Sunday, September 9, 2007

In Whose Honor?

Last year, the University of Illinois dropped their mascot, Chief Illiniwek, in light of an NCAA decision which held that any school using a Native American mascot would not be allowed to participate in NCAA-sanctioned sporting events.  Facing a choice between denying student athletes achievements in post-season playoff games and denying a long history of avid fans their beloved Chief, U of I made a difficult decision.  Though the “protesting” agent in this case would appear to be the NCAA, this proclamation came after many years of protest by the American Indian Movement (AIM), educators, and allied sympathizers.

 

In 1968 over 200 American Indians came together in attempts to assess the poor living conditions of Native Americans. This meeting led to the creation of the American Indian Movement. Nearly 40 years later, this social movement has a long history of bringing justice and recognition to American Indians. The first missions of AIM was to improve the slum-like living conditions, protect the rights to practice native religion freely, and to investigate questionable behavior of federal government in its regard to Native policies. Over the years, the missions and focus have spread past these early goals.  Among more contemporary efforts of AIM, they have honed in on the controversial use of Native American mascots by sports teams ranging from professional teams to little leagues.

 

Usually held outside of various stadiums and ballparks, AIM protesters and their allies carry signs, yell chants, sing songs, and embody what Native Americans “really look like” as they attempt to alter the attitudes of fans who walk through the gates.  In addition to the mascots themselves which are seen as derogatory and rhetorically violent toward the images of Native Americans, AIM focuses on the different rituals of sports enthusiasts (e.g., the “tomahawk chop” and “war dances”).  In 1995, AIM activities were quite active during the World Series which was dubbed the “World Series of Racism” by protesters.  Featuring the Atlanta Braves against the Cleveland Indians, AIM activists saw this as a perfect opportunity to address the problem of racist mascots.  Part of this activist event included dressing up in other “costumes” to mock Jewish people, African Americans, and the Pope—turning the table on fans to show how mascots would look if done in the spirit of other people, AIM embodied a creative (and threatening) alternative.

 

So the movement that I will be examining in this class will be social movement and activism against Native American sports mascots in the U.S.  Specifically, I will focus on activities of the AIM; however, since much of their activism is connected up to other local groups and individuals, the scope will shift depending upon the events I am analyzing.  Far from a cohesive movement, the emphasis of my project will be both on the individuals involved and the movement of social consciousness.

 

 

3 comments:

chris christenson said...

I remeber that movement very well, I had to endure years of debates....Ironically enough the mascot has been retired but the termoil it created sparked an intrest in many people. It also kind of made it rather iconic in an "underground" sort of way. I personally felt it was just a cartoon, a dancer etc. etc. I had a friend from high school who actually WAS the mascot, he is neither a racist or an indian, but he was one hell of a gymnast. I guess my point is...people can be offended by anything.

Webmaster said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
dhcotter said...

Chris,
I'm sure your friend was not a racist (though he engaged in an inherently racist act embedded within a racist system) and he was surely not an Indian. 36 students have played dress up to perform the "fancy dance." Not one of them have ever been of Native American descent. I'm sure your friend was one hell of a gymnast. With that being said, it is important to note that the very dance your friend performed is a false historical representation. All of the acrobatics preformed during the fancy dance have no historical legitimacy and are merely thrown in for audience appeal. The cartoon image you have in your mind is an historically false representations; the headdress, war paint, beating drums, and the fancy dance are all stereotypes that have been spoon fed to American culture for a century though mainstream media. The Chief made his debut in 1926, but according to US law, Native Americans were legally barred from performing native dances ON THEIR OWN LAND (well the land we relocated them to). If that is not a racist tradition, someone please point one out to me. A tradition founded in racism is racist, EVEN if it is currently grounded in ignorance.