I've been saying for years that the best way for people to "Save the Chief" would have been to endow a huge scholarship fund, tied directly to the Chief's existance, that funded scholarships for Native students, to the UI and elsewhere. This is far too little and too late to save Chief Illiniwek, but I'm excited that it has happened all the same, as it's the right thing to do, regardless of the fate of the Chief.
Students at the college will get some financial help, courtesy of the Council of Chiefs, an organization of University of Illinois graduates who portrayed Chief Illiniwek over the years. The group will announce today the beginning of a fund drive to raise money for the Frank Fools Crow Scholarship.
The scholarship fund is named for the late Mr. Fools Crow, an Oglala Sioux elder from the Pine Ridge reservation who made the headdress and buckskin outfit worn by those portraying Chief Illiniwek. The UI retired Chief Illiniwek last winter, and the Oglala Sioux Tribal Nation has asked the UI to return the regalia. UI officials are still trying to resolve the fate of the items.
While that issue was brewing, Short Bull suggested establishing the scholarship.
"We're not entering into the controversy of Chief Illiniwek," he said. "I know people on the reservation will appreciate having something to remember and memorialize Frank Fools Crow."
Tom Livingston, who portrayed Chief Illiniwek in 1988 and 1989, said such a scholarship had been part of the discussions of the Council of Chiefs while the fate of Chief Illiniwek was being decided.
"We felt it was meaningful to support the Oglala (Sioux) tribe and Chief Frank Fools Crow, who was a true champion of education and opportunity for his people. And he was good to us. We don't forget our friends," Livingston said.
Discuss.
As someone who despised The Chief, I have to say this is a great idea.
ok, so where are the anti-chief folks now? It appears that the pro-chief groups are doing positive things for Native Americans. Where is the PRC, Stephen Kaufman, Dean Cook, Charlene Teters, et al.? The Honor the Chief Society and the Council of Chiefs should be commended for their acts of service.
As someone who thinks that the retirement of the Chief was painful but necessary, I think that the pro-chief side is showing their integrity more and more. They are truly doing something honorable. Can we say the same for the anti-Chief crowd, who just disappeared as soon as the Chief was retired? What are they doing now? How are they working to actually help Native Americans?
----
Robert Dunn
Ex-Leftist, Born-Again Conservative American
Robert, you're right. Just because you don't know and aren't willing to do any research, they must not be doing anything.
I've posted to Illini Pundit in the past and continue to read it. I worked towards the end of "Chief Illiniwek" but myself and others (Native and not) also worked towards the establishment of the Native American House (NAH) on campus, and an American Indian Studies (AIS) program. The Native House and AIS host guest lectures and offer several courses each semester. Our events are listed on the campus calendar (http://www.uiuc.edu), and our NAH calendar, too: http://www.nah.uiuc.edu/calendar.htm The Urbana-Champaign community is welcome to NAH and our events. Our program is one deserving of much pride for UIUC. We have a program that has, in a short time, become one of the best Native Studies programs in the country.
Robert - I frequently contribute money to the Native American College Fund. I don't feel it necessary to call a press conference to publicize the fact I did it.
Let's please see this "charity" for it is -- an attempt by the pro-Chief factions to win favor from the Oglala so the tribe will stop asking for the regalia back, and perhaps in the future, support a new mascot. I'm surprised it took the pro-chief people this long to figure out they should try to buy support, instead of spending $84,000 (the amount the Honor the Chief group has spent according to my last look at the Illinois Attorney General's website) on things like billboards in Champaign.
On the other hand, their money spends just the same....
Jay
They disappeared? Was it magic or something?
I will grant IP this much, it's good the "Chief" supporters are finally doing something like this. Too little, too late.
But why didn't the Council of Chiefs start with a scholarship to UIUC itself? Could they not scrape up enough money from their many enthusiastic "supporters of Native American culture" to do that? The fact that the scholarship to the college on the res amounts to $500 each tells me that may be the problem.
Or did they want to test the waters first to see if real Indians would be willing to attend any college with the "Chief" supporters' support? Maybe the tribal chairman is enthusiastic, but who can blame him for saying that, given the little support that Native American scholars have received generally? I'm sure he wants all the help he can get for his people. Once again locally, such support has been through the Native American House, not from the realm of the Athletic Department or the Marching Illini.
And this "generosity" pales in comparison to what's expended at UIUC on football and basketball scholarships. Heck the Athletic Department could give up ONE of those and afford a young Native American scholar the chance to attend UIUC.
Finally, the way to really honor Frank Fools Crow would be to return the regalia. It was purchased by a former UI official who bragged to Athletic Department supporters about what a deal he'd gotten from an old man down on his luck while soliciting funds to cover its modest cost, which somewhat taints the "honor" associated with it. The UI has also never provided a full accounting for the eagle feathers that they illegally purchased with the rest of the regalia, only to be forced to restructure the transaction years later once the UI's legal beagles realized they might just have a federal scale legal problem on their hands if they didn't rewrite the deal they made with Fools Crow.
"But why didn't the Council of Chiefs start with a scholarship to UIUC itself? Could they not scrape up enough money from their many enthusiastic "supporters of Native American culture" to do that? The fact that the scholarship to the college on the res amounts to $500 each tells me that may be the problem."
Just speculation on my part, but I suspect the fact that the Chief has already been retired has hurt fundraising.
As I said, the time to do this was 20 years ago, and they should have endowed as many scholarships for NA students the UI as possible, with the stipulation that the scholarships go away if the Chief goes away. Cynical and underhanded and dispicable, maybe - but if it was supporting a good cause for the wrong reasons, is that so bad?
Anyway, it's all pointless now. The NCAA has gotten its way.
"And this "generosity" pales in comparison to what's expended at UIUC on football and basketball scholarships. Heck the Athletic Department could give up ONE of those and afford a young Native American scholar the chance to attend UIUC."
Just a point of clarification - at UI, all athletic scholarships are funded by athletic revenues. The DIA is self-supporting, so no "academic" funds go towards football or basketball scholarships.
"And this "generosity" pales in comparison to what's expended at UIUC on football and basketball scholarships. Heck the Athletic Department could give up ONE of those and afford a young Native American scholar the chance to attend UIUC."
Just a point of clarification - at UI, all athletic scholarships are funded by athletic revenues. The DIA is self-supporting, so no "academic" funds go towards football or basketball scholarships.
IP,
Yeah, I understand that. My point was, maybe it is time that a small portion of Athletic Department funds were allocated to support academic endeavours for a change. I guess that is a concept just too far beyond the pale to consider...even in a richly deserving case such as this. After all, the AD made lots of bucks exploiting Native American culture. It could be time to give some of it back, especially if no one in the AD wants to honestly address the issue of the regalia.
I'm the third generation of my family to attend UI, and I used to think that the Chief and the logo were cool because they represented Illinois and tradition. But later, the Chief seemed archaic. Years ago, many people thought that it was OK for white people to dress up in blackface, and one Illinois high school (Pekin?) used the "Chinks" as a name for their sports teams. Now we look back and say that times have changed, and people didn't know any better back then. I thought that history would probably take a similar view of the Chief someday.
As far as the history and tradition of the university, I really like looking at some of the old photos and portraits, and walking through some of the buildings where my grandparents may have attended class. The sports mascot just seems irrelevant.
"After all, the AD made lots of bucks exploiting Native American culture. It could be time to give some of it back, especially if no one in the AD wants to honestly address the issue of the regalia."
I hope you understand that reasonable people disagree about the DIA "exploiting" Natives.
I hope you understand that reasonable people disagree about the DIA "exploiting" Natives.
Yeah, I realize that also. The $500 scholarship from the CoC is sure to convince many that the "Chief" issue is finally giving Native Americans their due.
If giving the regalia back is too tough to do, how about founding a scholarship fund for the support of Native American scholars at UIUC based on 10% of the income from the sales of "Chief" merchandise over the years? Oh, I forgot that's already been spent on football, basketball, and other academically important stuff.
"Yeah, I realize that also. The $500 scholarship from the CoC is sure to convince many that the "Chief" issue is finally giving Native Americans their due."
It may convince many, but not all of us - as I said, it's a nice gesture, but it should have been done in much greater magnitude long ago. And, for me, it has nothing to do with "giving NAs thier due" as much as it was just the right thing to do all along for a group of people that should have been doing more than cheering to "honor the Chief."
"If giving the regalia back is too tough to do, how about founding a scholarship fund for the support of Native American scholars at UIUC based on 10% of the income from the sales of "Chief" merchandise over the years?"
I think that's a great idea, and again something that should have been done decades ago. Unfortunately, it's no longer a possibility - the NCAA has decreed that those of us who buy or sell Chief merchandise are racist, the Board of Trustees has agreed, and so such merchadise sales have been disallowed.
The DIA is not exactly "self-supporting". Every U of I student has to pay an "athletic fee", essentially a DIA tax that goes straight into the DIA's pocket. This tax amounts to about $2 million per year to the DIA. If you want to attend the U of I, you have to pay the tax. Hardly self-supporting.
"The DIA is not exactly "self-supporting". Every U of I student has to pay an "athletic fee", essentially a DIA tax that goes straight into the DIA's pocket. This tax amounts to about $2 million per year to the DIA. If you want to attend the U of I, you have to pay the tax. Hardly self-supporting."
Good point. I can't remember - is that fee specifically related to buildings/physical plant, or is it for operations, or both?
"Unfortunately, it's no longer a possibility - the NCAA has decreed that those of us who buy or sell Chief merchandise are racist, the Board of Trustees has agreed, and so such merchadise sales have been disallowed."
Not true IP, and I know you know better. The NCAA did not decree that people who buy or sell Chief merchandise are racist. The NCAA decreed that the Chief symbol itself is racist. A big difference. This kind of rhetoric doesn't help anyone. And yes, I also feel the same way about people who call Chief supporters racist.
"Not true IP, and I know you know better. The NCAA did not decree that people who buy or sell Chief merchandise are racist. The NCAA decreed that the Chief symbol itself is racist. A big difference. "
I'm sorry - the difference doesn't seem very large to me.
Those of us who wanted to keep the symbol, regardless of our perspectives, were told by the NCAA that doing so was unacceptable and that we were supporting a racist symbol. The UI BoT agreed. From my perspective, that's an official sanction that we're racist and supporting racist symbols.
But it's all a moot point anyway. The NCAA and UI certainly don't care, and there's nothing that can be done about it.
Debbie, i am sure that the Native House is sincere. However, what is the Native House, the PRC, and others doing to make sure that those who supported the Chief are not being vilified as racists? I know many decent people who are committed to a lot of good causes who supported the symbol. My grandmother started a girl scout troop in the 1950s that consisted of an all African-American troop. This was at a time when the African American community was strickly segregated from the white population of Champaign-Urbana. She risked her reputation, endured threats from actual racist white folks in CU for doing this.
On the other hand, i have met quite a few "anti-Chief" folks who are some of the worlds biggest jerks. Debbie, did you agree with Professor Kaufman when he was contacting prospective student athletes, discouraging them away from UIUC because of Chief Illiniwek? I thought that was the lowest thing that the anti-chief side could have done. Most of these athletes contacted were from low-income, minority backgrounds whom were probably the first to be given the opportunity to go to college. I remember being at anti-chief events where folks like Michael Haney were screaming at Chief supporters, calling them, "rednecks, white trash,etc." This was during a scheduled silent march. For those who care, the term redneck refers to poor white Southerners who had to work out in the fields all day. Their necks were so burned that they had permanent necks that were red. It was a slur created by wealthy Northerners. White trash should be obviously offensive.
Folks on both sides have been horrible representatives of their cause. I do not think that the vast majority of the Chief supporters were throwing beer at us, spitting at us, etc. As well, the vast majority of Chief supporters were horrified at the Facebook message.
But, why is there total silence when Chief supporters are compared to Nazi's, Klansmen, etc? I am not saying that Native students are doing this. Maybe it would have been a better idea to have never associated with the PRC, I-Resist, and other radical leftist organizations. Those organizations were the ones using inflammatory rhetoric against Chief supporters. Outside of a few individuals, i commend the actual Native Americans who were protesting the Chief of being more diplomatic.
Now is the time to bring healing to this issue! I think since the anti-Chief folks won, maybe they should extend a hand in reconciliation to the rest of the campus/CU community who have been affected by the retirement of the symbol.
Robert - If you feel the Native American House is responsible for the behavior of every single person who agrees with their cause, then you and all pro-Chief people are responsible for the people who threatened me and my family.
Don't blame us for the occasional idiot on our side, and I won't blame you for the idiots on your side.
Jay
IP - again we have to disagree. The difference between calling the Chief racist and calling people who like the Chief racist is profound. Let me try to give you an example: Newt Gingrich is an adulterer. If I like Newt Gingrich, does that make me an adulterer?
Jay
"Don't blame us for the occasional idiot on our side, and I won't blame you for the idiots on your side."
Cosign.
"IP - again we have to disagree. The difference between calling the Chief racist and calling people who like the Chief racist is profound. Let me try to give you an example: Newt Gingrich is an adulterer. If I like Newt Gingrich, does that make me an adulterer?"
I don't think the analogy is apt. Let me try one that is a little more illustrative, using a symbol that is obviously racist, without conceding that the Chief is such a symbol.
John Doe really likes burning crosses, particularly when they're in the front yard of minorities. Does you think his affinity for such symbols make him a racist?
To me, the NCAA and BoT have officially ruled that the Chief Illiniwek tradition is akin to burning a cross in someone's front yard - that, as a symbol Chief Illiniwek is racist. I disagree with that ruling, but that's the offical and final decree. Now, do you think someone who has an affinity for something that has been officially labeled as harmful and damaging and intimidating is racist?
The NCAA and BoT certainly do.
I think the real issue is not enough was being done to encourage and promote the academic opprotunities of Native American students by supporters of either side of the Chief issue. The Chief could have been used to raise awarness, unify people and raise money for Native American scholorships. Now the Chief is gone and what has changed? Is the UIUC campus less "hostile and abusive" as it was decreed by the NCAA now that the Chief is gone? Both the anti-Chief groups and the pro-Chief groups have argued about the UIUC symbol for almost 20 years now. In that time have things improved for Native Americans on campus as much as they could have improved had the energy used to argue for 20 years been put to more productive uses?
I agree with Robert--why aren't the Native American studies organizations doing more to defend the rights of people of the most persecuted groups like pro-chief people and people from Pekin, IL, and people who like to dress as ghosts on days other than Halloween (let's call them "ghost enthusiasts")?
Personally, if these Native Americans don't stand up for people like Robert Dunn, they clearly are not real supporters of Indians.
Maybe one day people will stop wasting keystrokes on this subject.
I'll start after this period -- .
Maybe one day people will stop wasting keystrokes on this subject.
You're right. Keystrokes are so precious that they should not be wasted on discussing Native American issues. Maybe we shouldn't waste keystrokes on any minority issues and save all the valuabe keystrokes for the important issues, like those that only affect the majority.
(Note: written with a sprinke of sarcasm, in case it was undetectable)
"I agree with Robert--why aren't the Native American studies organizations doing more to defend the rights of people of the most persecuted groups like pro-chief people and people from Pekin, IL, and people who like to dress as ghosts on days other than Halloween (let's call them "ghost enthusiasts")?"
You know, Pekin changed it's team name nearly 30 years ago, a couple years before I entered high school. And yet people still bring it up as if it is recent history or has any current relevance. Pekin seems doomed to be forever stamped "land of the racists" in central Illinois. Never mind that, although predominately white, it is currently more racially diverse than it's neighbors of similar size: Morton, East Peoria, etc.
Thanks for contributing to Pekin's image problem. Between the people from outside Pekin who continue to point the town out as an example of racism based on things that happened decades ago and the idiots inside Pekin who insist on buying "Chinks" merchandise because they see themselves as "Chinks" not "Dragons" due to their period of attendance I don't think this image will ever die. (Although I have to agree that "Dragons" sucks. At least as portrayed, it loses the Chinese imagery. Pekin was named after Beijing China. I think that connection could have been maintained with respect.)
The chief should never have been turned over to the department of Athletics. He was a product of the department of Bands and should have stayed there. His routine was a part of a marching band performance, not cheerleading and thus had more to do with the arts than athletics. Do we now ban any other performance art based on Native American culture? Which is the offensive part: that the marching band used Native American inspired imagery and dance in its performance or that that imagery was adopted and used by the University for marketing and merchandising? If it's the first, then we also have to ban things like "Porgy and Bess." If it's the latter, I can see the point.
TomB, I understand the frustration, but I'm not speaking from that perspective. I am fully aware that the name has been gone and that there is still a market for the memorabilia in Pekin. That was the population I was thinking of. Obviously, that doesn't apply to every single person from Pekin or who lives in Pekin and my apologies for the ambiguity in the original post.
Certainly, you could see how that would be troubling--not only historically, but also in the present--to those of and those who empathize with people of Chinese descent.
Additionally, the spectre of Pekin as a sundown town is something that must be acknowledged. The idea is not to vilify those in the present for past sins. It is the fact that there is a desire to bury such things that reflect contemporary inability to face the past and ensure that it is not replicated in the present and future.