| It’s a question of perspective and what exactly you show and write about. In the “Ballad” Native Americans really are just dangerous and savage boogeyman, a mere threat like a tiger in the jungle. We do not at all get to see their side and motivations. There is no attempt made to create empathy. I think sometimes that approach is totally fine! A film like “Dunkirk” really doesn’t have to show me the inner life and motivations of the Nazis. They can be the ominous boogeyman beyond the horizon, never clearly shown but always present as a clear threat. There is no need to create empathy, because prejudice against Nazis and those who idolize them is not really a problem at all. With Native Americans, however, such depictions were (and are?) the norm and that’s really totally unreasonable and not at all understandable. That’s the problem here. I hope this illustratest sufficiently well that perspective and what exactly you show is important. I make no claim that this is easy to figure out, but you do make it yourself a little to easy, expecially when you invoke things outside the text. I don’t think you can really do this, not to the extent you just did that. Maybe if we see someone in a film who is clearly identifiable as Jewish in a film killing an SS officer without any further context there is enough foreknowledge there among everyone that you really wouldn’t have to provide any further context within the text to make the motive clear. With Native Americans I do not at all feel as though we are at that point. |