Reel History 2: Natives without noses- 1607 with Disney and Terence Malick

She's supposed to be 13

So what's happened since Columbus discovered (the) America(s)? We're jumping a good 100 years for this next entry, so here's the simple version: in 1497, John Cabot landed on the mainland of North America (Columbus continued southward so, goodbye Columbus) on behalf of England, rediscovering Newfoundland; the French went deep into Canada to set up their colonial empire, who we'll meet again in The Last of the Mohicans; and Walter Raleigh was sent by Queen Elizabeth I to explore North America, paving the way for colonial settlements. Since this is all about American history, and Canadian history is boring, we're heading to Raleigh's Virginia to the first permanent settlement in what is now the United States, Jamestown. 

Pocahontas has one of the most interesting early American mythologies built around her; it comes mostly as the result of early American propaganda, but hey, that's usually the case with these historical types. Even so, we know very little about her apart from her European life, but she was still an important early American- a partner in the first mixed marriage in the country's history (sorry, not with John Smith), the matriarch of a dynastic Virginian family, entertaining the king and queen of England. She was also, before her conversion and Anglicization, the daughter of the chief of the tribal nations of Virginia- in effect, an American princess, making her the ripest of historical figures for a Disney movie.

Let's start at the beginning, though: in 1606, the entrepreneurial Virginia Company of London looked to set up settlements in the New World explored by Walter Raleigh (he of the coat across the puddle and, later, the imprisonment in the Tower of London). Their first settlement was Jamestown, founded deep inland on a peninsula of what is now the state of Virginia in May 1607. It turns out there were other people on the peninsula first- a collective of 14,000 Algonquin-speaking, Tidewater region natives under the leadership of Chief Powhatan (whose real name was the mouthful Wahunsenacawh). The Algonquins initially celebrated the arrival of the settlers, and provided crucial early support that helped the struggling colony. But with a growing colony came growing tension, and Chief Powhatan made an uneasy peace with the English, which lasted until his death in 1618. And it's the uneasiness of the peace that drives the conflict in both 1995's Pocahontas and 2005's The New World. But one of them glosses over most of the truth with cardboard cutouts of real historical figures- guess which one?

Okay, it's Pocahontas. The movie simplifies the motivations of the settlers and their native counterparts in typical Disney fashion, turning a complex history into a battle on behalf of greed and revenge. Also, animators decided it wasn't worth drawing noses on the Virginian Indian women, but that's their problem I suppose. Breaking down the biggest issues with the basic story of the settlers, of which there are many: Governor John Ratcliffe (actually the second governor) sails with his crew on the Susan Constant (he was actually the captain of the Discovery) in search of gold (in reality, the motivations weren't explicitly gold but to turn a profit for the investors, and when gold didn't turn up they focused on other industries like tobacco).

But it's not the white people who had a problem with their portrayal. The Powhatan tribe of today, led by Chief Roy Crazy Horse, said shortly after its release that the movie 'distorts history beyond recognition', despite Roy Disney calling his movie 'responsible, accurate, and respectful.' In the first part of this article, entitled 'The Pocahontas Myth", Chief Crazy Horse says that the history of his people isn't as fun or romantic as the movie makes it out to be, that calling the character 'Pocahontas' in the first place (a nickname given to her in her youth) was offensive, that her life was highlighted only because of European propaganda, and that the saving of John Smith never took place. Bummer.

Terence Malick's The New World would be taken to task based on second half of Chief Crazy Horse's open letter, as both deal with the adult life of Pocahontas (she was 13 when she first met with Smith and the English settlers, significantly younger than portrayed the Disney movie). The latter part of The New World concerns Pocahontas (now Rebecca) being taken into captivity in 1613, her separation from John Smith, meeting and marrying  tobacco exporter extraordinaire John Rolfe (played by Christian Bale, who also voiced Thomas in Pocahontas) in 1614, and her death in 1617 at the age of 22. According to Chief Crazy Horse, the real Pocahontas was used as propaganda for the colonial enterprise and 'wined and dined' in the presence of those that mattered. And while the movie doesn't shy away from these things, it portrays Pocahontas as leading a rather happy and wonderful life with her new love and sons, something the Chief portrays negatively.

But Malick's version of the story is more sensitive and detail-oriented than Pocahontas, and is, quite frankly, almost a masterpiece, making hard for me to hate on it for reasons Chief Crazy Horse would give. It's chocked full of gorgeous cinematography, it's got an even-handed story, and Malick shows more emotion in quiet contemplative shots than the Disney musical does in its big songs (which aren't bad at all). Also, in a particularly Malick-ian detail, King James is played by actor Jonathan Pryce, who has no lines, is barely on screen for ten seconds, and isn't recognizable. This, the main guy from Brazil. Awesome.

Chief Crazy Horse has many legitimate gripes, as do the Native peoples all over the continent, but his account has to be taken with a grain of salt. He says Pocahontas, the nickname given the young girl actually named Matoaka, means 'naughty one' or 'spoiled child', when from what extra research I could find, it was just emblematic of her frolicksome nature; colonialist William Strachey said it meant 'little wanton', and there's nothing to suggest it was a negative label. There's a reason for the Powhatan tribe to badmouth Pocahontas; there may be less at stake than when the settlers had to praise her, but reputation is, in some cases, all that indigenous groups have left.

The crucial (and contentious) detail in the stories of Pocahontas is her saving John Smith from certain head smashing at the hands of Chief Powhatan, after he captured Smith in December 1607 on a hunting expedition. And of course, both Pocahontas and The New World use this story to establish an emotional connection between Pocahontas and John Smith, but they use it differently- Pocahontas has it as the story's climax, taking place just as the two armies go to war; The New World puts the incident more in the middle and in the more accurate context of the Powhatan village after Smith's capture, because as it turns out, The New World goes much more in depth about Pocahontas than the movie that bears her name (to be fair, that movie is a Disney movie). Even if Malick is more accurate, there's much debate about whether or not it actually happened- one source says that John Smith didn't record the incident until 1616, after learning Pocahontas would be entertaining the king and queen, in hopes it would make them treat her better.

But the story, much like the relationship with John Smith, is now an integral part of who Pocahontas is, and what Disney does with her is like what Ridley Scott did with Christopher Columbus: tell the story the way it's been told for generations. And from what I gather from independent research (talking to my girlfriend), girls who watched it when they were little loved it to pieces, and it's hard to tell little girls that one of their favourite movies is nothing more than Eurocentric propaganda. But it's also hard to tell Native groups that their history is the wrong one, simply because it's not as fun.

1616 portrait engraving by Simon de Passe

Jamestown was briefly abandoned in 1610, but with increased support became profitable around 1613, and stayed an entity until 1699 when the state capital was moved to Williamsburg and the town was abandoned, now existing as an archaeological site. The settlers faced elimination from Chief Powhatan's successor, his brother Opchanacanough; one attack in 1622 killed more than 300 settlers, a quarter of the colony's population; and while a 1644 attack killed 500 settlers, it represented a tenth of the increasing population. This non-functioning coexistence lead to increased offense by the English, and as Jamestown became a royal colony in 1624 and attracted wealthier settlers, the Indian population declined, moving out of the area altogether, living amongst settlers, or moving onto ever-shrinking reserves.

NEXT UP: More settlements set up by more religious folk means more Puritanical fun in The Crucible, dealing with the Salem witch hunts in 1692.