Native ( Indian) portrayals?

[johan_steele]

Ah the voice of ignorance holds strong.

What responses didnt I like exactly? I thought I was being part of a discussion where at some points I was presenting some information I had found. Perhaps my responses weren't to your liking or upset some stupid world view you have?

Keep on keeping on then.

The link that explains my view better than I didn't take. Doesn't matter. I intend to keep on keeping on anyway.

One of the best learning experiences of my life was going to HS on a Reservation in SD. I learned what poor really meant , I mean poor the likes few have seen in the US.

I got to see the best of people and the worst. I gained an appreciation of the Lakota culture. As well as an understanding of the disgust towards the US and white cultures in general by a people that had been ground to dust. It shaped my world view.

In my time on this site I have seen a real attempt to connect the CS to the genocide of the Native American as though the CS was a fellow sufferer. Too many CS sycophants view themselves as the same as the Lakota, Cheyenne, Apache as though they and their ancestors were warriors who suffered along the same vein. They are not.

As I said I have seen some good impressions and I have seen some so bad they are patently insulting. Enough that I firmly believe unless you're a native, of the tribe being represented, just don't do it. While it's amusing to the Crow reenactors pretending to be Lakota & Cheyenne at the Little Big Horn it's annoying to the Lakota and Cheyenne.

While one poster has no issue with black face, stolen valor and other, what I consider, despicable actions I do. Mostly because I'm tired of watching the wannabes and Iwishiwas mock others with their ignorance.

Maybe it's my time in the military, on the reservation or just my upbringing but I think doing something that can easily be seen as purposefully insulting is a bad idea.

 

[archieclement]

As to the orginal question, there's a group out of Oklahoma.

https://m.facebook.com/1stRegimentChoctawMountedRifles/

There doesn't seem much in way of units, which goes to shortage of people to tell or present the story, which is certainly why I wouldn't dissuade anyone willing or wanting to participate. Certainly the biggest issue to most reenactments I've attended is lack of bodies with all the units, much less niche units such as Indian Regiments.

Certainly for reenactments, it requires actual bodies to protray any unit sized group. Perhaps if someone knows of actual reenacting groups that can regularly field company size groups of ACW "pureblooded" natives they will provide unit links........otherwise suggesting leave it to "natives" based on some apparent imaginary racial purity test, when groups don't exist is rather folly.

The only unit I find, based on its facebook pictures seems to accept mixed race depictions, and yet still doesn't appear to be able to field an actual company. So bodies are certainly rather needed.........

Certainly out west, such as in Oklahoma/Indian territory, native units were significant portion of the forces involved. And not portraying them would seem a disservice.

 

[archieclement]

Here's a YouTube clip of a reenactment where natives would been rather prominent.

And while some have presented images of Turner rifles or national reenactments where the scale approaches realistic, this I would say is far more typical of midwestern reenactments I've attended. If one wishes to criticize the dress or ethnicity of some the participants, if you further reduced the allready woefully undersized depiction it would be even worse and more.....and honestly have attended many with even less reenactors then this one.........

 

[johan_steele]

In a small event, one bad impression does more damage than in a large one.

 

[archieclement]

In a small event, one bad impression does more damage than in a large one.

Certainly a woman is more noticeable in a small event, yet you frequently see them. Because the lack of bodies certainly creates a poorer impression then a wrong cartridge box or rifle.

Obviously if apply "standard" some have suggested for native units, then women or blacks couldn't participate or fall in with units that were white or male, it's actually a larger discrepancy from being historically accurate. Either could conceivabley fill camp roles outside combat.

From reenacters I've spoke to many have a reason for wanting to reenact. Whether a love of history, and wanting to see local or state history they feel may not be presented, being presented, or they have a GGGF or GGGGF that may have been US or CS so feel some heritige link. What seems strange to me in these discussions, is that anyone specifically seeking to reenact as a native unit, the exact same motives would likely apply as to people wishing to reenact in any other type of unit.

Certainly in my experience, % of genetic ethnicity doesn't directly translate into one's view of heritige or ethnicity. For example I did a DNA test, the highest result was Irish........I've never particularly felt or identified as Irish, certainly never considered myself Irish-American. Someone with less Irish ethnicity then me might, if their family emphasized it. I've always simply identified as American, if I had reenacted, I would probally done confederate, as the land I own today and grew up hearing stories that go back to an ancestor who fought with MSG, then Confederacy. So there's an obvious ancestry/heritige connection, though mathematically he would be 1/32 of of ancestors at that point, but because of the direct connection through land/community I know more about him then the other gggps, some who I know nothing of.

So is it odd someone would feel drawn to reenact as either CS or Union because they know a GGGF or GGGGF fought for that side? Anymore then they might be drawn to Native? Or feel drawn to participate in Irish, German, Italian, hispanic, African-American cultural events based on a rather limited distant connection? Yet some people do, while other's dont.

 

[RobertBruceFerguson]

I would imagine Native Americans have better things to do than to take part in re-enactment of a War they were barely involved with...

Native Americans were not "barely involved with" the American Civil War. The Indian Nations invovled were completely overwhelmed with that conflict and later lost their ability to be recognized as independent nations.

 

[Scott1967]

Native Americans were not "barely involved with" during the American Civil War. The Indian Nations invovled were completely overwhelmed with that conflict and later lost their ability to be recognized as independent nations.

Your talking about two tribes the Choctaw and Cherokee as a whole Native Americans kept away from the war in fact more Britons fought in the war than Natives but you are correct the choosing of sides caused rifts within the tribes.

 

[Borderruffian]

Your talking about two tribes the Choctaw and Cherokee as a whole Native Americans kept away from the war in fact more Britons fought in the war than Natives but you are correct the choosing of sides caused rifts within the tribes.

The Plains Tribes the Southwestern Tribes yes. The Five Civilized Tribes had more of a stake in it .

 

[Dullknife]

The link that explains my view better than I didn't take. Doesn't matter. I intend to keep on keeping on anyway.

One of the best learning experiences of my life was going to HS on a Reservation in SD. I learned what poor really meant , I mean poor the likes few have seen in the US.

I got to see the best of people and the worst. I gained an appreciation of the Lakota culture. As well as an understanding of the disgust towards the US and white cultures in general by a people that had been ground to dust. It shaped my world view.

In my time on this site I have seen a real attempt to connect the CS to the genocide of the Native American as though the CS was a fellow sufferer. Too many CS sycophants view themselves as the same as the Lakota, Cheyenne, Apache as though they and their ancestors were warriors who suffered along the same vein. They are not.

As I said I have seen some good impressions and I have seen some so bad they are patently insulting. Enough that I firmly believe unless you're a native, of the tribe being represented, just don't do it. While it's amusing to the Crow reenactors pretending to be Lakota & Cheyenne at the Little Big Horn it's annoying to the Lakota and Cheyenne.

While one poster has no issue with black face, stolen valor and other, what I consider, despicable actions I do. Mostly because I'm tired of watching the wannabes and Iwishiwas mock others with their ignorance.

Maybe it's my time in the military, on the reservation or just my upbringing but I think doing something that can easily be seen as purposefully insulting is a bad idea.

You are such an upstanding guy... or at least you want people on here to believe. ( its convenient that you say you grew up with Indians...So what if you did? It gives you no authority to be the spokes person for all the various Indians out there.)...You keep cranking out these assumptions about people whom you know NOTHING about.

Just gonna put you on ignore and you can keep saying your stupid **** all you want.

Have a good one.

 

[johan_steele]

You are such an upstanding guy... or at least you want people on here to believe. ( its convenient that you say you grew up with Indians...So what if you did? It gives you no authority to be the spokes person for all the various Indians out there.)...You keep cranking out these assumptions about people whom you know NOTHING about.

Just gonna put you on ignore and you can keep saying your stupid **** all you want.

Have a good one.

That's what the ignore button is for. You asked for input and opinions. I presented my experience. It's understandable you won't like all of the input presented to you.

Good luck in your endeavors. I hope you are able to learn from your research.

 

[major bill]

None of us here are the reenacting police. Anyone can do any impression they want. It really matters very little to me if one does a well research impression or a poorly researched horrible impression. In the end I see it as adults playing soldier and nothing more.

 

[archieclement]

None of us here are the reenacting police. Anyone can do any impression they want. It really matters very little to me if one does a well research impression or a poorly researched horrible impression. In the end I see it as adults playing soldier and nothing more.

Tend to largely agree, though would hope they research the impression.

However do find it odd when some seem to suggest what others should consider their heritige, or how recent a connection has or should be for them to feel any connection. Certainly in reality, anyone motivated in part by a ACW ancestor to reenact, would be doing so on a rather distant and limited connection, as distant as 1/32 or 1/64............yet doesn't seem to be all that an unusual motivation.

Rather same with telling others what parts of history they should think needs presented, or ignored if their isn't actually bodies to do it.....

 

[7thWisconsin]

None of us here are the reenacting police. Anyone can do any impression they want. It really matters very little to me if one does a well research impression or a poorly researched horrible impression. In the end I see it as adults playing soldier and nothing more.

Careful there - you´re gonna get the same stink eye that I get when I refer to what we do as ¨historical cosplay.¨

 

[major bill]

Careful there - you´re gonna get the same stink eye that I get when I refer to what we do as ¨historical cosplay.¨

For a while my niece did 'Zombie' reenactments or perhaps Zombie cosplay.

 

[Borderruffian]

Tend to largely agree, though would hope they research the impression.

However do find it odd when some seem to suggest what others should consider their heritige, or how recent a connection has or should be for them to feel any connection. Certainly in reality, anyone motivated in part by a ACW ancestor to reenact, would be doing so on a rather distant and limited connection, as distant as 1/32 or 1/64............yet doesn't seem to be all that an unusual motivation.

Rather same with telling others what parts of history they should think needs presented, or ignored if their isn't actually bodies to do it.....

Depends on the unit the ones I'm aquatinted with had standards that members had to maintain at events, from uniforms and equipment, speech when spectators were present etc. And then again there were less hardcore units that " okey doked" it.

 

[archieclement]

Depends on the unit the ones I'm aquatinted with had standards that members had to maintain at events, from uniforms and equipment, speech when spectators were present etc. And then again there were less hardcore units that " okey doked" it.

Think most do have standards to appearance in gear ect.

Not aware of having to prove heritage or lineage as in joining ancestry based groups like SCV or SUV. That I have seen women, Asians, and blacks in what were white male units gave me the impression most try to be inclusive of participants rather then exclusionary.

Though certainly in thread about Vietnam reenacting......one wonders if there would be some type of racial restrictions to protray "NVA" impressions. It would be a hurdle similar to including Native American Regiments if so. In the clip it seemed primarily "white" males.

But hear what would seem a somewhat derogatory term to me among reenactors in "stitchcounters". Think many realize the actual goal is to try to create simply a reasonable appearance. That is unlikely to be actually 100% period correct, or there would have to be very exclusionary, including limiting age and weight

 

[Borderruffian]

Think most do have standards to appearance in gear ect.

Not aware of having to prove heritage or lineage as in joining ancestry based groups like SCV or SUV. That I have seen women, Asians, and blacks in what were white male units gave me the impression most try to be inclusive of participants rather then exclusionary.

Though certainly in thread about Vietnam reenacting......one wonders if there would be some type of racial restrictions to protray "NVA" impressions. It would be a hurdle similar to including Native American Regiments if so. In the clip it seemed primarily "white" males.

The only racial restrictions I'm aware of is in USCT reenactment units, for obvious reasons. In one unit I was in in Tennessee there were a couple of Native Americans of Lakota and Arapaho descendant , good horsemen probably the best in the unit both had relocated to Tennessee to work for Nissan when they opened the plant in Symarna. Never met and Asian reenactor and that area of Tennessee had a large amount of Laotian Refugee families.

 

[major bill]

Careful there - you´re gonna get the same stink eye that I get when I refer to what we do as ¨historical cosplay.¨

For a while my niece did 'Zombie' reenactments or perhaps Zombie cosplay. But would not playing a roll be playing a roll? Zombie, World War Two German soldier, or Civil War soldier, all are roll playing.

 

[archieclement]

The only racial restrictions I'm aware of is in USCT reenactment units, for obvious reasons. In one unit I was in in Tennessee there were a couple of Native Americans of Lakota and Arapaho descendant , good horsemen probably the best in the unit both had relocated to Tennessee to work for Nissan when they opened the plant in Symarna. Never met and Asian reenactor and that area of Tennessee had a large amount of Laotian Refugee families.

But the USCT I've seen all included white officers. Nor do I think they applied any shades of darkness standard.

Which is where is seems to get very fuzzy to me.........should they be 100%, 75%, 50%, 25%, less? Then certainly within any % ethnicity there's appearance variations to color..........

It's like Hollywood that Johnny Depp wasnt Comanche, didn't detract to me that he was representing a Indian in Tonto........nor did in The Blind Side that SJ was good Indian number 3 in the school play.......I understand it's simply roleplaying/acting a representation. As all ACW/any war living history/reenactments are.

BTW, in school I was a good Indian in a Thankgiving production as well

 

[Borderruffian]

Fr

But the USCT I've seen all included white officers. Nor do I think they applied any shades of darkness standard.

Which is where is seems to get very fuzzy to me.........should they be 100%, 75%, 50%, 25%, less? Then certainly within any % ethnicity there's appearance variations to color..........

It's like Hollywood that Johnny Depp wasnt Comanche, didn't detract to me that he was representing a Indian in Tonto........nor did in The Blind Side that SJ was good Indian number 3 in the school play.......I understand it's simply roleplaying/acting a representation. As all ACW/any war living history/reenactments are.

Because white Officers and some NCOs are historically correct , not so much white rifle rotters and string pullers in the ranks.