By James Long<\/em><\/p>\n Anthropology scholar Dowell has done extensive research on what she calls the “visual sovereignty” of Aboriginal culture in media<\/a>. In this chapter, Dowell “analyze[s] the ways in which Aboriginal media intervene in the Canadian national mediascape to impact on-screen representations of Aboriginal people” by “exploring the impact of APTN [the Aboriginal People’s Television Network<\/a>] on Aboriginal media production” (77). She also explores the representation of mixed-blood and two-spirit Aboriginals, and mentions the success of youth programming\u2014which pushes us to meditate on the effect of media like didactic cartoons on youth. It seems that a central tension Dowell has found in speaking with industry professionals such as Jeff Bear is a crossroads<\/i> between assimilating to mainstream media culture (in order to create awareness for unique Aboriginal stories)\u2014or to create a separate Aboriginal space to speak in traditional ways not yet well-received by the mainstream industry. Aboriginal artists themselves seem divided on this crossroads.<\/span><\/p>\n This chapter of her book first describes the frustrations Aboriginals often face when working in the media industry with mainstream colleagues. For example, when Kamala Todd interviewed chiefs for a news program, she did not cut their interviews because traditionally, elders should not be interrupted when telling their stories; but she had to fight against the non-Aboriginal producers in the room who wanted to edit the interviews to speed them along (Dowell 81-82).<\/span><\/p>\n APTN’s mandate is to share Aboriginal life with other Canadians (Dowell 84), and they seem to be doing this well, because most of the people who watch it are non-Aboriginal (Dowell 77). This was surprising for me, and has made me optimistic that people ARE interested in Aboriginal cultural expression; we just have to feed it to them right. Ironically, filmmakers and scholar Lorna Roth worry that rural Aboriginals have limited access to the channel on reserves, or that some city-dwellers cannot afford cable (Dowell 88).<\/span><\/p>\n A shortcoming of APTN is that, with its existence, many mainstream outlets reject Aboriginal content by telling its creators that it belongs on APTN instead of on their channels (Dowell 91-92). Producer Dorothy Christian describes her dream of having aboriginal content across all outlets, but filmmaker Odessa Shuquaya disagrees: “Why don’t we create our own mainstream, an Aboriginal-stream?” she says (qtd. in Dowell 92).<\/span><\/p>\n Another shortcoming\u2014a “common refrain . . . from Vancouver filmmakers” (Dowell 89) is the lack of West Coast-related content on APTN, as most of the channel’s programming is focussed on the North, says filmmaker Barb Cranmer (90). This is unfortunate, because BC is perhaps the most exciting arena for Aboriginal current affairs right now because of its ongoing treaty negotiations<\/a>\u00a0and protest movements (90). Indeed, having only one Aboriginal-dedicated channel is problematic because it conglomerates Aboriginal culture as a whole, as opposed to representing it as a mosaic of many unique cultures (as it is). We tend to simplify Aboriginal culture as “Aboriginal Culture,” not Squamish culture or Cree culture.<\/span><\/p>\n Fortunately, APTN is a great place to represent mixed-blood and Metis experiences because individuals from these communities tend to feel alienated within the larger Aboriginal community (Dowell 94-95 footnotes?). The two-spirit community<\/a> has also found comfort in the media, as many filmmakers have moved into queer-(and film-) friendly Vancouver, claiming that the homophobia that exists in rural reserve communities is a leftover colonial effect (Dowell 100-101).<\/span><\/p>\n Personally, I think APTN is a good first step…but perhaps an indicator of success is when we don’t need it anymore. “[V]isual sovereignty does not imply a separation form engagement with Canadian society[,]” Dowell reminds us, “but rather reflects the overlapping citizenship of Aboriginal people who hold citizenship in their Aboriginal nations as well as Canadian citizenship (104). A question for the future would be: how will APTN fit in to the changing landscape of film\/TV where\u00a0people selectively stream shows online<\/a> (through Netflix, for example), instead of committing to TV channel bundles? How can we ensure that our unique Canadian and Aboriginal voice will not be drowned out by popular media created by our (probably more well-funded) neighbours south of the border? Perhaps a good place to start is to encourage young artists to become future leaders in the industry. Or start introducing Aboriginal programming into the mainstream; the good news is, there is evidently a demand for it, and Canadians\u00a0want<\/em>\u00a0to learn more about the Aboriginal heritage of this country.<\/span><\/p>\n By Charmaine Li<\/em><\/p>\n In this paper, Dr. Michael Ray Fitzgerald from the University of Reading applies Cedric C. Clark’s four-stage model of minority media representation to a study on the representation of Native Americans in pop culture media. Although his research is focussed on American representation, I believe it is a useful introductory article to the subject of minority media representation in general<\/a>. I also believe it is\u00a0applicable to Canadians as the border between American and Canadian popular media is quite porous. We in Canada consume as much (if not more) American entertainment as Canadian entertainment.<\/span><\/p>\n Fitzgerald begins by summarizing\u00a0the Clark model’s four stages:<\/span><\/p>\n 1. Non-recognition: A given minority group is not acknowledged by the dominant media to even exist.<\/span><\/p>\n 2. Ridicule: Certain minority characters are portrayed as stupid, silly, lazy, irrational, or simply laughable.<\/span><\/p>\n 3. Regulation: Certain minority characters are presented as enforcers or administrators of the dominant group’s norms.<\/span><\/p>\n 4. Respect: The minority group in question is portrayed no differently than that any other group. Interracial relationships would also not appear extraordinary. (Fitzgerald 368)<\/cite><\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n Fitzergerald acknowledges that this model has been found by other scholars as imperfect\u2014and it is worthy of note that it was originally used more for investigating the representation of African Americans in media (368). He also notes that “[a]n arguable weakness in Clark’s model is that it suggests a linear or chronological progression,” while Native American representation has, through his findings, “undergone more than one stage of Non-recognition” (380).<\/span><\/p>\n In his study of Native American representation throughout American media (the methodology of which he delves in considerable detail), Fitzgerald found that “most American Indian characters are set in a distant, ‘historic’ past” and “[t]he more prominent the character and the more modern the setting, the more likely he (almost always a man) was to be a regulator” (376). When we think of Aboriginals, we don’t often think of them in Tshirt-and-jeans walking down a 21st-century street, do we?\u00a0Drawing on Thomas King’s Green Grass Running Water<\/i>, we don’t see Lionels and Eli’s and Charlie’s and rarer still, women like Alberta. We often don’t see complex people capable of fulfilling more than simple roles.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n Personally, I find the Regulation stage most interesting. It’s as if media is trying to “over-correct” itself by shouting “Minorities can be responsible too! Look at them not just obeying the law, but enforcing it!” We see stage 3 portrayed (perhaps satirically) in Green Grass Running Water<\/i>\u00a0by the characters of Eli and Charlie. They’re educated Aboriginal lawyers, but they’re not regarded highly by their Aboriginal peers. Fitzgerland cites additional scholars (Scotch and Jhally & Lewis) that “simply ‘flipping’ negative stereotypes to positive ones is not much of an improvement” (380). This brings to mind the age-old “noble savage” trope, like <\/span>this girl<\/a>:<\/span><\/p>\n![\"Screen](\"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/conversationscanada\/files\/2015\/06\/Screen-Shot-2015-07-24-at-5.50.32-PM-261x300.png\")
<\/a> ![\"Screen](\"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/conversationscanada\/files\/2015\/06\/Screen-Shot-2015-07-24-at-6.11.06-PM-300x191.png\")
<\/a><\/p>\nWorks Cited<\/h5>\n
\n
Dowell, Kristin L. “Aboriginal Diversity On-Screen.” Sovereign Screens<\/i>. Lincoln: U of Nebraska, 2013. 76-105. Project Muse<\/i>. Web. 19 July 2015.<\/b><\/span><\/h4>\n
Works cited<\/h5>\n
\n
Fitzgerald, Michael Ray. “‘Evolutionary Stages of Minorities in the Mass Media’: An Application of Clark’s Model to American Indian Television Representations.” The Howard Journal of Communications<\/i> 21.4 (2010): 367-84. Taylor and Francis<\/i>. Web. 9 July 2015.<\/b><\/span><\/h4>\n
\n