A response to Wingfooting It with Wyatt:

>> So to portray an Amerind realistically, you must have no Amerind stereotypes whatsoever present in a character? It isn't realistic to portray an Amerind character that partially shows off the heritage? <<

It's best to avoid stereotypes whenever possible, especially negative stereotypes. Thunderbird, the strong, silent warrior type, was something of a stereotype. American Eagle, who wore a Lakota-style headdress even though he was (I believe) Navajo, was worse.

>> I think that's a confusion in terminology on the writers' part, assuming that 'tribe' would refer to the Apache on his reservation. The incident is referred to as the 'Camp Verde massacre', not the 'Apache massacre'. Repeatedly, Jimmy states it's 'everyone on my reservation'. In X-FORCE #72 he states, "Two hundred and thirty-three people were killed in that massacre". Is there that few Apache left in the world? <<

Camp Verde is an actual Apache reservation, one of several in Arizona and New Mexico. Total Apache population is, um, several thousand, so the massacre didn't kill the remaining Apaches. In fact, a reference book I have gives the Camp Verde population as 624, so the massacre didn't even wipe out the Camp Verde Apaches.

>> Of course, Forge designs technology better than just about anyone in the world. James Proudstar was stated to be proficient in technological repair. Wyatt Wingfoot is also quite clever if I recall correctly. Dani Moonstar, while no superbrain, has never had problems with technology. Amara Aquilla did, however. Damn, what white-bashing that was, portraying Amara as not knowing what a light switch was! Damn that Claremont! <<

Marvel has done the best job portraying Indians of any major publisher. But there's certainly room for improvement. Wyatt Wingfoot and the Keewazi tribe are symptomatic of certain problems, and Chris Claremont exacerbated these problems in the recent FANTASTIC FOUR #29.

I wrote a short article titled "Why So Many Cheyenne?" that touched upon Marvel's handling of Indians. The short version is "Why so many Cheyenne (and Apache, and Lakota) when there are almost 560 federally recognized tribes?" It's too much work to copy the article here, but you can find it at Egroups.com.

>> I still don't think these problems are enough to have a cow over, but certainly, I admit there's room for improvement. There's room for improvement in anything. <<

I'm not giving birth to any species of animal that I'm aware of. Point is that Wyatt Wingfoot's treatment's is symptomatic of how we think in general. One could look at any ethnic or cultural group and find a similar pattern.

Take T'Challa and Wakanda, for instance. Conceptually similar to Wyatt and the Keewazi. Noble hero, hidden society, totally atypical of the region in question.

When is Marvel going to feature a major black hero who isn't an exotic prince, goddess, or future law enforcer? When is Joe Average African going to stumble over volcanic gases or get bitten by a radioactive asp? Ever? Don't hold your breath waiting.

In short, if things need improving, let's not be complacent. Let's start improving them.

>> But if you start down that road, then you can pick stereotypes about just about every character. Tony Stark is a stereotypical playboy because he's arrogant and womanizing. Hawkeye is a stereotypical archer because he's swashbuckling and overconfident. Scarlet Witch is a stereotypical witch because she studies the occult. Ben Grimm is a stereotypical football player because he uses 'ya' instead of 'you'. Ororo Munroe is a stereotypical black woman because she often wears African tribal clothing. Et cetera ad infinitum. <<

You're saying almost every Marvel character is stereotypical? Okay, I can buy that. So what's your point? <g>

>> I prefer to look at what *differs* in a character from a stereotype rather than what conforms to the stereotype. If you look for the stereotype angle, you can find it in anything, so I don't really see any point to that approach. <<

You can find a lot more stereotypes in some characters than in others. Compare Daredevil to the latest incarnation of the Punisher, for instance. The characters with the fewest stereotypes are generally the richest and truest creations.

>> Is it stereotypical for Apache to become marines? Is it stereotypical for Apache to be arrogant loudmouths? Is it stereotypical for Apache to call your little brother 'runt'? <<

I'm not an expert on the Apache, but I'd have to go with yes, yes, and yes.

>> I'm certain that if John Proudstar would have been around for longer than three issues, we'd have scores of ways in which he *wasn't* stereotypical. As it is, he died before we got to really know him. <<

I'm sure he could've been portrayed less stereotypically in one story, or even on one page. Look at his brother James. Has James evolved much beyond the strong, silent warrior type after 10 years? No, not really.

>> Factual errors. They happen all the time in fiction. It's not a *good* thing, but personally, I can live with them, just like I can live with characters talking in the vacuum of space. <<

I'm living with these things too, although I'm criticizing them. <g>

>> Of course, you can worry about factual errors, and certainly writers should do their best to avoid them, but I don't think they're worth an ulcer, IMO. <<

No symptoms of ulcers or cow births here. I'm in fine health as far as I know.

>> Keen. Didn't know that. I learn something new every day. <<

Who says comics aren't educational?

>> Well, in the Marvel Universe it did, so in the MU the Camp Verde population was evidently smaller. Either that, or in the MU there was a second Camp Verde with a smaller population than the real world Camp Verde. <<

The Marvel Universe is frequently identified as being the same as the real universe. That suggests a greater need to "get things right." We wouldn't accept it if a Marvel comic set the U.S. capital in Peoria or put Elmer Fudd on Mount Rushmore, so why should we tolerate mistakes about the Apache or "Keewazi"?

Because the former are examples of "our" culture while the latter are examples of "their" culture? Says who? Tell that to a Camp Verde Apache, who is just as much an American and a Marvel reader as I am. (I'd use you as an example, but I gather you're in Finland.)

>> I can buy that. Still, I don't think Punisher is invalidated as a character by being stereotypical. And if he is stereotypical, why aren't American Italians or Vietnam veterans speaking out against him? <<

In the past I've heard Italian Americans complain about stereotypical Mafia members and Vietnam vets complain about stereotypical war-crazed veterans—in the movies and on TV. So why don't they complain about the Punisher? A few reasons:

1) The Punisher is a comic-book character. His primary audience is youngsters who read comics, not adults who understand what's wrong and know how to complain about it.

2) That Castle is Italian and a Vietnam vet aren't well-known to the general public. (Marvel will have to retcon Frank's Vietnam service out of existence soon, anyway.)

3) The Punisher wasn't that objectionable a character until the recent Garth Ennis version.

>> So there's nothing un-stereotypical about John Proudstar? I find that hard to believe. <<

Nothing comes to mind. Of course, he was only around for three short issues, as one character in a crowd, so he didn't have much time to distinguish himself.

>> Probably because where the capital of one of the world's most powerful nations (with a few hundred million inhabitants) is, is somewhat more important then having the population of a few-hundred people reservation down exactly. At least to me, some things are more important than others. <<

Would you mind if Marvel botched the history and culture of Finland, an insignificant country with only a few million people?

>> The Marvel Universe also has fictional countries that the real universe doesn't have. If the MU = RU, then those fictional countries would not exist. Neither is there an Avengers Mansion at 890 Fifth Avenue in the real universe. Obviously, there are differences. And far, far greater ones than whether there are 200 or 600 Apache at Camp Verde. <<

The main difference is whether a variation between the MU and RU is necessary or unnecessary. Putting the Avengers mansion somewhere is necessary. Creating fictional races like the Kree or the Skrull is necessary. Creating fictional countries or Indian tribes is unnecessary.

Real countries and tribes could serve just as well—but for Anglo-American writers, that's too much work. You won't see England or France replaced with a fictional country, because "everyone" knows about them. Ironically, a group of American citizens somewhere in the Southwest is more foreign to most New York-based creators than a country across the Atlantic.

>> But I can also quite understand that within realistic constraints, you simply can't get everything right. The American culture in general is a "their" culture for me, anglo *or* Apache, it doesn't make a difference to me (though naturally the anglo culture is closer to mine). <<

No one forced Marvel to use an Apache character. Either get the character right, find someone who can get him right, or use another character.

>> If Finland got depicted in the comics as having polar bears walking in the streets, I'd just smirk and shake my head. <<

That stereotype wouldn't make the Finnish people look "primitive" or "savage," the way most stereotypes do with Native Americans. Imagine yourself being portrayed as stupid, drunk, or uncivilized...then imagine it happening for the thousandth or ten-thousandth time. Are you still smirking?

>> Certainly, it *could* be done better, but I can't demand 100% accuracy. <<

If Thunderbird or Wyatt Wingfoot were roughly 80% stereotypical—assuming you could quantify these things—then he'd be roughly 80% inaccurate. That's not far from a valid estimate. So we're talking about characters that are mostly inaccurate, not ones that are close to being 100% accurate.

>> What I *do* demand 100% accuracy on, though, is the in-comics continuity itself. Since that's the comics themselves, the very point, rather than the backdrop, it should be paid more attention to and be gotten *right*. <<

That would be nice also.

>> So if we have *atypical*, it's bad? I thought the argument was that adhering to stereotypes and being *typical* was bad. Damned if you do, damned if you don't? <<

Nope. Keeping it real is the way to go. Reality follows certain patterns but often diverges. Typical and atypical characters are both okay as long as you don't do either of them too often.

>> The Keewazi, as far as I know, aren't a hidden society, although I grant I might've missed that. <<

They've hidden or obscured their wealth and technology. FF #29: "...[A] people stripped of pride, a land bereft of hope"..."is precisely the impression the Keewazi seek to establish."

>> The Wakandans certainly aren't, the country is quite public knowledge as far as I'm aware. <<

Right. I should've said "removed" or "remote" from dominant society, not literally "hidden."

>> the 'ghetto' stereotype as opposed to prince/goddess. Falcon, Power Man, Cyborg of the Titans, Aegis of the New Warriors, etc. etc. <<

And that's a problem too. The inner-city hero is one extreme and the exotic hero (Black Panther, Storm, Northwind, arguably Bishop and Tyroc) is the other. Where are the middle-class black heroes to reflect the middle-class black reality?

>> Synch of Generation X is pretty major, being a feature character in one of the books in the top-selling line of comics, and he's about as average as you can get. Bronze Tiger of Suicide Squad? Roberto da Costa of X-Force (okay, granted, he's filthy rich, but he doesn't have a royal title...yet)? The Bedlam Brothers of X-Force? <<

Synch is a good example, assuming he comes from a "normal" background. It's not clear if Sunspot is mainly African, Indian, or what. Cloak fits the inner-city stereotype to a "T." The Bronze Tiger, the Bedlam Brothers, and Vibraxas? You're proving my point if these minor black characters are the only ones you can find that aren't stereotypical.

>> Black characters do get introduced quite a bit, and not just from ghettoes or royalty. <<

Off the top of my head, I'd say about 80% of them fall into one problematical category or another, just like 80% of the Indian characters.

>> I myself don't think things are bad enough to warrant a letter-writing campaign or anything, so I'm happy with complacence for the moment. <<

I post these opinions on my website more than I send them as letters to the editor. That way, they're available permanently for everyone to see. <g>

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

. . .