Category Archives: Film Review

Older than America

Older Than America trailer

Older Than America is the story of a young teacher who is haunted by dreams and visions about the abuses that went on in Indian boarding schools. Prior to watching it, I had only read about the schools’ assimilationist policies which required Native American children to abandon native dress and language – the violent policy of “Kill the Indian, Save the Man.” In this regard, the film reminded me of the Australian film Rabbit Proof Fence. I had not realized that in addition to the emotional toil that being stripped of your culture would have on a young child (or anyone, really), and the difficulty of having to spend long periods of time away from their families, the children were also verbally and physically abused, including raped. I think this is one more example of how widespread the increasingly visible pedophilia scandal in the Catholic church really is. In the film, the teacher slowly comes to learn about her mother’s past and the film attempts to bring some kind of closure to a painful chapter in both Native American history but also in the specific lives of the young teacher, played by director Georgina Lightning, and her mother and aunt, played by Tantoo Cardinal. 

I thought the film was powerful and important to make. It sheds light on a painful topic and it has probably served to bring about conversations and healing in communities affected by these violations. Since I have done some research into the history of mental illness, I also appreciated the fact that this was a central part of the story. I also appreciate the title of the film, which refers to native life ways, because I think it calls into question colonial cultural impositions. This is emphasized throughout the film by the romantic partnership between Lightning’s and Adam Beach’s character, which is contested by the indoctrinated aunt and U.S. legal authority but which is validated by Beach’s character’s father, a respected elder who is played by Dennis Banks.

That said, my one gripe with the film is the binary opposition that I saw surface at one point when I felt like native spirituality was conflated with “good” and Christianity with “bad.” I think that in order to break from a western epistemological framework, it’s important to see Native American religion or spirituality being emphasized on equal footing with Christianity. And I am not an apologist for the Catholic church. I think the crimes of the representatives of the Catholic Church are infuriating, that victims deserve  more swift reaction from the Church authorities and to see the perpetrators be held accountable for their crimes. But, the representatives of the Church aren’t the Church in its more  spiritual form. I’m hoping that there were some kind nuns and priests who could have manifested themselves in the film. And I’m willing to bet that there are open minded Native American Catholics, including many people who practice a syncretic form of Catholicism which mixes Christian and native life ways. I would have liked to see a more nuanced treatment of this. I realize we could get into a debate about the fact that Christianity is one of the main colonial cultural impositions. Had it not been for it and the broader colonial project, there would have been no boarding schools and therefore abuses. This is a valid point, of course. But I think nuance is important. It’s part of history. It’s part of life. And I think it’s helpful and necessary to see that. (This all reminds me of an article in the March 2010 AHA Perspectives by Philippa Levine called “The Trouble with Film.”)

Despite the long nature of my gripe, it is a powerful film. I think it would be eye opening for many and could be used in classes that discussed native spirituality, colonization, and the privileging of U.S. over native life ways. And Lightning is certainly a notable and talented artist.

I also wanted to note that as I watched the credits role at the end of the film, I was struck by all that goes into the making of films. In this case, I was especially impressed by credits listing mental health as well as cultural consultants. It made me wonder how many films that portray Native American cultures have cultural consultants. I’ll have to start checking.

Until next time…

The Devil’s Miner

The award-winning documentary The Devil’s Miner takes us into the life of the Vargas family of Potosí, Bolivia. Since his father passed away, the eldest son, Basilio, who is only fourteen years old, is the family breadwinner. Basilio works in the mines along with his younger brother Bernardino while his sister stays home with his mother whose job it is to watch over the miners’ equipment. In the film, we witness the dangerous and unhealthy work carried out by these two boys who are among hundreds who work in the mines of the area. Basilio attends school but, having no father, it is more likely that he will continue to work in the mines into adulthood, which is a depressing prospect since even the men who work as miners acknowledge that they expect to die young due to the health risks associated with working in the mines. In the first ten minutes of watching this documentary, my viewing companion, who is not big on commentary, must have been equally impressed with the situation of these child laborers since he commented on how good children in the U.S. have it. Indeed, if your child has the advantage of education and a wealth of time for recreational activities and you would like them to see how their counterparts live in other countries, this is a great film to watch since it would probably make them grateful for their opportunities and also possibly make a big impression on their social conscience. Needless to say, if your class is studying child labor, this is also a good pick.

The film also goes into spirituality in the person of the priest who counsels the miners not to give in to the personage of El Tio, or the Devil as he is referred to in the film. He is ruler of the mines and each mine has his statue, a site where miners pay homage in order to ensure their continued safety in the mines. One of the ways that miners pay their respects is by depositing coca leaves by their mine’s Tio. I liked the fact that we see this as well as how often the boys and men chew coca leaves during breaks since it works to stave off hunger and maintain energy. I think it’s important to see the cultural uses of coca leaves since it’s often villainized due to its use in cocaine.

Besides bringing child labor in these mines to light, I liked this film because it did not just paint a dismal portrait of these young miners . It also shows how they balance their lives with quick soccer games, school and with their dancing in the miners group during carnaval. I loved their miners’ dance move but more importantly, I enjoyed watching their preparation for carnaval because you could see that despite their harsh working conditions, and despite the potential to get insulted if more schoolmates knew Basilio was a miner, the boys and miners were proud of their identity as miners.

Viewing this film probably made more of an impact on me because it coincided with the deaths of 29 miners in a coal mine explosion in West Virginia and subsequently hearing various pieces in the radio about the incident as well as personal accounts of people who live in mining towns and come from mining families. My condolences to all the families and friends touched by these tragedies here and everywhere. — And check out The Devil’s Miner website for more information, including ways to contribute to ending child labor in Bolivia.

Mamachas of the Ring

I caught Mamachas of the Ring / Mamachas del Ring which screened last Friday, November 13 as part of the line up of one of my favorites, the (2009) Margaret Mead Film Festival. It tells the story of several Aymara female wrestlers in Bolivia, focusing on the story of the Campeona, Carmen Rosa. After some initial fame as part of a more organized league of wrestlers under the direction of coach Don Juan Mamani, the group had a falling out and three of them set out to publicize and draw crowds on their own. It was easy for me to be drawn into the story, not only because of the novelty of Aymara women wrestlers, but Carmen Rosa’s spunk, initiative and her passion for the sport – not to mention the tensions.

The documentary touched upon issues of gender and ethnicity but, as usual, I wanted to know more. While you got a sense for how some of the mainstream community felt about their work as wrestlers, I wanted the documentary to delve into whether the large following the women had and the smaller one they were working on attracting were Aymara and how the Aymara community feels abut their life as wrestlers. I also wanted to hear more about about the wrestlers’ children and husbands. Don’t get me wrong; it was great to see an intimate personal portrait — and maybe that’s how I should view more of these films. But, I  always hope for as much of a contextual portrait as possible because it will lend itself to classroom use and discussion on social issues. Maybe that was all the context that was possible; after all, I’m heading toward an oral history project of my own and I foresee the difficulty in delving into people’s lives.

Over all it was a fun movie that shed light on the feelings and lives of these pioneering women. Part of the fun, I should note, was the claymation which gave color to the telling of the stories.

Until next time, which may be January, after I’ve taken my comps., muy … bue … nas … noches, hasta mañana — as the little doggie in the Spanish language commercials of my youth used to say! Take care, folks.

Sueños binacionales / Bi-National Dreams

Español abajo.

Sueños binacionales / Bi-national Dreams, directed by Yolanda Cruz, deals with the experience of two Mexican indigenous groups in the United States. The first part of the documentary focuses on the Mixtec.  One of the largest indigenous groups in Mexico, the Mixtec and have been traveling to the Fresno area for over 30 years. Two charismatic community leaders discuss how the Mixtec have rallied around social issues and how their effective communication and organization has helped them reach out to immigrants from various Mixtec towns who have settled in the Fresno area. Community members who are featured show a strong commitment to maintaining ties to their communities in Mexico, endeavoring, it seems, to live the film title’s bi-national dream.

The second part of the documentary is less upbeat and perhaps that is why it is more gripping. It focuses on the Chatino, one of the smallest indigenous groups in Mexico. Chatino immigration to North Carolina is more recent, having occurred largely in the past 10 years.

While the Mixtec portion of the video was in Spanish, large parts of the second version is spoken in Chatino which I liked because you do not always get to hear native languages spoken. Although westerners tend to focus on the practicality of acquiring or knowing a language, there is something to the idea that a language’s sound transmits not only communication but also energy. I am reminded of the Mapuche speaker on the indigenous panel in March who began his talk by playing a music instrument and saying how it was important to allow the audience to feel that vibration. An Otavalo friend (noticing that I would use my elementary Kichwa) once commented on the importance of hearing a language’s sounds.

The Chatino story was not as sanguine as the Mixtec one. About half the population of the town (I rewound the tape but don’t remember seeing it noted in the film) where the Chatino were concentrated had migrated, giving the impression that those migrants will not return, at least not on a permanent basis. One hotel worker in North Carolina says as much. Another community member in Mexico, who speaks Chatino with pride, noted that not everyone is carrying on the Chatino language. Also, one of the community members in Mexico notes how the money earned while Chatinos travel to the United States could be better spent. Although his tone is pretty somber (since no one seems to be taking him up on the idea), he offers a very good plan of action for how the community could become more self sufficient. I wonder if the video circulated among community members and anyone listened?

I thought this film was great the first time I saw it. I still think it is a great example of the heterogeneity of Latino immigration to the United States and of indigenous groups even within a single nation. It could be used for classes on immigration, identity and community organization.

My only small gripe is that I wish the video had more background information on the indigenous groups both in Mexico and those who traveled to the United States. My second viewing of the video was related to an exhibit I am working on about the changing patterns of Latin American and Caribbean immigration to the United States. I am specifically writing a section on Latin American indigenous immigrants. It would be nice to have had more figures or statistics on the communities. It would have also been interesting to see the dynamics between Chatino, Mixtec and mestizo Mexican immigrants and even between them and Americans. That would probably have been another film but I mention it because I am curious about those dyanmics as well. But this aside, it’s a very interesting film and I look forward to seeing Cruz’s other films. For more information on her work, including acquiring a copy of  Sueños binacionales / Bi-natinoal Dreams, visit Petate Productions.

Sueños binacionales / Bi-national Dreams, un video por la videoasta Yolanda Cruz, se enfoca en las experiencias de dos grupos indígenas mexicanos que han inmigrado a los EEUU. La primera parte del documental se enfoca en la comunidad mixteca. Son uno de los grupos indígenas mas grandes de Mexico y han inmigrado a la region de California conocida como Fresno por mas de 30 años. Dos miembros de la comunicad hablan acerca de cómo la comunidad mixteca se ha organizado al rededor de temas sociales y cómo sus redes de comunicación intercomunitarias les ha permitido comunicar con miembros de otros pueblos mixtecas en la área de Fresno y en Mexico. Los líderes que son entrevistados demuestran un fuerto compromiso con sus comunidades en los EEUU y en Mexico y parece que están logrando el sueño binacional del título del video.

La seguna parte del documental no es tan optímista pero tal vez por ese motivo, fue hasta mas interesante para mi. Se trata de la comunidad chatino, uno de los grupos indígenas mas pequeños de Mexico. Empezaron a inmigrar al estado estadounidense de North Carolina en los últimos diez años.

Aunque esta parte del documental esta en español, una gran parte de esta sección está en el idioma chatino. Me gusto este detallo porque no siempre se tiene la oportunidad de oir idiomas indígenas ya que se privilegia el español o inglés (me doy cuenta de la ironía ya que está sección en español esta debajo de la sección en inglés. En mi caso no es por etnocentricidad ? norteamericana sino porque hablo mejor en inglés que español). Aunque la gente blanca o mestiza suele enfatizar el aspecto práctico de la adquisición de un idioma, creo que es verdad que  el sónido de un idioma trasnmite energía. Me acuerdo del señor mapuche que hablo durante el panel en marzo que empezó su charla tocando un instrumento diciendo que es importante que el público oiga esa vibración. Un amigo otavalo (notando que a veces utilizo el kichwa básico que conozco) una vez hizo el comentario que los sónidos y tal vez las vibraciones del idioma son importantes oir tambien.

La parte chatino no fue tan optimista como la seccion mixteca. Mitad del pueblo chatino (retrocedí el DVD pero no pude encontrar el nombre del pueblo) han inmigrado a los EEUU. Esto da la impresión que los inmigrantes no van a regresar a Mexico, al menos no permanentemente. Una trabajadora de hotel dice que le sería difícil regresar a México. Otro miembro de la comunidad que vive en México que conversa orgullosamente en chatino hace el comentario que no todos están manteniendo el idioma chatino.

No he traducido la siguente parte todavía…

Also, one of the community members in Mexico notes how the money earned while Chatinos travel to the United States could be better spent. Although his tone is pretty somber (since no one seems to be taking him up on the idea), he offers a very good plan of action for how the community could become more self sufficient. I wonder if the video circulated among community members and anyone listened?

I thought this film was great the first time I saw it. I still think it is a great example of the heterogeneity of Latino immigration to the United States and of indigenous groups even within a single nation. It could be used for classes on immigration, identity and community organization.

My only small gripe is that I wish the video had more background information on the indigenous groups both in Mexico and those who traveled to the United States. My second viewing of the video was related to an exhibit I am working on about the changing patterns of Latin American and Caribbean immigration to the United States. I am specifically writing a section on Latin American indigenous immigrants. It would be nice to have had more figures or statistics on the communities. It would have also been interesting to see the dynamics between Chatino, Mixtec and mestizo Mexican immigrants and even between them and Americans. That would probably have been another film but I mention it because I am curious about those dyanmics as well. But this aside, it’s a very interesting film and I look forward to seeing Cruz’s other films. For more information on her work, including acquiring a copy of  Sueños binacionales / Bi-natinoal Dreams, visit Petate Productions.

Barking Water, Silly Me

I went to the NMAI Heye Center on July 9, 2009 for the screening of Barking Water, a film by Sterlin Harjo, whose NMAI Film + Video Festival panel discussion I attended back in March. Harjo was on hand for questions after the screening.

Barking Water is the story of old flames, Irene and Frankie, who reunite for a road trip after Frankie learns that he is dying. Harjo noted that he has a big family and has been a pall bearer enough times that it has led him to contemplate the connection between life and death a lot. He noted that his previous film, Four Sheets to the Wind, begins with a funeral. The film’s road is paved with funny and touching moments with friends and family and with the memories of Irene and Frank’s past together. Perhaps because this is an unconventional love story – between older characters, between ex-partners, in dire circumstances – we are able to see that despite past hurt, love endures. During the Q&A, Harjo noted that he specifically sought out the actors who play Irene (Casey Camp-Horinek) and Frankie (Richard Ray Whitman) because he wanted to film a romance with an older couple. I thought that was pretty cool because you don’t see it often and because in this movie, you get a sense of the trials that real life relationships go through, not just the neatly packaged happily-ever-after stories I grew up on.

Never one to miss an opportunity to show his good sense of humor, Harjo also noted that he wanted those actors because he had seen them portray a spirit and a warrior, respectively, and (or but) knew their potential as actors. I took this as a comical reference to the fact that this movie didn’t cast the actors in stereotypical Indian roles. The movie was an authentic and sweet story about contemporary Native people. My use of the word authentic is strange since I don’t mean it in the way that it has often been used in the past (and maybe even the present) to denote an authentic vision of static Indians. I specify authentic because of the moving moments in the film but also because the NMAI staffer who introduced the film (I apologize because I can’t remember her name) was raised in Oklahoma and noted that Harjo did a great job of capturing the spirit of the place and giving the moviegoers an authentic feel for the place.

Harjo’s comment about spirits and warriors left a particular impression on me because it related to what I wanted to ask him about the film and with bigger issues about Native film. There were several scenes in the movie that I thought might have deeper significance to Seminole/Creek people (Harjo is Seminole/Creek). I am still working on my shyness when it comes to asking questions during Q&A so I didn’t ask what I wanted to which was a question I have for all Native filmmakers and that is: who is their target audience and if it is a mainstream audience, how do they approach the portrayal of Native culture without being too didactic about it? Although Latin American indigenous film and video includes feature films, many of the ones I’ve seen are documentaries and focus on cultural and political issues so there is no concern about imparting cultural knowledge in subtle ways. Since filmmaker communities’ target audience is their own … and other native communities, not the mainstream public or academics, there may be a reason to explain traditions in order to carry them on into the future. Or, there may not be a need to be explicit since most people in that community will understand the significance of a certain detail or act. But when a film like Barking Water comes along that seems to be directed at a general audience (although he didn’t get into specifics, Harjo happily noted that someone had picked it up for distribution — which in turn made me think of his remark about bootlegging in the last panel and whether this changed his mind about it), I wondered what I, because I am not from this community, was I missing? (I almost said, “I, as a non-Native” but caught myself because someone from the Hopi or Navajo community might miss the reference, too; although we tend to group people into groups like “Native American” or “Latino”, there are so many differences. There’s lots more to say about that, but I digress…) Were there scenes that had a bigger cultural significance but which were going over my head because they were not more explicitly explained? Or was that the intent? If you’re from the community you’ll get it and if you don’t, that’s okay? Okay, so why was I silly (see my post title)? Because, after listening to the responses to the questions asked I found out that … [insert train whistle music here] all the scenes I thought had deeper meanings were actually included for aesthetic purposes and/or by chance. Ha! The two times I’ve heard Harjo speak, he has made me laugh but I can just hear him laughing at me this time (I don’t know Harjo; I’m just using that “friend in my head” reference that radio host – and now talk show host – Wendy Williams likes to use. Oh, we have a ‘lil bit o’ everything in this blog, baby! That was George Costanza style.)

And then again, maybe it’s not so funny. Why? Because, like the spirits and warriors comment: why was I seeking some more profound meaning? Am I still caught up in that “authentic” in a backwards kind of way view of things? I don’t know. I’d actually be interested in the bigger significance of something I would have caught on Dynasty way back when, having not been born with a silver spoon in my mouth… But, you get my point. (And also, on a, wait just a minute there level, an audience member commented on a scene in the movie that makes reference to America belonging to Native Americans which I thought was interesting because the way that it was phrased in the movie, it felt like it could be read that way or be read on a romantic level. But, since Harjo thanked her for her comment, without saying that it wasn’t how he’d intended it, I was sitting there wondering, is he just being polite or was it really meant that way? Then I thought, well if that was indeed what was implied by that scene in the movie, then there was another political or social element to it that I had not even read into so maybe I don’t always do that? Guess you’d have to see the movie to see what I’m even talking about. I don’t want to spoil your interpretation of the scene.)  In any event, I have to ask these things in order to decolonize my brain and eyes.

I’m also uncomfortable even asking who native filmmakers’ target audience is because firstly, why should it be any different than any other movie? The implication of asking this question might be that Native films are somehow in their own category or a little different. And yet, we do categorize them as Native, right? I think I’ll revisit all these issues in more length as the blog progresses and with hopefully more insight as I go along.

So, it was a good movie and the discussion afterward even better since it got me thinking about these other questions I have. Also, on a more technical note, the way the film was shot, with a documentary style/road trip feel, as Harjo put it, and using certain visual techniques (random or not) – well, I liked it a lot visually. Also, just thought you’d like to know that this movie must be in the running for some type of record; it was shot in 17 days! (Another funny thing that came out of an audience member’s question is that in real life, that road trip which in the movie spanned several days would have only taken 3 ½ hours! Maybe not a profound bigger picture but definitely something insiders would have chuckled about.) I liked the soundtrack as well. I liked how some songs were paired with scenes that evoked a totally different type of feeling and the fact that the songs were very soulful (particularly the native language song in the church scene). I think several of us in the audience liked it enough that we would seek it out. I think someone in the audience said it may have been “line singing.” So, keep a look out for distribution and for the soundtrack; I will post when I hear about them. And, check the trailer out here. Until next time…