Dingoes ate your post, there.

I’ve seen objection to The Mystic Spiritual Leader “in” to the story. We shouldn’t have even touched on that idea since it’s a trope, the objection goes. (Not unlike going to the Exorcist place with the nun.) Of course, this was the plot engine for Jaye’s journey and Bill’s entire story, so if you can’t get past that, then, well, not sure what to say.

Is it a cliche? Well, yeah. It's not one that I mind yet. I think it's unfair to say that having a shaman-like figure in this story is the same as calling all Jews "cheap." Also, not all the tribe were Shamans or anything close. But a cliche, yeah. That’s why instead of a sweat lodge or the spiritual awakening happening during the traditional rituals, it happens in a steam room at the Family Fitness. And also why instead of Deena Littlefoot having something Touched by An Angel-y to say she’s still going on about imperialism and slot machines. It was a goof. I was actually expecting people to be more offended by her apparent spiritual awakening driving her to embrace capitalism. Which I find hilarious. Though some of the marxists on my staff were less amused.

My point is, this could just have easily been the story of a fortune teller like Whoopie in “Ghost” who teases Jaye with answers to her biggest questions and the fortune teller’s accountant grandson who is not Satsuma but something else entirely. (I hesitate to say a Gypsy, for obvious reasons, but you get the gist. Could have been anything), but you needed that mystical Yoda element in whatever form to drive the narrative. Setting the story with a Tribe gave us more options in terms of involving the other characters (specifically Mahandra and Sharon.) And it resonated with the commercialism of the Maid Of The Mist and our Niagara setting in general.

And now I’m going to do something terribly manly and not at all cowardly. I blame the other possible inaccuracies on other people. My costumer and production designer in Toronto assured me the wardrobe and sets were authentic (these women tend to know their shit, so I’m still not convinced they were wrong.) They had done an assload of research for the pilot (the Maid Of The Mist sacrifice sequence) and returned to it for this episode. Supposedly all the headdress and wardrobe were gleaned from Iroquois tradition. Of course we all know that totem poles are not Northeastern, which is why the totem pole itself says it’s not authentic and was put here for the tourists. And my production designer assured me that the wigwam (not teepee) was an acceptable alternative to a longhouse (which we wanted, but could not afford to build.) The wigwam was rented from an Indian company which comes out to the set and erects it themselves to, so was I told, assure accuracy.

I don’t know if any of this makes anyone feel any better or less disappointed, but the next time -- Gypsies!

Is it a cliche? Well, yeah. It's not one that I mind yet. I think it's unfair to say that having a shaman-like figure in this story is the same as calling all Jews "cheap."

That's not what I said.

That's not what I said.

That's true, I went back and reread what you said. But you were comparing our dead Satsuman spritual leader so some of the ugliest racist sterotypes, and I still think that's unfair.

Thank you, Tim. I just wish I could *see* it, rather than read it. It reawakened my bitterness over the cancelation, darn it.

My point is, this could just have easily been the story of a fortune teller like Whoopie in “Ghost” who teases Jaye with answers to her biggest questions and the fortune teller’s accountant grandson who is not Satsuma but something else entirely. (I hesitate to say a Gypsy, for obvious reasons, but you get the gist. Could have been anything), but you needed that mystical Yoda element in whatever form to drive the narrative. Setting the story with a Tribe gave us more options in terms of involving the other characters (specifically Mahandra and Sharon.) And it resonated with the commercialism of the Maid Of The Mist and our Niagara setting in general.

That's sort of what I was trying to get at with my lameass cheesy vs. harmful comparison. To me, there is a difference in the mystical Indian kind of trope, and the murderous savage trope.

That's true, I went back and reread what you said. But you were comparing our dead Satsuman spritual leader so some of the ugliest racist sterotypes, and I still think that's unfair.

Are there pretty racist stereotypes?

The mystical indian is so pervasive in storytelling. If there's an Indian, they're going to be having a spirit quest and talking to a coyote about the rape of mother earth.

It'd be like always having a Jewish character being a cheap accountant, or a Black character eating a watermellon and getting gold caps on their teeth.

I don't see it. I really don't. Doesn't Bill offset this? Doesn't the shopkeeper? Hell, doesn't Jaye? It's true we weren't satarizing the fact that there was a "Holy Woman." That needed to have some weight to make Jaye's spiritual journey have meaning. And if having that trope and not taking the air out of it is offensive, then we weren't sensitive enough to get that. Still, I quite honestly don't see how our portrayal of Bill's grandmother was akin to an African American character eating watermellon with bad teeth. Ewww.

To me, there is a difference in the mystical Indian kind of trope, and the murderous savage trope

As someone who's been troped, sure there's a difference. But the existence of murder doesn't make assault okay. "Hey, I coulda done worse!" has never gotten a pass from me.

Tim -- I like reading how you stripped off the flesh to get to the skeleton. And I like the skeleton and see it as important.

As I pointed out even about the snowy owl, I know precious little about the facts used in the story (except the totem, which as noted, is also in the script). If they turn out to be correct, then I stand corrected.

Just .. I wish it had been played with more. The subversion was almost inaudible in comparison.

Just .. I wish it had been played with more. The subversion was almost inaudible in comparison.

I totally agree. Which is why I say it did what I wanted to -- more or less. In terms of the "i'm chosen" aspect. I'm not saying i could have gotten it any closer to what it needed to be, and i do think themes got muddy. Probably would have been best to avoided the area totally.

As someone who's been troped, sure there's a difference. But the existence of murder doesn't make assault okay. "Hey, I coulda done worse!" has never gotten a pass from me.

But murder and assault are both bads. Is spiritualism, or mysticism bad? Isn't the problem with the mystical Indian trope mostly that it's a trope? Let me expound on that.

In the beginning, there were cowboys and injuns on film. Injuns bad. Scalp white women. Then rape them.

Then, when people starting really pushing the cause of Native Americans, they were all transformed into Yodas (sorry for the theft, Tim). It's not that it's saying a negative thing about Natives that the problem. It's that it was pigeonholing them, pseudo-objectifying Native Americans, such that it was the only thing said about them, which is ridiculous.* In this episode, we have a lawyer, shopkeeper and a distinctly UN-mystical accountant who are also Native Americans. And in fact the lawyer (which is like the modern day loan shark) is the one who ends up being mystical.

Maybe there are other objections to the trope that I don't understand. I would be glad to learn about them. I just thought the problem was a problem when people were "only" shown as such and such.

Can we never again have a drunk in a film, who happens to be named O'Malley, or a guy named Scapeccio, who has a gun in his hand, and a trunk full of dead enemy? I always thought it was the incomplete reflection of a group of people that was the problem. Are we getting into forbidden images?

edited to clarify what I was calling ridiculous:

* what is ridiculous is showing that all people X are like this. I do not think rejection or objection to the trope is ridiculous, particularly if/when its so pervasive that all you see of people X is the image provided by the trope. I also don't think the objections to the trope raised here were ridiculous. I meant painting a group of people all the same, rather than recognizing individuality is ridiculous.