Response to Edgerton's and Jackson's 'Redesigning Pocahontas'

Despite the lack of argument within this article, Edgerton and Jackson present insightful information on the topic of Pocahontas. I find it most interesting that Disney went through the trouble of hiring Native American consultants and actors, and yet they still didn’t make the movie historically accurate. I understand that the purpose of all Disney movies is to sell. I also understand that the target audience of these movies are very young and can’t understand complicated, controversial topics. However, I find that the solution to that for Disney should be for them to avoid trying to create historically based movies at all. The article has a quote that says “moviemakers shouldn’t be handcuffed when using real stories as jumping-off places.” I think this statement is obnoxious and literally just an excuse to let Disney off the hook.

Moviemakers shouldn’t attempt to recreate a story if they can’t do so accurately and effectively. The article says that the filmmakers had no intent to offend anyone; however, they should’ve known that ultimately that’s what would happen. I mean, for one, the animators admitted that they based Pocahontas’ looks on a white woman even though they had Native American women that they could’ve drawn from. This should’ve been the first cue that they were treading dangerous territory. Plus, they rewrote the twisted love story that takes place within Pocahontas and generally oversimplified everything else. Yes, they told the story of colonialism, but they pretended that it ended after Governor Radcliffe was vanquished. Also, they kindly left our Pocahontas’ death and the entire genocide of Native Americans—plus Pocahontas’ name change, conversion to Christianity, and the entire supremacy of Europeans. If we’re being fair, you can’t really throw all of that into a Disney movie; no one wants to scare the kids. But, this is precisely why Disney had no business recreating that story. They knew that Pocahontas died in the end and also that colonialism, racism, and environmentalism were touchy topics that they couldn’t adequately display within the realms of children animation. Therefore, they should’ve had SOMEONE with the “balls” to say that it just wasn’t a good idea.

The confusing thing about this article is that it shows conflicting views by Native Americans. Russel Means said he was surprised that Disney was willing to tell the truth—but if Disney had sworn under oath, they would’ve been arrested for perjury. They told the truth, but not the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Russell Means also claimed that the film was the “single finest work ever done on American Indians by Hollywood,” but, as Edgerton and Jackson mention, everything before Pocahontas followed the three stereotypes of American Indians. So, Means is basically just saying there was finally a movie that wasn’t offensive—there still wasn’t one that accurately or positively portrayed American Indians and their culture/lifestyle. Irene Bedard says it much better when she says it’s “a step in the right direction” because it’s not great but it’s better. I think that people counting Pocahontas as good enough or great portrayal of American Indians should be ashamed of themselves. It’s literally equated to saying it was good enough that Abraham Lincoln “freed the slaves,” when we all know that his freeing of the slaves was good in theory, but didn’t actually help much.

Overall, I can’t agree or disagree much with Edgerton and Jackson because they don’t put forth an argument, but I do think that Pocahontas supporters are slightly delusional.