1912 - (of the fake Indian movies) "I am convinced that much hard and prejudice will result."

Soon after the 1911 motion-picture protests, Carlisle Indian school got involved. Moses Friedman, superintendent 1908-1914, spoke out against the motion picture industry and the romantic and untrue depiction of Indian life. He called on an organized movement was necessary by indigenous people and the U.S. government to have these Indian-pictures censored, because they are an injustice and can do harm.

          "We have been hearing much recently in criticism of the untrue and libelous brand of moving pictures of Indian life and romance which are shown throughout the country," Friedman said, "and are supposed by the initiated public to be true to life. Some of the objection has come from the Indians themselves. The majority of these pictures are not only without foundation in fact, but not even have Indians to pose for them. To anyone who knows the Indian and his environment at first hand, this is immediately manifest. "

          "White men or Mexicans usually pose as Indians, with blackened faces, wigs and Indian costumes; their action an gestures are absurdly grotesque and exaggerated. These make-believe do not run, talk or walk like Indians, and their whole make-up brands them as fakirs."

          "The stories consist of some romance impossible of Indian nature, a hold-up or a battle or some kind. Quite often the Indians are made to do acts of seemingly heartless cruelty. No possible good can come from these representation, and I am convinced that much hard and prejudice will result."

          "Now the time is here when the Indian must live in peace and amity with the white man. Many of these pictures will tend to arrest and hamper this mutual understanding of the races in so vital to the Indian's welfare."                   (Source: 1912, Jan 29   The Daily Review ) 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The article was also published in The Scranton Republican, Jan 23, 1912, who then commented on the superintendent's statement in their article, Slandering the Indian. They say: 

          "The point of the superintendent of the Indian school has been well taken. Since the old days of Beadle's dime novels, which represented the Indian in every conceivable phase of fiendishness, there have been no such libelous exhibitions against the race as have been given in the moving picture shows. In one respect, however, the picture shows are not quite as bad as the dime novels. The portrayal of the Indian character by the ten cent actor with painted face does not inspire the horror that the works of feverish writers of border tales used to. The moving picture red man shows by every move that he is but a cheap representative of the Indian. While on the minds of the very young spectator he may make an impression, it is easy for nearly all spectators to see that he is a fake and a feeble one at that.
          "Still, we think that the Indians have a grievance. Even the untutored red ought to have some rights as a human being that should be respected. We presume that the Indian would about as soon be presented on the films as the unregenerate savage as to be made ridiculous. As the superintendent says, the Indian is rapidly taking his place in America as a good citizen, and nothing should stand in the way of his worthy ambition to break away from the old life. It seems to us that nothing could be more discouraging to the Indian of ambition than to see himself misrepresented and made ludicrous by the moving picture enterprise." 

1912, Jan 29   The Daily Review 

1912, Jan 23  The Scranton Republic