So before I comment on the whole Chief Illiniwek situation, let me first give some background…

In my life, I have been represented by three mascots: in grade school, by an unnamed and generic viking; in high school, by Charlie the Crusader; and in college, by Donald Duck.

Yes, I attended the University of Oregon, where every item of mascot apparel in the bookstore came with a tiny white “Copyright to Disney” mark.

(Actually, I was a member of the Clark Honors College, who referred to themselves as the Odd Ducks and had a platypus mascot.)

So what’s my take on the Chief?

Blah.

There you go. I’ve said my piece. See you next time. Same bat time, same bat page.

What? You mean that’s not enough.

Sigh.

Okay, here goes then: mostly, I’m against the Chief.

A mascot should be fun and silly. The moment it gets too serious or symbolic, then the battle has already been lost and any controversy over and done with.

It should be packaged, tossed in a basement, given a “Do not open until X-mas” sticker, and promptly forgotten.

Symbolism is, by definition, not a direct and literal statement, and thus can be interpreted many ways – both good and bad. When a mascot arrives on the field and starts cartwheeling about, people should be smiling, not wondering if they can write their next philosophy paper on comparative mascotry.

Really, my problem isn’t with having the Chief or lack of Chief, but with the whole controversy itself. It’s like every other hot button political topic: I’ve been yelled at to be pro or anti by so many people with so many hoarsely shouted arguments that I don’t want to say I’m pro or anti out of spite.

Most of my recent ire has gone to the pro-Chief forces, mainly due to the condescending, “Oh, you poor, misinformed protester” tone of many recent statements and letters to the editor.

And I still can’t wrap my brain around the idea of showing off a dance many people think is insulting in order to convince them it isn’t insulting. That seems like it would be as effective as a hippie trying to convince her parents of the virtues of free love by holding an orgy in the front yard. It doesn’t matter how many experts line up to attest to free love’s positive qualities: there’s still people doing it behind the hydrangea.

But, that said, I’m not deaf to the pro-Chief arguments either. As I mentioned earlier, my high school mascot was Charlie the Crusader, and this was a Jesuit high school. There was the occasional talk about whether Charlie was a proper mascot for our school. Was he insulting to Muslim students, or should crusader just be interpreted as “cross-bearer,” which is what the word originally meant?

Why didn’t it ever become a serious issue? Because Charlie was always shown with a massive jawline that would be out of place in even a B-grade action flick, and as he was taken as seriously as his overdrawn chin, it never became an issue.

I don’t mind being at a school without an official mascot.

I’m one year in and still trying to get used to orange and blue as a color scheme, after having been blue and yellow, or green and yellow my entire time in school.

And I still prefer being a platypus anyhow.

Joseph is a graduate student.