Native Americans and Advertising
Since the inception of national advertising in the late nineteenth century, advertisers have employed what they interpret as representations of “Indians” to sell goods and services. These representations appear in the form of both images and text and all of them exploit Native Americans for the benefit of mainstream U.S. society and corporate interests. Regardless of the specificities of each advertisement, the ads individually and collectively are universally negative due to the extensive use of stereotypes, violence, misappropriation, and misrepresentation. As such, these ads work to denigrate, vilify, and malign Native Americans, both historically and contemporarily. The representations of Native Americans in the ads examined here contribute to and continue what political scientist Michael Rogin calls “motivated forgetting” by obfuscating the reality of genocide of millions Native American people perpetrated by those living in the “land of the free and home of the brave.”
Advertising can be understood as a language through which knowledge or a discourse is produced. As a discursive formation, these advertisements carry a great deal of power. Not only are they creating knowledge, but through this creation of knowledge they assume truth. If the images and narratives presented in these advertisements did not reflect cultural beliefs and understandings to some extent, they would lack resonance within society and, therefore, would be rendered ineffective. Furthermore, these advertisements, along with other cultural texts, inculcate younger generations, thereby creating new purveyors of culture. By reading both the overt and subliminal messages contained in these ads it is possible to learn a great deal about hierarchies, power relations, and cultural standards, norms, and myths in the United States historically and today. As evidenced by the fact that these types of ads continue to be produced today, it is clear this is not a problem of the distant past.
While several themes run through the advertisements examined for this project including the overuse of Plains Indian motifs, Indians as the “Other,” the misuses and abuses of history, this work focusses on the prevalence of violence. The amount of overt violence depicted in the ads is astounding. In this context, overt violence is defined by the presence of weaponry, including bows and arrows, guns, knives, spears, and/or tomahawks and/or the presence of volatile language including words such as “invade,” “raiding,” “warpath,” or “savage.” References to scalping also are considered examples of overt violence.
One noticeable component of the advertisements that feature violence is the preponderance of individuals “playing Indian.” “Playing Indian,” is an activity that occurs consistently throughout the ad collection and refers to non-Native people taking on dress or characteristics commonly ascribed by popular culture to Native Americans. Men, women, children, and even non-human entities can “play Indian.”
One advertisement that exemplifies this comes from General Electric Flashcubes. The ad itself is an 11x14 page with the entire top half of the ad informing the viewer: “When you decide to shoot wild Indians you can’t afford to miss.” The imagery of the ad consists of four pictures and the GE Flashcubes. Three of the pictures show Euro-American children, both boys and girls, dressed as “Indians” and the fourth shows a Euro-American man, perhaps their father, with a suction cup arrow stuck to his forehead and a chagrined look on his face. The children evidently are making a lot of noise, hence the label “wild Indians.” The boy brandishes a bow and arrow, most likely the weapon used to shoot his father in the head. The play on words comes across clearly. Even though these people are not authentically Native American the ideas remain. Native Americans are wild and dangerous, so if you have the opportunity to shoot them, you need to make sure you are accurate.
Shooting “Indians” also takes place in ads for Magnavox Televisions and Kohler Plumbing Fixtures. Both of the advertisements feature young Euro-American boys shooting at “Indians.” The Magnavox ad depicts the scene of several young children watching television. On the screen appears a Native American man wearing a full headdress and a beaded chest plate. One of the boys in the ad, dressed as a cowboy, points a shiny six-shooter at the television and, by extension, the Native American man on the screen. The text of the advertisement describes the TV’s “thrilling program realism” due to its “vivid color pictures and sound.” Does this mean to suggest that the little boy is shooting at the Native man because the picture is so realistic? That the Native American man is simply pictured on the screen, not at all in a threatening or violent manner shows that regardless of what behavior Native Americans engage in, the conventional wisdom propagated by these advertisements suggests Native Americans should be considered dangerous at all times.
One noticeable component of the advertisements that feature violence is the preponderance of individuals “playing Indian.” “Playing Indian,” is an activity that occurs consistently throughout the ad collection and refers to non-Native people taking on dress or characteristics commonly ascribed by popular culture to Native Americans. Men, women, children, and even non-human entities can “play Indian.”
One advertisement that exemplifies this comes from General Electric Flashcubes. The ad itself is an 11x14 page with the entire top half of the ad informing the viewer: “When you decide to shoot wild Indians you can’t afford to miss.” The imagery of the ad consists of four pictures and the GE Flashcubes. Three of the pictures show Euro-American children, both boys and girls, dressed as “Indians” and the fourth shows a Euro-American man, perhaps their father, with a suction cup arrow stuck to his forehead and a chagrined look on his face. The children evidently are making a lot of noise, hence the label “wild Indians.” The boy brandishes a bow and arrow, most likely the weapon used to shoot his father in the head. The play on words comes across clearly. Even though these people are not authentically Native American the ideas remain. Native Americans are wild and dangerous, so if you have the opportunity to shoot them, you need to make sure you are accurate.
Shooting “Indians” also takes place in ads for Magnavox Televisions and Kohler Plumbing Fixtures. Both of the advertisements feature young Euro-American boys shooting at “Indians.” The Magnavox ad depicts the scene of several young children watching television. On the screen appears a Native American man wearing a full headdress and a beaded chest plate. One of the boys in the ad, dressed as a cowboy, points a shiny six-shooter at the television and, by extension, the Native American man on the screen. The text of the advertisement describes the TV’s “thrilling program realism” due to its “vivid color pictures and sound.” Does this mean to suggest that the little boy is shooting at the Native man because the picture is so realistic? That the Native American man is simply pictured on the screen, not at all in a threatening or violent manner shows that regardless of what behavior Native Americans engage in, the conventional wisdom propagated by these advertisements suggests Native Americans should be considered dangerous at all times.
The Kohler advertisement echoes that sentiment. This advertisement features, yet again, a young, non-Native American boy shooting an “Indian.” This time, the boy takes aim from the bathtub, using what looks like a toilet brush as a gun. In this case the “Indian” appears as a small doll propped over the edge of the sink holding a bow. The copy of the ad talks at length about the ease of cleaning this new bathtub and how the new design makes the tub “safe and comfortable.” The undercurrent of the message seems to suggest that perhaps the removal of the “Indian” will make the bathroom safe and comfortable.
The idea of creating a safe and comfortable environment also arises in an advertisement for Phillips Milk of Magnesia. This advertisement follows the same formula as many of those discussed previously. The “Indian” creates or represents a problem and the product advertised offers a solution. This ad showcases two Euro-American children dressed as “Indians;” a young boy running around the yard, yelling and flourishing a tomahawk and a young girl sitting in front of a tipi banging on a drum while yelling. The tagline for the ad reads “When their digestion is on the War Path!” The advertisement then describes the boy as a “wild Indian” who needs calming. Through the use of the product, the problem of digestive troubles will be rectified and the child will be safe and comfortable once again. That the problem is acting like a “wild Indian” and being on the “war path” once again indicates an inherent problem with Native Americans. Acting in this manner, according to the dictates of the advertisement, is not only inappropriate but also unhealthy and undesirable.
A second example of Indians on the warpath comes from Talon Slide Fasteners published in June 1940. This ad asks the audience “Are you on the warpath, too?” and features a cartoon drawing of a non-Native American man wearing a suit, a scowl, and a feather headdress. Much like other “warpath” advertisements, he also brandishes a tomahawk. According to the ad, “Gee but it makes folks mad to get an unsatisfactory slide fastener. And – boy! – they don’t get over it in a hurry either!” It goes on to state that if you want “trouble-free service” then you should “steer clear of unsatisfactory fasteners” and “follow the example of the majority.” With this statement and its accompanying image, the ad not only shows the appearance of s Native American or Native American characteristics as a consequence of a negative event, this time unhappiness over fasteners, but it also juxtaposes Native Americans with the majority. According to the ad, Native American people are not normative; they are not part of the majority, and so therefore they are the deviant, something that should be avoided.
Many ads which depict Native American violence do so without actual Native Americans, or even non-Natives “Playing Indian,” physically present. One such ad is for Air India where a young, frightened looking, non-Native boy (dressed in typical cowboy apparel) frantically reaches for the guns holstered at his sides. The tagline boldly informs the viewer, “THE INDIANS ARE COMING,” thereby “explaining” the child’s panic. Only the smaller print reveals the full story: “ah, the hospitable Indians!” referring to Indians from India as opposed to Native people from North America. The meaning of this ad comes across clearly. While Indians from India are welcoming, friendly, and warm, Natives from North America are violent, dangerous, and hostile. In fact, as evidenced by the imagery in the ad, the mere thought of Native Americans causes small children to panic and attempt to defend themselves against the threat, an act the ads depicts as natural.
All of the advertisements discussed here and those in the larger collection omit accurate portrayals of Native Americans and refuse to tell balanced and inclusive stories. By consistently and unrelentingly portraying Native Americans as savage and uncivilized, the advertisements, and by extension mainstream American society, justifies and supports the master narrative. The master narrative, which whitewashes large portions of U.S. history, needs to be reconceptualized. The time is ripe for a dramatic shift in the dominant consciousness with regard to the representation of Native Americans, both in advertising and in other popular culture venues. Misrepresentation and stereotyping of Native Americans by non-Native people are forms of oppression that need to end.
Early Advertisements
Transportation and Tourism
Billboards
Contemporary Advertisments
