Joined: Aug 17, 2006 Age: 40 Posts: 2426 Location: Ontario
Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2012 8:50 am Post subject:
Mummy_of_Peanut wrote:
Can anyone who is 'in the know' explain how the image on the Land of Lakes butter packaging is racist? I'm being totally honest when I say I don't see it, but maybe I'm missing something obvious. She looks like a nice lady. Is it the stereotypical costume? I'm not trying to be sarcastic or provoke, I would just like an explanation, so I can understand.
Think about the name and the history involved. Land of lakes + native woman offering something in a stance of supplication; and this is being put across as a positive image.
It's not immediately obvious but in historical context, there is something curious going on there.
Can anyone who is 'in the know' explain how the image on the Land of Lakes butter packaging is racist? I'm being totally honest when I say I don't see it, but maybe I'm missing something obvious. She looks like a nice lady. Is it the stereotypical costume? I'm not trying to be sarcastic or provoke, I would just like an explanation, so I can understand.
Think about the name and the history involved. Land of lakes + native woman offering something in a stance of supplication; and this is being put across as a positive image.
It's not immediately obvious but in historical context, there is something curious going on there.
OK, I get it. Thanks for that. _________________ "We act as though comfort and luxury were the chief requirements of life, when all we need to make us really happy is something to be enthusiatic about." Charles Kingsley
Sorry, I wasn't accusing you of racist. I will occasionally call people out on things but I am generally pretty blunt out about it.
Oh, I consider that good manners, actually.
Quote:
I guess I just don't know all about American Indian culture. I suppose it's a somewhat stereotypical image (???) I don't know, I honestly have never thought about it before.
Actually, I think that Edgewaters gave a fabulous explanation.
You know, I understand where you are coming from a lot better now, so pardon me for jumping the gun, please.
Last edited by WilliamWDelaney on Wed Jun 06, 2012 9:08 am; edited 2 times in total
The usual double standards by the US government.
They slaughtered the Red Indian population and stole their land but went to war when Hitler did the same thing.
The Land of Lakes woman makes good butter, and she's being nice enough to offer us some. She's not kneeling in supplication, she's kneeling because her tribe doesn't use chairs and she's hardly going to stand around holding a chunk of butter all day.
Seriously, though, I don't find the butter lady offensive.
How about that Notre Dame mascot, though? He's plenty offensive.
Joined: Sep 22, 2008 Age: 76 Posts: 29306 Location: New Jersey
Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2012 12:16 pm Post subject:
piroflip wrote:
Agreed.
The usual double standards by the US government.
They slaughtered the Red Indian population and stole their land but went to war when Hitler did the same thing.
Times changed. the 19 th century was the time of genocide for the U.S. The American people gave that up by 1930.
By the time the 1930's were around there were so many immigrants that racist pro genicidal thinking was no longer prevalent.
Most of the white folks did not want to kill blacks and indians. They just wanted them to stay away.
Joined: Aug 27, 2010 Posts: 4588 Location: mid atlantic coast usa
Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2012 12:57 pm Post subject:
YippySkippy wrote:
The Land of Lakes woman makes good butter, and she's being nice enough to offer us some. She's not kneeling in supplication, she's kneeling because her tribe doesn't use chairs and she's hardly going to stand around holding a chunk of butter all day.
Seriously, though, I don't find the butter lady offensive.
How about that Notre Dame mascot, though? He's plenty offensive.
Agree with both points.
My only problem with the Land-O-Lakes maiden is that though native americans did introduce the world to tobacco ( hence the logic of "Red Man Chew") they did not raise dairy cattle before the Europeans arrived. So why link a diary product to native americans-most of whom are probably lactose intorlerant?
Last edited by naturalplastic on Wed Jun 06, 2012 5:32 pm; edited 1 time in total
I've been looking, and I don't think that there have been any previous complaints about the Land O' Lakes maiden, by American Indians or anyone else.
Quote:
The Land O' Lakes Indian maiden holding the butter box was painted in 1928 by Brown & Bigelow illustrator Arthur C. Hanson, who also painted the original Old Style Lager logo. His original art hangs in the lobby of the Arden Hills office and depicts the maiden in a pastoral scene with lakes, pines, flowers and grazing cows in the background. According to Land O' Lakes, the original Indian maiden was "simplified and modernized" in 1939 by Jess Betlach and has undergone many minor modifications since as the enduring logo of the co-op. Red Lake Ojibwe artist Patrick DesJarlait updated the maiden's image in the 1950s. The package image is an example of the infinite-loop motif or Droste effect, in which the image is repeated, in theory infinitely, within itself.
Would the fact that an American Indian artist produced the present logo make it non-racist and acceptable?
What is a non-racist way to portray people? Strip everyone from their cultural heritage? _________________ *some atheist walks outside and picks up stick*
Would the work have been labeled "racist" if the artist had not been American Indian? Is it "racist", and is the artist an American Indian version of an "Uncle Tom?" Or, is it just good art (or just bad art)?
I've been looking, and I don't think that there have been any previous complaints about the Land O' Lakes maiden, by American Indians or anyone else.
Quote:
The Land O' Lakes Indian maiden holding the butter box was painted in 1928 by Brown & Bigelow illustrator Arthur C. Hanson, who also painted the original Old Style Lager logo. His original art hangs in the lobby of the Arden Hills office and depicts the maiden in a pastoral scene with lakes, pines, flowers and grazing cows in the background. According to Land O' Lakes, the original Indian maiden was "simplified and modernized" in 1939 by Jess Betlach and has undergone many minor modifications since as the enduring logo of the co-op. Red Lake Ojibwe artist Patrick DesJarlait updated the maiden's image in the 1950s. The package image is an example of the infinite-loop motif or Droste effect, in which the image is repeated, in theory infinitely, within itself.
Would the fact that an American Indian artist produced the present logo make it non-racist and acceptable?
Does the fact that the idea for "Aunt Jemima" came from an African-American artist and performer, namely Billy Kersands, make "Aunt Jemima" acceptable?
And here is how his famous song goes:
"The monkey dressed in soldier clothes,
Old Aunt Jemima, oh! oh! oh!
Went out in the woods for to drill some crows,
Old Aunt Jemima, oh! oh! oh!
The jay bird hung on the swinging limb,
Old Aunt Jemima, oh! oh! oh!
I up with a stone and hit him on the shin,
Old Aunt Jemima, oh! oh! oh!
Oh, Carline, oh, Carline,
Can't you dance the bee line,
Old Aunt Jemima, oh! oh! oh!
The bullfrog married the tadpole's sister,
Old Aunt Jemima, oh! oh! oh!
He smacked his lips and then he kissed her,
Old Aunt Jemima, oh! oh! oh!
She says if you love me as I love you,
Old Aunt Jemima, oh! oh! oh!
No knife can cut our love in two,
Old Aunt Jemima, oh! oh! oh!
Oh, Carline, oh, Carline,
Can't you dance the bee line,
Old Aunt Jemima, oh! oh! oh!"
However, the point is well taken that American Indians don't appear to be especially concerned over the Land o' Lakes Indian Maiden, and I ought to have chosen a better example for the case I was trying to make.
As I have stated above, some images that Native Americans actually have taken issue with are such things as school mascots based on the "Indian" archetype. Those are really much better examples of what I was getting at. We often make a big issue over images that are derogatory toward black people, but I noticed that we don't seem to treat complaints by Indian groups, over similar things, with the same level of seriousness.
However, I have seen some highly plausible explanations for this here. For example, there is the fact that people who identify as "Indian" constitute a relatively small proportion of the population, compared to black people. Furthermore, a lot of people who would be within their rights to consider themselves "Native American" are lumped in with the general "hispanic" population, and their Native American heritage may be overlooked entirely.
Therefore, I have realized over the course of this discussion that this is a very intricate and tangled issue.
Now, I don't want to jump the gun on anyone else today, but I get a sense that some of the responders here have an ulterior motive in trying to keep the discussion centered around the Indian maiden logo. I no longer have anything to do with it, from this point on. I have acknowledged the point that the Indian maiden was arguably a weak example.
They may not be a race, but what about dwarfs? Should someone stand up for how dwarfs are used and portrayed in the media? _________________ *some atheist walks outside and picks up stick*
I don't think there's any advertising featuring little people. Unless you count advertising in which they are portraying goblins, leprechauns, and Christmas elves.
My friend works with a short guy - not a dwarf, just a short guy - and everyone calls him "Peck". ("Willow" reference)
