1. Since there is no single appropriate or accurate term to refer to the Indigenous peoples of what is now known as the Americas, unless one refers specifically to a particular nation or tribe, I follow the conventional usage of “Native American” and “American Indian” in the context of the northern United States to refer to members of autochthonous communities; “First Nations” and “Aboriginal” in a Canadian context; “Indigenous” in a broad transnational and hemispheric context; and “Indian” to refer to the massmediated Hollywoodean image of Native peoples. I do so fully aware of the problematic origins of the terms and their homogenizing tendencies. For more on Indigenous identity terminology preferences, see Berkhofer, White Man’s Indian; Nagel, American Indian Ethnic Renewal; and Yellow Bird, “What We Want to Be Called,” 1–21. Likewise, I employ the terms “white,” “West(ern),” and “Euro-American” as interchangeable placeholder terms, with the understanding that these categories represent a broad spectrum of cultural histories and national-ethnic origins.
2. Sherman Alexie, “I Hated Tonto (Still Do),” Los Angeles Times, June 28, 1988.
3. Vizenor defines survivance in Fugitive Poses as “more than survival, more than endurance or mere response; the stories of survivance are an active presence.… The native stories of survivance are successive and natural estates; survivance is an active repudiation of dominance, tragedy, and victimry” (15).
4. Smith, “Land of a Thousand Dances.” This essay has been reprinted in Smith’s Everything You Know About Indians Is Wrong, a collection of new and previously published essays.
5. Ethnic spectatorship, according to Chow, takes into account both a critical examination of the stubborn, intractable, and egregious stereotypical spectacles of racialized popular images and a politics of identification that radically re-reads ethnic spectatorship as an affirming exercise. See Chow, Woman and Chinese Modernity, 24.
6. Chow, Woman and Chinese Modernity, 24.