| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision |
| 329:question:329--week_2_questions_comments-2024 [2024/09/05 13:06] – 199.111.64.79 | 329:question:329--week_2_questions_comments-2024 [2024/09/05 19:48] (current) – [The "So What" Question] 76.78.172.13 |
|---|
| Disney's 1990 retelling of Pocahontas was chalked full of historical inaccuracies. The biggest of which were in Pocahontas's appearance, behaviors, and relationship with John Smith. John Smith came to her town when she was only 10 -11 years old, while he was 27. Despite Disney’s narrative, the two were never romantically involved. **In fact, John Smith was feared by many Indigenous children in the area as he was known to enter villages and demand food and supplies at gunpoint. The real-life Pocahontas was completely different in comparison to her movie counterpart. She was not the strong, independent negotiator who brokered peace between her people and the colonists as shown in the movies. Instead, she was a loyal adviser and was regarded as her father's favorite, a position she worked hard to cultivate.** During Smith's time in Jamestown, the two shared little contact and remained devoted to their established communities. --Sam Barlow | Disney's 1990 retelling of Pocahontas was chalked full of historical inaccuracies. The biggest of which were in Pocahontas's appearance, behaviors, and relationship with John Smith. John Smith came to her town when she was only 10 -11 years old, while he was 27. Despite Disney’s narrative, the two were never romantically involved. **In fact, John Smith was feared by many Indigenous children in the area as he was known to enter villages and demand food and supplies at gunpoint. The real-life Pocahontas was completely different in comparison to her movie counterpart. She was not the strong, independent negotiator who brokered peace between her people and the colonists as shown in the movies. Instead, she was a loyal adviser and was regarded as her father's favorite, a position she worked hard to cultivate.** During Smith's time in Jamestown, the two shared little contact and remained devoted to their established communities. --Sam Barlow |
| |
| This movie, in my opinion, definitely picked and chose what it wanted to be accurate about. **The people under the Powhatan Confederacy did speak Algonquian, and the cloak that Powhatan was wearing did exist in real life.** However, there is likely no way **Pocahontas would've known English as immediately as she did.** [JM-https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=76O27781RlE&t=131s] In that regard, Disney took many creative liberties to tell the narrative they wanted to get across. I thought it was particularly interesting that they were accurate in ways that are deeply important to a culture's identity - like their language - but chose to disregard the main character's age and status in the tribe. Pocahontas was a favorite of her father, that part is known to be true, but the movie negates all of the work she had to do to get to that status, and all of the other people she was fighting her father's attention for. Additionally, I thought it was striking that Kokoum was ignored as a significant person in Pocahontas's life. He was her first and intended husband, and that would've been a much more significant deal than how Disney framed it. - Caty | This movie, in my opinion, definitely picked and chose what it wanted to be accurate about. **The people under the Powhatan Confederacy did speak Algonquian, and the cloak that Powhatan was wearing did exist in real life.** However, there is likely no way **Pocahontas would've known English as immediately as she did.** [JM-https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=76O27781RlE&t=131s] In that regard, Disney took many creative liberties to tell the narrative they wanted to get across. **I thought it was particularly interesting that they were accurate in ways that are deeply important to a culture's identity - like their language - but chose to disregard the main character's age and status in the tribe.** Pocahontas was a favorite of her father, that part is known to be true, but the movie negates all of the work she had to do to get to that status, and all of the other people she was fighting her father's attention for. Additionally, I thought it was striking that Kokoum was ignored as a significant person in Pocahontas's life. He was her first and intended husband, and that would've been a much more significant deal than how Disney framed it. - Caty |
| |
| The biggest error is that Pocahontas was around 10 years old when she first encountered John Smith, who was in his late twenties. Their relationship was not romantic at all. Another error is that the relationship with the natives and British was much more complex. From a history standpoint, the natives were already doing diplomacy before John smith was kidnapped. - jedidia Kazadi | The biggest error is that Pocahontas was around 10 years old when she first encountered John Smith, who was in his late twenties. Their relationship was not romantic at all. **Another error is that the relationship with the natives and British was much more complex**. From a history standpoint, the natives were already doing diplomacy before John smith was kidnapped. - jedidia Kazadi |
| |
| One historical inaccuracy in the movie //Pocahontas// is that Pocahontas had been asked for her hand in marriage before she met John Smith. While it is possible that this could be true there is no historical evidence to support this, Disney most likely added this to the movie to cause drama and since they aged her up to be about 18 or 19 it would be appropriate timing in Pocahontas’s life. Another historical inaccuracy is that Chief Powhatan himself was going to beat John Smith before Pocahontas saved him. Whether you believe John Smith’s account of this story or not, in his account Powhatan orders him to be killed rather than doing it himself. —Maddy W | One historical inaccuracy in the movie //Pocahontas// is that Pocahontas had been asked for her hand in marriage before she met John Smith. While it is possible that this could be true there is no historical evidence to support this, Disney most likely added this to the movie to cause drama and since they aged her up to be about 18 or 19 it would be appropriate timing in Pocahontas’s life. **Another historical inaccuracy is that Chief Powhatan himself was going to beat John Smith before Pocahontas saved him. Whether you believe John Smith’s account of this story or not, in his account Powhatan orders him to be killed rather than doing it himself.** —Maddy W |
| |
| A pretty prominent historical inaccuracy in Disney's Pocahontas is the ages of, and relationship between, Pocahontas and John Smith. In the movie, Pocahontas appears to be around 18 years old with John Smith not being much older and the two meet pretty early on, with a romantic relationship developing quickly between the two. In actuality, Pocahontas was about 11-12 years old and John Smith around early 30's. There is no evidence that suggests a romantic relationship between them. Pocahontas' "saving" of John Smith is also something that is dramatized and played up for audiences since there is little proof that this happened other than John Smith's future recounting of this event. This scene in the movie also suggests Pocahontas had more sway/power in her tribe than she realistically would have, even with being a favored child of her father.-Vumiliya Veriak | A pretty prominent historical inaccuracy in Disney's Pocahontas is the ages of, and relationship between, Pocahontas and John Smith. In the movie, Pocahontas appears to be around 18 years old with John Smith not being much older and the two meet pretty early on, with a romantic relationship developing quickly between the two. In actuality, Pocahontas was about 11-12 years old and John Smith around early 30's. There is no evidence that suggests a romantic relationship between them. Pocahontas' "saving" of John Smith is also something that is dramatized and played up for audiences since there is little proof that this happened other than John Smith's future recounting of this event. This **scene in the movie also suggests Pocahontas had more sway/power in her tribe than she realistically would have, even with being a favored child of her father**.-Vumiliya Veriak |
| |
| I would say the biggest historical errors would be romanticizing between John Smith and Pocahontas since she was 11 and he was triple her age. Another big error was the people that came to Jamestown other than the Governor Ratcliff in the way that they were made to be common people who weren't business men that thought the journey would be an easy money grab. Then with Pocahontas being the princess of the chief was entirely wrong since she was one of around 40 kids.-Ryan K. | I would say the biggest historical errors would be romanticizing between John Smith and Pocahontas since she was 11 and he was triple her age. Another big error was the people that came to Jamestown other than the Governor Ratcliff in the way that they were made to be common people who weren't business men that thought the journey would be an easy money grab. Then with Pocahontas being the princess of the chief was entirely wrong since she was one of around 40 kids.-Ryan K. |
| | |
| | What are the problems with Pocahontas? Well, many a thing actually. The main issue that stood out to me was the fact that Pocahontas and John Smith had such a romantic relationship. It was honestly gross to see the movie knowing the actual age difference after talking about it in class. Another historically inaccurate point was John Smith being the big ole savior, this is obviously drawn from his own unreliable narrative. Yet another aspect that really stood out to me was that when Powhatan arrives back in the beginning of the movie and he goes “Where is my daughter”...like dawg had many children, if it were historically accurate 20 of his daughters would run forward, but in the movie he was obviously just speaking about Pocahontas. -Anj |
| | |
| |
| ====== How does the film’s overall interpretation(s) deviate from scholarly historical sources? ====== | ====== How does the film’s overall interpretation(s) deviate from scholarly historical sources? ====== |
| ====== How does this movie work as a primary source about the time in which it was made? ====== | ====== How does this movie work as a primary source about the time in which it was made? ====== |
| |
| I think that this movie says a lot about the time that it was made by Disney in the 1990s, specifically about Disney’s strategy of making movies at the time. Pocahontas is considered one of the movies of the Disney Renaissance, a period in the late 20th century where Disney produced several successful animated films. A lot of these animated films are period pieces on varying times in history like Hercules, Mulan, Aladdin, Hunchback of Notre Dame, and Beauty and the Beast. Pocahontas is one of many of these renaissance films that leans into a historical fiction angle, and Disney during this time made movies like that to much success. - Ewan | **I think that this movie says a lot about the time that it was made by Disney in the 1990s, specifically about Disney’s strategy of making movies at the time. Pocahontas is considered one of the movies of the Disney Renaissance, a period in the late 20th century where Disney produced several successful animated films. A lot of these animated films are period pieces on varying times in history like Hercules, Mulan, Aladdin, Hunchback of Notre Dame, and Beauty and the Beast. Pocahontas is one of many of these renaissance films that leans into a historical fiction angle, and Disney during this time made movies like that to much success**. - Ewan |
| |
| I don’t know much about the state of Native American rights and activism at the time this film was made but I do know that the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) was passed in 1990. This shows that there progress being made at the time in the recognition of the acts of violence and dehumanization that Native American populations have faced throughout American history, so it is possible this increased attention on issues of Native American interest motivated Disney to produce a film that focuses on this topic. I would be interested to know if there were more similar events occurring around this time as well. - Rickie | **I don’t know much about the state of Native American rights and activism at the time this film was made but I do know that the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) was passed in 1990. This shows that there progress being made at the time in the recognition of the acts of violence and dehumanization that Native American populations have faced throughout American history, so it is possible this increased attention on issues of Native American interest motivated Disney to produce a film that focuses on this topic.** I would be interested to know if there were more similar events occurring around this time as well. - Rickie |
| |
| Disney's Pocahontas was a positive step toward Native American representation in film. Pocahontas was depicted as smart, kind, beautiful, and strong, which contrasts with the super-offensive portrayals that appear in most other forms of media. But, I think it is important to recognize that Disney’s Pocahontas is historically inaccurate and that their highly fictionalized version of her story is a way for people to make themselves feel better about the horrible things they have done and continue to do to Native Americans, including Pocahontas herself. Pocahontas's story was romanticized to fit the Disney brand and to make her seem more appealing to children in order to make more money in ticket sales as well as future merchandise. --Sam Barlow | **Disney's Pocahontas was a positive step toward Native American representation in film. Pocahontas was depicted as smart, kind, beautiful, and strong, which contrasts with the super-offensive portrayals that appear in most other forms of media. But, I think it is important to recognize that Disney’s Pocahontas is historically inaccurate and that their highly fictionalized version of her story is a way for people to make themselves feel better about the horrible things they have done and continue to do to Native Americans, including Pocahontas herself. Pocahontas's story was romanticized to fit the Disney brand and to make her seem more appealing to children in order to make more money in ticket sales as well as future merchandise.** --Sam Barlow |
| |
| As a primary source of the time it was made, Disney's Pocahontas sheds a lot of light on the sentiments not just Disney held at the time, but what the common understanding of the time surrounding Pocahontas and John Smith was in the 1990s. It should be pointed out that despite the lack of accuracy in the movie, most of the voice actors for the Native Americans were in fact Native American themselves, or of Native American descent. Additionally, the one Scottish settler was voiced by a Scottish man. So in that regard, Disney did not skip steps. This shows that in the 1990s, there were moves towards better representation not just on the screen, but behind it as well. However, I feel that this movie as a primary source shows that the American people were not necessarily interested in what the reality of the time period was. This is a romanticization of the beginnings of a brutal and long history of racism and colonization in early American history, and Disney's handling of it at the time of this movie's creation can lend to their belief of how historical events and people should be interpreted. - Caty | As a primary source of the time it was made, Disney's Pocahontas sheds a lot of light on the sentiments not just Disney held at the time, but **what the common understanding of the time surrounding Pocahontas and John Smith was in the 1990s**. It should be pointed out that despite the lack of accuracy in the movie, **most of the voice actors for the Native Americans were in fact Native American themselves, or of Native American descent. Additionally, the one Scottish settler was voiced by a Scottish man. So in that regard, Disney did not skip steps. This shows that in the 1990s, there were moves towards better representation not just on the screen, but behind it as well**. However, I feel that this movie as a primary source shows that the **American people were not necessarily interested in what the reality of the time period was. This is a romanticization of the beginnings of a brutal and long history of racism and colonization in early American history, and Disney's handling of it at the time of this movie's creation can lend to their belief of how historical events and people should be interpreted**. - Caty |
| |
| A lot of what I think is going on in this re-telling of the story is indicative of the mid-90s. There was a feminist push at the time for strong female leads in film and tv to "choose their own path" and to buck the norm, which describes the character of Pocahontas. A lot of female characters during this time had sexual freedom and didn't feel the need to be married in order to be content. The fact that Pocahontas' biggest dilemma for the first half of the film is whether or not to marry or to have her own adventures feels outdated and sexist now because that is not often a storyline for men. Why does she have to choose one or the other? Inevitably, she ends up with a guy anyway, to the point where they really stretched history just to give her a man. This is still sexist, however, I do think that in the 90s, women's independence was being celebrated and this film seems to have had that goal in mind. I was 3 when this film came out, and I was obsessed with the character of Pocahontas and looked up to her until age 5 or 6. She resonated with me because of how strong and brave she was depicted. In my experience of being the right demographic that Disney was aiming for in this time period, the film accomplished what it was meant to. I think its absolutely a primary source for what feminism looked like to a young girl growing up in 1995. - Jennifer | A lot of what I think is going on in this re-telling of the story is **indicative of the mid-90s. There was a feminist push at the time for strong female leads in film and tv to "choose their own path" and to buck the norm, which describes the character of Pocahontas. A lot of female characters during this time had sexual freedom and didn't feel the need to be married in order to be content. The fact that Pocahontas' biggest dilemma for the first half of the film is whether or not to marry or to have her own adventures feels outdated and sexist now because that is not often a storyline for men. Why does she have to choose one or the other? Inevitably, she ends up with a guy anyway, to the point where they really stretched history just to give her a man. This is still sexist, however, I do think that in the 90s, women's independence was being celebrated and this film seems to have had that goal in mind**. **I was 3 when this film came out, and I was obsessed with the character of Pocahontas and looked up to her until age 5 or 6. She resonated with me because of how strong and brave she was depicted. In my experience of being the right demographic that Disney was aiming for in this time period, the film accomplished what it was meant to. I think its absolutely a primary source for what feminism looked like to a young girl growing up in 1995.** - Jennifer |
| |
| ====== The "So What" Question ====== | ====== The "So What" Question ====== |
| I think this question is asking about the significance of the movie. Pocahontas made a major impact on Americans, as most of us don’t have a deep understanding of the true history of Native Americans. Since many only got their information from movies like these, it made them form a general stereotype of initial meetings when colonizers came to North America. Disney portrayed their meetings as a lot friendlier than they probably were. They did still show how war quickly broke out, so there is still definitely a lot of truth to this film. -Matt | I think this question is asking about the significance of the movie. Pocahontas made a major impact on Americans, as most of us don’t have a deep understanding of the true history of Native Americans. Since many only got their information from movies like these, it made them form a general stereotype of initial meetings when colonizers came to North America. Disney portrayed their meetings as a lot friendlier than they probably were. They did still show how war quickly broke out, so there is still definitely a lot of truth to this film. -Matt |
| |
| Why does it matter that Disney’s Pocahontas was so blatantly flagrant with regards to its treatment of historical accuracy? The film grossed close to $350 million dollars worldwide, was viewed by countless millions of people, and has become something of a cultural staple as part of the lineup of Disney’s Renaissance period. For many children growing up in the 1990s, 2000s, 2010s, and today, this version of the history of our nation’s earliest permanent English settlement is the one that they will know and spread. The founding of Jamestown was not a romantic getaway undertaken by a group of heroic Englishmen, and the relationship between the Colonists and the Powhatan Indians - and all Indigenous groups in the region - was not soothed over with songs and a single act of heroism undertaken by Pocahontas. This movie isn’t just a whitewash of some of our country’s earliest history; that alone would not deserve this amount of notoriety. The issue is that it was and continues to be a popular whitewash of that history. This says nothing of the film’s long-lasting and negative impact on the greater understanding of American Indians, perpetuating harmful narratives such as the “Indian princess” and “inherent connection to nature” myths that continue to persist to this day. - John M. | **//Why does it matter that Disney’s Pocahontas was so blatantly flagrant with regards to its treatment of historical accuracy? The film grossed close to $350 million dollars worldwide, was viewed by countless millions of people, and has become something of a cultural staple as part of the lineup of Disney’s Renaissance period. For many children growing up in the 1990s, 2000s, 2010s, and today, this version of the history of our nation’s earliest permanent English settlement is the one that they will know and spread.// The founding of Jamestown was not a romantic getaway undertaken by a group of heroic Englishmen, and the relationship between the Colonists and the Powhatan Indians - and all Indigenous groups in the region - was not soothed over with songs and a single act of heroism undertaken by Pocahontas. This movie isn’t just a whitewash of some of our country’s earliest history; that alone would not deserve this amount of notoriety. The issue is that it was and continues to be a popular whitewash of that history. This says nothing of the film’s long-lasting and negative impact on the greater understanding of American Indians, perpetuating harmful narratives such as the “Indian princess” and “inherent connection to nature” myths that continue to persist to this day. - John M.** |
| | |
| | **While this movie is a mostly inaccurate retelling of Pocahontas, Jamestown, and John Smith, it can be a good way to introduce the topic to children and families who might be unfamiliar with the story of how Jamestown was settled. For me, when I watch something that supposedly takes root in history, I research the real people of that story to see what was true about a particular depiction and what was false. This movie might be a gateway for many to delve into the true story of Pocahontas**. However, I also know that not everyone likes history or to go down a research rabbit hole. In that instance, **Disney should have a disclaimer** that while it uses factual names and settings, that the story they curated is in no way the true retelling of events. - Emma Galvin |
| |
| While this movie is a mostly inaccurate retelling of Pocahontas, Jamestown, and John Smith, it can be a good way to introduce the topic to children and families who might be unfamiliar with the story of how Jamestown was settled. For me, when I watch something that supposedly takes root in history, I research the real people of that story to see what was true about a particular depiction and what was false. This movie might be a gateway for many to delve into the true story of Pocahontas. However, I also know that not everyone likes history or to go down a research rabbit hole. In that instance, Disney should have a disclaimer that while it uses factual names and settings, that the story they curated is in no way the true retelling of events. - Emma Galvin | **Despite the problematic nature of the film, Pocahontas was a massive success for Disney that resulted in them making a sequel (which isn’t quite as good.) Despite that, the Disney film is almost timeless for children and has captured the imaginations of children for almost 30 years.** Why is this important? Well, this film could conceivably be responsible for helping younger children get interested in history. Beyond that, this film can also be used as a case study of the consequences of rewriting history to make into a film. For one, the film depicts the settling of Jamestown as a time of tension between whites and Natives that was ultimately settled after a big disagreement. Yet, as we know the conflict between the whites and Natives was gruesome, brutal, and exploded many times in the early years of the settlement. Personally, I feel as though Disney should include some short of disclaimer or notice indicting that this film is a highly colorful, dramatized, and watered down telling of the story.---- Thomas K |
| |
| | **Even though the main plot line of Pocahontas is a huge historical inaccuracy all together and watching this movie through a historical lens probably ruined it for me, I still think that’s important because while it might not have all the facts straight it can still introduce children to Pocahontas, Jamestown, settlements, New World exploration, and Native American culture/customs at a relatively young age.** —Maddy W |
| |
| Despite the problematic nature of the film, Pocahontas was a massive success for Disney that resulted in them making a sequel (which isn’t quite as good.) Despite that, the Disney film is almost timeless for children and has captured the imaginations of children for almost 30 years. Why is this important? Well, this film could conceivably be responsible for helping younger children get interested in history. Beyond that, this film can also be used as a case study of the consequences of rewriting history to make into a film. For one, the film depicts the settling of Jamestown as a time of tension between whites and Natives that was ultimately settled after a big disagreement. Yet, as we know the conflict between the whites and Natives was gruesome, brutal, and exploded many times in the early years of the settlement. Personally, I feel as though Disney should include some short of disclaimer or notice indicting that this film is a highly colorful, dramatized, and watered down telling of the story.---- Thomas K | I think that Pocahontas is a good introduction to children in a manner to get them familiar with this certain part of history. There are many aspects of this which highly appeal to children, such as the sort of personification of animals, the romance between John and Pocahontas. -Anj |
| |
| Even though the main plot line of Pocahontas is a huge historical inaccuracy all together and watching this movie through a historical lens probably ruined it for me, I still think that’s important because while it might not have all the facts straight it can still introduce children to Pocahontas, Jamestown, settlements, New World exploration, and Native American culture/customs at a relatively young age. —Maddy W | |
