ohs digital no. bc 00344 hitting the trail...2 ol. fififl o ˛ trafford, hitting the trail 3 the...

OHQ vol. 116, no. 2 Trafford, Hitting the Trail

EMILY TRAFFORD

Hitting the Trail

© 20 Oregon Historical Society

Live Displays of Native American, Filipino, and Japanese People at the Portland World’s Fair

TODAY THE GUILD’S LAKE AREA of Northwest Portland is an industrial district, the lake itself long ago filled with gravel. Yet just over a hundred years ago, a collection of amusement concessions occupied the lake’s shores and presented visitors from the city and beyond with an opportunity to participate in active lessons about the nation’s westward expansion. Primarily racial in content, these lessons were disseminated through a number of live-display concessions that featured performances from various groups considered to be non-white. After the concessions closed and the site began its physical transformation, visitors continued to exercise the skills of racial assessment that they had rehearsed during their time by the lake. This practice of racial interpretation allowed individuals and groups to rank both foreign and domestic non-white peoples on a hierarchical scale of progress and civiliza-tion, thereby affecting popular understandings of expansion and exclusion.

Between June and October , 0, over one and a half million visits were paid to the Lewis and Clark Centennial Exposition in Portland, Oregon. Strolling from the main exposition palaces to the large U.S. Government Building on a peninsula in Guild’s Lake, most visitors passed through the fair’s amusement concession strip, known as the Trail in homage to the explorers in whose names the city celebrated. Along the colorful and at times chaotic strip, visitors had the opportunity to encounter exotic food, souvenirs, and even people — for a small additional fee. One could inspect the home of conquered Native Americans, meet new imperial subjects from

the Philippines, and assess the Japanese as both immigrants and increasingly powerful trading partners. Owned and choreographed by professional show-men, the live-display concessions were selected by the fair’s organizational team. Those fair officials — composed of the city’s civic and business elite — were concerned with turning a profit, establishing commercial relationships, and promoting a narrative of American progress and supremacy on both national and international stages.2 Bound together in their demonstrations of non-whiteness, the live-display concessions instructed visitors about the racial groups and patterns that had coalesced on America’s Pacific Coast at the turn of the twentieth century. Featuring people of color from both home and abroad, the Trail was a unique site for the perpetuation and rehearsal of a multilayered and hierarchical racial world view.

Emily Trafford was awarded a 2013 Donald J. Sterling, Jr., Graduate Research Fellowship in Pacific Northwest History.

This image shows visitors on the Trail, the amusement concession strip at the 1905 world’s fair. The Trail was often crowded and noisy, with amusements staying open long into the night. Unlike the uniform architecture of the grand palaces elsewhere in the fair, Trail concessions adopted a range of styles, contributing to the impression of a varied and, at times, foreign space.

OH

S digital no. bc0

034

4

0 OHQ vol. 116, no. 2 Trafford, Hitting the Trail

OH

S digital no. bb

00

0

This promotional image of the 1905 Lewis and Clark Centennial Exposition held in Portland, Oregon, shows the scale and layout of the exposition. The Trail is located in the middle of the left image, along the lake’s edge and feeding into the Bridge of Nations that crossed Guild’s Lake.

2 3OHQ vol. 116, no. 2 Trafford, Hitting the Trail

The Native American, Filipino, and Japanese concessions visualized and dramatized concepts of race, marking each group in particular ways for the visiting public.3 The supposedly authentic, yet highly choreographed, repre-sentations of appearances, behaviors, and practices were infused with racial meanings that echoed existing stereotypes and were bolstered by popular Social Darwinism and the emergent discipline of anthropology.4 As a distinct yet integrated space within the fair grounds, the Trail interacted with over-arching narratives of American progress and white supremacy. Exhibitions in the main fair grounds professed the nation’s development and ascendancy, supporting those claims with new scientific explanations and classifications. The Trail concessions’ displays of foreign culture offered a stark form of comparison to the exhibitions of art and industry in the main grounds.

The main fair grounds were manicured, uniform, and expansive; the Trail was chaotic, varied, and crowded. Performers on the Trail wore colorful costumes, resided in specially built quarters, and participated in sensational

ceremonies. Guidebooks, journals, and newspapers declared that certain habits, traits, and preferences were typical of the race and cited those features as evidence of inferiority to Euro-Americans. With claims that the Native Americans’ “doom” had long been “written upon their brows,” the assertion that dog was a “tribal dish” of the Philippine Igorots, and the paternalistic description of Japanese peoples as “little brown men,” the Portland fair encouraged visitors to regard these populations as racially substandard, and therefore incompatible with idealized versions of the nation’s future racial composition. Despite obvious differences in the representations of the three groups, which reflected their varied roles in the processes of American expan-sion, there were also commonalities, ensuring that a repetitive and hierar-chical message of racial inferiority permeated the concession strip. Human displays — from the freak show to the tourism industry and to the world’s fair concession strip — have shaped our understandings of human differ-ence and societal norms. Rich scholarship on live human display in its many forms has been developed significantly in the past two decades, and putting a spotlight on the Trail offers a comparative assessment of the racialization of non-white peoples at the relatively understudied world’s fair in Portland.7

Building on the wave of scholarship inspired by Robert Rydell’s work on the hegemonic function of world’s fairs, this article applies Joe Feagin’s concept of an overarching world view that structures understandings of race — which he has termed the “white racial frame” — to argue that the live-display concessions were important cultural arenas for the perpetuation and rehearsal of racism. While racial stereotypes about the three groups had been advanced elsewhere, the world’s fair site consolidated those narratives, creating the opportunity for a protracted and comparative inspection of the groups on the Trail. The world’s fair, as an intermediary between official and popular narratives, legitimated the white racial frame by presenting it in a trustworthy and legible format. As a physical site, the fair brought the three groups together under narratives of progress and expansion, encouraging visitors to make racialized and hierarchical judgments, with white America consistently emerging on top. The live-display form disseminated the white racial frame in a highly choreographed yet supposedly authentic setting, and allowed individual fairgoers to practice using a framework of racial thoughts and actions in a specially designated space. This “tool kit,” as identified by Feagin, functioned to shape understandings and interpretations of racial encounters both inside and beyond the fair grounds. Occurring at a time and place that represented an important juncture between the continental expansion that characterized the nineteenth century and the overseas expan-sion that dominated the turn of the twentieth, the 0 world’s fair helped visitors conceive of the racial consequences of the nation’s Pacific future.0

Looking south from the Government Building on the peninsula in Guild’s Lake, this image shows crowds crossing the Bridge of Nations. In order to access this section of the fair, visitors would have had to walk along the Trail, which can be seen on the other end of the bridge.

OH

S di

gita

l no.

bb0

22


The lengthy official title of the celebration — the Lewis & Clark Centennial & American Pacific Exposition & Oriental Fair — pointed to the effects of expansion on the national and regional racial order. “Lewis and Clark Centen-nial” represented the nation’s completed expansion, which had claimed the continent west of the Mississippi River for America at the expense of Native American peoples. “American Pacific Exposition” signaled the importance of imperial and maritime interests in the Pacific, including the recent annexa-tion of Hawaii, the occupation of eastern Samoa, and the colonization of the Philippine islands. Similarly, “Oriental Fair” indicated the established trade and immigration ties between West Coast cities and Asian nations as well as the belief that a “re-awakening Asia” offered great commercial promise. Taken as a whole, the title made clear that the nation’s eyes were on the Pacific Coast and that various populations had become linked in their significance for the nation and the region’s future. This article builds on the historiography of the impe-rial function of turn-of-the-century world’s fairs, by drawing on studies of American imperialism that have established the need for foreign and domestic race relations to be considered together.2 Recent scholarship has pointed to the significance of the West Coast world’s fairs in promoting the nation’s imperial future and has analyzed the concession strips as important sites at which fair organizers worked to popularize the processes of expansion. A 200 special issue of the Pacific Northwest Quarterly, for example, examined how racial and imperial notions were shaped and challenged at the 0 Seattle world’s fair across several articles, although that issue did not employ a single, consistent analytical framework of race.3 Considering the three groups in conjunction demonstrates how individual displays worked together to constitute a racial tool kit that could be used to cement a multilayered view of white supremacy.

The Portland world’s fair was an ephemeral event, yet the urge to docu-ment, regulate, remember, and share the exposition experience has left historians with a rich and varied — albeit widely dispersed — archive.4

Promotional and commemorative materials such as guidebooks, programs, posters, and exposition journals provide textual and visual representations of the live concessions, reveal the didactic intent of the exposition man-agement, and demonstrate the legacy of the event beyond its spatial and temporal limits. Yet by their very nature, these sources can be problematic, obscuring organizational modifications and shortcomings behind the bluster of their aggrandizing tone. Official documents, such as concession contracts and correspondence, often suggest the behind-the-scenes expecta-tions, aims, and desires of exposition managers. Photographs, by no means an unmediated window onto the live concessions, are nevertheless vital in conveying details about the visual aspects of the performances. Newspapers provide local context, yet official sources show that fair employees would

often prepare articles for the press with the sole intention of idealizing the exposition.

The endlessly engaging and well-documented historical site of the world’s fair offers numerous avenues of study, but the complicated sources force researchers to look with a critical eye. In comparison to the larger and better known world’s fairs of the period — such as the 3 Chicago and 04 St. Louis expositions — there are far fewer sources relating to Portland’s event in general world’s fair collections. This uneven representation in the larger archives perhaps accounts for the tendency of scholars to consider the Lewis and Clark Centennial Exposition as a marginal story in the world’s fair chronicle, and thus why historians have not examined the Trail as frequently or in as much depth as other concession strips, such as the St. Louis Pike.7

Nevertheless, some historians have turned to the substantial exposition

The peristyle at the fair’s entrance displays the words “Westward the Course of Empire Takes its Way.” This motto was a celebration of the achievements of Meriwether Lewis and William Clark and indicated the nation’s growing interests in its Pacific empire. In celebrating the westward march of American progress, fair organizers hoped to put Portland firmly on the map as the premier city of the West Coast.

OH

S digital no. ba0

034

7OHQ vol. 116, no. 2 Trafford, Hitting the Trail

archives housed at the Oregon Historical Society in order to place the Portland fair at the center of their analyses. By recognizing the significance of America’s Pacific Coast to changing foreign and domestic race relations, the Portland fair becomes emblematic of a shift in the national consciousness, as thoughts and actions turned from East to West, in the hope that the Pacific Ocean would one day be “transformed into an American lake.” While the racial and ethnic battlegrounds of the Deep South and the East-ern Seaboard were by no means dormant in the early twentieth century, cities on the West Coast most acutely faced the collec-tive effects of the closing of the frontier, Asian immigration, and the new Pacific Empire on its doorstep.20 Race is not the only lens through which we can examine the changes and continuities of expansion, but its ability to shape and infuse all aspects of the social order makes it an important topic of research.2 With its displays of Native American, Filipino,

and Japanese peoples, the Trail in Portland represents a significant historical site at which to examine the interconnected racialization of several groups defined as non-white.

AN UNEXPLAINED RIDDLEMore than a year before the fair opened, the exposition’s official journal discussed the possibility of obtaining Congressional funding for a display of Native Americans. The authors claimed that it would be fascinating to observe

Ephemera such as this daily program not only gives detailed information about the content of the live displays but also points to broader ideas and assumptions about race. Although such publications were frequently out of step with the fast-paced developments on the Trail, they remain a rare window onto the huge number of daily events and displays.

OH

S di

gita

l no.

ba0

4

the “strange myths and weird, religious rites, the wild, mournful melodies,

and many curious customs of these primitive and to us incomprehensible people,” which were “still an unexplained riddle crying to us for solution.”22

As representatives of the nation and the region’s past, Native Americans were useful symbols of the celebratory narrative of American progress and white supremacy. At the turn of the twentieth century, Native Americans occupied a unique position within American society. While thousands had become American citizens in exchange for land under the Dawes Act, thousands more lived on reservations, most of which were located in the Western states.23 At the fair, entrepreneurs and exposition officials used Native American per-formers to dramatize a justification and blueprint for overseas expansion.

While the Native American concession at Portland also functioned as a model for the framing of less-familiar non-white populations, it primarily served as an opportunity to assess the nation’s indigenous peoples in close quarters. Live displays of Native Americans were not new, having appeared in the popular form of the Wild West Show from the 0s, and at world’s fairs since the 3 Chicago exposition.24 Almost ,000 indigenous people lived in Oregon in 00, and the fair took place fewer than thirty years after a number of violent Indian wars.2 Yet for one contributor to the fair’s official journal, the “problem of the Red Man” was the “most disconcerting mystery” to face the nation. She lamented that “after four centuries’ embarrassing acquaintance with him, we look into his stolid, unrevealing face and know that his inner life is still a sealed book to us.”2 In attempting to pry open that sealed book, the live concession presented a legible narrative about Native American life.

Although planning for the fair had begun many years in advance, events and exhibits were constantly subject to change, and fair organizers con-tinued to solicit for interesting concessions once the fair had opened. It is often unclear what exhibits existed, for how long, where they were located, who owned them, and what they contained. The gulf between promotional and commemorative texts is often vast, yet in the pursuit of documentary evidence, it is important not to disregard these earlier plans and anticipa-tions, which reveal much about the intentions and desires of the fair’s orga-nizational team. The fair’s Director of Concessions and Admissions, John Wakefield, wrote to the Director of Exhibits, Henry Dosch, to set forth his plan for a large, live display of Native Americans:

I am of the opinion that if some competent, energetic, faithful, party would take up a

concession privilege for a showing of Indians of various tribes, their Tribal manners,

habits and customs, doing this by an installation of perhaps one or two families from

each of the various Tribes, that the ensemble would be attractive to Exposition patrons,

of interest to all concerned, of value to the Exploitation Division and of profit to the

holder of the concession privilege.27


This internal correspon-dence shows the fair man-agement’s understanding of the appropriate form and function of the live concession. Wakefield hoped that a private con-cessionaire would come forward with a display, and he was certain that the vaguely defined “man-ners, habits and customs” of the performers would reveal their “Indian” and “Tribal” characteristics. Along with the assertion that family groups should be included, Wakefield betrayed his subscription to the colonial notion that an indigenous indi-vidual’s authentic state was visible in everyday life and that inner meaning could be revealed through visual observation.2 This conviction explains the popularity of the live con-cession form and ratio-nalizes Wakefield’s claim that such a display would be attractive, interesting, valuable, and profitable.

In the end, Native American performers and exhibits appeared in numerous locations and forms throughout the fair. Musical performances, athletic competitions, craft booths, statues, and photographs depicted Native Americans as unusual and bound to tradition, while a government exhibit sought to demonstrate their progress away from that tradition under the wardship of the state.2 On the Trail, Native Americans appeared in a concession variously referred to as the Indian Temple, Indian Collection, and Indian Village. Although Wakefield’s desire for a display of families was

met — with men, women, and children occupying the site — his ambition to host various tribes was not. For the most part, sources indicate that the performers were Nez Perce, although some refer to the Umatilla nation, both of which are native to the Columbia Plateau region of the Pacific Northwest.30

This local showing of the indigenous population anchored the narrative of white supremacy in long-held, domestic race relations, establishing a base for the multilayered racial world view that permeated the Trail as a whole.

Like many world’s fair concessions, the Native American display on the Trail began several months after the gates had opened. An article in the Oregon Sunday Journal announced the group’s arrival with the headline,

On page 135 of the Western World’s Fair, Official Daily Program, this detailed map of the Trail shows the “Indian Collection” at the bottom right corner. The Japanese village is located on the left of the main strip. Although the program was printed just two days before the fair was due to close, the map appears to be an earlier, outdated edition. It does not include the Igorot Village, which opened in September. Such changes and inconsistencies make it impossible to rely on maps in isolation.

OH

S Research

Library, Mss

0, box

, folder This photograph accompanied an article in the Oregon Sunday Journal titled “Held Trail Against White Men, Now Make Portland Holiday.” The group’s clothing and tepee met visitor expectations of authentic Native life and represented a stark contrast to the grand palaces and exhibits of progress elsewhere in the fair. To the left of the tepee, a modern structure is visible, further emphasizing the performers’ incongruity with contemporary society.

OH

S di

gita

l no.

bb0

30

3


“Held Trail Against White Men, Now Make Portland Holiday.” Evoking the history of the Oregon Trail, the headline framed Native Americans as antithetical to white pioneers. The article stated:

An Indian village at the exposition will be open for public inspection within a few days. Its

inhabitants are from the Caldwell reservation and number about 2. The Indians live in

their native tepees and are commanded by the successor of Chief Joseph of the Nez Perces

tribe. The present chief is an interesting old veteran. He wears the scalplocks of Crows and

Blackfeet, acquired in active warfare, and a buckskin coat which he declares in solemn

broken English has been worn by the chiefs of his tribe for the past 00 years. Four of the

Indians were warriors in Chief Joseph’s campaign against the United States 30 years ago.3

This brief news item emphasized the supposed inferiority of the Native Americans in several ways. That the performers would be travelling from the confines of a reservation to a site open for inspection established their subordinate status in relation to the visiting public. Tying the chief and other performers to past events and people firmly fixed them — and by extension, all indigenous peoples — as primitive representatives of the past, therefore denying them a role in contemporary society.32 The allusions to violence and war framed the group as hostile, although the reference to Crow and Blackfeet scalps suggested that aggression was not directed at whites. The new chief ’s “broken English” indicated that he was unable to assimilate, and thus to func-tion in the present. Finally, the practice of displaying defeated warriors visual-ized the narrative of American progress as victorious and inevitable, helping to reconcile the violent elements of expansion with the founding principles of a democratic republic.33

A photograph of the concession accompanied the article, depicting a group of men, women, and children dressed elaborately in war bonnets and beaded robes, in front of a tepee. These visual markers signified the group’s difference and helped to make their inferior status legible and apparent. Tepees and war bonnets were ubiquitous in visual representa-tions of indigenous peoples, regardless of nation, throughout the twentieth century. Such forms of dress and dwelling created an accessible symbol of Native Americans’ supposed otherness, inferiority, and incompatibility with contemporary society.34 Those associations were perpetuated at the world’s fair, cementing the link between outward appearance and inher-ent, racial characteristics. The white construction of the authentic Native American was predicated on the notion that whites and indigenous peoples were opposites; if whites were modern, civilized, and of the future, then the authentic Native American was traditional, uncivilized, and of the past.3

To the left of the tepee, a modern building is clearly visible, emphasizing the binary relationship between contemporary America and its indigenous

population. This architectural juxtaposition was repeated throughout the live concessions, establishing the Trail as a site of foreignness and difference within the manicured grounds.

A newspaper article several weeks later ridiculed the notion that Native Americans could be modern. Describing an occasion in which several mem-bers of the group took a ride on an “auto boat,” the article stated that it was a “strange and yet very picturesque sight” to see the “members of the tribes, clad in all the colors and beads that only the Indians know how to combine,” on a motorized boat. Attributing their appearance to an inherent racial trait, the article similarly inferred that the group’s response to the high-powered ride — in the form of “yells and grunts” — was a product of their inexperience with modern machinery. Rendered speechless, “their faces plainly showed that they wished the ride had been longer.”3 By putting their behaviors on display, the formerly “stolid, unrevealing face” of the Native American was depicted as the true means of understanding the group’s inner, racial characteristics.

Beyond the physical encounter on the Trail, various texts and ephemera helped structure visitor experiences and facilitate a repetitive rehearsal of white supremacy. Postcards depicted indigenous peoples in static, stereotypi-cal forms, which validated and bolstered similar depictions elsewhere on the Trail and acted as a visual reminder of the lessons learned at the fair.37 One particularly colorful postcard featured a Native American man elaborately clothed, with the mocking caption “Chief ‘Afraid of Eagle’ ” underneath. A souvenir by the Astoria Chamber of Commerce inserted Native Americans into the story of American progress, equating them with animals. Referring to the Lewis and Clark Expedition, the text described how the men had “crossed a country full of savages, previously unknown to civilized people” and offered a heavily qualified acknowledgement of the role of the “poor Indian woman,” Sacagawea.3 Celebrating the progress of the past century, the souvenir declared that “buffalo and Indians are nearly extinct” and that another “race of people” now occupied the country, developing its resources and replacing its “wigwams” with schools and churches.3 This dying-race narrative — which was widely employed by both ethnologists and promot-ers of Western tourism — justified invasive studies and exploitative displays by suggesting that there was an urgent scientific need to document Native American communities. The discourse of extinction rationalized the violence of conquest by suggesting that savagery was self-extinguishing in the face of inevitable progress.40 This ambiguous marrying of scientific and popular narratives was common at the world’s fair and played an important role in the live displays of other non-white peoples.

The Native American village on the Trail condensed various stereotypes, images, and emotions about the nation’s indigenous population, framing


of tropical islands, situated on

the opposite sides of the earth,

and inhabited by peoples strik-

ingly distinct from those of

the great republic of the West.

The question, What shall we

do with them? is one which

necessarily arises, but which

only time and experience

can answer. . . . A period of

watching and waiting is what

wisdom dictates.4

The live concessions at American world’s fairs became an ideal tool of assessment during this period of watching and waiting. Racial narratives about the Philippines bounced back and forth between popular and offi-cial sites, with military and ethnographic classifica-tions permeating exposi-tion concessions at Omaha in and St. Louis in 04. The division of the Philippine population into distinct races and tribes — which supposedly var-ied in language, custom, and levels of civilization — created a hierarchical scale that justified the imperial argument that the colony was provisionally incapable of full autonomy.4 This notion of distinct tribes was familiar to American audiences, as one popular text noted that the “wild tribes of the Luzon highlands correspond to our various tribes of Sioux, Apaches, Crows, Chippewas, etc.,” differing only in language and “minor customs.”0 This cor-relation between non-white populations at home and abroad contributed to the multilayered racial world view that permeated the Trail.

The Portland exposition management hoped to replicate the hugely successful, large-scale exhibition of Filipinos one year earlier at St. Louis, which had featured several hundred Philippine performers in a series of

the performers as primitive, warlike, unusual, and yet defeated and vanish-ing trophies of the nation’s racial past.4 This decontemporizing tactic of representation fixed the indigenous population’s inferior position within the racial order. By perpetuating the long-held belief that Native Americans did not encounter civilization until the arrival of Europeans, the indigenous population was framed as dependent on the benevolence of the superior white race.42 This notion of dependence had long shaped local and federal policy, and would continue to do so throughout the twentieth century. In 0, the Burke Act introduced a measurement of competence before individual land allotments would be issued, and despite the passage of the 24 Indian Citizenship Act, many western states restricted the extension of the franchise from Native Americans, frequently citing their supposed lack of civilization.43 The fair’s references to past conflicts — whether depicting Native Americans as aggressive or afraid — contributed to the encoding of U.S.–Native American relations through symbolic narratives, including notions of the frontier, the savage, and the inevitability of American progress. These supposedly self-evident categories and ideas transformed a history of violence into a narrative of American innocence that could further be adapted as expansion moved overseas.44 That Native Americans had been defeated, and could now be observed and consumed as colorful, beaded figures, impressed upon fairgoers that expansion abroad was a similarly inevitable task that would not disrupt the racial order at home.4

WARDS OF THE GOVERNMENTThe Philippine islands became a part of the burgeoning American empire at the close of the Spanish-American War. As fighting occurred between American soldiers and Filipino revolutionaries — officially ceasing in 02, yet continuing in remote areas for over a decade — Filipinos became American nationals.4 This abnormal political status allowed free passage into American borders without subjection to the nation’s immigration laws but prevented naturalized citizenship on racial grounds. Although large-scale Filipino immigration to the United States would not begin until the 20s, the islands’ Pacific location and the established patterns of Asian immigration to the West Coast brought the group within the purview of a simultaneously regional and global racial world view.47 Concerns about those unknown populations were expressed in a popular handbook to the new empire, which stated:

The United States of America, after more than a century of continental growth and

development, has, upon the threshold of the Twentieth Century, taken a new and radi-

cal step forward in its national career, having added to its dominions a large number

Don

ald G. Larson

Collection

on In

ternation

al Exp

ositions an

d Fairs, Hen

ry Madden

Library, Californ

ia State U

niversity, Fresn

o

This colorful, cartoon-like postcard shaped expectations about the Native American concession and framed visitors’ memories and impressions. The caption, “Chief ‘Afraid of Eagle’,” gave Native Americans a minimal, supposedly comical role in the story of American progress.


ethnological villages. In a letter to the St. Louis Philippine exhibit board, Director-General Harvey W. Scott claimed that the fair management were “very anxious to have a fine exhibit from the Philippines,” as the Pacific Coast “takes a great interest in everything pertaining to the Philippines and I am sure a good representation from the islands would prove a great mutual ben-efit.”2 Emphasizing the regional significance of hosting a Philippine display in Portland, Scott expressed the expectations of the fair’s potential visitors. The terms of a contract with the International Anthropological Exhibit Company, dated November 04, stipulated that the concessionaires should bring no fewer than 0 Filipinos who were “distinctively representative of their respective tribes” and would offer a “true” representation of their “homes, surroundings, conditions, occupations and habits of life.”3 Despite the exposition management’s best efforts, this contract and several others were not fulfilled — a problem compounded by Secretary of War William Howard Taft, who considered a ban on privately operated displays of Filipi-nos. For several months, it seemed that the Pacific Coast fair would not play host to any Philippine representatives. While Portland’s press attempted to save face — dismissing the Philippine population as “Little, Naked, Dirty Cannibals” and claiming that “Their Absence Will Not Be Noted So Far as Management Is Concerned” — behind the scenes, exposition president Henry Goode appealed directly to Taft, expressing his concerns that the fair would lose faith with its visitors. Six weeks before the fair was due to close, a Philippine concession finally opened on the Trail.4

Despite the fair management’s plan to have representatives from the vari-ous Philippine tribes, in the end, it was only possible to secure a small exhibit of performers from the Igorot group, who — according to the Philippine Commission — were near the bottom of the hierarchy and were part of the islands’ “wild or non-Christian population.” The Igorot Village immediately became one of the most popular exhibits at the exposition. The fair’s official journal offered a detailed assessment of the concession, stating:

Among the more than one hundred tribes of the Philippine Islands the Igorrote is one

of the most conspicuous and easily the most interesting, because of his strange customs

and method of life. So little known is he, that today he would be as great a curiosity in

the City of Manila as in Portland. The Igorrote are of Malay origin, of a superb bronze

color, with long straight hair, and remarkable physiques. . . . The men wear only a

breech-clout, called ‘G-string,’ and a picturesque little hat. . . . The Igorrote is a pagan,

a barbarian in culture, and agriculturist from necessity.

Much like descriptions of the Native American village, the text firmly estab-lished the inferiority of the Igorot performers. By claiming that the Philippine representatives were both interesting and little known, the journal positioned

the concession as a source of entertainment and authority of racial knowledge. The focus on the group’s appearance, with descriptions of skin color and dress, made their supposedly inherent racial differences legible and identifiable. Elements of their religion, culture, and society were dismissed as primitive and uncivilized, and thus incompatible with contemporary America.

Like the Native American representatives, the Igorot performers were framed as violent and warlike. A daily program claimed that there was “constant warfare between the neighboring tribes” in the Philippines and that the practice of “head-hunting [was] not only a means of self-defense,” but also a favored “pastime.” Obscuring the contemporary warfare involving American soldiers, this framework contained notions of Philippine violence, expressing it in sensational stories of internal fighting and of the Igorot per-formers’ supposed proclivity for slaughtering and eating dogs. Ceremonial dog feasts were a popular feature of the Igorot Village, ensuring, alongside

This image is from a Philippine Photographic Company souvenir booklet of the Visayan Village at the 1904 Louisiana Purchase Exposition held in St. Louis, Missouri. The Philippine exhibit at St. Louis was far more extensive than the display at Portland and included performers from a number of supposed “tribes” of the islands. The Visayans were described as a civilized, Christian tribe and were displayed as evidence of the islanders’ potential for uplift under American tutelage. Visayans were not on display at the Portland fair.

Donald G. Larson Collection on International Expositions and Fairs, Henry Madden Library, California State University, Fresno


the program’s assertion that “All Igorottes eat dog,” that the behavior was framed as a peculiar and singular racial trait.7 Despite the fair’s connection to the Corps of Discovery, evidence that the fair’s eponymous heroes had indulged in dog meat during their travels was willfully ignored. Instead, the dog feast at the Igorot Village became a fascinating spectacle of racial dif-ference. In one striking image from the fair, a large number of male visitors gathered around two young Filipino boys as they prepared the ceremonial dog feast, scrambling to see the spectacle.

The Philippine exhibit at St. Louis occupied forty-seven acres and featured approximately 1,200 Filipinos from the various “tribes,” ranging from the Christian Visayans to the supposedly savage Igorots and Negritos. This sustained comparative exhibition, underlining the Philippine potential for progress, was not replicated at the Portland fair, which only featured the sensational Igorot display.

Donald G. Larson Collection on International Expositions and Fairs, Henry Madden Library, California State University, Fresno

Although the fair management had failed to secure a large exhibit of Filipinos that could represent the various tribes, the Igorot Village could still function as a “study of contrasts” through its location on the Trail. A newspaper article stated that “five races of men” had gathered at the Fili-pino concession, including the “Indian brave, the Chinese merchant, the well-behaved negro, besides our own people, attracted by the little brown man.” Texts frequently compared the unfamiliar, foreign figures from the Philippines with the more recognizable, homegrown Native Americans. One journalist stated that the Igorot performers “look as intelligent as the aver-age Indian. Their skin is of a rich, bronze color, a little darker than that of the Indian.”0 Not only were the Philippine performers’ appearances subject to comparison, but so too were their behaviors. In an anecdote similar to that of the Native Americans on a motorized boat, the Oregon Daily Journal published a satirical report about a group of Igorot performers scaling the village fence in order to steal a ride on the hot air balloon concession. The group’s encounter with modernity — and the “wonder” it inspired — was roundly mocked. The article emphasized the Filipinos’ inferior position in the fair’s narrative of progress. They “chattered excitedly on the marvels accomplished by the white brother,” their voices reduced to an awe-struck admiration of the “house that flies.”

Comparisons and connections between Filipinos and Native Americans were not just present in supporting texts but were also evident in the fair’s physical structures. Both displays took the form of enclosed and architecturally styled native villages.2 The similarity of form, yet difference in architecture and content, made the direct comparison of the two villages a simple process that visitors could rehearse as they walked along the Trail. The comparison was further evident when one incensed visitor wrote to the fair’s Secretary and Director of Exploitation, Henry Reed, to complain about the treatment of dogs by the “barbarious Iggorotes now holding high carnage” at the exposition:

Supposing some of our Oregon-bred Indians were to come to Portland and make a raid

on dogs; how long would your chief of police permit them to live out of jail? Why, our

Indians are not permitted to drink North End booze. Yet the officials of the Fair, hire

these savages to come here and drag dogs around their sty by the neck.3

The visitor’s comments demonstrate a relative view of two populations — one domestic, one foreign — bound in their non-whiteness. Structuring his encounter with the Philippine dog feast through prior understanding of local Native Americans, the visitor used the racial tool kit that encouraged comparative observations and interpretations.4

While perceptions of Native Americans provided a useful model for the racialization of the Philippine performers, this comparison could function only to a limited extent. If Native Americans represented the nation and


the region’s completed colonial past, Filipinos typified concerns and hopes about the imperial future. The dying-race narrative could successfully frame Native Americans as temporally irrelevant in contemporary American society, but it could not apply to framing a population that had only recently been drawn into America’s social and political orbit — and that continued to put up a fierce resistance to the process of colonization. The Igorot Village at Portland contributed to a globalized vision of white supremacy that drew on and extended existing domestic racial hierarchies.7

Although the live Filipino concession at Portland only featured Igorot performers, this singular representation in itself evoked the existence of other, supposedly more developed tribes, and therefore the Igorots’ potential for limited progress under American tutelage. The framing of the Igorot per-

Two young Filipinos prepare a dog for a ceremonial feast. This image depicts a striking contrast between the performers, with their lack of clothing, and the smartly dressed men in the audience. The density of the surrounding crowd suggests a claustrophobic experience for those on display.

formers — with their violence directed internally or at canines, their awe at the white man’s progress, and their very presence on the Trail — established a narrative of Philippine dependence on American civilization. The Igorot performers on the Trail were said to be “from Uncle Sam’s island domain” and were “wards of the government.” Although they were framed as “barbarians,” textual materials informed visitors that “scientists say they are susceptible of a high state of development” and that the arrival of U.S. soldiers had put a stop to the “barbaric custom” of headhunting. While the Native American village featured dying trophies of America’s completed continental march, the Igorot Village contained living representatives of a new march toward supremacy in the Pacific.

CREATURES FROM A FAIRY BOOKAs the nation looked west for emerging markets, Japan came to represent an interesting connection between foreign and domestic race relations and between the processes of expansion and exclusion. Emerging as a modern empire in its own right, Japan challenged America’s power in the Pacific, disrupting hierarchical narratives of white supremacy. As a particularly vis-

This image depicts the Igorot Village on the Trail. According to the photograph, the concession charged $0.25 admission for adults and $0.10 for children. A sign advertises the village as “The real thing. The naked truth,” emphasizing its authority and veracity, yet also its ability to entertain. To the right of the village is an ice cream vendor.

OH

S Research

Library, org lot 40, box 32, folder 2O

HS

digi

tal n

o. b

b00

0


ible non-white immigrant group on America’s Pacific Coast, Japanese people also threatened the mythology of the West, which depicted the region as a once-homogenous product of white pioneering. Euro-Americans believed that powerful myth should not be surrendered to racial diversity so soon after the conquest of Native Americans. On the Trail, the framing of Japanese performers shared aspects of narratives surrounding both Native Americans and Filipinos. Those comparable images worked to support and strengthen one another and to cement a multilayered racial world view.

The American public became increasingly aware of Japan towards the end of the nineteenth century. Writing in the fair’s official journal, Japanese Vice Consul Tsuneji Aiba noted that Japan’s alliance with European armies during the Boxer Rebellion and its ongoing war with Russia had brought the nation to the world’s attention.70 Yet, despite an increasing awareness of the Pacific nations, members of the American public were not yet familiar with their populations. In language echoing assertions about the other groups on the Trail, a 7 article in the popular California magazine Overland Monthly discussed the rise of Japan and noted that “Japan is yet a country of mystery, her people an enigma.”7 The fair managers ultimately failed to fulfill their initial plans for a Japanese exhibit, as with the other groups, and their assumptions about the best means of revealing the mysteries of the Japanese people also matched their approach elsewhere on the Trail. In 04, Henry Dosch declared that the fair should be “largely Oriental in its features” in order to demonstrate Portland’s role as America’s import and export “gate” for “Oriental products.” He envisioned an exhibition of the

Positioned next to each other in the Oregon Journal Souvenir View Book of the Late Lewis and Clark Centennial Exposition, the images of Filipino and Native American villages can be easily compared. The groups’ posed stances in front of an architecturally specific backdrop are similar, yet their costumes are clearly different.

industries of these nations by “actual operating, working exhibits by the natives themselves, clad in their native costumes, living in their own houses, showing their modes of life, work and play.”72 Dosch’s plan for a working exhibit of the various Asian nations did not come to pass, and the appear-ances, behaviors, and traits of Japanese performers at the fair became the focus of the exhibit on the Trail.

The contract for the Japanese village, an agreement between the exposi-tion and Yumeto Kushibiki of St. Louis, set out the fair’s desire for a “true and representative picture of the Japanese life, manners and customs.” Although private companies and individuals owned the Trail concessions, the terms of the contract bound those owners to a certain vision of the display, set forth by the exposition management. Unlike the contract for the Philippine display, a further clause was included:

The concessionaire agrees that he will not employ in connection with the concession

herein contemplated any person, or give any entertainment, or produce any feature of

Japan that would in any way cast ridicule either upon the inhabitants or institutions of

said country; but that on the contrary this concession shall be so constructed and oper-

ated as to faithfully represent the Japanese people in a dignified and proper manner.73

The inclusion of such a clause was important. Poor treatment of Asian exhibi-tors at the 04 St. Louis exposition had alienated the Japanese government, causing the withdrawal of official involvement at Portland. Instead, private exhibitors — including merchants and businessmen from the region’s Japanese community — stepped in to install displays of Japanese industry in the Ori-ental Exhibits Building and to organize the Japanese concession on the Trail.74

Having been drawn into the sphere of American expansion under different terms from the Philippines, Japan afforded this more cautious treatment. Not only had Japan shocked the world in its triumph over Russia’s navy at the Battle of Tsushima just days before the Portland fair had opened, but it was also an important commercial partner in “America’s future market” in the Pacific and a valuable economic tie for port cities on the West Coast in particular.7

Despite the contract’s cautionary clause and the recognition of Japan’s commercial value, the concession on the Trail — known as Fair Japan — suc-cumbed to similar racial narratives as its neighboring displays. Guidebooks and promotional texts consistently described Fair Japan as “attractive and entertaining,” deeming it “one of the principal sights of the Trail.” Featuring demonstrations of rug making, a stand selling tea and rice cakes, a theatre, garden, and bazaar, the exhibit also featured geishas, who would “flutter about like creatures from out a fairy book.”7 In line with other Trail conces-sions, Fair Japan marked the performers’ appearances and behaviors as dif-ferent, and exhibited those features as evidence of their racial characteristics. The concession’s showcase of dancers and tea servers trivialized Japanese

OH

S R

esea

rch

Lib

rary

, Mss

0

, box

, fol

der


culture, while the rug-making demonstrations — like craft exhibits in the Native American village — framed the performers as primitive representa-tives of antiquity, obscuring the nation’s rapid industrialization.77

The curved arch of the concession’s entrance, covered with carved drag-ons, alerted visitors that they were about to enter a transplanted representa-tion of a foreign land. Yet Oregon was not entirely unfamiliar with Japanese people, and the fair’s concession was not the only place to witness Japanese culture in the region. Between and 0, Japanese residents represented the second largest group among the state’s foreign-born immigrants, and the largest group in Washington. Although the actual number of Japanese residents was small, their distinctive appearance as well as language and religious practices were especially visible to Oregon’s largely white popu-lation.7 On August 3, the fair hosted Japan Day, which saw an estimated 4,200 representatives of the “new world power” in attendance. Stating that the “little brown men turned out in force,” the Morning Oregonian alluded to a large Asian population that represented not only a valuable overseas market but also a budding industrial and military competitor and a sig-nificant source of immigration.7 On the Trail, however, such demographic issues were obscured, and the Japanese performers were cast as distant, benign foreigners.0

Although there were commonalities between the framing of the Japanese performers and the other groups on the Trail, there were also significant differences. The costumes worn by the members of Fair Japan functioned as visual markers of difference but were far more substantial than the Filipinos’ scant dress and more subdued than the Native Americans’ colorful beads and war bonnets. Women wore long kimonos with their hair pinned back neatly, and men wore trousers, tunics, and caps. For visitors, the costumes on the Trail offered a simple and comparable means of assessing the three groups. In colonial relationships, clothing — which is visible, tangible, and reproducible — acts as a signifier of authenticity, regardless of the colonizer’s role in constructing the components of what is deemed authentic. That the clothing on the Trail was simply one component of a highly choreographed performance likely did not matter to most visitors; costume signified the rela-tive civilization and progress of the peoples on display. The framework of war and violence that permeated the Native American and Filipino villages was also absent from Fair Japan — a notable omission considering that nation’s recent engagement with Russia. Instead, notions of beauty and peacefulness suffused the visual elements of the concession, and even its name suggested that visitors would encounter an enchanted, peaceable people.

Although these differences facilitated a more positive assessment of the Japanese performers, they were nevertheless suffused with the same over-

arching narratives of American progress and supremacy, and thus helped to bolster the white racial frame. In a speech aimed at eliciting Congressional funding for the exposition, the U.S. Representative from Oregon, Binger Hermann emphasized the importance of America’s engagement with the nations in the Pacific. Claiming that the more America introduced its “mod-ern improvements” and “western ideas” to the East, the greater the demand would be for American products, Hermann pointed to the social, political, and commercial “progress” that had been made in Japan since it had begun its “commingling with the western nations.”2 Although recognizing Japan’s success, Hermann attributed the change to the involvement of the West, thus depicting Japan as dependent and ultimately inferior to Euro-American powers. Echoing narratives of the white man’s burden, which suffused the

In this image of the Fair Japan concession, the curved arch and carved dragons at the entrance are overseen by an American flag first, and a Japanese flag second. A small stage to the left of the entrance featured several Japanese performers whose presence would entice visitors inside. To the left is a Japanese bazaar, and to the right is a restaurant.

OH

S digital no. bc0

034


Philippine concession, the framework identified Japanese success as a signi-fier of American supremacy.3 With this added mitigation, acknowledgements of Japanese progress would not run the risk of suggesting that the nation could achieve racial parity with white America. On the Trail, Japan’s inferior position within the racial order was visualized through the presence of an American flag at the entrance to the concession. The American flag had not been planted in Japan as it had in the Philippines, but its appearance on the Trail evoked similar ideas of empire, power, and dominance.

As in the other Trail concessions, textual and visual representations of Fair Japan paid close attention to the performers’ bodies. The dramatization of Japan’s supposed inferiority was embodied within the framing of the geisha. Seemingly always on hand to serve visitors tea and rice cakes, the “Golden-skinned geisha girls” visualized a narrative of submission, femininity, and passivity.4 Nineteenth-century European colonizers frequently declared

This image of the Japanese garden demonstrates the Fair Japan concession’s emphasis on beauty and tranquility through its features, names, and the appearance of its performers. The performers’ dress provides a stark visual contrast to the images of the Filipino performers.

the “feminine penetrability” of the ‘Orient’ in order to isolate the East from notions of Western progress, therefore justifying Western intervention.

The body of the geisha functioned to obscure Japan’s recent military suc-cesses, negate concerns that America’s Pacific supremacy was under threat, and perpetuate the idea that the East was open to commercial exploitation. Framing the Japanese performers as submissive also had consequences elsewhere on the Trail. If the conquered Native Americans represented a blueprint for expansion into the Philippines, the passive and semi-civilized Japanese performers could function as a model of development in Asia, and thus act as proof that American intervention would also uplift Filipinos.

Although fair managers could not secure representatives from the sup-posedly more civilized tribes from the Philippines, Fair Japan could stand in to promote America’s narrative of Western involvement in the Pacific region. When organizers were still hopeful of recruiting members of the Philippine Scouts for the fair, they noted that members of that U.S. Army–run battal-ion were “trim, orderly and soldier-like in appearance, though noticeably small in stature, like the Japanese,” and could therefore illustrate the work accomplished on the islands.7 This description of the Scouts attributed their success to American military order — thus emphasizing their dependence on their superiors — and drew comparisons with the Japanese to show their inherent potential and limitation for progress. This comparative framework in some ways foreshadowed the “Model Minority” image that framed some Asian American groups from the 0s, heralding their success at assimilating into American society. The Scouts’ small bodies mitigated the potentially alarming consequences of a militarized Philippine unit, instead evoking the supposed beauty and inertia of the partially civilized, yet still inferior, Japanese body.

The Portland world’s fair occurred immediately before a shift in U.S.-Japanese relations, and the relatively positive framing of the Japanese per-formers on the Trail marked an end to a largely benign image of the nation and its people. William Nimmo has identified the final months of 0 as a turning point in American public opinion toward the nation. As the United States began to interpret Japan’s military endeavors as an attempt to dominate the Pacific, opposition to Japanese immigration increased. In a 07–0 Gentlemen’s Agreement, Japan agreed to stop issuing pass-ports for those destined for the continental United States, and the United States promised to prevent further mistreatment of Japanese residents on American soil. Japan’s ascendency in the region warranted such diplomacy, yet nativist sentiments abounded on the West Coast and were expressed through racialized fears of military invasion and demographic competition. Kristofer Allerfeldt has claimed that Oregon was particularly polarized on

OH

S di

gita

l no.

bc0

034

7OHQ vol. 116, no. 2 Trafford, Hitting the Trail

regarded as a “great place,” and she noted the “Indian Village” in a far from comprehensive list of concessions.3 Yet this relative absence in itself indicates that the Trail did not subvert the visitors’ world view, but instead reflected and supported accepted ideas about race and difference.4 As the concessions on the Trail staged a hierarchical display of difference, they simultaneously facilitated a temporary collectiv-ity of sameness among the white visitors. The Morning Oregonian described the Trail as a “great leveler” and “common meeting ground,” where people cared little for the “outward manifestations of caste.” Here the “millionaire” and the “Valley farmer” could be found “hobnobbing gracefully.”

As visitors hit the Trail, they participated in an entertaining rehearsal of white supremacy that would continue to influence their thoughts and actions long after the fair gates had closed.

The live concessions on the Trail dramatized the appear-ances, behaviors, and practices of the performers and framed those features as self-evident signifiers of race. While these specific characteristics functioned as legible, identifiable indica-tors of the performers’ supposed inferiority, those details ultimately mat-tered less than the dissemination of a broader lesson about how to observe and rank non-white groups. The language of difference was less consistent, and less important, than the certainty that difference existed.7 The racial tool kit, which was in constant use on the Trail, taught visitors to recognize and assess features such as clothing and behavior as evidence of inherent racial traits, and thus a valid basis for arguments in favor of expansion and exclusion. The rehearsal and adaptation of this framework at the various

the issue of Japanese immigration, with the business community — which had been so instrumental in funding and organizing the fair — fighting against discriminatory legislation in fear of losing Japanese trade.0 Although Fair Japan had depicted the nation and its people as semi-civilized, passive “creatures,” the broader lessons of the racial toolkit permitted individuals to compare and contrast and to accept and reject particular elements of the white racial frame, using it to structure constantly changing racial encounters and relations. Above all, the frame prized whiteness, ensuring that non-white groups could only ever move up or down along a limited number of rungs on the racial hierarchical scale.

HITTING THE TRAILBefore the exposition opened its gates, one newspaper article declared:

Hitting the Trail will be to journey in many lands, jumping from a Japanese tea garden

to the Foolish House of Coney Island fame, thence to the Orient, with Its turrets and

booths, purposely made a dingy white so that the sightseer may half believe for a moment

when he steps inside that he has really seen the East. He will have seen it in effect. He

will have felt the weird influence of the Orient. But ten steps beyond he can go into the

nearer Orient, Japan, or into a “Wild West” show or what he will. Everything will be

there, and he can take his choice.2

Visitors at Portland had the opportunity to inspect non-white populations for a prolonged period and to make direct comparisons among the features of each native village. They could see conquered Native Americans in a crude tepee and meet former warriors who had been defeated by the advance of white civilization. The aging natives stood for the nation’s past and dem-onstrated what the superior white race had achieved. Just steps along the Trail, visitors could see the newest race to be subjugated by the might of the American military. The Filipinos represented the future of American foreign policy, and their supposedly savage and incapable form embodied both their need for American tutelage and their potential for improvement under it. If fairgoers wanted proof that Western involvement in Asia could lead to such improvement, they could pay a visit to Fair Japan and be greeted by the pleasant and passive geishas. Hitting the Trail was indeed a journey into many lands, but it also visualized the progress of the American nation from its indigenous past to its imperial future and plotted the position of various non-white races in relation to its own achievements.

It is impossible to know to what extent visitors on the Trail accepted par-ticular images and narratives surrounding the performers; visitor-authored sources rarely include detailed responses to the concessions. Pauline McClay’s account of the Portland fair featured a brief mention of the Trail, which she

This poster advertising the amusements sections of the 1905 World’s Fair in Portland, Oregon, encourages visitors to “Hit the Trail.” The Trail was an important part of the fair experience and, although a distinct space, was part of the main fair grounds and was shaped by its narratives of progress.

OH

S digital no. bb

00

44


concessions on the Trail facilitated the endless revision and application of the tool kit, even if those features changed. The tool kit could share and shape narratives, compare and contrast features, and give structure and meaning through repetition and ranking. Although the Igorot Village was only open for six weeks, and featured just one of the Philippine tribes, its relation to

This September 24, 1905, article in the Sunday Oregonian encourages visitors to experience the “queer folks of the world,” on display at the Lewis and Clark Exposition. The article highlights a narrative of white supremacy that reaches beyond America’s borders and identifies performers on the Trail as representative types of their home nations.

the Native American and Japanese concessions situated the village within a larger framework of racial difference. The similarities in language and imagery among the three concessions, as well as the differences and obvious omissions, strengthened the overarching message of the Igorot perform-ers’ inferiority. Rather than providing an object and definitive lesson on a particular nation or populace, the concessions worked together to create a site at which white supremacy could be exercised in its various and change-able forms. The Trail provided a distinct physical space that facilitated easy comparison among non-white groups and that was shaped by the larger narratives of the world’s fair, which transformed specific features and lessons into moral stories of American progress and achievement.

The inherent flexibility of the white racial frame also permitted and subsumed moments of apparent contradiction. The very presence of Native Americans at successive world’s fairs — in themselves modern and com-mercial spaces — disrupted the notion that they were a dying race with no role in contemporary society. For Filipinos, this paid journey to the metro-pole involved hardships, but also offered opportunities for participation in a wage economy.00 Fair Japan presented a narrative that would be largely disregarded by Americans on the West Coast as relations between the two nations shifted toward the end of 0. Despite the best efforts of the local business elite, anti-Asian sentiment grew. These alternative narratives and acts of resistance did not undo or undermine the lesson of white supremacy but, instead, demonstrated the breadth of its applicability.

As different racial groups and patterns coalesced on the West Coast, American citizens needed a multilayered and flexible racial world view that moved beyond the binary, black/white, slave/slaveholder structure.0 Multiple narratives, images, and stereotypes could be contained within the concessions because they signified an indisputable difference between white Americans on the one hand, and foreign and domestic non-white populations on the other. Regardless of the content of the performance, the “almost-but-not-quiteness,” and indeed not-whiteness, of the subordinate remained.02 Broad in its reach across racial groups and beyond borders, the designation of ‘non-whiteness’ simultaneously emphasized racial difference while obscuring the details, ensuring that the classification could flexibly be applied to any group considered as a barrier to the nation’s progress. Although the Portland fair did not succeed in transforming the Pacific Ocean into an American lake, it contributed to the development of an imagined region termed the “American Pacific,” that would be of increasing importance throughout the twentieth century.03 Creating a spectacle of the American Pacific in miniature on the shores of Guild’s Lake allowed those who hit the Trail to participate in an entertaining rehearsal of the future terms of white supremacy.


NOTES

The author wishes to thank the many people who have read and made helpful suggestions on this article, including the anonymous reviewers, Eliza Canty-Jones, and her edito-rial team.

. This figure does not necessarily reflect the number of visitors, as many individu-als attended the fair more than once. Carl Abbott, The Great Extravaganza: Portland and the Lewis and Clark Exposition, 3rd ed. (Portland: Oregon Historical Society Press, 2004), xi, 4.

2. For more on the organizational struc-ture of the fair, see Ibid., 4.

3. Sadiah Qureshi, Peoples on Parade: Exhibitions, Empire, and Anthropology in Nineteenth-Century Britain (Chicago: Uni-versity of Chicago Press, 20), 34, 4.

4. Social Darwinism applied biological-evolutionary theories to social concerns and asserted that the strongest races would survive and rule over the inevitably declining, weaker races. For more on Social Darwinism, see Carl N. Degler, In Search of Human Na-ture: Biology and Culture in American Social Science, 1800 to Present (Oxford: Oxford University Press, ).

. Robert W. Rydell, All the World’s a Fair: Visions of Empire at American International Expositions, 1876–1916 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 4),

. Lewis and Clark Journal 2:3 (Septem-ber 04), 2–22, the monthly publication is bound in a single volume and is held at the Oregon Historical Society Research Library [hereafter OHS Research Library]; Lewis and Clark Journal 4:4 (October 0), 4; “Japan’s Day at the Exposition,” Morning Oregonian September , 0.

7. See Rosemarie Garland Thomson, Freakery: Cultural Spectacles of the Extraor-dinary Body (New York: New York University Press, ); Jane C. Desmond, Staging Tour-ism: Bodies on Display from Waikiki to Sea World (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, ); Roslyn Poignant, Professional Savages: Captive Lives and Western Spectacle (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2004); Nancy

J. Parezo and Don. D. Fowler, Anthropology Goes to the Fair: The 1904 Louisiana Purchase Exposition (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2007); Pascal Blanchard et al., Human Zoos: Science and Spectacle in the Age of Colo-nial Empires (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 200); and Qureshi, Peoples on Parade.

. Joe R. Feagin, The White Racial Frame: Centuries of Racial Framing and Counter-Framing (London: Routledge, 200), 3. The 0s saw an explosion of literature that examined world’s fairs as instruments of hegemony. See Burton Benedict, The An-thropology of World’s Fairs: San Francisco’s Panama Pacific International Exposition of 1915 (Berkeley: Lowie Museum of Anthro-pology, 3); Rydell, All the World’s a Fair; Paul Greenhalgh, Ephemeral Vistas: The Expositions Universelles, Great Exhibitions and World’s Fairs, 1851–1939 (Manchester: Manchester University Press, ). A useful overview of this historiographical approach is offered in the introduction of Keith Walden, Becoming Modern in Toronto: The Industrial Exhibition and the Shaping of a Late Victorian Culture (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 7).

. Feagin, The White Racial Frame, 3, .0. Due to my focus on the West Coast

and the racial consequences of the turn to the Pacific, I do not focus on representations of Africans or African Americans. For scholar-ship on this topic, see Bernth Lindfors, Af-ricans on Stage: Studies in Ethnological Show Business (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, ).

. Exposition press release by I.N. Fleischner of the Press and Publicity Com-mittee in Lewis and Clark Centennial and American Pacific Exposition and Oriental Fair Records, 4–33, in Lewis and Clark Centennial Exposition records, Mss 0

[hereafter Lewis and Clark Exposition records], box , folder 7, OHS Research Library.

2. For literature on the imperial func-tion of world’s fairs, see Robert W. Rydell, All the World’s a Fair; Sarah J. Moore, Empire

on Display: San Francisco’s Panama-Pacific International Exposition of 1915 (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 203). Works on American imperialism and race include Amy Kaplan and Donald E. Pease, eds., Cul-tures of United States Imperialism (Durham: Duke University Press, 3); Frederick Cooper and Ann L. Stoler, Tensions of Em-pire: Colonial Cultures in a Bourgeois World (Berkeley: University of California Press, 7); and Matthew Frye Jacobson, Barbarian Virtues: The United States Encounters Foreign Peoples at Home and Abroad, 1876–1917 (New York: Hill and Wang, 2000).

3. See Barbara Berglund, “ ‘The Days of Old, the Days of Gold, the Days of ’4’: Iden-tity, History, and Memory at the California Midwinter International Exposition, 4,” The Public Historian 2:4 (2003): 2–4; Abi-gail Markwyn, “Economic Partner and Exotic Other: China and Japan at San Francisco’s Panama-Pacific International Exposition,” Western Historical Quarterly 3:4 (Winter 200): 43–; “Special Issue: Race and Em-pire at the Fair,”Pacific Northwest Quarterly 0:3 and 0:4 (Summer/Fall 200).

4. I spent four weeks at the OHS Re-search Library in 203 conducting research on the Portland fair as part of the Donald J. Sterling, Jr., Research Fellowship in Pacific Northwest History. Other major collections consulted include the Expositions and Fairs Collection (Collection 344), Department of Special Collections, Charles E. Young Re-search Library, University of California, Los Angeles [hereafter Young Research Library]; and the Donald G. Larson Collection on In-ternational Expositions and Fairs, –40, Special Collections Library, California State University, Fresno.

. These publications were often com-missioned by the exposition management. For more on the didactic and prescriptive nature of guidebooks for world’s fairs and urban tourism, see Catherine Cocks, Doing the Town: The Rise of Urban Tourism in the United States, 1850–1915 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 200), 43–73.

. Henry E. Reed, Official History of the Lewis and Clark Centennial Exposition (0) in Henry E. Reed Papers, Mss 33, box ,

OHS Research Library. This official history, written by the fair’s Director of Exploitation, was unpublished.

7. The Portland fair has been examined by world’s fair historian Robert Rydell, who has repeatedly argued for the live concession strips to be taken seriously as sites for histori-cal research. Rydell has considered the Trail alongside the Seattle “Pay Streak,” in Robert Rydell, “Visions of Empire: International Ex-positions in Portland and Seattle, 0–0,” Pacific Historical Review 2: (3), 37–; and in one chapter of Rydell, All the World’s a Fair (4).

. The Oregon Historical Quarterly has featured several articles about the Portland fair. See Pauline Oleo McClay, “My Trip to the Fair,” Oregon Historical Quarterly 0: (Spring 7): 0–; Lisa Blee, “Completing Lewis and Clark’s Westward March: Exhibit-ing a History of Empire at the 0 Portland World’s Fair,” Oregon Historical Quarterly 0:2 (Summer 200): 232–23; Deborah M. Olsen, “Fair Connections: Women’s Sepa-ratism and the Lewis and Clark Exposition of 0,” Oregon Historical Quarterly 0:2 (Summer 200): 74–203. A recent unpub-lished Masters thesis examines racial, gender, and urban ideologies at the fair, see Kat Cleland, “Disruptions in the Dream City: Unsettled Ideologies at the 0 World’s Fair in Portland, Oregon”(M.A. thesis, Portland State University, 203).

. H.W. Scott, “The Momentous Struggle for the Mastery of the Pacific,” Pacific Monthly 4: (July 0), 4; “Our Empire on the Pacific,” Leslie’s Weekly 00 (June 0), 7.

20. Nor were these battlegrounds un-connected to the West Coast states and their response to the shift in racial patterns. See Stacey L. Smith, “Oregon’s Civil War: The Troubled Legacy of Emancipation in the Pa-cific Northwest,” Oregon Historical Quarterly :2 (Summer 204): 4–73.

2. Robert G. Lee, Orientals: Asian Ameri-cans in Popular Culture (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, ), –7.

22. “An Indian Exhibit,” Lewis and Clark Journal :4 (April 04).

23. For more on the legal and political status of Native Americans in the nineteenth


and twentieth centuries, see Willard Hughes Rollings, “Citizenship and Suffrage: The Na-tive American Struggle for Civil Rights in the American West, 30–,” Nevada Law Journal : (2004): 2–40.

24. Christina Welch, “Savagery on Show: The Popular visual Representation of Native American Peoples and their Lifeways at the World’s Fairs (–04) and in Buffalo Bill’s Wild West (4–04),” Early Popular Visual Culture :4 (20): 337–32.

2. I refer to the census category of “American Indian, Eskimo, and Aleut.” Campbell Gibson and Kay Jung, “Historical Census Statistics on Population Totals By Race, 70 to 0, and By Hispanic Origin, 70 to 0, For The United States, Regions, Divisions, and States,” Working Paper no. (Washington, D.C.: Population Division, U.S. Census Bureau, 2002). Lisa Blee points to the Modoc (72–73), Nez Perce (77), and Bannock-Piute (7) wars. Blee, “Complet-ing Lewis and Clark’s Westward March,” 23.

2. Gertrude Metcalfe, “The Indian as Revealed in the Curtis Pictures,” Lewis and Clark Journal : (May 04), 3.

27. John A. Wakefield to Henry E. Dosch, June 7, 0, in Lewis and Clark Exposition re-cords, folder , box 4, OHS Research Library.

2. Paige Raibmon, “Living on Display: Colonial Visions of Aboriginal Domestic Spaces,” BC Studies 40 (2003): 74.

2. “Calendar of Events, Scheduled from June to October , 0” (Portland, 0), in Expositions and Fairs Collection, collection 344, box 0, folder , Department of Special Collections, Charles E. Young Research Li-brary, University of California, Los Angeles [hereafter Young Research Library]; Official Catalogue to the Lewis and Clark Exposition (Portland: H.B. Hardt, Albert Hess & Co, n.d.), 2, in Expositions and Fairs Collec-tion, collection 344, box 0, folder , Young Research Library; Lewis and Clark Journal : (May 04), 3; Lewis and Clark Journal 3:2 (February, 0), . For more on the various representations of Native Americans at the fair, see Cleland, “Disruptions in the Dream City”; Blee, “Completing Lewis and Clark’s Western March.”

30. “Held Trail Against White Men, Now Make Portland a Holiday,” Oregon Sunday Journal, August , 0, p. 0; “Noted Indian Here,” Morning Oregonian, August 2, 0,

p. 24; “Men from Every Clime at the Fair,” Sunday Oregonian, September 24, 0, p. 30; William H. Lee, Glimpses of the Lewis and Clark Exposition and the Golden West (Chicago: Laird & Lee, 0), 3.

3. “Held Trail Against White Men, Now Make Portland a Holiday,” Oregon Sunday Journal, August , 0. The reference to the Caldwell reservation appears to be a misspell-ing of Colville, a reservation in Washington State, where the Joseph band of Nez Perce peoples resided.

32. Phoebe S. Kropp, “ ‘There is a little sermon in that’: Constructing the Native Southwest at the San Diego Panama- California Exposition of ,” in Marta Wei-gle and Barbara A. Babcock, eds., The Great Southwest of the Fred Harvey Company and the Santa Fe Railway (Phoenix: The Heard Museum, ), 4.

33. Jo A. Woodsum, “ ‘Living Signs of Themselves’: A Research Note on the Politics and Practice of Exhibiting Native Americans in the United States at the Turn of the Cen-tury,” UCLA Historical Journal 3 (3): .

34. Both tepees and war bonnets are as-sociated with Plains nations.

3. Paige Raibmon, Authentic Indians: Episodes of Encounter from the Late-Nine-teenth-Century Northwest Coast (Durham: Duke University Press, 200), 7–.

3. “Noted Indian Here,” Morning Orego-nian, August 2, 0.

37. Ruth Hellier-Tinoco, Embodying Mexico: Tourism, Nationalism and Perfor-mance (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 20), 22–22; Wulf D. Hund, Michael Picker-ing, and Anandi Ramamurthy, eds., Colonial Advertising and Commodity Racism (Berlin: Lit Verlag, 203).

3. For the importance of Sacagawea to the Portland fair, see Blee, “Completing Lewis and Clark’s Westward March”; and Laura E. Donaldson, “Red Woman, White Dreams: Searching for Sacagawea,” Feminist Studies 32:3 (Fall 200): 23–33.

3. Lewis and Clark Souvenir, 1905 (As-toria: Astoria Chamber of Commerce, n.d.), Lewis and Clark Centennial Exposition re-cords, box 00, folder 2, OHS Research Library.

40. Patrick Brantlinger, Dark Vanishings: Discourse on the Extinction of Primitive Races, 1800–1930 (New York: Cornell University Press, 2003), –3.

4. Feagin, The White Racial Frame, 3; Moses, Wild West Shows, 2.

42. Desmond, Staging Tourism, 40; Joe R. Feagin and Clairece Booher Feagin, Ra-cial and Ethnic Relations, th ed. (Harlow: Pearson Education, 20), 4.

43. Rollings, “Citizenship and Suffrage,” 34–3; Beth H. Piatote, Domestic Subjects: Gender, Citizenship, and Law in Native Ameri-can Literature (New Haven: Yale University Press, 203), 0–0.

44. Boyd Cothran, Remembering the Mo-doc War: Redemptive Violence and the Making of American Innocence (Chapel Hill: Univer-sity of North Carolina Press, 204), 34–40.

4. Frederick Cooper and Ann L. Stoler, “Preface,”in Cooper and Stoler, eds., Tensions of Empire, vii.

4. For more on the U.S.-Philippines relationship, see Paul A. Kramer, The Blood of Government: Race, Empire, the United States, and the Philippines (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 200).

47. Rick Baldoz, The Third Asiatic In-vasion: Empire and Migration in Filipino America, 1898–1946 (New York: New York University Press, 20), . The 7 Ah Yup court decision deemed Asian peoples ineligible for naturalization on the basis that they were neither white nor black. See Ian Haney-Lopez, White by Law: The Legal Construction of Race, 2nd ed. (New York: New York University Press, 200).

4. Charles Morris, Our Island Empire: A Hand-Book of Cuba, Puerto Rico, Hawaii and the Philippine Islands (Philadelphia, ), ix; James Landers, “Island Empire: Discourse on U.S. Imperialism in Century, Cosmopolitan, McClure’s 3–00,” American Journalism 23: (200): –24.

4. James W. Trent, “Defectives at the World’s Fair: Constructing Disability in

04,” Remedial and Special Education :4 (): 20. For discussion of Philippine ex-hibit at St. Louis, see Rydell, All the World’s a Fair, 7–7. Philippine Commission, Census of the Philippine Islands, Volume 1: Geography, History and Population (Washington: United States Bureau of the Census, 0).

0. Marrion Wilcox, ed., Harper’s His-tory of the War in the Philippines (New York: Harper and Brothers, 00), 33.

. Rydell, All the World’s a Fair, 7–7; Jose D. Fermin, 1904 World’s Fair: The Filipino Experience (Quezon City: University of the Philippines Press, 200).

2. H.W. Scott to W.P. Wilson, July 4, 04, in Lewis and Clark Centennial Exposi-tion records, box 3, folder 4, OHS Research Library. H.W. Goode replaced Scott as Presi-dent of the exposition several weeks later. Abbott, The Great Extravaganza.

3. Contract between Lewis and Clark Centennial Exposition and International Anthropological Exhibit Company, in Lewis and Clark Centennial Exposition records, box 3, folder , OHS Research Library.

4. “Little, Naked, Dirty, Cannibals,” Morning Oregonian, April 24, 0, p. 2. The correspondence between Goode and Taft comes from Rydell’s more detailed account of the difficulties in securing a Philippine exhibit. Rydell, All the World’s a Fair, 3–.

. Philippine Commission, Census of the Philippine Islands, 32. The term Igorot is spelled in various ways throughout the lit-erature. I use the generally accepted spelling, except when differences occur in the primary sources. The term can be considered to have pejorative connotations today, and my use of it is intended only to reflect the historical designation.

. Lewis and Clark Journal 4:4 (October 0): 4.

7. Official Daily Program 3 (October 3, 0), in Expositions and Fairs Collec-tion, collection 344, box 0, folder, 7, Young Research Library, 4–.

. Meriwether Lewis and William Clark, The History of the Lewis and Clark Expedition: Volume II, Elliot Coues, ed. (New York: Dover Publications, 7; Facsimile republication


of 3 Harper edition), 2. The Lewis and Clark Expedition journals were published multiple times after they were first printed in 4. The 04 centenary of the expedition saw numerous re-publications.

. “At the Igorrote Village,” Morning Oregonian, September 2, 0, p. 7.

0. “Dog Eaters Here,” September , 0, p. 4.

. “Igorrotes Plan to Steal the Big Air-ship,” Oregon Daily Journal, September 7, 0, p. .

2. Live displays of Native peoples oc-curred in various locations and in various forms, including the Native village, and reached the height of their popularity in the nineteenth century. For more on native vil-lages, see Blanchard et al., Human Zoos; Ger-trude M. Scott, “Village Performance: Villages at the Chicago World’s Columbian Exposition, 3,” (Ph.D. diss., New York University, ).

3. W.H. Grindstaff, letter to Henry E. Reed, September 3, 0, Lewis and Clark Exposition records, OHS Research Library. The letter was originally addressed to the Mayor of Portland and forwarded to Reed. It was written on letterhead, and was sent from the offices of Grindstaff & Schalk, a real estate and insurance business located on 24 Stark Street, Portland.

4. Jacobson, Barbarian Virtues, 0; Jon Olivera, “Colonial Ethnology and the Igor-rote Village at the AYP,” Pacific Northwest Quarterly 0:3-4 (Summer/Fall 200): 43.

. Concerns about the Philippines oc-cupied both pro- and anti-imperialists. As a keen proponent of imperialism, Theodore Roosevelt spoke of the nation’s duty in the Philippines, which would benefit the Philip-pine people and contribute to the “great work of uplifting mankind.” Theodore Roosevelt, “The Strenuous Life,” [speech], the Hamilton Club, Chicago, April 0, . Mark Twain lampooned this notion of duty in a critique of imperialism, stating “shall we go on con-ferring our Civilization upon the peoples that sit in darkness, or shall we give those poor things a rest?” Mark Twain, “To the Person Sitting in Darkness,” North American Review 3 (February 0): 4.

. Jacobson, Barbarian Virtues, .7. Olivera, “Colonial Ethnology and

the Igorrote Village at the AYP,” 4; Baldoz, The Third Asiatic Invasion, 44; Amy Kaplan, “ ‘Left Alone with America’: The Absence of Empire in the Study of American Culture,” in Kaplan and Pease, eds., Cultures of United States Imperialism, –.

. Lewis and Clark Journal 4:4 (October 0), 4; “Wild Men of the Philippines,”Oregon Daily Journal, July 3, 0, p. 2; “Igorrotes for the Exposition,” Morning Oregonian, June , 0, p. 0.

. Frank Van Nuys, Americanizing the West: Race, Immigrants, and Citizenship, 1890-1930 (Lawrence: University of Kansas Press, 2002), . This mythology ignored the roles of Asian and Latin American peoples in the settlement of the West.

70. Tsuneji Aiba, “Japan’s Relations to Fair,” Lewis and Clark Journal 2:4 (October 04), 2–3; Francis Gieringer, “ ‘Born into the Purple’: American Perceptions of the Japanese at the Lewis and Clark Centennial and the Alaska-Yukon-Pacific Exposition,” (Undergraduate thesis, Georgetown Univer-sity, 20), –0.

7. M.L. Wakeman Curtis, “Japanese Ri-valry: As Studied on the Ground,” Overland Monthly 30:77 (7), 22.

72. Henry E. Dosch, “Department of Exhibits,” Lewis and Clark Journal :3 (March 04): 7; Rydell, All the World’s a Fair, 202.

73. Contract between Lewis and Clark Centennial Exposition and Yumeto Kushibi-ki, in Lewis and Clark Exposition records,box 37, folder , OHS Research Library. Various contracts between the exposition manage-ment and concession holders can be found in Lewis and Clark Exposition records, boxes 3–40, OHS Research Library.

74. Rydell, “Visions of Empire,” –0.7. Gieringer, ‘“Born into the Purple’,”

7; “The Centennial Anniversary of the Ex-ploration of Lewis and Clark, and Industrial Exposition at Portland City, Oreg., in 0,” Speech of Hon. Binger Hermann of Oregon in the House of Representatives of the United States, Friday, March 4, 04 (Washington, 04) [hereafter Speech of Hon. Binger

Hermann], OHS Research Library, PAM H42c.

7. Union Pacific, Lewis and Clark Cen-tennial Exposition (n.p.,n.d.), 0, in Lewis and Clark Exposition records, box 00, folder 0, OHS Research Library; R.A. Reid, Sights and Scenes at the Lewis and Clark Centennial Exposition; Very Completely Illustrating the Fair (0), in Lewis and Clark Exposition records, box 0, folder , OHS Research Library.

77. From , Japan underwent a peri-od of intense modernization, building rail-roads and telegraphs and forming a skilled labor force. By 0, one-third of Japanese immigrants in the United States were em-ployed on the railroads, while others worked in agriculture and in canneries. See William F. Nimmo, Stars and Stripes Across the Pa-cific: The United States, Japan and the Asia/Pacific Region, 1895–1945 (Westport: Prae-ger, 200), –7; Kristofer Allerfeldt, Race, Radicalism, Religion, and Restriction: Im-migration in the Pacific Northwest, 1890–1924 (Westport: Praeger, 2003), –2; Abigail Markwyn, “Economic Partner and Exotic Other: China and Japan at San Francisco’s Panama-Pacific International Exposition,” Western Historical Quarterly 3:4 (Winter 200): 44; Neil Harris, Cultural Excursions: Marketing Appetites and Cultural Tastes in Modern America (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 0), 2.

7. Allerfeldt, Race, Radicalism, Religion, and Restriction, 0.

7. “Japan’s Day at the Exposition,” Morning Oregonian, September , 0.

0. Shelley Sang-Hee Lee, “Gateway to the Orient: Japan and Seattle’s Nikkei Community at the AYP,” Pacific Northwest Quarterly 0:3–4 (Summer/Fall 200): 0.

. Nira Wickramasinghe, Dressing the Colonised Body: Politics, Clothing and Identity in Colonial Sri Lanka (Hyderabad: Orient Longman, 2003), –70.

2. Speech of Hon. Binger Hermann, March 4, 04, p. 3, OHS Research Library.

3. “The White Man’s Burden” is a poem by Rudyard Kipling, published in . Its original publication in McClure’s Magazine

was accompanied by the subtitle “The United States and the Philippine Islands.” The phrase has been interpreted to mean that white people have the duty to rule others, and aid in their moral and social development.

4. Olin D. Wheeler, The Lewis and Clark Exposition, Portland, Oregon, June 1 to October 15, 1905 (St. Paul: Northern Pacific Railway, 0), 44–4.

. Edward W. Said, Orientalism (Lon-don: Penguin, ), 20.

. Nimmo, Stars and Stripes Across the Pacific, 2–22.

7. Lewis and Clark Journal 3:2 (Febru-ary 0), .

. Lee, Orientals, 0.. Nimmo, Stars and Stripes Across the

Pacific, –7.0. Allerfeldt, Race, Radicalism, Religion,

and Restriction, 7–200.. Feagin, The White Racial Frame, 2.2. “Trail will Dazzle,” Morning Orego-

nian, January , 0, p. .3. McClay, “My Trip to the Fair,” .4. Martha R. Clevenger, ed., “Indescrib-

ably Grand”: Diaries and Letters from the 1904 World’s Fair (St. Louis: Missouri Historical Society Press, ), 22–2.

. Desmond, Staging Tourism, xv–xvi.. “Trail a Great Leveler,” Morning Or-

egonian, August 2, 0, p. 0.7. Raibmon, Authentic Indians, 7–.. Feagin, The White Racial Frame, 3.. Raibmon, Authentic Indians, .00. Patricia O. Afable, “Journeys from

Bontoc to the Western Fairs, 04–: The ‘Nikimalika’ and their Interpreters,” Philip-pine Studies 2:4 (2004): 44–73; Fermin, 1904 World’s Fair; Olivera,”Colonial Ethnology and the Igorrote Village at the AYP.”

0. Tomas Almaguer, Racial Fault Lines: The Historical Origins of White Supremacy in California (Berkeley: University of California Press, 200), 2.

02. Desmond, Staging Tourism, .03. For an explanation of this term, see

John R. Eperjesi, The Imperialist Imaginary: Visions of Asia and the Pacific in American Culture (Hanover, University Press of New England, 200).

ohs digital no. bc 00344 hitting the trail...2 ol. fififl o ˛ trafford, hitting the trail 3 the...

Documents