I bet that you've read The Indian in the Cupboard by Lynn Reid Banks in your elementary school guided reading group before. And I bet you believed what they were saying when they described the Indian in the cupboard. What if is book actually broke rules that were set up for authors? It does.
The way that Banks writes about Little Bear, the Indian in the story, in the stereotypical way he speaks, does not match criteria that was set up for books on Modern Fantasy literature and literature with minority characters. For starters the character being portrayed must be a unique individual and cannot be representative of an entire group. The book cannot also have stereotypes of appearance, characteristic traits, or behavior. Banks breaks both of these things by categorizing Indians as a whole and not being specific to Iroquois traditions.
Banks does also not dress Little Bear correctly. His hair, in some images, should have been in a roach and not braids, seeing as though he was a warrior. The moccasins that he would have worn would have reflected the Iroquoian tribe, the one of which he belonged to. They would have actually gather by the ankles, and would have not been the short kind. His loin cloth also would have most likely been shorter than shown in the images in the book. The last notable thing is that is was very unlikely that Little Bear would have even wore a vest, even though he is shown wearing one.
Another major wrong that Banks wrote about is how Little Bear became a chief. In the book it is said that he became a chief just because his father was also a chief. This is untrue. To become a chief, Little Bear would have had to shown that he was worthy to to become one, he would not have just been named one because his father was once a chief.
When writing a novel with historical content, you have to be careful in how you write it and what you say. From learning more about the Native Americans in class, I can see how these is issues with The Indian in the Cupboard are a problem. It is important to know if you are reading a reliable book, because sometimes what you are taught is not actually the truth.
Website. A Demand for Excellence in Books for Children. Winter 1995. Jan LaBonty. http://jaie.asu.edu/v34/V34S2dem.htm. Accessed 13 January 2013.
"Indian In the Cupboard cover." Book cover. Girl Of The Corn. December 6, 2013. Carrie Olson, Girl Of The Corn. http://girlofthecorn.com/2013/12/page/2/. Accessed 14 January 2013.
"Little Bear coming out of a box." Photograph. The 'Ted' Problem: What If Other Family Film Characters Had Stuck Around. June 25, 2012. Brian Salisbury, Hollywood. http://www.hollywood.com/static/about-us. Accessed 14 January 2013.
I have not read "The Indian in the Cupboard", but after reading this post I was fairly happy I hadn't. I had no idea that there are rules set up for authors, and after learning that I was surprised that this book was allowed to be published, let alone taught. What I liked most about your post Emma was the way you applied the information you had learned in class about the Native Americans to something you had been taught when you were younger, it's a type of connection I wouldn't have thought up.
ReplyDeleteAs annoying as it is (and it is!) that there are major mistakes in these books, I have to say as a homeschooling parent to a 9 year old boy, the series is a TERRIFIC jumping-off place for getting excited about learning about different times and cultures. As my son gets out various toys to stand in for the characters and objects in the stories, he has been asking me questions like: "but what do the cowboys sleep in? We can't just leave him out in the cold." and "Would Little Bear REALLY have made a longhouse?" etc. These are the 'teachable moments' in which we sit down together with Google and discover the answers to these questions. ("Bunkhouse, a makeshift tent, or just on his bedroll, depending," and, "yes", as far as I can tell, if you're wondering. More research is needed; we are just getting started!) Critical thinking isn't taught much until the later years in typical schools- which is a shame. At nine, my son already knows to question what he hears and sees, and asks the relevant questions. I'm looking forward to learning alongside him as he asks more questions about Little Bear, Boone, Tommy, and all the others in these imaginative stories. Sometimes it's ok to dive into something like this, even if it's not anywhere near perfect as far as accuracy, if it ignites the passion for play and for learning more. On our first read-through of the series, we discussed the insensitive handling of the Native American people and culture, talked about stereotyping, and discovered that different periods of time in our history were very different from each other. We also learned a little about England, and unearthed the origins of the term 'skinhead', which carries different connotations here that it does across the pond. The series is rife with opportunity to teach, including correcting all the inaccuracies :)
ReplyDelete