Stereotype Wall Street (Natasha)

While I have found much of Robert Cantwell's book to be useful and interesting, his comments on stereotyping have been the most valuable to my own research. He speaks of stereotyping as a fundamental function of the human mind, a simple form of thinking that seeks to class people and things into certain groups. He also suggests that stereotypes arise naturally when multiple cultural groups interact with one another and that little can be done to change the instinctual process that dictates the creation and manifestation of stereotypes. On this final point I disagree.

Though difficult, I think persistent re-education can change an individual's thinking on even the most trenchant stereotypes. I believe that stereotypes can be far more destructive than Cantwell seems to believe. Take as an example the stereotypes about Mexican immigrants that your average U.S. citizen holds (stereotypes that have been carefully shaped by news pundits and politicians) and the manifestation of those stereotypes in everything from draconian anti-immigrant legislation to hate crimes. Given the very real outcomes that stereotypes can have, I think it imperative that those with counternarratives do all they can to re-educate the public.
A recent example of redirecting stereotypes can be seen in the way some Native groups have responded to the Occupy Wall Street movement.* The "occupy" rhetoric has been questioned by several groups who remind the protesters that all of America is occupied land. An early artistic critique of the OWS movement depicted a Plains Indian man with some widely recognizable, stereotypical signifiers of Indianness: a stern gaze, a feather in his hair, Plains Indian dress, an arrowhead, the reference to mother earth, and the red wash that the artist has finished him in:

 

 This initial poster was shared widely on the internet, both through social media and news sites like Indian Country Today. This widespread circulation validates and contributes to the creation of stereotypes about American Indians but, stereotyping aside, also served as a powerful interruption to the "occupy" rhetoric that many found to be so problematic. So, as Native Appropriations blogger asks, "Is it more important to disrupt the narrative with images that non-Native folks already recognize and resonate with? Or are the images like the "Decolonize" poster doing more harm than good?" In other words, are stereotypes useful enough in certain situations that their replication and circulation is justified? Did the poster carry more weight because it it appealed to a common understanding of what it means to be Indian? Or could the messages have been just as valuable had this image - which more accurately reflects the original Lenape inhabitants of Manhattan - been circulated?:

Either way, I think the question of stereotypes an important one to consider. I was dissatisfied with Cantwell's conclusion that stereotypes can't be changed when I believe that in some cases it is imperative that they are. That said, the questions raised by the Native Appropriations blogger point out valuable possibilities for reclaiming and using existing stereotypes to further the objectives of the group being stereotyped in the first place.

*I want to credit the Native Appropriations blog for the images and inspiring my discussion of stereotypes in the responses to the OWS movement. More thorough critiques of these posters and the OWS movement as a whole can be found in this post.