329-2012--Week 2 Questions/Comments

Things the movie got right
I was speaking with a friend a little while ago who teaches high school history and she mentioned that Pugs were very much in fashion (China gave them to the Dutch in the 16th Century. I couldn't help but notice the evil Governors Pug... On another note, I had to notice that the mindset of the English is very much an imperialistic mindset. Totally appropriate for this sort of setting. --JST

Even though the movie never really dealt with it directly, they did do a pretty good job showing the traditional gender roles within the Native American society. In the beginning sequences, the men are shown hunting and acting as warriors, while the women were farming and making food. Grandmother Willow also seemed like she was sort of the guiding wise presence for several generations of women in Pocahontas' family, which might be stretching to say it represented a matriarchal society. Also, the song "Savages" I thought pretty accurately showed how both groups didn't really understand where the other was coming from, and how that led to conflict, at least in the simplified-for-kids way of understanding it.-- Carrie

In the opening scenes on the ship the movie did depict well the hopes and expectations of the British colonists for the new land. They expressed their expectations for gold and opportunities for success and an improvement in status. It also showed the preconceived prejudices the British had against the natives that were picked up from previous settlers who had traveled to native inhabited lands. -Kendall

In the very beginning during the Virginia Company song they said they were going to get “freedom, prosperity, and the adventure of our lives.” This seems to be what the colonists thought they were going to get out of the new world. Disney showed correct gender roles with women farming and men fishing and fighting. Disney also called the natives “savages, barely even human” and talked about their impure ways in the song “Savages.” –Hannah Laughlin

Despite the sweeping generalizations of Native American spirituality, I thought the movie did a good job atillustrating the connection between the natives and the land. -Brooke

I have to agree with Carrie, the song does do a good job showing the misunderstandings between the two groups. The Disney artists did create a pretty accurate illustration of the indian village and the early fort at Jamestown. Also the connection of the native people to the land they lived on was well portrayed. --M. Ogle

After watching the movie for the first time in its entirety and having just read John Smith's first hand account of Jamestown,I was extremely surprised to catch so many details that Disney got right. - Kocum asks chief for her hand in marriage evidence of tribal consent before marriage. - Although highly sensationalized the movie displays the forests teeming with a variety of wildlife and how connected the Native Americans are with their environment. - The governor mentions how Spain had made a fortune from the new world and they hoped to become wealthy from gold. -The English were portrayed as very egotistical and believed they had nothing to learn from the Native Americans, the English believed they were the superior people. - Jamestown was portrayed as very primitive with the settlers living in tents. - The movie makes it clear that both groups did not understand the other groups customs and attitudes towards life. - In the end John Smith returns to England without Pocahontas. - Jason Milton

I was really curious about the guns they used in the movie. I googled "guns from the early 1600s" and the images that came up were consistent with the ones from the movie. I believe they are called matchlock guns. -Wolana

This was my first time watching 'Pocahontas' in it's entirety. Maybe my favorite detail that the movie portrayed correctly was that the English expectations were very much based on Spain's precedent of finding gold and other fabulous wealth in the New World. I laughed a bit when, during that part of the song, a map of the new world appears and the 'camera' begins panning over it, beginning much farther South. I also thought the movie portrayed the English fixation on acquiring wealth rather than securing basic provisions sort of nicely, considering how stylized the story is, by showing the sailors jumping ship and starting to dig immediately. ---Mary Quinn

As I watched the opening scenes of Disney’s Pocahontas, I reflected on Dr. McClurken’s Tuesday lecture, and I realized that Disney got quite a few things right in regards to the cultural life of the Powhatan Indians. The women of the tribe were pictured engaged in agricultural duties and the children were pictured at play. They did a good job at representing the matriarchal society. Even the frequently ridiculed Grandmother Willow character represented the collective wisdom of the elder women of the tribe. But the best and most realistic representation of the value of women in their society is demonstrated in an emotional exchange between Pocahontas and Chief Powhatan.'''Powhatan remarks how much Pocahontas looks like her mother and he begins to reminisce about his now-dead wife. He tells Pocahontas, “Our people looked to her for wisdom and strength. Someday, they will look to you as well.”''' - Sara G.

I'll try to add something original. '''In terms of geography, the movie suceeded in portraying the correct scenery... of trees. The most common trees in eastern VA are deciduous, bald cypress (in swamps), maple, mulberry, etc. '''Watching the film, it at least got that right. Disney even got the willow's species right. The willow is "Salix nigra" -- AKA a Black Willow -- which is a marshy willow. Other than the trees, the movie got a lot of things right. The common Native American gender roles were obviously in place. The technology of both the indians and the settlers were accurate. I think the most interesting point in Disney's favor I've learned in the past week is what Dr. McClurken said on Tuesday about how pugs were apparently very popular as exotic Chinese pets, so it's not entirely unlikely that a cute little pug was the first English settler to set foot paw in the New World! - Sam R.

Things the movie got wrong

 * Location/Scenery/Setting

The environment depicted in Disney’s Pocahontas is entirely wrong. When the Virginia Company arrived in the New World, the area chosen for Jamestown was almost completely swampland, full of mosquitoes and poor soil for farming. That is why the settlers were struggling so hard to survive. It certainly was not the fertile, mountainous area full of waterfalls and clear blue rivers as depicted in the Disney film, and there were certainly no moose. This list of what the movie got wrong can go on and on. –Paige

The Indians planted their crops in very neat, western-looking rows, and there were cliffs and mountains, etc. One of the most obvious changes made was in the Indians’ clothing. Not that nudity is good for a children’s film, but as far as I can find, shirts were not a popular garment. - Laura-Michal

I was also struck (like Paige was) by the incorrect depiction of the landscape. Where was the swampland and poor farming land? It certainly was depicted as a Garden of Eden. I also thought throughout the movie how the ONLY threat to these settlers' lives seemed to be the violence from the Native Americans. However, as Professor McClurken talked about today in class, the 90% death rate of Jamestown in these early years had a variety of contributing factors--namely disease and poison (from the high salinity of the water). Not once are these mentioned in the Disney version. --Ellen S.

For me, the landscape in the Disney film was more reminiscent of New England or maybe Plymouth Rock. Maybe changing the setting away from swampy VA was a way to not have to discuss the farming challenges and so simplify the narrative further?---Mary Quinn


 * People

I agree with Paige that there are many errors in this movie that could be listed forever, so I am going to point out a few more. The one I found most interesting is that the movie madeJohn Smith so much younger than all of the other men, yet still portrayed him as having more experience. Obviously Disney made him younger and aged Pocahontas so that their romantic relationship, which never happened, could be justified with modern notions of age appropriate relationships, but it is still inaccurate. I also found it interesting that Pocahontas was portrayed as Powhatan’s only daughter and that he pushed her to marry Kocoum when there is little evidence women were forced into relationships. Also, Kocoum dies way too early, he didn’t even get to marry Pocahontas. I think that is enough mistakes to point out for now. –Amanda V

In the beginning of the film, Powhatan greets the returning warriors saying that they had defeated some enemy and now they would have peace. Later on, when they get into conflict with the English, they are really only acting out of self-defense (at least that's what the song told me). '''Disney seems to think that Native Americans only ever fought in self-defense, and never for conquest or for their own political reasons. Apparently war is something that only mean Europeans do. To me, this was just a further reinforcement of the "noble savage" ideal.''' --Stef L.

I felt the aggression towards the Native Americans start way too early in the movie. They started calling them savages before they even left London. While I think that the English had an idea that they might encounter Native Americans, I don’t think they would have been calling them savages that early (at least I don't think so.....?).--Kayle P

As Dr. McCLurken mentioned, there are absolutely no 250+ foot cliffs in Jamestown. The way the movie makes it seem like Pocahontas and John Smith are the same age is not correct. I doubt that the real John Smith, was what seemed to be about 6'2 muscular Fabio type, fully decked out in armor and Pocahontas did not actually an aboriginal barbie type figure, she was a child. --M. Ogle

What struck me the most was how Disney portrayed '''John Smith as blonde-haired and blue-eyed. Reminded me of the whole master race Aryan concept, '''which would play into the racial superiority attitude John Smith (cartoon version) implied during his first meeting with Pocahontas when he talked about how the Englishmen were going to civilize the continent. -Wolana

For being a 10 year old, Pocahontas was looking pretty old. Her actions and interactions with the settlers seems more probable for the 18 year old she was portrayed as and not the pre teen she actually was. Her relationship with Smith was central to the plot and all outside events came as a result of that. -Rachel T.

What I found interesting was the changing of the roles of the different characters. The differences in Pocahontas, and John Smith, along with Her father and Kocoum. The age changes, the basic roles of each, and the relationships between individuals being exaggerated for the benefits of the film - PMccloy

I debated where to file my nuggets of observation. I settled on this category because while these choices were not necessarily wrong (in that the people did exist) but 'I do not understand why they took artistic license where there was not a clear purpose. The prime example of this confusing use of artistic license is the choice to characterize John Ratcliffe as the antagonist in this film'. While it is true that he was the second president of the Jamestown Colony and that he commanded the Discovery on the crossing voyage, Ratcliffe and Smith were never on the same ship. John Smith sailed on the Susan Constant. While it makes sense for economy of animation to put Smith and Ratcliffe on the same ship, why would Disney not characterize Edward Maria Wingfield – the actual first president? My suspicion is that Disney intentionally chose Ratcliffe because every Disney movie needs a villain, and who better to vilify than the rat – John Ratcliffe. Disney’s choice to vilify Ratcliffe seems even less obvious and more ironic when one considers that Ratcliffe’s tendency to engage in generous trade with the native population. I did think it was a funny bit of foreshadowing that Disney named Ratcliffe’s pug “Percy”, since George Percy was president of the Jamestown colony a few years later. - Sara G.

'''In the movie Kocoum’s death was the event that sparked John Smith’s attempted execution. Kocoum clearly did not die if he was able to marry Pocahontas at a later date. Which brings the question, what sparked the real event?'''- Emily

The most glaring issue to me is Pocahontas's age. She looks like she's 30 in the movie, and John Smith looks like a strapping lad in his early-to-late 20's. Perfect for a romcom/Disney "princess" movie. Suspiciously perfect... Of course, this couldn't be further from the truth. As Dr. McClurken pointed out last class, the average Native American life span was 18 years. she was probably 12-13. John Smith was over 30. The real story isn't fit for Disney material. If John Smith had a romantic relationship with Pocahontas, he was a pedophile. - Sam R.


 * Magic Swirling Language Fun

'''She cannot fly. Jump off of a cliff and survive. She cannot talk to trees.''' -Aqsa Z.

For children's sake, I understand the "magical" method helps smooth over some of the messy bits, but I think the movie would have benefited from demonstrating the language struggle. Continuing with that, why did Pocahontas have to learn Smith's language and not the other way around? I'm confused why Smith had an "American accent," too--not that I would want to hear Mel Gibson try that out, but it struck me as odd. The absence of reciprocity also bothered me, especially since it seems to be a huge part of the Smith narrative we read for this. -- Brooke


 * Other issues

Jamestown does not look like western Virginia! Disney showed incorrect landscape with mountains and waterfalls. There’s also the problem of the immediate romantic connection between John Smith and Pocahontas, as well as Pocahontas understanding English right away. Disney shows that Pocahontas will be the new leader of her people, which hints that she is the only child of Powhatan. Kocuom’s death anyone? - Hannah Laughlin

'''The union jack flag wasn't created until 1801. John Smith was wearing what looks like Spanish conquistador armor and helmet'''. As mentioned in class, Powhatan wouldn't bash his head in, just torture him to death. - Zhen Chen

I agree with Brooke's point about how the story might have benefited from showing the language barrier between Smith and Pocahontas. I realize that the film makers needed to show communication in order to have their lead characters fall in love, but having Pocahontas magically learn English was a little too convenient. ---Mary Quinn

Movie as primary source (about the time in which it was made)
I think that the filmmakers were very conscious of how the English colonists should have treated the Native Americans, and used more modern sensibilities to make John Smith look good and Governor Radcliffe look bad. I really '''doubt that Smith would have believed the Native Americans were the equals he treated them like in the movie; his writings make it pretty clear they were far beneath him, but if the filmmakers had written him like that, nobody in the 1990s or later would have easily believed he was supposed to be the hero. I think that Radcliffe more accurately reflected the thinking of colonists at the time, but because that's no longer politically correct, he ends up looking (and being) the villain'''.--Carrie

So 90s. The character Wiggins (Ratcliffe's servant) really jumps out as the typical 90s gay stereotype. 1. Remember when kid's movies actually depicted gay characters as worthy of ridicule? 2. Consider this: Matthew Sheppard was killed in 1998, just 3 years later. Homosexuality is not really an issue of the Pocahontas story, but it is a part of the 90s movie story. Also, there's a scene in which Ratcliffe is asking, somewhat rhetorically, why the "savages" were on the attack. '''Wiggins replies, only to be ignored, "Maybe it because we stole their land and killed their people?" (rough paraphrase, sorry) This reply seemed to me to be right from the script of 90s post-Howard Zinn political correctness'''. --Stef L.

After finishing a class on Native American history, I'm not able to say this film is a primary source for much of anything. The whole, "We're going to teach you how to do things better" is rather accurate, but that's about it. If anything, I would use this film as a hook to pique interest in Native American culture and first meetings. - Brooke

As spoken about last week the fact that movies can be used to look at ideals present at the time is quite interesting. Looking at John Smith, he is individualistic, a hard-worked and prefered to use his words rather than his fist to work out the issues they were having with the 'Natives'. These all seem like ideals that are often portrayed in even recent films - PMccloy

I agree with everyone else. I do not think this movie could have been used as a primary source at all. They barely got any historical facts correct. When I did my 299 project on Pocahontas, I did use this as a primary source as one of the many interpretations that society had of who exactly Pocahontas and John Smith were. Granted, it was evidence for the inaccurate viewpoint, but other than that, there is not much one could use from here. --Aqsa Z.

General comments for Pocahontas

 * Don't blame Disney

I will be the first to admit that I am an avid Disney fan. No matter what film Disney creates, it is always an amazing family film full of entertainment regardless whether it is historically accurate or not. I don't think the directors wanted to portray events accurately in the movie, rather the goal was to get people interested in the story of Pocahontas so that if people wanted to, they could look up the history themselves and at the same time create an unforgettable story that kids and even adults can enjoy. –Paige

I don’t think an adult should look to a Disney movie for factual information. But to introduce a young child into a glimpse of a certain historical event and actually make them interested in the topic Disney got it right. Not all of the facts are right and they add in details that aren’t true but for the age range it is intended for I would allow my future kids to watch it and hope they care enough to ask about it and are open minded enough to listen to how it actually happened. –Olivia H.

I must agree with Olivia here, Disney movies are only valuable as entertainment. Unless the research had to do with the cultural impact of Walt Disney himself no self respecting historian could take them seriously. As it turns out, according to John Smith, Pocahontas had very little to do with the overall story. Disney decided to look for a Native American princess story and took major artistic licensing in publishing it. ---NJenn

I thought that overall Pocahontas does its job, which is to entertain young children and many college students. I think that it is a good way to teach young kids about some of the themes of colonization, even if the facts are not accurate. From this movie people can understand the differences that led to conflict between Native Americans and English settlers. It’s similar to telling kids about George Washington chopping down a cherry tree and then admitting to it because he cannot lie. There is no proof of this, but kids still get the message that George Washington was an honest person.- Amanda V

I tend to agree with Ellen. I am the first to admit that I love this movie; I think that it is very entertaining. However, I also know that it is horrible inaccurate, but that doesn't mean that I can't enjoy the movie. I think that it tells a story that otherwise some kids wouldn't be exposed to except when sitting in elementary school history. I think that it can provide exposure to a “true story” as long as children understand that the movie is not entirely true. --Kayle P To be honest I don't think what I learned about Pocahontas and John Smith in elementary school history class differed much from the movie. Most of what we learn in elementary school is already watered down to appeal to a bunch of kids who can barely sit still long enough to learn it. What makes Pocahontas different from other Disney movies? Because its loosely based on historical events? Is a child going to start believing willow trees talk and fairy godmothers are real? I know as a child I didn't distinguish between Pocahontas and Sleeping Beauty as one being more true than the other. '''I don't really understand why Pocahontas is even questioned as a historical movie. To me its a fairy tale loosely based on historic events made for the entertainment and consumption of children.''' --Kendall


 * Blame Disney?

I actually did my Hist 299 research paper on the historical accuracy of Pocahontas. First off, I basically ruined the movie for myself. Secondly, the fact that there were different variations from historians was surprising for me. Obviously there will be different interpretations, but to have so many different viewpoints was really interesting. The interpretation of the ritual ceremony, idea that everything was made up period, etc. After learning how inaccurate Pocahontas's life really was, I realized I was more intrigued by the way Algonkian women lived their lives and their role in their communities. -Aqsa Z. Watching Pocahontas this time around was interesting. I must admit I had not seen it in a long time, so watching it with the correct historical information fresh in my head tainted my view of the movie. I agree with some of my classmates that getting the message out there is important and the value of the movie as entertainment. However, I wonder if that is worth it--relaying false information just for kids to get an "idea" of the truth? --Ellen S.

I was 11 years old when this movie came out and I remember being excited to go see it, sadly that same year in 5th grade we had taken a field trip to Jamestown and I remember being disappointed because the scenery in the movie looked nothing like Jamestown and the story was nothing like what they had taught us on the field trip. Although it is not accurate it was Disney's first attempt at using real historical events to create a Disney Princess instead of a completely fictional fairy tale. It will always be one of my favorite Disney movies. --M.Ogle

I never really realized how incorrect the storyline was. Not that I trust when Disney present, but I have always looked at it as entertainment. Having gone through the class discussion before watching the movie, you could really see everything that had gone wrong. And although many of the different historical points were incorrect I really enjoyed the underlying thoughts that were portrayed to the viewers. Not only the ideals that were being pushed int he 90's but that reinforcement of that historic discourse surrounding that period. Native American beliefs, the ideas of European superiority. But the thing that I enjoyed the most was how present those were in the songs. Maybe its just me (though probably not), when I hear Pocahontas I either think "Colors of the Wind" or maybe "Mine, Mine, Mine", both which put those ideals to music, which to me, those songs are the most memorable part of the movie. -PMccloy

I grew up as a Disney kid. It was my life as a child and Pocahontas was one of my favorites. I had not seen it for over ten years, so it was interesting to go back and watch it. Knowing the historical background of the story made the viewing experience a little awkward. The romantic relationship had little development. They seemed to be instantly in love. I still thought the movie was entertaining, but watching it as an adult is a much different experience. The movie is also shorter than I remembered. - Emily

Since the only similarities shared between the film and reality seems to really be names and dates, it makes me wonder how much the filmmakers wanted to portray the truth. Pocahontas is a prominent figure in American history and perhaps Disney just wanted to monopolize on her name while tying in the princess theme. It is an interesting approach to children's entertainment that does not seem to even fully attempt to tie in the reality of the situation. -Rachel T.

There was no accurate information on Pocahontas to know her real story. I think Disney needed to make her more appealing to audiences (i.e. children), or else she would not have been the main lead. Disney appeared to have intentions of colonists/the Virginia Company and the cultural aspects of the natives correct. -Hannah Laughlin

While watching the movie a question popped into my mind. The movie portrayed the settlers of Jamestown as being all males. I know that there were very few females at Jamestown, but on the initial settlement were there any women at all? -Jason Milton

Jason - I really should look this up before answering - but if I remember correctly - there were no women on the three original ships. Women were not brought into the colony for nearly two years, and then only in small numbers. It wasn't for several years (like more than ten) before a larger female population arrived. Don't quote me on these facts. They're off the top of my head. - Sara G.

I don't know what everyone's talking about. 'My racoon talks to me all the time. Especially when he watches me sleep. I can even hear him whispering about me behind my back to humming birds. Don't get me started on the talking trees I see daily.' - Sam R.

John Smith (1608) reading
I thought it was really interesting how little Pocahontas factored into Smith's writings. Even though I knew she didn't have that much to do with Smith, I kept scrolling and thinking she would turn up any second; the brief mention at the very end wasn't what I was expecting! --Carrie

Like Carrie, I was surprised at how little Pocahontas was mentioned. I kept waiting to hear about her page after page, but then she is only mentioned at the very end. Because I grew up with the movie version of Pocahontas, I had assumed she would have a larger role in his writings. Interesting the way he changed his mind about her in the 1624 version of his events, making her more important. - Amanda V

In reading John Smith's writings, we can clearly see why so many directors make movies about historical events. Even though Smith's writings are very compelling, they are very long and the language can be very difficult to read to those who are not accustomed to the 17th century style of writing.I personally found this very interesting, but to someone who is not particualry interested in Early American History, they will probably just want to watch the movie. --Paige

In the grand scheme of this writing is a great starting point for our class. It's something that I have always admired about directors. They manage to turn a narrative that is not exactly appealing into something that makes you interested in the subject.In the case of these writings, John Smith is rather boring, and descriptive... and boring. Pocahontas does not even appear that often as you would think based on Disney's retelling of this story. I have to admit, when giving tours of the Capital to people, they often think that John Smith and P lived, "happily ever after." The truth ends with smallpox and is far from the sweet ever after. ---JST

I agree with Paige. I see why Disney had to change details to make this a movie kids would want to watch. This has very good details and gives us one perspective on how the English and Native Americans interacted. But you could not give this to a child or young adult and expect them care about this topic or even pay attention at all. I’m not sure how many adults would choose to read this selection. --Olivia H.

Several years ago I saw a .pdf of a map which would be useful to this conversation.'''The GMU website claims it to be a map drawn by John Smith and it is quite astonishing how many details are close to correct being that it is hand drawn. Another interesting piece of information was that it was never widely known how far that company had traveled inland. I find this map interesting in that they made it as far upriver as present day Lynchburg, because where the Monacan Nation is marked on the map is now nearby Amherst County, my hometown'''. ---NJenn

http://chnm.gmu.edu/loudountah/activities/pdf/smithmap.pdf

In regards to my last here are more maps drawn of the Chesapeake Bay area from earlier explorations.

http://www.smithtrail.net/captain-john-smith/smiths-maps/chesapeake/ ---NJenn

Reading the entire selection was difficult to say the least. About half of what John Smith did was gouging himself on venison and bread. I'm surprised by how much story Disney got out of this account considering it was mostly the previously mentioned eating and wandering around the rivers.'''I'm not sure what to make of kings vs. emperors. Is he using those terms interchangeably or referring to different people?''' Nor does he describe the personalities of any colonist well, he will frequently repeat colonist's names but its hard to keep track of who's who. - Zhen

I thought it was interesting how inconsistently Smith applied God’s will to the environment and turns of events, and to the reactions of and interactions with the Natives. He was not even consistent in the context in which he applied it. For example, random acts of kindness on the part of the Natives were not consistently presumed to be God-driven, nor were they free will driven. Conversely, the terrible fortunes that sometimes befell the settlers, such as famine or disease, were sometimes attributed to the wrath of God. I found this vacillation somewhat puzzling. – Sara G.

While Smith is certainly not a compelling author, this reading reflects both the constant struggle for food and the tenuous relationship that existed between the Native Americans and the men of the Virginia Company. The number of tribes that Smith came in contact with was higher that I would have guessed, and it’s interesting that of all these groups, he only seems to think favorably of Powhatan’s people. I’m also very interested in what made Disney think that this would make a good children’s film, because that is definitely not my first inclination. - Laura-Michal

'''Here's the reciprocity I was looking for! Poor John Smith must have been so confused when the natives were getting mad at him after he had received gifts from them. I think this would have been a vital point to include in the movie. These misunderstandings because of language barriers, cultural barriers, and plain biases could have really enhanced the movie.'''-- Brooke

I don't blame Disney for not using this version of Smith's journals even though its believed to be the most accurate. '''Smith's accounts of his interactions with the natives were confusing to say the least. What child doesn't want to watch a movie about Smith wandering around the wilds of Virginia as a prisoner?/in the company of natives? The 1608 version of events definitely appeals to those looking for a more authentic sense of history instead of Disney's romanticized version'''. --Kendall

I found the account which John Smith gives in this work very interesting. It was fascinating to learn just how much exploring Smith did, initially once they had arrived in the new world. Smith's account of how the Native Americans treated him is eye opening, the tribes seemed very welcoming and extremely hospitable for the most part. Much of his writing is spent describing all of the food the different tribes gave him. Smith's writing also makes the reader aware of death's ever looming presence during this time, with his nonchalant attitude when describing someones death from disease or violence. - Jason Milton

As little as this reading and his memoirs had to do with Pocahontas, I'm surprised that Disney took what little is known about this story and ran with it to make a multi-million dollar movie. Also, the fact that many people beleived his stories even though all three memoirs were contradicting of one another is really interesting but surprising. --Aqsa Z.