Cowboys and Indians

Cowboys and Indians

        In my grade ten history class, I was required to learn about the Indigenous peoples of Canada. Our class decided to focus on the Mohawks, who were known as the warriors. The textbook told stories of the Mohawks fighting neighbouring bands and even fighting their own people at times. The picture the textbook painted was simple: the Mohawks were a “savage”, violent group of people who could not control themselves. Of course, what the textbook left out was the fact that much of this “savage” behaviour was due to the onset of European colonialism. The reasoning behind the violent dispute is not important, however. As a nation, we turn a blind eye to the truths of our past, and instead focus on the story we are taught as a child; the white people came to save the “primitive”, indigenous population from themselves.

        Michael Yellow Bird describes such stories as the one above as a master narrative (2004). Yellow Bird explains that such stories depict Indians as “savages”, who cannot control their behaviour. This story also emphasizes the Cowboy’s defeat over the Indians in past battles. In the United States Army for example, the term “Indian Country” is used to describe hostile territory (Silliman, 2008). The use of this term by the
American Army is used to describe “hostile, unpacified territories in active war zones” (Silliman, 2008). One could ask why the American Army uses such a degrading term like “Indian Country” to explain war tactics, in areas such as Vietnam and Iraq which do not have a substantial Native American Population. Silliman suggests that through the story of Cowboys and Indians, American soldiers and the general population alike have come to understand any enemy as the Indian, whom they must conquer and defeat (Silliman, 2008). By using this term to describe hostile enemy ground, “Indian Country” suggests that Native Americans remain the American enemy. As Yellow Bird (2004) illustrated with the Cowboys and Indians childhood “toys of genocide”, children are taught from a young age that the cowboys are superior to the Indians, identifying themselves as the cowboy who always survives, defeating the Indian.

        To further illustrate the pervasiveness of this master narrative, the example of the famous 1995 film adaptation of the childhood novel titled “Indian in the Cupboard” tells the story of a young boy who finds a plastic “Indian” in an old cupboard his brother passed down to him (www.youtube.com). The plastic Indian comes to life, and is eventually placed in the cupboard with a plastic cowboy. A friend of the little boy warns him to not “put them together, you know, cowboys and Indians” to which the little boy responds with “Duh!” signifying an understanding that if an Indian is confronted by a Cowboy, he is sure to die. Besides the obvious message sent to it’s audience, this movie is perfect in reinforcing underlying depictions of Cowboys and Indians, as a master narrative. The white child is of full size, while the Indian is the size of a small plastic figurine; a toy that can be played with and manipulated by the white boy. This distinction between superior and inferior is not coincidental; one could argue that even a small white child is superior to the Indian, capable of capturing the control of that Indian’s livelihood. The fact that this novel turned film’s target audience was children reaffirms the idea by which both Silliman and Yellow Bird suggest that through the exposure of the master narrative, a child’s understanding of indigenous peoples is shaped at a very young age.

        Another aspect of the Cowboys and Indians master narrative, as Silliman (2008) suggests, is that it crosses cultural bounds; troops from around the world were quoted as saying “welcome to Injun Country” when speaking of their war zone. This would reiterate the pervasiveness of the master narrative, where it is capable of travelling far places. A personal example to push this point further would be the “Cowboy Town” and “Wild, Wild West Show” featured at a Malaysian resort. I had travelled thousands of Kilometers from my home only to find the same master narrative taught to me as a child on display to thousands of young Malaysians. With references to Jesse James, John Wayne, and “The Good Old Days of the West”, I wondered what a country and culture so far away from the west could know about the Wild, Wild West. It is clear now that the concept of Cowboys and Indians, whether a person is directly involved or not, is a simple concept; the indigenous people are inferior, and must be removed. Of course this master narrative crosses cultural borders, it is at the root of Ethnocentrism; the belief that a group of peoples is superior to another.

        Through Silliman’s article which discussed the “Indian Country” term, Yellow Bird’s idea of the Master Narrative, and the use of a childhood film, along with personal examples, the history of our past is present in today’s world. Using derogatory terms and scenarios such as playing “Cowboys and Indians” indirectly teaches our society to hate the Indians. One could argue that such childhood games and military grunt language shapes the person’s understanding and opinion of an Indian. So, think back to your own childhood and realize you have grown up with the master narrative. How has this shaped your understanding of the Indian?