He’s not at the top of my list this week and his avoidance of dealing with the Chief isn’t helping. The Chief is a horrible stereotype of a proud tribe. It has to go. Whether Emil Jones shot across the bow is the most effective means to do so is open to question, but at least he took a strong position on it.
For those not seeing the problem with the Chief, imagine a team called the Nigerians that had someone dress up in traditional dress of Zulus and then did a caricature of those customs for a bunch of screaming college students. Just as minstrel shows are a thing of the past, so should the current incarnation of the Chief. Perhaps a new incarnation that is respectful of Illini customs would be appropriate, but the current version is a horrible slap in the face to American Indians.
Zorn sums up the problem quite well
To me, the Chief debate is simple: He’s got to go because in our culture, public institutions in particular don’t preserve or maintain symbols or language that a significant portion of the population–particularly those most directly affected — feels is profoundly offensive.
It’s not a mascot. This is democracy. Not rule by the vocal ass slappers in the minority.
Keep the Chief
The Turkey Burger has Spoken!
1) mascot: a person or animal that is adopted by a team or other group as a symbolic figure.
The Chief is a mascot.
2) Would it be okay if a majority of AP readers decided to forcibly take Mr. Burger’s property and divide it up among themselves? Of course not.
This country has a fine tradition of putting aside majority opinion in the interests of a minority’s basic rights. America has long recognized that some things are not controlled by majority rule.
I’d be curious if the well named Turkeyburger could define assslappers and mascot for our entertainment.
However Vocal Ass Slappers would make a great band name.
I agree with OneMan (put it on the calendar.)
My choice for a replacement:
University of Illinois Railsplitters
LOL–yes it would be a great band. I’m okay with the Illini as a nickname, it is the current form the Chief takes as a representation of the Illini that bothers me. For that matter I think the Braves is a decent nickname though the tomahawk chop is offensive. The Redskins need to go the way of the Pekin Chinks.
Turkeyburger appears to be referring to the half-assed referendum the now-defunct Illinois Student Government placed on the ballot this past March. 70% of those who voted supported the Chief, which isn’t suprising, considering that the question was biased that way. I’d deconstruct that further, but Austin Mayor has already done a fine job.
I myself don’t see much of a problem with the Illini name, but I also don’t oppose changing it either as long as it’s not “Prairie Fire.” “Railsplitters” is a fine nickname and as a descendant of many nineteenth century immigrants and blue-collar workers, I have no problem with it.
> imagine a team called the Nigerians that had
> someone dress up in traditional dress of Zulus and
> then did a caricature of those customs for a bunch
> of screaming college students.
Well, I would fail everyone at that college in geography, political science, and English composition since: (a) Nigeria is about 1500 kilometers from the very northernmost point where the Zulus were thought to have ever lived (b) the Zulus are in fact revered by many in armys and militaristic societies around the world due to their legendary courage and toughness – sort of like the Illini (c) your paragraphs has so many mixed comparisons it topples of its own weight!
Cranky
Cranky,
First, your masterful use of the exclamation mark is a sure indication of that you are *the* expert on English composition. Therefore, I will not even attempt to question that aspect of your run-on sentence.
Second, I fail to see what your statement about militaristic societies alleged reverence for the Zulu has to do with whether or not such a depiction would be a stereotypical caricature. Your statement, even if true, would justify neither the hypothetical mascot nor the Chief.
Finally, your geography comment only proves AP’s point because the Chief should get an “F” too:
“First, the university’s portrayal of the Chief is a clear misrepresentation, as manifested by several inaccuracies. The Illini were Woodlands people — not Plains people — and as a result evidenced an entirely different material culture than the Lakota people whose clothing the current Chief dons. The Chief’s dance was reportedly derived from a Lakota ritual known as the Devil’s Dance and taught to Lester Leutwiler by Sioux people in Colorado as part of a scouting project.
“While it is difficult to factually assess these reports of the early Chief tradition, three things are very clear: (1) for decades the university promoted — and the students believed — that the Chief’s dance was an authentic form of some Indian tribal celebration; (2) whether or not the Chief’s dance was originally “derived” from a Lakota ritual, it was “adapted” early on for sports events and currently resembles no traditional or contemporary expression of dance known to native people, the Lakota included; and (3) even if the current Chief’s dance were an accurate portrayal of any Lakota dance form, that form is Lakota and not native to the Illini.
“It is also worth noting that the music which accompanies the Chief’s dance is completely foreign to any musical expression known to native people — in short, it is the creation of white America.
“Finally, I might add that none of these facts are in dispute. The official university statement regarding Chief Illiniwek was modified in 1990 because administrators recognized that any claim to authenticity of the Chief’s portrayal was absurd. This revision and the reasons behind it have been documented and are presumably well-known.”
— http://www.inwhosehonor.com/GONE.HTML
—-your paragraphs has so many mixed comparisons it topples of its own weight!
Ummmm…as AM points out—that is the point. The Chief has virtually nothing in common with the Illini tribe he supposedly ‘honors’