Edward curtis erased whites and froze Indians in the past
by Carmen Van Kerckhove
Fascinating article about Edward Curtis, whose photographs of American Indians are instantly familiar to us all. (Hat tip to Newspaper Rock!)
Curtis’ images of Indians are burned into the hearts and minds of many Americans to this day. They are also at the center of controversy.
The photos are so luminous and exquisitely composed that it is impossible to imagine the disputation that rages around them. Curtis started as a society photographer in Seattle, and his portraits of Indians are as stunning as those he might have taken of big-wigs…
Curtis’ images have not been universally welcomed in Indian country. Many Indians — and non-Indian scholars — object to Curtis’ methods, even if the results are stunning. For instance, Curtis arranged many of the photos carefully and at times ludicrously. His Hopi women ground corn in ceremonial dress, and he sometimes clothed individuals in items from other tribes.
Still, as UCSD scholar Ross Frank and Heidi Wigler, the Wangenheim librarian point out, Curtis’ legacy is troubling on more serious grounds. Curtis “collected” people, their dwellings, and their material culture (baskets, clothing, cradleboards, for instance). Anthropologists shelved Indians and their artifacts in museums — thousands of Indian remains rested in museums until repatriation — but Curtis froze them in images. “His approach was anthropological, he wanted to capture an ideal in a pure form, as if the outside world didn’t exist,” says Wigler.
Curtis was only interested in the Indian past, because the Indian present was “spoiled” by Euroamerican intrusions, and, like most Americans of his day, he was convinced that Indians had no future. So he carefully eliminates the white presence in Indian life. His photo of a Hopi ceremonial shows only Indians participating and watching; another “photojournalistic” version of the same ceremonial shows many whites attending (as they do today)…
Even more seriously, Curtis openly displays “scientific racism” in the photos. At the turn of the twentieth century, anthropologists were measuring skulls, creating categories of peoples, and using science to relate personality to race and to assert the superiority of the Caucasian race. (Anthropologist Frank Boas revolutionized the field when he railed against these bedrock ideas.)
Frank points out that Curtis named noteworthy individuals he photographed, like Geronimo, but he left most of his subjects suspended in anonymity, their individuality obliterated by their race. A Diegueño woman is simply “Southern Diegueño Woman,” and a Qahátíka Girl is “A Type of Desert Indian.”
Carmen Van Kerckhove is co-founder and president of
kim wrote:
I was just saying to my husband that there had been controversy, decades old, at the much famed steward-of-the-earth philosophy said to be held by a nation in either the Pacific Northwest, or the eastern portion of what is now Washington state.
Years ago, in trying to find information about Michael Her Many Horses, a young man who spoke at great length in Ken Burns’ documentary on the American Indian almost eleven years ago, I found a site where he was speaking in forum about the known inaccuracies and flagrant misrepresentations of Native American culture and tradition.
Ranging from ceremony to style of dress to purported regard toward use of the land, Michael Her Many Horses spoke of the complicity of many well-know institutions and organizations, such as the Smithsonian, having acknowledged that blatant manipulation and ‘artistic lisence’ had been used in the works that these institutions had put forth as true historical depictions.
The defense, according to the forum concensus, by these institutions, organizations, and publishers was appallingly apathetic, a resultant benign benevolence that did not require there be any real scholarship attached to the work.
There was no real reason to self-correct: the indelible impressions in the mind of the American public and the world had done no real harm to the people whose depictions and ideas were falsified, but actually promoted a sort of spiritual provenance, foresight and attributed to them an ecology-driven activism organic to fundamental tribal practice – which benefits the image of the Native American in the mind of the rest of the world.
“So What,” was the response. ” So what we it’s not really their history, their legacy, it works for me.”
Posted 21 Nov 2006 at 4:07 pm ¶
Jay wrote:
This controversy is way overblown, it totally overlooks the fact that he humanized the Indian in his portraits, and abhored the treatment of the Indian.
Many, many of the portraits have the individuals names, to pretend any different is a distortion. Confusing anthropology with racism is a serious mistake, and is really slanted journalism.
Anyone interested in forming their own opinion should go to the Northwest University website that has Curtis’s entire work scanned, and start reading.
Posted 22 Nov 2006 at 10:43 pm ¶
Jay wrote:
You also might be interested in a production (dvd): The Indian Picture Opera, a re-made 1911 Curtis slide show, where Curtis describes various tribes and their customs. Found on Amazon.
Posted 22 Nov 2006 at 10:48 pm ¶