Navajo Potatoes: not what I was expecting

I saw this pop up on my friend Jerry's Facebook wall, and immediately thought it was going to be a "Random Appropriation of the Day"--but I was pleasantly and unexpectedly wrong. Walmart now sells potatoes grown on the Navajo Nation. How cool is that?

Update: commenter Bill posted the "About Us" from the Navajo Pride webpage:

"We produce premier Navajo Pride brand agricultural products, guaranteed to be the highest quality on the market today. We are located in the heart of the Four Corners region near Farmington, New Mexico, and are the largest contiguous farmland in the nation.

Our agribusiness features state-of-the-art farming technology including a multimillion dollar water management system. NAPI produces the finest and freshest varieties of Navajo Pride brand potatoes, corn, alfalfa, beans, and small grains, such as barley, wheat and oats. We are also expanding our Navajo Pride brand product selection at all times, so be sure and check our product availability frequently.
What makes Navajo Pride brand so unique? We are owned and operated by the Navajo people--those who understand and have been farming the land for centuries.
At NAPI, we take pride in producing Navajo Pride brand premium products for retail purposes, repackaging or for direct sale to our customers."

Awesome.

(Thanks Jerry!)

Project Runway's "Squash Blossom" blouse

I've been reading a few Project Runway recaps and watching some sporadic clips online (again with the no cable thing--you think I can get cable written off as a blogging expense?), and a couple of people sent me this image from last week's episode.

From what I can gather, the contestants were asked to create a textile design, and then make an outfit centered around their creation. Gretchen chose the design above, which she called a "squash blossom" design, as a nod to her upbringing in the southwest.



So, it's actually kinda pretty. I like it. But, it's not a squash blossom design. This is a squash blossom design (or at least what I've always seen referred to as a Navajo squash blossom necklace):

(awesome picture, right? it's from Life Mag's archives, here)

Gretchen's design is, to me anyway, a Zuni headdress/sunbonnet design:

I think this brings up a really interesting discussion. I think it is ok for designers to "draw inspiration" from Native cultures, but it can become very uncomfortable very quickly, and there is a fine line between what is acceptable and what could be considered otherizing, marginalizing, and cultural appropriation.

As it stands, Gretchen collapsed many distinct tribes throughout the southwest region into one "Southwest Native American Style", and mis-characterized the design as a "squash blossom". She didn't attach an actual tribe to the design, which a quick google would have solved real quickly.

But also, like I said, I didn't see the episode, so let me know if I'm giving her an unreasonably hard time.

So, if Gretchen had said "my design is a design taken from the Zuni Pueblo in New Mexico, it is a traditional headdress or sun bonnet design, and is often used on jewelry pieces by pueblo artisans..." or something of the sort, would it have been better? I'm not sure.

Where do we draw the line of inspiration and appropriation? Can "inspiration" be done in a way that is positive for the (almost always) marginalized communities that the designs or styles are taken from?

These are things I grapple with all the time as images come through my inbox...and I'm still not sure I have an easy answer.

Thoughts?

UPDATE: apparently Gretchen DID call it a "sunbonnet" design, and the "squash blossom" came from the bloggers who apparently don't pay attention to the actual episode they are recapping. From my friend A.:

"Although I don't pretend to speak for the propriety of Gretchen's use of the sun bonnet pattern, I watched the episode, and she did say she was inspired by her mom's sun bonnet jewelry (not squash blossom), with multiple references to having grown up "in the southwest." The whole episode is available for viewing on mylifetime.com (it was an awesome episode, although not because of Gretchen)."

 So thanks for filling me in!

(Thanks Maria!)

"Navajo" Fashion Spread in Seventeen

(via my culture is not a trend, click for bigger version)

Cultural appropriation in fashion has now gone seriously mainstream. The favorite read of tweens and teens everywhere, Seventeen Magazine, featured this "Navajo" fall fashion spread in their August issue. On many levels, I find this even more offensive than having a generic "tribal fashion" spread. I know I always point out that those spreads lump a million different Native tribes, images, and traditions into one catch-all, otherizing, "tribal" idea--and at least this one listed a tribe, right? Yeah, not so much. 

They still rely on generalized Native stereotypes, but this time are referring to a specific culture. This points to the fact that in the collective American consciousness, all tribes are interchangeable. Navajo, Ojibwe, Kootenai, take your pick. They're all the same! For instance, dream catchers: definitely not Navajo. Would I still be upset if they had paid attention and made taken inspiration from actual Navajo culture? Like if they had a white model dressed up in a rug dress? Of course. But hopefully you see my point.

My friend Marlon did a little research, and found out that in January 1973 Seventeen actually did a cover story entitled: "Special Report: Today's Young Navajos". I love the cover image (below) for many reasons, but mainly because they didn't have her pose in traditional clothes or try and have her conform to a more stereotypical image. She looks like she's about to laugh, just hanging out with her friends. Well done. I can't find the article, so I have no idea if the accompanying story was a shining example or a cringe-inducing piece, but it's still pretty interesting to examine the cover alone: 
 

As I was pulling together this post, I wanted a shocking, over-the-top example to illustrate how these fashion spreads make me feel every time I encounter them in magazines or on other fashion blogs...so I turned to polyvore and MS Paint, and made this:

UPDATE 8/28: After sleeping on it, I took it down. What was here was a "fashion" spread made up of various Africa/Urban/other Black stereotype "inspirations". It didn't illustrate my point, and any point it did make was at the expense of another marginalized group with not nearly enough context or description given. I was going for a visceral reaction, but in a blogging world where most page views are a matter of seconds, it's definitely not enough to throw that up there alone. I also want you to focus on the juxtaposition of the two Seventeen images rather than my misguided attempts at making a point. Apologies for my initial transgressions, and in the words of Kanye West's prolific Twitter: IT'S A PROCESS.  Thanks for bearing with me.  

I bet every fashion blogger making an Native-inspired version relies on the same tatic--pulling together complete stereotypes of what they think of when they hear "Native American". We are so much more than that--but to the readers of the August issue of Seventeen and the fashion blogosphere, we are simply feathers, dream catchers, headdresses, warpaint, moccasins, and beads. Nothing more. 

(Thanks Lauren and Marlon!)

Random Appropriation of the Day! (Crate & Barrel "Hogan" Rug)

Another Random Appropriation courtesy of my parent's house in San Diego. My mom got some beautiful new rugs for our bathroom from the Crate & Barrel outlet, and I don't know if you can read it, but this style of rug is called a "Hogan" rug.

Still missing the Native connection? This is a Hogan:

 (image source)

Hogans are the traditional home of the Navajo--which are definitely still widely in use today for ceremonial purposes, driving through the Navajo Nation you often see a hogan next to the more "modern" homes.

Just I thought it was a random name for a rug, and immediately thought of the Navajo/weaving/rugs connection. But I'll admit, it could be an appropriation of another Hogan:

 (image source)

I mean, that bandanna looks kinda like the rug... :)

But here's the screen grab of the Crate & Barrel rug:

I'm beginning to be more and more intrigued by the use of Native names/imagery in product naming, even when the product has nothing to do with Natives.

Random Appropriation of the Day ("Navajo Bronze" Hair Dye)

Apparently Clairol has a color of their "Natural Instincts" line called "Navajo Bronze"--a "light caramel brown". Of course, since Clariol wants you to think that this line of hair dye is "natural" and stuff, they have to use Natives for marketing, since we're all tied to nature and pure and whatever else they think. Frustrating.

Amazon listing: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B001E5EC4A/?tag=botkrajai-20

(Thanks Scott!)

North American Indians: a step by step guide to "playing Indian"

My friend Katie is currently in her first year of teaching 4th grade on the Rosebud Sioux reservation in South Dakota (go Katie!), and she sent me a scanned copy of this ridiculous book that was in her classroom library. I'll let her give the context:

"I finally started going through my classroom's library and was pretty appalled to find this book (along with the typical Indian the Cupboard and Little House on the Prairie-esque books).  I teach 4th grade on the Rosebud Reservation; 100% of my students are Lakota.  The book purports to give a history of Native Americans and a guide to Native crafts, but what it ends up being is a veritable handbook for white kids to "play Indian."  All the photos are of white kids dressed up as Indians!  I can't find one picture (other than the historical ones, of course) of a Native American child.  Even more disturbingly, the descriptions make it sound as if these white kids are authentic representations of Indian clothing, etc. The worst thing is that this book is (now was, ugh) in the library of a classroom full of Lakota children.  It's like hey kids, these pictures of white kids can teach you how to be Indian better than your own people!"

After the jump, scanned selections of the book. Prepare yourself, it's pretty bad. (All images can be clicked for a bigger version)

First thing of note: the title page says "Consultant: Anne Armitage, BA--The American Museum in Britain. So, there weren't any qualified "consultants" who were actually Native? or I don't know, maybe in AMERICA? Also, this is published by Scholastic--usually a well known and trusted name in children's books. 

This page talks about "Indian clothing". Everything is in past tense (as is the whole book), and it has instructions on how to make a "war bonnet" along with a historic photograph. 

"Hairstyles were important ways to look different but still fit in with tribal traditions. Some groups smeared their hair with mud and sculpted it into different shapes." Um, really? 

The descriptions of the tribes (not to mention the accompanying images) make me so upset. The past tense and historic descriptions would leave any child thinking there was no way a Nez Perce, Chumash, Tlingit, or Navajo person still lived today. 

Katie pointed out that the caption with the boy reads: "Plains warriors carried spears and hide shield and wore elaborate headdresses for ceremonial occasions", implying that he IS a "plains warrior".

More tribal descriptions--the description of the seminole is especially interesting. It's mostly about North American settlers and influence rather than the tribe. 

look at the boy's stance. Sitting "Indian style".

A couple of things: I like the fact the "Plains Warrior" and the "Seminole" are playing stickball--complete disregard for regionality of the game. Also, the one reference to traditions continuing today mentions that a form of this game is still played today "called lacrosse." Not that tribes still play the traditional form, which they do. 

"Early European Explorers and settlers tried to write down the sounds of Indian words, but some could not accurately be conveyed using our alphabet."

The caption reads "a sioux boy and a nez perce girl would have been able to speak to each other using sign language". 

So, overall, I'm a bit at a loss for words. I can't believe scholastic decided this was a great book to promote "hands on learning," and that someone decided this was a good book to put in a 4th grade reservation classroom. I mean, this is straight up, by definition cultural appropriation. 

I also just googled the book, and found it on a few "recommended book" lists for teachers (gross), and found that there is an entire series of books that teach kids how to "play history": Egypt, Rome, Stone Age...and American Indians (completely the same, right?). It appears to be still in print. 

Another example of placing Natives in the historic past, of melding of hundreds of distinct tribal traditions, of playing Indian, of not allowing Indians to be "experts" on ourselves, the "otherization" of American Indians...and about every other issue I've dealt with on this blog. So frustrating. 

Major kudos to Katie for cleaning out her classroom library, her students are lucky to have her. 

(Thanks Katie!)

Indians in the Times today!: Tuba City hospital a "model" for births

(image via nytimes.com)

Nice article today in the NY Times about the Tuba City health center and its policies and practices surrounding birth, specifically focusing on their high rate of natural births after c-sections. 

I'm drawing attention to the article for a few reasons, primarily  because the article presents Native communities in a positive light, showcasing the strengths of the community and culture, and not seeing them as detriments to the "western" ways of birth. It's nice to see some positive words about Indians in a national news outlet. 

But, the article does paint Indian Health Services (IHS) like it's awesome and the best system ever--and I know many, many people who would argue otherwise. IHS is definitely not known for its quality care. 

The article can be found here, and includes some cute pictures of Indian babies too. :)

 (like this one. aww)

Happy Sunday!

NY Times--Lessons at Indian Hospital about births: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/07/health/07birth.html?pagewanted=1&em

Spool No. 72's Coyote Navajo Rug Clutch

Another fashion appropriation sent by my sister, this one from the clothing website Spool No. 72. From perusing their website, they seem to be along the lines of Anthropologie, bohemian/vintage chic with maybe a little more "ethnic" flair thrown in there. The clutch description reads:

An exclusive for Spool No. 72. Made from a vintage Navajo rug each of our hand crafted clutches are one of a kind. The Coyote is truly a piece of art and is crafted from a native wool blend rug. Substantial in size the Coyote is adorned in breaided elk leather and a vintage horse blanket pin. 

and then, the line below:

Native hand crafted in the US

So does that mean the rug is Native made? or the whole thing is made by a Native person? There isn't any other information on the site to point one way or the other. I also happened to notice that their logo has an arrow through it :

 

And, when you click on the homepage of the company, the header reads "Spool No. 72: Rustic Native Inspired Women's clothing," but there is no further mention in the body of the page, just on the little blue bar above the browser window.

So I did some clicking, and I found their blog here. Along the right side is an section labeled "Native Inspirations" where I found even more bags:

(more after the jump plus an article I found about the boutique)

"Indian Saddlebred Tote"

"Foothills Clutch"

"Indian Arrow Tote"

"Buck Indian Rug Clutch"

Interestingly, none of the other bags say "Native hand crafted in America." They do all mention that they are made from "vintage Indian rugs", however.

On the blog there was a link to a NW source article about the company. The article, which can be found here, is entitled "Try on the American West with looks from Spool No. 72". It says that their merchandise "captures the essence of authentic American style and takes it to another level." There we go with throwing around the "authenticity" again.The article also notes that the clutches/bags are made in-house.

Overall, I'm a little perplexed. There's a chance that they could be a Native-run company, which would make sense given they claim the clutch is "Native hand made", but there isn't any further information to confirm/deny this. I'll keep looking around and keep you posted.

NW source article: http://www.nwsource.com/shopping/fashion/try-spirit-american-west-looks-spool-no-72

Spool No. 72 website: http://host5.shoppepro.com/~spoolcom/

Spool No. 72 blog: http://spoolno72.blogspot.com/

(Thanks sees!)

More Tribal Fashion: Gap "Navajo Tracker Hat"

My good friend Kayla (who is Hupa/Yurok/Karuk from Northern California) pointed me to this "Navajo Tracker Hat" from the Gap (no longer on sale so sorry I can't link to it). She pointed out, however, that the design looks very similar to the basket hats from her community, rather than decidedly Navajo:

(image via http://www.hoopa-nsn.gov)

and even more similar to this knit version:

(image via http://www.nativevillage.org)

This is a good example of using a more "well known" tribal name paired with a design or tradition from another community, adding to the perception that tribal traditions are interchangeable and the same across Indian Country.

(Thanks to Kayla for the photos!)

"Tribal Fashion": the newest trend?

Jezebel had a great post today highlighting Rachel Zoe’s newest “Zoe Report” entitled “Gone Native”. Zoe points to the work of Lindsay Thornburg, a designer who makes cloaks out of Pendleton fabrics (both vintage and contemporary) with names like “Navajo Nile” and “Walking Rock”. Zoe’s text reads:

“As my newest outerwear crush, I am blown away by each one of Thornburg’s ethnic-inspired cloaks. They are a brilliant interpretation of the current tribal trend which will carry over from winter as a hugely coveted look for spring.”

Ethnic-inspired? Current tribal trend? What exactly does that even mean?
Here are some of Thornburg's designs:

(images via http://www.lindseythornburg.com)

Also included at the bottom of the Zoe Report (presumably for those of us who can't afford a $950 cloak) is this Electric Navajo Poncho from Forever 21:





I always find it hard to articulate why it is that these things are so offensive. Jezebel commenter roxanneismyalterego puts part of it into perspective:

“Calling mass produced clothing "Native" or "tribal" devalues the culture of whichever group the clothing is inspired by. In a sense, you're saying, "it doesn't matter WHICH native or tribal group this was inspired by, it's just not WHITE."

Which is definitely a piece of the issue. A major problem with depictions of “Native” in reference to American Indians is the reduction of 500+ tribes, each with their unique history, culture, language, and traditions into one stereotyped image, one that we as Native people know well: the buckskin-clad, feather-headdress-wearing, face-painted, Plains-inspired Indian. They also only ever seem to appropriate three tribes in terms of names and “inspiration”—Navajo (or Navaho if you’re Urban Outfitters), Sioux (which is another antiquated name and represents a group of tribes, not just one), and Cherokee (believe me, I KNOW about that one). You never seem to see a Nisqually V-neck or a Wampanoag jewelry holder.

Dodai Stewart, the author of the Jezebel post, pointed to another great post on Racialicious to shut down an ill-informed commenter, and it really breaks down the problems with cultural appropriations. It’s all about oppression, power, and colonialism. You can read the whole post here.

some of the key quotes:

"'What’s so wrong with being inspired by another culture?’ Nothing, really. But “inspiration” drawn from a historically oppressed culture comes with a tangle of baggage born of generations of marginalization and bias.”

“A Japanese teen wearing a t-shirt emblazoned with the logo of a big American company is not the same as Madonna sporting a bindi as part of her latest reinvention. The difference is history and power. Colonization has made Western Anglo culture supreme–powerful and coveted. It is understood in its diversity and nuance as other cultures can only hope to be. Ignorance of culture that is a burden to Asians, African and indigenous peoples, is unknown to most European descendants or at least lacks the same negative impact."

"It matters who is doing the appropriating. If a dominant culture fancies some random element (a mode of dress, a manner of speaking, a style of music) of my culture interesting or exotic, but otherwise disdains my being and seeks to marginalize me, it is surely an insult.”

As recently as our parents and grandparents’ generations, Native children were forcibly sent to government run boarding schools founded on a policy of “kill the Indian, save the man”, where they were taught their culture and traditions were wrong and backward, and beaten if they spoke their tribal languages. Until 1978 with the passage of The American Indian Religious Freedom Act, Native peoples in the US were not even allowed to practice their traditional ceremonies without fear of persecution. Indian reservations are some the poorest places in the US with the highest levels of unemployment. So, Rachel Zoe, the problem is that behind that trendy poncho there are hundreds of years of cultural genocide and ongoing oppression at play, and the fact that you deem it worthy of inclusion in your blog doesn’t and can’t erase that.

The Jezebel post also refers to many other recent fashion campaigns and examples from companies like American Apparel, Victoria’s Secret, and yes, even the hipster snuggie I posted about earlier. Let’s hope this trend is one that goes the way of ill-fated trends of yesteryear like overalls and dying your hair with kool-aid.

Jezebel post: http://jezebel.com/5450961/rachel-zoe-pronounces-tribal-trend-so-hot-right-now

Zoe Report: http://www.rachelzoe.com/lindsey-thornburg-cloak

Lindsay Thornburg's webpage: http://www.lindseythornburg.com/store.html

Racialicious post: http://www.racialicious.com/2008/09/18/cultural-appropriation-homage-or-insult/

Wikipedia entry on Cultural Appropriation (a good background read): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_appropriation

(Thanks to Charlotte R. for the tip about the Jezebel article!)