I found it hilarious. The fact that it's not a real product he's trying to sell sort of emphasizes the example he's trying to illustrate.

I think it's funny and effective. As Janelle said, it's a fake product and Greene is also playing a fake doctor on TV.

It has an assimilationist thrust in the sense that it's not presenting indigenous Americans as noble, purer-than-thou figures: they'd like to make a buck too, just not with over-the-top caricatures of themselves.

I would almost say that his product undermines the message a little, except that we interrupt the "it really works!" moment with Greene telling him to take off the headdress. Seriously. Which I think brings us back to the critique and I think it remains funny BUT informative as well, which is the most effective kind of message. This was on a mainstream comedy show (Rick Mercer Report) and many people then saw it, which is great, but it does have to maintain the comedy edge and that will dilute the message. However, again, so important to have to get to people.

Can anyone honestly believe that "Dr. Green's Flesh Wound Reliever" is a real thing that really exists? It's just part of the parody, he isn't trying to sell you anything.

"I can’t quite decide how showing Greene then trying to sell his own product fits in." Really? You really think this is a real product?

Since I got called out in the main post, I feel obliged to comment. But I'm gonna have to think. I'd say Sue's comment summarizes my initial reaction to the clip in question.

Re. the Erin Gibson piece, I'd never seen any of her satire previously, so I had no context in which to place that particular performance. But I can't say that about Graham Greene, who I still remember from seeing Dances with Wolves in the theater, not to mention The Red Green Show, and who I think is a) a brilliant actor, b) a very smart guy, and c) a politically aware performer who constantly struggles against being typecast in offensive and limited roles. So I'm bringing all that history to my viewing.

In the performances I've seen (and I don't get CBC down here, so I'm sure there's lots I've missed), Greene seems determined to subvert whatever simplistic message might be in the script. So, sure, he's going to subvert the "noble savage" stereotype, but he's also going to subvert the AIM-style militant stereotype.

And you can see that pattern of reinforcement/subversion in this little 53-second clip at a breakneck pace, at that whiplash effect is part of what makes it funny.

( . . . which, now that I think of it, is probably what struck me as "pinkwashing" about the Gibson clip, and probably says more about my personal psychology than anything in the pieces themselves. I will allow that I prefaced my comment on Gibson by saying "my irony meter may need to be recalibrated.")

Gwen, your ninja edit's not going to save you - next time at least do a Google search to see if it's a real product. Greene is not trying to sell you a real product, the bit about turning it into a commercial is a narrative framing structure that turns the bit from a serious sociological critique to a socially-minded satire.

The product itself is also a commentary. He's saying that if you appropriate Native Culture you'll need a product to treat flesh wounds because he's going to shoot you with arrows.

Yeah, it's not like Graham Greene is putting his face on a product and asking people to buy it for its Mysterious Native Healing Powerz. He's making a statement about people who DO put images of Native people on products they're selling, i.e. that it's a crappy thing to do.

This is from a satire tv show.

I'm by no means a Graham Greene expert, but this approach (including the spiel for his own fake product) seems very consistent with his other work undermining stereotypes.

There was the character in the Maverick remake who had his whole community engaged in roleplaying for money, and an episode of "Murder She Wrote" in which his character tracked someone's footsteps, and Angela Lansbury's character says, "Oh, are you tracking?" and his character says, "Yeah, my dad taught me how. I would've preferred a bicycle, but we couldn't afford it."

I take all of this is to be a conscious and deliberate effort to make viewers aware that First Nations/American Indian people are very much part of the modern world, including the modern economy.

I suppose you can make a case that it's assimilationist, but I think there's a case to be made that depicting First Nations/American Indian peoples outside the modern economy is a variation on the noble savage stereotype and does more harm than good.

(It occurs to me this is a nice counter to the ad that was featured here a while back, something about Chicago meaning onion field b/c the Potawatomi didn't have a word for global business center?)

DR. ROBOTNIK'S ITCHING POWDER.

SO DESTRUCTIVE, IT WILL CAUSE YOU TO SPROUT BOILS AND EXPLODE.

BUT FIRST WE'RE GOING CAMPING

The context in which this clip appears is important to consider; for those of you who don't know, they "actor" suffering from his injuries sustained while appropriating Native American culture is in fact, the host/head comedian of the show, Rick Mercer (a guy who probably has done more good for Canada and inspired more Canadians to think critically and shake things up than any politician ever has). The Rick Mercer show is all about satire and parody (Much like the shows of John Daily or Steven Colbert). So the audience up here would know right away that this clip is going to be making fun of something. When much-respected and legendary actor Graeme Greene appears, we know, of course, that he is going to take our culture to task for something that isn't quite right, but in a fun-loving kind of way (he knows finger-wagging and shame-blaming won't help).

No one here (in Canada) would presume that this product is any more real than say, Chris Rock's "bullet hole tampons" (SNL, one of the best parody products ever). We know that the spot is pointing out that 1) Non-native populations appropriating native cultures and symbols is inappropriate and often just plain wrong, especially when it is done for commerical profit and 2)Lakota (owned by HPI, a small father and son business in B.C.; no, they aren't aboriginal), being a prime instigator of this type of crap, is just stupid, and deserves to be taken to task for capitalizing on this already limiting depiction of Aboriginal peoples. The fact that it is Graeme Greene doing this makes the work far more effective. By joining in the parody, he makes us see how absurd the stereotype is, even if it falls into the "noble savage" category which a lot of people think is "okay" (because it's, like, not negative, right? Note sarcasm here.)

Taking the clip out of context makes it a bit more problematic, because if you know Rick Mercer, you know he doesn't give two hoots how Americans (or anyone besides the Canadian public) will perceive the show and if they "get" the joke or not (for further proof of this, see "Talking to Americans"). This is a Canadian show, made for a Canadian audience, that celebrates our culture and politics. If you don't get it, that's too bad for you, really.

So if you want to see the actual story that prompted this skit, please look here:
http://www.canadianbusiness.com/managing/career/article.jsp?content=20070212_85327_85327

You will notice that actor Floyed Red Crow Westerman, who acted alongside Greene in Dances with Wolves, was recruited by the owners of HPI to write the music and script, as well as star in the commerical. Other than the product originally being developed by a Metis horse-trainer, the product itself isn't much more aboriginal than peanut butter, but the owners of HPI very consciously chose to capitalize on this stereotype nonetheless.

Knowing the whole story here (which many Canadians would have) helps deepen the meanings of this fairly complex (and utterly hilarious) parody.

My personal opinion is that this is a rather effective challenge to the practice of non-aboriginals capitalizing on Aboriginal culture and stereotypes for profit.

Yeah, just to add on to Sadie's comment. A few things because a lot of people seem to think Canadian culture is indistinguishable from American culture.

Humour and comedy are really big in Canadian culture, not just in the realm of political satire (although political satire has always been popular here. And done in a different style--shows like 22 Minutes or Royal Canadian Air Farce are/were almost a combination of the Colbert Report and Saturday Night Live). Humour is usually seen as the best way to get your message across painlessly--that's probably why so many advertisements in Canada use it.

Also, this clip appeared in a show on the CBC, which is Canada's public broadcaster. So this clip (as well as the rest of the show, which usually involves poking fun at politicians and government policies) is actually federally funded through taxpayer dollars.

And pretty much everyone watches the CBC, and a heck of a lot of people watch Rick Mercer. He once got over 3% of the electorate to sign a petition requesting that Stockwell Day change his first name to Doris.

I also want to point out that this show is available only in English, which excludes a significant minority of the population. Although at the same time, most Quebecois I know would never try to appropriate Native culture because they're too busy trying to pretend that Native people don't exist.

The U.S. vs. Canadian thing seems a little bit silly to me. I am an American, and I don't think the humor here is very subtle. Even if I don't know the entire political background, I can see that he is pointing to a behavior he doesn't like, threatening cartoonish violence against people involved in this behavior as a way of expressing his frustration, and at the same time satirizing the behavior in question. How much more do you need to understand?

I think Megan nailed it. Funny & effective.

Its N8V Humor people....just for laughs, enjoy it for what it is!