The controversy over the University’s athletic symbol stands at a deadlock and has done so for more than a decade. Given that it is reproduced constantly by two identifiable “sides,” wisdom suggests that neither side is right, if only because neither position offers a viable resolution of this campus conflict. On one side, the advocates of a non-racist American future have not created a context for dialogue about the values, sentiments and meanings of athleticism at Urbana-Champaign. Without having this dialogue, they cannot start a conversation about the best way for some (current or subsequent) University athletic symbol to represent those ideals.

At the same time, the claim that the athletic symbol honors American Indians of the plains region is patently absurd. I would be surprised if a single person could be found who maintains close contact with an indigenous community within this country’s expanse of 50 states and is recognized by that community as indigenous and believes the current athletic symbol at the University honors his or her community. In either case, it is still a small number of those who feel honored.

If the aim were to honor those peoples, we ought to have worn the black of mourning – superimposing the familiar blue and orange against a black field and called ourselves something like the “Men in Black.” – to express grief over tragic moments of U.S. history that should resonate in all of us. We would be exhibiting something far nobler than anything that emerges from the controversial, rancorous situation that prevails today.)

Secondly, until real dialogue occurs, those who favor a change of mascot cannot be seen to possess any alternatives. Until the advocates of a racism-free campus regroup, they will not occupy a position to propose names or mascots that are free of ignorance – ignorance that, during Euro-American settlement of the United States, combined with feckless state administration and murderous planning to produce genocidal episodes. The primary issue at this moment of our campus history cannot be whether to keep the current athletic symbol but what values we want to embrace together. Once this is done, the rest will follow.

Steven M. Maas

graduate Student