A toponymy of American summer camps: Onscreen stereotypes or symbols ripe for change?
2022; Wiley; Volume: 45; Issue: 2 Linguagem: Inglês
10.1111/jacc.13337
ISSN1542-734X
AutoresAlexia Franzidis, Alana N. Seaman, Jayna Donaldson,
Tópico(s)Animal and Plant Science Education
ResumoSummer camp has been a quintessential part of the American childhood experience for over a century. Hosting millions of kids each year (“ACA Facts and Trends”) and generating its own enduring trope in popular culture, summer camp has become a cherished rite of passage for generations of the country’s youth. Camps represent a meaningful learning experience and are a cultural touchstone for generations of Americans. While summer camps offer kids the chance to be immersed in nature, their positioning as an anthesis to industrialized city-, and now, modern-life has long depended on the appropriation of Native American culture, icons, and imagery. Historically, many summer camps took on Native American-inspired names and traditions as a means of reflecting their (outdoor/wilderness) values, and to attract and satisfy campers (Browne et al. 53; Van Slyck 25). However, such thematic branding and programming is not harmless. Rather, place names are important as they both frame how people perceive a space as a unique location (Lefebvre 3; Taun 5) and signify elements of cultural significance (Helleland 96; Lowenthal, 127; Rose-Redwood et al. 309; Van Slyck 35). Further, place names often both reflect and influence cultural perceptions by putting undue value on only certain aspects of a location such as specific topographical characteristics or elements of an area’s past by memorializing particular figures from history or recalling some historic events while overlooking others (Rose-Redwood and Alderman 5). The stereotyped use of Native American signs, symbols, and traditions is also well known to have negative impacts on Native Americans and non-Native Americans alike (Davis-Delano et al. 615; Fryberg et al. 210). Films, television, and other facets of popular culture perpetuate the relationship between summer camp and the appropriation of Native American culture. In both contexts these (mis)representations can exacerbate the oppression of minority groups by reinforcing already-existing stereotypes and solidifying cultural ideas (Davis-Delano et al. 630; Fryberg et al. 216; Matthes 1004) or showing only segments of reality instead of a whole picture (Schroeder & Seaman). However, Hollywood’s portrayal of summer camps as places where appropriation of Native American culture takes place, particularly in the crafting of camp names, may not be wrong in doing so. At present, scholarship on the contemporary appropriation of Native American culture by modern summer camps is sparse. Further analysis is needed to determine if these popularly portrayed practices that may seem fictional, outdated, and even light-hearted, are in fact still representative of what is currently being employed by the nation’s summer camps. Thus, this study sought to investigate whether and how summer camps are currently appropriating Native American culture through their public image. Camp names and official descriptions were considered in comparison to common themes seen in the popular depiction of the perennial experience in films and television over the last five decades. Researchers aimed to determine if references made in popular culture are simply antiquated, or if they are accurately spoofing the damaging stereotypes in use by contemporary summer camps. American summer camps emerged as an antithesis to the effects of urban modernity during the industrial revolution that swept the country in the late 18- and early 1900s. Fueled by a belief that children needed experiences in the outdoors to become strong and well-rounded individuals (Yerkes), experiences that were limited in many increasingly urban cities, parents sent their children to summer camps to develop socially by being exposed to nature for a set period of time (Smith 70). Though the first camps were primarily provided for boys, by the end of the first quarter of the twentieth century, there were over 100 girls’ camps in the United States (Yerkes) and over 1000 camps in total across the country (Gershon). Today, over 14 million children attend summer camp each year in the United States (“ACA Facts and Trends,” 2018), and the American Camp Association (ACA) alone has impacted the lives of over 26 million children and their families (“Timeline” ACA). With over 15,000 camps nationwide (ACA), contemporary camps take on many different forms, from short-term weekly camps to overnight camps that last several months. However, the most popular length of time for children to attend a summer camp is three to five weeks (ACA; Mason). Day camps are often in or near urban centers, while many overnight camps remain secluded (or seemingly so) in nature. Since their inception over 100 years ago, camps have used Native American culture to symbolize a “wilderness environment” (Van Slyck 174) and communicate a “primitive” (Paris 191) experience wherein children would learn to “live like Indians” (Wall 514; see also Browne et al. 52). Camps have long appealed to urban parents who desired these nature-based experiences for their children by employing the idea of the Native American out in the wild, fending for themselves, to spark interest in outdoor activities and education (Browne et al. 55; Wall 513). Similarly, spiritual and religious elements were drawn from various Native American cultures by camps “to encourage youth to emulate perceived Native American traits including courage, independence, spirituality, vigor, and a close relationship to nature” (Browne et al. 56). Likewise, numerous camps bore names influenced by indigenous languages and cultures as they were also meant to reflect the type of experience popularly associated with camp. Historically, camps such as “Chocorua, Pasquaney, [and] Mishawaka” utilized Native American names inspired by nearby geographical features (Van Slyck 173) wherein others such as “Temagami, Keewaydin, [and] Ahmek” (Wall 516) announced to campers “the foreign nature of the experience” (Wall 521) they would have. In fact, early on “all the popular camps of the day had Indian [inspired] names” (Wall 521). While not all camp names were of actual indigenous origin, “Camp Wanna-com-bac” for instance merely sounds as if it was influenced by American Indian languages though it quite obviously was not (Wall 523), there was little concern over their authenticity as it was largely believed that people were satisfied so long as “the overall effect was an Indian tone” (Wall 523). In contrast, the Woodcraft Indians organization was a camp that, despite its name, was not meant for American Indians at all. Instead, young, white, American boys comprised the campers who would experience what camp founders deemed the ideal Native American lifestyle, in turn becoming “Indians,” by living in teepees, building fires, and wearing traditional—or what was perceived as traditional—Native American clothing (Turner-Strong and Posner 400). Camp Fire Girls and the Boy Scouts of America evoked comparable appeal with their titles similarly emphasizing children learning skills to survive in nature, much like what Native Americans might have done (Deloria 63; Turner-Strong & Posner 401). While these camps still exist, and their Native American-inspired names remain, other camps have reconsidered their appropriation of indigenous monikers, and some have even gone on to change their titles completely. Camp IHC, for example was formerly known as Indian Head Camp. However out of respect for the rich Native American history of the Pennsylvania area they call home, camp officials recently worked with local nations to discuss what was offensive about the entity’s original name and to develop a new name more respectful of the area’s many stakeholders (Macleod). However, this respect for surrounding nations and indigenous cultures has not traditionally been widespread (Wall 513). Cultural appropriation, or “the adoption by a majority culture of the rituals, customs, dress, symbols, songs, ceremonies, and other elements from a minority culture” (Browne, Gillard, and Garst 56) without permission or with a lack of understanding or respect for the importance of the tradition in its home culture, have long been common amongst American summer camps. Native American customs and ways of life, heavily linked to notions of “savagery,” have been used by camps to frame the experiences they offer as the “antidote to modernity” (Van Slyck 172) for decades. Though the employment of such “anti-modern images” (Wall 515) may have added to the appeal of camp life, the utilization of such tropes has not always led to a sufficient representation of indigenous cultures. In fact, most camps made little effort to “honor (or even accurately portray) Aboriginal tradition” (Wall 514). Instead camps often included certain elements of Native American culture, while choosing to leave others out (Browne et al. 64) or created inaccurate mashups from various Native American nations such as using totem poles alongside teepees--elements drawn from two separate Native American nations (Wall 515). “Historical accuracy” in this sense was previously of little concern to camp leaders (Browne et al. 52) who exploited the fact that Native Americans were viewed by the public as strong, brave, and rugged and using the idea to draw young Americans to camp (Browne et al 55; see also Smith 100; Wall 516). Films, television, and other facets of popular culture have enduringly bound the concepts of Native American culture and summer camps together. In the past few decades, films that play on Native American themes in summer camps such as Meatballs (1979), Troop Beverly Hills (1989), Addams Family Values (1993), and Moonrise Kingdom (2012), have been extremely popular both on the big screen and later, via streaming services and cable syndication. Each of these popular films, amongst a host of others, feature big name actors (e.g. Bill Murray; Shelley Long; Christopher Lloyd and Christina Ricci; Bruce Willis, Edward Norton, Frances McDormand respectively) as and alongside white characters at camp participating in Native American cultural practices and employing Native American props and symbols along the way. Many shows portray camp culture as being closely related to a Native American “experience” of living in the wild by chanting around bonfires and wearing traditional Native American regalia – namely headdresses such as those mostly notably depicted in Troop Beverly Hills (1989), Addams Family Values (1993) (Washuta), Heavyweights (1995), and Moonrise Kingdom (2012). In several instances the headdresses seem clearly meant to mock a contemporary era of entitled wealthy white people’s ignorant appropriation of other cultures. The trope is evident in Shelley Long’s character Phyllis’ attempt to lead a girl scout type troop in hopes of proving herself something more than a spoiled, vapid, shopping-obsessed housewife in the 1989 hit Troop Beverly Hills. Several scenes feature “Phyllis” donning an over-the-top headdress with her coordinated designer heels and outfit while she serves her girls luxury snacks in their posh teepee set up inside the main character’s sleek, high-end mansion. Similarly in Meatballs (1979), Bill Murray’s head camp counselor, “Tripper,” while being interviewed by a reporter curious about the comedic ‘exclusivity’ of the camp, leans casually on a large carved Indian statue complete with a feather headdress while telling the man about the camp’s excessive ten-thousand-dollar price tag (a large sum by today’s standards much the less in 1979 when the film came out). Other shows use of headdresses seems meant to represent characters commitment to their camp team in the face of competition. In Meatballs (1979), Heavyweights (1995), and Moonrise Kingdom (2012) for example campers wear long feather headpieces near the end of the film during the story arc when they are in a position where they must dig deep and band together to overcome the pinnacle challenges they’re facing. You have taken the land that is rightfully ours. Years from now my people will be forced to live in mobile homes on reservations. Your people will wear cardigans and drink high balls. We will sell our bracelets by the roadsides. You will play golf and enjoy hot hors d’oeuvres. My people will have pain and degradation. Your people will have stick-shifts. The gods of my tribe have spoken. They have said ‘do not trust the pilgrims’… and for all these reasons I’ve decided to scalp you and burn your village to the ground. Addams Family Values (1993) Addams (1:08:40 - 1:09:23) While Wednesday’s position was likely aimed at poking fun again at the ignorance of many contemporary American Caucasians and the hypocrisy of Native American imagery use in summer camps, the depiction nonetheless both reinforces the links between summer camp and appropriation of Native American culture and reduces an entire race of unique peoples to a set of homogenized albeit updated stereotypes. Further, the framing of ‘bad’ characters through Native American costuming works to further entrench the image of all Native Americans as “savage,” “war-like,” and “uncivilized” (actual words used to describe indigenous groups in Addams Family Values). In addition to clothing, numerous films and television shows often weave Native American symbols, traditions, and terminology into their depictions of American summer camps. On-screen camp monikers, logos, and motifs utilize tribe titles for cabin names in The Parent Trap (1998); call end of camp competitions things like ‘Apache Relays’ (e.g. Heavyweights); and encompassed arrowheads in camp branding in Camp Nowhere (1994) and Heavyweights (1995). Others use Native American sounding names for camp titles (e.g. Camp Tomahawk in Meatballs (1979), Camp Anawanna in Salute Your Shorts (1991-1993), and Camp Microchip-a-weh in Camp Nowhere). Numerous other backdrop elements are also often similarly employed. Teepees are used as camp setting features in Troop Beverly Hills (1989); Addams Family Values (1993); Camp Nowhere (1994); Heavyweights (1995); and Moonrise Kingdom (2012). Likewise, totem poles are incorporated into set décor in Troop Beverly Hills (1989), The Parent Trap (1998), Salute Your Shorts (1991-1993), The Simpsons Kamp Krusty (1992), Addams Family Values (1993), and Moonrise Kingdom (2012). Such aesthetic elements are likely meant to convey the authenticity of the camps being depicted. In line with their ability to hone in on the idiosyncrasies of American culture, The Simpsons Kamp Krusty (1992) plays on this point with Krusty the Klown boasting in a commercial within the episode that his camp “was built on an actual Indian burial ground.” Further, some depictions of camp life make use of the distinct and persistent cadence of beating hollow drums often associated with Indian attacks in the old Spaghetti Westerns of the 1960’s and 1970’s. In Meatballs (1979) the music is used in one of the first scenes where the kids are boarding buses headed for camp. In The Simpsons episode Kamp Krusty (1992), Addams Family Values (1993), Salute Your Shorts (1991-1993), Heavyweights (1995), and Moonrise Kingdom (2012) similar beating drums accompany scenes featuring campers engaging in intense competition – often with other camps or rival scout troops. Hollywood has a long history of appropriating Native American culture and perpetuating stereotypes about both Native Americans and camp experiences both in their representation of summer camps and more broadly across a variety of film and television genres and subjects. The stylized use of Native American culture in major films is longstanding and most often associated with the image of the “noble savage, an idealized concept of uncivilized man, who symbolizes the innate goodness of one not exposed to the corrupting influences of civilization” (“Noble Savage”). Similar to how summer camps are associated with Native American culture, the noble savage is often shown as being very in-touch with nature and living according to traditional cultural practices (Ellingson, 20; Redford 46). These “good Indians” in film tend to help white men, while the “bad” ones stand up for their people and defend themselves (McLaurin), an idea that was displayed and perpetuated in popular films and television shows such as Dances with Wolves (1990), The Last of the Mohicans (1992), and Little House on the Prairie (1974-1983). In other films such as Stagecoach (1939) and Geronimo (1993) Native Americans are “victims of manifest destiny” (Young 16), being driven out of their homes by white men’s westward expansion. In the original The Lone Ranger (1949-1957) and its film remake (2013), Native Americans are often depicted as men of few words, speaking in broken sentences. And, in other films such as Jonah Hex (2010) and The Lone Ranger (2013), Native Americans are medicine men or warriors that sometimes use magical powers unknown to the more civilized on-screen Caucasians (Nittle; Young). In each instance however Native Americans are heavily stereotyped and often positioned as characters that simply support the main storyline or the protagonist thereby lacking any real depth relative to or any reverence for the cultural components depicted. Even children’s movies like Pocahontas and Peter Pan contain various instances of Native American stereotyping (Breaux 399; Laemle, 16; McLaurin; Nittle; Rosewood). In Pocahontas for example, the title character is portrayed as the ideal “Indian princess” (Nittle) who is deemed fit for such recognition based on her worth as a wife for a white man. In the same film, many assumptions were made about the cultural practices of the Powhatan tribe—assumptions that were, in fact, false (Rosewood). Likewise, in Disney’s Peter Pan (1953), the film’s Blackfoot Indians are portrayed as an almost fictional people with “black footprints, red skin, and sharp, angled noses” (Rosewood). The trope is also popular across many facets of the American vernacular from Land-O-Lakes butter logos to professional sport team mascots (see Burkley et al. 225; Davis-Delano, et al. 614). While creative license may have generated these depictions, the positioning of real people(s) alongside fantastical creatures like fairies and talking animals, the selective remembrance of a nation’s actual history, and the sexualization of historic figures works to diminish the credibility of Native American culture. In turn, the existence of specific tribes, figures, and histories may be “dismissed” altogether (Breaux 415; Laemle 199; Rosenstein; Rosewood). In this sense, cultural appropriation plays into the oppression of minority groups like Native Americans as they are often wrongfully spoken for, silenced, or misrepresented by other groups adopting their cultural elements (Matthes 1013). Given that people’s perceptions of the world around them is often influenced by popular culture (Boden 290; Brooks 26; Lipsitz 32), these films effectively work to further engrain in the minds of viewers inaccurate notions of Native American culture generally and fuel antiquated expectations about camp specifically. Despite their popularity, the repeated portrayal and, in turn, mass consumption of these borrowed or misallocated images whether via summer camps, film, or television, often facilitates widespread misunderstandings about the cultures depicted by giving credence to the stereotypes surrounding them (Angle et al., 85; Davis-Delano et al. 615), and passively the practice of stereotyping as a whole (Davis-Delano et al. 616). McLaurin explains that “stereotypes, when reinforced often enough, have been shown to affect how we view others, how we view ourselves, and what we think we know about other cultures” (6). Numerous studies have shown that exposure to Native American stereotyping and stylized figures and symbols appropriated from indigenous cultures including those found in sport mascots and fictional media not only increases real world stereotyping, it also negatively impacts how Native Americans feel about themselves (see Davis-Delano et al. 620). Whether portrayed “positively” or not, exposure to stereotypical images of Indians has been found to diminish Native American’s views of their individual potential, their self-esteem, and their sense of belonging to their community (Fryberg et al., 215). Thus, regardless of the intentions of such stylized representations – whether on screen or at camp, the damaging cultural impacts remain the same. This is particularly concerning when considered in relation to both films and summer camps as stereotypes are especially harmful when adopted at a young age because children grow up with notions of the world that have been fed to them (Rosewood). Outwardly, names are most immediately identifiable example of the ways in which camps might employ the appropriation of Native American culture. Place names, like depictions in popular culture, memorialize or signify what is important to a society (Lowenthal 99). Moreover these de facto memorializations often shape how people think about both places and certain populations (Edensor 325; Lowenthal 165). Taun (72) and Lefebvre (68) argue that place is space made meaningful wherein a geographic location defined by usually, quantitative parameters becomes a distinct place by the way people move through, interact with, and communicate about it. In this sense, place names imbue spaces with value. Many times place names are used to pay tribute to a specific person such as a founder, donor, or local historic figure (Rose-Redwood et al. 309) or bear monikers that signify noteworthy nearby geographical features such as mountains, rivers, or area towns and villages (Van Slyck 203). Oftentimes, place names are simply markers of a place, a way to make them distinct from other similar locations. Other times, the name of a place can become more important than the place to which it refers (Light 143), and may draw more attention to an associated location than it would if it was not named. Garden of the Gods Park in Colorado for example is a famous location and is visited by about 4 million people every year (Beyers et al,; “Garden of the Gods Transportation Study”). However, if Garden of the Gods was not labeled as such, it is unlikely it would be so popular as it is really just a desert full of rocks. While the sandstone formations may be aesthetically pleasing, the name is primarily what makes the park appealing to visitors. In this sense, such titles may inadvertently (or in some cases purposefully) embellish certain aspects of the local area or its history, which can in turn lead to disappointment and/or misunderstandings amongst those unfamiliar with the place being represented by placing undue value on specific physical or social aspects of the area. Toponymy is a research approach that considers “the place-names of a region or especially the etymological study of them” (Light 154; “Toponymy”) It can be applied to examine the origin and meaning of names, or to consider patterns and regional relevance of place names (Tent 67). In short, toponymic research helps determine why places are named the way they are, which in turn, can highlight the important but often subtle ways social structures, traditions, and even stereotypes are perpetuated in the landscape (Light 148). For this study, toponymy offers a useful framework for comparing and contrasting the names, origins, and meanings of modern day camps with their activities, features, and locations, and determines if Native American names are being misused. A qualitative content analysis methodology (Weber 21) was employed to examine summer camp names. A content analysis aims to ‘read’ or identify patterns in a data set by searching out “underlying themes in the materials being analyzed” (Bryman, 2004, p. 392). This approach enables researchers to quantify and analyze the presence, meaning, and relationships of words and concepts, and to make inferences about the information they communicate (Kohlbacher, 2006). Babbie explains that a content analysis is an adaptable way to study a variety of recorded human communications (341). Summer camp names and their public images are one such ‘text’ that can be ‘read’ by scholars. As such this information was collected as data. The names of traditional overnight summer camps were found using the American Camp Association (ACA) website. The ACA is an accrediting body that oversees and provides guidance for over 3781 camps, 10938 programs, and 4104 sessions in the United States. The ACA lists agencies that host camps11. The ACA website lists camps from the following organizations – the number of overnight summer camps are included in parentheses: 4-H Clubs (55 camps), Audubon Society (3 camps), Big Brothers Big Sisters (1), Boy Scouts of America (11), Boys & Girls Clubs of America (8), Camp Fire (18), Elks (2), FFA (1), Fresh Air Society (0), Girl Scouts of the USA (162), Girls Inc. (0), Jewish Community Center (22), Kiwanis Club (2), Lions Club (10), Urban League (0), Woodmen of the World (19), YMCA (195), and YWCA (4). , and from this list, the YMCA offers the highest number of overnight camps. As such, the researchers focused on overnight YMCA camps. Within the United States, the YMCA is a nonprofit organization that offers after-school activities, physical fitness outlets (e.g. gyms, swimming pools, basketball courts, etc.), day care, and youth work. It aims at “strengthening community by empowering young people, improving the health and well-being of people of all ages and inspiring action in and across communities.” The YMCA is a Christian organization (YMCA is the abbreviation of Young Men's Christian Association) and, along with other religiously affiliated groups and youth organizations (such as the Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, Jewish Community Center), are well known for offering multiple camps. The YMCA believes in the ‘transformational’ characteristics of camp in its ability to assist youth with making friends, learn about nature, and develop new skills. In 2020, the YMCA offered 1467-day camps and 234-overnight camps, serving 364,910 children and teenagers in the United States. Camps were found using the “Find a Camp” search tool provided on the ACA website, specifically ‘overnight camps’ with an organizational affiliation from the ‘YMCA’ agency/club. This yielded 195 total camps (157 accredited). The camp names were entered into a spreadsheet and, using purposeful sampling22. Purposeful sampling is a form of non-random sampling researchers use their own judgement to locate cases of a specific population based on characteristics of a population and the objective of the study (Neuman 2000). , the researchers examined this list for camps that had Native American inspired names and / or Native American sounding names. The criteria included names that bear a resemblance to a Native American word (either in spelling or phonetics), actual Native American names – either a person (e.g. Piomingo), nation/group/people (e.g. Mohawk), or place (e.g. Wewa [short for Wewahitchka]), or Native American objects or symbols (e.g. Arrowhead). This yielded a list of 58 names (from the 195 camps). The analysis was conducted in two parts. First, the names of the camps were reviewed and clustered into themes of similar items (natural landmarks and features, prominent historical Native American people or names, and words/expressions/greetings). These themes were then analyzed to assess if there was a justification for using these names. In doing this the researchers compared the names of camps with their accurate meaning, translation, or origin. The researchers excluded fictitious sounding names – such as Nan A Bo Sho and Y-Noah. While Nanabozho means "my rabbit" in Ojibwe and “trickster spirit” in Anishinaabe mythology, and Y-Noah is phonetically similar to Winona meaning “firstborn daughter” in Dakota, the researchers did not want to assume association with the traditional names unless they were spelled accurately. Following this, additional data were collected about each camp to ascertain the day-to-day activities and philosophy of each camp. This information was found through the ACA’s description on each camp; however, when this data were not available the researchers went directly to the camp’s website using the link provided on the ACA website. For most camps the descriptive information included: the camp’s location; the camp’s proximity to natural landmarks and features (e.g. lakes, mountains); the date the camp was founded; the types of programmatic activities (e.g. crafts, archery, horseback riding); the intended participant (e.g. male, female); the style of accommodations (e.g. rustic lakefront cabins); the goal of the camp (e.g. develop self-esteem, teach campers about camping equipment), and the vision/mission of each camp (e.g. offer programs to learn respect for the natural world). For both steps in the data analysis process, open coding and memoing were used simultaneously. Open coding involves “opening up” and drawing out key elements of the data without an expectation as to what might be found (Babbie 110), whereas memoing refers to simply taking notes during the data analysis process and recording how findings were derived (Miles and Huberman 194). At this point data was considered with the depictions of onscreen summer camps in mind. However, while researchers did not set out to look for the mirroring of specific elements within the data set, a number of parallels emerged. These processes revealed the researchers’ initial thoughts upon observing the data for the first time. Evident almost immediately were examples of stylized multi-syllable names, simple generic icons such as arrows, and iconic figures being utilized by camps. After introductory exposure to the data, axial coding, or group
Referência(s)