The Coyote's Game Blog

Judging by recent events in the fashion and entertainment industry, It seems to be difficult for many non-Native people to understand why they should respect Native American culture and traditions.  After all, we openly criticize the dominant culture, and our laws support freedom of speech.  Why should we treat American Indian customs differently? 

Partially, I think the problem is that most people in our society have had very little contact with traditional Native American culture.  They don’t understand that to disrespect what appears to be a superficial aspect of Native culture is to disrespect tribal beliefs and traditions.  Also, Indian people have a longer history of cultural suppression and assimilation than other minorities in the US.  It isn’t surprising that they’re demanding respect for what they’ve preserved.   In addition, some wannabes have crossed the line between imitation and respect when they vulgarize customs such as sweat lodges.

There’s a large gray area between admiring and imitating Native culture and lack of respect.  Some of it has to do with motive.  When I lived on a reservation, an Anglo I knew, who sincerely believed in the traditional religion, asked a medicine man to hold a healing ceremony for him—not so that he could later write or blog about the experience, but because he believed he would be healed of a serious illness.   On the other hand, I also knew non-Natives who bribed members of the tribe to let them participate in traditional ceremonies.   And, at the far end of the spectrum we have the recent situation where a Victoria’s Secret underwear model was decked out in Native jewelry and an imitation feather war bonnet.

But times change, too.  Last Spring I attended the Denver pow-wow and my jaw dropped when the emcee invited non-Indian visitors to join in a few of the dances.   Not to mention the fact that the audience applauded every dance.  My attitude toward pow-wow dances comes from the years spent at a reservation college where at each and every pow-wow the college president reminded non-Natives that the dances were religious in nature and applause was unacceptable.  Joining in the dance was grounds for a strong reprimand.

Teaching respect is not as simple as passing a law on equal rights.  First, children need to understand the importance of respecting people from other cultures.   That’s best taught at home by example, but it can also be learned at multi-ethnic schools like those I attended, with children whose parents came from all over the world.

Looking back on it now, I think the Denver pow-wow emcee was right.  If non-Indian children are allowed to participate in dances with little religious significance, maybe when those children become adults they won’t see Native culture as something alien or exotic.   Instead of feeling threatened by it, hopefully they’ll see that Native American culture has many things of value to offer and deserves their respect.

Beading is a skilled craft and fine beadwork an art.  For many Native people, beadwork is part of tribal culture, a skill handed down from generation to generation.  Because beadwork is used to make adornments for children as well as adults, and because some is classified as jewelry, it is regulated by law. 

At present, U.S. consumer safety laws do not require any special documents to import beads and jewelry findings.  Nor do they restrict beadwork and beaded jewelry for adults.  However, the 2008 Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act does regulate all products intended for children.

Only the State of California’s Lead-Containing Jewelry Law and Proposition 65 require special documents proving adult jewelry components meet their safety standards.  Anyone who lives or works in California, or who sells to customers from California must comply with both of these laws.

California requires all manufacturers to provide certificates showing that their products comply with California law, and Proposition 65 requires anyone employing 10 or more people selling or distributing products in the State of California to include warning labels.  These labels must state that the product contains specified hazardous materials or, that the product may contain a hazardous material.

With some exceptions, most beadwork for adults falls into the second category.  The warning reads:  “This product may contain a chemical known to the State of California to cause cancer or birth defects or other reproductive harm.”  There are two reasons why the warning is required.

First, because the chemicals listed in Proposition 65 are reviewed twice a year.  California's logic is that just because beading components are not classified as harmful now, some chemical used for coloring or lining the beads may be found to cause harm in the future.  Use of warning labels protects jewelry makers from unintentionally breaking the law.

Second, although these laws were intended to regulate things like cast lead jewelry charms for children, they have resulted in a flood of lawsuits that include possible harm to adults—not always because it was proven that someone got cancer from the product, but because they “might” get cancer.  Without the warning, at some future date, the seller or maker of beaded jewelry may find themself in court trying to prove that their jewelry didn’t cause harm.  Even though most beaders don't employ 10 or more people and are exempt from Proposition 65's warning, no one is exempt from the threat of lawsuits.

Certainly children should be protected from toxic materials.  But how far we should go to protect adults from possible harm caused by swallowing or inhaling something that was clearly meant only to be worn externally as jewelry, is debatable.  I suspect the adult provisions in these laws have more to do with the fact that today stupidity is profitable and benefits the legal profession, than with controlling potentially harmful substances.

And it seems a pity that in order to protect ourselves from lawsuits, we should be forced to put scary warnings on something meant to bring beauty and joy to our lives.

One of the complaints that I hear frequently from non-Native acquaintances is:  “All of those Indians are so rich because they get money from the casinos.”

Well, I know that the majority of Native people in this country are not getting rich from casino share-outs, but it’s a hard myth to refute.  Definitely, someone is making money.  So I did a little on-line research to see if anyone had published statistics on how many Indians were getting rich from casino profits.

There isn’t a lot out there.  If you want the nitty-gritty on Indian casinos, read Time Magazine’s December 2002 article “Indian Casinos:  Who Gets the Money?”  http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1003869,00.html.   From this article it’s clear that tribes are not waltzing away with 100% of casino profits.  In fact, the promoters who finance, set up and manage most Indian casinos get 30% to 40%.  Not only that, Indian gaming pays federal taxes, $9.4 billion in 2009, according to 500 Nations Indian Casinos Supersite.  Tribes get $4 of every $10 wagered at casinos (National Indian Gaming Commission figures).   

28 states currently allow Indian casinos. 

In general, casinos are not free meal tickets for individual tribal members.  It’s well documented that tribes are using casino profits to repave crumbling reservation roads, to build safe, modern schools for their children as well as to fund child welfare programs, to purchase traditional lands and sacred sites not included in their original reservation, to build desperately needed housing, water systems—things that most Americans living outside of reservations take for granted.

Other benefits of Indian casinos, according to a 2004 Bureau of Economic Research article, include more young adults moving back to the reservation, adult employment increasing by 26% and a 14% decline in the number of working poor.  It should be added that the increased employment in counties near an Indian casino includes non-Native people as well as Indians.  

“Indian Casinos:  Who Gets the Money?” describes the 1988 Indian Gaming Regulatory Act as the U.S. government’s attempt to cut funding to Indian tribes and encourage them to pay their own way.   Whether or not you agree with the ethics of this system, in some cases it has succeeded.  However, the article points out that tribes with casinos located in rural areas usually don’t make much money.  It’s the tribes with casinos in or near high population areas that reap big profits.

According to the Time article, only about 25% of tribal members get any direct payout from casino profits.  True, there are documented cases of corruption and abuse; but there are no perfect systems anywhere.

Conclusion?  The big Indian casino payout is just another urban myth.

Not long ago a Native American artist I know lamented that the demand for his products has dropped in recent years.   I agree with him that at present, real Indian crafts are mainly a niche market.

Some may argue that fashion trends loosely imitating traditional Native styles and patterns show interest in American Indian arts.  Or that imitation dream catchers, Kokopeli decorations and the like, offered on and off-line, indicate popularity.  I beg to differ.  Fashion is ephemeral; dream catcher and Kokopelis have become Americana, sold everywhere, like salt water taffy.  There are still genuine collectors as well as buyers who seek out work made by Native artists with tribal enrollment.  But judging by the predominant hair color of shoppers at events like the Santa Fe Indian Market, most of them are Boomers.

Young Native artists are turning out amazing work—art that transcends the “American Indian” genre and compares favorably with contemporary global art.  A new generation of young Indian crafts people are creating outstanding designs that combine traditional techniques with modern concepts.  But unless we get more non-Native people interested, the demand will not change and these talented artists will be forced to treat their art as a hobby rather than a primary or secondary source of income.  A few of these artists have succeeded in breaking through the glass ceiling and winning general recognition; they are not many.

It seems the entertainment industry often inspires fashion.  I just read an article on BBC Magazine that, in part, credited the popularity of corsets as outwear to Madonna’s 1990s Blond Ambition tour.   In the same way, the success of Billy Jack (1971) and  Dances with Wolves (1990) helped to make Indian jewelry and crafts universally popular then.

So what’s to do?  We need to spark some interest in Native arts and crafts among the younger generations.  Maybe the time is ripe for a runaway indie film made by First People.  Or for someone like Steven Spielberg to back a movie celebrating the American Indian.

Get busy, Hollywood!

The media furor over Urban Outfitter’s inappropriate and illegal use of the word “Navajo” for a line of fake Native clothing and accessories has died down, but some basic issues remain.  Urban Outfitters has removed the word Navajo from their tags, although it doesn’t appear they’ve apologized to Sasha Houston Brown or to the Dine' People.

So why?

Because two big name fashion designers visited Santa Fe last year and, inspired by the Southwestern style fashions sold there at high end boutiques, released new lines of Native inspired clothing that are all the rage among the beautiful folk.  And their ideas have influenced other well known fashion designers.  If you don’t believe me, check out the New York Times Fashion and Style page for March 16 of this year.

 This isn’t the first time Native American designs have been borrowed by the fashion world and it won’t be the last.  But I feel that two important issues are being overlooked.

Why was the legal violation not taken seriously?  If a clothing firm decided to market a new line of ladies clothing, including underwear, and appropriated the name of any other minority group in the United States (and I’m not going to give an example so that I won’t offend anyone), the screams would be heard all the way to the White House.  Here, there was no outrage from the ACLU, no legal challenge--except from the Navajo Department of Justice.   

The second thing that’s being ignored is the Native people themselves.   Why are they not being taken seriously?  Today's young Indian people are highly educated, they hold important positions outside the reservations; more, they are trained and recognized artists.  I find myself wondering why some of these fashion big shots didn’t approach talented Native clothing designers and either hire them or produce clothing inspired by their work?

Could the reason be that the First People are still the most ignored minority in American society today?