Not Recommended: Gooney Bird and the Room Mother, by Lois Lowry

Gooney Bird Greene by Lois Lowry came out in 2002. In 2005, Gooney Bird and the Room Mother came out and there are a few more Gooney Bird books since then. Of course, Lowry has written many books -- several of which have won major book awards. 

Published by Houghton Mifflin in 2005, I'm disappointed that nobody involved in the creation of Gooney Bird and the Room Mother noted the problems I see. And, I'm disappointed in the starred review from Kirkus. Their reviewer described it as a "winning, tongue-in-cheek outing." School Library Journal said the illustrations highlight key moments in the story, but four of the 10 illustrations show kids stereotypically dressed up as Pilgrims and Indians. Why didn't they note that problem?

I didn't know about the Gooney Bird books until recently when a reader wrote to ask me about Gooney Bird and the Room Mother. Here's the description:

Gooney Bird Greene likes to be right smack in the middle of everything. That's why she wants to have the lead role of Squanto in her class Thanksgiving pageant. But that role will go to whoever finds someone to be the room mother. All the parents are so busy, no one can bring cupcakes to the play. Gooney Bird Greene to the rescue! She finds a room mother alright, but promises not to tell who it is until the day of the play. Now the kids are really busy getting ready for the show. But will the mystery room mother really show up?

Thanksgiving events in schools are disturbing because they introduce (or affirm) a feel-good story that glosses the truth of what happened. Reading reviews at Goodreads, I see two that note the problems I saw. Walton says that "History is totally whitewashed in appalling ways." Cindy says that she was uncomfortable with the dressing up part and that the book went from uncomfortable to "downright inappropriate" in its depiction of Squanto as a "very, very helpful guy." She notes that the book briefly references the fact that Squanto was forcibly taken to Spain and sold as a slave but that the general narrative of him is about choices he made to go here and there. Surely Houghton Mifflin could make sure their staff includes people like Walton and Cindy who could help the publishing house and the author, too, step away from feel-good stories that mis-educate children. 

Without hesitation, I am giving it a 'Not Recommended' label:

Several years ago I wrote an article for Journal of Language and Literacy Education. In it I analyzed Anne Rockwell's Thanksgiving Day and did a lot of historical research about Thanksgiving that I am using as I read through Lowry's book. Below, description is in plain text and my comments are in italics:

In chapter 2, Gooney Bird tells her teacher, Mrs. Pidgeon, that she wants to color Squanto's feather on the mural the class is working on. On page 10, we read that she's coloring one of his feathers blue. On page 13, she's coloring one red. 

Debbie's comments: Did the man commonly known as Squanto wear feathers? And if he did, what did they look like? Did he wear them all the time? Were some red and some blue? The man's name was Tisquantum, not Squanto. His correct name has been known for so long. Why do children's books continue to use Squanto? 

In chapter 4, the teacher tells them the mural is coming along well and that they also have to learn a song, make costumes, and select a cast of characters for the pageant. They need Pilgrims and Native Americans.  Gooney Bird wants to be Squanto. Children have begun working on their costumes, as shown by the illustration of them singing the song:

Debbie's comments: That illustration with kids in those hats and headbands appears four times in the book. I see that in many children's books and in many photos teachers share of their own classroom activities around the holiday. Lowry's book joins the pile of educationally bad children's books that get circulated in society. It miseducates every child who learns this is ok.

The pageant would be more educational if it was tribally specific. By that, I mean that instructional materials about the Pilgrims need to use the name of the tribal nation--Wampanoag--rather than generic labels like Native American. I'd also want to see more facts than are likely to be included in pageants. However, my guess is once the facts are included, any "fun" in a pageant disappears. If a fuller understanding leads teachers to reject books like this one, or to stop doing these activities, that's a huge plus for children they teach!

Here's the song lyrics, sung to the tune of Jingle Bells:

Succotash, succotash, lima beans and corn. Thank you, noble Squanto, you may set the platter down.

Debbie's comments: I think the idea is to show gratitude to Native peoples -- Tisquantum in particular -- for help in learning how to plant and grow vegetables but why is he characterized as noble? 

On page 32 the class works on their costumes. Their teacher tells them that the Pilgrims didn't decorate their clothing but Native Americans did. Students making headbands glue beads onto them and will also add a feather. Chelsea says "I wish I could be a Native American" because she hates her plain Pilgrim hat. There's a conversation about Pilgrims being brave, crossing the ocean. 

Debbie's comments: This pervasive activity -- Native people in feathered headbands and Pilgrims in hats with buckles is inaccurate. The idea that Pilgrims wore black and white clothing and buckles on their hats and shoes is not accurate. The Mayflower History page (and other sources, too), tell us that is a stereotype.  

Many people in the US wish they could be Native. They may have a romantic idea of what it means but that idea is often missing the difficulties Native people endured and endure as we fight for our rights, homelands, religious sites, return of artifacts and so on. There's a growing body of writing about people who go from wishing to claiming a Native identity. I've been compiling a log that you may want to visit. 

On page 34, Mrs. Pidgeon asks Gooney Bird if she has been working on Squanto's dance. On the piano she plays some low notes in a repetitive way and tells Gooney Bird to pretend it is a drumbeat that Squanto should keep time to, and maybe doing some "rhythmic foot-hopping, too." 

Debbie's comments: I can almost hear (in my imagination) the low notes Mrs. Pidgeon is playing. They're the sort of thing you hear in so many movies and TV shows and on sports fields where the team has a stereotypical mascot. It is kind of a BOOM boom boom boom, BOOM boom boom boom in a minor tone. If you listen to Native music done by Native drummers, do you hear that sort of thing? I don't. Take a few minutes to watch this video from the Museum of Indian Culture in New Mexico. In it, you will see how pueblo drums are made. There's a segment where a group of children is playing the drums they've made, and in the background of some of the narration, you can hear drumming. Music across Native Nations is different, of course, and I don't know all of it but I don't hear it in pow wow drumming or any other ceremonies of other nations that I've been to. I'll look for an example of Wampanoag drumming and add it when I find one.

In chapter 6 on page 36, Gooney Bird is wearing a hat with a feather in it. Mrs. Pidgeon asks why she doesn't have a headband. Here's their conversation:  

"I decided Squanto should have a better hat than the other Native Americans, because he's been to England, remember?"

"Well, yes, he did travel there. But that's a top hat, Gooney Bird. Something an ambassador might wear. I don't think---"

"I think Squanto brought it back from England. He probably went shopping and bought a lot of new clothes there. People always buy new clothes when they travel." 

Debbie's comments: Yikes! Granted, the character is a little girl but that character was created by an adult and looked over by editors at the publishing house... it is disappointing that nobody hit the pause button on the idea of Tisquantum shopping in England as if he is a modern day tourist!

On page 38, Gooney Bird began testing some dance steps and says that she thinks Squanto probably learned the tango in England. 

Debbie's comments: Again, how did this get by editors?! I'd have flagged the idea of a kidnapped individual learning the tango (as if he is a modern day tourist) as being ridiculous but I'd also have looked up the tango. When was it invented? The answer: in the 18th century. When was Tisquantum there? Centuries before that! 

Beyond that, it is important to know that Native dance is not performance or entertainment. Much of it is associated with a spiritual or religious ceremony. Teachers would not reenact something they see in a church or temple or place of worship... and it should not happen with Native dance either. Far too many writers misrepresent it in books they write. 

Near the end of chapter 8, Mrs. Pidgeon worries that the costumes and song are slapdash and ill-fitting. The students tell her all the things they've learned in her classroom and she cheers up and says:

"I'm sorry that I was depressed for a minute. It's just that the story of the first Thanksgiving is such a truly wonderful story, about becoming friends, and helping one another, and being thankful. I wish I could have presented it better, instead of writing a dumb song about succotash."

Debbie's comments: These pageants are not a wonderful story! Especially for Native children. Native parents have been asking teachers to reconsider them for decades.  

Gooney Bird has an idea. The day of the pageant, their presentation opens with Gooney Bird as Squanto, entering the multipurpose room with a dance that is "a combination of shuffles, taps, and twirls, with an occasional pause for a hop" done to Mrs. Pidgeon playing rhythmic drumming sort of music on the piano. At the front of the room, she says:

I am not the actual Squanto. The real Squanto was a Patuxet Indian who was born in a village near where the Pilgrims would land, but when he was born they hadn't landed yet.

He learned to speak English from some early settlers. He helped them in many ways. He was a very helpful guy. 

When some of them went back to England, they invited him to go along. His mother didn't want him to.

But he went anyway. This was way back in the 1600s. Squanto is dead now. I am not the real Squanto. I am an imitation.  

Debbie's comments: See notes above regarding Native dance and rhythmic drumming. Regarding Tisquantum speaking English: none of my sources say he learned it from early settlers. He learned it when he was kidnapped and taken to England. They didn't "invite" him to go along. Later in her remarks, Gooney Bird says he was taken captive, but why didn't Lowry or her editors remove the invitation part here? And where did that bit about what his mother wanted come from? I've never seen that before but I can imagine teachers raising that part and asking "would your mom want you to go so far away." It makes me deeply uncomfortable. He wasn't a child when taken. Does that passage invite children to think of him as a child? 

She asks the principal to tell the audience what imitation means (she said "I am not the real Squanto. I am an imitation.") and then continues:

He traveled around for a while, being helpful because he was a helpful guy. He was an interpreter between the Americans and the Indians. 

Debbie's comments: "He traveled around the world" and "being helpful" invoke an image that does not reflect the truth. I urge teachers to read Chris Newell's If You Lived During the Plimoth Thanksgiving. Get a classroom set of the book and use it to critique Gooney Bird's remarks! Develop a lesson plan on how to critically analyze the ways the Thanksgiving story is presented! In his book, Newell tells us that Tisquantum and 20 other Patuxet Wampanoag people and seven Nausets were kidnapped by Thomas Hunt who took them to Spain to sell them as enslaved people. 

She asks a classmate to explain the word interpreter and then continues:

But suddenly--a bad ship captain tricked him into going onto his ship. It was a big scam. They made him a captive and took him to Spain. The captives all were sold as slaves. It made Squanto pretty mad. 

But he was indefatigable.

After a long time Squanto finally made his way home. He had been away for years. And when he finally got home, he found that his village was gone. His people had all died. He was the last of his tribe. 

It was very sad. But he became friends with the great chief Massasoit, and after a while he met the Pilgrims, who had just arrived. So he had some new friends and they hung out together. 

The Pilgrims' lives in America would have been a fiasco if good Indians like Squanto had not helped them.

Squanto had gotten lots of new clothes in England, and he had learned to dance.

The End.

Gooney Bird bowed, twirled in a circle, did a bit of hula, and then said:

"All of my story was absolutely true, except maybe the part about learning to dance, but I think he probably did."   

Debbie's comments: "He traveled around the world" and "being helpful" invoke an image that does not reflect the truth. I urge teachers to read Chris Newell's If You Lived During the Plimoth Thanksgiving. Get a classroom set of the book and use it to critique Gooney Bird's remarks! Develop a lesson plan on how to critically analyze the ways the Thanksgiving story is presented! 

Gooney Bird tells children some truth but overall there is a silver-lining way to her remarks. "It was very sad" is immediately displaced by "But he became friends..." And then "... new friends" and "hung out together" and "new clothes" and "learned to dance" -- all of that softens the truth. And note the "good Indians" characterization, too. It implies there's bad Indians. Who were they, and what did they do that readers are meant to think of as "bad"? 

 

Hmmm... What was Sendak thinking about when he created WHERE THE WILD THINGS ARE?

A few months ago, a reader sent me a link that she'd know I'd be interested in... to an auction site that was auctioning a framed collage (collage might not be the right word) of three items. Here's the framed item, titled by the auction house "Sendak Drawing on Wild Things Proof Sheet W/Photograph."

Here's the unedited description from the auction house (retrieved today, Oct 2 2018):

Rare 1963 original ink drawing with added personal photograph on the promotion proof sheet for the first edition of "Where The Wild Things Are", signed and illustrated by Maurice Sendak.

Original colored photograph was taken during The Childrens Book Confrence, University of Utah, Park City, Utah-1960 of Sendak with Morton Schindel (of Western Woods) and possibly Tomi Ungerer.

Original ink sketch and inscription by Sendak of Indian boy with feather inscribed and signed twice by Maurice Sendak.

*Photograph reveals a feather on each of the artist's heads.

The photograph of a young Morton Schindel (Weston Woods). Maurice Sendak and (believed to be) Tomi Ungerer.

Why each figure has a feather standing in their hair is unknown, but mimicked in Sendak's ink drawing of an Indian also with a single feather.

This proof sheet for WILD THINGS comes from the original first printing of the book (1963) as Sendak would have wanted to show off his latest project to Morton Schindel (Weston Woods).

Note the slight off registry along the bottom edge of the Wild Things image which was one of the initial problems Harper & Row had in printing the earliest known copies.

Here's an enlarged look at that end of the framed item:

And here's a blow up of the photo:

Fascinating, isn't it? If a scholar of Sendak's work finds additional information about this, I'd love to see it! What was Sendak thinking? What do you think about it? 

Debbie--have you seen ALL KINDS OF FAMILIES by Mary Ann Hoberman?

In my mail today (Oct 3, 2017) is an email from a librarian in Illinois, asking if I've seen Mary Ann Hoberman's All Kinds of Families. First published in 2009 by Little Brown, it was published again in 2014 by McGraw Hill Education. The illustrations are by Marc Boutavant. Here's the description:

With irresistible, rollicking rhyme, beloved picture book author Mary Ann Hoberman shows readers that families, large and small, are all around us. From celery stalks to bottle caps, buttons, and rings, the objects we group together form families, just like the ones we are a part of. And, as we grow up, our families grow, too.

Mary Ann Hoberman gives readers a sense of belonging in this all-inclusive celebration of families and our role in them.

The librarian in Illinois sent me a scan of this page in the book:

The text on that page is:

Pens full of bright-colored ink are a family
Toothbrushes over the sink are a family
Even the thoughts that you think are a family
Light as a feather
Living together
Inside of your mind
What else can you find?

Nothing in Hoberman's text is about Native people, but I guess Boutavant saw the word "feather" and decided to draw his idea of a headdress on that kid and a dreamcatcher, too. Course, Hoberman's text in A House is A House for Me tells us she's got some problems in her thinking, too:

If you've got either book in your library, consider talking with children about stereotypes. If your collection development policy has language in it about accuracy of information, you can remove these books.

Reading While White review's Lane Smith's THERE IS A TRIBE OF KIDS

Several months ago I saw the cover of Lane Smith's There Is a Tribe of Kids and wondered about his use of the word tribe. Most people see the word "tribe" and think of a group of people who they view as primitive, or exotic, or primal, or... you get the picture, right? If not, open another browser window and do an image search of the word tribe. Did you do it? If yes, you saw a lot of photographs of people of color and of Native peoples, too.

In the last few weeks, I got an email from someone asking me if I'd written about that word. The person writing didn't mention Smith's There Is a Tribe of Kids but may have been asking themselves the same question Sam Bloom did when he read the book. I haven't yet had a chance to look for Smith's book.

Yesterday, Sam's review of There Is a Tribe of Kids went up at Reading While White. I highly recommend you head over there and see what he has to say. On one page of the book, the kids are shown playing in a forest... and they've got leaves stuck into their hair in ways that suggest they're playing Indian. Here's that page:

Sam isn't the only one to notice that problem. He pointed to the review in the New York Times Book Review, where the reviewer wrote that this kind of play signifies wildness.

And, Sam notes that the book has gotten several starred reviews from the major children's literature review journals--journals that librarians use to purchase books. Those starred reviews will mean it is likely to be in your local library. That image, however, means There Is a Tribe of Kids is going into AICL's Foul Among the Good gallery.

Do read Sam's review, and the comment thread, too. I am especially taken with Pat's comment. She used a phrase (I'll put it in bold font) that appeals to me: "An informed reading means giving up the position of innocence that White readers enjoy when other cultures' are represented in service of an engaging story."

Sam's post and the comment thread give us a peek at what goes on behind the scenes in book reviewing. In his review, Sam wondered if the book is getting starred reviews because people like Lane Smith's work overall. Roger Sutton replied that Horn Book didn't give it a starred review, but that their discussion of the book itself included the playing Indian part that Sam's review is about, but that "the reviewer and the editors differed" with Sam's assessment, so, Horn Book recommended the book.

Roger and I have disagreed on playing Indian over and over again. Horn Book gives that activity a pass because Horn Book views it as an "extra literary" concern. Intrigued? You can read one of the more recent discussions we had: Are we doing it white?

Pat's comment is perfect. Far too many people don't want to give up their position of innocence. Playing Indian is just too much fun (they say) and it isn't racist (they insist), or inappropriate (they argue)... Indeed, some say that sort of thing honors Native peoples.

It doesn't honor anyone. It is inappropriate.

My guess is that Lane Smith didn't know it is a problem. His editor, Simon Boughton, apparently didn't know, either. If you know Smith or Boughton, I hope you ask them to think critically about playing Indian. There Is a Tribe of Kids, published by Macmillan, came out in May of 2016.

Goodreads "Top 100 Children's Books"

On April 27, 2016, Jessica Donaghy posted The Top 100 Children's Books on Goodreads. To determine which chapter and middle grade books should be "on every kid's shelves" they "looked for the best reviewed books, all with average ratings above a 4.0 (a high bar that cuts out giants like Ramona and Huck Finn)." 

Stereotypical representations: thumbs down

Of course, such lists get circulated on social media.

The Children's Book Council tweeted it, and then John Schu tweeted it, which is how I saw it.

Looking it over, I gotta give it a thumbs down for the Native representations on it. Come on, people! How about, when you look at these kinds of lists, you ask yourself about Native representations on it. We all have to speak up for change to happen!

I'm thrilled to see several authors of color on the list. I see Jackie Woodson's Brown Girl Dreaming. And Kwame Alexander's Crossover, too. And Pam Munoz Ryan's Echo. And several titles by Sharon Draper. And Grace Lin's Where the Mountain Meets the Moon. 

But what about Native writers? None. Louise Erdrich's Birchbark House ought to be on here, don't you think? Nothing on it by the most prolific Native writer either! I mean Joseph Bruchac.

What about Native characters or stories that aren't stereotypical? Again, none. Here's the list of titles. The ones in bold are ones that have stereotypical Native characters. Those two? The grunting and animal-like Indians in Little House on the Prairie and the stereotypical Tiger Lily and playing-Indians of Peter Pan. 

What did and did not got onto this list reflects two things: a visibility problem, and, a refusal to let go of books with stereotypical content. What will you do about that? Who else is missing, I wonder?

Aesop's Fables
Alice's Adventures in Wonderland, by Lewis Carroll
Amulet, by Kazu Kibuishi
Anne of Green Gables, by L.M. Montgomery
The Arabian Nights
Avatar: The Last Airbender, by Gene Luen Yang
Awkward, by Svetlana Chmakova
A Bear Called Paddington, by Michael Bond
The Black Stallion, by Walter Farley
Bone, by Jeff Smith
Book of Three, by Lloyd Alexander
The Borrowers, by Mary Norton
The Boxcar Children (#1), by Gertrude Chandler Warren
Brown Girl Dreaming, by Jacqueline Woodson
Calvin and Hobbes, by Bill Watterson
Chains, by Laurie Halse Anderson
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, by Road Dahl
Charlotte's Web, by E.B. White
Coraline, by Neil Gaiman
Crossover, by Kwame Alexander
Dealing with Dragons, by Patricia C. Wrede
The Devil's Arithmetic, by Jane Yolen
The Diary of a Young Girl, by Anne Frank
Drama, by Raina Telgemeier
Echo, by Pam Munoz Ryan
El Deafo, by Cece Bell
Fablehaven, by Brandon Mull
The False Prince, by Jennifer A. Nielsen
From the Mixed Up Files of Mrs. Basil E. Frankweiler, by E. L. Konigsburg
The Giver, by Lois Lowry
Gracefully Grayson, by Ami Polonsky
The Graveyard Book, by Neil Gaiman
Grimm's Fairy Tales
A Handful of Stars, by Cynthia Lord
Hans Christian Andersen Fairy Tales
Haroun and the Sea of Stories, by Salman Rushdie
Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone, by J.K. Rowling
The Hobbit, by J. R. Tolkien
Howl's Moving Castle, by Diana Wynne Jones
The Incredible Journey, by Sheila Burnford
Inside Out and Back Again, by Thanhha Lai
Into the Wild (Warriors), by Erin Hunter
The Invention of Hugo Cabret, by Brian Selznick
Just So Stories, by Rudyard Kipling
The Lightning Thief, by Rick Riordan
The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, by C. S. Lewis
The Lions of Little Rock, by Kristin Levine
Little House on the Prairie, by Laura Ingalls Wilder
The Little Prince, by Antoine de Saint-Exupery
A Little Princess, by Frances Hodgson Burnett
Little Women, by Louisa May Alcott
A Long Walk to Water, by Linda Sue Park
Mary Poppins, by P. L. Travers
Matilda, by Roald Dahl
The Mighty Miss Malone, by Christopher Paul Curtis
The Miraculous Journey of Edward Tulane, by Kate DiCamillo
Mockingbird, by Kathryn Erskine
Mrs. Frisby and the Rats of NIMH, by Robert C. O'Brien
Mrs. Piggle Wiggle, by Betty MacDonald
My Side of the Mountain, by Jean Craighead George
My Sweet Orange Tree, by Jose Mauro de Vasconcelos
The Mysterious Benedict Society, by Trenton Lee Stewart
The Name of this Book is Secret, by Pseudonymous Bosch
The Neverending Story, by Michael Ende
Number the Stars, by Lois Lowry
Old Yeller, by Fred Gipson
The One and Only Ivan, by Katherine Applegate
Out of My Mind, by Sharon M. Draper
Peter and the Starcatchers, by Dave Barry
Peter Pan, by J. M. Barre
The Phantom Tollbooth, by Norton Juster
Pippi Longstocking, by Astrid Lindgren
Princess Academy, by Shannon Hale
The Red Pyramid, by Rick Riordan
The Red Umbrella, by Christina Diaz Gonzales
Redwall, by Brian Jacques
Ranger's Apprentice, by John Flanagan
Sadako and the Thousand Paper Cranes, by Eleanor Coerr
Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark, by Alvin Schwartz
The Secret Garden, by Frances Hodgson Burnett
See You at Harry's, by Jo Knowles
Sideways Stories from Wayside School, by Louis Sachar
The Skin I'm In, by Sharon G. Flake
Smile, by Raina Telgemeier
So Be It, by Sarah Weeks
Stella by Starlight, by Sharon M. Draper
The Story of a Seagull and the Cat Who Taught Her to Fly, by Luis Sepulveda
Tales of a Fourth Grade Nothing, by Judy Blume
The Two Princesses of Bamarre, by Gail Carson Levine
Watership Down, by Richard Adams
The Westing Game, by Ellen Raskin
When You Reach Me, by Rebecca Stead
Where the Mountain Meets the Moon, by Grace Lin
Where the Red Fern Grows, by Wilson Rawls
Where the Sidewalk Ends, by Shel Silverstein
Winnie the Pooh, by A. A. Milne
The Land of Stories and the Wishing Spell, by Chris Colfer
Wolf Brother, by Michelle Paver
Wonder, by R. J. Palacio
A Wrinkle in Time, by Madeleine L'Engle

Eric Jennings, Sherman Alexie, and Damaging Perceptions about Alcohol Use Amongst Native Peoples

Editors Note on Feb 25, 2018: Please see my apology about promoting Alexie's work. 

This post is about one of the ways that Alexie's words harm readers--Native and not. Words shape expectations of what Native writing should be. Alexie is affirming stereotypical ideas.  --Debbie

~~~~

Yesterday on Twitter, Annie Pho tweeted this image:

The words in the image she tweeted are a 2016 article by Eric Jennings, titled "The librarian stereotype: How librarians are damaging their image and profession." People on twitter were, appropriately, angry that Jennings used that excerpt in the way that he did. Here's the words Jennings used (shown in the image above):

When I was at the 2009 Association of College and Research Libraries conference, I saw Sherman Alexie speak, and one of the things that stuck with me is that there's always some truth to a stereotype. He was talking specifically about how the stereotype for many Native Americans is that they are alcoholics. And, in fact, most of his family members are alcoholics. He even went on record as saying that the whole race is filled with alcoholics and that pretending that alcoholism is a stereotype among Native Americans is a form of denial (Alexie, 2009).

I took a look at the source for Jennings's quote. It is a video. I watched it. Alexie did, in fact, say what Jennings says he did. 

Was it wise for Jennings to use that excerpt in his article about stereotypes of librarians? I think not. Here's why.

Most people know what a stereotype of a librarian looks like. They know it is a stereotype, because they know a librarian in real life who is nothing like that stereotype. 

Most people, however, do not know a Native person. So, there's no way for them--in the course of their everyday life--to know that most of us are not, in fact, alcoholics.

Let's think about that a minute.

Alexie said it is a stereotype that Native people are alcoholics. 

The truth? Alcoholism is a widespread disease. 

Alcoholism is a social disease. It does not exist in higher incidences amongst Native communities. Alexie tells us about his specific family. What he says is not true for every Native family. It is not true for my own family. I'm not saying "Not us" out of a holier-than-thou space.

A research study released earlier this year says it isn't true for most Native people in the US either. Holding that view, however, has costs to Native people. The news report about the article included this:

"Of course, debunking a stereotype doesn’t mean that alcohol problems don’t exist," Cunningham said. "All major U.S. racial and ethnic groups face problems due to alcohol abuse, and alcohol use within those groups can vary with geographic location, age and gender.

"But falsely stereotyping a group regarding alcohol can have its own unique consequences. For example, some employers might be reluctant to hire individuals from a group that has been stereotyped regarding alcohol. Patients from such a group, possibly wanting to avoid embarrassment, may be reluctant to discuss alcohol-related problems with their doctors."

And here's another paragraph:

"Negative stereotyping of groups of people who have less access to health care creates even more health disparities," Muramoto said. "Based on a false negative stereotype, some health care providers may inaccurately attribute a presenting health problem to alcohol use and fail to appropriately diagnose and treat the problem."

Several years ago, a dear elder in my tribal nation dealt with that very thing. He wasn't well. He had tests done. Based on those test results, his doctors assumed he was alcoholic, and that alcohol abuse was the cause of what they saw in tests. He told them he didn't drink, but, they didn't believe him. Now, he's finally been diagnosed with a fatal disease, unrelated to alcohol. He was telling the truth, but, the doctors did not believe him. Just writing those words brings tears to my eyes. 

What Alexie says, matters. Words shape what people think and what people do. Words shaped those doctors who didn't believe this elder. 

In a recent article in Booklist, Cynthia Leitich Smith wrote this:

I’ve had allied non-Indian librarians tell me, one way or another, that they’re committed to telling stories about “real Indians” and go on to clarify that they mean alcoholics living in reservation communities. As if, say, my tribal town and urban characters were somehow less “real.” 

I cringed reading Cynthia's words because what she's encountering--like the elder did--is a belief in a stereotype. Those doctors and these librarians think it is real. Others think it is, too. I'm seeing it in books by non-Native writers, a lot. Writers seem to have an idea that, if they're writing a story about Native people or our communities, they better make sure to have an alcoholic in it. 

Writers who do that are damaging us, and they're damaging non-Native readers, too. They are taking a social illness and making it a NATIVE social illness. My guess is that they have read Alexie's The Absolutely True Diary of a Part Time Indian. That story has alcoholism in it. Because he's got it in his book, I think writers are thinking that they should make sure to include it in their stories, too.

Writers: Don't do that.

Editors: Don't let your writers do that.

Book reviewers and bloggers: Your reviews/posts influence purchasing decisions. Pay attention. See what I see, which is the overrepresentation of alcoholism as a part of Native life. 

Everyone: Read the study. See for yourself. 

See the news article:
Study Debunks Notions about Native Americans, Alcohol

Read the study: 
Alcohol use among Native Americans compared to whites: Examining the veracity of the 'Native American elevated alcohol consumption' belief

And--read widely. Alexie is one writer. There are others. Don't let him and the stories he tells be the "single story" you know about Native peoples. You can start with Gansworth, Leitich Smith, Edwardson, Erdrich, Tingle, Van Camp, and Taylor. 

Cover of Parent Magazine's December 2015 issue

On Thursday, December 10, I learned about the cover of the new Parents magazine (h/t Heid and Allicia). Both are Native women and mothers.

Like them, I found the depiction of a little girl, in that toy headdress, screaming in an out-of-control way, as a play on the "wild Indian" stereotype. You know the phrase, I'm sure: "stop running around like a wild Indian." In 2006, AARP's magazine had a full-page Tylenol ad showing a kid, similarly clad, with a grandparent holding the child's hand and glad that she had Tylenol on hand.

I shared the image on Twitter, questioning editors at Parents directly, and asked others to ask, too. Their Twitter account was inundated. A few hours later, Parents issued an apology.

Here's the apology on Twitter:

And here's the apology on Facebook:

There are a lot of comments to their Facebook apology that suggest that readers are as ignorant of the problem as the editors and designers who put the cover together. Those comments indicate the tremendous need for the editors at Parents to do some follow up articles to help their readers understand the issues at play in their depiction of that child in that toy headdress.

In short: a headdress is not a toy. It holds tremendous spiritual significance to those who have them and to their families and tribal nations. That kind of headdress is specific to some tribes but not all of them, but the general public believes it to be something all tribes use, as if we are a single, monolithic entity.

In comments on Facebook and Twitter, I saw some people making comparisons between the "Bored No More" caption for that photo and the "Idle No More" movement of First Nations people. I think that is a valid point.

I hope the editors at Parents read all the comments and respond in an educational way. In my comment to them on Facebook I invited them to share books with their readers, books drawn from my list of Best Books.

In many places, I saw people appalled that Parents would do that cover in 2015, but we can point to many places in which similar imagery is used, uncritically. Mascots for sports teams is one example. A lot of this imagery is in children's books that I write about here, in the illustrations or in the text. I hate cliched expressions but they do have their place. There is much work to do.

Dear Teachers: An Open Letter about Images of Indians

November 17, 2015

Dear Teachers,

Each day when young children get home from school, parents ask how their day went and if they have any homework. For some parents, the homework their child brings home can be daunting because it has material on it that they haven't thought about in years. They have to "brush up" on it in order to help their children understand the concepts the child's homework is intended to reinforce. Some parents find homework annoying because it is so repetitive and their children could be doing something more engaging.

Last month on social media, Native parents circulated photos of worksheets and books their children were bringing home. Some of these photos were of cartoon-like images of Indians who greeted Columbus.

November is Native American month. Thanksgiving happens this month, too, so, some of the worksheets parents are sharing on social media are about Indians greeting the Pilgrims. Some just have random images of Indians on them because it is Native American month.

If I asked you, teachers, to look through your file of worksheets, some of you will see what I'm talking about. Smiling Indians handing corn to Pilgrims. Cute Indians sitting cross legged on the ground, tending a fire, next to a tipi. Color-by-number worksheets of Indians... We could go on and on, right?

For Native parents--and for non-Native parents who know these images are stereotypical--the homework itself is more than daunting or annoying. They know those worksheets carry messages of who or what Indians are supposed to be. They know those images are misinforming the children the worksheets are meant to educate. For them, these worksheets put them in a what-do-I-do about this moment. Some will point out the stereotypical image and, if needed, tell their child why it is stereotypical and not ok. Some will arrange to meet with the teacher. Some will express their frustration, with family and friends, in person and on social media. And some will keep silent because they fear that speaking to you, their child's teacher, will put their child in an awkward position.

For Native children, those images are one more silent assault on Native culture. These silent assaults, however, are ones their teachers are handing to them. My guess is that some of you, teachers, don't even notice those images on those worksheets.

I have empathy and respect for teachers. I taught elementary school in the 1980s. I know how hard it was, then, to work with the limited resources I had from the school itself, and from my own pocket. Teaching is even harder, today, than it was then. So I'm not writing this to make you feel bad.

I'm writing to ask you to take a few seconds to look--really look--at the worksheets you're going to use today, or tomorrow, or the next day, or any day. Do they have those images of Indians on them? If they do, set them aside.

A lot of you assume these worksheets and biased children's books don't matter because you believe there aren't any Native kids in your classroom. If you're basing that belief on an idea that Native people have dark skin, dark hair, high cheekbones, and personal names that sound Indian in some way, you're reflecting a stereotype.

I don't say any of this to shame you, or to embarrass you.

We all have a lot of ignorance about people who are unlike ourselves. I have had many moments of being embarrassed! I, for example, loved Five Chinese Brothers. I have very warm memories of reading it--memories that go all the way back to my early childhood years. I carried that book in my heart for decades. Then, in a graduate school course about children's literature, that book was one we looked at, and I realized how racist its depictions are... and I let it go.

I hope you'll read this letter as a virtual hug, of sorts, from a fellow educator who--like you--cares about teaching and what we teach to children. We're all learning, every day, how to do it better. I welcome any questions you have--about worksheets, or books. My entire website is for you. It's all free. For you.

Sincerely,
Debbie Reese
American Indians in Children's Literature

P.S. (added an hour after I hit upload on my letter):

My husband suggested I say a bit more about what teachers can do instead of the usual Thanksgiving activities. So! If you're working with very young children, remember your training. Early childhood education is centered on teaching children in a here-and-now framework. For them, the long-ago (when colonization began) is not best practice. For children at that age, if you want to do something about the holiday, take the what-I'm-thankful approach instead of a usual Pilgrims and Indians ones. Because you're working on their fine motor skills and use craft projects for that purpose, you can do arts activities about turkeys. For older children (3rd grade and up), check out American Indian Perspectives on Thanksgiving. If you want to take some time to unlearn what you've learned about Thanksgiving, you can start with a fellow teacher's post about Thanksgiving books: Kara Stewart's "Children's Books about Thanksgiving."

Mercer Mayer's JUST A SPECIAL THANKSGIVING

Well, I did my annual visit to Barnes and Noble to see what they had on the Thanksgiving shelf. Never a pleasant outing, I hasten to add, but one that I do each year, hoping that there won't be any new books where characters do a Thanksgiving reenactment or play of some kind.

Out this year from HarperCollins is Just a Special Thanksgiving by Mercer Mayer. I'll say up front that I do not recommend it. Here's the synopsis:

Little Critter® has charmed readers for over forty years.

Now he is going to have a Thanksgiving he'll never forget! From the school play to a surprise dinner for all of Critterville, celebrate along with Little Critter and his family as they give thanks this holiday. Starring Mercer Mayer's classic, loveable character, this brand-new 8x8 storybook is perfect for story time and includes a sheet of stickers!

If you just look at the cover, you don't see anybody in feathers. You might think they're doing a "just be thankful" kind of story, but nope. 

One of the first pages shows Critter and his buddies at school, getting ready for the play. 

When it is time for the play, Critter (playing the part of a turkey), freezes and the others look on, worried:

Later, everyone goes to the parade, where Critter ends up on a float:

Pretty awful, start to finish, and I gotta say, too, that I'm disappointed. Though I haven't read a Critter book in a long long time, I do have fond memories of them. I dove into research spaces and see that a colleague, Michelle Abate, has an article about Critter in a 2015 issue of Bookbird. I'm going to see if I can get a copy of it. Course, her article won't have anything about Just a Special Thanksgiving in it, but I'm interested in a researcher's perspective on the series. 

Oh, and here's a photo of the display:

I didn't look at each book. Some are familiar from years past, like Pete the Cat in which Pete is shown as Squanto. And there's some messed up images in the Curious George book, too. And Pinkalicious. 

If I was buying? I'd get that one on the bottom row: The Great Thanksgiving Escape by Mark Fearing. It is hilarious. That page where the kids run into "the great wall of butts" is priceless! I know my sister's grandson would love that part. 

Update: Nov 16 2015

I got Michelle Abate's article, "The Biggest Loser: Mercer Mayer's Little Critter Series: The Queer Art of Failure and the American Obsession with Achievement," published in Bookbird in January of 2014. Reading it helped me think about why I liked the books I read with my daughter when she was little. Abate writes (p. 8):

...although he never completes any of the tasks that he sets out to accomplish, these disappointments allow him to discover alternative achievements that are, arguably, even more fulfilling and important than his initial goal... 

Those alternative achievements? The importance of relationships. 

Reading her article makes me think about the relationships the publishing industry has with Native people--indeed--with the many peoples who have been misrepresented or omitted entirely from the books they publish. From my point of view, Just A Special Thanksgiving is a failure that Mercer Mayer and his publisher can set aside in favor of the relationships they want to build with Native people and all people who are saying 'stop giving us this story' of Thanksgiving! 

Ladybug Girl in Headdress? Gone!

Yesterday, Betsy Bird at School Library Journal wrote about a significant change to the picture book, Lady Bug Girl, written by David Soman and illustrated by Jacky Davis. First published in 2008, it came to my attention when a reader wrote to me about the endpapers, which showed Lady Bug Girl in a headdress. At the time, I wrote a Dear Parents of Ladybug Girl post (writing to the author and illustrator as her parents).

Looking at the image now, I'm drawn to what she's doing: she's got what looks like a lipstick in her hand and is, presumably putting "war paint" on her cheeks. See? David Arnold's character did that in Mosquitoland. Remember that? (My apologies for the poor quality of the images I'm using today.)

Well, a new edition of Lady Bug Girl is out, and, as Betsy noted, Lady Bug Girl in a headdress is gone from the endpapers. I was pleased as can be about that change! Below are the covers for the 2015 "Super Fan Edition" and beneath it is the original 2008 cover.

And here's the changed endpapers:

It is the second book I'm writing about this year, that has been changed--for the better--and as such, something all of us can celebrate! Thank you, Soman, Davis, and Dial (the publisher) for deciding to remove it. It is a step in the right direction. Betsy and I agree--if there was a note in the book about the change, it would help people take a step in the right direction with you, Soman and Davis. For now, though, thank you!

Enid Blyton's SECRET SEVEN series

Update on June 18, 2021: Blyton's books are in the news because a site called "English Heritage" notes that people have, in the past, noted racism in her books. I can't figure out why this is in the news, now, but it seems to be related to Black Lives Matter. When I get more information, I'll be back to add it.  Back in 2015, I did a brief post on Blyton's "Red Indians." Today I am adding excerpts from Blyton's The Boy Next Door and this interior illustration from a 1951 reprint of the book (image found on the Enid Blyton website). Obviously, the illustration and the text are very stereotypical. 

Page 16:  When Betty, Robin, and Lucy hear that there's a boy next door, they peer over the fence into the yard to see if they can see him. They see a woman sleeping in a chair and then see the someone (the boy) creeping out of the hedge to the woman. Then, 

The Red Indian suddenly rose to his feet, gave an ear-splitting yell, ran round and round the chair in a very fierce manner, and then disappeared into the hedge again. The woman woke and sat up angrily.

Page 19-20: The three children plan to go next door and scare the boy next door. Lucy asks if Robin has a "Red Indian suit" that she can use. Robin tells her she can use her old one because she got a new one at Christmas. Then, she says 

"Really, you should be a Red Indian squaw, and not wear a proper brave's head-dress with heaps of feathers--but it won't matter for once."

Page 23: The children, wearing their Red Indian suits, lay on their tummies and wriggle along "as Red Indians do." Robin and Betty have played at this for years and frown at Lucy when she makes a stick crack under her:

"Sh!" whispered Robin. "Don't you know that Red Indians never make a sound, silly?"

Page 25-26: Kit (the boy next door) surprises them and ties them up, one by one, to trees:

"Now for a war dance!" he said, "and then maybe I'll try shooting a few arrows at you!" 

He proceeds to yell and whoop, angry that they're tied up but also admiring Kit because "he really did seem exactly like a real Red Indian."

Original post:

Enid Blyton's SECRET SEVEN series

posted on June 18, 2015

Enid Blyton popped up in my news media feed this morning because of an exhibit about her and her work that is on national tour in the UK. Somewhere in my reading about children's literature, I'd read something about her work being controversial. I rummaged around a bit and hit on the golliwogs in her stories. I poked around a bit more and found that she has characters who play Indian ("Red Indian" as it is called in the UK) in the Secret Seven series.

According to The Telegraph, the images of golliwogs and references to them have been "doctored" in books in which they appear. I doubt if the same is true for the playing Indian parts of her books. I ordered The Boy Next Door and will see if any changes have been made. Course, I won't know till it arrives just which edition I'll get!

For now, check out these three illustrations (credit for these images is to the Enid Blyton Society website).

Here's the cover of the 1944 edition. Illustrations for it are by A. E. Bestall:

From what I've gleaned about The Boy Next Door, Blyton's characters peer over the fence and see the kid next door dancing like a Red Indian. Since they play Red Indian, too, they decide to put on their Red Indian costumes and sneak up on that neighbor kid and scare him. So... here they are, sneaking up on him:

But something goes wrong:

When the book arrives, I'll share what I read. Old books, yes, but Blyton is a key figure in children's literature. As such, her work remains influential. In the meantime, head over to the page about this book. There's a lot more illustrations there, and some comments about the story, too. No mention, however, of the problems in a play Indian theme.

Nobody went "huh?" when Rachel Dolezal said she lived in a tipi...

I've been following the news stories about Rachel Dolezal. There are many. All the major media outlets are reporting about--and questioning--her performance of a Black identity.

This post is less about her than about those who apparently believe what she said about her childhood.

In a Feb 5, 2015 interview she gave to Shawntelle Moncy of The Easterner, she said she was born in a tipi in Montana and lived off the land, hunting food with a bow and arrow for most of her childhood.

Nobody, it seems, went 'huh?' when they read those parts of Moncy's article.

Moncy believed her. Moncy's editor believed her. Did someone question it, somewhere? Anywhere? (If you see that questioning, let me know.)*

That lack of questioning is important. 

It tells us that people are pretty ignorant 

about American Indians. 

Elsewhere, her mother said that she (the mother) lived in a tipi in Montana for awhile, but wasn't living in it when Rachel was born. In an article at the Spokesman Review, her mother said they have "faint traces" of Native heritage. When she lived in that tipi, was she (like her daughter) performing an identity?

As I noted above, this post is less about Dolezal and more about what people believe about American Indians. As many have said, Dolezal is likely mentally ill. That may excuse what she did regarding claims to a Black identity.

The lack of questioning of that born-in-a-tipi story, however, points to the need for children's books and media that accurately portray our lives in the past and the present so that people don't put forth stories like the one Dolezar did, and so that that those who hear that kind of thing question such stories.

Dolezal's story about living in a tipi is plausible but not probable. The power of stereotyping is in her story, and in those who accepted it, too. That is not ok. Look at the images of Native people you are giving to children in your home, in your school, and in your library. Do some weeding. Make some better choices. Contribute to a more educated citizenry.

*Native media is addressing the story. My use of "nobody" is specific to non-Native media. Some Native stories on it include:

Fake Black Folks, Fake Indians, and Allies, by Gyasi Ross of Indian Country Today

Rachel Dolezal, Blackface, and Pretendians, by Ruth Hopkins of Last Real Indians 

Imposters bring harm to Native people, by Doug George-Kanentiio at indianz.com (added June 18, 2015)




Update: June 14th, 2015 at 1:50 PM

People in children's literature with questionable claims to Native identity include John Smelcer, Paul Goble, Jamake Highwater, and "Forrest" Carter.


Update: June 15th, 2015 at 8:00 AM

In her comment, K.T. Horning notes that Jamake Highwater's fraudulent claim to Native identity was exposed by Akwesasne Notes. I've had Highwater on a list of "future blog posts" for some time and ought to prioritize it. For now, if you're interested in knowing more about him, see Kathryn W. Shanley's article, "The Indians America Loves to Love and Read." Published in American Indian Quarterly, Volume 21, No. 4, in Autumn of 1997, she excerpts the Hank Adams article in Akwesasne Notes in 1984, and one by Jack Anderson in The Washington Post. 


Update: June 18, 2015 at 6:30 AM

In a television interview at Today, Dolezal said she was not born in a teepee,but followed those words with "that I know of." She's casting all manner of disclaimers that aren't disclaimers, leaving a lot of wiggle room for... what?

Open Letter to David Arnold, author of MOSQUITOLAND

Friday, March 13, 2015

Dear Mr. Arnold,

Thank you for responding to my critique of the "Cherokee" content in Mosquitoland.  No doubt, many people in children's literature are thinking well of you for what you said, but the conversation cannot end there.

With Mim and her "war paint," you--inadvertently--are doing what generations of Native people have fought against for hundreds of years.

Misrepresentations of Indigenous peoples are of such magnitude that, in 2008, the United Nations issued its Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. There are studies of the harm that misrepresentations do to Native and non-Native youth. In 2005, the American Psychological Association issued a statement about stereotyping. Last year, the National Congress of American Indians issued a report on this matter (NCAI's first national campaign took place in 1968).

Yesterday (March 12 2015), I read the USA Today review of Mosquitoland. I trust you did, too. I hope you cringed at the lead. For those who didn't see the review, here's a screen capture of the opening lines:

See "slap on some war paint" in the first line of the review? That is what a major newspaper honed in on: "war paint' and how it can get you through the day. Let's look at what Mim does when she puts on her "war paint" (Kindle Locations 694-697):

I start with the left cheek, always. This habit is king, and it must be exactly the same, line for line. The first stroke is a two-sided arrow, the point of which touches the bridge of my nose. Then, a broad horizontal line across the forehead. The third stroke is an arrow on my right cheek, mirroring the first one. Next, a thick line down the middle of my face, from the top of my forehead to the bottom of my chin. And lastly, a dot inside both arrows.

Now let's look at the finished image, from the trailer for the book:

As you know, Mr. Arnold, people are praising Mosquitoland for its look at mental illness, medications, and Mim's perseverance.

Few people (in reviews or on social media), however, are talking about the stereotypical imagery you deployed for Mim's perseverance. That "war paint" gets her "through the day" (as the USA Today reporter said). Let's look at some of that "war paint" and how it is used to get fans through a game.

This is the mascot at Florida State:

This was the mascot at the University of Illinois. Though it is officially retired, fans continue to paint their faces in the ways that the mascot did:

Here's fans of the Cleveland baseball team:

Here's a fan of the Washington pro football team:

Those four individuals--and thousands of others--stood in front of a mirror, just like Mim did, and picked up the items they used for their "war paint" as they got ready to rally their team against a foe.

I suspect you had none of this in mind as you wrote those words above, describing how Mim puts on her "war paint" or when you and your fellow author (Jasmine Warga, the woman portraying Mim) worked on the trailer. I watched that trailer on your website. It is gone from there, now. I hope you took it down in response to my review. If that is why you took it down, I think I'm right in saying (above) that I hope you cringed as you read what the USA Today reviewer said about war paint.

The question is: what to do now?

In my response to your comment, I suggested that you talk with editors and other writers about stereotyping. Looks like you ought to add others to that list, too. I realize this is awkward. How does an author say "this was probably not a good idea" without hurting the sales of your book? I'm well aware that my criticism leads people to buy the book to see what you did for themselves, thereby elevating its sales, which suggests to the industry that people want MORE books like it.

We definitely need more books about the mental health of young people, but not ones like Mosquitoland that add to the problems of Native people, who--like those with mental health--are misunderstood and denigrated in far too many places.

Given the widespread praise of your book and the fact that you've sold your second book already, I think you actually have a secure platform from which to educate others about the problems in using tribal peoples as you did. You're getting requests for interviews; please use those interviews to educate your readers. I read that there is a possibility for Mosquitoland to become a movie. Please use whatever power you have to keep that stereotyping out of the script.

This, Mr. Arnold, is an opportunity to educate others.

Sincerely,
Debbie



Update, Saturday March 28 2015

This morning, Mr. Arnold submitted a reply via the comment option. I'm pasting his response here for the reader's convenience:

Dr. Reese,

Since reading your open letter, I’ve taken some time to listen and process. First, I assure you this conversation is not about book sales. In Mosquitoland, I wrote the best book I possibly could, and I am very proud of the outcome; whatever successes or failures I may have, my governing principles are always to be as honest and compassionate as possible.

You also suggest that I speak with editors and other writers about stereotyping—know that I’ve been doing just that. This process has led me to have conversations with those in my personal circle (my editor, my agent, my publisher) and other authors in our larger publishing community about a range of characters and backgrounds, discussing how we reach out to those communities we mean to portray in fiction.

While I would love to share my own intentions behind Mim’s actions, I do not believe it is the author’s place to discuss intention. Saying “see, what I meant by that…” is a slippery slope, one that robs readers of their own unique interpretations. As I mentioned in my previous response, our interpretations of Mim’s actions are quite different. That said, I think having dialogue is less about agreeing with everyone at the table, and more about a person’s desire to sit at the table to begin with.

Mim puts lipstick on her face and calls it war paint. Over the last few weeks, you have made me aware of how those actions might display harmful stereotypes of Native Americans. While that was certainly not my intention, I apologize for the impact it has had in reflecting those, or any, stereotypes. I could not agree more that a healthy portrayal of diverse characters and cultures is important in literature, and moving forward I hope my work contributes positively to that discussion.

David Arnold

As Mr. Arnold indicates, he is interested in dialogue. Here is my response:

March 30, 2015

Dear Mr. Arnold,

Again, thank you for replying. Your response is a visible effort to move forward in a way that informs people involved with children's and young adult literature. Right now, I want to focus on your conversations with people in the industry.

I am, of course, glad to know you're engaging key people in conversations about stereotyping. It so easily slips into speech and writing! Here's one example. A few weeks ago I started watching The Good Wife. In back-to-back episodes in the first season, I heard two phrases that are commonly used--but--problematic. One is "low man on the totem pole" and the other was "keep him on the reservation" (it is usually "he/she went off the reservation"). My guess is that nobody at that particular table knew those phrases rise from a space of ignorance or oppression of Native peoples. 

In the conversations you are having, my guess is that some people are encouraging you to ignore this whole thing. Some may be telling you that I (and others who take up the misrepresentation of Native peoples) need to "get a life" or "get over it." Your response tells me that you're not listening to them as much as you are to me, perhaps, but certainly those you trust, who--like you--also want to move forward in a positive way. 

It is labor intensive work. A few days ago, a librarian wrote to me asking for a reliable source for the Iroquois story of the Three Sisters (corn, beans, squash). I've spent hours searching. I've found a great many sources from the 1800s, but they're by people who were outsiders to Native communities. I've found sources from the 1900s, again by outsiders, who used other outsiders to vet the material. 

I view all of this as a lot of well-intentioned outsiders. To use the table metaphor, were there no seats at those tables for a Native voice? 

Are there seats for Native people at that table now? The one you are sitting at? Your response indicates that you are interested in dialogue, so, for you, the answer is yes.

Elsewhere, I've written that the seat-at-the-table metaphor doesn't work. Tables are owned by someone. Generally, they are in someone's house. As a guest at that table, there are generally rules that govern how the people at that table will interact. In this particular situation (children/YA lit), the house is major publishers and if we extend it out a bit, review journals. 

I'm thinking we ought not gather at that table. I'm thinking that it may be best to go for a walk outside where the sunshine and fresh air can help us all move forward as we have the dialogue we both seek. 

With whatever influence you have, I encourage you to push for more inclusive conversations. In this case, I refer to Native people. I hasten to add two things. One, be mindful of selecting beta readers. Two, remember that it is important that the people you talk with are well-versed in critical analysis. As Dan Snyder (owner of that Washington DC pro football team) has found out, you can find people who say they're Native (and they might be) but who have bought into the "honoring" of Native people regardless of the quality or context of the representation itself. 

One last thing: did you happen to read my post about Ben Esposito, the educational game developer who wanted to prove that I was wrong in my criticism of his game? Check it out. Kurtis Scaletta ran with the idea I proposed. See his How to Fail. Your willingness to have this conversation with me, coupled with the tremendous interest in the We Need Diverse Books campaign, makes me optimistic.   

Sincerely,
Debbie