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.

Is spiritualism, or mysticism bad?

It's the stereotyping that's the issue. What %age of mystical white people do you see? Compared to Indian? Not saying there can never be another one, but I do think the urge to use any given cliché should be carefully examined, and the spotlight is on the user.

Probably would have been best to avoided the area totally.

Yeah. I can see generally and simply what'd need to be done to please me, but then you get into the "playing with sacred" stuff that'll piss a bunch of other people off.

It's the stereotyping that's the issue. What %age of mystical white people do you see? Compared to Indian? Not saying there can never be another one, but I do think the urge to use any given cliché should be carefully examined, and the spotlight is on the user.

Okay, that's what I thought. In the case of this episode of Wonderfalls, you can count two mystical Indians to one mystical white woman. And one mystical Indian was dead before the other became mystical. It's a show where an Anglo is the focus of this big, mystical plot.

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.

Allyson asked me what I was defending, the story or my vision of it. Which is a great question. Kind of both. When I said that I’m not dismissive of opinions here, I really meant that. If people like Kat and Allyson and Ita bristled, then there was something which merited bristling. I believe that. I thought it would be interesting and instructive to let you in a little on the process of doing something like this. How production realities, narrative need and concerns about sensitivities all wrestle with each other.