Focus 580; Chief Illiniwek and the Academic Mission of the University of Illinois

We'll be talking a little bit more about the controversy surrounding chief Alon awake on the campus of the University of Illinois and elsewhere. This is a topic that we have covered from a variety of perspectives over really the past few years actually and a couple weeks ago we did a program with several students for chief ally network that's a new student group that has been established on the campus of the University of Illinois to speak out in favor of keeping the chief as a symbol of the University of Illinois. And this morning we'll have a different perspective. We have two guests in the studio with us and they are Brenda Farnell She's a member of the faculty of the anthropology department here at the University of Illinois the anthropology department recently issued a letter to the University of Illinois board of trustees essentially saying that the chief is harmful to the academic mission of the university and also directly impacts their work and has anthropologists. We'll talk a little bit more about that with Brenda Farnell during this hour. Also joining us is Mary Blanchard. She is a Ph.D. student in Educational Policy Studies and her specialty

is Indigenous education around the world not just a. Here in the Midwest and we will talk with them during this hour of the program and get their perspective on Chief want to work. As we talk we invite you into the conversation if you'd like to join us around Champaign-Urbana the number to call 3 3 3 9 4 5 5. And toll free anywhere you can here is 800 to 2 2 9 4 5 5 again within the 170 area code 3 3 3 W while L and toll free elsewhere. 800 to 2 2 oil well to both of you good morning. Well thank you. Good morning thanks for joining us. And Professor for now maybe I'll start with you and ask you to talk a little bit about what concerns you with regard to Chief Illiniwek and maybe that leader a little bit in more detail into this statement on behalf of the anthropology faculty here. Yes thank you. Well as a teacher and an anthropologist when I first came to this university just two years ago I very quickly began to

realize that my job was being made much more difficult by the kind of sentimental attachment that many students have to the symbol. And as I began to talk with my colleagues we realized that this really was a position that anthropology of all the disciplines should in fact take a stand on so a number of us got together and began to think about the effects this was having on our teaching and on our research and that was the start of the lettuce that we found. First of all that the symbol is promoting inaccurate information about the peoples of Illinois both past and present. We found that it was undermining the effectiveness of our teaching and deeply problematic for the academic environment both inside and outside of the classroom. We also find that it creates a very negative professional relationship in our dealings with the Native American communities and also adversely affects the recruitment of Native American faculty and students into our department and the university generally.

So these were all affairs that we felt were academic concerns and we felt that we were moving the debate forward by introducing this as an academic issue. Not merely an issue of human rights or racism and so forth. This is a statement from the anthropology faculty. It was issued in February to the board of trustees and it was published elsewhere in the octopus here a weekly paper in Champagne Urbana elsewhere. This spells out in some detail the reasons for the points that you made. You know I guess so. Was this something that was a unanimous statement from the anthropology. Faculty you know it began as a conversation between seven or eight of us who got together on our own time to discuss this and then we presented different versions of what we had to say to our whole department. We took feedback and so forth and then. And everyone who wanted to signed that I said OK.

There have been subsequently Well I guess shortly after that the University of Illinois University Senate passed a resolution urging the board of trustees to retire chief a lot of work. And we've also seen that several other departments in fact I believe 10 other academic departments have signed on to that urging the board. And I'm wondering has there been a response from the board of trustees to either your letter or some of those other statements. You know well from we haven't had any direct contact with the board of trustees we have only seen what's been in the newspapers along with everyone else. We're very heartened that some of the board of trustees have taken this as an academic issue affecting University very seriously and I'm willing to rethink the issue. We're also very disappointed that the others are rather transient and ignoring the ramifications this has for us as an educational institution. OK we'll talk some more about that but only bring Rosemary into the car conversation with me pleasured you are our students in Educational Policy Studies and I guess your specialty is Indigenous education. How did you come into this particular issue.

Well I guess when I say Indigenous education what I see there is a particular American Indian focus to what I'm doing I am a older graduate student and for a number of years I have lived in the southwestern part of the United States and for six years I was a policy analyst with the Navajo Nation in their education division dealing with education matters and then for eight years I was on the faculty of a community campus of the University of New Mexico teaching American Indian government Native American social problems and things like that in an environment where the majority of my students were Native American. And. I wish to to look more deeply into the global aspect of the attempts of indigenous peoples including American Indians to assert themselves more fully in the education of their children initially I was just looking at the education of their own children which had been taken out of their hands and had been used actually to undermine their culture. In exploring the issue as I have since I've come here I have found

it harder to separate the issue of indigenous peoples efforts to regain control of the education of their own children and the educational implications of how they are portrayed in the larger society of the nation state because that creates the context in which they are acting as tribal nations in that larger nation state and they are so often struggling rather than having their vision of themselves incorporated into the educational life of that larger community that they are communities within. They are having to struggle against it and often even in the education of their own children they are having to deal at home with the way in which their children have experienced being portrayed at school or on the media. And I would point out when the children are watching a national. Collegiate game they are going to encounter an image of themselves which their parents are going to be having to deal with when those children go home so I became more and more aware that I could not just focus on

my little question which is a big question of American Indians as indigenous people seeking to assert more control over their children's education. But the whole relationship of education in our nation state and its implications for either enhanced in the cultural survival or undermining the cultural survival of our indigenous people. OK. And then I began to realize this is going to be difficult for me when I get out in the field to be taken seriously on these issues when I am going to be associated with a symbol that. I would say the majority of native people I have encountered see as undermining their effort. I hope there's a lot we could talk about with regard to the educational. The history of education for American Indians and. We could probably talk with us the hour about this. But I wonder if we could at least to give people a sort of sense of what it is you're talking about to sort of review a little bit of the history of this because I think people may

not know too much about the boarding schools and so forth and some of the some of the ways in which. Indigenous cultures in this on this continent were you know sort of discouraged through the educational system. I want you to talk about that a little bit. Well that's again as you say I don't want to take the hour on this because yeah because the issue is certainly what goes on here. Yeah. But in fact. You'll find education written into many treaties and you'll think oh isn't that good acting. You know having hurt these people so much now we're going to give them education but it was meant as an as a continuation of the Conquest experience. You will turn your children over to was. We will take them away from you. We will educate them to no longer speak their language and no longer feel at home in the way of life they have come from. We will teach them that their way of spiritual practice is bad. I think one thing we need to look at in getting back to the outline of a controversy in addition to the impact of the boarding

schools and the education for cultural extinction. There was also a series of regulations which the Bureau of Indian Affairs a promulgated called the religious Crimes Regulations which took native religious practices and made them illegal. And there are stories in the families of people I have taught about the the marshals coming in and trying to break up a sialic o ceremony about the. Someone spending time in jail the great grandfathers or grandfather spending time in jail because of maintaining religious practice and I think people need to realize that when the native people who object to the chief the line of work situation are talking about how deeply they're offended when regalia that is associated with the ceremonial religious practice is used in an inappropriate way by someone who is not a practitioner. That that is tapping into all of that pain and injury from the wholesale assault and religious practice which was which was a part of their of their being conquered by

us. OK and just you know a quick follow up on this how recently were these sorts of I mean I mean we're talking in the boarding schools and the other sorts of prohibitions against practice religion and so forth. How recently was this in our history. Well. There's different manifestations of it. And again to this this gets to be very lengthy. There was the religious Crimes Regulations were finally let go in I believe the late 20s or early 30s certainly under Mr. Collier did not carry them out. However very recently our Supreme Court in Smith vs. Oregon Department of Employment Security. I maintain that the religious practice of the member of the Native American Church could be a reason for being fired. Right because they refuse to distinguish between the ceremonial use of peyote in a religious service and drug use. And therefore I think if you were to talk to native people certainly the native people with whom I have dialogue

they would say that the religion that the repression and misunderstanding of their religion goes into this day and within our prison system. Native American practitioners who have wanted to practice their ceremonial religious practice with prisoners in order to help them in becoming whole as a part of their are as a part of their rehabilitation. I have encountered prejudice against the sweat lodge against the way in which they practice the worst prejudices saying this isn't religious. If you come in here with a book and read prayers we will recognize that is religious. If you come in here and chop some logs and heat some rocks and sweat we're going to say that something else so you can't do it. So this is an ongoing problem. I want to ask both of you are either of you. To talk a little bit about your own experiences I mean we were discussing the idea that she thought the work impinges upon your your academic and professional activities and credibility and one if you can talk a little bit about any experiences you've had that sort of illustrate

this point. Yes I think I can speak to that both in the classroom and also in doing research. You know one of the things we're challenged with as professionals. Educating the future citizens of Illinois is providing accurate information. And yet I find that my colleagues have found this too when we try and provide accurate information about Native Americans in the context of stereotyping and cultural oppression and so forth. The. Chief airliner what symbol prevents any kind of deep reflection on that issue because with what we find is that students wish to retain a romanticized sentimental view of Native Americans in the past and they don't want to confront the rather uncomfortable. Use me in the rather uncomfortable history that is much more accurate. You know that is the native peoples of Illinois who were forcibly removed from their homes in this

region that they were subject to execution if they attempted to remain and that the whole romantic image of the symbol you know betrays a lack of awareness of the suppression and the resistance even to considering it as a part of our history. So you know those kinds of facts historical facts are uncomfortable for students to to contemplate because of course they they contradict the core values that this nation as a place of liberty freedom and justice for all people. But when American Indian peoples are excluded from that embrace as they were in the past and are today you know that the ongoing struggles over treaty rights and economic issues educational issues as Rosemary is pointing out and political resources and economic resources are contested then you know these are difficult facts to for us students to confront and we find that in the classroom the image of the chief actually. Discourages such deeply reflective

critical thinking of our own situation and we feel that you know our students the best to understand all sides of this complex history rather than maintaining a romantic view of what that history is about. Some of the students that I spoke with a couple weeks ago on this program from the group of students which you want to work would say to that that perhaps in the past that has been the case and that some of the abusive practices in the the truly objectionable character caricature is of Indians in the ways in which Chief Illiniwek have been portrayed in the past have been eliminated and that indeed we need to continue to make progress to make the chief more of an educational asset to the university and the use the phrase gateway to understanding that she can function as a gateway to understanding the Native American cultures. And you know they seem very sincere in saying that they would like to do more and that there is a need for more effort in this

direction do you think. I mean what's wrong with that well why wouldn't that. Well you know I think those sentiments are very laudable but you know let's look again at the facts involved in the case. If it were true that the presence of the alignment symbol on a campus and it's been here for 70 years let's remember that if it were true that that promoted student interest in American Indians then one would expect to find courses and programs. About Native Americans in the courses catalog right reflecting this interest now I invite anyone listening to actually go and look at the courses catalog. You will find there are no courses on American Indian history there are no courses listed in Educational Psychology Sociology religion health care philosophy comparative literature folklore none of these departments. Scuse me have any courses listed but deal with any issues of concern to Native Americans past or present. I was interested to look through the offerings in linguistics and again as a newcomer to campus I was I was looking for what resources supported my

own teaching in American Indian languages and cultures and I noticed that students here have a wonderful opportunity to study all kinds of languages for example African languages like Wolof and Zulu and Swahili and other languages like Hebrew and Hindi. But when I look to any Native American languages not a single one no Navajo no Crea no luck auteur not even the major languages of the two hundred and fifty languages that are spoken just in North America. None of those are offered on this campus. So again looking at the facts. Where are the courses to support the idea that the presence of the chief in fact encourages an interest in Native American Studies. It's not that. Let me just read it is our guest this morning we're talking with Brenda Farnell She's a professor of anthropology here at the University of Illinois and Rosemarie Blanchard. She is a doctoral student in Educational Policy Studies and her field is Indigenous education she has been an educator for some time as well working in schools serving American Indians.

And we're talking about the Shiva want to a controversy and how the chief affects the academic mission of the University of Illinois. If you would like to join the conversation you can do so by calling us around Champaign-Urbana at 3 3 3 9 4 5 5. And toll free elsewhere 800 2 2 2 1 4 5 5. Related I was going to ask you all do you know if if you could relate any experiences that you've had when you were teaching in American schools and so forth. Just how do these images and I suppose there are differences between for example the Cleveland Indian logo and she didn't want to work and so forth but you know you mention that. You would observe people's reactions to various ways in which Americans were portrayed on TV. Did you see any direct sort of reaction to for example chief on a work in this particular case. Well I think what I did is I had a class I was teaching on American Indian social problems and

one of my students took the question of the representation in the media of American Indians and did an outstanding piece of work on it and I think in a way when we asked the wrong question we keep getting the wrong or confusing answers and I'd like to suggest that the issue is not so much what is the particular manner in which the native person is portrayed but where do we recognize the locus of control over defining native peoples who they are what is significant about them and. This is where we run into international human rights issues. As a matter of fact under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which recognizes the right of ethnic minorities to culture and has in discussions of that before the the commission of the Commission of Human Rights in the United Nations has recognized indigenous people as being protected by that right. There was a study that was done on discrimination against indigenous people by a gentleman called

Jose Martinez Coble for the the Commission on Human Rights and the working group on indigenous populations. And one of the things that he said I just want to quote him very briefly because it's very important in how we look at this. The fundamental assertion must be that indigenous populations must be recognised according to their own perception and conception of themselves in relation to other groups. And here is where I think the problem we need to look at the problem it isn't a question of is chief align a wik more. More dignified than Chief Wahoo or whatever the other they call that other fellow on of the different ones but the question is are we appropriating to ourselves as non-native people the right to define what is an honorable depiction of a Native person. And where did we get the right to decide what is an honorable portrayal of a Native person other than by taking it away from native people with whom it properly belongs. And I don't see any way no matter how

you rearrange the regalia. I don't see any way of getting around that fundamental violation of the rights of all peoples to define themselves. You see another point about that you can't simply tidy up the symbol and ignore the fact that the majority of Native Americans certainly that I have been in contact with and Rosemarie as well as well as major national institutions the national education national Canadian Educational Association and so forth they are telling us that this is not an honorable symbol. It doesn't matter how much you tidy up it doesn't matter how accurate you make it. The very idea of having someone dressed in a different Galia at entertainment at a sports event is offensive and it's offensive for many reasons that most non-native people don't understand. And this is why I say that it affects our academic mission. You can't.

Teach students who are non-native that this kind of a portrayal is a stereotype unless they understand what what is accurate and from my perspective you know what part of that accurate information involves not only understanding how an ally night Chief might have been dressed in a 79 hundreds because he's a historical representation presumably but they would also understand that from the native perspective the young man portraying the chief hasn't earned the right to wear a coat or military regalia just as he doesn't have the right to wear a US Marines uniform and a Purple Heart. So it offends that tradition for Native Americans with accurate information. Our students would know that dancing and the wearing of traditional regalia is deeply connected with spiritual beliefs and practices and so. They would understand then why I put the Chiefs performance at an entertainment as an entertainment at a sporting event violates those religious

sensibilities of many American Indian people and they would also understand why American Indians are the only recognized ethnic minority in the US who are still subject to this kind of public stereotyping. You know this is the kind of deep thinking we want to students to be to be doing why is it that it's no longer appropriate safe for African-Americans to be portrayed with blackface or Mexican-Americans to be portrayed with you know the Frito Bandito whatever he was cold. Why is it that only American Indians are still subject to that kind of stereotyping. This is the question people need to be asking. It's not appropriate for any other ethnic minority. Why is it appropriate for American Indians. And I think there are some very interesting historical reasons for that as Rosemary alluded to it's about history a collective denial of a very uncomfortable history that really has hasn't come to the surface yet. OK. We have a couple calls to talk with so let's go ahead and do that. And before we get too much for that I should

also mention there's a rosemary Blanchard has to leave in about 15 minutes so I'm sorry we're going to lose her before run out of time here but for now I will continue to talk with us for the rest of the hour. We have a couple of listeners to talk with let's go to some one on one number one. Good morning you're on focus 580. Good morning. Yes good morning. My family goes back to three time homesteaders and I that's why I know that about 40 or 50 years ago maybe even longer. There are some deterrent who went through central Illinois and made history. All those families and people they were very caring thing about the end dancers who were washed to get the land and that that's something that I never really learned about in Illinois history. I think that that first chapter or not history that just wants to be forgotten and I was definitely at home fit and what it is.

To be forgotten and I didn't get into the history books. That's something to lock into a land of fresh university you know racial of Illinois. What does that mean. How does that play into this. Probably. I think there's an odd kind of conscious desire to play the night a whole grand jury homesteader and the Indians that could be part of this. Yes I agree with you entirely but that is is a part of history that that hasn't been examined. And as I indicated earlier for very important reasons it's an uncomfortable history but it's one that we really need to come to terms with the fact you are going to be adequately equipped to be students of a global community and if you act at the bank. City University what has what it what it but its origins are as a land grant university. Really rests

on a total denigration of the Indians. Yes. Some may have or may have some part in the board of trustees. Maybe some of their families go back that far but it made it good. Something we don't talk about it's not nice to talk about. That's it that might be another attack you could follow. I think your comments are very very insightful in that regard it is absolutely something we need to to think about more carefully. You might be interested to know that the the very first performance of Chief airline I worked was an interesting reinvention of history. In 1926 when the very first performance was staged on the football field there was a little drama that was a part of that and the University of Illinois was playing the University of Pennsylvania. And at the half time what

happened was William Penn a figure represented dressed as William Penn came onto the football field and met chief ally in a wake. And they shook hands and the band played and so forth. So it was a wonderful invention of history that played at what I call a feel good history. It was wiping out the actual facts of the disruptive and dreadful history of the treatment of native peoples the the wars and so forth that went on. What it did was it was a race that actual history and create the way in which we would like to think history had being that Indians and settlers shook hands and we're all happy now we all get along and you know let's just. Play this game. I think that's a very important part of the history that it was at first a staged drama that was especially designed to eliminate the actual facts of that history but to create something that we could all feel good about. Paul Teresa the last caller lines are awful and I want to get on includes many people's as possible. One

quick follow up though. One thing that that is heard by people who support Chief Illiniwek when we talk about the history of Native Americans in Illinois is that the Lonny essentially were driven out and annihilated by other Indian tribes and that this is this is one reason why it's OK perhaps that you know we're now portraying the a lot in what we regard as a very dignified manner. And it's not necessarily appropriating any other culture because that culture was essentially wiped out by other similar cultures of Native Americans working to see about that. Well again that's a history that absolves the thrum any responsibility. Now certainly. The history books tell us that there was indeed tremendous conflict between native peoples as well as between settlers and native peoples. But we also have to realize part of that was exacerbated by the Western movement of non native peoples who were pushing groups that were located for the East like the

Iroquois and so forth into Illinois Territory and so there is tremendous competition for resources and that fueled conflict between native peoples Not that it wasn't there before. You know I don't want to promote the notion of Native Americans that is a romantic stereotype they of course had their wars and disagreements and so forth but it's inaccurate to suggest that this was somehow their fault and outside of the arrival of Europeans into the area they said we weren't wiped out disease and into a tribal war as well as wars between settlers and native people. Certainly diminish the numbers until as far as we can tell there were only about one hundred fifty people from what had been a Confederate loose confederacy of about 12 Illinois tribes and they didn't call themselves this but outsiders called themselves Illinois Confederacy. One of those groups were the Peoria and the descendants of the Peoria those hundred and fifty. Real remnants if you like off the people who were removed

from the state of Illinois now live in Oklahoma. So those those are the only direct descendants. But again as I say the the rhetoric of they wiped each other out therefore it's not our fault. Serves the same function as the the drama on the football field between the feline week and William Penn. It makes as it absolves us from any responsibility and it certainly doesn't explain in line with regalia. Which is a sort of ersatz Lakota and which no one claims is in any way an authentic representation of how the online I would have looked in when they were living here. So what I see more is and this is we need to remember that we are an educational institution and this I think is one of the one of the undermining of our own mission that the anthropology faculty was talking about. We find ourselves rather than trying to or understanding's of an issue trying to front grab onto anything we can say that lets us continue to

do what we want to do and that is inconsistent. I would say with the attitude of open inquiry which is supposed to be the environment that institutions such as ours would be fostering. And yes and that is why in the anthropology faculty letter we stressed that. The symbol in and of itself undermines our teaching because the sentimental attachment many students hold for the symbol overrides any critical reflection. And so that undercuts our goals as educators to foster the kind of cross-cultural understanding but also critical self-knowledge that is required for citizens of the 21st century who need to live in a global environment. Very good we have several of the callers In fact our lines are full to let's go on include some more listeners. So one on one or two next. Good morning you're in focus 580. Good morning. First I want to say that I talk called in last year and think we should be the ally bears or something of the University of Illinois bears this just change it.

There's plenty of other symbols and I'm sympathetic. I think we've made some great injustices in our history. Toward the Native American. And there needs to be restitution. However there is a couple of comments that have been made that I feel might trump up the case in a way that's maybe not productive. There are all kinds of minorities and people groups in America that are. Are treated unkindly in our media and in our tainment it's not right to say that Native Americans are the only group to have this happen. Michael Medved he is on public broadcasting has done a video on Hollywood's systematic slandering of Christian evangelical Christians and Catholics and a case in point let's take a look at Saturday Night Live and Father Guido Sarducci wearing a priest priest clothing investments and so on.

Not even authentically. And talking about how Jesus didn't really walk on the water. It was Billy Christ on that Jesus was standing on his shoulders. I mean how you can be your own pope order of be your own pope. GET THIS IS IT. And when people like James Dobson and focus on the family talk about well what we find is no one wants to listen to the way your goals are characterized on television and in the media. Oh I agree entirely. We're not trying to foster the notion that Native Americans are the only people subject to racism and derogatory stereotyping. But I think your comment is very pertinent in that it draws attention back to this is accurate. As an academic issue we must ensure that the educated members of our population are sophisticated enough in their thinking to be able to combat this kind of lack of respect for people who are different than ourselves.

Yeah I agree we're mean country. You know a lot of weight. I think that it's very well the comedian at the University brings to the university attend some of the loaded with mean spirited attacks on all kinds of people women. And I need to run. But. The William Penn issue. If I would have been in the stands watching that what I would have seen is a statement saying it's a long time since Penn and the Indians battled things out. Things are better today. We want to make peace. It's not a re characterization of history at all. And and I think that there is a desire in a lot of these public ceremonies to and I'm sure it doesn't reflect reality either that the restitution hasn't been made but that desire is being put forth at that moment by those young people in those costumes. But then if then if it is how can we say we're honoring Native people if we refuse to listen to the protests. You know the this is again the

issue of respect for not only Native Americans that you say were tending towards a very mean spirited attitude towards any people who are different from us that I agree. Yeah I think you know we need to learn and this is something that our country is learning slowly. Actually glacially I think and that is we need to learn how to be respectful in an environment in which people are different from each other and in which those differences are not going to be homogenous ised into one type somewhere along the line. And I see a direct connection between the inability of some segments of our population to see the insult in the portrayal of American Indians by non-Indians in ways that Indians find insulting and the inability of others in our population to portray Catholic priests and fundamentalist Christians in ways that they would find offensive and not to see the offense in that we seem to be saying that the real issue is who gets to

treat her in that way and we have not learned to see the issue as treating other groups in that way in the first place. So perhaps. There is an educational opportunity in the pain which Chief online a wick causes to native people and their courage in expressing that pain. To begin to look beyond just the question of the particular image that is and who is it painful to. But the fundamental question of the. Human wrong if you will as opposed to a human right. I've taking a group of whom you are not a part and portraying them in a way that they find offensive in a public environment for the entertainment of people like yourself. So I think I am glad you brought up these other occasions where the same practice is done with another group it shows how deep I would UK tional effort needs to be on respect in a globally diverse environment.

Well very good we have our lines were firm My apologies again for the last call I want to move on. And also Rosemarie I think you have to leave pretty quick here so dear if you can if you want to hang on for a few more minutes or OK well let's take another call then this is I believe All right. We have listed on line number three next. Good morning you're in focus 580. Good morning my time as an Anglo I am deeply conflicted about chief ally. I remember freshman in nineteen sixty six watching the dance and it was the best part of the football game. It's a it's a great entertainment. Yeah but as I've been listening to your conversations more you think I'm coming around more to your way of thinking. I think I'm more offended by the nickname fighting a line I maybe even than Chief of my network. Maybe the relocated align higher the defeated a line or maybe just a line I do think it's important though for us to try to keep a sense of place and people that have been here before us. And

but I'm more offended by the nickname fighting a line I think than probably anything else you know it's it's a very dramatic dance. It could serve as the gateway I suppose although listening to a conversation that seem like it is and I've always felt that you know he was more of like you said of playing costume rather than a prairie woodland tribe. I'm living along the banks of the Illinois River in Peoria Ill. All right it's not a problem. You know I wish you well but you know what. Thank you for your calm and thank you for your for your openness. As you say in an accurate representation is is really problematic you know it's as we said in the anthropology faculty letter you know it's the direct equivalent of representing Italians or Germans with someone dressed in a Scottish kilt playing the bagpipes or more Polish people being represented by a Russian Cossack. You know these things or

are offensive to people who who are as Rosemary said being represented outside of any consideration of their of their feelings about him about this but it is an issue I think you're right. There is an extremely important connection to land and history that is embodied in the symbol but I think we could find other symbols that would do this without stereotyping any particular ethnic group. Let's make it a history that we can all be a part of and which unites everyone who is here on campus rather than excluding want to minority and the Native American students on this campus and the native people in the state certainly do not feel welcome on this campus. And I think this will have to be my last comment alas but I think you know we need to look at and acknowledge the fact that without in any way recognizing that the appropriation of a native identity was in fact culturally offensive to

Native people and in fact contributed to the to the denigration of their culture in our larger environment without meaning to do that at all. Many people drew a great deal of pleasure from going to a game and seeing a line of work in that sort of before knowledge phase. And I think we don't need we don't need to beat ourselves up about things like that those activities that people engaged in with their families in the open air that gave them pleasure. Those are good memories of good moments. And the question now is now that we have come to a level of understanding that there are other families that are hurt deeply by this portrayal and the Native American women who have been students here with small children have particularly talked about the harmful effect on their children of the environment that this creates. Now that we see there are other families that are hurt by this. What we need what I what I think. It's the best way to protect those precious memories that people have of themselves is not to

hang onto it in a different context in a different climate. But to say that felt really good then knowing what I knew and not knowing what I didn't know. And I'm glad for the time I spent with my family and friends and for the warm feeling we had. Now I want to create an environment where families can sit in that warm feeling here and now. If Chief a light a wick stands in the way of that for some of the families of our community then let us find a symbol that we can all join behind and we can again innocently sit with our family without having that innocent pleasure undermined by the fact that some people are deeply injured by that particular symbol that we've used so I don't think there's a need to in any way denigrate memories that we have that are pleasurable to was and there are times that we strengthened our tie of family and community. Now I alas do have to go. OK. Well Rosemarie Blanchard thank you very much. You have another Again we understand. Thanks for talking

with us. We will continue on for another 10 minutes or so with Brenda Farnell professor of anthropology here at the University of Illinois we're talking about what controversy and the impact of Chief Leiweke on the academic mission of the University of Illinois. Our lines were false so I want to make sure we go ahead and include as many people as possible for anyone. I just wanted to add one thing I think the previous caller raised a very important issue about emotions and the way in which they the presence of a few feline and his three emotionally stirring and how people that's what people remember is a very positive experience as Rosemarie said for for families to hang on to. But again when we reflect upon the ways in which those kinds of emotions can be manipulated for good. All manipulated for bad like traditions you know one has to evaluate those in context. And you know for example we know that all kinds of political and religious leaders can stir up that kind of emotion. Now leaders like Martin Luther King did it to extremely positive effect. But we also know that

leaders like Hitler Mao Tse-Tung and so forth stood up exactly those same kinds of mass emotions for very negative purposes. So again I would I would ask supporters of the chief to just think about whether the the source of their positive emotion is in fact one as Rosemary said that is now of the Jewish summit concern given that we know this is offensive to Native Americans. OK we'll talk with some listeners Next up someone on line number one. Good morning you're in focus 580. Hello I forgot my numbers at me. That's you yes. OK. I just wanted to say I barely want to take your time because it's such a wonderful program and both your participants have expressed what I was with a person have felt and been unable to articulate and I thank you this is wonderful I hope it's being taped I hope the board of trustees sits and listens to it over and over. You have covered so many issues and covered

them so well particularly these lesser ones about the sort of visceral effect of the chiefs and so on and so I am astonished that alumni who are articulate and sophisticated mature and persist in saying they will not. Moniker of the universe. If the chief So quote you address something like that as well I find it just wonderful I want to see the letter from the Department of apology and that's right after I get off provided it makes the call. Thank you and I'd be very pleased to send you a copy of that letter if you if you contact me. Personally. One of the things anthropology I think brings to this issue is understood as an attempt to understand both sides of the story and you know one thing we do understand is that for many alumni the symbol doesn't in fact in many ways represent Native Americans what it report it symbolizes for them is their commitment to the university.

It's a symbol that for them represents the wonderful times they had here as an undergraduate or graduate student. And so. We can find other symbols that will promote those same kinds of feelings and I don't undermine the importance of those feelings it's very important for an institution to to have symbols that unite people in that way. But we have to be very careful about the way we we choose those symbols. And I'd like to just say a word about tradition. You know that. Traditions are very important of course and as an anthropologist it's something I study very carefully. But traditions in and of themselves are not always all noble and what we find here is when times and moral sensibilities change we often have to change the symbols that we we are attached to and I think this is way where we are now with this particular symbol so I would love to hear from people who have ideas about a new symbol for the University of Illinois that would do all those things that supporters of the chief want the symbol to do but

what we need now of course is a symbol that unites the campus right now we have a symbol that divides and that does not make for an effective campus community and it doesn't make for an effective symbol any longer. Well very good we have several other callers waiting and just about six minutes left during this hour will go on include as many people as we can. Next in line number two good morning unfocussed 580 Is there a color there. Yes yes yes right. Got Good morning. I just might try briefly I think for address one of the things the last caller statement about support. It should be noted that in discussions with and other institutions that have made similar changes over the past 30 years we've really learned that any negative response from the moms or the local community is always short lived. And this is especially true when the leadership from the top was strong and. Unfortunately that's one of the problems in dealing with this that we haven't had strong leadership coming on the campus.

Moreover I want to say I've been following I your programs in the last week there are some very appropriate direct to specs on Paul Robeson and on Dr. Martin Luther King. And I just have a feeling that that that they would be much more taken by the people in the community actually not paying homage to them but getting out and actually doing the work that they started. And one suggestion that I have is is is that W I L L actually follow their lead and discontinue the reference to the term fighting a line I when they're referring to a university athletic team. And you have watched the students and faculty have voted in the Senate. It seems that there's no rationale for continuing that certainly what we heard from your guests today is you know it's a great deal of rationale not to do that so I'm asking that you allow to join in now and not just report history but participate in the making history.

OK. Well I hear your comments and you know I'm sure there will be something we'll discuss. Well I hope I think you're right that the people who who actually make the Struma nations trust you to have a role to play and I appreciate the role you're playing today. In dealing with this issue. But you can't you can actually be doing on much more. If I may make one other comment. And and that is there really is quite a bit of poxy on the part of the board of trustees because of their past policies which are part of the actual code that our students follow. Like stipulates that that's that we all have a commitment to the programs within the law to ameliorate or eliminate rape possible the effects of the fire start side of discrimination and what we find that support doing instead of acting to ameliorate on women eight to start service to nation they're actually choosing the opposite path. So I hope that your

listeners realize this kind of hypocrisy we can't expect our students to behave in one way where the board is behaving in quite the opposite way and I think that the public now needs to get in touch with the board and. Thank you for the call. Yes thank you for your comments I think it's very interesting I think we have a fundamental contradiction. You know the UIUC wants to promote itself as justifiably as an outstanding world class educational institution. And there are certain fundamental responsibilities that go with that in terms of promoting a climate of inclusive A-T and diversity so that all peoples of the world can feel welcome here on this campus. But there seems to be a contradiction between that responsibility and that image of the university and the desire on the part of the board of trustees to maintain a very local sort of loyalty to an outdated mode of representation that has symbolized the university in the past. And

I hope they will give some serious consideration to to the fundamental responsibility that certainly the faculty are very concerned about and that is our reputation as a world class institution versus this very local notion of how we should be portraying ourselves. We just have about a minute a half left I'm sore to say there are two other callers I won't be able to include in the discussion but we will continue this topic at another time I can promise you that just as a way of wrapping up and we have seen a lot of activity recently just this past weekend there was a conference on the campus sponsored by some student groups and some American Indian groups on the elimination of racist mascots as as they describe language and so forth. There have been a number of university departments that have come out and urged the the Board of Trustees of the university to retire the Chief Deveau to the faculty senate the letter from the anthropology department and so forth and the board in its hearing I believe yesterday or the day before I may be getting my days mixed up here. There was a public comment

period where our number of students urged the board to consider these these issues and to engage in dialogue. And the board has simply said that we're not going to and we're not going to really talk about it right now anymore until something is something new. I guess the way wrapping up you know what do you what do you think is going to happen or what would you like to see what would you hope to see happen. Well I'm glad you brought that up it's very distressing. At a democratic institution to find that people who we look to for moral leadership on these kinds of issues instead of responding to new information from faculty and students in fact close the door to any dialogue that's very very disturbing and I would hope that those members of the board of trustees who are willing to rethink this issue will try to enlighten their colleagues on this issue that it is something that affects us academically and that they have a responsibility to promote our interests as a world class institution.

Well we're going to have to leave it there since we're here at the end of our time and I'm sorry there's much more we could talk about but anyway we will stop there Brenda Farr Nell professor of anthropology here at the University of Illinois has been our guest and leaving us just a little bit before the end of the program Rosemary Blanchard who was a doctoral student Educational Policy Studies. And thanks very much for being here. Thank you very much.