Engl. 339 - White Fawn's Devotion vs. Ramona vs. Redskin

Okay, today I am comparing the three films we saw about native Americans on Tuesday and Thursday:

• White Fawn's Devotion (heeeey! One of those words is my name!) (1910), 11 min. long, dir. by James Young Deer.
• Ramona (1910), 17 min long, dir. by the illustrious D.W. Griffith
• Redskin (1929), 90 min long, dir. by Victor Schertzinger

Now, all three of these films portray the native American as more than just target practice for the heroic cowboy, but their treatment of them differs wildly through the three films. Naturally, I am aware that it is hardly fair to compare a pair of 1910 films with one made in 1929, bit it is worth paying attention to the amount of maturity gained in those twenty years, not just in terms of the directing but in the plot, the acting, and the technological breakthroughs.

All three of the films are silent, but in those twenty years we see a leap and a bound in the quality of the acting. Where in White Fawn, the title character had to gesticulate and flap her jaw silently for what seemed like five minutes in order to convey this: I will die before I let him leave me. Where where Ramona's way of showing uncertainty was to hold her arms straight out and zoom around her little desert garden like she's playing airplane, Redskin is able to communicate exactly what a character feels for another in a single look. This is less because of revolutionary acting changes and more because of the growing voyeurism of the crowd. Unnaccustomed to scrutinizing a stranger's personal life, the early audience had to be led by the hand in understanding the nuances of expression. Before long, gone were the wild, sweeping guestures, the clasped hands pressed to bosoms, and in came subtlety of face and movement, allowed by viewers who had learned to eavesdrop properly on the characters.

The films also show a marked difference in portrayals of Indians. In White Fawn, the protagonist is lovely and devoted, but the rest of her tribe fit squarely into the concept of 'Indians as Villains,' many of them wearing the stereotypical many-feathered war bonnet while they are shot down by the white hero. In Ramona, the hero is slightly more fleshed out, but still somewhat bland. His main point is that he is an Indian, and that and his love for Ramona and anger at being driven out is the sum of his character. While both of these films are sympathetic to the cause of the Native American, they do little to make the viewer desire any sort of change. However, Redskin changes this by making the characters well-fleshed out and multi-faceted. Their race is no longer the only thing that defines them; they have wants and desires aside from it, and indeed it is a point of contention, as they are not even certain what race they are, a point which is interesting when you consider that both Wing Foot and Corn Blossom were played by white actors.

Ultimately, the juxtaposition of the two 1910 films agains the 1929 one is a greater sense of maturity, as during those years audiences began to want deeper meaning and better characters, and expect more from the cinema. It is a great illustration of the evolution of early film.