Thoughts on THE UNFORGIVEN

The Unforgiven

My father grew up on a farm in West Texas, and like all good Texans, he thinks he's a cowboy. Well, he longs to be a cowboy--or a pirate. He's really not picky, but the point is, his desire to be a cowboy has manifested in his love for Westerns. He lists The Searchers, Rio Bravo, and High Noon as some of his favorite films and becomes rather depressed when none of his 5 daughters (or wife) want to watch one of these films. Of course, my mother's favorite Western is McClintock, the classic John Wayne film that is basically the Western version of The Quiet Man. This is probably my favorite John Wayne film as well, but then it is more of a screwball comedy set in the Old West rather than an actual Western.*

At the same time, my father is very proud of his Native American heritage. One of my great, great grandmothers was full blooded Cherokee, and my father has expressed his disdain for Andrew Jackson's treatment of the Native Americans (specifically the Trail of Tears), yet he still lists The Searchers as one of his favorite (and ultimate) Westerns. What I seem to be unable to understand is how he can be in favor of Native American rights but love Westerns?

Thanks to the Glasgow Film Festival's celebration of Audrey Hepburn, I was able to watch The Unforgiven. In this film, Hepburn plays Rachel, a Native American woman who was adopted as a baby and raised by a white family in Texas. Soon the local tribe discovers she is one of them and hound the family for her return--though they deny that she is Indian. At the same time, the local cattle ranchers turn their backs on her and her family, and, like in High Noon, Burt Lancaster rallies his small family (including Lilian Gish as the matriarch) for a final showdown with the Indians. Rachel is safe, the family loves her regardless of her true heritage--unlike their racists friends.

While the narrative displays the Zachery family as a family unit who consider Rachel one of their own, and will love her no matter her race, it has the same message most Westerns have: White men good, 'Red man' bad** and Rachel must deliver the final blow--killing her 'brother' who has come to rescue her. Rachel turns her back on biological family in favor of her adopted family, but she also rejects herself and kills off the 'evil Indian blood' within her.

I understand that for some this is an adoption story. That she may be biologically related to the local tribe, but the Zachery's are her true family, and she will fight to protect them. However, she is also ashamed and chastised for not being white. The story goes beyond who her family is, but who she is. She cannot stand to be part of the 'others' and thus when she kills an Indian she is killing off the 'dirty' part of herself. To further prove this point, she must be the one to kill the last Indian.

Earlier during the final battle, Rachel is caught off guard and unable to kill one of the Indians when he looks at her and says “sister.” This is the first time it is made clear to her that these are 'her people' and that she was taken from them as a child. However, at the end, her 'Indian brother' enters into the root cellar, where she is alone with her wounded white brother. They stand face to face for a moment before she kills him and ends the fight.

Ultimately, she chooses to be white and as they exit the destroyed house, all is peaceful in the world because she has purged herself of her Indian blood. The birds flying across the beautiful blue sky reinforce that she made the right decision.

Anyway, I can't really answer for my father's preference for Westerns while complaining about Andrew Jackson's Native American policies, but it kind of reminded me of Rachel's identity confusion, and how she falls for the classic genre trappings.

*Of course my father and I have had many debates over what constitutes a Western. He refuses to consider Blazing Saddles as a Western (and I usually do not either); however, many people experience their first Western through the Mel Brooks' parody. It adheres to most rules while also mocking it. Much like the debate of whether Shaun of the Dead is in fact horror or parody as well. This is why my father does not truly consider McClintock a Western, much like he wouldn't consider Mel Gibson's Maverick one either. To him, they are (romantic) comedies set in the Old West. However, McClintock stars John Wayne and when you think of John Wayne you think of 'Westerns' and 'War Movies,' and to be a Western it often needs to star a certain actor or be directed by a certain director.

**I use this term only because it is regularly used in these genre films.