Another response to Star Trek Voyager:  Chakotay:

A writer who wishes to remain anonymous sent me the following message 12/30/05:

The following debate ensued. (I've edited all the replies slightly for the sake of clarity.)

Rob replies (12/30/05)
>> As a journalist who was researching Mr. Robert Beltran during his time on "Voyager", I can tell you that your article quoting him is completely wrong. <<

Are you talking about my page at http://www.bluecorncomics.com/chakotay.htm? I don't believe writer Al Carroll quoted Robert Beltran on that page. Tell me which quote you're referring to and then we'll discuss it.

>> In fact, it not only misquotes him, it says the exact opposite of anything I have ever heard or read Robert say. Rather, you would find his comments agreeing with your own sentiments. <<

If you have some quotes from Beltran, please send them to me. I'll be happy to incorporate them into my page.

>> Your writer needs to do better research before making inaccurate summaries and misrepresenting Mr. Beltran's point of view. <<

An inaccurate summary isn't the same as an inaccurate quote, you know. But again, tell me where the inaccuracies are, with supporting documentation, and I'll update the page.

Rob Schmidt
Publisher
PEACE PARTY

Al Carroll replies (12/30/05)
Hello,

Rob Schmidt forwarded your email about me, as you can see below.

As a historian I take my research seriously, as did the two committtees that reviewed my work, one a dissertation committee and another a peer review committee for a university press. None of them found any inaccuracies with my research or writing.

So far all you've said is vague unsupported assertions, some of them clearly false.

Nowhere did I quote Beltran, for starters. Far from being unfair to him, I went fairly easy on him. For example, there is a photo of him posing with a New Age spiritual exploiter who poses as a Native medicine man, which this imposter has posted on his website as an endorsement.

My sources were primarily the STV episodes themselves, along with a websites of one of the screenwriters. If you have any information that contradicts those sources, I'd be interested in seeing it.

Dr. Al Carroll
Social & Behavioral Sciences Dept.
St. Phillip's College

Our correspondent replies to Al (12/30/05)
Dr. Carroll,

I'm pleased to hear that you take this matter seriously. I would be curious to see your sources as well.You are correct, you did not directly quote him and you should have. In so doing, you have misrepresented what he has said.

Star Trek is fantasy. I happen to agree with you that their writers should have been more accurate and have told them that. However, misrepresenting Mr. Beltran's viewpoint is not going to assist your case. You have failed to aid your case by confusing the actor with his character.

In fact, what you have stated is obviously a misprepresentation of what he said and is easily demonstrated by the actual quote you refer to in your article. In fact, he agrees with the nature of what you are trying to prove.

Dr. Carroll. I am not the one making assertions, you are and they are unsubstantiated ones, as far as I can see. I would like to see the photo and the interviews you are referring to that support your words. I have researched Mr. Beltran's career for some time now and I have never come across him saying anything like what you have written.

Incidentally Dr. Carroll, Mr. Beltran does not get a lot of choice about who he poses with and who he does not. Star Trek fans dress up in many guises and many want a photo taken with him. It would be an impossible task for him to keep track of every photo that has been taken and the use it has been put to. He is an actor, not a writer. If you must quote or speak about someone, why not contact Brannon Braga or Rick Berman for their responses? They were the ones responsible for the traversty, not the player on the stage who is paid to read his lines. Brannon Braga has a website and he has an e-mail address you can write to.

I too worked as an academic at a university and am well versed in the procedures necessary for peer review. I am sure they were concentrating on your assertions regarding the inaccurate portrayal of Native American culture and not whether you are misrepresenting the views of an actor in order to make your case.

I look forward to viewing the URL you are referring to.

Our correspondent supplies more info (12/31/05)
Dr. Carroll and Mr. Schmidt -

Here are a few links for you. I believe it is standard procedure for any article or book to substantiate their claims by listing their sources and research materials. I do not see any listings in the article concerned and can only assume that they are listed in your broader publication.

However, here is another article that is well represented and well documented, on the same subject.

Here's a few readily available resources, gathered from the first few pages of a Google search. At this point, I have not even started to dig into the interviews, articles etc., in my files.

From Sci-Fi Universe -

Articles from a variety of magazines:

How he saw the character -

Might I add that Mr. Beltran is a second generation Mexican-American whose grandparents came from Mexico to work in the fields in California's Central Valley? His family were involved with Cesar Chavez and the Brown Berets -- they have much to be very proud of as both Americans and Latinos.

Or let's deal very briefly with Mr. Beltran's views regarding Chakotay's tattoo and fake spirituallity: He ridicules/criticises both. I have magazine articles where he speaks about these matters more completely but they are not on-line.

Chatting up Chakotay
These quotes are from on-line chats at startrek.com

And from another startrek.com chat -

Here's a fan's view of what Mr. Beltran said at a convention -

More on Chakotay's heritage
From the imdb -

From an old on-line review of mine.

In fact, it was Mr. Beltran who attempted to get the producers and writers to maintain greater standards of accuracy and to take care not to offend.

Regarding your comments concerning how Mr. Beltran is regarded by the public and the Native American fans in particular.

This website has promoted him as a Native American celebrity for at least 5 years, to my observation.

And these Native American people do not seem backward in coming forward to claim kinship. BTW, just because his name is listed on their site it doesn't mean that he endorses their product.

I might add that the first time I truly heard someone proseleticising about New Age beliefs (specifically Crystal Skulls), it was a Native American from New Mexico's Nambe Pueblo.

Not all fans would agree with your interpretation of the use or interpretation of Native American cultures either. Here's a recent one:

Another set of fan responses:

In fact, it seems obvious, from even a cursory glance at the Trek related bulletin boards these days, that the fans are able to differentiate between fantasy and fact.

From the above Trek Today BBS posts -

Here's another list for you to investigate and I too shall be re-checking each of these to see if I have missed anything in my research.

I can produce more reference material should you so desire. I certainly would like to see the sources you have used to draw your conclusions, as it would assist me in my own research.

BTW, if you would like to see a couple of my own on-line articles, they can be found at:

As you will observe, that is Robert's older brother being referred to. I look forward to seeing your sources.

Al Carroll replies (1/2/06)
I should start this email by thanking you for providing me with more sources. Ironically virtually every source you've given supports my arguments, not yours. I'll go into that in more detail in the response to your other email.

I'd also like for you to give your permission to Rob to repost our emails on his site, since I think it'd be of great interest to the many who go there, Star Trek fans or otherwise. Rob already knows he's free to quote from any email I send him.

I'm still unclear as to where you get this bizarre notion I have ever quoted Beltran. That's twice now you've made this false assertion.

There is quite a bit of emotion on your part in your defense of Beltran, which suggests to me you either know him personally at least somewhat well (or imagine you do) or are a very dedicated fan, or both. Perhaps it's his involvement in community groups or charitable causes which adds to this admiration.

But whether he's a nice guy has little to with the stereotyping he spread in his portrayal of Chakotay. It's no coincidence he's only been honored by Latino organizations for his work, not by Native ones.

If you like I can send you the chapter of the upcoming book so you can see the full context in which I discuss the character of Chakotay, as well as the sources. The chapter may be slightly modified by the time it gets to print, ironically by the addition of all the sources you've turned up which, again, only strengthen my case.

My critique of his portrayal of Chakotay is basically only one paragraph and part of another. As I said before (but you chose to ignore, as you ignored both myself and Rob pointing out I never quoted Beltran) the only sources I used were the episodes themselves along with a website of one of the writers.

Pretty much my problems with his portrayal are:

1) He's as wooden as a cigar store Indian for most of the time, emotionless, Stoic, imitating many of the old racist portrayals from Westerns but with a phaser instead of a tomahawk.

If one wants a good portrayal of how Indians actually are, hang around us and you'll see we laugh and joke and kid around as much as the next bunch. Smoke Signals is much more accurate in that regard, or Powwow Highway.

If you want to see a Latino actor do a good job of portraying Indians, see A Martinez in Powwow Highway or Grand Avenue.

2) The character is a New Age version of an Indian, and Beltran defends that. Your own sources admit as much, as I'll go into in more detail in responding to your other email.

3) Beltran suddenly claimed to be an Indian in response to criticism of his portrayal. In fact he likely has Native ancestry but is not Native. Virtually no Natives would accept his claim to be one, and many are upset when he falsely poses as one.

Your quote below only shows how out of touch he is, not only with Native people but with the social sciences over the past half century. Starting with Ashley Montague in the 1960s, indeed going as far back as Franz Boas in the 1910s, very few social scientists buy into the model of "race" as biologically determined or even valid.

Very few Native people do as well. The only well known Native I can think of who would buy the "blood makes you an Indian" argument might be John Trudell with poetry about blood memory.

Essentially most Natives would say one must be raised in or know the culture intimately or be part of an Indian community to be an Indian. Beltran is not now, never was, and never will be.

If one wanted to see an example of someone with both Latino and Native heritage who is widely accepted by other Indians, take a look at Benjamin Bratt, whose mother is Quechua. He IDs as both Quechua and Peruvian, unlike Beltran who claims to be a generic Indian.

Someone should also tell him "By the way, Mayans and Aztecs did wear feathers."

4) By perpetuating the Stoic Indian and New Age Indian stereotypes and by being a Wannabe, Beltran is definitely One Huge Step Backwards in his portrayal.

I am far from the only one in academia to make these sorts of arguments. I highly recommend DeBendetti's Star Trek and History: Race-ing Towwards a White Future, for anyone who is naive enough to think any of the Star Trek series or films somehow represent any improvements in their portrayals of nonwhites.

I'd also highly recommend this article to you.

5) Finally, quite a few of the fans can't stand his portrayal. You seem to have missed that. As I said in the piece of the chapter that's on Rob's site, I am extremely heartened by the fact that so many fans of all ethnic backgrounds caught on to how phony and stereotypical the character of Chakotay and Beltran's portrayal are.

What fans think of Chakotay
Here's a very brief cross section of fan reaction to Chakotay:

As far as the photo of Beltran with a Nuage imposter, I recall it as being on our discussion forum at www.newagefraud.org. If I were planning on using it in the chapter, I'd track it down. Since I'm not, you're welcome to.

Al Carroll

Rob weighs in (1/3/06)
>> You are correct, you did not directly quote him and you should have. In so doing, you have misrepresented what he has said. <<

>> In fact, what you have stated is obviously a misprepresentation of what he said and is easily demonstrated by the actual quote you refer to in your article. <<

Huh? You just admitted there was no direct quote. So what's this "actual quote" you said Al Carroll referred to? Quit talking about the alleged quote and quote it. Then we'll have some idea what you're talking about.

>> I happen to agree with you that their writers should have been more accurate and have told them that. <<

Great...so what's the problem? Most of Al's essay criticizes Voyager's writers for their generally inaccurate portrayal of Indians. Al wrote only two sentences discussing what Beltran said about Chakotay.

If those two sentences were totally wrong, it wouldn't change the overall thrust of Al's essay. It would remain roughly 95% on target because roughly 95% of it is about the show, not about Beltran.

Of course, I don't believe anything Al wrote is wrong. If I did, I'd question it myself.

>> However, misrepresenting Mr. Beltran's viewpoint is not going to assist your case. <<

If we misrepresented Beltran's viewpoint, which we haven't done, it wouldn't change the overall thrust of the essay. You know, the thrust that said the show's portrayal of Indians wasn't accurate? Which you yourself admitted? Rather than condemning us for a possible mistake, you should be praising us for getting the basic point right.

Anyway, quote the alleged misrepresentation and we'll consider it. Your opinion that something in Al's article is inaccurate isn't worth discussing until you provide specifics.

>> For everyone who is concerned, and they should be, I'd like to clarify that I am a Native American. Mexico is a nation of Mestizos, people who are half indigenous and half European. <<

I'm sure that doesn't matter, but I give full credit to the indigenous half of the Mexican people's heritage. I'm sure Al does too.

>> Dr. Carroll. I am not the one making assertions, you are and they are unsubstantiated ones, as far as I can see. <<

Many of the so-called assertions are Al's opinions, not hard facts. As for the hard facts, such as what happened in particular episodes...again, tell us what you think is inaccurate and we'll discuss it.

>> I have researched Mr. Beltran's career for some time now and I have never come across him saying anything like what you have written. <<

Again, Al doesn't quote Beltran at all, as you've already admitted. You're wasting our time referring to quotations that don't exist. If you're referring to something else, go ahead and tell us what it is. Then we'll consider it.

>> Incidentally Dr. Carroll, Mr. Beltran does not get a lot of choice about who he poses with and who he does not. <<

Al didn't refer to the photograph in his original essay. He was using it as a minor piece of supporting evidence. Tell us what's wrong with the original essay, if you can, or give it up.

>> If you must quote or speak about someone, why not contact Brannon Braga or Rick Berman for their responses? They were the ones responsible for the traversty, not the player on the stage who is paid to read his lines. <<

Al didn't blame Beltran for the errors in Voyager's depiction of Chakotay. If you think he did, you misread the essay.

>> http://www.philjohn.com/papers/pjkd_ga12.html <<

This is well-documented? The only thing that seems relevant to your complaint is:

"They" refers to Indians, and we've already said Chakotay is some sort of Indian. The question is whether Voyager portrays him as an authentic or a phony Indian. This article doesn't address that point.

>> http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Labyrinth/7683/robert.html <<

The only relevant passage in this article seems to be this:

This is the author's summation. The article doesn't quote Beltran on the subject, as far as I can tell, and doesn't refer to past quotes. But if Beltran agrees with this quote, it tends to confirm that he has no "ties to or understanding of Native cultures," as Al wrote.

>> Articles from a variety of magazines:

Robert says some of the other cast members have a much stronger input in their roles than he does. <<

Again, Al didn't blame Beltran for Chakotay's depiction. All Al made was a somewhat related claim:

The point of this is that Beltran didn't do much to contradict the New-Age depiction of Chakotay. But that doesn't mean Beltran was responsible for it. Al didn't claim he was responsible, so we don't need to defend or document that claim.

In fact, Al specifically attributed the problems with Chakotay to Larry Brody and unidentified "STV writers." If you think he attributed them to Beltran, again, you've misread the article.

Comments confirm Al's claims
>> His spirituality is different from mine. I'm a Christian, so, although I respect other religions, Chakotay's doesn't inspire me <<

This tends to confirm that Beltran has no "ties to or understanding of Native cultures" (i.e., Native religions), as Al wrote.

>> I wish I had his discipline; that's what I've given him I think. He's a guy who's very much in control of himself. <<

This tends to confirm Al's opinion that "Robert Beltran actually seems to imitate the old Westerns for his unflinchingly stone-faced Stoic portrayal."

>> Okay, but we're still wondering: Is the actor as spiritual a man as his always-praying alter ego? <<

Again, irrelevant.

>> Might I add that Mr. Beltran is a second generation Mexican-American whose grandparents came from Mexico to work in the fields in California's Central Valley? His family were involved with Cesar Chavez and the Brown Berets -- they have much to be very proud of as both Americans and Latinos. <<

You can add it, but it's irrelevant.

>> Or let's deal very briefly with Mr. Beltran's views regarding Chakotay's tattoo and fake spirituallity: He ridicules/criticises both. I have magazine articles where he speaks about these matters more completely but they are not on-line. <<

That's convenient. Feel free to tell us which magazines and quote a few sentences from them. It won't take much time for you to type them in.

>> Q: Is the design for Chakotay's tattoo on his forehead your idea or make-ups?
sudea

RB: It was a special request from Charles Manson. <<

This is a joke response, not a serious one. It doesn't tell us whether Beltran approves or disapproves of the tattoo. And since Al didn't blame Beltran for coming up with the tattoo, it's irrelevant.

>> RB: In general, yes I'm very happy with Chakotay's development. <<

Beltran could've said Chakotay's heritage was as a phony as a wooden buffalo nickel at this point. Instead, he implied he's happy with it. This tends to confirm Al's claim that Beltran has offered a "public defense of the New Age aspects of Chakotay as authentically Indian."

>> RB: Well, let's see... He can talk to his dead father, Live in his dreams <<

As does this.

>> Q: what, if any, tribe are your markings based on?
vilna

RB: Actually it's based on a Maori tribal design. <<

This is a serious response, but it doesn't tell us whether Beltran approves or disapproves of the tattoo. And since Al didn't blame Beltran for coming up with the tattoo, it's irrelevant.

>> Q: How do you feel about your character's involvement with spirit guides and spiritual scenes?
Heidi

RB: I think within the context of a science fiction show, it can be fascinating. <<

This also tends to confirm Al's claim that Beltran has offered a "public defense of the New Age aspects of Chakotay as authentically Indian."

>> He has some Native American as well as European blood (probably like 99,9% of all Americans...) but regards himself as a Mexican-American (since that is where his main roots are), quite to the disappointment of some fans who wanted to know about his own "tribal rituals". <<

Someone who regards himself as Mexican-American could claim to be Mayan, as Al asserted. Without knowing more, this paraphrase of a fan exchange doesn't tell us much.

>> Robert Adame Beltran was born in Bakersfield, California on the 19th November. He is the seventh of ten children and he's of Mexican-Native American ancestry, though Robert describes his heritage as Latindio. <<

Likewise.

>> The producer's apprehension about Beltran being "on the nose" were based on long experience with casting. <<

Since Al wrote that Beltran's "physical appearance leaves no doubt he has Indian ancestry," this seems irrelevant.

Birthplace shifts from Mexico to Central America
>> Meaning I'm Mestizo, which is a blend of European blood and indigenous Central American. <<

As one website states

By shifting his claim to having Indian blood from Central America instead of from Mexico, Beltran is edging toward what Al wrote about him: that he claimed to be Mayan. Mayas are probably the most common Indians in Central America.

Let's summarize. According to the data you've provided, Beltran has claimed he:

Well, which is it? This sounds like what Al implied: that Beltran claimed to be Mexican until it was more advantageous to claim he was part (Central American) Indian. It certainly does not bolster your claim that Beltran has been straightforward about his ancestry.

>> Later, Beltran called Jeri Taylor and suggested they move Chakotay's tribal background south of the border. He could be Mayan, Aztec, Inca, even Olmec. These were all cultures known to be highly advanced in science and astronomy. <<

Perhaps, but these cultures weren't interchangeable. In contrast, the typical New Ager claims that all Indians were part of some holistic, pan-indigenous culture. So this tends to support Al's claim that Beltran defended "the New Age aspects of Chakotay as authentically Indian."

>> In fact, it was Mr. Beltran who attempted to get the producers and writers to maintain greater standards of accuracy and to take care not to offend. <<

Narrowing Chakotay's origin to the lower half of the Americas isn't much of a standard. And a large part of the problem was the other things the writers introduced: vision quests, sweat lodges, medicine wheels, etc. North American tribes may have had these things, but Central and South American tribes didn't.

If Beltran wanted to criticize or ridicule Chakotay's background, this was the time to do. What he could've said was, "Let's make Chakotay Maya or Aztec or Inca. And when we do, let's be sure to leave out the vision quests, sweat lodges, medicine wheels, and so forth. These are New Age clichés; they have nothing to do with Central and South American Indian cultures."

He could've refused to play the role unless the writers made it authentic. Or he could've taken the role and undermined it with private or public protests against its stereotypical aspects. Did he do any of these things? I doubt it, and it isn't evident from the evidence you've provided.

>> This website has promoted him as a Native American celebrity for at least 5 years, to my observation.

http://www.nativecelebs.com/actors8.htm <<

Beltran doesn't appear to be listed there now. And what this site may or may not say about him is irrelevant.

>> And these Native American people do not seem backward in coming forward to claim kinship. BTW, just because his name is listed on their site it doesn't mean that he endorses their product. <<

What does it mean if his name isn't on the site? That Beltran has no "ties to or understanding of Native cultures"? Hmm.

>> http://wovoca.com/native-american-actor.htm <<

This site lists Beltran as playing the character Chakotay, nothing more. It may list him because the character is Native, not because the actor is. Again, it's irrelevant.

The only thing Al has written about Beltran is what he himself claims. Which, as you've just shown, is all over the map.

>> I might add that the first time I truly heard someone proseleticising about New Age beliefs (specifically Crystal Skulls), it was a Native American from New Mexico's Nambe Pueblo. <<

I doubt crystal skulls are an authentic part of Nambe culture. If they aren't, Al and I probably would criticize this incident too. Many Indians and pseudo-Indians have taken to doing New Age rituals to earn a buck from naive tourists.

Fans agree:  Chakotay is stereotypical
>> http://www.trekbbs.com/threads/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=5311024&page=3&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=31&fpart=1 <<

These comments:

all support what Al has written.

>> http://64.33.77.146/discus/messages/6/11960.html?1017656543 <<

As do these comments:

>> In fact, it seems obvious, from even a cursory glance at the Trek related bulletin boards these days, that the fans are able to differentiate between fantasy and fact. <<

We're the ones distinguishing between Chakotay the fantasy Indian and real, fact-based Indians. If you agree that Chakotay is a mishmash of New Age stereotypes, then what's the problem? If you disagree, then you're the one having a problem distinguishing fact from fantasy.

No one is saying that Voyager is supposed to be a factual account of Indians. What we're saying is that its fictional account of Indians is stereotypical. We understand the difference between fact and fiction. Do you understand the difference between authentic and inauthentic fiction?

If you think we should give Voyager a pass because it's fictional...well, forget it. From the Old West to outer space, fiction has been a primary source of Native stereotyping. And the harm of this stereotyping is well-documented. See The Harm of Native Stereotyping:  Facts and Evidence for details.

It seems obvious that most knowledgeable fans would agree with Al's essay if they read it. In fact, I haven't seen one that came close to disagreeing with Al's premise. Why don't you provide a quote that actually disagrees with something Al wrote?

>> I hadn't noticed any 'stereotypes' when I watched the show. <<

See above. Lots of people don't notice stereotypes until people like me and Al point them out. That doesn't mean they're not there. I've posted several years' worth of them in my Stereotype of the Month contest to prove the point.

>> I can produce more reference material should you so desire. <<

If you have something that actually contradicts what Al wrote, feel free to provide it. What you've produced so far has failed to make your case.

Rob Schmidt
Publisher
PEACE PARTY

Our correspondent replies to Al (1/4/06)
No Dr. you do not have my permission to use anything either at that website or in your book. My name is not to be mentioned in any way shape or form with regards to this.

Your estimation and interpretation of what I sent you is not only incorrect but skewed and I will have nothing to do with it in any way, shape or form.

You are quite incorrect regarding my own experience with Native American people's and history and I find your portrayal inaccurate and erroneous.

I shall look over your other e-mail but if it continues in this form then you shall simply confirm the impression you are giving me from this e-mail: You are neither objective nor accurate.

I would suggest that you should stick to an academic argument in your book and describe the character of Chakotay, referring to the creators of that character and not to the actor who portrays him. If you wish to be taken seriously then I would suggest that you need to tackle those who created the character: Rick Berman and Berman Braga. They are readily available on-line, for comment.

That is the only suggestion I can make to you as you seem determined to misrepresent what I have said as well as what Mr. Beltran has said.

No Dr. I am not emotional and nor have I appeared to be that way. If I had been emotional about the topic, I would have ignored you. But as a writer, I wanted to know what sources you were quoting. This e-mail indicates that you are merely seeking sensationalism and I am not interested in any discussion along those lines.

Our correspondent replies to Rob (1/4/06)
Mr. Schmidt,

As I am sure you are aware, it is not necessary to actually quote someone in order to claim they are saying something.

I just read Dr. Carroll's other e-mail and am no longer interested in any further discussion. I made the mistake of thinking you may have had some actual information that lead you to draw the conclusions you have about Mr. Beltran's personal views. It turns out that you have no references or sources.

As I stated before, you do not have my permission to sue my name or writing in any way, shape or form.

Al replies to our correspondent (1/4/06)
There's not much I could add to Rob's points about the sources. What's amazing to me was how [you] could have so clearly misinterpreted one source after another.

Would you mind pointing me towards links with some of your work...?

The only points I feel the need to add are these:

While Beltran's comment about having an elephant for an "animal totem" was probably humorous, most Nuage people probably would have taken it at face value. And most Indians would never have made that joke, or would have been far more scathing in their remarks, since a spirit guide is usually regarded as something far too personal to talk about.

And after all, "totem animal" is a Nuage phrase, not an Indian one.

If Beltran were simply a Latino with a good understanding of the fact of his likely having Native ancestry (even if he can't be sure of the tribe, or much more likely, numerous tribes), that would not just be fine, that's something I'd be happy to see and encourage.

I think many Natives would agree with me on that. One of the most famous example being Jack Forbes' book Aztecas del Norte, which had a huge influence on the Chicano Movement and Brown Power of the 60s and 70s, esp the Chicanindio groups.

It's likely these that Beltran was referring to when he called himself "Latindio."

I can think of positive examples of Latino identification with Indians, such as cartoonist Lalo Alcaraz, that are much like Black Americans identifying with the plight of those in Africa and Haiti.

I can also think of plenty of negative examples unfortunately, including Nuage imposters such as "Maestro Tlakael" who poses as an Aztec medicine man while claiming Atlantis is part of Aztec tradition.

I'm a bit short for time right now since it's the start of the semester, but I will get to your latest email tomorrow....

Al Carroll

Rob gets annoyed (2/8/06)
And replies to our correspondent's last message to Al:

>> No Dr. you do not have my permission to use anything either at that website or in your book. <<

What's the matter? Afraid to stand behind your convictions? Sorry that you tried such half-baked arguments and found them shredded to pieces?

>> My name is not to be mentioned in any way shape or form with regards to this. <<

In other words, you're scared to have your name attached to your comments. I can understand that in your case, but it's still a sign of intellectual cowardice. Well, so be it.

>> Your estimation and interpretation of what I sent you is not only incorrect but skewed and I will have nothing to do with it in any way, shape or form. <<

"Interpreting" your comments didn't require much effort. They were mistaken on the face of it. Little or no interpretation was necessary to point out the error of your ways.

>> You are quite incorrect regarding my own experience with Native American people's and history <<

I don't think Al said anything about your experience with Native people or history. He did say you seemed emotional, which this comment bears out. You're defending yourself against things you imagine we said, not things we actually said.

Meanwhile, you haven't demonstrated any "incorrectness" on the our part. We've demonstrated your incorrectness in spades.

>> I shall look over your other e-mail but if it continues in this form then you shall simply confirm the impression you are giving me from this e-mail: You are neither objective nor accurate. <<

In other words, you're afraid to debate the issues you yourself raised. There's a phrase that applies to such an approach, friend: "If you can't take the heat, stay out of the kitchen." Keep that in mind the next time you dare challenge your intellectual superiors.

>> I would suggest that you should stick to an academic argument in your book and describe the character of Chakotay, referring to the creators of that character and not to the actor who portrays him. <<

Al and I have both referred to Beltran's own quotes where they were relevant to the debate. You're the only one who can't distinguish between the actor and the show's creators. We've pointed out where either was at fault when it was appropriate.

>> If you wish to be taken seriously then I would suggest that you need to tackle those who created the character: Rick Berman and Berman Braga. <<

You're the only one who hasn't taken my Chakotay page "seriously." None of the thousands of people who have seen it have criticized it before now.

>> That is the only suggestion I can make to you as you seem determined to misrepresent what I have said as well as what Mr. Beltran has said. <<

There's no misrepresentation. If there were, I'm confident you'd try to document it. Instead, you're turning tail and running—the mark of someone who can't support his beliefs.

>> No Dr. I am not emotional and nor have I appeared to be that way. <<

You sound like an adolescent Star Trek fan to me—wailing when someone points out the flaws in his childhood idols.

>> If I had been emotional about the topic, I would have ignored you. <<

Feel free to be "emotional" in the future, then, and ignore us. Don't criticize my pages again unless you can back up your comments with solid facts and evidence. So far, you've shown scant ability to do so.

>> But as a writer, I wanted to know what sources you were quoting. <<

Al told you several of his sources. And, as he pointed out, you yourself provided sources that contradicted your arguments. Oops.

>> This e-mail indicates that you are merely seeking sensationalism and I am not interested in any discussion along those lines. <<

You're not interested in any discussion, period, from what I can tell. If this is the best you can do, go away and don't come back. We don't need your worthless criticism.

Rob Schmidt
Publisher
PEACE PARTY

Rob replies to our correspondent's message to him (2/8/06)
>> As I am sure you are aware, it is not necessary to actually quote someone in order to claim they are saying something. <<

This is hilarious. By my count, you said Al quoted Beltran three times. True, you also denied that Al quoted Beltran once, but that only means the quotes beat the non-quotes, 3-1.

You also said Al referred to an "actual quote" once. But when I asked what this actual quote was, you couldn't or wouldn't supply it. In short, don't accuse us of quoting people unless you can back up your claims. Otherwise, it's a waste of our time.

>> I just read Dr. Carroll's other e-mail and am no longer interested in any further discussion. <<

Clearly you were never interested in discussion. You folded like a cheap tent when we contradicted your claims.

>> I made the mistake of thinking you may have had some actual information that lead you to draw the conclusions you have about Mr. Beltran's personal views. <<

You made a mistake, all right...the mistake of debating people who could argue rings around you. Oops.

I quoted Beltran's views at length to make my points. Here's one of many such quotes you were too yellow to address:

According to the data you've provided, Beltran has claimed he:

Well, which is it? This sounds like what Al implied: that Beltran claimed to be Mexican until it was more advantageous to claim he was part (Central American) Indian. It certainly does not bolster your claim that Beltran has been straightforward about his ancestry.

Got an answer now? Or are you still too knock-kneed to respond? I'm not surprised. I've done exactly what you wanted—quoted Beltran on a point Al Carroll originally raised—and you can't or won't address it. This alone puts the lie to your wrongheaded assertions.

>> As I stated before, you do not have my permission to sue my name or writing in any way, shape or form. <<

Get serious, bub. I don't need your permission to cite or quote all the websites and interviews you cited or quoted.

I also don't need your permission to paraphrase your arguments for the world to see. Such paraphrases are my words, not yours.

In addition, I don't need your permission to briefly quote you for the purposes of commentary or criticism. This is exactly what the fair-use exception to the copyright law permits:

Whether I end up quoting you is for me to know and you to find out. If you don't like the results, you can take it up with my high-priced lawyer.

As *I* stated before, "If you can't take the heat, stay out of the kitchen." I have zero tolerance for intellectual cowards who waste my time with their opinions and then turn tail and run when shown the facts.

Rob

Related links
New Age mystics, healers, and ceremonies
TV shows featuring Indians

Join our Native/pop culture blog and comment   Sign up to receive our FREE newsletter via e-mail   See the latest Native American stereotypes in the media   Political and social developments ripped from the headlines

. . .