(unattributed)
1993 Dancing in Moccasins: Keeping Native American Traditions Alive. Princeton, NJ: Films for the Humanities and Sciences.
Notes: 1 videocassette (49 min.); sd., col. with b&w sequences; 1/2 in. Program originally appeared on channel 9 KMBC TV.Reviewed 06 Dec 2001 by:
Raymond A. Bucko <bucko@creighton.edu>
Anthropology, Creighton University, Omaha, Nebraska, USAMedium: Film/Video Subject
Keywords:Indians of North America - History - 20th century
Indian dance - United States
ABSTRACT: ôDancing in Moccasinsö is a metaphor employed throughout this film to express the celebratory continuation of Native life and traditions despite difficult conditions in the past as well as the present. The film is as much about cultural survival and triumph as it is cultural loss and tragedy.
The film begins with the grim realities of the past: geographical displacement, land loss, warfare, boarding schools, forced assimilation and cultural and linguistic loss, and religious persecution and conversion. Historical footage is interspersed with personal narratives of Native peoples from a wide variety of tribal and cultural backgrounds. The film then look at three ôcontemporaryö controversies in Indian Country: The Navajo û Hopi land dispute, Anishnable (Chippewa/Ojibway) fishing rights in Wisconsin, and Indian poverty in Ashville, North Carolina. Due to the brevity of this film, 49 minutes, the narrative hardly begins to reveal the complexity of these issues, especially the land dispute between Hopi and Navajo which is presented simply as a problem generated by the United States government. It is far more complex than the film reveals.Finally the film finds a coherent and more in-depth focus by examining social, economic, and educational realities both the Kickapoo reservation in Brown County, Kansas and the for the urban Indian population of Lawrence, Kansas. This is the real strength of the film. Through personal narratives, visuals and some now rather outdated statistical data, the film portrays life on a small rural reservation as well as in a large urban center eschewing the romantic paradigm of Indians ôin natureö and yet remaining respectful of attempts to regain tradition and adapt to an outside world of ever changing social and economic realities. The film should be applauded for exploring the life of urban Natives for despite the fact that more Native peoples live in cities than on reservations and rural areas combined this population still remains ignored by and largely invisible to outsiders.
The last segment of the film describes the institution of the pow-wow, a Native celebratory event involving the reunion of families, dancing (sometimes in competition for monetary prizes), feasting and conducting other traditional ceremonies such as give-aways (ceremonial distribution of property) and honoring individuals and groups. Individual Natives narrate the importance of these events, particularly for a population that is more and more scattered away from reservations and in urban centers. The film also discusses the social and economic realities of this important institution.
The film has both insightful as well as problematic observations. The film perceptively states that religion is the main source of Native identity today. One Native voice stresses that although Indians may be poor materially they are rich in other ways. This is an essential insight to stress when using a film like this for educational purposes for students can be very good at ôpityingö people but sometimes have a harder time finding the dignity and equality of peoples whose circumstances differ from their own. The film appropriately stresses cultural revitalization and the importance of Native people finding their place in roles of leadership in situations like tribal leadership, teaching and health care.
Problematically, the filmÆs narrator at one point states that Indians are susceptible to alcoholism because they have not yet had enough time to build up an immunity to alcohol. There are a wide variety of theories for Native (and non-Native) alcoholism and the filmÆs observation presents only one, and probably one of the most fanciful, explanations. The film also says that in Wisconsin spearfishing is the main source of Native food, missing the symbolic importance of spearfishing as an exercise of sovereignty and overstating the material importance of fish, with no mention of collecting wild rice or of other foodstuffs important to their diet.
While this film is distributed by Films for the Humanities and Sciences (http://www.films.com/), the original footage was apparently produced by a local Kansas City television station, KMBC (http://www.thekansascitychannel.com/) . The film seems more designed for a popular audience than an academic one and the context is clearly that of the Native population of Kansas although the film does not explicitly state this and tries, poorly, for a pan-Indian focus. This is ironic for the film excels in portraying a segment of the Native population of Kansas. The context, no doubt, was provided by its initial airing on television. Neither the film nor the box states when the film was originally made or broadcasted.
One would wish that when film companies recycle films like this that they would add an introduction placing the film in its original context, especially when the film is touted by the distributor as examining ôtodayÆs Native Americansö. Clearly updates cannot be done annually but there is a duty to provide a clear context for the data presented. The Films for the Humanities & SciencesÆ website review of this film (http://www.films.com/item.cfm?bin=4278) states: ôThis program examines the needs and problems of todayÆs Native Americans, both those who live on the reservation and those who have chosen the mainstream.ö This film was released in 1994, five years after at least some of the footage was shot making the term ôtodayö rather inaccurate. As of the writing of this review (December 2001), 12 years have elapsed and at least some of the film was shot.
The film ends by suggesting that one can find further information by going to the library or contacting the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Today we have the internet as an added resource and the Bureau has its own web site (http://www.doi.gov/bureau-indian-affairs.html). The United States Census Bureau is also a useful resource for demographic research (http://www.census.gov/). In terms of the main focus of the film, the Kickapoo reservation in Kansas, one can find a more recent (at least 1996 from context although no publication date is listed on the page) set of environmental and demographic information on the Kickapoo of Kansas at http://www.mnisose.org/profiles/kickapoo.htm posted on the Mni Sose Intertribal Water Rights Coalition web site. The site also have a brief history of this group. Anthropologist James Mooney also wrote an entry for the 1910 edition of the Catholic Encyclopedia on the Kickapoo around the turn of the century http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08635c.htm. Mooney also wrote an entry on the Kickapoo for Frederick Webb HodgeÆs two-volume Handbook of American Indians North of Mexico at http://www.prairienet.org/prairienations/kick.htm.
While this is not a useful film for viewing the contemporary Native scene, this work does provide a sensitive forum for a variety of insightful Native voices and provides a welcomed focus on urban Natives and is quite appropriate as a pedagogical tool in those regards.
To cite this review, the American Anthropological Association recommends the following style:
Bucko, Raymond A.
2001 Review of Dancing in Moccasins: Keeping Native American Traditions Alive. Anthropology Review Database. December 06. Electronic document, http://wings.buffalo.edu/ARD/cgi/showme.cgi?keycode=1505, accessed February 10, 2010.© Anthropology Review Database
(available online: http://wings.buffalo.edu/ARD/)