Is this inevitable?

It's not usually this grim.

Those who have protested against UIUC's chief illiniwek know well that things can get ugly. But rarely is it spelled out so ... clearly.

What shall we make of this?

The writer is certainly entitled to their opinion. But it seems likely that quite a few would disagree with this statement. Or would they?

The Letters are filled with views regarding the chief. Many favoring the chief express their feelings that the chief is an honorable symbol - and intended to honor Native Americans.

But we have to be realistic. As long as the chief dances on the field, there will be some who see him as much more than a symbol, but a right. A right for predominately white Americans to put any symbol out there we please, even if it clearly represents a particular race. And who is to say it isn't appropriate?

Really now - Native Americans who are closely tied to their culture and history make it clear that they are not honored by the chief. There is the matter of the historical treatment of Native Americans in our country. One gets the impression this chief is seen as one more hurt -- one more insult -- one more jab at them.

If you have read this far you were likely waiting for the punchline, the indignant outrage. Nevermind that: Read again the letter at top. Native people have said the "intend to honor" arguments appeared when the anti-chief protests began. The honor is looking a little thin. In the case of the author quoted above (yes, this was a real letter), there isn't any honor in it. "The victor dictates..."

The chief's presence guarantees a range of reactions among supporters, and some of those are a long, long way from honor. The university would likely distance itself from the blunt statements above, but arguably has to own up to some responsibility for perpetuating the environment in which such comments take place.

It becomes clear that such harsh feelings are not so rare when speaking with Native Americans in our community. Some have been harassed; some have been threatened. One commented on the irony that while the visible symbol is said to bring honor, "real Indians are not welcome here." Here in Champaign-Urbana, IL.

Indignation is on holiday. More than anything else, this situation is sad.

Quotes

• "[Get] a college degree and get out of town"
• "I think the mascot honors me. What are you going to do about that?"
• "Go back to your casinos, collect your welfare, food stamps ..."
• "Screw the wimps and the attorneys."
• "Why not work some place else if you do not agree with the Chief?"
• "SAVE THE CHIEF baby and screw you"

UIUC Responds to NCAA

The NCAA challenged the University of Illinois and other institutions with "Native American mascots or logos" to a self-evaluation, which the University has now completed. The University's response has come under fire.

In the Chicago Sun-Times, staff reporter Dave Newbart stated that UIUC "largely dodged questions on whether the school believes the chief is disrespectful -- or not -- to Native Americans."

continued in right column

"Why don't you leave"

A small anti-chief protest was held at Assembly Hall prior to the Final Four championship game. The picture that emerged was unfortunately familiar. The following letter was written to the Daily Illini.

Letter: Impolite Illini
Thursday, April 7, 2005

We were not part of the mass of people who spilled onto Green Street and the Quad after the men's basketball national championship on Monday. We were, however, among the throngs gathered outside of the Assembly Hall prior to tip-off. There, happy fans warmly greeted us with shouts of "F--- you!" and "If you don't like it here, why don't you leave!" Others acknowledged us by chanting cheerfully "We love the Chief, we love the Chief ..." One young woman asked us if we were part of a group and when we were going to leave.

During unpleasant moments such as these and others that include brute intimidation along with vulgarities and disrespect, we realize anew what is at stake in the now decades-long struggle for social justice on this campus.

We acknowledge the dozens - and perhaps hundreds - of people waiting outside of the Assembly Hall who wore shirts that communicated simply "Illinois" and made no reference to the Chief, logo and team name. Perhaps, these people made a deliberate choice. Maybe they identify themselves as silent allies of efforts to retire dehumanizing stereotypes. Possibly they are unspeaking opponents of the boorish behavior that far too often accompanies the caricaturing of American Indian people.

"We" are two professors and an undergraduate. We are tribally enrolled American Indians who know our people, our history and our traditions. There is a difference between American Indians and the romantic noble savage stereotype that manifests in the gymnastics and acrobatic antics of the high-kicking, dancing Chief Illiniwek and in the Fighting Illini logo and name. Our position is more than simply anti-Chief; it is pro-American Indian people. We understand that some people neither desire nor are obligated to understand our position, and so our voices often are rejected or unheard as supporters of the Chief and the media tend to distort our message, twist our logic or dismiss us all together.

As responsible citizens of this campus community, we insert ourselves on this matter to rupture the silence around racial injustice. We speak out for the purpose of demanding accountability, as well as to rewrite narratives of belonging on this campus.

If for no other reason than the acrimony and the antagonism that bubbles to the surface in ways that make it much more difficult to be an American Indian person than it ever should be, the symbol (or mascot or cheerleader), the logo, the team name and all other uninvited efforts to honor American-Indian people in University athletics must end immediately.

D. Anthony Tyeeme Clark
postdoctoral fellow and assistant professor

Debbie A. Reese
assistant professor

Genevieve Tenoso
University employee

While the NCAA said "It's not just for the sake of submitting something," the University was quoted as saying "If the NCAA thinks they need more information, they will let us know." UIUC professor Stephen Kaufman said of the report: "They don't answer most of the questions."

The NCAA will assess the member university responses in June, and take up possible action at its August meeting.

"The list of institutions which have dealt successfully with similar issues is long ... the list of those institutions still attempting to defer or avoid the obvious solution is very short." - NCA report

Remember?      March 15, 2004      Native Americans protest at the University of Illinois

Ten Reasons to Retire The Chief

1. Diversity. We do want a diverse, inclusive atmosphere welcoming of all cultures. 2. Stereotypes. The Chief perpetuates harmful, insulting stereotypes of Native people in a big way. 3. Publicity. The presence of the Chief has brought national disapproval to an outstanding University. 4. Racism. It was not the intention, and no one likes the "R" word, but Native Americans are very upset by the presence of Chief Illiniwek. 5. Children. Powerful stereotypes are particularly harmful to children - their self esteem and school performance.

6. Accuracy. Let's be honest - the Chief isn't the real thing. The dance is part of half-time entertainment. 7. Honor. Native Americans are not honored. Quite the contrary, they have made it clear they are offended by the Chief. 8. NCAA. In case you missed it, the NCAA has made it clear they are unhappy with American Indian mascots. 9. Choices. Potential faculty and students have chosen not to teach or attend the University because of the Chief. 10. Image. Call the Chief a symbol or a mascot - he is a public figure that harms the University's image.