What’s the point of view in the exhibits?

Who is the intended audience?

What’s the point of the exhibits? What are they aiming to do?

What topics, themes, categories or ideas that are emphasized here?

How are they differentiated from non-indigenous society?

What particular exhibits, images, objects or presentations strike you as especially important and meaningful in understanding the museum and indigenous peoples?

What’s your stake in this? Is there any way it’s especially meaningful to you?

3) Post your own individual response to the museum at the class blog. Focus on the messages the museum presents about the indigenous peoples of the Americas, using examples (or one extended example) from the exhibitions you’ve explored. Although it’s entirely legitimate to base your impressions on your personal taste and opinions, this should be a critical response: that is, not an autobiographical account of your time at the museum but a real consideration of how the museum communicates ideas.

Through the whole of the semester, we will consider how the subject matter of the humanities—ideas, beliefs, art, culture—is developed and shared through institutions. To study art, texts, and culture critically is to study the nature of institutions and how they communicate ideas. At a museum school, we have a special opportunity, and a special responsibility, to consider how museums and colleges affect popular belief and the world we live in.

Due by Monday, September 21 at 9 am at this blog. Post your comment in response to this entry. If you find (for some reason) that you are unable to post a comment on the blog, email your response as a Word document to: bwelt@corcoran.org. (Be sure to contact me about any difficulties in joining the blog or Yahoo group.) This is an ungraded but mandatory assignment.

Another option: Make your own separate blog entry including images from the web or your own photographs. To do this, you must accept the invitation to become an author at the blog.