Minitou: the Representation of Native American Peoples and Cultures in German- Language Children’S Books Since 2000

Minitou: The Representation of Native American Peoples and Cultures in German- Language Children’s Books since 2000

Masterarbeit

zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades Master of Arts (MA)

an der Karl-Franzens-Universität Graz

vorgelegt von Kevin EBERHARD, BA BA

am Institut für Amerikanistik

Begutachterin: Univ.-Prof. Dr.phil. Nassim Winnie BALESTRINI

Graz, 2017

Ehrenwörtliche Erklärung

Ich erkläre ehrenwörtlich, dass ich die vorliegende Arbeit selbständig und ohne fremde Hilfe verfasst, andere als die angegebenen Quellen nicht benutzt und die den Quellen wörtlich oder inhaltlich entnommenen Stellen als solche kenntlich gemacht habe. Die Arbeit wurde bisher in gleicher oder ähnlicher Form keiner anderen inländischen oder ausländischen Prüfungsbehörde vorgelegt und auch noch nicht veröffentlicht. Die vorliegende Fassung entspricht der eingereichten elektronischen Version.

Datum: Unterschrift

Acknowledgements

First, I would like to thank my advisor Dr.phil. Nassim Winnie Balestrini for her confidence, support, and valuable input. Secondly, I want to thank my whole family, especially my parents,

Richard and Sabine, who not only supported me financially during my studies, but also encouraged me to follow my interests, and by all that have made me into the person I am today.

Finally yet importantly, I want to thank my girlfriend Sabrina for her mental support and academic as well as linguistic help, and my friends for making the last eight years the best I could ask for.

A sincere Thank you and Danke to all of you.

Table of Contents 1. Introduction ...... 6 2. Native Americans as Stereotyped Indians ...... 13 2.1 Origins of the Indian Stereotypes ...... 13 2.2 Indian Stereotypes and Counter-Stereotypes ...... 14 2.3 Effects of Indian Stereotypes ...... 21 2.3.1 The Victims of Stereotyping: Native Americans ...... 22 2.3.2 Profiteers of Stereotyping: White Cannibal Culture ...... 26 2.4 Modern Expressions of Stereotypes in US Culture...... 29 3. German-Speakers and Indians ...... 32 3.1 Winnetou and Old Shatterhand: Noble Savage and German Hero ...... 34 3.2 Karl May and German-Speaking “Indianthusiasm” (Lutz) ...... 39 3.3 Historical Reasons: Building a National Identity with Indians ...... 43 3.4 Special Relationship: A Profitable Myth ...... 47 3.5 Indians in German-Speaking Culture: Curse or Opportunity? ...... 50 4. Children’s Books as Entertainment and Education ...... 56 4.1 Native Americans in Children’s Books ...... 58 4.2 Should German-Speakers Tell Stories about Native Americans? ...... 62 5. Analysis of German-Language Children’s Books ...... 65 5.1 Stereotyped Indians in Titles and on Covers...... 67 5.2 Setting: Vague versus Specific ...... 68 5.2.1 The Prairie ...... 68 5.2.2 Plains versus Lake Indians ...... 70 5.2.3 Modern Settings ...... 71 5.3 Indian Lifestyles ...... 72 5.3.1 The Lifestyle of the (Plains) Indian ...... 72 5.3.2 Beyond the Plains Lifestyle ...... 74 5.3.3 Supernatural Indians: Interactions with Fantastical Creatures and Animals ...... 76 5.3.4 Information on Indian Lifestyles: Between Fiction and Non-Fiction ...... 77 5.4 Indian Characters ...... 80 5.4.1 Indian Heroes and Heroines ...... 80 5.4.2 Indian Side Characters: The Chief and the Medicine Man ...... 82 5.5 Names of Indian Characters ...... 84

5.6 The Value of Relationships in the Indian Societies Represented...... 85 5.6.1 (Dis-)Respect for Parents ...... 85 5.6.2 Gender Roles: The Role of Women ...... 87 5.6.3 The Ecological Indian: Friendship between Indians and Animals ...... 90 5.7 The Role of Non-Indians in Stories about Indians ...... 92 5.7.1 Relationship between Indians and Non-Indians: Antagonists or Friends? ...... 92 5.8 Language in German-Language Children’s Books ...... 99 5.8.1 Loaded Words ...... 99 5.8.2 Indian Language ...... 100 5.9 Illustrations of Indians ...... 101 5.10 Effects of Stereotypes on Young German-Speaking Audiences ...... 103 5.11 German-Speaking Authors and Illustrators without Expertise ...... 105 6. Comparison to Modern English-Language Children’s Books ...... 106 6.1 Names of Tribes in Titles ...... 107 6.2 Specific Traditional and Modern Settings ...... 108 6.3 Native American Characters ...... 108 6.4 Uneventful Plots ...... 109 6.5 The Diversity of Native American Languages...... 110 6.6 Illustrations ...... 111 6.7 Native American Authors: A Diverse Group ...... 112 7. Conclusion ...... 113 8. Works Cited ...... 119 8.1 Primary Sources ...... 119 8.2 Secondary Sources ...... 120 9. Appendix ...... 125

1. Introduction

“Indians” or as German-speakers say, “Indianer” have been present in German popular culture even since before Karl May’s incredibly successful stories about the fictional Apache

Indian character Winnetou and his blood brother, the German immigrant Old Shatterhand. While authors such as Charles Sealsfield and Friedrich Gerstäcker, who wrote about their experience with Indians before May, are only known in scholarly circles, May’s novels and their film adaptations of the 1960s have formed perceptions of millions of people regarding Native

Americans in German-speaking culture ever since. However, German-speaking culture’s fascination with Indians transcends Karl May’s stories. As Hartmut Lutz argues, Indians have an impact on the everyday German language:

There is a marked Indian presence in German everyday culture, even down to the

linguistic level, where sentences like “ein Indianer weint nicht!” (an Indian

doesn’t cry), “ein Indianer kennt keinen Schmerz” (an Indian braves pain), or

figures such as “der letzte Mohikaner” (the last of the Mohicans) have become

part of everyday speech. (169)

Due to the popularity and success of Karl May’s stories, Indians were, and continue to be, an important component to German-speaking culture. In fact, many individuals of German-speaking culture go as far to say that it is not merely a component to their culture, but rather a “special relationship” with Indians themselves. This special relationship is demonstrated by the hobbyist groups, dressed in wigs, feathers, and furs, pretending to be Indians at events such as the Karl

May Festival, weekend celebrations, and similar events.

Even for German-speaking children, Indians are exceptionally interesting, for it is common to play “Cowboys und Indianer,” a role-play fight that usually ends with the Indians as winners. Where does this fascination of German children, from early childhood on, come from?

The answer to this question can be found in bookstores all over Germany and Austria – and potentially Switzerland. In addition to knights, pirates, and wizards, Indians are among the favorite characters, commonly the protagonists, of German-language children’s books. There are stories for all ages and reading levels, from picture books to books for first-time readers. In

Germany, the Stiftung Lesen, an organization with the aim to promote reading and increase reading skills of children, explicitly recommends numerous of the German-language children’s books dealing with Indians. The organization’s label can be found on several books included in the corpus, underlining the fact that Indians are considered appealing characters, which manage to draw German-speaking children to reading books. In turn, books such as those of Stiftung

Lesen are one of the earliest sources introducing and teaching German-speaking children about

Indians.

Minority characters in books and movies, especially Indians, have been extremely popular in various cultures including the US and the German-speaking world, but the most successful ones – such as Winnetou, Pocahontas, and others – are stereotyped figures. These representations are culturally insensitive, misleading, and detrimental to the actual groups represented. As German-language children’s books about Indians are also highly successful and sought after by both children and their parents, it appears necessary to analyze how these books represent Native Americans. More precisely, this analysis will examine if these stories contain problematic, stereotypical representations of Native Americans. This analysis will be based on the guidelines provided by the Council on Interracial Books for Children, which identify the

7 most common issues when it comes to interracial books. The aim of these guidelines is to ensure that characters in the books are presented as complex human beings, as Native American individuals instead of stereotyped Indians.1 The Council was founded in the aftermath of the

Civil Rights Movement to modernize textbooks in the South, especially regarding their representation of African Americans. The Council also focused on other racial and social groups, such as Native Americans, Latinos, and women, in its reviews of textbooks and children’s books.

Due to this group and others, textbooks and children’s books in the US were analyzed and reevaluated, which counteracted the distribution of problematic books in schools. In this way, the

Council positively shaped the book market in the US as well as educated numerous teachers and parents until its dissolution in the 1980s, but its guidelines are timeless and still useful today.

In this paper, I will explain whence the stereotypes about Native Americans originated, what the most popular stereotypes are, and how they have affected Native Americans as well as

Europeans and Euro Americans. This contextualization of the stereotypes will be supported by the theories and ideas from the studies of race and ethnicity in order to underline that the Indian identity has been culturally constructed by white Europeans and Euro Americans in order to subjugate and exploit Native American peoples. This cultural construction of Indian identity has been shaped by racial stereotypes, which were introduced by European explorers such as

Columbus, and can still be seen in the US and Europe today. Historian Robert F. Berkhofer explains that images about Indians were largely informed by the prejudice of white colonizers and settlers, which then were distributed and eventually became fact (17). These misconceptions such as the good Indian (proud, brave, noble, and handsome) and the bad Indian (naked, treacherous, bloodthirsty, and primitive) were introduced by white Europeans in the 15th and 16th

1 In this paper, I will use the term “Indian“ when referring to the stereotyped Indian (e.g. monolithic, past) and the term “Native American“ for the diverse ethnic group of peoples still extant in US society.

8 century (Berkhofer 28) to subjugate Native Americans and – since the first day – receive access to their vast resources. Even today, authors and directors use these stereotyped images because, as cultural studies scholar C. Richard Kind argues, white European and Euro American societies feel a “sense of inevitability,” a “sense of ownership,” and a “sense of empowerment” (11) when dealing with Native American culture. Therefore, white “cannibal culture” (Root) continues appropriating and exploiting Native American resources by profiting from the exoticism of

Native American peoples and cultures.

After discussing Indian stereotypes in general, I will take a closer look at the role those stereotypes have played in Europe, particularly in German-speaking culture. Obviously, Karl

May is ubiquitous in this discourse because his books have lain the groundwork for the enthusiasm in German-speaking culture, which is largely based on stereotypes. Because of May,

German-speakers feel a special connection to Indians. In contrast, this relationship is hardly different than that of the other European cultures with Indians when paying more attention to them. It is merely May’s success that creates the illusion that numerous German-speakers are particularly enthusiastic about Indians. This discussion of the origin of Indian stereotypes in

German-speaking culture is vital to understanding why Native American peoples and cultures are represented in the way they are in German-language children’s books.

For the analysis, it was necessary to become familiar with the German-speaking book market in order to find German-language children’s literature that is representative of how

Native Americans are depicted in this culture. Additionally, a small selection of English- language books should function as comparative texts in order to contrast their representations of

Native American peoples and cultures with those in German-language books. The German- language children’s books relevant for this project had to meet various criteria. First, all books

9 needed to be written in German and discuss Indians. In order to limit the number of books, as well as to focus on the present time, only those books were selected that were published or republished in the 2000s. This limitation should ensure that only those children’s books were analyzed that are currently on the market and therefore most likely to be read by German- speaking children today. These criteria were met by nine German-language children’s books, which are included in the analysis. For the English-language children’s books, the same criteria were used: they had to be written in English, deal with Native Americans, and be published after

2000. By comparing a number of children’s books of both cultures, it will become clear how the representations of Native Americans are similar and/or differ in German-speaking and US culture.

All three parts of this paper – the historical and cultural contextualization of the Indian stereotypes, the analysis of German-language children’s books, and the comparison to US examples – are necessary to discuss the representation of Native Americans in German-language children’s books. In this way, this paper wants to show that German-language children’s books represent Native Americans as stereotypical Indians, and that this representation has a long international, as well as specifically European, tradition. It will attempt to show where the fascination of German-speaking culture with Indians came from historically. As is widely known today in academia, this fascination is mainly based on stereotypes dating back to the prejudiced perceptions of Columbus and other colonists. However, German-speaking culture’s view is significantly different from that of other cultures, especially the US perception. It is more positive towards Indians by depicting them as noble savages, but hardly any less stereotypical. In fact, German-speaking culture only uses Indians by claiming positive Indian characteristics such as nobility, bravery, and primitiveness for itself. Particularly in 19th century, Indians as noble

10 savages were useful to decry the downsides of Western civilization and industrialization in

Europe and to reform civilization by leading Europeans at the time back to nature. Using Indians for putting forward a social critique can be seen across cultures as well as across historical periods. This paper will argue that today’s representation of Indians in German-speaking children’s books is based on historic influences such as Karl May as well as on needs of modern

21st century German-speaking society.

This paper intends to gain momentum in the process of awareness-making. A major aim is to show that German-speaking culture needs to reevaluate its children’s books about Indians because the majority of these books present stereotypical Indians, not Native Americans.

Virtually all of the books available are written by German-speaking authors with little to no authority when it comes to Native American culture, history, and issues. Due to this lack of knowledge and expertise, these authors only perpetuate images and concepts of stereotypical

Indians that are so widely-spread in German-speaking culture. What renders this practice even more problematic is the fact that these authors financially benefit from their ignorance, since their books are sought after by German-speaking parents and children. If German-speaking culture actually desires to have a special relationship with Native Americans, rather than its

Indianer, all parts involved in this process – authors, publishers, book stores, and customers – need to be made aware of how wrong and damaging their imagination is when it comes to

Indians.

Another aspect of this paper concerns the question if German-speaking authors should write Native stories at all, or if German-speaking children should only read translations of Native

American stories originally written in English or in Native languages. This paper will argue that

– in general – Native American authors should write about their own cultures and telling their

11 own personal and cultural stories. When viewing the situation in the US, however, it seems possible that non-Native authors may write Native stories if they engage with Native cultures and are experts in Native cultures. Even then, these authors should consult with Native Americans in order to avoid cultural insensitivities. Despite all the damage stereotypical representations of

Indians have done so far in German-speaking culture, they have continued to maintain the interest of German-speakers in Indians. This interest should not vanish with more realistic stories that feature Native peoples as human, alive, and thriving instead of stereotyped, dead, and in the past. Both Native cultures and German-speaking culture would benefit from greater awareness of each other.

The last part of this paper aims to highlight that representations of Native

Americans in US children’s books greatly differ from those in German-speaking culture. These books are largely written by Native American authors, who focus on specific tribes at a specific time. They represent Native American characters as lively human beings and Native cultures as diverse and thriving. In this way, these books treat Native Americans with more cultural sensitivity and expertise, and thus avoid using popular Indian stereotypes. By comparing these books to German-language children’s books, it becomes evident that German-speaking culture perceives Native Americans largely as Indians. At the same time, the comparison shows the possibilities German-speaking authors have in order to improve their books and maintain cultural integrity. Similar to what the Council on Intercultural Books for Children started in US culture in the 1960s, German-speaking culture needs to reconsider its relationship with Native American culture. In this way, the US market should function as a role model for German-speaking authors, publishers, and consumers. They need to represent Native Americans how Native

American authors perceive their own respective tribal culture, and not how Euro Americans and

Europeans have imagined Indians for centuries.

2. Native Americans as Stereotyped Indians

2.1 Origins of the Indian Stereotypes

False perceptions regarding indigenous peoples have existed since the first contact between Europeans and Native peoples in the Americas. As historian Robert F. Berkhofer underlines, both the terms and the images of Native peoples were introduced by Europeans:

“Since the original inhabitants of the Western Hemisphere neither called themselves by a single term nor understood themselves as a collectivity, the idea and the image of the Indian must be a

White conception” (3). Indeed, it was Christopher Columbus who coined the term “Indian” when referring to the Native individuals he encountered on his travels in the 15th century. His wrong geographical concepts – based on his assumption or desire that he reached India – is the basis of the fact that people still use the geographically false term “Indian” for Native American peoples

(Berkhofer 4). This term does not only exist in English, but in numerous other languages today.

The Spanish, for which Columbus explored and colonized, first used it: “From the Spanish term came eventually the French Indien, the German Indianer, the English Indian, and similar in other

European languages for the New World inhabitant” (Berkhofer 5).

Besides the misleading term “Indian,” European explorers such as Columbus and

Vespucci were responsible for the main images of Native individuals and peoples. Europeans who could not encounter indigenous peoples firsthand had to trust the explorers’ travelogues and diary entries. In these written accounts, Columbus and others represented Native individuals as naked primitives, savages, and cannibals, and also contrasted their societies and religions with

European civilization and Christianity (Berkhofer 5). Other exploring European nations at the time such as England and France designed similar images of Native peoples. These two nations regarded Native peoples as even more savage than the Spanish because they did not encounter the flourishing civilizations of the Incas and Mayas. In total, however, white Christian civilization was presented as superior and more developed in all European cultures (Berkhofer

13).

Berkhofer further identifies three practices that Europeans used to transform Native individuals to stereotyped Indians: generalization, white standards, and moral judgment (25).

First of all, Europeans introduced the term and concept of Indians in order to conceive of the numerous culturally different tribes they encountered as one whole. Secondly, they compared all

Indians to standards that Europeans at the time deemed significant and highlighted deficiencies of Indians in terms of those white standards. Thirdly, Europeans morally evaluated and judged

Native peoples in their ethnographic descriptions. These practices were expressions of the culturally imperialist mindset of Europeans. They needed to conceive of Native peoples as primitive and savage Indians in order to underline the superiority of white Christian civilization.

Berkhofer stresses this reciprocal effect of these stereotypes: “For this reason, many commentators on the history of White Indian imagery see Europeans and Americans as using counterimages of themselves to describe Indians and the counterimages of Indians to describe themselves” (27). If Indians were presented as savage and primitive, Europeans as the counterimage appeared civilized and advanced.

2.2 Indian Stereotypes and Counter-Stereotypes

Indian stereotypes have remained highly influential for the perception of Native

American peoples and cultures. Berkhofer differentiates between two major conceptions of

14 stereotypes of Native Americans: the good Indian and the bad Indian. While there are numerous subcategories within the two, stereotypes categorize Indians as either good or bad. The good

Indian was “friendly, courteous, and hospitable to the initial invaders of his lands” (Berkhofer

28). Berkhofer further describes the good Indian:

Along with handsomeness of physique and physiognomy went great stamina and

endurance. Modest in attitude, if not always in dress, the noble Indian exhibited

great calm and dignity in bearing, conversation, and even under torture. Brave in

combat, he was tender in love for family and children. Pride in himself and

independence of other persons combined with a plain existence and wholesome

enjoyment of nature’s gifts. According to this version, the Indian, in short, lived a

life of liberty, simplicity, and innocence. (28)

In contrast, the bad Indian was presented as the complete opposite: “Nakedness and lechery, passion and vanity led to lives of polygamy and sexual promiscuity among themselves and constant warfare and fiendish revenge against their enemies” (Berkhofer 28). In both ways,

Europeans decided how and why Indians became part of the one or the other category. It is highly interesting that Europeans did not necessarily agree when categorizing Indians as good or bad. Rather, it was possible that the very same element of Indians or their culture lead some

Europeans to conceive of them as good, others as bad. For example, alleged primitivism of

Indians was seen as deficient and inferior to white culture, hence the bad Indian stereotype, or as desirable and a valid alternative to white civilization, hence the good Indian stereotype. The same is true for Indians’ alleged desire to fight, because of which Indians were seen as either bloodthirsty (when attacking innocent settlers) or courageous (when defending the tribe)

(Berkhofer 28-29).

There are numerous more specific expressions of the good and bad Indian, which can be found in various cultural texts such as in literature, film, and television. The list below contains a selection of them followed by facts that dismantle the various stereotypes. These stereotypes account for a limited number of images of Indians, which will be useful when analyzing

German-language children’s books. Choctaw historian Devon A. Mihesuah presents (among others) the following widespread stereotypes:

1. “Indians are all alike” (20).

One of the most popular stereotypes combines uncountable Native American tribes and their various cultures to the monolithic group of Indians. Mihesuah states that there are about 2.1 million Indians, 511 culturally distinct federally recognized tribes, and 200 unrecognized tribes

(20). These figures underline that the term ‘Indian’ means completely distinct cultural groups, which have little cultural connections and similarities with each other. She fittingly compares the diversity between Native American tribes to that between European nations: “Lumping Indians together into one group presumed to have the same cultural and physiological characteristics is the same as assuming that all Europeans are alike, that they speak the same language, have the same heritage, and share the same values” (20).

Connected to this stereotype is the fact that Indians represented in white (US and

European) cultures are predominantly Plains Indians. They are frequently presented as living in tipis in the prairie and hunting bison on horseback. Cherokee scholar Rayna Green explains that

“it is no accident that the last and most resilient enemy of Americanization comes to represent the most desirable form of playing Indian” (38). It is their resilience in fighting the US government in the 19th century that has stuck the most with white audiences in the whole world.

This fixation on Plains Indians, however, denies the existence of uncountable other Native

American tribes and their numerous distinct cultures. The concept of the monolithic Indian is factually wrong and a mere imagination of whites. For example, white representations “have tended to mix elements from different tribes, such as including a tipi and a totem pole in the same scene. In fact, tipis were and are used by the Plains tribes, while totem poles were and are carved by Northwestern tribal groups” (Reese). The same high degree of diversity is true for the lifestyles of Native Americans today: There are Native Americans in rural and urban areas, who are traditionalists or progressives, and who differ in numerous other categories (Mihesuah 24). In contrast to the dominant white imagination of monolithic Indians, Native American tribes and cultures are as different and distinct as other cultural groups everywhere in the world.

2. “Indians had no civilization until Europeans brought it to them” (37).

Indians are usually regarded as primitive and uncivilized, especially when compared to white European civilization. Underlying this wrong evaluation of Native American cultures was the “ethnocentric” mindset of Europeans (Mihesuah 37). This mindset led them to interpret every difference of their culture to those of Native Americans as a sign of superiority of their European civilization to the primitive lifestyles of Native Americans. As Mihesuah explains, the term

‘civilization’ is problematic because Europeans deliberately introduced it to elevate themselves above other cultural groups. Moreover, even when civilization is used to evaluate Native tribes, most Native societies met requirements to be regarded as such. For example, various Native tribes had sophisticated irrigation systems, trade partners, religions, and/or egalitarian societies

(37-38). What Europeans at the time could not grasp was the fact that Native American cultures were different from their own, and that this difference did not necessarily mean deficiency and inferiority.

In relation to the ethnocentric mindset of Europeans was the notion that the stages of childhood were similar to the evolution of human society from primitivism to civilization.

According to this theory, children were “little savages,” (Deloria 107) who had to live like

Indians for some time as preparation for their lives in white civilization. In turn, Native

Americans were regarded “as children of nature and […] they were denoted as childlike wards in their political relations to the U.S. government” (Deloria 106). Both white children and Native

Americans were attributed with similar traits such as being primitive, naïve, and uneducated. Not everyone, however, believed in and accepted this alleged superiority of white civilization. As

Berkhofer underlines, Indians’ alleged primitivism could be taken as a counter-example to white civilization:

In short, primitivism postulated people dwelling in nature according to nature,

existing free of history’s burdens and the social complexity felt by Europeans in

the modern period, and offering hope to mankind at the same time that they

constituted a powerful counter-example to existing European civilization. (72)

Whether considered positive or negative, white society agreed that Indians were primitive and uncivilized. While some used it to prove their superiority, others highlighted the flaws of white civilization with Indians’ primitivism.

3. “Indians are a vanished race” (74).

Another influential stereotype is that of the vanished Indian. According to this stereotype,

Indians do not exist in modern US society anymore because their ancestors died in wars, by diseases, or because they assimilated into white society. In fact, there was a decline through the centuries, from estimated 7 million Native Americans in 1492 to only 250 000 in 1900. In the

18 last century, however, the Native population has risen again to 2.1 million in 1994 (Mihesuah

74). These numbers indicate that the vanished Indian stereotype is factually false. Native

Americans are still a vital part of US society.

This stereotype is responsible for the notion of regarding Native Americans and their cultures as elements of the past with no room in the present. Due to the progress of white colonists and settlers, the fate of Indians was considered to be either death or assimilation into white society, thus confirming the triumph of white civilization. Europeans believed (and numerous people all over the world still do) in the “progressive cultural evolution: human societies progressed through stages – hunter / gatherer, pastoralist, agriculturalist, trader, manufacturer. Indian people necessarily existed in a different stage and thus, in relation to modern white Americans, in a different temporal zone” (Deloria 106). In this sense, it seemed inevitable that Indians were a vanishing race. There could be no evolution for Indians who still kept essential features of their Indianness such as primitivism and savagery. “Only civilization had history and dynamics in this view, so therefore Indianness must be conceived of as ahistorical and static” (Berkhofer 29). As a result, Native Americans today – who managed to persist – are expected to dress as Indians did in the past: “White Europeans and Americans expect even at present to see an Indian out of the forest or a Wild West show rather than on farm or in city” (Berkhofer 29). Indianness is considered timeless because evolution would mean losing that very Indianness.

4. “Indians were warlike and treacherous” (Mihesuah 48).

It is one of the most well known stereotypes of Indians that they are brave warriors.

Mihesuah points out that both white colonists and settlers as well as Native Americans used

19 violence against each other, but it is Native Americans who are deemed warlike and treacherous:

“While the history of Indian-Euro-American relations is filled with instances of European massacres of Indians, in movies and on television, it is always the Indians who are portrayed as bloodthirsty villains” (48). Bloodthirsty Indians can be found in numerous works of literature and film in which Indian warriors ambush innocent white settlers. At the same time, these representations neglect the fact that it “was the Euro-Americans’ desire for Indian land that initiated wars” (48) and resulted in terror in and genocide of Native communities. Paradoxically,

Indians’ ability to fight was interpreted as a positive trait by whites when they could use it for their own purposes. Killing Indians “enhanced their conqueror’s reputation” (49). The same notion is responsible for the fact that sports teams have used Indian mascots and team names in order to express their great fighting spirit.

5. “Indians did not value or empower women” (61).

Native American societies are frequently represented as patriarchal, even more so than white societies. Decision-makers are usually Indian men in movies and literature, while Indian women hardly play a role. Mihesuah explains that roles and chores of Native women were “less glamorous” (63), and therefore were hardly ever depicted. In contrast, men’s roles were highlighted because hunting and fighting were considered more interesting to audiences. In reality, however, numerous Native American societies such as the Cherokees and Iroquois were

“matrilineal and matrilocal societies” (61). The power of women shrunk over the centuries because colonists refused to interact with powerful women (64). Another influential stereotype about Native American women deals with their appearance. For white society, Indian women can be either squaws or princesses: “1) they are ugly, dirt, subservient, abused “squaws” who loved to torture white men; or 2) they are beautiful, exotic “Princesses,” often Chiefs’ daughters,

20 usually willing to leave their people to marry dashing Europeans” (61). Again, white men used their view on Native American women in order to empower themselves and their culture.

2.3 Effects of Indian Stereotypes

The stereotypes of Indians mentioned above (as well as the numerous others) have affected the way Native Americans as well as white Europeans and Americans have perceived

Native peoples and cultures. As pointed out above, all these stereotypes can be easily identified as factually false when taking a closer look. The problem, however, is that white Europeans and

Americans have hardly ever done that. White cultures have widely neglected to question their perceptions of and relationships to Native American peoples and cultures in order to dismantle hurtful stereotypes and ameliorate their mutual relationships. This is even more problematic when taking into account that the majority of the most influential stereotypes were introduced by

Columbus and other colonists around 1500 and have played a great role in forming people’s perceptions on Native Americans until today. Berkhofer explains how stereotypes have developed in US society: “[P]reconception seemed to have created image, and image in turn became fact” (17). He further identifies the social and cultural power of whites as the major reason why stereotypes regarding Native Americans are largely accepted as facts and truths, whether in the US or Europe: “Whether as a conception or as stereotype, however, the idea of the

Indian has created a reality in its own image as a result of the power of the Whites and the response of Native Americans” (3). Berkhofer does not clarify the term “Whites,” but it appears to include white colonists and settlers in the US as well as whites in Europe. All of them wielded social power, and therefore played a role in establishing stereotypes regarding Native Americans as facts.

2.3.1 The Victims of Stereotyping: Native Americans

The fact that stereotypes have been widely accepted as facts has gravely affected Native

Americans. Anthropologist Michael Dorris points out that Native Americans were not only forced to fight white colonists and settlers trying to occupy their lands, but they have also had to battle the myths whites propagated as truths about Native peoples and cultures: “In a certain sense, for five hundred years Indian people have been measured and have competed against a fantasy over which they have had no control. They are compared with beings who never really were, yet the stereotype is taken for truth” (100). It does not even matter if the stereotype represents Native Americans positively or negatively; both are equally devastating for Native people because stereotypes usually deny complexities and shades. The popular stereotype of the

Indian warrior, for example, could represent Indians either as brave and noble heroes who defend their tribe and defeat their enemies or as treacherous and evil savages who attack innocent white settlers. Both interpretations of the same stereotype are equally unrealistic and fantastical: The former shows an ideal hero (e.g. Winnetou), who real Native Americans can never live up to and they eventually end up frustrated and disillusioned. The latter presents Native Americans as intrinsically evil and hostile, especially to white people, and leads to them being confronted with prejudice and racial hatred. It becomes clear that all stereotypes, positive or negative, are detrimental to those depicted because they function as powerful images Native Americans are forced to engage with.

The most important effect of Indian stereotypes on Native Americans was that these mostly negative stereotypes greatly impacted the policies of the US government in regards to

Native American issues. The infamous phrase “The only good Indians are the dead Indians”

(Landry) uttered in a speech by the later US president Theodore Roosevelt in 1886 pointedly

22 verbalizes the US government’s actions since its formation. From the independence of the US

“until 1975, government policy alternated between eradicating the ‘Indian Problem’ through extermination/assimilation, and paternalistic programmes providing services and limited autonomy to reservation dwellers” (Native Americans). Underlying these policies was the notion that Native Americans stood in the way of (white) progress with their primitiveness and opposition to US land grabbing. For this reason, the US government sought to subordinate

Native American tribes by military and cultural means: “For White Americans during this long period of time, the only good Indian was indeed a dead Indian – whether through warfare or through assimilation” (Berkhofer 30). Examples for such policies are the Removal Act of 1830, which forced thousands of Native Americans from their ancestral lands, massacres such as at

Wounded Knee in 1890, and the introduction of boarding schools to forcefully assimilate Native

Americans into white US society.

Although the hurtful policies of the US government have not eradicated Native

Americans peoples and cultures – as most of them were designed for – they have led to the public perception, especially of white society, that Native Americans do no longer exist. Keeping

Native Americans in reservations apart from white society has been one of the methods. Another one is perpetuating stereotypes representing them as (Plains) Indians from the 19th century, as objects of the past. Hollywood movies have predominantly presented Indians as bloodthirsty savages, who fight white settlers in the Plains such as in Stagecoach (1939) and The Searchers

(1956). At the same time, they have neglected to show contemporary Native Americans or deal with any contemporary issues that they face. In this way, Indian stereotypes have created the illusion that Native American peoples are extinct and only account for one chapter in American history.

As Berkhofer highlights, the stereotypical image of the Indian is so popular that it has replaced the knowledge about real Native Americans for numerous whites: “In these ways modern Native Americans and their contemporary lifestyles have largely disappeared from the

White imagination” (30), while stereotypes have persisted. In addition to Hollywood, Mihesuah identifies the lack of voice Native Americans have had in academia:

Indians also lose their authoritative voice in the world of academia. Most books

on Indians are written by non-Indians who do not attempt to find Indians’

interpretations of historical events and therefore write from a Euro-American

perspective, evaluating tribes’ cultures and histories by non-Indian standards.

(114)

The same is true for other fields in the political, social, and cultural sphere such as policy- making, social programs, and producing movies considering Native peoples and issues.

Euro Americans have dominated every aspect of US society and culture, thus have also decided on the image of Native Americans. This flawed image of the Indian is so appealing to whites that it is profitable in the US as well as in Europe to play Indian. Playing Indian includes white children’s and adults’ role-plays as well as stressing or even inventing Native American heritage for economic purposes. Obviously, playing Indian is hurtful to Native Americans because it expresses a sense of ownership of Native culture without actually having experienced subordination and genocide. Green goes even so far as to consider playing Indian genocide of

Native Americans:

For, I would insist now, the living performance of ‘playing Indian’ by non-Indian

peoples depends upon the physical and psychological removal, even the death, of

real Indians. In that sense, the performance, purportedly often done out of a state

and implicit love for Indians, is really the obverse of another well-known cultural

phenomenon, ‘Indian hating,’ as most often expressed in another, deadly

performance genre called ‘genocide’. (31)

At first, genocide may seem extreme when applied to the practice of playing Indian. However, playing Indian involves non-Indians pretending to be Native Americans, usually in stereotypical ways. Since this practice is not only widely spread but also profitable, actual Native cultures are recoded with Indian stereotypes. Without resistance by Native Americans to determine themselves, Native cultures would already be lost to “would-be Indians, who reinscribe nineteenth-century, romantic images of ‘noble savages’” (Shanley 28).

There is still an ongoing battle over the image of Native Americans between Native peoples and white societies in the US and Europe with no end in sight. Whites in the US and

Europe are reluctant to abandon using Indian stereotypes due to financial reason: “[Indians’] recognition factor, as they say on Madison Avenue, outranks, on a world scale, that of Santa

Claus, Mickey Mouse, and Coca Cola combined” (Dorris 99). Only because of Native American activism and the continued resistance against attempts of being controlled and subordinated by the US government, Native Americans have maintained their agency and self-determination. For centuries, white Europeans and Americans have attempted to control what Native peoples and their cultures are. Thus far, Native Americans have successfully resisted the attempts of cultural genocide by Euro Americans and Europeans for centuries.

2.3.2 Profiteers of Stereotyping: White Cannibal Culture

Stereotypes regarding Native Americans were created in order to clearly distinguish oneself – that is European and Euro American societies – from Native peoples and cultures. This distinction expressed the feeling of superiority white colonists had when observing and interacting with Native peoples. Every difference between white civilizations to Native cultures was interpreted as a sign of superiority of white Christian civilization. Even today, stereotyping

“allows those who do it to feel superior to the group being stereotyped” (Mihesuah 115). The ethnocentric mindset of Europeans has played an important role in establishing images of stereotyped Indians. As Dorris highlights, the “Indian mystique was designed for mass consumption by a European audience, the fulfillment of old and deepseated expectations for ‘the

Other’” (99). Creating the inferior ‘Other’ made whites colonists feel superior, while being ignorant to the diversity and progressive nature of Native cultures. This alleged superiority is still significant in today’s times, especially in terms of discrimination of Native peoples by individuals, corporations, and even the US government. A current example are oil and gas pipelines that are (planned to be) built on Native lands without consulting the tribes involved first.

Despite the obvious negative effects on Native Americans, these stereotypes have maintained their place in US society and culture. The main reason for this is that appropriation of

Native culture is highly popular and profitable. Cultural studies scholar C. Richard King claims that Native Americans are objectified and used as commodities in modern capitalist societies around the world: “In the twenty-first century, corporations use images of American Indians to market goods and services and create profitable and pleasurable stories and experiences, arguably perfecting a long tradition of commodity racism” (12). The concept of commodity

26 racism involves white appropriation of aspects of Native cultures, which are then used and sold as commodities without consulting or including Native Americans in the process. It is considered racism because it is based on stereotypical and racist images. What is more, the whole process of cultural appropriation could not exist without racist attitudes of the appropriator, who “reduces the living people and culture to the status of objects” (Root 72).

King further argues that commodity racism is not only detrimental to Native Americans because they lose authority over their own cultures, but it also confirms cultural imperialism and the feeling of white superiority: “The popular and expressive forms of contemporary consumer culture remain rooted in commodity racism and cultural imperialism. As such, they continue to recycle distorted images of American Indians, reinforcing and reproducing the white racial frame” (22). The white racial frame constitutes how people conceive of their race as well as that of others. Through this frame, the white race is perceived as the norm and allegedly superior to all other races. It is written into popular films, books, other forms of media, and even policy as unchallengeable truth, in the form of a “sense of inevitability,” a “sense of ownership,” and a

“sense of empowerment” (11). In this way, the fate of Native Americans as objects of the past appears inevitable, and white Americans and Europeans feel they have ownership of these objects because of their social power.

Art historian Deborah Root discusses the appropriation and commodification of Native

American cultures and refers to appropriators as cannibals. In her view, cultural appropriation is not only borrowing and sharing of cultural aspects, but it also “involves the taking up and commodification of aesthetic, cultural, and, more recently, spiritual forms of a society. Culture is neatly packaged for the consumer’s convenience” (70). Commodification of cultural aspects would not necessarily be a problem if those profiting from these cultural commodities were part

27 of the commodified culture. However, commodification of culture combined with appropriation results in “culture theft, the theft of voice,” which appropriators are rarely held accountable but rather financially compensated for (Keeshig-Tobias 98). Root points out that white artists degrade Native Americans to objects in the process of appropriation: “Because the people from whom the material is taken are not compensated, they by definition are treated as objectified, passive sources of inspiration rather than participants in an exchange of ideas” (72). On the one hand, this is problematic from a financial point of view when Native Americans are neither included in the process nor in the benefits of commodifying aspects of their cultures. On the other hand, Native Americans are rendered objects and lose their self-determination and voice over their own cultures.

Moreover, Root argues that in the processes of appropriation and commodification of aspects of Native cultures a new element comes into being, thus culture is deterritorialized and recoded:

The connection between capital and traditional culture, and between the

traditional form and the commodified form of culture, is extremely important to

the problem of appropriation because the explicit referencing of a traditional

system of meaning is the reason cultural difference sells. The original, culturally

situated form of the commodity is retained, at least enough so that the consumer is

able to recognize it as being, in some respects at least, traditional, yet these forms

are assigned a new meaning by the larger market, a process that itself elides the

specific social and historical context in which all this buying and selling are

taking place. (85)

This capitalist practice is so successful because it uses the exoticism of different cultures, which is appealing to modern customers, and at the same time only relevant elements – that is to the appropriator – are transferred to the capital culture. The traditional meaning and/or context do not matter, only the financial opportunities of the element in capital culture. For example, Indian hobbyists randomly pick aspects of various different Native American tribes and cultures, and use and sell them for their own financial benefit, often in completely different contexts. The results are profitable but utterly recoded elements, which may even replace the traditional elements in capital culture.

2.4 Modern Expressions of Stereotypes in US Culture

In modern US and European cultures, there are numerous examples of traditional elements of Native American cultures that are recoded and even replace these traditional elements as artificial, virtually purely capitalist commodities. The film industry has been one of the major perpetuators of Indian stereotypes in modern times. Berkhofer mentions that “the images of the good and bad Indian persist from the era of Columbus up to the present without substantial modification or variation” (71). This is also true for most movies from the last 35 years – besides those directed by Native American directors such as Smoke Signals (1998) and

Atanarjuat. The Fast Runner (2001). Additionally, movies frequently misrepresent elements of

Native cultures such as gender roles: “In movies and on television, roles of Indian men have been glorified while women’s roles are ignored” (Mihesuah 63). Movies are so successful in presenting and teaching about Indians – usually not on Native cultures – that scholars such as

King refer to them as part of a popular pedagogy:

Popular pedagogy teaches important, and at times, seemingly unchanging lessons

about American Indians that created a collective understanding about Indians

(what are Indians like, what do they believe, how do they act, and so forth), the

history of Indian-white relations (who did what when, what people and events

matter, and how we should remember them), and the contours of Indianness

(savagism, stoicism, vanishing, inferior, and so forth). (11)

This popular pedagogy is responsible for the fact that Indian stereotypes and (misrepresented) elements of Native American cultures are visible in virtually all aspects of US culture. Examples can be found in advertisements, fashion as well as in names and mascots of sports teams.

What King calls the popular pedagogy is also vital for understanding the practice of playing Indian. Playing Indian refers to the practice of non-Indians acting as if they actually were

– what they understand as – Indian. Green points out that this practice is pervasive in various social and cultural contexts all over the world:

This expressive complex of behaviours reiterates itself freely across boundaries of

race and class, gender and age group, regional and other affiliative groups, to find

its various expressions in a range of media from traditional, orally transmitted

texts (songs, stories, jokes, anecdotes) to formal, literary texts, to artifacts

(clothing, toys, tools, drawings, paintings), to dramatic performances (games,

gestures, dramas) and ritual enactments or reenactments. (30)

Playing Indian includes children and adults acting out role-plays, hobbyists assuming an Indian lifestyle, and it even plays a role in sports teams choosing Indian names or mascots. All of these perpetuators attempt to establish a connection with elements that are usually understood as

Indian such as the fight between Indians and Cowboys, Indians’ special relationship to nature, and their savagery and vigor in competitions.

Obviously, money is one of the main reasons why non-Indians play Indian. Images of

Indians are profitable, which becomes evident in the Washington Redskins’ resistance to drop the racist name of this professional football team. Apart from money, playing Indian “offers this escape, of course, for all who perform the roles, however brief or transient the performance may be, and thus, perhaps, we can understand part of its attraction” (Green 31). However, it is generally clear that playing Indian is hurtful to Native Americans because important elements of their cultures are misrepresented by strangers who have no interest in their actual cultures or in their pressing issues. Literary studies scholar Susan Marcia Stan underlines how problematic playing Indian is – whether out of financial reasons or not – by substituting Indian with other races: “[I]t assumes that being Indian is something that can be put on or taken off at will and completely ignores the cultural heritage of Native people. Further, we don’t “play Chinese” or

“play African,” and we certainly don’t “play White”.” It is inappropriate for non-Indians to pretend to be Indian because they have not experienced any culturally significant moments, whether positive or negative, that constitute being Native American either personally or in oral history.

The practice of playing Indian is morally wrong because when non-Indians pretend to be

Indian, they neglect Native peoples and their cultures, and instead are solely concerned with their own needs and benefits. Paradoxically, these non-Indians – when asked for their reasoning – often claim to be fascinated with Native cultures, and therefore dress up and behave like Indians.

For example, Dan Snyder, the owner of the professional football team Washington Redskins, wrote a letter to fans in 2014, claiming that the name honors Native Americans: “I wrote then– and believe even more firmly now–that our team name captures the best of who we are and who we can be, by staying true to our history and honoring the deep and enduring values our name

31 represents” (ICMN Staff). This alleged appreciation of Native American culture negatively affects Native Americans because a racial slur is publicly used and thus normalized. In this way,

“Indians are in effect, loved to death through playing Indian, while despised when they want to act out their real traditional roles on the American landscape” (Green 50). Those playing Indian are so obsessed with their Indian fantasy that they reject actual Native peoples and their different cultures: “For most people, the myth has become real and a preferred substitute for ethnographic reality” (Dorris 99). Consequently, actual Native American cultures, and particularly issues they face are muted. Native American issues are not only underrepresented in the US, but even more so in parts of the earth where inhabitants rarely come into contact with actual Native American peoples and cultures. In these areas, stereotypical images of Native Americans are the most influential source of information. This is especially visible in the German-speaking cultures of

Germany and Austria, which will be discussed in the next chapters.

3. German-Speakers and Indians

Indians have been incorporated into German-speaking cultures for centuries, although they appear to be geographically and historically distant from Native cultures on the American continent. At the time other European nations such as Spain, France, and England came in contact with indigenous peoples in the Americas, the German-speaking areas did not resemble today’s nation states, especially Germany and Austria. While Germany was divided into numerous sovereign states until the unification in 1871, Austria was part of the Austro-

Hungarian Empire until the end of WWI. Both empires did not have any colonies in the

Americas, and therefore could not directly encounter Native tribes and their cultures. For this reason, German-speaking cultures depended on the accounts of European explorers and

32 colonizers in order to receive news about the foreign peoples. The German term for Native

Americans “Indianer,” which is a translation from Columbus’s name for them, supports this claim.

Additionally, German-speaking cultures assumed the concept of Native American peoples as stereotyped Indians from the sea-faring nations, especially France. While the Spanish and English waged horrific wars and eliminated whole populations militarily and with the help of diseases, the French “had far better relations with Indians than the English did” (Conlin 92).

Because far less French than English settlers decided to cross the Atlantic, the French mission’s goal was trading for valuable goods such as fur. They even supported intermarriage and amalgamation (Conlin 92). Consequently, as Berkhofer explains, the “Noble Savage” image originates from the French (75), while the English spread the image of “Bloodthirsty Demons.”

The US transformed their perception of Indians to that of noble savages not until the 19th century, after the last military encounters with Native American tribes (88).

Unlike those nations with a desire for Native American resources and land, German- speaking nations had little use demonizing Native peoples. That is why Native peoples and cultures were predominantly considered noble savages in German-speaking cultures, thus totally different from the dominant American perception. However, both German-speaking cultures as well as American culture used Indians as a means to build national identity. Deloria delineates this process for American culture, but it can also be applied to the relatively young nations of

Germany and Austria:

For the revolutionary generation and its successors, the creating of national

identity was wrapped up in imagining and then appropriating an interior Indian

Other, a figure situated within American societal boundaries. Indians represented

images, emotions, and ideologies that signified Americanness. By imagining

Indian Others as a kind of us rather than a them, one could more easily gain

access to those Indian / American qualities and make them one’s own. The

resulting identity was compromised, however, by political and imperial American

identity that also required aggressive, exterior Indian Others who justified the

violent acquisition of Indian land. (103)

Similarly, German-speaking cultures imagined and appropriated an Indian Other – based on images by other European nations – to create the German or Austrian identity with fitting and prestigious Indian qualities. Certain Indian qualities were presented as typically German such as tribalism and fighting spirit. Unlike in American culture, there was no need for an aggressive, exterior Indian Other in Germany and Austria, which facilitated this process. Both cultures were too far away from the wars and the other atrocities of other European nations and the US. The lack of contact with Native Americans also led to the situation that stereotypical images needed and used in creating national identity in Germany and Austria were hardly ever contested, and, because of that, one author, Karl May, could shape the perception of German-speaking cultures regarding Native American peoples and cultures.

3.1 Winnetou and Old Shatterhand: Noble Savage and German Hero

Karl May is classified as one of the most influential German writers of all time. For this reason, his biography has been discussed abundantly in scholarly circles, especially when it comes to his influence on German-Indian relations. In short, May was a petty criminal, who was arrested several times and didn’t start writing stories until his thirties. His literary ambitions were unsuccessful at first, until he published his first Winnetou and Old Shatterhand novel (Galchen).

This novel as well as the numerous stories that followed developed into German classics.

Scholars agree that May’s persona added to his oeuvre. He deliberately did not clarify the confusion about Old Shatterhand being his alter ego. On the contrary, May fueled it as Galchen describes in The New Yorker:

He commissioned a gunsmith to make two of the rifles imagined in his novels—

Winnetou’s Silberbüchse and Old Shatterhand’s Bärentöter. He claimed to

understand “more than 1,200 languages and dialects.” He was fond of dressing up

in a fringed leather frontiersman’s jacket and wide-brimmed felt hat. For anyone

with remaining doubts as to the veracity of his stories, he said, “I really am Old

Shatterhand . . . and have experienced the stories I tell.”

At this time, it was virtually impossible to prove May wrong. Obviously, there was no internet to quickly discredit his claims, but there were a few Native Americans travelling through Europe, even around 1900. May managed to cleverly react to those who could easily unmask his false claims and potentially hurt his literary success: “Once May became famous, when real Indians came through Germany in Wild West shows May not only avoided them but defamed them as

“outcasts from their tribe” who played “vile, lying roles”” (Galchen). That May played Old

Shatterhand in real life increased the authenticity of his stories. It rendered them real-life accounts, similar to the travelogues of Columbus and others. As with those texts, it took generations until errors in May’s stories were found and pointed out. By that time, however,

May’s stories had shaped perceptions on Indians so gravely that it hardly mattered that May had never set foot on American soil (Galchen).

Because May never travelled to the US and directly encountered the lands and peoples he depicted, he greatly incorporated elements from writers before him. At this time, in the latter part of the 19th century, “James Fenimore Cooper’s “Leatherstocking Tales” were best-sellers in

Europe as well as in America” (Galchen). Moreover, there were German-speaking writers such as Charles Sealsfield and Friedrich Gerstäcker, who had travelled to America and written stories about their experience on this continent. Historian H. Glenn Penny argues that May used elements from various sources for his stories and sold them as authentic texts about his own experience:

What May did do was mine the literature produced by the writers who came

before him and simplify Germans’ efforts to engage it. Much of the serious

scholarship on May stresses the ways in which he literally borrowed characters,

plots, and entire pieces of other authors’ work in addition to taking information

from encyclopedias, travelogues, and many other texts on America for his

fictions. These scholars have generally agreed that part of his success was due to

his use of these already extant stories for the historical and factual backdrop of his

adventures. That made them both familiar and authentic for his readers. (66)

May’s accomplishment does not lie in creativity or mastery of literary techniques, that is qualities that usually render authors and their texts classics and/or successful. Rather, he successfully selected and adapted already existing elements for his stories to make them appropriate for the broader public, especially teenagers. Additionally, May knew how to market his product by playing a character from his story, and thus creating authenticity. Penny is right when he states that “May’s success is also irritating, because he capitalized upon a powerful

36 trend in German literature but contributed little to it” (2013, 65). In other words, May was an average writer but an astounding marketer.

As discussed above, May used already existing images regarding Native Americans in his stories. The major reason was, of course, that May could not write about his own experience with

Native Americans because he had never encountered or interacted with any. Additionally, Indian stereotypes had already existed in German culture before May because news and images about

Native Americans had been distributed from other European nations, especially the French. For this reason, May’s depiction of Native Americans mostly refers to the noble savage stereotype, which was the most common one in France. In most of May’s stories, he presents “Native

Americans as innocent victims of white aggressors” (Michaels 206). Commonly, white bandits attempt to defraud Native tribes in order to steal their lands and resources. This clear distinction between good, noble Indians and lying, greedy whites “made the books easy to read and encouraged young readers to play out the parts, much as May himself had done” (Penny 2013,

66). Unlike in the US tradition, German-speaking readers tended to ally with the Indians in the stories, as Old Shatterhand, the German settler, becomes the blood brother of the Apache

Winnetou in May’s novels. May designed his stories in a way that clearly led readers to identify with German settlers, who usually respect and befriend Indians in May’s stories. In this way of representation, Penny identifies the reason for the appeal of May’s stories in German-speaking culture: “Thus, May’s popularity stemmed to a large degree from the familiarity of both the

American Indian theme and the German characters he placed at its center” (2013, 66). Since the

German characters in May’s stories have positive attitudes towards Indians, German-speaking readers and the culture at large view Indians as positive noble savages. This perception of

Indians as friends is completely different to the US tradition, in which Indians tend to be presented as bloodthirsty and treacherous enemies.

May’s depiction of Indians as friends and allies is certainly positive towards Native

Americans. However, this perception of Indians as noble savages is nothing less stereotypical than the bloodthirsty Indian imagery: “Although May’s image of Native Americans is positive, it is nevertheless shaped by stereotypes” (Michaels 206). In considering Indians friends and allies, they are reduced to helpers of white (German) characters, who manage to save them from the evil white man. More importantly, Indian characters such as Winnetou are unrealistic heroes; these stories “present fairy tales of a better world with larger-than-life saviour figures” (Michaels

207-208). Another aspect of Indian characters such as Winnetou relates to their environment. He is presented as an “environmentalist who lives in harmony with the land and is in tune with nature in a mystical way” (Stan). This representation misrepresents Native American cultures and their relationships to nature. It results in a situation in which real-life Native American individuals can never live up to this perfect, stereotypical figure.

May’s Indians are limited to the Plains Indians, who live in the prairie, reside in tipis, and hunt bison. Although there are several different tribes shown in May’s stories, they are presented in a monolithic way, without any tribal diversity (Stan). Galchen highlights that May’s stories show “greenhorn errors” such as that the “Apache and Kiowa were allies and not enemies, for example.” May did not use specific names of tribes because their distinctive cultures and histories were important to him – he had never encountered any of them. Rather, May included them because they made his stories sound more authentic, and he was aware of the fact that his readers were not able to identify his inaccuracies. German language and literature scholar

Jennifer Michaels concludes that despite May’s “sympathy for Native Americans and admiration

38 for their resistance to American colonization, May and the Westerns later based on his works perpetuate widely held romantic stereotypes of Native Americans as noble savages” (206). May exploited the need of German-speaking societies during and after industrialization and urbanization for “the primitive” and “the unspoiled” (Lutz 168).

3.2 Karl May and German-Speaking “Indianthusiasm” (Lutz)

Karl May cleverly satisfied his readers’ need for an Indian ‘Other’ that responded to industrialization and urbanization in the late 19th and the early 20th century. His stories became one of the most read stories in German-speaking cultures with more than a hundred million copies (Galchen). Penny claims that “May’s work never eclipsed Cooper’s tales or the thrill of

Buffalo Bill, but it did benefit from them and join them in perpetuating and broadening the

German obsession with American Indians” (2013, 67). While May’s stories are ubiquitous in

German culture, “May is virtually unknown to Americans, unless one is a student of German culture” (Stan). One main reason is certainly that May depicts Indians as friends of upright whites, while only being enemies of white bandits. This view comes into conflict with the (past) position of the US government that regarded Native Americans as obstacles to US expansion and white progress. In May’s stories, those characters are depicted as evil that hold beliefs which were in accordance with the US government. Galchen also explains the indifference of US culture to May by referring to the different situations in the US versus German-speaking cultures:

For Americans, the West was a frontier and a place of new rules, but it could

never be as distant a land of wonder and transformation as it was for May; it just

wasn’t far enough away. Which may be part of why Karl May’s stories have

never met with much success in English translation.

For German-speaking readers, May’s stories are exotic and show friendly encounters between white (German) settlers and Indians, thus resulting in fascination of these locations, characters, and stories. In contrast, all the negative aspects of US-Native American relations such as wars with Native tribes, land grabbing, and genocide are part of American history and identity.

Therefore, May’s stories could never resonate in American culture such as they did in Europe.

In German-speaking cultures, the obsession with May has survived until today, particularly because his stories were transformed into highly popular film adaptations in the

1960s and 1970s. These Westerns reached large audiences at the time of their release, and they are even shown on television today. Michaels states that German Westerns, based on May’s stories, were “in some way progressive since they raise questions about white responsibility for the destruction of Native Americans” (208). Although these movies portray Native Americans stereotypically, that is as noble savages, they do not depict them as enemies of white progress as

American movies frequently did. In The Searchers (1956), for example, John Wayne’s violence towards Indians – he shoots an already dead Indian in the head – is rendered as normal behavior against Indian enemies (Reel Injun 33:00-34:23). In contrast, Indians function as noble heroes fighting white bandits in German Westerns. As mentioned above, German Westerns were successful even decades after their release dates, and more movies and TV series were produced well into the 1990s (Michaels 210).

May’s books as well as their movie adaptations have remained influential in German- speaking culture. Of course, both literary and film versions can still be consumed today.

Moreover, German admirers of May honor his heritage with the annual Karl May festival in Bad

Segeberg, in which his stories are transferred on stage. Usually, well-known German actors play the audiences’ beloved characters Winnetou and Old Shatterhand. In 2015, the festival season

“brought in a total of 346,677 people which set a record for the third consecutive year (“Treasure of Silver Lake”)” (Vacchio). This obsession is not limited to Germany. There is a “number of

German and Austrian towns [that] have Karl May festivals, but the festival in Bad Segeberg is the largest, the most magnificently staged, and probably the most financially successful. It began in 1952” (Galchen). These staged stories can be considered the final step in creating Indians and their culture in German-speaking cultures. What started with Karl May’s books and spread with film adaptations of his novels, is re-interpreted in a “natural outdoor amphitheatre,” (Galchen) which increases authenticity for audiences. There, May’s stories can be experienced in a way that seems to be virtually real life.

This obsession with May’s Indian stories has developed into a cult about everything

Indian in Germany and Austria. May’s view on Native Americans has played a decisive role in shaping German-speaking culture’s perception. As Stan underlines, this perception is largely based on myths: “May’s books, together with Hollywood films and pulp fiction, have fed certain myths about American Indians that are so ingrained in popular culture as to be almost impossible to dispel.” These myths become apparent in hobbyism, which refers to the phenomenon of non-

Indians meeting with other enthusiasts to play Indian. Hobbyists understand Indians as ahistorical, that is from the 19th century, and without variation, so that only Plains Indians are considered real Indians (Green 43). This phenomenon is controversial, especially among Native

Americans. In general, most Native Americans confronted with hobbyism criticize the fact that hobbyists do not actually engage with Native peoples and cultures, but rather with a myth that has little to do with reality. When they realize that their understanding of Native Americans is misguided, “European hobbyists or “Indianer” (Germans mainly) are disappointed to discover that Plains tribes do not live their lives as portrayed by the 19th century German pulp novelist,

Karl May” (Mihesuah 12). In this view, it is not the interest in actual Native American cultures, but the false image of Indians created by May that drives hobbyists to play “Wannabee” Indians:

“Europeans are assisted in their fantasies of these warriors by the writer, Karl May (the German

Fenimore Cooper) whose tales of an America he never saw, tales of Old Shatterhand the Indian

Scout, fuel the Western fires for German versions of playing Indian forever” (Green 38).

As stated above, hobbyism is based on the assumption that Native Americans and their cultures are relicts from the past, and that only Plains Indians are real Indians. Consequently, this

“romanticized view leaves little room for the here-and-now Indian, who often lives in stark contrast to this stereotype” (Stan). While it is certainly true for the majority of hobbyists that they neglect deviating lifestyles and contemporary issues of Natives, several scholars argue that hobbyism is a major driver for others to engage more deeply and honestly with Native peoples and cultures. Galchen shares her own experience when talking to hobbyists in Germany: “May’s idealizations and errors have inspired countless fans to undertake detailed cultural investigations.

[…] Part of being a Karl May fan, it seems, is correcting Karl May.” As Galchen experienced,

May’s stories can function as starting points for engaging with Native cultures and issues.

According to Green, this interest in today’s Native American cultures accounts for the major difference between German and US hobbyism: “[U]nlike in America, the hobbyist movement is accompanied by a passion for contemporary Indian politics and literature as well as for the material and dramatic culture of the Plains” (43). While the enthusiasm of hobbyists and Karl

May fans may have positive effects on Native American peoples, most hobbyists and fans will never transcend May’s Indian stereotypes.

3.3 Historical Reasons: Building a National Identity with Indians

As highlighted above, Indians occupy a special place in German-speaking culture and have influenced various parts of it. The stereotype of the Indian has even left its imprint on the

German language, “where sentences like “ein Indianer weint nicht!” (an Indian doesn’t cry), “ein

Indianer kennt keinen Schmerz” (an Indian braves pain), or figures such as “der letzte

Mohikaner” (the last of the Mohicans) have become part of everyday speech” (Lutz 169). This perceived special relationship of German-speaking culture with Indians is largely based on Karl

May’s work and the success thereof. While his stories were hardly received outside of German- speaking culture, and especially not in America, other cultures have noticed the impact of May’s writing for German-speaking readers. Therefore, international journalists and scholars (Eddy,

Feest, Galchen, Green, Haircrow, Michaels, Stan, Vacchio, Zantop) frequently refer to Karl May when discussing why German-speaking culture is so fascinated with Indians.

May’s influence on German-speaking culture’s relationship with Indians is undeniable.

There are numerous theories trying to explain his success in Germany such as those dealing with historical developments in Germany. Both scholars Hartmut Lutz (170) and Susanne Zantop (5) explain Germans’ obsession with Indians by referring to Germany’s very own history as a nation. In their view, Germans needed and used Indians in their process of building their nation and identity. In 18th century, numerous German states were occupied by the French under

Napoleon and had to resist this imperialist power. Consequently, Germans regarded their history similar to that of Native tribes: numerous tribal nations that had to fight back foreign invaders in order to secure their national and cultural future. In 19th century, the German states were unified, and Germans were involved in building their nation and establishing their own culture and identity. At this time, May’s stories became popular, and his depiction of brave and just German

43 settlers functioned as guiding principles for German identity. In this way, his stories as well as those by others were elevated to the status of fairy tales that constituted German cultural identity.

Austrian anthropologist Christian F. Feest underlines that after Germany’s unification, “more than a thousand titles of fiction relating to American Indians were published in the last quarter of the nineteenth-century alone” (1990, 316). He further links this boom in literature about Indians to Germany’s high emigration rate to the US, which “may indeed be seen as a major factor in determining the interest in America in general and in the Indians in particular in the respective countries of origin” (2002, 37).

Karl May’s success in Austria is not as thoroughly dealt with in scholarly circles since the main focus lies on Germany. Unlike Germany, (the main part of) Austria has had a long national tradition within the Austro-Hungarian Empire, and therefore its national cultural identity appears to have been more solid than that of the young German Empire around 1900. That is why, Austrian essayist and librarian Alfred Pfoser explains May’s success in Austria with the claim that May and his Austrian audience had a deep personal relationship:

Als Beweis können dafür verschiedene Äußerungen dienen, die in seinen Büchern

vorkommen und seine dem österreichischen Land und Volk entgegengebrachte

Sympathie widerspiegeln und die von den Karl-May-Anhängern unter den

österreichischen Journalisten auch gern zitiert wurden. (130)

Additionally, May visited Austria numerous times, and he was promoted by famous Austrian writer Peter Rosegger, who was among the first to publish one of May’s stories in Austria

(Pfoser 131). Another reason for his success in Austria was that even the Austrian emperors appreciated his stories: “Erzherzöge umschwärmten ihn, selbst die Gattin des Thronfolgers

44 erwies sich als seine Gönnerin. May registrierte voller Stolz, daß das österreichische Kaiserhaus seine Bücher las” (Pfoser 132). All these factors played a part in May’s success in Austria because his stories were recommended by those holding the most cultural power at the time. In this way, they established Karl May as a well-respected writer in Austria around 1900, which laid the groundwork for his decade-long success.

Since Germany and Austria are relatively young nations, when compared to others such as England, Spain, and France, they did not participate in colonialism in the Americas. For this reason, German history and identity is not as tainted of colonial experience, especially of the cruelties committed by other colonizing nations. This gave Germans the moral high ground over the French and British until WWII, and Feest even identifies “a theme in German literature relating to America that depicts Germany as the potentially better colonial power, a presumption that made Germany the natural ally of the Indians in their struggle against British or French domination” (1990, 317). According to this theme, Germans and Indians would have a more just colonial relationship, while still being a colonial power and placing themselves above Indians.

Paradoxically, Germans considered Indians their natural allies against colonizers, while being a colonizing power, especially in Africa, themselves. Zantop explains that May’s stories are responsible for this factually false view of Germans as the better colonial power: “Unlike

Spanish, British, or French colonizers, Germans – May’s fiction suggests – were/are able to establish a relationship of mutual recognition and collaboration with American Indians” (4). In reality, Germans proved before and during WWII that they did not treat the colonized and minorities any better than the US, the French, or the British. Lutz relates the fascination with

Indians in German-speaking culture to the Holocaust. Similar to the US, German-speaking culture has used the ‘Other’ to both romanticize and demonize it. While the US has both

45 romanticized and demonized Native Americans, German-speaking culture has romanticized

Indians and at the same time demonized Jews (and other geographically closer minorities) (167).

Lutz further underlines that the geographical distance or proximity of the ‘Other’ plays an important role in deciding what it is used for: “The Indianer as the external other who, from a safe distance, loves the self would compensate and cover up for the internal other whom the self could then hate and annihilate” (180). This explains how it was possible in German-speaking culture to admire Indians and at the same time despise Jews and other minorities. Additionally, establishing this connection to Indians rather than other colonizers means that German-speaking culture – in which horrific crimes against minorities have been committed – “allows Germans to identify with the victims of history, rather than with the victimizers” (169). In this way, it alleviates the pains of the past and present and helps German-speaking culture keep a clean(er) conscience.

In addition to historical reasons, Indians have proven to be highly lucrative in German- speaking culture. Similar to the US, the connection between German-speaking culture and Indian culture is exaggerated in order to increase demand for Indian products such as books, movies, and fashion items. “German Indianthusiasm” is exploited for financial reasons because the

“Indian lore is marketable and profitable” (Lutz 169). Indians are such a significant part of

German-speaking culture that it feels entitled to use elements of Indian culture as part of their own German-speaking culture. This is what Root calls the “entitlement of the appropriator” (72) and King “the sense of ownership” (11); both are based on the social and cultural power of

Germany and Austria, in contrast to Native American tribes. This entitlement or ownership is expressed, for example, by the Karl May museum in Radebeul, Germany when it resisted returning Native American scalps from its exhibition to the tribe it belonged to (Eddy). Other

46 examples are professional non-Indian hobbyists, who “by claiming the right to improvise on the most sacred rituals, have begun to develop a sense of ownership over Native culture” (Haircrow).

These German-speaking appropriators highlight the special connection they may feel to Indian culture, but their behavior is hardly different to that of other appropriators in Europe and the US.

All of them use Indians for their own respective needs, whether financial or other.

3.4 Special Relationship: A Profitable Myth

As suggested above, German-speaking culture considers its relationship to Indians special. When taking a closer look, however, numerous aspects explaining this special bond can be dismantled as fabricated myths. These myths are used by German-speaking culture to claim authority over Indian culture and use it as part of its own culture. On the one hand, German- speaking culture has used Indians as the ‘Other’ for the means of both contrast to and identification with them. On the other hand, Indians have been recognized as highly profitable marketable goods. Both ways of using Indians are also carried out by other European nations, in which enthusiasm for Indians is as widely spread as in Germany and Austria. There are numerous examples that underline that the special bond between German-speaking culture and

Indians is a myth. Feest mentions and dismantles the most prominent arguments for the special relationship between German-speaking culture and Indians. First, only Germans were said to be able to live with Native Americans, which was used to highlight mutual understanding between the cultures. In reality, numerous other Europeans joined Native American tribes; especially the

French had close relations to their trade partners (2002, 33). Secondly, the special relationship between Sitting Bull, the chief of the Sioux in the late 19th century, and German journalist

Rudolf Cronau, who travelled to the US and allegedly became friends with Sitting Bull, is

“largely imaginary” and rather smart marketing than the truth (2002, 35). In fact, various

European cultures have tried to establish a special relationship with Indians, especially writers and artists from France, Poland, and England (2002, 30). Most importantly, the hype around Karl

May is largely responsible for the fact that scholars deal with Indians in Europe through the lens of German culture, while neglecting writers from other cultures. Thus, scholars directly participate in singling out and exaggerating German interest in Indians and downplaying others’

(2002, 37). Additionally, hobbyism is not exclusively a phenomenon in German culture:

Not only does hobbyism have a substantial tradition in the United States, but it

occurs nearly everywhere in western, northern, central, and eastern Europe. In

some regions it appears to be a fairly recent phenomenon, but it has deep

historical roots in countries such as Great Britain, the Netherlands, France, and

the former Czechoslovakia. Although there are recent video documentaries on

Indian hobbyism in the Czech Republic and in Russia, the prominence of German

hobbyism may be attributable to the fact that it has been covered earlier and more

frequently in the media and that it has even been the subject of some serious

research. (2002, 31)

Feest also claims that there is not even such a large number of hobbyists in Germany when its whole population is taken into account and compared to other countries (2002, 31).

Both Feest and Zantop argue that other European cultures have been as enthusiastic about

Indians for decades. Interestingly, it is common for numerous European nations to create and emphasize a special relationship between one’s own culture to Indians: “On closer look, however, these “Indians” turn out to be a population inhabiting the European mind, not the

American landscape, a fictional assemblage fabricated over the past five centuries to serve

48 specific cultural and emotional needs of its inventors” (Feest 1990, 313). This special link between European cultures and Indians is nothing more than ordinary practice. The dynamic image of Indians in Europe supports the claim that the relationship between European cultures and Indians has never been mutual but one-sided and exploitive: “That the image of the “Indian” in Europe has not remained static over time is, truly, the best evidence for its function in serving changing European needs” (Feest 1990, 317). Feest provides an illustrative example that shows how Indians are used in fiction according to the needs of the respective culture at a specific point in time. While the French allied with the Comanche, the rivaling Germans befriended their arch enemies, the Apache, in 19th century literature (1990, 316). Native American peoples and cultures have always been incidental to the needs of European cultures. Zantop also underlines that it matters what Indians can do for the respective culture, not the other way around: “Not surprisingly, the clichéd image of the Indian freely roaming the prairie has more to do with national needs at specific historical moments in Europe than with Indian people and their experiences on the North American continent” (5).

In fact, the relationship between Indians and European cultures is virtually no different to that of Indians to US culture. Both approaches involve using the nations’ social and cultural power over Native American cultures when appropriating elements that appear useful in delineating one’s own culture. Zantop lists various elements of Europeans’ enthusiasm with

Indians:

the exoticized yet sympathetic, even idealizing depiction of the Other; the fixation

on hair and skin color as essential markers of difference, typical of European

racialized descriptions from Columbus’s letters onward, the fantasy of balance,

equality, tacit agreement, and respect between two extraordinary men/cultures as

they meet eye-to-eye; and, last but not least, the erotic attraction to the Other

experienced by the European newcomer. (3)

Most of those elements are also relevant in the US. However, European cultures tend to highlight equality of and respect for Indians more, although their ways of appropriation of certain elements of Native cultures express the same mindset that has eventually resulted in continuing subordination and oppression of Native Americans. Feest underlines that this attitude of cannibal culture as outlined by Root – that is appropriating and recoding certain elements of Native cultures for the needs and benefit of the appropriator’s culture – accounts for one fundamental

“characteristic of the old and continuing relationship of Europeans with the “Indian” [that] is, indeed, the perpetual willingness to accept their own centuries old expectation that the Indian has a worthwhile “message” for everyone” (1990, 330). In this way, the relationship between Indians and European cultures, and specifically German-speaking culture, can be considered customary and similar to that of the US in its detrimental effect on Native American peoples and cultures.

3.5 Indians in German-Speaking Culture: Curse or Opportunity?

It is evident that German-speaking culture’s relationship with Indians is clearly not special but similar to that of other cultures’ in its use of elements of Native cultures for their own needs. This point is certainly important because it dismantles the prevailing myth that German- speakers and Indians are connected by their histories and cultures. However, it does not change the fact that Indians are ubiquitous in German-speaking culture and that this perception of

Indians is largely based on stereotypes and myths. The question, thus, remains if German- speakers’ interest in Indians is solely detrimental to Native American peoples and cultures or if there can be any positive outcome. Despite all criticism, the perceptions and attitudes of German- speakers towards Indians are unlikely to be reversed completely. Penny clarifies that this is such

50 a tough question to answer that not even Native Americans – those affected most by the stereotypes – are completely certain: “There is, unsurprisingly, no unitary voice among Native

Americans about either the use of stereotypical symbols of Indianness by Native Americans in

Germany or Germans’ affinity for them” (2006, 813). Since there seems to be no final answer to this question, both sides of the argument will be outlined in the following paragraphs.

A Curse

Indian stereotypes in German-speaking culture are detrimental to Native American peoples and cultures because they highlight certain elements of Native American cultures, while completely ignoring others. Prominent Indian elements are, for example, those of Plains Indians from the 19th century (e.g. tipis, feathers, horses, etc.). At the same time, other Native nations and cultural diversity among those nations as well as contemporary lifestyles and issues of Native

Americans are excluded and virtually non-extant in German-speaking culture. Lutz summarizes the effect of German-speakers’ interest in stereotypical Indians: “It tends to historicize Indians as figures of the past, and it assumes that anybody “truly Indian” will follow cultural practices and resemble in clothing and physiognomy First Nations before or during first contact” (169). This view shapes perceptions of millions of German-speakers, which can be difficult to overturn.

What is more, this focus on stereotypical Indians denies the numerous different lifestyles Native

Americans had in the past and still have today. In effect, Native Americans, the “real Indians have to be dead” (Green 49). It is virtually impossible to imagine that German-speaking culture can both hold on to the stereotypes and acknowledge the existence and diversity of Native

Americans. Indians are, either, characters out of history books and those still around relicts from the past who live exactly as the myth prescribes them to do; or Germans acknowledge that those stereotyped Indians are European myths, and that contemporary Native Americans do not

51 resemble them at all. It seems to be either the first or the latter: The myth denies the existence of the actual people, and the existence of Native Americans contradicts and dismantles the myth.

Penny also underlines that acknowledging the existence of Native Americans may end German- speakers’ interest in Indians: “[T]he really authentic present and its representatives are too close to the everyday experience of many Germans to be exciting” (2006, 816).

Besides the negative effects of stereotypes, it is morally reprehensible of German- speaking culture to “embrace the positive aspects of a particular culture without experiencing the pain and misery that also come through being a member of that particular culture. You cannot have the good without the bad” (Vacchio). For this reason, German-speaking culture can never fairly claim Indians and their lifestyle as part of their culture. The attempt by German-speaking culture to incorporate Indians expresses the power relations between the two parties: While

Native Americans have had to fight against these false images and for self-determination,

German-speakers have profited enormously from using Indian stereotypes. Michaels provides the example of Westerns: “Once the films were produced, however, this commercialization became a thriving industry. It offered, for example, toys, games, chocolate figurines and comic strips about Old Shatterhand and Winnetou, names now protected by trademarks” (208-209).

Additionally, Indians are used for political reasons, which Penny explained to Galchen for her article in The New Yorker:

Of the relation between Native Americans and Germans today, the historian H.

Glenn Penny, of the University of Iowa, told me, “When Germans think through

certain problems, they also think about those problems through and in terms of

Indians. So in the nineteen-sixties this thinking had a lot to do with political

protest, with the image of Indians as resisters. In the anti-nuclear protests of the

nineteen-seventies, they flew in a lot of Indians from the Pine Ridge Reservation.

Then, in the nineteen-eighties, the esoteric Indian was hot – the idea of the

medicine man, of a deep knowledge of nature. Now it’s Green politics. In some

ways, “Penny said, “the Indians are being instrumentalized, but also they get to

shape their own image, at least somewhat.”

Penny highlights that – particularly in the past – Indians were used in German-speaking cultures in an exploitive way because of the extensive interest of German-speakers in Indians. He also indicates opportunities for Native Americans because, despite being generally indifferent to

Native issues, this interest can be used by Native Americans for addressing Native issues.

An Opportunity

It is clear – especially in Penny’s wording “instrumentalized” – that Native Americans are generally rendered objects used for a specific purpose in German-speaking culture and other cultures. Vacchio states that this objectification is not considered problematic by all Native

Americans: “Despite these negative opinions, not everyone thinks that this cultural appropriation is harmful. Some Natives living in Germany as well as North America find the deep interest in themselves and their culture flattering.” While the interest in Indians does not necessarily mean interest in Native American peoples and their culture, this interest can be used to promote Native cultures and issues. Due to the persistence of Native Americans, they have increasingly become successful in instrumentalizing the German-speakers’ interest in Indians for their own benefit.

For this reason, Native American tribes attempt to establish relationships to European Indian enthusiasts. Red Haircrow, a Native American with “Chiricahua Apache and Cherokee heritage” living in Germany, explains that there “are also some tribes in North America reaching out to

53 their fans in Europe. They realize that this is an opportunity to promote understanding and education and a way to market Native culture to a highly sympathetic audience.”

It is obvious that German-speakers’ perception of Native Americans is largely based on stereotypes that do not adequately reflect reality. Various tribes do not condemn the interest of

German-speakers fueled by these stereotypes, but rather use it as a starting point for intercultural exchange of ideas and goods. This exchange is different from earlier approaches because it is initiated by Native Americans for the benefit of Native American peoples and cultures. Finally, as Penny argues, Native Americans have successfully claimed authority over what ‘Indian’ means:

Native Americans have gained the ultimate authority to mediate representations of

Indianness. This is not only true among hobbyists and in the world of popular art

and culture but also within Germany’s leading ethnological museums. That does

not mean that this growing consensus over authority has led to consistent

evaluations of representations or consistent displays of Indianness. (2006, 814)

Penny’s last point is crucial because it expresses the fact that there are numerous views and opinions about representations of Indianness, even in the Native American community. A vital step in tackling stereotypes – that promote one true form of Indianness – is making clear that

Native American cultures and peoples are diverse, also in their evaluations of representations.

While scholars agree that Native Americans ought to have ultimate authority to evaluate representations of them, they still disagree on whether Native Americans have been successful or not. Eddy claims that there has been a transfer of authority on Native issues in the US since the

1960s, which is yet to happen in German-speaking culture:

Though public sentiment in the United States has slowly shifted since the 1960s

toward supporting the right of indigenous peoples, especially the American

Indians, to reclaim their own cultures from museums and institutions, no such

transformation has taken place in Germany.

She provides the example of the Karl May museum in Radebeul, Germany, which refused to return scalps of Native Americans to the tribe they belonged to. Even in the US, it can be argued that Native Americans have not reclaimed full authority yet. The debate over Native American team names and mascots of sports teams is a good example. Native activists continually put pressure on these teams in order to bring about change. They have been successful with numerous high school sports teams, but powerful franchises such as the Washington Redskins and the Cleveland Indians have held on to their names despite public outcry. In Germany, progress has also been made when it comes to Native Americans reclaiming authority over their own cultures. Penny gives various examples that support this claim:

And there is good evidence that this message is coming through. Although Der

Schuh des Manitou, a spoof on the famous Karl May films, broke all records in

the German film industry in 2003, the number of visitors to the Karl May

Museum in Radebeul have declined rapidly since German unification in 1990, and

the sales of May’s books have seen their most significant drop since the Karl May

press was founded in the early twentieth century. (2006, 817)

In conclusion, it can be said that Indian stereotypes are still influential in German- speaking culture and dominate the popular perception of Native Americans. However, efforts have been made by Native Americans to tackle this problem not only in the US but also in

Europe. The fight for Native American self-determination is certainly not over, but Native

Americans have understood that the interest of German-speakers in Indians can be channeled in ways that benefit Native American peoples and cultures. For this reason, it is important to look closely at every aspect of German-speaking culture in order to single out and dismantle Indian stereotypes, which will be done in the following chapters with children’s books.

4. Children’s Books as Entertainment and Education

Children’s books are among the first ways children come in contact with culture besides personal contact with family and friends. They can be used to open new perspectives on one’s own culture, but they also introduce foreign cultures. Mendoza and Reese underline the dual role of children’s books as either mirror of one’s own culture or window to other cultures: “A child may see his or her own life reflected in a book or may have an opportunity to see into someone else’s life.” For this reason, children’s books tend to cover familiar settings such as school and home, or historically or culturally distant topics such as knights, pirates, and Indians. On a different level, Mendoza and Reese distinguish between three main purposes of children’s literature: aesthetic, psychosocial, and informative/instructional. The aesthetic purpose of children’s literature refers to the quality of children’s literature to draw its readers into the story.

This is accomplished by appealing to the world of young readers; characters, for example, are of similar age as readers, and they are frequently presented with pictures. The psychosocial purpose of children’s books means that they help children make sense of the world and themselves. These stories tend to include various cultural and social rules such as power structures and gender roles.

The informative purpose deals with the fact that children’s literature contains knowledge and ideas that children learn when reading. This is true for books about familiar situations such as

56 school, and even more so for unfamiliar and foreign contents such as those about knights and

Indians.

Besides those purposes for children, children’s books are cultural and literary products.

Donna E. Norton, scholar on children’s literature, highlights that children’s books “are the major means of transmitting our literary heritage from one generation to the next” (1987, 5). This literary heritage varies in different cultures, and that is why similar topics are covered with great variety in different cultures. This becomes evident when children’s literature deals with foreign cultures because it accounts for an outside view on a certain culture that may deviate from the inside perspective. This is particularly noteworthy if the literary heritage involves problematic views on certain cultures such as German-speaking culture’s view on Native Americans. Norton points out that stories for children are highly influential in shaping perceptions of one’s own culture as well as of other cultures: “Literature plays a strong role in helping us understand and value our cultural heritage as well. Developing positive attitude toward our own and other cultures is necessary for both social and personal development” (1987, 5).

Children’s literature definitely plays an important role in conveying social and cultural concepts, rules, and knowledge. The problem is, however, that by far not all children’s books complete the task of promoting positive attitudes toward other cultures. From a historical perspective, children’s literature represented the majority culture’s view on one’s own culture and other cultures with little reflection or deviation from this norm. Mendoza and Reese state that until the 1960s minorities were virtually excluded from children’s books; in the 1960s the interest in multicultural books increased, but most were written by whites: “Initially, European

Americans were the exclusive producers of new images of people outside the mainstream.” For this reason, culturally insensitive and thus highly problematic books dominated the children’s

57 book market in the US for a long time. The result were three major pitfalls outlined by Mendoza and Reese: 1) Popular books are usually culturally sensitive books, 2) “a single book about a group can adequately portray that group’s experience,” 3) sensitive and realistic multicultural books are widely available in libraries and bookshops. All three statements are generally believed to be true, but in fact false.

Until after the 1960s, culturally insensitive children’s books were the majority, not the exception. The reason for this lay in the fact that white Americans dominated virtually every position in the book-making and -selling process including writing, editing, publishing, buying, and reading. Mendoza and Reese highlight that what “will be published, who will illustrate it, and how it will be marketed are all decisions that, historically and currently rest primarily with

European Americans, who own the largest publishing houses and continue to dominate the key- decision-making positions.” For this reason, those represented in the stories – African

Americans, Native Americans, Asian Americans, and other minorities – had no voice in creating and shaping their own representation. European American decision-makers did also not cooperate with representatives of minority groups to create more realistic representations because of indifference to minority cultures and/or financial reasons as stereotypes tend to be highly profitable. In this way, stereotypes of various cultural groups were unreflectively spread by children’s books, and therefore have influenced children’s perceptions of minorities until today.

4.1 Native Americans in Children’s Books

While culturally insensitive children’s books – and other cultural products for that matter

– are detrimental to various minority cultures, those about Native American cultures are particularly hurtful. These books frequently depict Native Americans and their cultures by using

58 stereotypes that render Native peoples and cultures inferior to white American culture. Native peoples are especially negatively impacted by these distorted stories because of the importance of stories within Native American cultures. Lenore Keeshig-Tobias, member of the Chippewas of Nawash First Nation and children’s book author and storyteller, underlines that Native stories transcend mere entertainment: “Stories are not just entertainment. Stories are power. They reflect the deepest, the most intimate perceptions, relationships and attitudes of a people. Stories show how a people, a culture thinks. Such wonderful offerings are seldom reproduced by outsiders”

(98). She further points out that stories deal with actual experience of Native Americans, which cannot be related by non-Natives: “Native stories deal with the experience of our humanity, experiences we laugh and cry and sweat for, experiences we learn from. Stories are not just for entertainment” (100). The majority of children’s books, in contrast, did not adequately represent

Native American experience, but rather white imaginations of Native American peoples and cultures.

As mentioned above, stereotypes about Native Americans were common in children’s books in the US until recently. Norton states that books “about Native Americans written for juvenile audiences and published prior to the mid-1970s are frequently filled with such negative stereotypes” (2005, 72). She further lists several wide-spread stereotypes about Native peoples as well as Native cultures in children’s books in the US. According to Norton, the three most common stereotypes rendered Native Americans “savage, depraved, and cruel,” “noble, proud, silent, and close to nature,” or “inferior, childlike, and helpless” (1987, 505). Similarly, there are three typical ways Native American cultures were represented in children’s books in the US.

First, Native cultures were depicted as “inferior to white culture,” (1987, 505) and consequently

Native American characters tend to abandon their Native culture. Secondly, Native cultures were

59 portrayed as “valueless, and thus not worthy of respect,” and even violent (1987, 505). Thirdly, children’s books showed Native cultures as “quaint or superficial, without depth or warmth,” which can be seen in the disparaging of ceremonies (1987, 505). All the stereotypes mentioned did not reflect real Native peoples and cultures, but rather a whitewashed version and distortion of them. Still, they are marketed and perceived by readers as realistic representations.

Until the 1960s, children’s books mainly focused on Euro American characters and environments, and multicultural children’s books contained culturally problematic representations of minorities because the majority was written by Euro American authors. A noticeable change was instigated by the Council on Interracial Books for Children (CIBC) in the aftermath of the Civil Rights Movement in the 1960s. This organization was founded as a reaction to problematic textbooks in schools in Mississippi, especially in terms of African

Americans, with the goal to make books for children more realistic and sensitive. Consequently, it started with a focus on African American issues, but it also dealt with issues of other minority groups later on (Banfield 17). Among the council’s actions was creating the Racism and Sexism

Resource Center, which published resource guides to analyze books for racism and sexism

(Banfield 19). It also founded the “Bulletin of Interracial Books for Children,” which wrote reviews on popular children’s books. Besides tackling issues with already existing books, the council organized a writers’ contest for minority writers of children’s books in order to promote their work (Banfield 18). The work of the CIBC succeeded in raising awareness about issues with children’s books regarding racial and gender stereotypes, and thus managed to improve cultural and gender sensitivity in the book market in the US. The CIBC’s influence, especially their guidelines for analyzing books, has persisted until today: “This work resulted in “10 Quick

Ways to Analyze Children’s Books for Racism and Sexism,” which has been reprinted in

60 brochure and pamphlet form by many organizations since 1989, when the CIBC was disbanded”

(Stan).

While this change has reshaped the US children’s book market in positive ways,

Europeans have yet to reconsider their relationship with Native Americans. Stan claims that

Native Americans are treated differently in the US than in Europe: “The major difference between the European and North American attitudes toward American Indians, however, is that

Europeans have no vested interest in correcting these misperceptions, while North Americans do.” She explains this with the fact that there has been little protest against stereotypical representations in Europe. Stereotyped Indians are not a major issue in Europe because its population is not directly affected by it and is also greatly unaware that the problem even exists.

These images are so popular and widely accepted as realistic that they are hardly questioned.

Stan, however, underlines that it is vital for European children to know about real Native

Americans, not only about European imaginations of Indians:

Just as it is important that North American children recognize that their countries’

indigenous people are still here, so too is it important for European children to

understand that Indians in America are alive and well and living alongside their

fellow American and Canadian citizens. To nurture the fantasy of the noble

savage by reproducing false images does the European child a disservice.

As the work of the CIBC in the US has shown, raising awareness about the issue is the first step to solving the problem of stereotypical images of Native Americans and other minority groups in any culture, including the German-speaking one.

Despite the progress that has been made in the US, there are still numerous issues when it comes to the literature about Native Americans. Norton lists four points of concern: authenticity of text and illustrations; conflicts over sovereignty in regards to who may write, adapt, or interpret stories and cultures; disputes over translations of poetry, folklore, and biography/autobiography; and disagreements over literal versus metaphorical interpretations

(2005, 74). All of these issues do not only occur in the US, but are also relevant in Europe, especially those regarding sovereignty and translations. While it is obvious that stereotypes should not be included in children’s books, it is more difficult to answer if non-Natives, for example German-speakers, should tell stories about Native Americans at all, and if stories by

Natives can be adequately translated into other languages.

4.2 Should German-Speakers Tell Stories about Native Americans?

In all cultures including US, Native American, and European cultures, it should be clear that experience of individuals differs greatly, and that therefore one story cannot stand for everybody else. Obviously, in a country with over 300 million inhabitants, one American individual has experience that is completely different from other Americans inside and outside their racial, social, and/or cultural groups. Mendoza and Reese, however, stress the roles of children’s literature as both art and sources of information, which triggers a debate around the question of authenticity and accuracy:

Some critics, educators, librarians, and others involved with children and their

books assert that literature (except for nonfiction) is art and need not be concerned

too much with being verifiable. Others, who see interaction with literature as one

potentially powerful factor in the child’s construction of knowledge about people

and the world, argue that some types of fiction should be held to standards of

accuracy and authenticity similar to those of informational books.

As will be shown in the analysis, children’s literature, especially that dealing with foreign cultures, always consists of information and knowledge on the represented culture, which should be portrayed as accurately and authentically as possible. An authentic representation of foreign cultures benefits young readers because they learn about accurate aspects of foreign cultures, and also those cultures represented because they do not have to deal with hurtful stereotypes.

In all cultures, there is a connection between stories and those telling the story, which can be seen in copyright laws expressing the ownership about one’s own story. Naturally, this is also true for Native American cultures but often ignored by white appropriators, who feel ownership over Native American cultures. However, Native American experience is directly linked to the person who has had it: “So powerful are stories that, in Native cultures, one storyteller cannot tell another’s story without permission” (Keeshig-Tobias 99). There is an inseparable link between the story and storyteller, which cannot be imitated by anyone else. The rule mentioned above particularly applies to non-Natives, who can never adequately tell Native stories. Keeshig-Tobias highlights that experience of Native Americans differs, and thus one Native American individual cannot speak for another. As a result, non-Natives, then, appear to be completely unable to relate

Native American experience, especially when rendering one event or story that is representative of the experience of all Native Americans.

According to Keeshig-Tobias, it is virtually impossible for non-Natives to write stories about Native Americans because non-Natives lack the experience in Native American society and culture. Numerous other Native Americans agree with her that only Native American authors

63 can tell authentic and accurate stories about Native peoples and cultures. The problem with the concept of authenticity, however, is that both Native American and non-Native cultures use it to claim their authority: “Authenticity functions as an ideal, both for the people trying to sell commodified versions of culture and for many of those who have taken on the project of criticizing consumer culture” (Root 78). Authenticity, thus, since it is culturally constructed

(Deloria 2007), refers to whatever those using it attempt to achieve. While non-Natives may consider Indian stereotypes authentic, Native Americans will certainly disagree, and there may not be unity among Native Americans of what ‘authentic’ means. For example, authentic lifestyle of Native Americans could be past lifestyles before contact for some, or modern lifestyles in cities or on reservations for others. To avoid the concept of authenticity, Root proposes the concept of cultural integrity:

In the marketplace authenticity is no more than a merchandising device. I prefer

to use the more flexible idea of cultural integrity to refer to autochthonous cultural

traditions and to the possibility of aesthetic, social, and ceremonial meanings able

to exist outside of the system of capitalist exchange, at least for the most part.

Integrity retains an idea of cultural wholeness and of a relatively unbroken

connection between the image or object and the culture in which it is made and

used. (80)

The concept of cultural integrity helps answer the question if non-Natives are able to tell stories about Native American peoples and cultures. In contrast to those claiming that only

Native Americans should deal with Native stories, others argue that also “knowledgeable and sensitive authors who are able to write with a Native American perspective” are allowed to narrate Native stories (Norton 77). This debate is still ongoing and is unlikely to be resolved in

64 the near future. However, it is crucial to point out that the children’s book market has fundamentally improved in the US because minority writers have reclaimed their cultural authority. Consequently, it is most desirable if Native American authors tell stories about their perception of their own Native American culture. Even Native Americans can only speak for themselves, not for others: “There is a difference between claiming an identity and seeking to represent a people to the larger world” (Shanley 44). In this way, these stories should be more personally than culturally representative. For non-Native authors who attempt to write about

Native Americans, it is indispensable and “irresponsible not to consult several sources” (Reese), and thus preserve the cultural integrity of the stories told. In conclusion, Native American authors should narrate stories about their own experience; non-Native authors need to do research before dealing with Native American characters and/or cultures. This means for the

German-speaking context that the book market should solely feature stories that are either both written by Native American authors and translated into German, or written by German-speaking authors who have consulted with various Native American experts and authorities.

5. Analysis of German-Language Children’s Books

In the tradition of German-language children’s literature, foreign cultures have always occupied a special place. Jutta Kleedorfer, expert on German-language youth literature, explains that this trend in German children’s literature originated in the 18th century:

Im aufsteigenden Bürgertum des 18. Jahrhunderts erhielten Bildung, Erziehung,

Familie und Kindheit einen besonderen Stellenwert und wurden in der für die

Jugend geschriebenen Literatur neu definiert. Das Fundament einer moralisch und

bürgerlich heilen Welt und deren wohlbegründete Ordnung wurde zusätzlich

gefestigt durch den neugierigen Blick in fremde Welten: Doch die Abenteuer- und

Reiseliteratur, die Seefahrts- und Indianergeschichten vermittelten Projektionen

sozialer Intentionen, waren geprägt von Unkenntnis und Intoleranz. (33)

As mentioned in the quote, stories about Indians are among the most popular stories in German- language children’s literature, next to those about knights, Vikings, and pirates. Consequently, it was a simple task to find numerous books featuring Indians created and designed for German- speaking children. The main criteria of selection were the books’ target audience and date of publication. The intended target audience should be German-speaking children in elementary school in order to ensure that their previous knowledge about Indians was conceivably scarce.

Such books include explanations of Indian culture, history, and lifestyle. In terms of the date of

(re-)publication, books should have entered the market as recently as possible, which means after

2000. Nine German-language children’s books matched the criteria introduced above and therefore were selected as my corpus.

The analysis is based on the guidelines provided by the Council on Interracial Books for

Children, called “10 Quick Ways to Analyze Children’s Books for Racism and Sexism,” because they have been used successfully to analyze children’s books since the 1960s. These guidelines tackle stereotypes and racism on various levels: story, illustrations, characters, lifestyles, relationships, effect, author’s perspective, loaded words, and background of the author. In addition to this basic guide on racism and sexism in general, there are various evaluation guidelines specifically for books dealing with Native Americans such as those by Harvey, Harjo and Welborn (1995), Mendoza and Reese (2001), and Norton (2005). All of them provide guiding questions and lists of stereotypes that frequently occur in (children’s) literature. All of these materials, which were designed for the US context, will be used to inform the analysis.

These guidelines will not only help the analysis, but also provide a structure to how the results will be presented. In order to avoid repetition, the results are categorized, so that one category either represents several (or all) books or only one book specifically. This approach appears more structured and insightful. As discussed in the CIBC’s guidelines above, the categories will address all levels of the children’s books including author, plot, characters, elements, setting, and illustrations. This comprehensive analysis offers the most insights into how German-language children’s books represent Native American peoples and cultures.

5.1 Stereotyped Indians in Titles and on Covers

The titles of books are important because they provide initial information on what the books deal with. In this way, titles as well as the cover of the book determine whether a book is purchased or not. Of the nine children’s books analyzed there are eight that have the word

“Indianer” in the title. The only exception is Fliegender Stern, which uses the name of the book’s main protagonist – the cover still shows a stereotyped Indian boy riding a horse. As virtually all children’s books analyzed directly refer to Indians – by title and/or cover – it becomes evident that they intend to be identified as books about Indians at first sight. This is important from the marketing perspective. Both parents and children roaming the bookstores look at the covers and titles and are thus drawn to these books about Indians. As was highlighted above, Indians appeal to German-speakers of all generations: children desire the adventures in foreign lands, while parents are familiar with Indians from their own childhood. In this way, creators and marketers of books cleverly exploit the expectations and desires of potential buyers and leave nothing to chance. Therefore stereotyped Indians are visible both on the covers and in the titles of German- language children’s books.

5.2 Setting: Vague versus Specific

5.2.1 The Prairie

The majority of the German-language children’s books analyzed are set in the American prairie without specific information on the time period. These books do not explicitly state the setting, but rather use certain elements that refer to the prairie such as tipis, buffalos, horses, and

Cowboys. These elements are included in the texts as well as depicted in illustrations. In Ein Tag bei den Indianern, for example, illustrations clearly set the story by showing tipis, horses, and buffalos, which can be seen in Illustration 1 and 2. In this way, these elements help children identify the prairie as the natural habitat of Indians. The prairie is the main setting in most of the books analyzed, but the sole one in Kleine Indianerin (2015), Ein Tag bei den Indianern (2011),

Yakari. Indianerabenteuer für Erstleser (2016), Der kleine Drache Kokosnuss bei den Indianern

(2011), and Fliegender Stern (2007)2.

Moreover, the majority of books (e.g. Kleine Indianerin, Fliegender Stern, Yakari,

Indianergeschichten, and Minitou. Der große Indianer) neglect to be specific in terms of tribal nation or time frame. What they do, however, is explain how Indians live in the prairie. Indian characters are shown riding on horses and hunting buffalo. As there are no specifics in regards to tribal affiliation or time period, these books and its characters appear to represent Indians in general. According to these representations, there are no Native Americans who live in different environments than the prairie and have different lifestyles than hunting buffalo. Additionally, they do not mention if these stories are set in the past or in any specific time period at all. Young readers, therefore, have to assume that Indians are either people of the past or they still roam the

2 When citing from the children’s books, I will only refer to page numbers when they are included. Several of the books do not include page numbers. As these books do not contain more than twenty pages, I will only refer to the book, not the page number.

68 prairie today. Both assumptions are detrimental to Native Americans: the former suggests that

Native Americans do not exist at all anymore, while the latter denies the diverse lifestyles of

Native Americans in the past and present. It is clear that these books do not intend to introduce

Native American peoples and their cultures, but rather discuss the Indians of the European imagination. All of those books mentioned above suggest that Indians lived (and still live) in the prairie as Plains Indian tribes did in the 19th century.

The only exception when it comes to specificity is Ein Tag bei den Indianern. It includes both a specific time period and the name of the tribe, but it lacks a precise location of the tribe.

While the information given could be used to locate them geographically, it is unlikely that young readers are able to do that. As the title suggests, the book introduces the lifestyles of

(Lakota) Indians 200 years ago by showing a typical day in their lives. Similar to the other books mentioned, it represents Indians living in tipis, riding horses, and hunting buffalo. In contrast, however, this book avoids general statements about the Indians in the past or present by providing a specific setting. This setting clarifies that Lakota Indians used to live as represented in the book 200 years ago, which means that other tribes may have had different lifestyles at the time and that members of the Lakotas as well as other Native Americans may live differently today. The only shortage of the book is its title that suggests a general introduction into Indian culture, while only discussing the Lakota culture. Apart from that, the clear setting is a quality that should be the standard when dealing with Native Americans, especially in children’s books, because young readers are likely to lack previous knowledge on Native American peoples, cultures, and histories.

5.2.2 Plains versus Lake Indians

While the books mentioned above only show Indian characters living in the prairie, there are several books that explicitly distinguish between Indians of the prairie and Indians of the lake. The “Seeindianer” (Indianergeschichten 6) live in mud houses next to a big lake, and their main diet is fish instead of buffalo. It is, however, unclear where the lake is because there is neither reference to the place nor the name of the tribe. As the two books featuring ‘Lake

Indians’ (Minitou and Indianergeschichten) show them encounter and interact with those Indians living in the prairie, they suggest that there is proximity between the two tribes. They even seem to be in walking distance of each other. This close proximity is unrealistic because the Great

Lakes are hundreds of miles away from the Great Plains, and members of those tribes would need long travels to reach each other’s villages. These books certainly represent false geographical distances. However, they show young readers that there are different tribes than the

Plains Indians. As the majority of books deny this fact, these two books deserve recognition for representing tribal diversity due to different environments, despite being geographically vague.

In terms of time, both books – Minitou and Indianergeschichten – do not give any information on when the stories are set. Similar to those books featuring Plains Indians, these texts imply two options regarding time, which both are hurtful to Native Americans. The Indian characters represented in these texts refer either to how Indians used to live in the past until white settlers and later the US government succeeded in exterminating them, or these characters are representations of how Indians still live in modern times. Both options neglect the fact that

Native Americans are still a factor in US society, and live in various different ways whether traditional or modern. Not providing any time frame suggests that Indians and their cultures are

70 stable rather than dynamic. In this way, these books represent stereotyped Indians, not Native

American individuals because those characters cannot be allocated in time.

5.2.3 Modern Settings

Besides those books that are set in the prairie or at lakes in the unspecified past or present, there are also texts with a modern setting. Despite the fact that both of them use a modern setting, these two books differ profoundly. Paul und Marie spielen Indianer is set in contemporary German-speaking culture and – as the title suggests – it deals with two German- speaking children playing Indian. Paul and Marie are in Paul’s backyard, where they pretend to be Plains Indians. As their fantastic role models, they erect a tipi, wear feathers, and pretend to hunt buffalo with bow and arrow. The illustrations support their game by mixing the real with their imagined setting. As can be seen in Illustration 3, one illustration features both the children’s backyard and the American prairie. Paul, Marie and Oma Tinni clearly dance in front of their self-made tipi with their dog, but this scene merges into images from the prairie – desert, cacti, and buffalo – without any visual disruption. The illustrations, thus, underline and visualize that the children feel as if they were Indians in the prairie when they play Indian. For young readers, this suggests that it is possible and not problematic at all to assume an Indian identity.

This Indian identity is, however, only based on the stereotyped lifestyle of Plains Indians: it includes only positive aspects of the Plains Indians’ culture, while excluding significant aspects such as fights against white settlers and the US government for survival, massacres, and particularly contemporary lifestyles of Plains Indian tribes.

In contrast to Paul und Marie spielen Indianer, the book Die drei ??? Geheimnis der

Indianer is not set in German-speaking culture but in the US. The story revolves around three boys from Rocky Beach, California in contemporary time. The setting is specific, modern and

71 realistic; consequently, the boys do not engage with stereotyped Indians, but with Native

American characters (Hopi, to be specific), who they meet at a Hoop Dance competition. This setting allows the story to deal with Native American individuals and their culture in a realistic way. In this corpus, it is exceptional because it does not focus on past or even imaginary (Plains)

Indians. Rather, it provides room for contemporary Native American characters and issues they face in US culture today. In conclusion, it can be said that a specific setting in terms of location and time increases the chances that the book deals with Native American individuals – whether in the past or present – rather than with imaginary, virtually fairytale Indians.

5.3 Indian Lifestyles

Intertwined with the setting – the location and time of the story – are the lifestyles of the

Indian characters in German-language children’s books on Indians. Obviously, the environment

Indians live in dictates their lifestyles including diet, fashion, and religion. Regarding lifestyles and cultures, it is important to analyze if the term ‘Indian’ refers to a specific tribe or the monolithic category Indian. Additionally, the information provided on lifestyles ought to be accurate, and the various lifestyles of Native Americans should be presented without evaluation and judgment, especially from a white (European and Euro American) perspective.

5.3.1 The Lifestyle of the (Plains) Indian

As already mentioned when discussing the setting, most German-language children’s books feature the Plains Indians without referring to specific tribes. In most cases, certain elements are used that are widely identified with Plains Indians such as tipis, bow and arrow, feathers, horses, and buffalo. These elements can be found in virtually all books analyzed (except for Die drei ???). The lifestyles of all the Indians represented are similar: they live in villages made of tipis, are nomads, and hunt buffalo for food as well as clothing. This lifestyle is

72 presented as typical of Indians without naming specific tribes. In this way, the vast majority of books suggest that this lifestyle is representative of all Indians, which refers to the monolithic category Indian. According to the majority of books, Indians live as Plains Indians did until the end of the 19th century. This representation is wrong and supports the assumption that there are no other Native American cultures than those of the Plains tribes. Thus, it helps perpetuate the stereotype of the monolithic Indian, rather than promote knowledge on actual Native American peoples and the great variety of cultures and lifestyles.

In terms of fashion, there appears to be agreement that Plains Indians wore long brown clothes with fringes, feathers, headbands, and moccasins or no shoes at all. Additionally, most

Indians are shown with long black hair. This fashion style is represented by most Indians in the stories. What is more, it is also partly copied by Paul and Marie in the book Paul und Marie spielen Indianer and by the three American boys in Die drei ???: all of them are shown with feathers in their hair on the cover of the books. It is clear that playing Indian involves dressing as the stereotyped Indian, not as members of specific tribes. The books intend to appeal to the imaginations of their intended audience, which expects to see elements of Plains Indian culture.

This becomes apparent when comparing the cover of Die drei ??? with the book’s plot. While the three boys are presented with feathers, headbands, and feather decoration on the cover

(Illustration 4), the three boys never actually dress up in the story. Thus, the cover has the sole purpose of claiming that this volume deals with stereotyped Indians, which it paradoxically does not, in order to appeal to the imaginations and expectations of its intended audience. Marketers know that buyers expect certain elements in an Indian story, regardless whether they are actually incorporated in the story or not. When these popular elements are visible, it facilitates selling the book.

While most elements used in the children’s books correctly refer to the Plains Indians, the book Der kleine Drache Kokosnuss bei den Indianern claims that totem poles are part of the

Sioux Indians’ culture. This text features the specific tribe of the Plains Sioux Indians, but it contains the popular but false assumption that totem poles are part of the culture of Plains

Indians. After encountering the Sioux Indians, Kokosnuss, Oskar and Matilda find themselves bound to a totem pole: “Der Marterpfahl ist mit geheimnisvollen Bildern bemalt” (38). On the next page, there is even an illustration showing the friends and the totem pole (Illustration 5).

Additionally, they discuss the meaning of the totem pole as an instrument of torture, and that it is included in numerous Indian stories they know: “Außerdem ist es eng hier zu dritt. In den

Indianergeschichten, die ich kenne, hat immer jeder seinen eigenen Marterpfahl” (38). The book uses totem poles for its story and also justifies using it by referring to other stories that also contain it as an element of Plains Indian culture. In reality, however, totem poles are not part of the culture of Plains Indians; they were nomads and therefore had no use for these solid constructs. In fact, totem poles belong to the Native American cultures of the Northwest Coast, for example the Haida (Wright). In German-speaking culture, totem poles are frequently connected to Indians, which usually are Plains Indians. This book perpetuates this myth that

Plains Indians used totem poles. Although it deals with the specific tribe of the Sioux Indians, it still operates with elements of the stereotyped Indian. In this way, it misrepresents the Plains

Sioux Indian culture and reinforces the Indian stereotype.

5.3.2 Beyond the Plains Lifestyle

When discussing the setting of the Indian stories analyzed, it was highlighted that two books, Minitou and Indianergeschichten, differentiate between the environment of the prairie and the lake. While they represent the tribes living in the prairie similar to the other books, these

74 two children’s books contrast them with Lake Indians. These Lake Indians have a different lifestyle than the Plains Indians: they fish, build boats, and live in mud houses. According to

Indianergeschichten, they also wear their hair short. Tonkin, a boy from a Plains Indian tribe, wants to cut his hair as short as his friend Waschaki, who is from a Lake Indian tribe. His mother explains the difference to Tonkin: “Waschaki ist ein Seeindianer”, sagt Tonkins Mutter. “Wir sind Prärie-Indianer. Und die haben lange Haare!” (6) In this way, this book introduces the idea of tribal diversity, which is generally neglected in German-language children’s books. Although there are numerous other Native American tribes as well as differences between Plains Indian tribes, it still underlines that there is tribal diversity.

Another example for such a book is Minitou. Der große Indianer, whose title directly refers to Karl May’s famous character Winnetou. The title links the book to the enormously successful books of Karl May and thus suggests that it is rather about May’s perception of

Indians than about actual Native Americans. It begins its story with the lines: “Mitten in der weiten Prärie Amerikas leuchtete der helle Mond über einem ruhigen Indianerdorf.” It clearly identifies the setting as the prairie in America, where this Indian village is located. In the course of the story, two children from different Indian tribes – the one lives in tipis and hunts buffalo, the other lives in mud houses and fishes – meet and communicate with each other. Anila, the girl from the tribe of the lake, explains the differences in lifestyle to Minitou, the Plains Indian. He learns that Anila and her tribe are sedentary, while Minitou’s tribe is nomadic: “Wir ziehen nicht um”, flüsterte Anila. “Wir bleiben immer hier.” Da staunte Minitou noch mehr. Sein Dorf blieb nie für längere Zeit an einem Ort.“ Despite their differences in lifestyles, they appear to speak the same language and can therefore understand each other without problems. This suggests that – although there is cultural diversity in lifestyles – there exists one language that different Native

American tribes can speak and understand. In reality, this is not true: there are numerous different languages, even within the category comprising Plains Indian tribes. Paradoxically,

Minitou highlights that there is both cultural diversity and monolithic Indianess – at least linguistically – at the same time. This inaccuracy may be included for the sake of the story, so that the children from different tribes are able to interact with each other, but it still needs to be pointed out here.

Additionally, members of both tribes, the Plains Indian and the (Great) Lake tribe, look the same in illustrations. Whereas the linguistic inaccuracy may be overlooked, there is no reason why there is no cultural diversity in fashion, hairstyle or else between these two tribes. In fact, the illustrations appear as if the tribe living in the prairie and the one at the lake were completely the same. This can be seen when comparing Illustration 6 with Illustration 7. There is no individuality in these representations; rather both of them express the monolithic Indian stereotype. In this way, this book suggests that Indians are all alike. There may be differences in lifestyles, but generally Indians still look the same and speak the same language. In reality,

Plains Indian nations such as the Blackfoot and the Dakota do not have the same language or culture as nations from the Great Lakes such as the Iroquois and the Menominee (Native

Languages of the Americas).

5.3.3 Supernatural Indians: Interactions with Fantastical Creatures and Animals

In various German-language children’s books, Indians come in contact with fantastical characters such as dragons or they have supernatural powers themselves. The series Der kleine

Drache Kokosnuss revolves around the dragon named Kokosnuss, who encounters fantastical creatures such as mummies and vampires or past peoples such as Vikings in other books of the series. In this way, this book series equates Indians with Vikings, mummies, dragons, and

76 vampires. Similar to those peoples or creatures, Indians are deemed either fantastical or peoples of the past, a myth without actual presence in contemporary times. Obviously, this representation denies the existence of millions of Native Americans in the US.

Another example that relates Indians to fantasy and myth is the book series Yakari, which deals with the Indian boy Yakari and his friends. The book Yakari. Indianerabenteuer für

Erstleser includes eight short stories that show Yakari in adventures. Most of these adventures involve Yakari and various animals that he helps to safety and happiness. In these stories, animals are personalized; they have personality traits and can speak and understand Indians. In the first story “Die dickköpfige Ziege,” Yakari saves the goat from a wolf. In the conversation with the goat, Yakari learns that it wants a more adventurous life: “Hallo Ziege!”, ruft Yakari.

“Weshalb bist du ganz alleine unterwegs?” Die Ziege antwortet: “Ich will neue Abenteuer erleben.” (11-12) Yakari cannot only talk to goats, but also to beavers, dogs, horses, elks, antelopes and birds. These stories underline the close relationship of Indians to nature, particularly animals. Indians are able to communicate with various kinds of animals, whether mammals or birds. This ability clearly refers to the stereotype of Indians being close to nature.

Therefore, the Indian boy Yakari accounts for a stereotyped Indian because of his supernatural powers. This stereotype may be positive, but it is no less a stereotype, which creates unrealistic expectations of Native Americans and even renders them fantastical creatures.

5.3.4 Information on Indian Lifestyles: Between Fiction and Non-Fiction

One appealing aspect of children’s books is its place between entertainment and education that allows children to learn when enjoying stories. All children’s books analyzed deal with Indians in a fictional form since they contain fictional stories with fictional settings and characters. Various books can easily be identified as fictional because – as discussed above –

77 they contain fantastical creatures or elements in connection with Indians such as dragons or talking animals. Other books are less obvious in revealing their stories as fiction. They do not include fantastical creatures, and thus these representations of Indians appear more realistic.

Moreover, various books provide additional material and/or informative texts and images to their fictional stories. Three of the nine books analyzed contain explicit information on Indian objects,

Indian words, and the Indian sign language. For example, Ein Tag bei den Indianern introduces young readers to the lifestyle of the Lakotas in the 19th century by showing one typical day. It presents how tipis were erected in a step-by-step instruction (Illustration 8) and explains that bison was used for food as well as clothes and utensils (Illustration 9). In this way, it teaches young readers about the lifestyles of one specific tribe at a specific period in time. It does so using a fictionalized story and characters that appropriately and correctly represent Lakota culture in the past.

In contrast to this representation, Minitou shows the differences between Plains and Lake

Indians in a superficial way. It states that Indians of different tribes, which the book does not specify, speak the same language and look the same. Moreover, the book explains the Plains

Indian Sign Language before and after the fictional story (Illustration 10). In this way, it claims not only to be fiction, but also non-fiction for children by giving factual information on various tribes’ lifestyles and ways of communication. This is problematic because – as highlighted above

– there are inaccuracies and mistakes in the information it provides. Additionally, there is no explanation that goes with the images of the sign language, which leaves young readers wondering about its purpose. It is possible to assume that Indians – as they allegedly speak the same language – do not need it for intertribal communications, but for interactions with non-

Indians. In reality, it was used because different Native American nations could not understand

78 each other, and therefore needed other ways of communication (Native Languages of the

Americas). As the children from different tribes can communicate with ease in the story, the sign language appears useless. To clarify its purpose, the book ought to mention the linguistic diversity between Native American tribes. This would also prevent young readers from assuming that all Indians speak the same language, and thus account for a more realistic representation of

Native American peoples and cultures.

The children’s book Paul und Marie spielen Indianer also deals with Indian languages and clarifies linguistic diversity of Native American tribes: “Es gibt viele verschiedene

Indianerstämme, die alle ihre eigene Sprache haben.” It also includes words of the Sioux Indians such as “Hau,” “Tipi,” and “Tatonka.” Additionally, the book features several physical experiments. Dressed as Indians the German-speaking children carry out these experiments, which have no relation to Native American cultures, whether imagined or real. For this reason, it seems that Indian elements are part of the story in order to sell the physical experiments. Indian stereotypes are the sugar that coats the medicine of the physics lesson. Both the Indian words and experiments underline that this book’s main intention is education. Besides teaching positive contents such as Indian words and physics, this book also normalizes and even promotes the practice of playing Indian. This practice is not only culturally insensitive but, as Green argues, even genocidal because it “depends upon the physical and psychological removal, even the death, of real Indians” (31). In this way, this children’s book promotes the stereotyped Indian, expresses the sense of ownership German-speaking culture feels, and denies the existence of

Native Americans and their diverse cultures. For this reason, the book as a whole is extremely problematic and offensive to Native Americans.

5.4 Indian Characters

5.4.1 Indian Heroes and Heroines

All but three children’s books in the corpus feature Indian heroes. Among those six books with Indian main protagonists, the majority uses male Indian heroes; only one uses an Indian girl as main character, and Ein Tag bei den Indianern deals with male and female twins as focal points of the story. The main protagonists are highly important for the story because they are usually the main actors, and thus young readers identify with them when reading the story. In the analysis of Indian heroes in the German-language children’s books, it becomes evident that the majority of them are depicted as completely positive characters without weaknesses. In general, both male and female Indian heroes are respectful, righteous, brave, adventurous, and ready to help other people and animals. This is true for five of the six books with Indian main protagonists. All of them depict their Indian heroes – whether male or female – as noble savages.

The Indian boy Yakari, for example, is depicted as brave and adventurous. He is not afraid in the face of any situation and repeatedly manages to save other Indians and animals from danger. In the course of a horse race, Yakari decides against winning the race and instead waits for his rivals: “Kurz vor dem siebten Feuer wartet Yakari schließlich auf die anderen Reiter.

“Warum reitest du nicht ins Ziel?”, fragt Regenbogen. “Kleiner Donner hat sich wehgetan. Er soll heute nicht mehr galoppieren.“ Zu viert kehren sie ins Dorf zurück“ (Yakari 26-27). Yakari is presented as a completely positive character without any flaws. In this way, he corresponds to the stereotype of the noble savage, who is always calm and kind and does the right thing. While the characterization of Yakari is certainly positive, it is still stereotypical and unrealistic. Yakari is not represented as a complex human being but as a perfect, imagined Indian.

Similar to Yakari, the book Kleine Indianerin depicts Tanzendes Blatt as the perfect heroine. She represents all traits that Norton lists of the noble savage: “noble, proud, silent, and close to nature” (505). The best friend of Tanzendes Blatt is not another Indian child but the wind: “Als Tanzendes Blatt geboren wurde, fegte der Wind über das Land und ließ die Blätter tanzen. Er wurde der beste Freund der kleinen Indianerin.“ Additionally, Tanzendes Blatt decides to help search a missing child, although she is not allowed to. Despite the thunderstorm, she bravely looks for and eventually finds the missing child. She receives praise from the tribe’s chief in the end, even though she disobeyed the rules of the tribe before: “Ich danke dir,

Tanzendes Blatt”, sagte der Häuptling am Abend.” In this way, Tanzendes Blatt emerges as the heroine in this story. As Yakari, she is presented as totally positive and without flaws or weaknesses, thus she accounts for a stereotyped character. Both stories teach German-speaking children positive values through Indian characters, which function as exaggerated role models for these young readers in their process of identity-building.

In contrast to the vast majority of positive Indian heroes, the book Indianergeschichten depicts its three male Indian heroes more controversially. Both Tonkin and Kitoma are disrespectful and defiant to their mothers. While Tonkin resists his mother’s attempts to comb his hair, Kitoma refuses to tidy the tipi. Both boys are represented as stubborn and obstinate, thus not perfect or overtly positive. They test their boundaries, and risk offending their parents and other tribal members with their actions. This behavior is typical of children. Both children learn their lessons in the end, and understand and comply with parental and/or tribal rules. In this way, these characters appear more realistic, especially when compared to Yakari and Tanzendes Blatt.

These stories in Indianergeschichten are lessons for modern children, who learn to follow the rules of their parents, because even Indian savages eventually comply with those of their parents.

At the same time, however, both stories remain on the surface in terms of cultural depth and integrity. It seems easy to replace the setting and the Indian characters with non-Indians; confrontations because of hairstyle and cleaning up are issues that non-Indian parents and children face as well. While the issues and characters involved appear more realistic, Indian culture does certainly not. This becomes evident, for example, in the interaction Kitoma has with his mother when he refuses to clean up: “”Pass bloß auf”, droht er, “sonst grab ich das Kriegsbeil aus.” Das sagen Indianer, bevor sie in den Krieg ziehen. “Das findest du ja gar nicht in deiner

Unordnung“, schimpft seine Mutter“ (Indianergeschichten 21). It is clear that this conversation rather represents European imaginations of Indian experience. It uses the serious Native

American practice of burying the hatchet, which is popular knowledge about Indian culture and even a common phrase in German-speaking culture, in a completely different context. In reality,

“[h]atchets were buried by the chiefs of tribes when they came to a peace agreement. The phrase is recorded from the 17th century in English but the practice it refers to is much earlier, possibly pre-dating the European settlement of America” (Martin). Here, the actual practice is appropriated for the need of the story and in this way also ridiculed: Kitoma cannot find the hatchet in his mess. In this way, the story recodes the practice according to the needs of the appropriating culture. In conclusion, this book presents Tonkin and Kitoma as characters that resist the popular stereotype of the noble savage, but it is highly problematic in appropriating, recoding, and ridiculing the practice of burying the hatchet.

5.4.2 Indian Side Characters: The Chief and the Medicine Man

Similar to Indian heroes, other Indian characters rather function as cultural representatives than individuals. Their individual personalities remain in the background, and their motivations and desires are hidden from readers. These Indian characters are only important

82 as representatives of Indian culture, not even of one specific tribal culture. In the majority of books, these Indian characters have similar jobs and qualities: the stern but just chief, who usually is the father of the hero, and the wise and mystical medicine man. There is no individuality in their characterizations, but they are clichés and stereotyped figures. In

Fliegender Stern, Kleine Indianerin, Der kleine Drache Kokosnuss bei den Indianern, and

Indianergeschichten, the chiefs appear as serious leaders, who are just in their decisions and always praise the Indian heroes (or the dragons) for their bravery in the end. These chiefs lack any other personality traits and are only used in this way. Their only function is to give the final verdict on the hero’s actions and character. In Der kleine Drache Kokosnuss bei den Indianern, chief Dünner Hering announces to the dragon heroes in the end of the book: “Ihr seid tapfere

Krieger und dürft ziehen, wohin ihr wollt. Howgh.“ Dünner Hering legt seine Hände auf die

Brust und sagt: „Dünner Hering hat sich in den Fremdlingen getäuscht. Ihr seid in Ordnung.““

(58).

The same is true for medicine men, which are always depicted in the same way as knowledgeable and mystical. In Fliegender Stern, the medicine man Wissendes Auge is explicitly characterized as a man of magic: “Und er weiß alles. Er kann die Kranken heilen und das Wetter voraussagen und mit den Geistern reden. Er spricht sogar mit dem Großen Geist, der die ganze Welt gemacht hat! Bestimmt weiß er alles vom weißen Mann“ (48). Similarly, the medicine man is said to know everything in Yakari and is therefore referred to as „Der-der-alles- weiß“ (40). Other Indian characters than the chief and the medicine man hardly play a role in the stories that are set in the unspecified past. The reason for this is that these two characters are most well-known as typically Indian. By referring to them, the stories gain in alleged cultural integrity and render them more believable to its intended audience. The chief and the medicine

83 man are constitutive for creating a story about Indians in German-speaking culture. For this reason, these characters appear to be virtually the same and without any individuality in all the stories they are used in.

Stereotyped Indian characters such as the chief and the medicine man are clearly used in order to appeal to (young) readers’ expectations of what Indianness connotes. Another way these stories achieve this is by illustrating them in typical ways. For example, in all three stories that feature a medicine man he is shown sitting when introduced the first time (Illustrations 11-13). In all three stories, he also gives advice to the heroes and shares his knowledge with them.

Additionally, the medicine man is called explicitly regarding his job within the tribe: “Wissendes

Auge” (Fliegender Stern 50), “Der-der-alles-weiß” (Yakari 40), and “Shaman” (Minitou). The same is true for chiefs, who are depicted in the same way with a feathered headdress.

5.5 Names of Indian Characters

Indian names are vital in creating authenticity in the story. All stories featuring Indian characters include (stereo-)typical Indian names. These names generally refer to nature, and they consist of an adjective and a noun such as “Fliegender Stern” (Fliegender Stern 7) and

“Tanzendes Blatt” (Kleine Indianerin). Commonly, these names represent and underline the most important personality trait of the character. For example in Yakari, Stolze Wolke is so proud that he risks everything and loses in the horse race. In Der Kleine Drache Kokosnuss bei den Indianern, Indian names are ridiculed: The first one to speak in the council of wise men is called “Früher Vogel” (32), and the last one “Letztes Wort” (35). Others are completely arbitrary such as “Grüne Leuchte” and “Gelbes Ei” (32). Besides these German adjective-noun combinations, there are also fictional words/names such as “Tonkin” (Indianergeschichten 4),

“Kitoma” (17), “Nokana” (28), and “Yakari” (Yakari 8). In Die drei ???, the two Native

Americans are named Pamuya and Aponovi, and Pamuya also explains the German translation of

Aponovi’s name: “Der Name Aponovi bedeutet übrigens Wo der Wind durch die Lücke bläst. Es ist ein Name aus dem Stamm der Hopi-Indianer” (21). While the names of the Indian characters differ, all books use them in order to gain authenticity and cultural integrity, even if this authenticity is illusionary and fake. In this way, the names are major factors in appealing to the expectations of the culture in which the books appear, and thus are elements that help create the story world. This is not problematic per se, but it is hurtful to Native American peoples when the names are used to ridicule Indian characters and have nothing to do with the personality of the character.

5.6 The Value of Relationships in the Indian Societies Represented

5.6.1 (Dis-)Respect for Parents

In general, Indian characters in the German language children’s books show respect to their parents as well as other adults and the elders. It appears that respect for adults is an integral part of Indian culture represented in the books. This is particularly visible in Fliegender Stern.

Fliegender Stern treats his parents politely; he even stands up when talking to his mother, which appears to be a social rule of the tribe: “Fliegender Stern stand auf. Wenn die Mutter mit ihm sprach, durfte er nicht sitzen bleiben” (9). Similarly, Fliegender Stern behaves respectfully when his father gives him his own horse: “Fliegender Stern verneigte sich vor seinem Vater, wie er es gelernt hatte” (20). In both scenes, it becomes evident that respect is a crucial part of social interactions between Indian children and their parents.

While Indian characters such as Fliegender Stern treat their parents and other adults respectfully, there are numerous scenes that show the same children disobey their parents’ rules.

Numerous books contain children who leave their tribal community in search for adventures.

Such scenes can be found in Fliegender Stern, Minitou, Kleine Indianerin, and particularly in

Der kleine Drache Kokosnuss bei den Indianern: Fliegender Stern and his friend Grasvogel travel to the white people far away from their village; Minitou sneaks away into the prairie and encounters another tribe; Tanzendes Blatt searches for the missing boy all by herself; and Wilde

Hummel even releases the dragons from the captivity of her tribe. In all these examples, the behavior of the Indian children does not result in any negative consequences, but is praised and awarded in the end. What is more, the last example explicitly states that traditions are obsolete and implicitly that the rules of the elders and the chief may be ignored if the child decides to:

““Warum hast du uns gerettet?” fragt Kokosnuss. “Der Weise Rat ist ein Haufen alter

Schlümpfe”, antwortet das Indianermädchen wütend. „Bringen Fremdlinge an den Marterpfahl, so was! Marterpfähle sind Präriegras von gestern“ (Der kleine Drache Kokosnuss bei den

Indianern 40). It becomes clear that – in general – respect is valued in these Indian societies represented, but individuality is preferred over blind obedience.

An extreme example of disobedience and even disrespect can be found in

Indianergeschichten. In these stories, the Indian children Tonkin and Kitoma disobey the rules established by their parents and the tribal community. As mentioned above, Tonkin decides to cut his hair short, which stands against the custom of the tribe. His disrespectful behavior towards his community and his parents does not have any negative consequences; the end of the story even suggests that the tradition may be reasonable, but he does not have to care too much about it if he can attract attention: “In der Prärie sind lange Haare vielleicht doch besser. Aber wenigstens falle ich heute mal auf wie ein bunter Hund” (16). Similarly, Kitoma refuses to tidy his tipi and argues with his mother. Both stories represent Indian children as wild savages, who

86 can hardly be tamed by their parents. This representation is problematic because it alludes to the popular stereotype that Indians are savages and unfit to live in white civilization. While all children – regardless of their race and culture – certainly behave inappropriately at times, such a representation of Indian children is particularly detrimental because the stereotype of uncivilized savages is still highly influential today. It is crucial to underline that disrespectful Indian children in stories should not reflect on Native American culture as being inferior and inherently savage and uncivilized.

In the case of the books analyzed, it is noteworthy that numerous stories contain scenes that present Indian children disobeying the rules of their parents and their tribe. This fact suggests that rules do not play an important role in Indian culture, especially because these children are hardly ever punished, but rather praised for their actions. At the same time, the white children (and the dragons, which function as focal points for German-speaking readers) tend to strictly follow the rules that civilized society in the form of their parents have established. The dragons travel to the Indians in search for buffalo meat for the father of Kokosnuss. The three

American boys in Die drei ??? repeatedly communicate with the police chief while solving their case. This contrast appears to highlight a difference in cultures: On the one hand, Indian culture does not seem to establish and/or Indian children do not adhere to social rules in the books; on the other hand, white children appear obedient to their parents’ rules in the stories. This representation implicitly promotes the false stereotype that Indian culture is inferior to white civilization and that Indian children are savages, who tend to break rules.

5.6.2 Gender Roles: The Role of Women

The majority of children’s books analyzed represent Indian culture as having a clear distinction between genders and their roles. As most books depict (imaginations) of Plains

Indians, they show men as hunters and fishermen, and women as caretakers of the children and those building the tipi. In Fliegender Stern, the gender differences are evident: women are in the village, while men are out hunting buffalo. It clearly depicts men as active and women as passive characters: “Die Frauen und alten Leute saßen zusammen und redeten miteinander. Alle warteten auf die Männer, die auf die Jagd geritten waren” (9). This difference is also acted out by Indian children. Fliegender Stern tries to discuss his desire to be accepted by the older boys with his friend Grasvogel. When Fliegender Stern’s sister joins their conversation, he draws the attention to the clear differences in gender: ““Was soll Grasvogel denn tun?”, fragte Rote Blume. “Das ist nichts für Mädchen”, sagte Fliegender Stern” (39). This statement by Fliegender Stern underlines that there appears to be a clear difference between the genders that is also related to power.

Males seem to have greater social power than females in this Indian society depicted in the novel.

While there were different jobs for men and women in Plains Indian tribes, both were deemed equally important. As historical geographer David J. Wishart explains, “[t]raditionally,

Plains Indian gender roles were well defined, and men’s and women’s responsibilities were equally crucial to the functioning, even the survival, of their societies. Consequently, both men and women were respected for doing their jobs well, although this is not how early European

American observers saw it.” Rather, Europeans projected their own perceptions of gender roles on Native Americans. This is what the novel Fliegender Stern does in rendering women passive characters, which sit and wait all day until the men return home from hunting. In reality, Plains

Indian women had multiple jobs, which white observers could see:

They witnessed them, from varying societies and at various times of the year,

clearing fields, planting, hoeing, and harvesting; digging cache pits and storing

food; erecting and dismantling lodges and tipis; collecting wild plants and

firewood; cooking, hauling water, and washing dishes; transporting possessions,

generally on foot, on bison hunts; making household items, including pottery and

clothing; and child rearing. This workload increased during the first half of the

nineteenth century as the fur trade raised the demands for dressed skins and robes.

(Wishart)

In contrast to Fliegender Stern, Ein Tag bei den Indianern shows more realistically how the jobs were divided among the genders. While Lakota men are represented as hunters, women are depicted as those erecting the tipis as well as processing the buffalo. This representation highlights that the jobs of both genders were equally important. There is no distinction between passive women and active men.

In Der kleine Drache Kokosnuss bei den Indianern, the Sioux girl Wilde Hummel actively fights the gender roles that her tribe has established. She blames tradition and the wise elders that she is not allowed to become a hunter: “Und das Mädchen im Camp arbeiten müssen, ist ungerecht. Tipis aufbauen, Tipis abbauen, Felle gerben, Kleidung waschen, Essen kochen,

Wasser schleppen, das ist alles so anstrengend! Viel lieber würde ich sammeln und jagen“ (40-

41). These feminist ideas of Wilde Hummel may appear positive at first sight, but they are detrimental to Native American cultures when taking a closer look. Obviously, it is positive to support and promote the empowerment and self-determination of women in all cultures and societies. In this context, however, feminism functions as a hypocritical tool. It transfers the modern ideas of feminism to a foreign culture centuries ago. In fact, European and American societies had even greater gender divisions than Native American societies in the 19th century. In this way, these progressive ideas – which are certainly not fully implemented in European and

American societies even today – are used to downplay the Sioux culture represented in the book as old-fashioned and outdated. This evaluation is certainly correct from today’s point of view, but it creates the illusion that Sioux culture – as well as other Native American cultures – is naturally primitive and savage in comparison to the allegedly progressive European and

American cultures. In reality, the oppression of women was rather a characteristic of white civilizations than Native American societies, as Wishart underlines:

In the last decades of the nineteenth century, the Canadian and U.S. governments

launched a concerted attack on the traditional roles of Indian men and women:

Indian men were to become farmers or blacksmiths, and Indian women were to

become housewives, in keeping with European American concepts of “civilized”

divisions of labor.

In conclusion, this representation in Der kleine Drache Kokosnuss bei den Indianern promotes feminist ideas at the expense of Native American cultures, and in particular Sioux culture.

5.6.3 The Ecological Indian: Friendship between Indians and Animals

In connection with the noble savage stereotype is that of the ‘ecological Indian:’ the alleged close relationship of Indians to nature and especially animals. The stereotype suggests that Indians feel connected to trees, plants, and animals. Consequently, there appears to be a special bond between Indians and animals, in particular their horses, in US and European cultural texts. In the specific context of German-language children’s books, the great majority of those books analyzed represent Indians and animals as close friends and partners. This close relationship is expressed by giving horses names such as Himmelsrand in Fliegender Stern,

Weiße Wolke in Kleine Indianerin, Wildfang in Indianergeschichten, and Kleiner Donner in

Yakari.

Moreover, there are scenes in various books that show how Indians help animals in dangerous situations. In Minitou, for example, the young Indian boy Minitou and his friend Anila save a young anxious horse out of thorny bushes:

Plötzlich erklang eine zarte Melodie. Anila spielte ein Lied auf der Flöte. Minitou

wurde ganz warm im Bauch. Auch das Pferd wurde ruhiger. Vorsichtig schlich

Minitou zu ihm und legte seine Hand beruhigend auf den warmen Pferderücken.

„Ich helfe dir“, wisperte er. Behutsam bog er die Äste zur Seite. Dann griff er in

seine kleine Ledertasche und nahm ein Messer heraus. Rasch schnitt er die letzten

Zweige entzwei und befreite das Bein des Pferdes. Das Pferd schaute Minitou

einen Moment lang an, dann wieherte es und stob davon.

This passage clearly underlines that there is a deeper connection between Indians and animals.

After being helped by Minitou, the horse neighs and appears to thank them for their rescue. Here,

Indians and animals cannot speak with each other.

In other books, Indians and animals can communicate with each other. In

Indianergeschichten, Tonkin and his horse Wildfang have a conversation: “Wildfang begrüßt ihn schnaubend: “Wo warst du so lange?” Indianer verstehen nämlich die Sprache der Pferde.

“Haare kämmen”, mault Tonkin” (7-8). Here, Indians are able to understand and speak the language of horses, which appears to be different from the Indian language. The narrator explicitly explains that Indians understand the language of horses, and thus renders it a factual statement, which is – of course – false. In Yakari, Indians and all animals even seem to speak the

91 same language. In the various stories included in the book, Yakari talks to horses, goats, birds, dogs and elks. The animals also talk to each other. There seem to be no linguistic boundaries but a unique language Indians and all animals share. In conclusion, these books clearly represent

Indians as ecological Indians with a close relationship to nature. According to these books,

Indians and animals are friends; they even speak the same language or understand each other’s languages. In this way, these representations perpetuate the ecological Indian stereotype and present unrealistic imaginations regarding Indians to young readers.

5.7 The Role of Non-Indians in Stories about Indians

The main criterion when selecting German-language children’s books useful for this analysis was that they needed to represent Indians and their cultures. For this reason, all books chosen relate to Indians whether directly by focusing on Indian protagonists or indirectly by the means of non-Indians who meet Indian characters or play Indian. Consequently, there are a number of books that do not involve non-Indians in their story, but that focus exclusively on

Indian characters. To be specific, there are five children’s books in the corpus without non-

Indians. These stories rely solely on Indian characters including the main protagonist. In contrast, there are four children’s books that include non-Indian characters or even feature non-Indian protagonists. While the quality of the book does not depend on whether non-Indian characters are or are not part of the story, it certainly affects various aspects on the story level such as the plot as well as the relationship between non-Indian and Indian characters. That is why it appears crucial to analyze which role non-Indians play for the story in the children’s books.

5.7.1 Relationship between Indians and Non-Indians: Antagonists or Friends?

Both Indian and non-Indian characters are used in only three of the nine German- language children’s books analyzed. Paul und Marie spielen Indianer solely focuses on non-

Indian characters, who assume Indian identities when playing with each other. The narrator refers to the two children as “die beiden Indianer,” but there are no Indian characters involved. In contrast to this book, Fliegender Stern, Der kleine Drache Kokosnuss bei den Indianern, and Die drei ??? represent interactions between Indian and non-Indian characters. The first two books show Indians encountering non-Indians in the past. Although they do not explicitly mention the temporal setting, a historical (or imagined) setting can be assumed by the characters and their lifestyles involved. The latter represents non-Indian boys interact with Indian characters in contemporary times.

The Indian Perspective on Whites

In Fliegender Stern, non-Indians are mostly characterized from the perspective of

Indians. For the Indian children, whites are antagonistic, unknown, and mythical. When discussing the lack of buffalo, the two boys Fliegender Stern and Grasvogel share their knowledge on non-Indians: “”Der weiße Mann hat unsere Büffel verjagt”, sagte Fliegender

Stern. “Hast du den weißen Mann schon gesehen?”, fragte Grasvogel. “Nein, ich habe ihn auch noch nicht gesehen”, antwortete Fliegender Stern, “aber ich weiß, dass die Väter im vergangenen

Herbst bei ihm waren. Sie brachten ihm die besten Büffelfelle und dafür gab der weiße Mann ihnen Schießpulver und Kugeln für die Gewehre““ (47-48). In order to find out more about non-

Indians, the two children ask the medicine man Wissendes Auge, who tells them about the lifestyles of whites, their ignorance and indifference to the lifestyles of Indians, and he concludes:

“Es gibt gute Indianer und es gibt böse Indianer”, sagte er, “und ich kenne gute

weiße Menschen und böse weiße Menschen. Sie wissen nicht, dass der Große

Geist uns dieses Land gegeben hat. Sie wissen nicht, dass wir nicht wie sie in

festen Zelten wohnen können und dass ihre Speisen uns krank und schwach

machen. Sie wissen nicht oder sie denken nicht darüber nach. Sie meinen, alle

Menschen sollten so leben wie sie.“ (53-54)

This characterization of whites by Wissendes Auge points out the main problems the Indian tribe has faced due to white settlers. They have limited the number of buffalo and also attempted to force their lifestyle on Indians. Despite not mentioning the name of the tribe, this account correctly represents the forceful influence of white settlers on Native American tribes. It is positive that the book presents the perspective of Indians because it is generally missing from the popular discourse about the history of the American continent in German-speaking culture.

The Myth of Passive Indians

Although Fliegender Stern mainly provides the point of view of Indian characters on whites, it includes various problematic views that Indians allegedly appear to have. First of all, the tribe of Fliegender Stern is represented as passive and defeated in the face of white settlers.

When Fliegender Stern asks his father why nobody seems to have tried to talk to white people, he replies: “”Wenn du größer bist, wirst du wissen, dass wir keine Macht gegen den weißen

Mann haben”” (56). Only Fliegender Stern’s naivety lets him assume that white progress can be stopped, while Indian adults have realized that resistance is senseless. This alleged mindset of these Indian characters contradicts the uncountable examples of Native American resistance to white settlements over the centuries such as the battles between tribes and colonists as well as the

US government, the American Indian Movement in the 1960s, and Native American resistance to pipelines even today. Therefore, this alleged view of these Indians is rather what a non-Indian

94 writer may assume Indians may have felt like, which is not supported by historical facts. In fact,

“the Indian population has increased and continues to grow, partly because of health care, vaccinations, increased immunity to diseases, a higher birth rate than death rate, and the option to self-identify as “Indian” on censuses” (Mihesuah 75). Particularly the fact that Native American peoples and cultures still exist and flourish today underlines that Native Americans have never passively accepted attempts of oppression, genocide, and assimilation by Europeans and Euro

Americans.

Whitewashing Genocide of Native Americans

Another highly problematic aspect of Fliegender Stern deals with the character called

Doktor Christoph. Unlike other white characters in the novel, he is friendly with Indians, can understand and speak their language, and appears to understand their side of the argument. In his conversation with Fliegender Stern and Grasvogel, he makes multiple controversial remarks when sharing his point of view on Indian-settler relations. First, he claims that the reason why whites have moved to America is the urge to know and own everything as well as the false fact that there used to be only a small number of Indians: “Sie wollen alles wissen und kennen. Sie haben die Kräfte des Feuers, des Wassers und des Blitzes gebändigt. Sie wollten die ganze Erde besitzen. Vor vielen hundert Jahren sind sie schon hierhergekommen. Sie sahen, dass nur wenige

Indianer in diesem großen Land lebten““ (78). Rather than the desire for knowledge, white colonists longed for fame and wealth out of greed and the mindset that white Christians were superior to any other race. What is more, scholars estimate that – in contrast to Doktor

Christoph’s view – before first contact there lived about seven million Native Americans on the

American continent (Mihesuah 74), and that there existed at least 2000 cultures (Berkhofer 3).

Furthermore, Doktor Christoph explains how Indians should behave in the face of white progress; in his view, Indians need to be forgiving and understanding despite the genocide of numerous Indian peoples. His advice for the children is: “Ihr müsst lernen, als Brüder mit den

Weißen zu leben“ (80). Correctly, Grasvogel interjects that it seems inconceivable to befriend whites because they have systematically killed Indians and buffalo, the main source of food that numerous tribes depend on. Doktor Christoph replies: “Ihr müsst Neues lernen […] Ihr müsst lernen in Frieden mit denen zu leben, die euch Böses getan haben”” (80). This view of Doktor

Christoph represents the problematic mindset of European settlers and the US government.

According to them, Indians are the problem of white progress, and they need to forget the atrocities white people have committed, abandon their inferior, primitive lifestyles, and adapt to white society.

While this mindset is certainly racist and hurtful to Native Americans, the characterization of Doktor Christoph even increases its effect on young readers. As mentioned above, he is represented as a wise man, who only wants the best for his Indian friends. He explicitly tells Fliegender Stern and Grasvogel: “Ich bin euer Freund” (81). In addition, he is referred to as a doctor, which is usually a well-respected profession. Therefore, his statements gain in profoundness and validity. Moreover, his actions also seem to confirm that he is a friend of Indians. Doktor Christoph draws a map for the children, which directs them to a place with plenty of buffalo. In the end, he helps the Indians find buffalo, but this good deed does not conceal the fact that his mindset and his views on Indian-white relations is rooted in white supremacy and racism. His actions rather function as a means of deception: On the surface, he is represented as wise, kind, and friendly towards Indians, but his statements contain false facts and white supremacist ideas, which are designed to oppress Native American peoples and exploit

96 their resources. In this way, this book whitewashes the troubling history of Indian-white relations.

Good and Bad Non-Indians: Saving Indians

In all three books with non-Indian characters, there is the general distinction between good and bad non-Indians/whites. Good non-Indian characters are sympathetic towards Indians, show interest in their culture, and most importantly risk their lives to save Indians from bad non-

Indians. In contrast, bad non-Indians are hostile towards Indians, disrespect their culture, and try to harm Indian characters by hunting buffalo or stealing cultural artifacts. Clear distinctions between good and bad characters are common in children’s books. What is noteworthy, however, is the fact that Indians are victimized and therefore need to be helped by good non-Indian characters. In Der kleine Drache Kokosnuss bei den Indianern, for example, the two dragons, the porcupine, and the Indian girl Wilde Hummel save the Sioux tribe from white buffalo hunters, who want to enslave the Indians. Without the help of these non-Indian characters, the captured

Indians would be doomed. So the story clearly renders the non-Indian characters heroes, while victimizing the Sioux tribe.

In Die drei ??? this common narrative is even more evident because it actually uses three white American boys as saviors of two Hopi Indians. The three boys are clearly depicted as positive characters, especially regarding their attitude towards Indians. They attend the Hopi dance event, and they also appreciate Native American cultures and their products such as their names: “”Aponovi”, meinte Bob. “Das ist ja ein schöner Name”” (21). What is more, the Hopi woman named Pamuya explicitly characterizes the three boys as positive characters: “Aber du und deine Freunde, ihr seid aufrichtige Jungen, das spüre ich” (21). She refers to them as friends

97 when the boys offer helping her with the bad non-Indian characters: “”Das werde ich tun, meine jungen Freunde”” (25).

In contrast to the three boys, there is a group of non-Indian gangsters, who attempt to steal the cultural objects, Katsinas, Pamuya sells. After one of them has unsuccessfully tried to buy one, he abducts Pamuya and her husband Aponovi. Again, Pamuya is the one who characterizes the bad non-Indians as hunters of Katsinas:

”Es gibt viele Sammler von Katsinas, die viel Geld für die alten Puppen bezahlen.

Das geht schon seit Jahrzehnten so. Sie durchstreifen die USA und suchen nach

wertvollen Katsinas. Man findet sie auf jedem Fest und bei jedem

Tanzwettbewerb, wo es Verkaufsstände gibt. Und natürlich kommen die Käufer

auch in unserer Dörfer. Diese Puppen werden auf der ganzen Welt teuer

gehandelt. Es gibt Menschen, die bis zu 10.000 Dollar für eine alte Katsina

bezahlen.“ (20)

Besides Pamuya’s characterization, these bad non-Indian men characterize themselves by overtly admitting to their motives. One of the men, Tom, states that he wants to steal the Katsinas, so that he can sell them for profit: “”Aber ich werde die Puppen finden und verkaufen. Ich habe

Käufer in Europa, die zahlen für jede einzelne Puppe 10.000 Dollar!““ (134). The book clarifies that there are positive non-Indian characters, which help Indians defeat the negative non-Indian characters.

Moreover, the structure of the book underlines that the Indian characters can only be saved with help by the three white boys. The book allows readers to decide on which page the story should continue, which influences the outcome of the story. At the beginning of the story,

98 for example, readers have to decide if the three boys should go to the stage right away or take a look at the stands first. The first option results in the event being cancelled due to a threat call and thus ends the story with the words: “Und so endet der Fall mit einem friedlichen Marktplatz und ohne jede weitere Aufregung. Das Ende gefällt dir nicht? Dann probiere es doch noch einmal und gehe zurück auf Seite 7” (15). Only the second option leads readers to the desired end of the story, which features the three boys as the saviors of the Indian characters Aponovi and Pamuya. This structure clearly suggests that the only appropriate ending to the story is when the three American boys defeat the white gangsters. In this way, the (intended) plot victimizes the Indian characters and renders them passive, virtually without chance against greedy white men. As mentioned above, this is problematic because it claims that Indians are allegedly passive and helpless, whereas Native Americans have actively and successfully resisted attempts of whites to oppress, assimilate, and annihilate them culturally and militarily.

5.8 Language in German-Language Children’s Books

5.8.1 Loaded Words

In the majority of German-language children’s books analyzed Indians and their culture are represented stereotypically. Despite being unspecific and unrealistic, these books present

Indians positively. This can also be seen on the language level. There are virtually no loaded words used in the books to refer to Indians. According to the guide provided by the Council on

Interracial Books for Children, examples of common loaded words in US children’s books are the following: ““savage,” “primitive,” “lazy,” “superstitious,” “treacherous,” “wily,” “crafty,”

“inscrutable,” “docile,” and “backward”” (“10 Quick Ways to Analyze Children’s Books for

Racism and Sexism”). None of these words occur in the children’s books analyzed in translation.

While German-language children’s books represent Indians positively and without loaded words,

99 there is one instance in which Indians are referred to as dangerous and cruel. In Der kleine

Drache Kokosnuss bei den Indianern, the dragons and the porcupine talk about the prairie and its dangers. Besides the extreme temperatures, Matilda mentions Indians as a possible threat: “”Ich habe gehört, dass die Sioux sehr gefährlich sind. Die sollen Marterpfähle haben und so was““

(20). This remark points out that Indians, especially the Sioux, are dangerous because they torture their enemies on stakes – which are not even part of Sioux culture. It clearly relates

Indians to the stereotype of the bloodthirsty Indian, who is naturally vicious, brutal, and savage.

In this book, Indians are considered threats to the main protagonists because of their violent culture. In reality as well as in the book, Indians mostly react to transgressions by non-Indians such as the buffalo hunters in this book.

5.8.2 Indian Language

Besides loaded words, language is an important aspect of children’s books to analyze in regard to how Indian language is represented in German. Obviously, children’s books in

German-speaking culture are written in German, even when they deal with foreign cultures and peoples, who speak different languages. In general, different languages are not represented in children’s books, so that the books can be easily understood by young readers. The majority of books included in the corpus do not differentiate between the language of non-Indians and

Indians. Both speak German at a Native speaker level without any problems. One book, however, represents the Indian language by a different style of communication. While in the US context Indian characters frequently have insufficient and defective English skills, these Indians’ style of communication is elaborated, and even figurative and metaphorical. In Der kleine

Drache Kokosnuss bei den Indianern, the chief announces the final verdict about the intruders in a metaphorical way: “”Manitu ist unendlich in seiner Weisheit. Das Gras der Prärie hat kein

100

Ende und keinen Anfang. Der Regen fällt, wie er fällt, und der Hase springt, wie er springt. Die

Fremdlinge werden am Marterpfahl dem großen Manitu geopfert. Howgh, ich habe das letzte

Wort gesprochen““ (36). The dragon Oskar cannot follow the chief’s train of thought: “Oskar brummt: “So was! Und was hat das mit Regen und Hasen zu tun?”” (36). This passage clearly shows that Indians and the dragons use German, but the Indians talk completely differently in style than non-Indians. Here, language functions as a means to highlight cultural difference.

Oskar’s reaction to the chief’s utterance underlines that non-Indian speech is more precise and less figurative than that of Indians. There is no judgment of Indian speech as inferior; it is rather a marker of cultural difference, while still using German for both cultures.

5.9 Illustrations of Indians

The illustrations play an important role in children’s books because they help young readers visualize the setting and characters. In this way, illustrations support the immersion process of young readers and shape their perceptions. This is particularly influential when the book deals with culturally distant settings and characters such as Indians. As German-speaking children are unlikely to have experienced Indian peoples and cultures, these illustrations lay the groundwork for how they imagine Indians and their environment. It becomes evident that illustrations of children’s books dealing with Indians need to be analyzed because they determine how German-speaking children conceive Indian characters and their culture. Creators of children’s books know about the importance of illustrations, and for this reason all nine children’s books analyzed contain illustrations of Indians.

In general, the majority of children’s books analyzed represent Indians with help of the same visual elements such as dark hair, feathers and/or headband, brown clothes, and moccasins or no shoes at all. Despite the different graphic designs, all the traditional Indian characters are

101 illustrated with all or several of these elements. This fact is not problematic per se because several of these elements are part of Plains Indians culture (although they are used for representing the monolithic category Indian here). The problem, however, is that even Indian characters within the same book look completely the same, especially regarding their faces. If differentiated at all, these Indian characters look different only in hairstyle and/or clothing. This kind of illustration can be found in Indianergeschichten (Illustration 14), Fliegender Stern

(Illustration 15), Ein Tag bei den Indianern (Illustration 1), Kleine Indianerin (Illustration 16),

Minitou (Illustration 6 and 7), and Yakari (Illustration 17). This clearly indicates that Indians are conceived of as a group, not as individuals. They are used in order to represent their racial/cultural group. In this way, young readers are guided to perceive Indians as one stereotyped group, in which everybody looks alike, while Native Americans are as individually different as individuals of any other racial and cultural group. These illustrations underline the fact that these representations – in text and image – are stereotypes and myths rather than realistic depictions of Native American peoples and their cultures.

Another aspect of illustrations of Indians in German-language children’s books deals with the fact that Indians are represented as white European/Euro American characters dressed as

Indians. Obviously, the book Paul und Marie spielen Indianer shows German-speaking children dressing up as Indians (Illustration 3). Here, it is clear that these characters are not Indians, but non-Indians wearing feathers, headbands, and war paint. Despite all the problems this book contains, at least these illustrations do not claim to represent Indians. In Indianergeschichten, however, Indians appear to be whites dressed up as Indians with the claim to represent actual

Indians (Illustration 18). These characters have light skin, especially when compared to the illustrations of Indians in the other children’s books. They rather resemble the German-speaking

102 characters Paul and Marie than Indian characters in other books. These whitewashed illustrations in Indianergeschichten underline that the book deals with Indians of the European imaginations; this imagination is so limited that the Indian characters appear to be whites in Indian costumes.

This poor representation neglects and denies even the most obvious cultural differences such as skin color, and appropriates the most popular elements of the Indian stereotype and uses them to make profit.

Die drei ??? is a welcome exception to the vast majority of German-language children’s books analyzed regarding the illustration of Indians. Besides being the only book featuring

Indians in a contemporary setting, it also represents the two Native American characters Pamuya and Aponovi in a realistic way, as can be seen in Illustration 19. Both Pamuya and Aponovi are dressed in modern clothes, just as the majority of Native Americans are today. This illustration lacks the most dominant stereotypical elements when representing Indians. The Native American characters resemble the three white American boys in clothing style. Similar to the text, the illustration depicts the two Native American characters as individuals rather than mere stereotypes. In this way, these illustrations contradict the most common stereotypes such as that all Indians are alike, and that Indians still live and look like they did in the 19th century.

Unfortunately, such illustrations are the exception in German-speaking culture. The fact that this book is the single example of the corpus underlines that the majority of German-language children’s books does not transcend stereotypes, whether in text or image.

5.10 Effects of Stereotypes on Young German-Speaking Audiences

Unlike in the US context, stereotype Indians do not affect the young reader’s self-image in a negative way in Europe. First, German-language children’s books are unlikely to be read by

Native American children. Secondly, children’s books about Indians in German-speaking culture

103 commonly portray Indians in a positive way; Indians are hardly ever represented as bloodthirsty warriors or lazy alcoholics. In German-speaking culture, however, Indians are perceived on the basis of stereotypes, but not the negative ones that are common in US culture. In Germany and

Austria, Indians are represented as noble savages and ecological Indians, who love nature, are friends with animals, and live the Plains Indian lifestyle of the 19th century. This representation is distorted and imaginary, but it does not hurt young German-speaking readers. They are able to identify with Indian characters in children’s books because those are usually represented as brave, just, and clever heroes. They are depicted so positively that young German-speaking readers desire to be as brave and smart as Yakari, Minitou, and the other Indian characters. These representations are clearly appealing to children, and may even lead them to participate in the practice of playing Indian.

The problem of these representations lies in the fact that they are based on stereotypes, myths, and imaginations. Yakari, Minitou, and the other Indian heroes are not realistic, complex characters, and similarly their alleged culture is fake and constructed by Europeans. Although these books portray Indians and their culture positively, they represent them in a limited way.

The majority lacks transcending stereotypes: Indians are people of the past, they live as Plains

Indians in tipis and hunt buffalo, and they wear feathers and war paint. These images generate false admiration towards Indians, which results in wrong expectations of what Native American peoples and cultures are like in reality. As German-speaking children only know stereotyped

Indians, they are only interested in Native Americans when they correspond with the myth they are familiar with. This myth expresses the notion that Indians have vanished, and therefore it is appropriate for non-Indians such as them to assume Indian identities and play Indian. Indians, then, become people of the imagination of non-Indians, which denies their actual existence. With

104 such a false perception of Indians and their culture deeply rooted in the minds of German- speaking children, it seems impossible to create interest in contemporary Native American peoples and their cultures that is based on respect for each other’s histories and cultures.

5.11 German-Speaking Authors and Illustrators without Expertise

Among those responsible for the lack of knowledge about and respect for Native

American cultures in Germany and Austria are writers and illustrators of German-language children’s books. When children’s books deal with foreign cultures, it is crucial to analyze the author’s and illustrator’s background, both in terms of national and cultural background as well as study and work experience. Children’s books about foreign cultures can only be culturally accurate and sensitive if the author and illustrator are either members of or experts on the foreign culture. It ought to be the highest goal to uphold the cultural integrity of the foreign culture.

Without experience in and/or knowledge of the foreign culture, it is virtually impossible to succeed in creating stories and images about them that maintain cultural integrity. For this reason, it is vital to analyze the information about the author and illustrator provided by the book.

This information should explain why the author and illustrator are qualified to deal with Native

American culture, either by experience or expertise. When there is no information given, it is necessary to research the biography of those involved creating the book. This information is essential because it contains reasons for why Indians are represented in a certain way.

All of the nine German-language children’s books analyzed were originally published in

German, and therefore are not translations from other languages. The authors of these books were either born in Germany or Austria and are native speakers of German. None of the authors and illustrators is a member of a Native American nation. What is more, none of them is in any way qualified for dealing with Native American peoples and cultures as a consequence of

105 academic studies in this field. The majority of authors studied German studies and have worked as teachers or professional writers of children’s books. The same lack of cultural experience or knowledge is true for illustrators. It becomes evident that these German-speaking authors and illustrators are not capable of creating children’s books about Native Americans with cultural integrity. They do not have any qualifications for this job. Even the short biographies contain stereotypical ideas of Indians: Claudia Ondracek’s biography, included in Indianergeschichten, mentions her ability of tiptoeing like an Indian “Inzwischen schreibt sie selbst Kinderbücher und manchmal schleicht sie wie eine Indianerin auf leisen Sohlen durch die Wohnung, damit ihr kleiner Sohn nicht aufwacht“ (40). Consequently, these authors perpetuate the stereotypes that are most prominent and popular in German-speaking culture. This limited perspective is extremely profitable in German-speaking culture because the audience – parents and children alike – are unaware of or indifferent to the fact that their perception of Native Americans is a false imagination, which is repeated and maintained by these authors and illustrators. At the same time, the voices and perspectives of Native Americans are missing and cannot be heard unless books by Native Americans are translated into German or until German-speaking authors and illustrators of children’s books are made aware of their ignorance and begin doing research on the specific Native American culture they would like to represent.

6. Comparison to Modern English-Language Children’s Books

In comparison to the German-language children’s books thoroughly analyzed above, contemporary children’s books in the US and Canada deal with Native American peoples and cultures in a more sensitive and realistic way. This finds expression on various levels such as in the titles and covers, settings, characters, plots, illustrations, and the background of the authors

106 and illustrators. By analyzing and comparing all these aspects of contemporary English-language children’s books about Native American cultures, it becomes evident that German-language children’s books are one-sided and stereotypical in their representations of Native Americans.

This comparison clarifies the potential German-speaking culture has in improving its relationship to Native American culture by taking their English-language counterparts as an example. The following analysis of English-language children’s books is structured by using certain aspects that are most striking when compared to German-language ones. This analysis does not completely cover all aspects of the children’s books, but it functions as a means of comparison in order to underline the wide disparities in dealing with Native Americans in both cultures today.

6.1 Names of Tribes in Titles

When comparing the titles and covers of children’s books about Native Americans in the

US and Canada to the ones in German-speaking culture, it becomes evident that those in English do not use the word ‘Indian’ and do not refer to popular Indian elements. While appealing to the popular Indian stereotype appears indispensable for German-language children’s books, none of the books chosen from the English-language context uses the term ‘Indian’ in its title. Moreover, a number of books incorporate the specific name of the tribe in its subtitle in order to clarify the tribe involved in the story. For example, Saltypie. A Choctaw Journey from Darkness into Light makes clear that the story is from the Choctaw culture, and The Star People. A Lakota Story refers to the Lakota culture in its subtitle. This is important to make sure young readers and their parents know which Native American culture the book deals with. These books in the US and

Canada do not claim to represent all Native American cultures – or the monolithic Indian – but individual books cover one tribe’s culture. In this way, the titles underline that these children’s

107 books in the US and Canada intend to deal with Native American cultures, not stereotyped

Indians.

6.2 Specific Traditional and Modern Settings

Similar to the titles, the setting of the children’s books in the US and Canada is specific.

The stories are set in the past or in contemporary times, and always revolve around a specific tribe. In Buffalo Bird Girl, for example, S.D. Nelson retells the story of an actual Hidatsa Indian girl, who lived in the 19th century, and introduces the traditional life of the Hidatsa Indians in great detail. The book even includes a map of the Great Plains of the time (Illustration 20) as well as a timeline of the Hidatsa’s history. In addition, Saltypie tells the story of a Choctaw family in Oklahoma in the 20th century. In contrast to the majority of German-language children’s books, both books mentioned above explicitly state the time and the tribe represented.

By including a specific setting, these texts avoid stating that all Indians are the same, and that

Plains Indians are the only real Indians. In this way, these books do not use common stereotypes, but instead show that Native American peoples and cultures were diverse in the past and have maintained their diversity in contemporary times.

6.3 Native American Characters

The characters in the English-language children’s books are as diverse as the different cultures they belong to. As is common in children’s books in general, the main characters are children, so that young readers can easily identify with the Native American heroes and heroines.

Because the main protagonists in these books are so diverse, they avoid being stereotyped

Indians. Unlike in the German-language context, characters in English-language children’s books are not defined by their Indianness, but by their personalities and role within the family. In

SkySisters, for example, the two Ojibway sisters, Alex and Allie, are not referred to as Indians or

108

Native Americans. Their characterization is mainly based on them being sisters and their assigned roles: the younger one, Alex, is to listen to her older sister Allie, who needs to take care of Alex when going out into the snow at night to experience the Northern Lights, the SkySisters.

In this text, they characterize themselves by using Anishinawbe Ojibway words: “Nishiime” for younger sister and “Nimise” for older sister. It becomes clear that their relationship on this special day is the main theme in this book, not their stereotypical Indianness.

In Thunder Boy Jr., a young boy is dissatisfied with his name because he is named after his father Big Thunder. As he does not want to be Little Thunder, he thinks about a more fitting name for himself. Similar to SkySister, this book gives a glimpse into the world of a Native

American individual, whose complex thoughts and feelings are dealt with. His complex identity is represented by the various names the boy considers: there is “Not Afraid of Ten Thousand

Teeth” because he is not afraid to touch a live orca or “Full of Wonder” because of his desire to travel the world. In the end, his father gives him the name “Lightning” to underline their connectedness that is such as that between thunder and lightning. This book clearly features a complex human being, not a stereotyped Indian by showing his deepest troubles and desires regarding his name and place in the world.

6.4 Uneventful Plots

In contrast to the German-language children’s books, the English-language ones analyzed are not adventure books, which usually consist of fights, dangers, and (physical) challenges. In the English-language context, stories about Native Americans are not limited to adventures, but they contain more truthful topics and issues. In all the US and Canadian children’s books analyzed, the stories deal with the respective tribal culture and the families the characters live in.

The book Wild Berries, for example, shows the boy Clarence picking wild berries with his

109 grandmother in the forest. This tradition of the boy and his grandmother teaches him about the animals living in the forest such as ants, spiders, foxes, and birds. The plot seems uneventful when compared to the German-language children’s books, which underlines that Indians in

German-speaking culture belong to the genre of adventure literature. The popular stereotype includes Indians as warriors, who seek adventures and challenges. In the US and Canada, these books contain personal memories and identity struggles of the authors such as in Wild Berries,

SkySisters, Saltypie, and Thunder Boy Jr. In this way, these books dismantle the plots of

German-language children’s books as stereotypical because they predominantly represent Indian characters as constantly looking for adventures.

6.5 The Diversity of Native American Languages

Obviously, Native American authors do not use loaded words when telling stories about

Native American characters. Loaded words represent the power structure that white European and Euro American society established, which Native American authors have no reason to adhere to because of their cultural background and identity. On the contrary, these authors use their books as a stage to present their various Native languages. For this reason, these books include various languages and thus show how diverse Native American cultures are on a linguistic level. As mentioned above, SkySisters uses words from the Anishinawbe Ojibway language such as “Nishiime” (younger sister), “Nimise” (older sister), and “Nokomis”

(grandmother). The same is true for Wild Berries, which includes words from the Cree language such as “pikaci-minisa” (wild berries), “okoma” (his grandma), and “ininimina” (blueberries) in the story, and it also provides a short list of vocabulary and a pronunciation guide in the back of the book. Both books give translations of the words, so that non-Natives can also read and

110 understand the words. In this way, Native American languages and their great diversity are introduced to a greater audience in order to tackle the stereotype of the monolithic Indian.

6.6 Illustrations

In the English-language children’s books analyzed, the illustrations underline the diversity of Native American cultures and thus dismantle the stereotype of the timeless, monolithic (Plains) Indian. In these books, numerous of the characters do not belong to one of the Plains Indian tribes, and therefore do not match the most popular criteria for a stereotyped

(Plains) Indian such as feathers and headband. Additionally, the books analyzed predominantly show Native American characters in contemporary settings. For this reason, these characters do not look like stereotyped Indians because they dress in modern clothes. Examples for these characters are the two Ojibway sisters, Alex and Allie, in SkySisters (Illustration 20). They are shown wearing hats, scarves, gloves, and winter jackets. Their Ojibway culture is not visible in their clothes as the majority of Native Americans today do not dress in their traditional clothes

(every day). The same is true for Wild Berries, Saltypie, and Thunder Boy Jr.

The two books that feature stories set in the past, The Star People and Buffalo Bird Girl, illustrate their characters as Plains Indians because they deal with the Lakota nation and the

Hidatsa nation. As can be seen in Illustration 22, it includes certain elements of the Plains Indian culture such as feathers, face paint, and clothes with fringes. However, it does not use these elements to allude to the stereotyped Indian, but in order to adequately represent the Lakota culture in the 19th century. The traditional clothes shown in the illustration match the traditional setting of the story that is set in the past. In this way, they help young readers visualize the characters from the Lakota culture, not the stereotyped Indian.

111

6.7 Native American Authors: A Diverse Group

In contrast to the authors of German-language children’s books, all of the English- language books analyzed are written by Native American authors. To be more specific, these authors are members of various tribal communities in the US and Canada. For example, the author of Wild Berries Julie Flett is a Metis and Cree author from Vancouver; S.D. Nelson is a member of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe and wrote The Star People and Buffalo Bird Girl; Tim

Tingle, the author of Saltypie, is a Choctaw from Oklahoma; the author of SkySisters Jan

Bourdeau Waboose is a Nishnawbe Ojibway from Northern Ontario; and famous Native

American author Sherman Alexie is a Spokane/Coeur d’Alene tribal member from Washington and wrote Thunder Boy Jr. This fact underlines that these authors do not only have cultural expertise because of their personal cultural background, but they also represent the great cultural diversity of Native American cultures, which stereotypical representations so frequently deny or neglect to show. It is clear that Native American authors are more likely to uphold cultural integrity and avoid stereotypes. Because of their cultural background and experience, they have no interest in representing themselves and their cultures by using stereotypes; on the contrary, they dismantle and criticize popular Indian stereotypes because they have been directly affected by them.

112

7. Conclusion

This paper has shown that stereotypes of Indians are still widely spread in German- language children’s books. Stereotypes, such as the “noble savage,” the “bloodthirsty warriors,” and the “ecological Indian,” were introduced by European explorers and have remained influential in different cultures all over the world. Particularly, cultures that did not encounter

Native American peoples received and directly conveyed the accounts and perceptions of colonists without questioning. In turn, stereotypes of Indians came to cultures such as German- speaking culture, which has largely perceived Native Americans as noble savages and ecological

Indians. As is common knowledge in German-speaking culture, Karl May was the decisive figure in establishing Indian stereotypes. Numerous scholars point out that May greatly based his

Indian stories on already existing stories and his writing is far from original. His success is generally explained with his talent as a marketer, rather than a storyteller.

Moreover, Germany and Austria, as young nations, used May’s stories for the purpose of building its cultural identity by claiming certain features (e.g. tribalism, loyalty, and fighting spirit) of Indians for themselves. These historical reasons are largely responsible for May’s success in German-speaking culture. This success led to the myth that German-speaking culture has a special relationship to Indians. It appears to be popular knowledge around the world that numerous German-speakers are particularly enthusiastic about Indians, and even various scholars support this claim. In reality, this alleged special relationship is mainly based on the dominant role of May’s books in this discourse, and thus is as much of a myth as his imaginations of

Indians. Conclusively, German-speaking culture, similar to numerous others, has used Indians for its own purposes such as identity-building, politics (e.g. green politics, resistance movements), and profit. (White) societies in the whole world have utilized Indians, as the

113

‘Other,’ in order to build their own identities as civilized and rationale peoples and elevate themselves above the primitive savages and heathens. In contemporary times, these cultural differences are marketed and sold as valuable exotic products such as children’s books.

The analysis of German-language children’s books underlines the fact that German- speaking culture’s relationship to Native Americans is rather typical than special. As in numerous other cultures, Indians are profitable as cultural objects. This becomes evident when considering the titles and covers of German-language children’s books, which clearly feature the word Indian as well as certain key elements (feathers, headbands, tipis etc.) in order to appeal to the expectations of potential buyers and readers. All but one book analyzed use the word Indian in the title or subtitle, and every single one includes stereotypical Indian elements on the cover.

What is more, the majority of children’s books analyzed deal with Plains Indians. Besides so- called “Lake Indians” shown in two books, Plains Indians function as representatives of all

Indians. This representation denies the existence of numerous different Native American cultures apart from the Plains Indians. In addition, these representations generally lack specific settings and do not refer to specific tribes. Different tribes – if they are included at all – speak the same language and dress the same way. Further, Indian characters are illustrated without any individuality, especially in their faces, which presents them as monolithic. Even when the book does not contain stereotyped Indians such as Die drei ???, the illustration on the cover shows the three Euro American protagonists dressed as stereotyped Indians in order to appeal to potential buyers and readers. All of those aspects make clear that German-language children’s books depict Native Americans as stereotyped Indians, which only exist in the imagination of German- speaking culture.

114

In general, representations of Native Americans in German-language children’s books are stereotypical, but positive. Indian characters are noble savages and ecological Indians, who are closely connected to nature, can talk to animals, and selflessly save friends and animals from danger. While characters such as Yakari are certainly stereotyped and unrealistic, the majority of books promote a positive attitude towards Indians and their (Plains) culture. An exception is

Fliegender Stern, in which its white character Doktor Christoph is represented as a friend of

Indians, while making culturally racist remarks. In his opinion, Europeans settled in America because only a few Indians had lived there previously, and Indians had to adapt because white progress was inevitable. By depicting this character positively, these culturally racist comments are normalized, although they are highly controversial.

The numerous problems included in German-language children’s books can be explained by the fact that all books analyzed are written by German-speakers. Neither authors nor illustrators have Native American cultural background, but rather are rooted in German-speaking culture. This does not necessarily pose a problem, but it raises the question whether these authors can be cultural authorities of Native American cultures because of their heritage. Moreover, these authors cannot be considered experts on Native American cultures because none of them have any academic background in this field. Together with the lack of cultural expertise, the stereotypical representations in the vast majority of children’s books analyzed reveal that not a single author has done research or consulted with Native Americans before creating the book.

Rather, they appear to have been drawn to Indians because of their own problematic mindset in regard to Indians. In this way, these authors perpetuate the cycle of stereotypical representations of Indians in German-speaking culture, which desperately needs to be broken.

115

In order to underline the deficiencies, but also the potential, of German-language children’s books, they were compared to a small number of English-language children’s books.

As this paper mainly dealt with the perception of German-speaking culture, analyzing the

English-language examples served only for highlighting differences to German-language books.

The situation on the US and Canadian book market, when it comes to children’s books about

Native Americans, deserves a more thorough and comprehensive analysis. The comparison, however, has shown that English-language children’s books represent Native American characters as complex individuals, not as stereotyped Indians. This is expressed in the titles, which do not include the term Indian, but rather refer to specific tribes such as Saltypie. A

Choctaw Journey from Darkness into Light and The Star People. A Lakota Story. These titles show that Native American cultures and their stories are diverse and cannot be expressed by the monolithic concept of the Indian. Similar to the titles, the settings and characters are diverse and specific. There are stories that are set in the past, such as in The Star People, and those that play in contemporary times, such as in Thunder Boy Jr. In both ways, the settings are realistic and specific by referring to specific tribes, instead of vaguely mentioning Indians in a timeless way, as is often the case in German-language children’s books. Additionally, the English-language children’s books include various Native American languages with English translation, and thus they underline the great cultural diversity of Native American cultures on a linguistic level.

The major reason why the English-language children’s books analyzed differ so greatly from their German-language counterparts lies in the cultural background and authority of the authors and illustrators. While the latter are created by Germans and Austrians with little to no cultural expertise – besides being familiar to common Indian stereotypes – the authors of the

English-language books are without exception members of various Native American tribes.

116

Several among them, such as Tim Tingle, who received a Masters Degree in English Literature with focus on American Indian Studies from the University of Oklahoma, and Jan Bourdeau

Waboose, who wrote for Native American magazines and newspapers, do not only have a tribal affiliation, but also work and are experts in the field of Native American Studies. Because of both their personal and academic background in Native American cultures, they are able to present their Native American perspectives on actual topics and issues important to Native

Americans. As in Thunder Boy Jr., this may include identity struggles of children living in more than one culture or, as in Wild Berries and SkySisters, personal childhood memories and traditions. These authors are cultural experts and, because of that, create positive and complex

Native American characters. Due to their cultural heritage, they are less likely to discuss Native

American stories and issues – which directly involve themselves – by using stereotypes. The main reason that these children’s books are more culturally sensitive and maintain cultural integrity is that these authors personally hold stakes in representing Native American characters and cultures themselves as complex human beings and thriving cultures. The German-speaking authors neither have the expertise nor personal interests that could result in their stories avoiding

Indian stereotypes, but they rather present the white view on Native American peoples and cultures.

This paper attempted to raise awareness to the problematic representations of Native

Americans in German-speaking culture, particularly in children’s books, and also point towards ways of tackling this issue. First, it is necessary to regard Native Americans as complex, contemporary human beings and their cultures as thriving and diverse. Secondly, those involved in the process of (children’s) book-making should consult with Native Americans before publishing a book featuring Native American characters, particularly when authors do not have

117 any background in Native American cultures. Thirdly, parents should restrain from buying culturally insensitive books for their children in order to end the existence and acceptance of those stereotypes. Unfortunately, stereotypical representations of Native Americans are not limited to children’s books, but can also be seen in other cultural products such as movies, advertisements, and costumes, thus rendering the tackling of this problem both more difficult and important. Moreover, hurtful stereotypes also involve minority groups other than Native

Americans in German-speaking culture and in other parts of Europe and the United States. In order to tackle these images of Indians, black people, Muslims, and numerous other groups, it is crucial – as Deborah Root puts it – to “decolonize our eye and carefully examine the cultural and aesthetic phenomena we have been taught to find interesting” (204). These stereotypes continue to express the perceived cultural superiority of (male) white people regarding all other social and cultural groups. In using these stereotypes and profiting from them financially, white people – in

Europe and the United States – participate in the “continuation of colonial attitude” (Root 72), which should be rejected and have no place in the 21st century.

118

8. Works Cited

8.1 Primary Sources

German-Language Children’s Books

Breuer, Maria and Daniela Kunkel. Lesemaus. Paul und Marie spielen Indianer. Bd. 180. Hamburg: Carlsen, 2016. Print.

Elschner, Geraldine and Mone Schliephack. Kleine Indianerin. Zürich: Michael Neugebauer Verlag, 2015. Print.

Grimm, Sandra and Susanne Szesny. Minitou. Der große Indianer. Hamburg: Carlsen, 2014. Print.

Holtei, Christa and Astrid Vohwinkel. Lesemaus. Ein Tag bei den Indianern. Bd. 10. Hamburg: Carlsen, 2011. Print.

Siegner, Ingo. Der kleine Drache Kokosnuss bei den Indianern. Munich: CBJ, 2011. Print.

Kessel, Carola von. Yakari. Indianerabenteuer für Erstleser. Stuttgart: Friendz, 2016. Print.

Ondracek, Claudia and Susanne Wechdorn. Leserabe. Indianergeschichten. Ravensburg: Ravensburger, 2008. Print.

Pfeiffer, Boris and Jan Saße. Die drei ??? Geheimnis der Indianer. Bd. 18. Stuttgart: Franckh- Kosmos, 2016. Print.

Wölfel, Ursula and Bettina Wölfel. Fliegender Stern. Hamburg: Carlsen, 2007. Print.

English-Language Children’s Books

Alexie, Sherman and Yuyi Morales. Thunder Boy Jr. New York: Little, Brown Books for Young Readers, 2016. Print.

Flett, Julie. Wild Berries. Vancouver: Simply Read Books, 2013. Print.

Nelson, S.D. Buffalo Bird Girl. A Hidatsa Story. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 2015. Print.

119

---. The Star People. A Lakota Story. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 2003. Print.

Tingle, Tim and Karen Clarkson. Saltypie. A Choctaw Journey from Darkness into Light. El Paso: Cinco Puntos Press, 2010. Print.

Waboose, Jan Bourdeau and Brian Deines. SkySisters. Toronto: Kids Can Press, 2002. Print.

8.2 Secondary Sources

Banfield, Beryle. “Commitment to Change. The Council on Interracial Books for Children and the World of Children’s Books.” African American Review 32.1 (1998): 17-22. Print.

Bataille, Gretchen M. Native American Representations. First Encounters, Distorted Images, and Literary Appropriations. Lincoln: UP of Nebraska, 2001. Print.

Berkhofer, Robert F. The White Man’s Indian. Images of the American Indian from Columbus to the Present. New York: Knopf, 1978. Print.

Calloway, Colin, Gerd Gemünden, and Susanne Zantop. Germans and Indians. Fantasies, Encounters, Projections. Lincoln: UP of Nebraska, 2002. Print.

Clifton, James A. The Invented Indian. Cultural Fictions and Government Policies. New Brunswick: Transaction, 1990. Print.

Conlin, Joseph R. The American Past. A Survey of American History. 8th ed. Belmont: Wadsworth, 2009. Print.

Deloria, Philip J. Playing Indian. New Haven: UP of Yale, 2007. Print.

Dorris, Michael. “Indians on the Shelf.” The American Indian and the Problem of History. Ed. Calvin Martin. New York: UP of Oxford, 1987. 98-105. Print.

Eddy, Melissa. “Lost in Translation. Germany’s Fascination with the American Old West.” Nytimes.com. The New York Times, 18 Aug. 2014. Web. 10 May 2017. .

120

Feest, Christian F. “Europe’s Indians.” The Invented Indian. Cultural Fictions and Government Policies. Ed. James A. Clifton. New Brunswick: Transaction, 1990. 313- 332. Print.

---. “Germany’s Indians in a European Perspective.” Germans and Indians. Fantasies, Encounters, Projections. Ed. Colin Calloway, Gerd Gemünden, and Susanne Zantop. Lincoln: UP of Nebraska, 2002. 25-43. Print.

Galchen, Rivka. “Wild West Germany. Why Do Cowboys and Indians so Captivate the Country?” newyorker.com. The New Yorker, 9 Apr. 2012. Web. 10 May 2017. .

Green, Rayna. “The Tribe Called Wannabee. Playing Indian in America and Europe.” Folklore 99.1 (1988): 30-55. Print.

Haircrow, Red. “Germany’s Obsession with American Indians is touching – and occasionally surreal.” indiancountrymedianetwork.com. Indian Country Today, 24 Mar. 2013. Web. 10 May 2017. .

Harvey, Karen D. How to Teach about American Indians. A Guide for the School Library Media Specialist. Westport: Greenwood, 1995. Print.

ICMN Staff. “Outrage in Indian Country as Redskins Owner Announces Foundation.” indiancountrymedianetwork.com. Indian Country Today, 25 Mar. 2014. Web. 12 May 2017. .

Keeshig-Tobias, Lenore. “Not just Entertainment.” Through Indian Eyes. The Native Experience in Books for Children. Ed. Beverly Slapin and Doris Seale. Philadelphia: New Society Publishers, 1992. 98-101. Print.

Kleedorfer, Jutta. “Vom Wilden zum Menschen. Ein Streifzug durch die Dritte Welt in der Kinder- und Jugendliteratur.“ Medienimpulse 7.26 (1998): 33-42. Print.

121

King, C. Richard. Unsettling America. The Uses of Indianness in the 21st Century. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield, 2013. Print.

Landry, Alysa. “Theodore Roosevelt: “The Only Good Indians Are Dead Indians”.” indiancountrymedianetwork.com. Indian Country Today, 28 Jun. 2016. Web. 10 May 2017. .

Lutz, Hartmut. “German Indianthusiasm. A Socially Constructed German National(ist) Myth.” Germans and Indians. Fantasies, Encounters, Projections. Ed. Colin Calloway, Gerd Gemünden, and Susanne Zantop. Lincoln: UP of Nebraska, 2002. 167-184. Print.

Martin, Calvin, ed. The American Indian and the Problem of History. New York: UP of Oxford, 1987. Print.

Martin, Gary. “Bury the Hatchet.” phrases.org.uk. The Phrase Finder, 2017. Web. 10 May 2017. .

Mendoza, Jean and Debbie Reese. “Examining Multicultural Picture Books for the Early Childhood Classroom. Possibilities and Pitfalls.” Early Childhood Research and Practice 3.2 (2001). Web. 10 May 2017. .

Michaels, Jennifer. “Fantasies of Native Americans. Karl May’s Continuing Impact on the German Imagination.” European Journal of American Culture 31.3 (2012): 205-218. Print.

Mihesuah, Devon Abbott. American Indians. Stereotypes and Realities. Atlanta: Clarity, 2004. Print.

Native Americans. Minority Rights Group International. MRG, Apr. 2009. Web. 13 May 2017. .

Native Languages of the Americas. Preserving and promoting American Indian languages. Native Languages of the Americas, 2016. Web. 10 May 2017. .

122

Norton, Donna E. Through the Eyes of a Child. An Introduction to Children’s Literature. Columbus: Merrill, 1987. Print.

---. Multicultural Children’s Literature. Through the Eyes of Many Children. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, 2005. Print.

Penny, H. Glenn. “Elusive Authenticity. The Quest for the Authentic Indian in German Public Culture.” Comparative Studies in Society and History 48.4 (2006): 798-819. Print.

---. Kindred by Choice. Chapel Hill: UP of North Carolina, 2013. Print.

Pfoser, Alfred. “Karl May und die österreichische Politik.” Karl May und Österreich. Realität – Fiktion – Rezeption. Ed. Wilhelm Brauneder. Husum: Hansa, 1996. 127-158. Print.

Reel Injun. Dir. Neil Diamond, Catherine Bainbridge, and Jeremiah Hayes. Perf. Adam Beach, Chris Eyre, and Russell Means. Domino Film, 2009. Film.

Reese, Debbie. “Authenticity and Sensitivity. Goals for Writing and Reviewing Books with Native American Themes.” slj.com. School Library Journal, 1 Dec. 1999. Web. 10 May 2017. .

Root, Deborah. Cannibal Culture. Art, Appropriation, and the Commodification of Difference. Boulder: Westview, 1998. Print.

Shanley, Kathryin. “The Indians America loves to love and read. American Indian Identity and Cultural Appropriation.” Native American Representations. First Encounters, Distorted Images, and Literary Appropriations. Ed. Gretchen M. Bataillle. Lincoln: UP of Nebraska, 2001. 26-49. Print.

Slapin, Beverly and Doris Seale, eds. Through Indian Eyes. The Native Experience in Books for Children. Philadelphia: New Society Publishers, 1992. Print.

Slapin, Beverly, Doris Seale, and Rosemary Gonzales. “How to Tell the Difference.” Through Indian Eyes. The Native Experience in Books for Children. Ed. Beverly Slapin and Doris Seale. Philadelphia: New Society Publishers, 1992. 241-267. Print.

123

Stan, Susan Marcia. “Picturing American Indians. Image vs. Authenticity.” ibby.org. International Board on Books for Young People, 2010. Web. 10 May 2017. .

Vacchio, Nick. “European Indians. Germany’s Fetishization of Native American Culture.” prospectjournal.org. Prospect. Journal of International Affairs at UCSD, 7 Jan. 2016. Web. 10 May 2017. .

Wishart, David J. “Native American Gender Roles.” Encyclopedia of the Great Plains, 2011. Web. 10 May 2017. .

Wright, Robin K. “Totem Poles. Heraldic Columns of the Northwest Coast.” University of Washington Libraries, n.d. Web. 10 May 2017. .

Zantop, Susanne. “Close Encounters. Deutsche und Indianer.” Germans and Indians. Fantasies, Encounters, Projections. Ed. Colin Calloway, Gerd Gemünden, and Susanne Zantop. Lincoln: UP of Nebraska, 2002. 3-14. Print.

124

9. Appendix

Illustration 1 (Ein Tag bei den Indianern)

Illustration 2 (Ein Tag bei den Indianern)

125

Illustration 3 (Paul und Marie spielen Indianer)

Illustration 4 (Die drei ??? Geheimnis der Indianer)

126

Illustration 5 (Der kleine Drache Kokosnuss bei den Indianern 39)

Illustration 6 (Minitou)

127

Illustration 7 (Minitou)

Illustration 8 (Ein Tag bei den Indianern)

128

Illustration 9 (Ein Tag bei den Indianern)

Illustration 10 (Minitou)

129

Illustration 11 (Minitou)

Illustration 12 (Yakari 41)

130

Illustration 13 (Fliegender Stern 51)

Illustration 14 (Indianergeschichten 13)

131

Illustration 15 (Fliegender Stern 69)

Illustration 16 (Kleine Indianerin)

132

Illustration 17 (Yakari 19)

Illustration 18 (Indianergeschichten 14)

133

Illustration 19 (Die drei ??? Geheimnis der Indianer 140)

Illustration 20 (Buffalo Bird Girl. A Hidatsa Story)

134

Illustration 21 (SkySisters)

Illustration 22 (The Star People. A Lakota Story)

135