A more authentic Curtis?

After our discussion of the work Edward S. Curtis did to "document" the Native American Populations of North America, and his 'dodge and burn' practices in regards to showing (or not showing ) the reality of Native Americans in the 1920s, I was interested to see some contemporary work that is strongly related.

Edward S. Curtis, 1908, Red Star - Arikara
Retrieved from: http://curtis.library.northwestern.edu/curtis/viewPage.cgi?showp=1&size=2&id=nai.05.book.00000262.p&volume=5 

Curtis's work has been debated in Native and non-Native circles for years. Some, like Lakota Thomas Haukaas (Robbins, 2006), feel a kinship with the images, while others feel the work is racist, or at best dishonest, because of it's selectivity, contrived / posed nature, elimination of traces of the modern world etc...

Matika Wilbur comes from the Swinomish and Tulalip Tribes in Washington State. She has spent the past year on the road photographing the 562 ( now 566 ) nationally recognized tribes in the US (Matikawilbur.com) in a travelling photographer arrangement that echos Curtis's work from a century ago. She has photographed hundreds of Native American's in stunning and remote areas, as well as in Urban centers. Her goal is tri-fold, encompassing documentation, education and awareness for the realities of modern Native Americans. Her images are beautiful, with a soft and judicious use of colour.  Her journey, and body of work, have been sponsored through public sponsors  via Kickstarter, as well as through a variety of grants.

Pedagogically, I feel that looking at, and discussing, Wilbur's work in contrast to that of Curtis's has a lot of value when talking about representation, authenticity, racism, intention, and ethics in relation to photography.

Matika Wilbur, Honoring Tradition, Project 562.
Retrieved from: http://matikawilbur.com/

My guiding question would be:
Are Wilbur's representations of Native American's less problematic than the images that Curtis took almost 100 years ago? Why or why not?

To spur on discussion encourage students to identify similarities and differences in the methods and or results of the two photographers.
Similarities - They both pose their subjects, they often choose natural surroundings or indistinct backgrounds over modern/man-made structures, both have subjects wear traditional dress etc...
Differences - Sponsorship - public vs. corporate sponsorship, Native vs. Caucasian artists, etc...
Also, do the almost one hundred years between the two bodies of works justify some of the issues brought up in Curtis's work?

Although these questions would likely spur on lively discussion among any group of students, I would be particularly interested in exploring this topic with students at the high school where I teach because of the high Mohawk population and general sensitivity to Native issues among our students.

Robbins, Cathy.(Nov. 2006).Collecting  Indians. Voice of San Diego. http://voiceofsandiego.org/2006/11/16/collecting-indians-3/  

Wilbur, Matika. (2013). Project 562. http://matikawilbur.com/

Edward S. Curtis's The North American Indian,(1907-1930). Northwestern University Digital Library Collection.  http://curtis.library.northwestern.edu/