Johnny Depp's Got Papers. It's Official He's Comanche.

JOHNNY DEPP'S GOT PAPERS NOW, HE'S BEEN GIVEN CREDENTIALS 

So, word has spread across the Internet like a wildfire in the southwest, but the Apache 8 aren't there to comment on this absurdity. If you haven't guessed, Johnny Depp is officially a Comanche. He now can ignore his Cherokee ancestry he so steadfastly clung to while being vetted of his "Nativeness." Or was it Creek? Well that doesn't matter any longer because the Comanche adopted him. I guess he'll be selling his estate in France and flying to Oklahoma or New Mexico (where his adoption ceremony took place):

Johnny Depp adopted into the Comanche Nation

(New Mexico Business Weekly by Megan Kamerick, Senior Reporter

Date: Monday, May 21, 2012, 5:09pm MDT) 

I'm a little dismayed that he would forgo his Cherokee-ness to become Comanche. You know, deny who you say you are to become who you want to be. But that's not unlike what his entire life has been up to this point, maybe this is an apex moment. I mean he has lived a life of lies acting, not literal lies, but pretend lies. He has pretended to be a pirate, the Demon Barber of Fleet Street, an undercover cop in high schools, a scissor-fingered gothic Frankenstein creation, a Public Enemy, a Mad Hatter, an undercover FBI agent, just to name a few, and now his resume will include an Indian and no longer only the kind played on the silver screen, or by young boys with brightly colored feathers in some ridiculous looking headdress. Nope, he has finally realized his dream of becoming Indigenous. I'm not sure but I believe his condition exists somewhere within the pages of the DSM-IV.

In the above article, LaDonna Harris mentions,

It seemed like a natural fit to officially welcome him into our Comanche family. I reached out, and Johnny was very receptive to the idea. He seemed proud to receive the invitation, and we were honored that he so enthusiastically agreed. 

I'm a little lost for words that by PLAYING INDIAN (a phenomenon coined by Phillip DeLoria), specifically Tonto, more specifically a Comanche, makes it "a natural fit" to adopt Depp into the Comanche Nation. Thousands of little kids play "Cowboys and Indians" all the time, some kids are Lakota, some are Pawnee, some are Apache. It makes sense that Depp would be "receptive to the idea . . ." while enthusiastically agreeing to do so, it's nearly every kid's fantasy to be NDN--and it's been no different for Depp, claiming different tribal ties in various interviews as well as directing a film in which for the first time he PLAYED INDIAN, The Brave (1997).  Unfortunately, what Depp is doing isn't catapulting Indigenous culture into the 21st century, nor is his pretending combatting negative stereotypes surrounding NDNs.* On the contrary, his actions are perpetuating stereotypes that continue to diminish who We are by the cinematic mode.

Depp's portrayal, the actual act of taking a role away from a Native actor (playing red face), not his acting, is insidious. He is perpetuating myths about Native people in a medium that is so disseminated and more often than not in America--Americans educate themselves with popular culture--Americans believe, or at least get their information from what they see on the screen, the portrayals by actors (you know pretending to be NDN) as historically accurate and acceptable. These manifestations are so damaging that they hinder Us from moving forward in the 21st century because We are being relegated to anachronistic versions of Ourselves making Our present all the more difficult to negotiate.

Now, whatever the Comanche Nation wants to do is their business, but I'm not sure how Johnny Depp's "acting" role as Tonto in The Lone Ranger has anything to do with adopting a movie star into a tribe. Maybe I'm missing something? Comanche Nation Tribal Chairman, Johnny Wauqua commented about Depp in a news release that,

He's a very thoughtful human being, and throughout his life and career, he has exhibited traits that are aligned with the values and worldview that indigenous people share. 

Really? I'm a bit perplexed in regards to Depp's "exhibited traits" aligning him with Indigenous people. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure he gives money to worthy causes, and he's probably a very nice guy. But just why didn't his directorial debut film, The Brave (1997) ever hit a screen in North America? Was it really because of the negative reception it received at the Canne Film Festival? Was he hurt because his moment of make-believe wasn't believable (that no one could believe he was Native, onscreen or off)? The Brave (1997) didn't receive rave reviews, and therefore by association Johnny Depp wasn't validated as BEING INDIAN, which negated his fantasy of BECOMING INDIAN. I think these particular acts speak volumes when it comes to "exhibited traits."

In my opinion, this is a simple case of someone being starstruck, "it seemed a natural fit to officially welcome him into our Comanche family." Is that what "IT" is? Never is "it" elaborated upon, unless you assume Depp's role as a fictional Comanche is "IT."
________________________________________________

* To add to my argument I reference my earlier post, Johnny Depp to Play Tonto, Once Again Depp Has Some Degree of NDN Blood? Perfect Timing!
and elaborate that Depp mentions in an interview (Linthicum, Albuquerque Journal, 3/8/2012) how he'll handle the years of stereotyped portrayals of Natives in film. Apparently, through his performance he imagines he will somehow combat these stereotypes by not acting like the stereotypes, but what he fails to comprehend is no matter how good his intentions, the mere fact of him portraying an Indigenous persona, real or fictional, is what will contribute to the damage toll of Indigenous representation in film. One of the most problematic issues of Native Representation in film was and continues to be non-Natives playing the role of Natives. This has got to stop. It's 2012 and there are enough Native actors to play these parts, but it's Hollywood's lack of vision and bottom line that perpetuates the utilization of non-Native movie stars in the roles of Native characters.

Johnny Depp to Play Tonto, Once Again Depp Has Some Degree of NDN Blood? Perfect Timing!

I'm pissed off, no, better yet I'm f**king outraged at what I am seeing regarding Johnny Depp's desire to speak for Native people through a fictional role on the silver screen via his vision of Tonto. Depp has claimed Native blood on various occasions via the Cherokee Nation, the Creek Nation and the Navajo Nation, most recently standing more concretely with his alleged ties to the Cherokee Nation--in NDN Country saying so, doesn't make it so.

But, if this is what Johnny Depp envisions Tonto to be:



Then I absolutely have to argue that he stole his Native "identity" from the Kirby Sattler painting, I Am Crow. Proof positive:



This whole concept from Depp is ridiculous. His vision to turn ". . . the way Indians were treated throughout history ‍of cinema, and turn it on its head” through the realization of the character Tonto is myopic at best (Linthicum, Albuquerque Journal, 3/8/2012). His comprehension of what has happened to Indigenous people is from the colonizer's perspective. He has no inside first-hand knowledge aside from his sense of how Tonto was wronged in the television series, The Lone Ranger. When the idea of this film came to him, Depp thought, ". . . about Tonto and what could be done in my own small way (to) try to — ‘eliminate’ isn’t possible —but reinvent the relationship, to attempt to take some ‍of the ugliness thrown on the Native Americans" (Linthicum, Albuquerque Journal, 3/8/2012). Has he ever played a Native American role? Yes, in his 1997 film, The Brave. This film was never released in the U.S. (North America) and I wonder why? Because the film is based on the book of the same name by Fletch author, Gregory McDonald--which is steeped in Native American stereotypes, that's why.

There is no escaping the fact that there is a plethora of Native American actors who could play this part infusing it with a realistic portrayal of Indigeneity, but Hollywood in its infinite wisdom, better yet, Johnny Depp, Gore Verbinski, Jerry Bruckheimer and Disney in their combined infinite wisdom believe that Depp's limited claim of Cherokee blood--remember his multiple claims to the Navajo and Creek Nations too--is enough to represent a, none-the-less fictional, Native character. After all, we do suspended disbelief while watching films, so how big of a stretch will it be for us to do so for this production? But that's not the issue. The issue is the continued persistance by Hollywood to negate the Native American in any role that involves Indigeneity. People love Johnny Depp, I get it, but his claims of Indigeneity have gone from the eastern seaboard to the southwest: Cherokee, then Creek and finally Navajo. Really? Really? How many times have we seen this? Too many.

I understand that this film is historical fiction, but that doesn't mean Our image has to be molested and reinvented on the silver screen. That's what Depp claims he wants to "turn on its head." But by concocting some over the top exaggerated caricature of what he thinks Native identity was or is, is doing more harm than good. I cannot say for sure that's what he's doing, but given his previous caricatures of the roles he's played, it's expected.

The counter argument to this is a sophomoric and often moronic one, that implies, "well then only White people should play White people, only Black people should play Black people," and dumbing down the argument to an absurd level, something like, "only police officers should portray police officers." Really? Really? How disconnected can one become? That argument is so off topic that it becomes sadly absurd. Now the argument becomes one contrasting ethnicity/identity with profession. This particular mindset is responsible for the Washington Redskins. Denigrate all you want, your argument is baseless, a foundation rooted in some no doubt sincere but misplaced perspective that one group of people is honoring another, yet without ever asking the other group if they feel honored.

Hollywood and Native American representation is a whole other monster. It's not about depicting portrayals or representations that honor Native Americans and their cultures. In all reality it indirectly concerns Native Americans. It's about entertainment--absent reality, absent truth--and completely commodified. No one actually cares about portraying Native Americans accurately, other than Native Americans and those individuals interested in accurate representations in film, media and elsewhere. The issue is polarizing because one set of people are concerned with the ignorance that is American history, where the Native American has vanished because of American popular culture's perpetuation of a myth they created, all the while wondering why We, Native Americans or Indigenous people, are up in arms over this projected fallacy; and then you have the other set of people, that believe it's only cinema or fiction and that accurate representations really needn't be considered. Unfortunately, that's where they're wrong. It is because of cinema and media and the rest of American popular culture that We as Indigenous people are often considered a vanquished people, represented in stereotypic fashion, because Our voices aren't loud enough to be heard over the din that is American ignorance, even better still, the machinery that is Hollywood and the mechanisms of cultural pedagogy.

John Cusack

Okay, as a huge fan of John Cusack I have been compelled to attempt to make contact, not in person, but virtually via Twitter. I follow his tweets and he's in Syracuse shooting the film, Adult World. Now I'm not holding my breath that he'll ever respond to this lunatic tweeting at him asking if he'd like to get a glass of 21 year old Aberfeldy scotch or attend a tradish sweat on Onondaga, the two are diametrically opposed. But, the little kid in me holds out hope that some contact may be made somehow. If not, no big deal, it never hurts to try, nothing ventured, nothing gained.

"The Lone Ranger" with Johnny Depp.

For now, the production of "The Lone Ranger" has been postponed, ah!

Source Code

As an individual that utilizes Google's "Analytics" in my website, I have found that it functions as a decent tool for me to track where and who and how my website is being viewed. Unfortunately, as a designer I have run into a specific issue with someone else "designing" another person's website by taking my source code and not deleting my unique Google Urchin Tracker ID from their site, which then provides me with reports from that site. Now, I've created individual filters to omit that information and I've tracked the URL owner and contacted him about this issue, nothing has happened. So, to all you self-proclaimed web-designers, when you use other people's Source Code make sure you know HTML, CSS, Flash, XHTML, JAVA or whatever language you are using to construct with so you don't take information that isn't applicable to your site.

The Aging Dinosaur: Virtual Reality vs. Reality Reality

It seems unfathomable to me that our world has developed so far beyond interpersonal relationships and into the realm of AI that contact with other people is becoming more and more virtual. This has been going on for quite some time, beginning with chat rooms, online gaming, and now the ever annoying facebook or social networking platform. When I say that, I say that with some humor, I am one of the millions of individuals on fb. Although lately, I am beginning to become perturbed by that social network, not that I'm looking for another one. I have friends, close friends, and family all over the country and my only connection with them is through fb? That's so fucked up. I even have family locally and my only connection with them is via fb, how disturbing is that? Granted, I don't necessarily want to see all these people everyday, or talk to them everyday, but the personal disconnect that is fb is quite unsettling. At first, the novelty was interesting. I could find out what my friends/family were doing, but now it's an inundation of status updates, attention seeking "look at me" posts, which not only seems to be a form of virtual pollution but has got to be the most arrogant and conceited cry for attention in a forum that is responsible for severing human contact. It does have its advantages. When you have friends and family all over you can keep in touch, although you could actually talk and see those friends and family through Skype if you are so inclined in utilizing technology, you could also use a phone, making the experience less barren. It does function well as a platform to disseminate information, that is undeniable. Events that are happening are distributed via facebook invitations, but with the ease in doing so, the amount of events that are now taking place has risen exponentially, as have the "specialty" pages on fb.

I am an individual that would rather engage others in person, but distance makes that difficult, the phone is preference one for me, preference two is email, fb is further down the ladder in my book. The ability to network is my main reason for utilizing facebook. Although my main preference is the phone, there are some individuals that are just not good at returning calls if you cannot connect initially. Others are just not good phone people, they call you and they don't maintain the conversation or barely initiate a conversation and yet they've called you. I've called people and it seems like I've caught them at a bad time, but they don't inform you of that, usually they treat you like you've imposed yourself on them, it's a phone for god's sake. I'm not sure if it's because virtual reality has forced an awkward wedge in between people, you know, virtual distance, yet it has also created virtual closeness. People don't want to be bothered and they can use technology to their advantage, e.g. caller ID, IM blocks/online status notifications. I wonder if all this technology and the advances in virtual reality hasn't placed humankind behind the proverbial eight ball. We aren't necessarily as social as other animals on our planet, but interaction occurs on a daily basis for those of us that leave our homes everyday. If you want a job, you're typically asked whether or not you're a "team player" or if you "work well with others." Well most people have jobs, and in the countries that unfortunately exist as third world countries, the people still interact with one another and actually exist in a more developed social structure than those of us with computers, cell phones, flat screen televisions and any other smart technology you want to throw in there.

As someone that loves the outdoors and nature, I have a difficult time navigating between virtual reality and reality reality. Ironic enough, I work within virtual reality.

Johnny Depp as Tonto, Postscript

After posting the Johnny Depp as Tonto blog, I was thinking how coincidental it was that Depp decided to adapt a novel about an Indigenous person after having starred two years earlier as William Blake, beside Indigenous actor, comedian, musician; Gary Farmer (Exaybachay, a.k.a Nobody) in Jim Jarmusch's, Dead Man? It seems to have been a logical chain of events for Depp. First, you play a role next to an Indigenous actor, who is playing a character that is Indigenous. Secondly, you find a novel centered on an Indigenous character and all the strife of Indigenous culture, adapt it for the screen and then star in said adaptation. I never mentioned that the author of the novel, The Brave, is also the author of the Fletch and Flynn series of novels. Therefore, The Brave is quite a departure from the cultural content he was used to depicting or even knowing about.