Ken Burns and The West

I have often wondered how people make money at some of the things they do. Frequently when talking about historical figures historians tend to say great stuff like, "The poet, random name here, said..." or "the philosopher, different random name here,..." and so forth.
So what exactly did these people do to make their way in the world? Sure, now you can make a good living as a poet, no matter how bad you are, if you develop a following...or as a philosopher if you manage to get a proper cult following...okay, almost any field will make you a living if you are good at it...but how did that work in say...1500?
Be that as it may, Ken Burns has developed a great representation as a film documentarian. He covers vastly divergent topics, from Jazz to baseball to the Civil War to that mythical location, "The West".
It is hard to define where or what or even when the West was. Was it the picture of pioneers moving in wagon trains across the prairies? It has long intrigued me the myths surrounding these pioneers. The history books have one picture of them but just a little thought will prove that idea wrong.
I had always pictured the "pioneers" who were the backbone of the Westward Movement as the poor of the east moving West in hope of financial success. The problem with this is the economic impossibility of it being true.
Wagons were expensive. Horses, oxen, guns, ammunition, food, clothing, and other necessities cost several thousand dollars. It was not a simple matter of hopping on a horse and going for a summer ride...it required time, effort, planning, and MONEY. The Westward move was often a move of the, if not wealthy, then certainly well off.
Now that I have gone on one of my famous tangents, lets get back to the point. Burns has a great reputation for his documentaries. With that in mind one of the selections I got from the library for research purposes is his epic "The West".
I watched the first disc and I am a little uncertain what I think. On the one thing, it is fairly even handed. It points out good and bad done by "both" "sides".
I emphasize those two words for a couple reasons. First, there were not just two viewpoints. It was not "Europe v the New World" nor "Spanish v Indians" but rather Spanish v French v English v Hopis v Pueblos v Navajos v Apache v Sioux v Kiowa v....well, the list goes on. The names change based on location but the truth remains. There were many interested parties and the "sides" often changed.
But what I find somewhat disturbing about this documentary is the near constant background of music that evokes many unfortunate stereotypes about Native Americans and Native American culture.
Imagine a Scottish documentary where regardless of the subject there were bagpipes playing in the background. Sure, bagpipes are important to the Scots, but there are other elements to Scotland.
The information is solid, although as yet it is all pretty familiar to me. I have been fortunate to have excellent, knowledgable professors who have pointed me in the direction of excellent sources for reading. Hopefully the next three discs will be more fresh and at some point not every tribe will have the same songs...where is Clyde Warrior when you need him?