Pendergast-Pow Wow Highway-It May Be Right But Is It Realistic?

Regarding Pow Wow Highway, I see Buddy and Philbert as wounded warriors on individual (and joint) hero quests towards self realization. Although the characters’ quests share the same goal, to recover a sense of personal and cultural identity, they approach their quests from very different, perhaps even opposite, philosophies. Philbert’s non-violent and spiritual approach to his quest is pitted against Buddy’s comparatively hostile and faithless approach. In the beginning of the film, Buddy appears to be the stronger of the two warriors, but by the film’s end, we realize that it is Philbert, the unlikely warrior, that has the superior philosophy. Despite the film’s clear message of Philbert’s superior strength and Buddy’s shortcomings, I still wondered if perhaps the film intended for us to appreciate some sort of balance or middle way that exists between the conflicting approaches. Specifically, I wondered if the film attributed even the smallest value and/or relevance to Buddy’s approach. I can see how Buddy, having served in Vietnam, may have become faithless and mean. If he served in actual combat, his hostility and animalistic knee-jerk reactions would have been very valuable qualities. And it is my understanding that war veterans who have served in combat often suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder that basically locks them in fight or flight mode well after they have completed their service. From this perspective, perhaps it can be interpreted that Buddy was no less a warrior than Philbert, but that Philbert’s approach was perhaps simply conducive to their current circumstances. Or, alternatively, perhaps Philbert’s nonviolent and faith-guided approach was intended to be interpreted as an ideal which Native Americans and all oppressed cultures can perhaps strive towards and look to for guidance in their healing, while simultaneously recognizing the inevitability of our falling short of this ideal. In this way, Philbert’s approach can be affirmed as the superior path, while Buddy’s path, although inferior, can still be acknowledged as having served a purpose, as opposed to something that is useless and can be absolutely avoided. Buddy, as in the case of all people who have served in combat, was courageously responding to the needs of less-than-ideal circumstances in a less-than-ideal world. Just as the most enlightened among us strive daily to trust in the good yet, knowing the inevitability of evil, they lock their doors, so too do those struggling against oppression who strive to use only “good medicine,” may periodically carry a gun. It’s not ideal, but it’s reality.