McLeod, Christopher
2001 In the Light of Reverence: Protecting America's Sacred Lands. Oley, PA: Bullfrog Films.
Notes: VHS color, 73 minutes.Reviewed 13 Jun 2002 by:
Samuel R. Cook <Samlcook@aol.com>
Virginia Polytechnic Institute, Blacksburg, Virginia, USAMedium: Film/Video Subject
Keywords:Indians of North America - Religion
Indians of North America - Land tenure
Teton Indians - Religion
Hopi Indians - Religion
Wintu Indians - Religion
Public lands - West (U.S.)
Tourism - Environmental aspects - Wyoming
Tourism - Environmental aspects - California
Mineral industries - Environmental aspects - Arizona
Devils Tower National Monument (Wyo.)
Mount Shasta (Calif.)
ABSTRACT: This film compares the struggles of three American Indian nations ù the Lakota of the Great Plains, the Hopis of Arizona, and the Wintu of northern California ù to protect sites that are pivotal in their sacred traditions. While the crises differ in terms of specific threats to each site and the interests examined, each case involves a complex struggle between indigenous worldviews, emphasizing stewardship and sacred history deriving from the land, and Western notions of individual rights and the land as commodity.
Seemingly few people who are not indigenous to the Americas understand the interrelated political and sacred ramifications of being indigenous to this continent, much less to a specific territory. Lack of understanding is part and parcel of conflicting worldviewsùindigenous notions of peoplehood and sacred history deriving from the land, on the one hand, and Western notions of individual freedom and the land (and all that it contains) as commodity on the other. 'In the Light of Reverence' attempts to explicate these differing views, if not to breech the epistemological chasm that is at the center of a number of profound, but virtually unsung human rights and environmental crises in America today.Director/Producer Christopher McLeod, whose experience in documentary film treatment of indigenous environmental issues is considerable, has produced a compelling comparative study of environmental and cultural threats facing three contemporary Indian nations as they strive to protect their most sacred landsùthe Lakota of Wyoming and South Dakota, the Hopi of Arizona, and the Wintu of northern California. While these three groupsÆ experiences in trying to protect (sometimes unsuccessfully) their sacred sites differ in peculiar ways, the common theme in all their struggles is their inability to convey (at least the significance of) their own worldviews to encroaching Westerners, and to secure a legal foundation on which their sacred traditions will find a secure footing.
The first third of the film focuses on the struggles of various bands of the Lakota and Dakota Sioux nations to observe rituals on sacred sites that are no longer under their controlùspecifically, portions of the Black Hills that fall under National Park Service (NPS) jurisdiction. DevilÆs Tower, Wyoming has always been a pivotal landmark in Lakota sacred geography, as evidenced by its Lakota name ù Mato Tipala, or 'Lodge of the Bear' (the divergent choices in nomenclature lend evidence to the cultural confrontation at hand). Each June, Lakota people gather at this site to observe an important rite recalling their sacred origin. In recent years, however, they have had to contend with an onslaught of rock climbers who are attracted by the natural challenge of the tower. McLeod examines the Lakota peoples' efforts to petition the Park Service to ban climbing during that period, and the worldviews that fuelled a legal action in which the NPS was only successful in maintaining a policy of requesting a voluntary abstinence in climbing. Perhaps more than in other sections, this segment of the film does an excellent job of contextualizing the conflict and highlighting divergent views and complexities. Not only are traditional Lakota voices at the forefront in relating their worldviews and concerns, but various rock climbers convey both frustrations (one climber, who initiated the lawsuit to halt the ban on climbing, proclaimed that climbing was his religion) and sympathies (another climber willingly volunteered not to climb during June for the same reasons). McLeod wisely includes the voices of local ranchers whose sentiments are decisively against Natives in order to place the controversy within its local political context.
The second segment of Light of Reverence examines the efforts of Hopi elders to protect and preserve a dwindling number of sacred shrines that are said to mark the peopleÆs ancient migrations to their homeland. In this case, the conflict is overwhelmingly aggravated by Western economic interestsùnamely, coal and gravel mining. Most of the shrines in question are on private or federal land off the Hopi Reservation, including Waldruff Butte, where a gravel mine -- opened to facilitate the expansion of an interstate -- threatened to destroy an ancient shrine that has been continuously maintained by Hopis since its consecration. In that case, Clinton Administration officials in the late 1990s were able to negotiate a monetary settlement with mine owners who agreed to move elsewhere. Such was not the case at the White Vulcan Mine near the San Francisco Peaks, where a shrine was mockingly videotaped while being destroyed. Yet the most urgent crisis at hand in this segment concerns the depletion of the Hopi and Navajo aquifer as a result of a coal slurry serving PeabodyÆs coal operations on the Navajo and Hopi Reservations. This has caused several springs, many of which are the focal point of sacred shrines, to dry up in a land where water is a precious resource in the first place. Through the words of Hopi leaders and elders, the film draws a comparison between Hopi stories of the destruction of previous worlds and the current crisis. The overarching message here is of a conflict between divergent concepts of stewardship and profit. What is lacking as a result of time constraints is a greater contextual background of the Navajo-Hopi land dispute, a socio-legal construction that is the crucible for much of the crisis in question.
The final section of this film focuses on the efforts of the Wintu of northern California to protect a small spring on Mount Shasta from non-Indian profanities in the form of tourism and cultural appropriation. The Wintu are a small, non-federally recognized tribe that does not have a land base. Nonetheless, they have maintained vital aspects of a shamanistic tradition that is tied to a sacred spring now on Forest Service land. Here, the film follows their battles on two frontsùfirst, to prevent the construction of a ski resort that would come too close to the spring to ensure its purity and tranquility, and second, a more complex battle to keep non-Indian New Age religious zealots from invading this site that the Wintu view as being under their exclusive stewardship. In both cases Forest Service officials were willing to listen and serve as advocates for the Wintu people. At the bottom line the question became one of acceptable activities on a specific parcel of public land. In the long run the Forest Service found it much easier to refuse a permit to build a ski lodge, prompting the realtor backing the venture to assert that ôPretty soon weÆre going to be a country thatÆs fragmented by every group having its own little set of rights. The pursuit of happiness was the pursuit of private property. And now thatÆs being erodedàunder the guise of religionö (emphasis added). If it is ironic that Western capitalism should learn the limits of expansion in this case, the WintuÆs campaign to bar non-Indian religious sects from their spring continues to be even more difficult because the stakes are more existential than material. One of the most touching and compelling voices in this segment is that of Florence Jones, the elderly and blunt Wintu keeper of the spring. Jones is the last fluent speaker of the Wintu language, and likens the New Age invasion to her own hypothetical interruption of a Christian church service. This final segment of the film is both engaging and confounding precisely because the interests in conflict are not easily reduced to a black and white comparison.
The shortcomings of this documentary are largely due to time constraints. First, each situation examined would have benefited from greater historical and legal contextualization (e.g., how did the Lakota lose the Black Hills in spite of the 1868 Fort Laramie Treaty? How was it possible for Peabody Coal to open one of the worldÆs largest open pit mines in the heart of Navajo and Hopi sacred space? Why are the Wintu non-federally recognized and how does that confound their battles for religious freedom?). A more detailed discussion of the American Indian Religious Freedom Act of 1978 and its necessity and ineffectiveness would have also made for a more rounded approach. Likewise, while the film might be labeled ôpro-Indianö (and necessarily so) the editing of oral accounts from all parties sometimes runs the risk of seeming out of context.
Nonetheless, McLeod and associates could not have produced a better and more compelling documentary on the subject at hand unless they exceeded the current length of 73 minutes. Indeed, the filmmakers have done an outstanding job of delivering a remarkably accessible presentation on a very sensitive and infinitely complex issue. The film weaves oral testimonies from key actors in each dispute along with those of eminent American Indian scholars such as Vine Deloria, Jr. and Charles F. Wilkinson, juxtaposed with oral renderings of Lakota, Hopi, and Wintu sacred tradition, tastefully narrated by American Indian actors Peter Coyote and Tantoo Cardinal. The issues are presented in a provocative manner that draws the viewer into the dialogue and beckons critical contemplation.
To cite this review, the American Anthropological Association recommends the following style:
Cook, Samuel R.
2002 Review of In the Light of Reverence: Protecting America's Sacred Lands. Anthropology Review Database. June 13. Electronic document, http://wings.buffalo.edu/ARD/cgi/showme.cgi?keycode=1721, accessed November 22, 2009.© Anthropology Review Database
(available online: http://wings.buffalo.edu/ARD/)