In the reading, “I’ve Always Wanted to Be an American Indian”, the overall idea is that there is some ignorance of the white men. They don’t understand what it really means to be Native American. Basically the idea is “you don’t understand___, you only know__” The idea is that now that you know all about this from a different perspective now, do you still want to be a Native American/Indian?
In the reading, “James Luna and the Paradoxically Present Vanishing Indian”, I found the abstract at the beginning very helpful. On page 7 I gathered a good explanation of the West. The West constructs, then expects and adheres. It’s the way they work. Stereotypes are constructed by the West. On page 8, when it says “through subjective perception” the subjective is basically the Western perspective. This demonstration that Luna does makes me wonder, so is there no right one? What is right? Or is the point that 1 can’t represent the whole culture? Then later on in this page it says, ” even people that are art saavy fell for for it”…so are art people expected to know vs. others who aren’t art saavy?
In this reading when it focuses on the photography of the Native Americans, I found it interesting how it says, “the photographers behind them are like big game hunters on safari and their big game is the real Indian.” It seems that they are treating them more like an object/subject than a human.
“The so-called real Indian sought by the camera-wielding hunters described by Smith was, and continues to be, the regalia-clad version of the real Indian in Luna’s performance-the spectacle of Otherness”-they only want that version because that’s been constructed as a view to the West!
Hannah Van Dyke, Hope College 2017