Wahoo …
157The Indians are one game away from the World Series, there’s mayhem and excitement and so much to write about. But for some reason, I’m motivated tonight to write about Chief Wahoo. I wouldn’t blame you for skipping this one … not many people seem to agree with me about how it’s past time to get rid of this racist logo of my childhood.
* * *
Cleveland has had an odd and somewhat comical history when it comes to sports nicknames. The football team is, of course, called the Browns, technically after the great Paul Brown, though Tom Hanks always says it’s because everything Cleveland is brown. He has a point.
You know, it was always hard to know exactly what you were supposed to do as a “Brown” fan. You could wear brown, of course, but that was pretty limiting. And then you would be standing in the stands, ready to do something, but what the hell does brown do (for you)? You supposed to pretend to be a UPS Truck? You supposed to mimic something brown (and boy does THAT bring up some disgusting possibilities?) I mean Brown is not a particularly active color.
At least the Browns nickname makes some sort of Cleveland sense. The basketball team is called the Cavaliers, after 17th Century English Warriors who dressed nice. Perfect. The hockey team, first as a minor league team and then briefly in the NHL, was called the Barons for reasons that seem to be lost to history and logic. Another hockey team was called the Crusaders. Another hockey team was the Lumberjacks. You get the sense that at some point it was a big game to try and come up with the nickname that had the least to do with Cleveland.
Nickname guy 1: How about Haberdashers?
Nickname guy 2: No, we have some of those in Cleveland.
Nickname guy 1: Polar Bears?
Nickname guy 2: I think there are some at the Cleveland Zoo.
Nickname guy 1: How about Crusaders? They’re long dead.
Cleveland’s baseball nickname history has its own crazy history. The baseball team was, for a year in 1890, called the Cleveland Infants. My best guess is they were named that for 16-year-old pitcher Willie McGill, who won 11 games that season, but I don’t know. Maybe they brought infants to the games. Maybe they had a deal where you could use your infant as a ticket into the game.
In other years, the baseball teams were called the Blues, the Bronchos and, of course, the Spiders. We’ll get back to the Spiders in a few minutes.
Then, from 1903-1914, they were known as the Cleveland Naps. This was after the great Napoleon Lajoie, who signed with the team as a free agent in 1903. II’m guessing it was in the contract that they name the team after him; I’m surprised Roger Clemens didn’t ask for this. Though Lajoie was a great player, you do have to admire a team that would name itself after a quick afternoon sleep.
Then, in 1914, the Naps lost 102 games, and Lajoie hit .258, 80 points below his career average. He was 39 then and clearly done (he did play two more mostly ineffective years in Philadelphia), and so Cleveland needed a new nickname. You know what’s coming. This is when legend and fact blur.
* * *
The way I had always heard it growing up is that the team, needing a new nickname, went back into their history to honor an old Native American player named Louis Sockalexis. Sockalexis was, by most accounts, the first native American to play professional baseball. He had been quite a phenom in high school, and he developed into a a fairly mediocre and minor outfielder for the Spiders (he played just 94 games in three years). He did hit .338 his one good year and apparently (or at least I was told) he was beloved and respected by everybody. In this “respected-and-beloved” version, nobody ever mentions that Sockalexis may have ruined his career by jumping from the second-story window of a whorehouse. Or that he was an alcoholic.
Still, in all versions of the story, Sockalexis had to deal with horrendous racism, terrible taunts, whoops from the crowd, and so on. He endured (sort of — at least until that second story window thing). So this version of the story goes that in 1915, less than two years after the tragic death of Louis Sockalexis, the baseball team named itself the “Indians” in his honor. That’s how I heard it. And, because you will believe anything that you hear as a kid I believed it for a long while (I also believed for a long time that dinosaurs turned into oil — I still sort of believe it, I can’t help it. Also that if you stare at the moon too long you will turn into a werewolf).
In recent years, though, we find that this Sockalexis story might be a bit exaggerated or, more to the point, complete bullcrap. If you really think about it, the story never made much sense to begin with. Why exactly would people in Cleveland — this in a time when native Americans were generally viewed as subhuman in America — name their team after a relatively minor and certainly troubled outfielder?
There seems to be some evidence now that the Indians were actually named that to capture some of the magic of the Native-American named Boston Braves, who had just had their Miracle Braves season (the Braves, incidentally, were not named AFTER any Native Americans but were rather named after a greasy politican named James Gaffney, who became team president and was apparently called the Brave of Tammany Hall). This version makes more sense, certainly. There’s also a theory that the name was chosen by a fan contest in the newspapers and you KNOW they weren’t honoring Louis Sockalexis.
We do know for sure they were called the Indians in 1915, and (according to a story written by author and NYU Professor Jonathan Zimmerman) they were welcomed with the sort of sportswriting grace that would follow the Indians through the years: “We’ll have the Indians on the warpath all the time, eager for scalps to dangle at their belts.”
Oh yes, we honor you Louis Sockalexis.
What, however, makes a successful nickname? You got it: Winning. The Indians were successful pretty quickly. In 1916, they traded for an outfielder named Tris Speaker. That same year they picked up a pitcher named Stan Covaleski in what Baseball Reference calls “an unknown transaction.” There need to be more of those. And the Indians also picked up a 26-year-old pitcher on waivers named Jim Bagby. Those three were the key forces in the Indians 1920 World Series championship. After that, they were the Indians to stay.
* * *
Chief Wahoo, from what I can tell, was born much later. The first Chief Wahoo logo seems to have been drawn just after World War II. Until then, Cleveland wore hats with various kinds of Cs on them. In 1947, the first Chief Wahoo appears on a hat. He’s got the yellow face, long nose, the freakish grin, the single feather behind his head … quite an honor for Sockalexis. As a friend of mine used to say, “It’s surprising they didn’t put a whiskey bottle right next to his head.”
Three years later, they changed the Wahoo logo — I suspect this is not because people thought it was racist (nobody really cared) but because they liked a newer, cleaner version of Wahoo. This new Wahoo was another grinning, slightly-smaller-nosed, one-feather Indian, only this time his face was all red. This is, more or less, the Chief Wahoo of today.
This is also the Chief Wahoo I grew up with, though it should be said that there was a time during my childhood when the Indians seemed more or less embarrassed by Wahoo. I never thought this was because of any PC sensibilities — I think they Indians were just so bad they were looking for a new start wherever they could find one. They started going back to trying various Cs on hats throughout the 1960s and 1970s, including the unforgettable “Crooked C” blue and red catastrophe of 1975. I have to find one of those hats.
Wahoo was around though — there was a giant Wahoo on Cleveland Municipal Stadium, you could see it from a half mile away. I know I wore lots of clothes with that grinning Wahoo on them. I had no problem doing that. I liked Wahoo. To me, he was funny. Then, that’s the point, isn’t it?
You know, I remember once walking through the Holocaust Museum, and seeing all of these horrifying caricatures of Jews that they would give to kids in 1930s Germany. I looked at these things in horror for a long, long time. You know why? The logos themselves weren’t so different from Wahoo. I’m not comparing anything but the style of logos — obviously, the Jewish caricatures were a billion-billion times more sinister. They were meant to raise an entire generation of Jew-haters. Wahoo is, I think, just a stupid sports logo.
But — and this is the point — those logos, like Wahoo, were of real people only they were cartoony and goofy and exaggerated and meant to make a child laugh. They did not LOOK much different.
* * *
Here’s a newspaper quote you might enjoy, taken from the same article I mentioned earlier:
“To insist that Native Americans be given equal rights with other citizens is one thing. To insist that their particular sensibilities entitle them to exercise a kind of sensorship is quite another.”
That’s the argument for Wahoo, isn’t it? The argument is that Native Americans are being too sensitive. What’s the big deal anyway? Chief wahoo doesn’t hurt anybody. Don’t Native Americans have much bigger problems to deal with than a logo on a baseball cap? Wahoo has been around for a long time, we don’t need censorship of our sports because a few Native Americans are marching, right?
Trouble is, that quote wasn’t about Native Americans. It was actually a quote taken from Washington Post in 1947, and you can replace “Native Americans” with Negroes. It was an editorial The Post wrote about how Little Black Sambo was a fun little storybook character, and anyone who took offense to this grinning, big-lipped abomination was just acting silly and politically correct.
Symbols do matter. The funny thing is, everybody really does understand this on both sides of the argument. The Confederate Flag doesn’t just matter to those who see it as a racist symbol. It also matters to those who put in on their trucks or state flags. Neo-Nazis spray paint swastikas on Synagogues — they know it matters. You could not put a Little Black Sambo statue on your front lawn and then say, “Oh, I just appreciate the artistry.”
Wahoo is an inherentry racist symbol. Nobody could really deny this. Nobody could look at that grinning mug and say, “No, it’s really a flattering portrayal of Native Americans, who were conquered, nearly wiped off the planet by our ancestors and then forced to live on reservations.”
The thing is, I think so many of us were raised to think of Indians as cartoon characters, as movie villains, as the Native American who had a tear in his eye because people kept dumping garbage all over this great land, that we have become desensitized. I heard someone doing a comedy bit on XM Radio about Native Americans and casinos and alcohol and how nobody should care anyway because they lost the wars, and though I’ve heard similar bits (and I think I have pretty tough comedy constitution), this particular one was so cruel, so mean-spirited, so wrong, that I realized there was probably no other group in America someone could say such awful things about without drawing the Kramer backlash.
The only reason Chief Wahoo is around is because Native Americans don’t have a strong enough voice in this country to put a stop to it. When Native Americans protested at the 1997 World Series, they were mostly laughed at. Three were arrested. Is this really the kind of country we want to be? And for what? To stand up for our inherent rights to enjoy a racist sports logo?
I love Cleveland. I love the Indians and I even love Wahoo in a weird way because it is such a part of my childhood. But it is not just time to get rid of Wahoo, it is way, way past time. I don’t think this is the biggest problem facing the world, or even the 5,4993,287th biggest problem facing the world. I don’t care about political correctness either. No. It’s just wrong. Very wrong.Get rid of it. The fewer wrong things in the world, better.
And it brings me all the way back to this … why can’t we just go back to calling the team the Spiders. That’s a great name, and it’s not taken by anybody in major sports. There’s history there. It actually fits Cleveland (believe me, there are more spiders in Cleveland than Native Americans — especially those creepy Daddy Long Legs that are like walking paperclips). And there are a million incredible logo and mascot possibilities.
Even if they don’t get rid of the Indians nickname (I think you might as well go all the way) it’s definitely time to bury Wahoo. This would be a good year to make it happen. The Indians are a game away from the World Series. There is some real joy happening. There is some real exciement. The Indians have a real chance to end the longest citywide sports drought in American sports. There are a lot of good feelings in the Cleveland air. It would be a good time to bury a logo that should never have been born to begin with.
Tags: Uncategorized
Joe -
I have, in front of me, the book on the 1899 Cleveland Spiders (well, I’m a sucker for losing teams).
In it, Sockalexis is a sad figure, playing just a few games in his last futile attempt at big league stardom. He has one great day, but had troubles in the field, and had off field trouble. It implies that he was beloved if sober. In 1897, he was a fan favorite until he got a taste of the demon rum (he blamed his teammates) and from then on it was a struggle.
I don’t know about why they named the team the Indians, but there was some love for Sockalexis. If sober, he could really play the game. But he wasn’t sober very often.
Hallelujah! Rob Neyer also made some nice comments about this in his chat tonight. My favorite, “Let us assume for a moment that a team used the same image, but was called the Jews. That wouldn’t be offensive to you?”
I’m an anti-PC type of guy myself, Joe, and I couldn’t agree with you more on this one. Plus, the retro-uni possibilities with the Spiders are low-hanging fruit of the choicest kind.
Love your work here on this blog so far, BTW.
[...] Joe Posnanski wrote an interesting post today on Wahoo â?¦Here’s a quick excerptWahoo … October 17th, 2007 The Indians are one game away from the World Series, there’s mayhem and excitement and so much to write about. But for some reason, I’m motivated tonight to write about Chief Wahoo. I wouldn’t blame you for skipping this one … not many people seem to agree with me about how it’s past time to get rid of this racist [...]
Don, that’s a great post. You are right on, baby, it’s just wrong.
Let’s hope the Red Sox come back against the Spiders. You’ll also note that the Joy of Sox website has been using “Spiders” to refer to the team all through the playoffs.
http://joyofsox.blogspot.com/
/applaud
Lots of good points: it’s not my city but, FWIW, I agree.
One reason why the Spiders name might be a tough sell: 20-134.
Couldn’t agree more, Joe. I had the same reaction as you did at the Holocaust Museum: those images were meant to appear innocuous but obviously were not.
I have a better idea, why not just change the name to the Yankees…that way Lebron could wear his hat and no one would know who he was rooting for.
Good work, as always.
To go with the city’s tradition of naming the team after people associated with the team, I’ve been calling the team the Hafners. If I were a graphic designer, I’d try to adjust Wahoo to be a Pronk chariacature, but I don’t have the chops.
I also like the Script “I” that seems to echo Wahoo (to keep tradition) while still losing the racism.
But what do I know? I’m a Minnesota boy.
Joe,
I disagree 100%. If you go through life looking for things to be offended by you’ll find them at every turn. Why didn’t you address the Minnesota Vikings or the Fighting Irish in your attack on the Indians? I have Irish heritage and their mascot “offends” me. Isn’t it racist, too? In Houston they even had to change the name of the soccer team from ‘36ers (1836ers) to the Dynamo because some people were “offended” that 1836 was the year Santa Anna lost to the Texians. I’m not making that up!
Not all whites hated or viewed Native American Indians (It is the whole term. Native American is incorrect.) As someone born in the US, I’m also a “native American” and I have Native American Indian ancestry from my family’s roots in Oklahoma. The relationship between the tribes themselves was often violent and complex. A large number of town and county names in America are American Indian names or words in honor of the traits for which the tribes were admired. Chief Wahoo is no more racist than Yosemite Sam is to Anglos that are cowboys. Look at leaders like Sam Houston and his background if you want to see that the stereotype of the evil white man oppressor is the p.c. version of today’s history. I guess we need to all root for the Rockies now since how can we be expected to root for a team with a racist logo? Although, I supose we could be offended at the Rockies logo since the moutains are being spoiled by humankind and we are all killing Mother Earth, right?
Joe,
Well put. Every game this postseason as my friends and I have watched, there’s been at least one moment–the guys in redface in the stands, the cutout of the old Wahoo face taped up by a fan behind the plate–when we’ve been stopped cold, astonished that this is still accepted.
Oddibe, you’re intentionally missing a big point: take issue with their logos as you will, but the Irish and the Vikings were named by people who had some Irish or Viking heritage for an audience that shared that heritage. Unless you believe the Sockalexis story, there doesn’t appear to have been any Native American input at all in the story of the Cleveland Indians. They were named, and the caricature was created by, people who, on the other hand, were descended from the people who had spent the previous century attempting to destroy the group they were now caricaturing.
No matter how many tangential or inapplicable examples you bring up, the question remains one of power relationships and how those are reinforced and transmitted to new generations. Chief Wahoo is offensive and should go.
Hats!
http://www.dugout-memories.com/cleind.html
I’m rootin’ for the Rockies because they were named after a cartoon flying squirrel.
[...] on the Spiders October 17th, 2007 — Mr. Brannan A prominent voice from Cleveland seems to agree with me. Is he reading my blog??? Posted in [...]
Ah, you knew the old Notre Dame argument would show up. Weren’t most of the original students at Notre Dame Irish Catholic boys from Chicago? Therefore, they were naming the athletic teams after the dominant ethnic group on campus. Hardly racist, if they were giving the name to themselves.
I’m always fascinated by the angry defenses of these names by us white folks. Inevitably, people claim “I have some Indian blood in me, and I don’t find it offensive.” Unless you’ve lived on a reservation, are immediately distinguishable as a descendent of the original occupiers of this land, or check the Native American box when you’re given the choice, that argument doesn’t really work. Teams change uniform designs and color schemes all the time. What’s so difficult about just changing the name as well?
The only time Braves, Indians, etc. are acceptable is in cases like Haskell Indian Nations University, when they follow the Notre Dame rule: naming the teams after the people who (originally) populated them.
Bravo, Joe. I hope someone important is listening.
Yay, Joe! An excellent, right-on essay — though with one small tinge of naivete. You clearly haven’t ever felt impelled to endure a Rush Limbaugh broadcast, as I have: judging by his continued success, it’s still safe to say extremely vicious things about Muslims or Latinos. Though he’s in a partisan context; I don’t think San Diego’s next sports team could ever be the Fighting Wetbacks, and than goodness.
Back to Wahoo: the excellent Atom & His Package album Redefining Music contains a song on this topic called “If You Own the Washington Redskins, You’re a Cock”. To anyone who likes (or doesn’t mind) geeks with cheap synthesizers, I recommend it highly.
Oddibe (Formerly Kerfeld): the Minnesota Vikings come from a city founded and at-the-time dominated by Norwegian-Americans. The Notre Dame Fighting Irish represent a university that was, at the time, overwhelmingly made up of Irish-Americans. If most of the 1915 Cleveland Indians were Native-Americans — instead of, y’know, none of them — I think the issue would be treated very differently.
Joe,
The Cooperstown Cap Company has Cleveland hats, including a particularly grotesque model from 1948, at http://www.ballcap.com
I’m a lifelong Indians fan, and I’ve been hoping they’d change back to “Spiders” for YEARS. Even the horrifying thought that they might have some kind of webbing-style pinstripes that resemble Spiderman’s costume doesn’t faze me. I envision a cool, minimalistic cartoon spider logo, or maybe just a baseball caught in a web? My only regret is they might have to change the colors to black and gray or somesuch — I’m really used to the red and blue. It would be worth it though.
Well said, Joe.
@Oddibe (Formerly Kerfeld): to add to Brian B.’s points, history matters. The fact that “Indians” were the victim of genocide and forced relocation makes the representation of the group distinct from Cowboys, Irish, Vikings, etc. There is a power-difference between Indians and groups that are now assimilated into a White majority, and you can’t ignore that difference by complaining that people are being over-sensitive.
The bottom line for me: would I allow my kid to dress up as Chief Wahoo for Halloween? No way. Vikings, Pirates, Cowboys, Flying Squirrels, etc. all seem like fine costumes. How do you explain the Chief Wahoo image to your kids as justified today?
Oddibe, you neglect to point out that Native American “Indians” were systematically exterminated by, among others, descendents of the Vikings and Irish-Americans. It isn’t about ethnicity or offending minorities. It is about genocide. The issue needs to be portrayed that way. And Viciously.
If you rename the team the Spiders, then obviously the mascot must be named Boris.
In about 1976, I went to a restaurant outside Atlanta that was on a former plantation. I belive it was called Aunt Fannie’s Cabin and the menu was said to be based on the legendary cooking of Aunt Fannie herself, who was a slave. The evening’s choices were presented to the customers on a board hung around the neck of a young black man, who recited the selections in a sing-song, distracted voice. He was followed by an older black man who was our waiter. Every customer in the place was white and every employee in the place was black, and it made me more than a little uncomfortable, as if we were celebrating not just the food, which was delicious, but also the entire slaveholding era, which didn’t do much for our appetites. Perhaps we were being overly sensitive. If we had then been invited to an Atlanta Slaves baseball game, I think I would have opted out.
Just wanted to say that I agree with Mr. Posnanski’s essay. At least drop the Chief Wahoo logo.
Great, another PC schlock-fest by a white man who feels the need to feel offended by proxy for a group of people that he has no association with.
So what, we have to treat natives differently because of what YOUR ancestors did (not mine)? How long do we need to wear kid gloves because of the sins of your fathers? My grandfather was in Dachau and I was raised Orthodox Jewish from birth. If there were a team called the Cleveland Jews and their mascot had a big nose and a bag of pennies and a kipah, I wouldn’t be offended. I’d find it hilarious, and I bet you that Woody Allen, Mel Brooks and a whole bunch of other Jews would agree.
Now, it WOULD offend me if, say, one of the headlines was “Peralta’s misplayed grounder holo”cost” the Jews the game,” then I’d be offended, but last I checked, no sportswriter has talked about the Indians sending their opponents on a “trail of tears,” and the last time someone refferred to the Indians “scalping” another team was before Brown v. Board of Education.
So here’s the message Luke wants to send: “It’s okay to deride and trivialize the culture of successful people in the majority, but not okay to do the same thing to minorities.” So you want to make the Cleveland WASPs, then?
I expect most of you PC sticklers have a coronary when you see old re-runs of the Super Friends with Apache Chief. After all, he’s an incredibly offensive stereotype, isn’t he? But then again, so is Foghorn Leghorn, and no one seems to care about him. And of course, all of these concerns seem to suddenly pop up when the Indians are WINNING. No one cares if we offend people from the bottom of the division, eh?
Ridiculous. I figured you’d be above this sort of heavy-handed rhetoric, Joe. I find it so sad that we’ve become so soft that if someone tried to release Blazing Saddles in 2007, they’d be crucified and the movie would never see the light of day.
Oh, and you’re missing the point about the Kramer situation. I’ve heard vile, disgusting racial humor, and those comedians don’t get villefied, and rightfully so; it’s humor, it’s SUPPOSED to be vile at times, and if oyu don’t like it, you don’t listen.
Kramer, well, A. he wasn’t funny B. it wasn’t even a joke, it was just a rant and C. he wasn’t telling it as a routine, he was attacking a specific black individual, and that takes it out of the realm of comedy. Then it becomes personal, it’s meant only to hurt. If you start taking away our right to tell offensive jokes, well, then you’re bordering some dangerous territory.
the indian’s wahoo logo is racist. period end of story.
you may not like it, but thats just the fact.
thats all we talked about for the past few games when watching. even worse than the Sox untimely hitting is the fact that there are people in the stands w/ the wahoo’s and the dressing up like native americans.
if people want to just let ignorance rule, so be it. i think they are pretty lame and the idea of defending one wrong thing by trying to tie it to other things that may or may not be wrong is hilarious.
just accept that its a disgraceful logo and start to deal with it. its 2007, not 1915 or 1860 for that matter. it’d be nice if we could all agree on something so painfully obvious to just about everyone.
I love it when white people tell minorities what they should and shouldn’t be offended by. It’s just so evocative of the problem.
There’s a similar issue with the mascot Chief Illini, who is admittedly not as overtly racist. The white students and white school administration passionately tell the Native Americans that the mascot is meant to honor them, and yet the people who are being honored are the very ones who are protesting said mascot.
Also, I can promise you that the Washington Redskins will never change their name or logo as long as they are profitable.
Joe’s right, of course. But even if you disagree with him, let’s get selfish for a minute.
It’s time to end the Curse of Wahoo. Cleveland ain’t winning a Series until Wahoo goes. In a game where so many people are obsessed with superstition, luck and curses, why not take a step that’s pretty much guaranteed to win the team some needed positive karma?
Bring on the Spiders!
And Jim Haas–brilliant post on the Rockies. Now if they’d just ditch Dinger for Bullwinkle….
To be honest, I’m more offended by your comparison to Nazi Germany, trvializing images that were steeped in a mountain of hate-filled, anti-semetic rhetoric by comparing it to something as inconsequential as a baseball mascot. I guess I missed the part where any Native Americans at old Municipal had to wear little tomahawk patches on their shirts.
I guess I missed the part where any Native Americans at old Municipal had to wear little tomahawk patches on their shirts.
There were no Native Americans at old Municipal, because Native Americans were practically exterminated from North America. That’s the point.
It is interesting how bringing up an issue like this instantly polarizes responses. Bully to the notion of dialogue! It’s much more fun to spout dogma, close my eyes, and rub my sweet things all over the party line! Yay for ignoring what other people say while waiting my turn to talk! There are flaws in Joe’s post. He is white. He is not a member of a Native American Tribe (though a good friend of mine, a woman covered in freckles and sporting naturally red hair, was a member of the Cherokee Nation, as her Grandmother was 100%; so, you never know based solely upon Joe’s milky complexion). He does sound a little PC. But, there is some serious conflation at work here in the comments, and more than a little shoddy rhetoric (the likes of which I keep reading elsewhere every time an issue of this nature is raised).
Yup, Michael Richards (nee Kramer) wasn’t delivering his “material.” He vented his spleen. But, you forget Steve, that this decision to rip the audience is also a comedic trope. Ever witnessed Don Rickles in action…? Harlan Williams, by chance…? This is why the rant is all the more uncomfortable: we aren’t sure initially if Richards is still trying to work the room, by “insulting” his audience. But Chief Wahoo isn’t a comedian. The Cleveland Indians franchise isn’t “performing” in this genre at all. Sure, MLB is entertainment. No doubt. But, when MLB “speaks” to its fans (either through spokespersons, commentators, press releases, commercials, etc), comedy is not the primary concern. Retiring #42 wasn’t a “bit” to generate laughs. As funny as Bud Selig may look and sound, he isn’t a comedian. The rules (as they apply to MLB, and as MLB applies them) are quite different. Read some of the press Rosanne Barr received when she attempted to joke during her stirring rendition of the National Anthem at old Jack Murphy Stadium, an all ages venue where folks attended to watch a sporting event (something that wouldn’t have been nearly as controversial if done on stage at the Laugh Factory, a 21+ nightclub, with a two drink minimum, where folks pay to hear jokes-some of which are rightly offensive). MLB isn’t a cartoon (featuring a character like Apache Chief), or a comedian (like Andy Kaufman), or an institution responsible for raising our children (like mommy and daddy are supposed to). MLB may use comedy, cartoons, and parental discretion in communicating with its fanbase, but these genres are of secondary, or even tertiary, concern at best. The precidents have been established: tell a feeble woman joke about Kim Ng in a public venue, you get fired. MLB doesn’t tolerate that type of humor. So why should it continue to tolerate Chief Wahoo?
And what, exactly, does saying “I’m Jewish, and some other famous people I know about are too, so I can safely say that I think they’d all agree (though I have no idea if this is actually the case) with me when I say that I wouldn’t care one whit if there were a team called the “Cleveland Jews and their mascot had a big nose and a bag of pennies and a kipah.” Great! How does this prove your point, exactly? A + B = C, thus: (A) I’m Jewish (and by birthright am the spokeperson for all things Jewish) and (B) some other people are too (who I’ll speak for without consulting them first) which proves that (C) I am right in claim that naming a team the Cleveland Jews is totally a good idea (in fact, Cleveland Jews = hilarious!) and you are wrong in saying that Chief Wahoo is offensive, though it pains you to say it, since you romanticize the image due to childhoos memories. Meh… My 18-year-old composition students could tear that line of reasoning to shreds. I’d suspect that Woody Allen, Mel Brooks, and a whole bunch of other famous folks (like Philip Roth & Saul Bellow, for instance; I know of their fame and can freely speak their exact sentiments too!) will have somewhat differing opinions and rationales. But what do I know? I’m not Jewish! So I can only speak for British/Irish/Scottish/Austrian/RandomlyInheiritedDNA folks from West Virginia who moved to Chicago, by way of Indiana, like me? If I haven’t lived it specifically, I can’t speak about it without being PC! Yay for narrow definitions!
The facts are: 1) We, Americans, did in fact kill a whole lot of the folks, known as Native American Indians because we named them that, who lived here before we did; 2) We took their land, especially great locations for trade like Cleveland; 3) We made fun of them for centuries, portraying them as savages, and wasting nearly a hundred years writing poetry about being afraid they’d taint our white souls (Hooray for American Literature I); 4) Chief Wahoo is a ridiculously rascist caricature, created for a baseball team, and having nothing to do with humor as such (which, of course, needs to be vile sometimes). Chief Wahoo is a symbol that stands for a region, its mores and beliefs, or, if not that, then some famous aspect of that region’s history. This is exactly like naming a team the Atlanta Slaves, and having some Little Black Sambo mascot image appear on all things Slaves. At least the Braves have some artifacts used by actual Native American tribes in their logo, though this is still a bit questionable, to be honest. It’s offensive. The logo should be changed. Why is that so hard to understand?
Out of the milliion and one other possibilities for team names which would be Cleveland appropriate, and not offensive to a prominant minority in America & its history, surely one can suffice. I don’t see Washington Bullets fans losing too much sleep over their name change. That was a PC move, to be certain. But it worked out just fine in the end. And if things are a little bit better as a result, then it’s a win-win situation.
As for you closing proclamation/conflation/defecation smeared information that, “If you start taking away our right to tell offensive jokes, well, then you’re bordering some dangerous territory.” I’d like to see you parse that rationale, as it applies to baseball mascots/team logos. The domino effect rhetorical strategy is always so charming. To say “If I can’t tell N****r jokes, our society will turn into an Orwellian nightmare,” was the perfect way to end your spiel, as it sums up the weird thinking evinced in your post perfectly.
As a closing thought: I’m still confused about the claim that if a newspaper ran a headline about the Cleveland Jews (a logo/name/mascot you’re all about) that read: “‘Peralta’s misplayed grounder holo”cost” the Jews the game,’” you’d rightfully be offended. So, it’s okay for the logo/name/mascot to be overtly racist, as long as we don’t talk about it? The decision to brand a baseball franchise in a racist manner is benign, but a throw away headline from a periodical that extends the metaphor isn’t? Please, break this down for me. I’m waiting with baited breath…
Well written thoughts here, that match my own. I’ve also thought the Spiders would be a great name.
As for 20-134…well, while the 60’s, 70’s, and 80’s weren’t as bad, they were a lot longer.
ed
Steve, I don’t think Joe was making that comparison at all. And, if it matters to you, I’m Jewish.
Great, another PC schlock-fest by a white man who feels the need to feel offended by proxy for a group of people that he has no association with.
A group many of whose members have made it clear that they are offended.
we have to treat natives differently because of what YOUR ancestors did (not mine)?
Joe is Polish by descent. I’m an Ashkenazi Jew. I’m pretty sure we’re against going out of our way to pointlessly offend any group. There is no artistic good cause served by the Chief Wahoo logo. Nor would there be a good cause served by the, er, Cleveland Jews with their huge noses and bags of pennies. It would be an apter comparison if it were the Munich Jews or the Zagreb Jews, founded 1949 and still playing; have you tried asking Woody Allen if he thinks that would be hilarious?
(Doing a quick Google search: it’s very possible the mainstream media has learned not to talk about “scalping” in a Cleveland Indians context, but the blog world contains plenty of holdouts. It would be less of a live issue, I’m sure, if for example Native Americans didn’t still have the highest rate of racial poverty in the country, and didn’t have the highest rate of mysteriously-disappearing presidential votes in 2004, where entire reservations in swing states would troop to the polls, vote for city council and U.S. House, but apparently leave without registering an opinion on Bush v Kerry.)
here’s the message Luke wants to send: “It’s okay to deride and trivialize the culture of successful people in the majority, but not okay to do the same thing to minorities.” So you want to make the Cleveland WASPs, then?
Doubt he feels that way, but it’s odd you read his post and not mine, two prior, which specifies that the Vikings and Fighting Irish names were proud racial statements by locally-predominant ethnicities.
Anyone familiar with the song “Talking Hypothetical American Pastime Blues” by Hugh Blumenfeld? It raises most of the same points Joe does in his post, and uses many of the team name examples above, such as “Negroes” and “Jews.” And it’s funny.
Joe is right on this. I’m not overly worked up about it, but then I’m a white guy with no connection to either the team or N.A. heritage. The thing is, Native American’s ARE pissed about it. They have very little voice in this country, though, so many people can go around thinking that it’s just “PC libruls” who complain. And if a NA does complain, it’s “aw, go open a casino! *snicker*”
Like Joe says, there are lots of other wrongs in this world that rank above this one. But this isn’t difficult to understand.
If it was the “Cleveland Jews” there would be outrage. Not from Steve, apparently, but from many others.
Chief Wahoo does look like WWII-era propoganda, btw. I don’t know why that’s hard to see or believe, considering he seems to have been created around about 1947. Duh. Lots of stuff created in that timeframe was racist as hell. Much of it has been abandoned.
I’m an Indians fan thrilled by our success but slightly sheepish that Chief Wahoo is still grinning at me at the outset of every broadcast. I just left the University of Illinois, where we dumped our (far less offensive, but still inappropriate) mascot, and can’t believe that my hometown can’t do the same.
As for the “Cleveland Jews” comparison Steve made, I think it’s very different if people mock themselves. In your case, you cited prominent Jews that play off Jewish stereotypes. As for me, I’m of Appalachian Extraction, and will occasionally make jokes about hillbillies. But Chief Wahoo isn’t the product of Native Americans playing off Native American stereotypes. It’s a bunch of white people that got together and mocked Native Americans, shortly after nearly exterminating them. The obvious comparison, which has already been made, is if a Munich team in the 50s had been named the Jews. Would you appreciate the big nose then?
But really, where is the redeeming quality in Chief Wahoo? Other than fond memories (of which I actually have many), there’s nothing to really like about him. We can do so much better, whether it’s a spider or even just a stylish ‘I’.
As an aside, Joe, I’m just catching up on your posts, and couldn’t believe you have Chicago in the top 10 of the HCQ. Really? For all the moaning of Cubs fans, the Bulls had six championships in the 90s! They had the single most transcendent athlete of the last 50 years (okay, so that’s debatable, but the point remains). The Bears won the Super Bowl recently enough that most people remember it. And half the city enjoyed a World Series just two years ago (and the way the Cubs spend money, they’ll likely buy one soon enough). There is nothing in that city to complain about.
I love a good logical fallacy or 3 on a rainy day. Thank god for the comment section!
Also: Godwin!
Joe,
I think it’s an interesting and insightful (albeit recycled) commentary. Of course it’s offensive to Native Americans and, as a die-hard Tribe fan, I find it to be somewhat embarrassing. I would prefer they keep the name and use the “I” or the “C” as the logo.
(Btw, I recently bought the 1975 red and blue Tribe hat — it’s awesome and unoffensive and most definitely not a “catastrophe…but I digress)
But why write this now? The poster above who noted that no one gives a damn when the Indians are .500 or worse was right on. I’m offended that a wonderful, exciting, likeable team has to be vilified here because of it’s (ridiculous) logo. No, the players aren;t being attacked but it certainly deflects from an amazing playoff run. Can’t we just enjoy the Indians for this improbable stretch without having a discussion about the historical mistreatment of Native Americans?
Anyway, I’ll be cheering tomorrow night in my offensive jersey, hoping and praying my beloved Tribe can win the pennant, and finally win it all for Cleveland. Maybe next year the Tribe will only use the “I” or the “C” — but right now the Chief still is there and hope is in the air.
Go Tribe.
Just posted on AOL, so will not write everything I wrote there, but this has nothing to do with being PC, it has to do with not having racists images. I have been complaining about this for years, including the Redskins, which is the team I root for because they play in my city, but anyone with a brain has to know the term Redskins in racist, and an image of a big grinning redfaced Indian mascot is also if not racist, definitely offensive. They say they did a poll and 90% of native americans polled said they did not find Redskins offensive. I did a poll that was not selective as to which native americans I polled and it was the opposite, but even more, to the point where less than 10% said it was not offensive, but some did say they liked the team. Names like Warriors would work for most, but you gotta lose the stereotypical native american imagery.
Joe, that was a great read and very well done.
One last comment — the team name itself isn’t meant to mock anyone. Teams don’t choose names as jokes, they choose them to sound tough or at least somewhat intimidating. So, although Chief Wahoo is an insulting logo, the name “Indians” by a “bunch of white people that got together and mocked Native Americans” like the poster above said.
That should’ve been “wasn’t chosen by a bunch of white people that got together and mocked Native Americans.”
First off, Mel Brooks has publicly discussed his sensitivity toward anti-Semitism in a “60 Minutes” interview.
Woody Allen is also sensitive in this regard. Remember the “Did you eat yet?” “No, Jew” scene?
Finally, Notre Dame’s mascot is a leprechaun, not an offensive charicature of a stereotypical Irishman. And in sports, being described as “Fighting” is a compliment. Nobody wants to play for the “Notre Dame Cowards”.
Agree 100%. the team missed a wonderful opportunity when it moved into jacobs field not to concurrently re-brand as the Spiders. Alternatively the team could, without making any announcement, simply disontinue using chief wahoo, keep the name indians for a few years and then once wahoo goes it would only be a matter of time… phase out the wahoo logo then the name a few years later.
I think all of you are nuts that have a problem with the Indian. Let it go life is to short. Enjoy them winning and STOP BITCHING.
Excellent column, Joe!! You belted a Manny moon shot here!!!!
And yes, as mentioned by a poster above, I am now (for for the foreseeable future) calling the Cleveland baseball team the Spiders.
As a Sox fan, I do not like that Cleveland is 3-0 since I started, but I believe this is coincidence. :>)
Can we also work on that team from Atlanta also?
You have a good poiint that I am glad you put it out there…HOWEVER….Daddy long legs are not spders!!!! Only six legs and one body segament. In an event, I am sure there are still more spiders in Cleveland than Native Americans. Go Spiders!!!
I wrote about the history of the name last week and switched to Spiders on the 13th.
The people that think that Wahoo needs to go are ridiculous. It’s stupid to suggest that sports logos and mascots subjugate other cultures. These mascots are time honored traditions, and our forefathers came up with them, not to offend other cultures, but to embrace them. Team names were chosen for a reason, and obviously the Indians name was chosen because of the massive Native American influence in that part of the country at that time (Cuyahoga River, anyone? Sounds like an Indian name to me)! It should be looked at as an honor that Cleveland chose to honor its Native America heritage by naming their team the Indians. Absolutely no one is trying to offend anyone here! I think the Native Americans, and all of the squeaky clean conservatives that find this offensive, need to take a look back at the history of our national pastime and see the real reason that some of these things came to be!
FWIW, the Atlanta Braves eliminated “Chief Noc-A-Homa” over twenty years ago. That character had only a quarter-century or so history compared to sixty years of Chief Wahoo, but shouldn’t it be a relatively simple matter to change the team logo?
I imagine one could argue that a prominent team might realize a significant PR boost - with some savvy marketing scheme - for being the first of the long-time holdouts to change the offensive nickname. (The NFL team in our nation’s capital city should be the first to start.) And, oh, the opportunity to push shiny new logo gear onto the market and reap the profits.
i was at the series in 97 and stood at the plaza for sometime and never saw anyone making fun of the protesters..barons are named for the rich families that lived in cleveland at the turn of the century along east blvd which is now mlk rockefellars of standard oil and others…are you sure you are from cleveland the lumberjacks moved to cleve from pennsylvania…duh…..hence the yellow and black (uggg) colors..are you sure you are from cleveland? hey indian names and culture are all over greater cleveland with counties rivers towns streets all named after tribes they should be honored..so why not the indians? the chief stays unill enough natives come forth and say they dont want it then it will go its that simple
GET A LIFE! You bleeding hearts are the same morons who want “In God We Trust” removed. It is a MASCOT!!!!!!!!!!!!! Go hug a tree
Is it me, or is calling someone “PC” about the laziest GD argument you can make?
I think it would be great if you guys dropped Wahoo. I think it would be great if you switched to “Spiders.” But mostly, I think it would be great if you stopped beating the Red Sox.
They should definitely change their names to the Cleveland Caucasians!
http://www.shelflifeclothing.com/shirtpages/caucasians.html
I just find it weird that the people who claim the mascot doesn’t matter at all — who say “It is a MASCOT!!!!! Go hug a tree” and “I think the people who think Wahoo needs to go are ridiculous” and “I expect you PC sticklers have a coronary” — are the ones who sound vein-poppingly angry.
America, land of the Offended. Please, worry about staying off dope, feeding your kids and getting a job!
It’s amazing how ignorant people are when it comes to issues of racial sensitivity and the history of race-based images. For decades, white and black performers alike performed in blackface, representing hilarious, broadly drawn stereotypes of African-Americans, and very few people considered it racist or problematic because it was “just entertainment.” Now, performing in blackface is looked on as horrifically racist regardless of the context — and even talking about blackface and minstrelsy in historical terms can be very problematic.
I believe that for the purposes of discussion, the Chief Wahoo mascot should be separated from the name “Indians.” The latter, though problematic to some, is not inherently racist, and, in fact, could ostensibly be seen as a tribute to the races and tribes that were practically wiped off the face of the earth by European-American white settlers. The mascot, however, is patently offensive, a cartoon version of what white Americans in the 1940s thought would be a funny version of an imagined racial other. Chief Wahoo — even the name is offensive — represents no specific tribe or individual, but a caricature of a multitudes. Although this mascot has no “power” per se, and doesn’t “actively” promote racial agendas or violence against American Indians, it is not a symbol that anyone should be proud of. Swastikas were used by the Boy Scouts and other organizations for years before World War II but aren’t any more with good reason. Symbols and our ideas of race change over the years. There is nothing wrong with encouraging the Cleveland base ball club to get along with the times and remove Chief Wahoo as an official logo from all team apparel and merchandise. A small thing, perhaps, but the least we can do as baseball fans who actually care about something besides ourselves and our own narrow history.
RELAX already, why do people feel a need to represent peoples and cultures that they are not a member of??? Chief Wahoo is a CARTOON character, do you fail to realize that?? When did it become wrong to name a team anything?? This did not start with the Washinton NBA franchise, HOWEVER when the Bullets were pressured into changing their name to the Wizards, it marked the beginning of the Whining American (casual-fan,or simply NON-FAN) Sports debate, worry about you and yours. Everyone else can do the same, if something offends you, IGNORE it but leave these American Classics alone. Turn your interests in solving “problems” to the problems in our education system, or the welfare or social security systems, or something a little more PERSONAL to you and your family, but leave things in the sporting world as they lie.
Ha HA ha sounds like a bunch of red sox complaining…go tribe
What the hell are we suppose to do, change the names of many of our states, thousands of our couties and cities and probably millions of our streets in this country because they have Indian names. Get real idiots!!
Got a several trillion dollars to make all these changes
Joe,
This always seems to come up with the Tribe is winning. I assume you were just as vocal when they stunk, right? Uh huh.
Good grief, if you really as good a writer as some say, can’t you find anything more interesting, and more relevant, to write about at this exciting time for Cleveland and the Indians than this junk?
Oh, and one last thing. I grew up in Cleveland as well in the 1960’s when the Indians sucked. There were a few of us who proudly admitted to being Indians fans, who got straight-A tickets from the Plain Dealer and actually sat in those row ZZ seats at the old stadim. And none of us thought Chief Wahoo was funny. He was simply the symbol of the team. I don’t know any kid who thought it was a joke. You must’ve hung around a strange crowd.
So leave it alone, Joe. At least for now. If you really want to drum up (oh, sorry, was that racist?) some lame “drop the Chief” movement then at least have the class to wait until this run is over. Throwing this racist garbage out now just detracts from a great team supported by a great city that is well-deserving of a championship.
Here is what it will take to end the whole business.
Some fabulously wealthy individual appears to buy a sports team which is on sale–baseball, football, doesn’t matter. He’s got the cash, he’s got plans to make the team a winner, yada yada. The sale is approved.
Then, once the whole transaction is official, that new owner reveals himself to be Cherokee, or Navajo, or whatever, and announces that his team will be renamed the (City Name Here) N—–s, with its new logo the most offensive Sambo caricature you can find. When the league of course threatens to prevent him from making that change, he points to the nickname of Washington’s NFL franchise, and/or to Cleveland’s MLB team mascot/logo, and points out that as long as those are accepted and in place the league has no standing to forbid that name change, and that he is willing to expend lots of money in legal fees to sue their saggy posteriors off to prove his point.
Only then will there be change. Not until.
But “Spiders” would be unbearably cool.
Thank god the Indians are getting rid of script “I” I thought they were trying to do away with cheif wahoo. Thank god chief wahoo lives on. Go Tribe!
Its time to worry about some thing different! if the indians were not going to the world series ( after they win tommorow ) there would be no problem. Your causing a problem,thats not there! I wear Cleveland Indians stuff all the time. NOT once has anyone said it bothers them. I have native american in me and Im fine with it. so shove it! There are more than the indians that could be changed. look at all the high schools that are named with some kind of refrence to indians. Its better than sox! sox always stink! who did you talk to that said that there botherd by the logo or the name. are they even native american? Its time to grow up! name 10 indians you know personaly that live in the usa. if you can do that i will be surprised. There is worst things going on and your complaining about a logo or name. more people care more about sports than they do about old history that basicaly means nothing. seriusly what difference is it going to make if you change one name/logo when there are so many out there,who knows how many there are. You will never please everbody! Let it go! watch the news later ( besides sports news ) this is a minor, minor problem. Basicaly Joe needs to drop it and find something else to write about. this is a country that wanted to change are language and in some parts of the country ( i read on the news) a school wanted to put up some mexican flag above are own countries! Now complain about that. some thing somebody needs to complain about! we got our priorities wrong!drop it!
Why don’t you people grow up and care about something that really matters. You have your heads so far up your ass you have to pipe air into you so can breathe. We as a society have lowered ourselves to the lowest common denominator for way too long. It is a symbol of a warrior, someone who fights to win. ake a good look at ourselves when you write to get on the band wagon to get rid of Wahoo. More pressing problems in this world than this. Just shows how stupid and plain ignorant people are today.
I agree that Wahoo mocks Native Americans. The question is what do you replace Wahoo with? Perhaps a proud portrait of Sitting Bull?
Ya know, it’s just a symbol. People don’t see the logo and have a laugh at the expense of Native American Indians. They see it and think of the baseball team. I’ve been a lifelong Indians fan, and I’d hate for the logo to change. I apologize if that’s offensive or I’m insensitive.
Jacoby Ellsbury better look around baseball. its all foreigners! M-o-r-o-n!!!
ATOM AND HIS PACKAGE, “If You Own the Washington Redskins You’re a Cock”
I like sports
There are some things I force myself to miss
like I never met an athlete I like and hockey in Texas
when it comes to native American nickname teams
Even within the context of sports it’s awful and mean
and you’ll go wah wah wah you’re so PC
and i will say hey wait
my my my how have the table turns to be a fucking prick is a desirable trait
While we’re on the subject of changing team names there’s no jazz in Utah
and few lakes in LA
just this once give me the benefit of the doubt
the bullets became the wizards, too violent? get out
and you’ll go wa wa wa you’re so PC
and i will say hey wait
remind me again how it came to be
that being a stupid american is a desirable trait
wouldn’t it be offensive if we cheered
“rah rah rah” for the Carolina negroes
with a beat box cheer and a big foam afro
the Minnesota Vikings became the New York kikes
with dollar bills on their helmets cause thats what they’re like
ya know Atom, What about the Saints, Angels and the Padres too
ain’t that the same thing for Christians thats offending you?
When there’s a Jesus Christ mascot shooting crucifixes
they nailed to a cross dying to save the team
you’ll be right, you’ll be right
but until then
you’re… not… right
so
what’s your take on Washington redskins
what’s your take on the Cleveland Indians
If most of the Native Americans “were practically exterminated from North America.” Then who exactly is offended? Other than self-rightous, guilty feeling white men, who really cares then? It’s not up to you, me, or anyone else to tell someone what does and does not offend them. If YOU have a problem with Wahoo, then, either change teams, or learn to live with it. If the few remaining Native Americans have a problem with it, then why not leave it up to them to solve it, just like anyone else?
Round and round we go again, with immeasurable venom spilled over something that, in the grand scheme of things, should not be so difficult to change.
Let’s be honest - it’s the commercial logo of a commercial enterprise that just happens to play baseball. No other enterprise in any field of business would be allowed to do business under a sign like that - just look at the nonsense around the Proctor & Gamble logo over something far sillier. Besides, changing the logo is, in a strictly economic sense, a rebranding opportunity that should allow the team to make a fortune selling the new logo hats, jerseys, etc. There are no real obstacles to the change, except perhaps the MLB approval process for this sort of thing, and every economic incentive to do so.
The individuals saying “It’s just a logo, get over it” should, I think be asking themselves a similar question - if it’s just a logo, why should they care if it changes? No one’s going to come to their houses and forcibly confiscate their old-logo t-shirts and hats, and if the change offends them so much, they’re free to root for another team.
“I’m X and I wouldn’t be offended if a team were named after my ethnicity” is an interesting argument to make, but hardly one that carries any real weight. After all, it’s easy to bandy in hypotheticals, but make it happen in real life and who knows what your actual response would be. And, of course, it’s always easier to be calm and collected, and to congratulate yourself for being coolly rational when it’s someone else’s ox getting gored.
Personally, I think the logo should go, for multiple reasons. It is a racial caricature of a sort that has long since been unacceptable in every other aspect of our society. It is a lightning rod for criticism that takes away from what should be the focus of the season - the play on the field. And, to be blunt, it’s goddamned ugly, and doesn’t make me want to wear anything that’s adorned with it.
But ultimately, I think the logo is only going to change when it costs the team enough money to make an alteration worthwhile against the inevitable know-nothing backlash that they “caved”.
skott Says:
October 17th, 2007 at 6:50 pm
“the indian’s wahoo logo is racist. period end of story.
you may not like it, but thats just the fact.
thats all we talked about for the past few games when watching. even worse than the Sox untimely hitting is the fact that there are people in the stands w/ the wahoo’s and the dressing up like native americans.”
Aaron H says:
Okay but who said anything bad about the Native Americans in the first place.Im part native american and im glad that were being honnord by somebody! who honors the native americans besides the sports teams? do you ever honor them? i’ve been to high school games and kids dress up as indians because there school name has something to do with indians! its not there racisist or anything there cheering for there team!Its harmless! .its every where! again how do any of you honor our native americans. nobody i know ever honors the native americans! heck if i remember correctly there are holloween costumes that are indian costumes. i never see anyone complaining about that! Lets start there with changing things! But we wont cause we dont want to make are kids suffer a day! boo whooo! who wants to dress up like Pocahontas anyways! who care? realy!
if everyone wants to idolize us natives do it in a powow like everyone else! if you want to root for us root for us in a court room not a stadium. if you want me to feel like i am a mascot to some corperate america keep chief yahoo and humpty dumpty singing their songs. i dont mind that we are portraid on ball caps or helmets or even mortor cycles, i just think if you are going to go that far might as well go all the way & take our image off cigarettes too. why let the buck stop at the stadium shops, everything w/ a N.A. logo (owned by non-N.A.) needs to be pulled. if the almighty dollar went back to a no name reservation out in tim-buck-too from the stadium, i might be comfortable. or maybe give a share of the team to a N.A. something but ya, theres my 2 cents.
Since “In God We Trust” was added randomly in 1956 to seperate America from “godless Communists,” and, as Teddy Roosevelt himself said:
My own feeling in the matter is due to my very firm conviction that to put such a motto on coins, or to use it in any kindred manner, not only does no good but does positive harm, and is in effect irreverence, which comes dangerously close to sacrilege…It is a motto which it is indeed well to have inscribed on our great national monuments, in our temples of justice, in our legislative halls, and in building such as those at West Point and Annapolis — in short, wherever it will tend to arouse and inspire a lofty emotion in those who look thereon. But it seems to me eminently unwise to cheapen such a motto by use on coins, just as it would be to cheapen it by use on postage stamps, or in advertisements
it would seem to me that it’s not the worst idea ever to remove God from money. And “under God” was also added to the Pledge in the ’50s, as a result of the cold war, and fears of those atheistic communists. So, perhaps that too could go the way of the worm. But maybe it’s just that my bleeding heart keeps staining the few dollars I’ve got left, leaving me with thoughts of blood money…
In any case, I hope Cleveland destroys the friggin Red Sox, then steamrolls the Rockies! I am so bleeding bored of the Red Sox…
GO TRIBE!!!!
I will preface this by stating that I am an Illinois alumnus for both my BS and MD. My ex-wife and son are Cherokee and my current wife is Oneida. I work primarily on numerous reservations such as Ojibwa, Lakota, Crow, and now Navajo.
When I attended the University of Illinois, Chief Illiniwek was not viewed as a ‘mascot’, but rather a symbol. In order to serve as Chief, an individual had to learn a Native American Indian dance, but moreso, had to symbolize the school. This meant appearing at grade schools to encourage education, appearing at elderly care homes, as well as numerous community events, while maintaining acedemic standards.
The activists who ‘complained’ about the Chief are not members of the Illini tribe. There are no known living members. In my discussions with my family as well as many of the Native Americans that I am priveleged to work with and serve, the primary response they give is that inappropriate characterizations of Native Americans is repugnant, but that removal of appropriate honoring of their cultures constitutes racism itself and the further attempt to further marginalize them and ultimately erase their culture. I have been asked when the State of Illinois will be forced to change its name since it also was named for the Illini tribe.
All this said, I do find the antics of the characterizing of Native Americans disgusting. This includes the image of Chief Wahoo and the Tomahawk Chop of the Braves. The Florida Seminoles are allowed their symbol simply because of a financial arrangement with the Seminole tribe. Most of these issues unfortunately are not morally decided or racially decided but economically so. The NCAA overstepped by changing Marquette from the Warriors to the Golden Eagles and similarly by threatening Illinois with sanctions if the Chief didn’t disappear from our children (which includes Native American children). The reservations that I have worked at have huge interest in basketball through high school which then often disappears in college. There are few symbols to look up to.
Warriors is a valid positive characterization and is the term Braves. It is HOW these impressions are given that is important. I am not sure if this fits, since I am not African American, but I think that while a team would be disgusting to call itself the Anywhere Slaves, the idea of the Anywhere Zulus might be appropriate with a logo that was appropriate - perhaps a spear. Remember, the Zulus gave the British all they could handle in the late 1800’s.
Political Correctness should encompass appropriate images and history. I am part Irish, but a leprachaun is not the only symbol of Ireland. I would not necessarily appreciate Sinn Fein logos, but having a symbol of the warrior Cuchulain would possibly be inspiring.
Enough diatribe - it comes down to perception. When we elevate a symbol, we honor it. When we degrade it, then we should all feel ashamed.
Doc
It’s a shame that a group of people have nothing better to do then go after something like a patch on the side of a uniform. How does this really offend anyone? It’s a symbol on a uniform, how in the world is this hurting anyone? Americas Game, seems to me, this isn’t America when people go after something so harmless. And why is the ” Race ” card always braught into things?! As long as people keep playing the ” Race ” card, there will always be race issues. I think Chief Wahoo is cool and he needs to stay. This group of racist card players need to use their time on ( Important) issues. Before you know it, we’ll have to remove the Dolphin off the helmets of the Miami Dolphins. Whats this world coming to?
Im sorry I dont think that there is anything wrong with the mascot for the cleveland Indians. THe way that we think today is absured. Just because there is a red faced grinning Indian as their mascot doesnt mean we are racist or unjust. and is sure doesnt mean that our forefathers were stupid..
Full disclosure: I am an Irish-American, Cleveland Indians fan who likes the name Indians but could take or leave the logo. I personally don’t find it racist, but I’m not attached to it either.
1. Just because a subset of people are Irish, or “Viking”, doesn’t automatically give them a free pass to be racist, even towards themselves. That’s foolish. If a small group of black people decided to field a team called the Niggers and use Sambo as the mascot, I think quite a few people would be shocked and offended. “Fighting Irish” is a stereotype - REGARDLESS of who picked it as a logo/mascot. The Irish were second class citizens right there along with the Native Americans for 100 years and there are some pretty nasty drawings of them out there too.
2. Simply being a member of a group does not give you the authority to declare something as definitively racist towards that group. You can be offended personally, but no single person speaks for a group of people. People CAN disagree within their own groups on these topics.
3. The idea that the Wahoo logo is racist is slightly weird to me. What is it depicting exactly that is so offensive? That “Indians” smile, have one feather and red skin? It’s anachronistic and the intent is likely to depict a competitve warrior.
4. Why would anyone want a goofy, smiling “warrior” as your logo? Wouldn’t you want a more repsectable representative, one worthy of being a warrior?
5. If the logo was less cartoonish and more realistic/historical, would that still be offensive?
Anyway I am not attempting to settle the discussion, just throw in my two cents. If I had a vote, I’d be fine with getting a new logo. But I’d rather like to keep the name. You can turn the whole thing on it’s ear and actually honor the culture (instead of making it silly).
I barely want to dignify Steve’s post with a response, but this is just totally absurd:
So here’s the message Luke wants to send: “It’s okay to deride and trivialize the culture of successful people in the majority, but not okay to do the same thing to minorities.” So you want to make the Cleveland WASPs, then?
You logic is nonexistent. The latter doesn’t entail the former at all.
You’re being reactionary, plain and simple. You can’t po