Seminole Tradition

By Charlie Barnes, Executive Director - Seminole Boosters

It was during this 30th Anniversary Bobby Bowden Tour in April and May that the latest assaults against Florida State University and our embrace of the noble Seminole tradition were launched. Now, the NCAA has been pressured to become involved in the issue. Tommy Bowden has said of his father that he is a good and decent man during the week: God-fearing, loving and kind and all that, Tommy says. "However," the Clemson coach cautions, "On game day, daddy is strictly Old Testament. He's going to smite down his enemies; it's all fire and destruction then."

We are locked in battle now with the politically-correct crowd: activist opponents who will never relent until they have broken us to their will. If we are to win our right to be who we are - and I believe we will win and that we must - then like Coach Bowden our spirit for this fight must be forged in the fires of absolute resolve.

I'll be writing more about this in future issues of the Report to Boosters as events unfold. Below is a column that was first published in April, 2001. At the time, our President Sandy D'Alemberte stood strong and square against any compromise in our use of the Seminole symbol. Our new President T.K.Wetherell appears to be just as solid, just as determined. Following the April, 2001 column is an excerpt of a column from March, 2004.

April, 2001

The New Yorker advertises itself as "the best magazine there is…probably the best magazine there ever was." Its political inclinations aside, The New Yorker fully deserves its self-adoring description. The magazine's wonderfully urbane cartoons have been catalogued and compiled into coffee table books for generations. One cartoon published in the late 1920s is an enduring favorite. In the drawing, an upscale couple has attempted to convince their precocious toddler to eat something good for him. He wants no part of it, and it's obvious that they've fibbed and told him the substance is something other than what it quite plainly is not. The baby's blithe dismissal of the whole discussion is: "Well, I say it's spinach, and I say the hell with it." See cartoon on Newyorker's cartoonbank.com.

These last few months, we've seen the latest attempt by the usual suspects to feed Florida State University some spinach by calling it something else and trying to make us feel guilty for not eating it. The "Indian mascot" crowd at it again. First, let's define the terms. Words have meanings, and it's not by accident that the PC police deliberately use the words 'mascot' and 'nickname' in their rants on this particular issue. One of their goals is to get even neutral parties to make routine use of the terms they choose. 'Mascot' and 'nickname' are meant to be dismissive words; they are used to lessen any argument on our part that our use of 'Seminole' honors a courageous people.

Specific words are used to frame issues precisely, and the way they are framed by their proponents often determines public's perception. When we speak of Osceola, we refer to it as an honored 'symbol'. The distinction between mascot and symbol is important. "Human beings are not mascots", they say, and so they are correct. Osceola is not our 'mascot', and neither are the Seminoles.

Uga the Bulldog at Georgia is a mascot, as is Florida's Albert the Alligator. The FAMU Rattlers, 'Ralphie' the Colorado Buffalo and 'Bevo' the Texas Longhorn are all mascots. At California-Irvine, they have Peter the Anteater. Now that's a mascot.

It is very much in keeping with our university's rich history that we selected the triumphant Human spirit as our enduring symbol. That unconquered spirit is perfectly characterized in the history of the Seminole Tribe of Florida. One of the foremost sculptors in the world has been commissioned to create a twice-life-sized bronze statue of a mounted Seminole warrior. That statue will stand on a pedestal in the center of Williams Plaza, directly in front of the University Center Club, at the end of Langford Green. Although Osceola, the great war leader, is widely seen as the personification of our University symbol, this bronze figure is deliberately intended not to be reflective of a specific person. The statue will symbolize the Florida Seminoles themselves, and their unique history as the only unconquered Indian people.

On Friday, April 13, the United States Commission on Civil Rights voted four to two in favor of a statement urging non-Indian schools, from elementary levels through collegiate, to drop the use of Indian images and team names. According to press reports, the statement does not refer to professional sports teams such at the Atlanta Braves or Kansas City Chiefs, but rather is specifically aimed at the use of team names and mascots in schools. Their reasoning is that students, especially those in elementary and secondary schools, have little choice in which school to attend, and so cannot avoid being offended if they are inclined to be offended.

The Commission's vote has no force of law, but the vote is seen by activists as another weapon, and an important one, in their campaign to change the use of Indian names and symbols - they always use the terms 'mascots' and 'nicknames' - at the nation's educational institutions. Of course, they favor the tactic of focusing on high profile targets, like FSU as well as the Fighting Illini (Chief Illiniwek) of the University of Illinois.

While the Commissioners may have sincere motives, some of their information appears to be incomplete. Commissioner Elise M. Meeks, a Sioux Indian, called Florida State's Osceola figure "comical, insulting and demeaning [because he is] dancing around." I do not recall ever seeing Osceola dance around, nor behave in any way comical. On the other hand, two Commissioners argued against the statement, saying that it was too broad and could divert attention away from truly serious problems faced by the Indian population. The two successfully got Meeks' original draft of the statement changed so that the final version affirms the Commission's respect for the First Amendment and the freedom of expression.

There's no doubt that the Commission's vote has boosted the energies of the radicals. A collection of rogue Faculty members at the University of Illinois says it intends to disrupt the recruiting of student-athletes if Chief Illiniwek is not removed. Last summer they actively discouraged Oklahoma basketball coach Kelvin Sampson from accepting a job at Illinois. When the University of Illinois Trustees announced it would form a 'task force' to examine the issue, that was not enough for the extremists. Said radical professor Steven Kaufman, "It sucks." Nothing less than complete capitulation, and right now, will slake the radicals' thirst for making you do that which you do not want to do. Kaufman smirked about the "inevitablity" of their victory on the issue.

Such is the arrogance of the radicals. It is probably very much like the arrogance of the United States Government officials who demanded the Seminoles complete surrender, over and over again, through the span of the 19th Century. Those officials no doubt assured the Seminole leaders that their fight to remain free would inevitably fail, that they could not possibly win, and that it would be better to give in now than to risk the wrath of an enraged enemy.

In the coming months and years, you will hear versions of those same arguments directed at Florida State, and with the same arrogance. These radicals are not so much interested in reason or in fact. For most of them, this particular issue is just the issue of the moment. They're not doing this because they're inspired by the power of a moral issue; they are motivated primarily by the burning desire to force you to do something that you do not wish to do. They're doing it because they can.

So far, the reaction of main stream media columnists has been, well, surprising. Columnist Florence King, writing in the National Review, spoke in another context about the danger of not squarely taking on one's attackers. "There are only so many battles we can remain above before the enemy decides that we won't fight."

Skip Bayless, sports columnist for the Chicago Tribune, took on the Illinois issue directly. "Maybe I'm too much of a middle-aged white guy to comprehend why faculty members are threatening to [disrupt recruiting]. Maybe the insensitive redneck in me makes me think these professors are motivated by the jealous nerd in them… They crave the publicity that comes from driving an unstoppable politically correct bandwagon spilling over with knee-jerk liberals, so now they're trying to make a name off their basketball team's climb to national prominence."

Media commentator Roger Ebert wrote, "We live in the State of Illinois, named for the Illini Tribe of Native Americans. It was inescapable that the state university would celebrate an Illini Chief…The Chief was never a 'mascot', and indeed goes so far back that he pre-dates the use of 'mascots' for most sports teams… A case could be made that he was the single most positive public image of Indians in Illinois." Ebert goes on to say that Illinois is "under attack from a small, self-righteous coalition that wants to wipe [Illiniwek] from the university's history," and that the actions of the radicals "must be balanced against the inhibiting climate of political correctness among today's academics."

Political columnist George Will notes that "America overflows with specious 'victims' demanding redress for spurious grievances." Dallas Morning News columnist Ruben Navarrette writes "Tantrums aimed at companies and corporations have become the stock in trade of some of the nation's most well off grievance organizations."

Columnist Jeff Jacoby of the Boston Globe weighed against the Commission's statement. "So this is what 'civil rights' has degenerated into?" he writes. "Does it really need to be pointed out how idiotic all of this is? No athletic team chooses a name or a mascot in order to bring contempt or disrepute on itself. On the contrary…Cleveland's ballclub would never have changed its name to "Indians" in 1915 if "Indians" was an insult. Chief Wahoo is no more a racist icon than the Celtic's potbellied Irishman or the San Diego Padres' roly-poly, bat-swinging monk… If teams with Indian names portrayed them as savages or alcoholics, outrage would be the appropriate reaction. But they don't. They depict Indians and by extension themselves as noble, courageous and fierce. The Fighting Sioux is a title of honor just like The Fighting Irish."

Catherine Donaldson-Evans, political writer for Fox News, addressed the legal issue. She quotes Roger Clegg, general counsel of the Washington-based Center for Equal Opportunity on the suggestion that the use of Indian names could violate someone's rights. "That seems to be a stretch. [They] were chosen not to ridicule or denigrate American Indians, but because of admiration for them and their martial virtues like bravery and fierceness." Clegg concedes that some Indian symbols and names could indeed be construed as racially insulting, she says, but he insists that to categorically condemn the use of all American Indian mascots is silly.

Donaldson-Evans concludes her column with Clegg's dry observation that "The Civil Rights Commission apparently doesn't have enough to do."

Our President, Sandy D'Alemberte is widely respected as an independent thinker and a champion of progressive causes. There may be an assumption on the part of those who press this issue against us that Sandy will lend a sympathetic ear, or if not, that they can successfully employ threatening tactics against him. That will prove to be unwise on their part. They will not find Sandy D'Alemberte to be an easy mark, and they may make the mistake of attacking his character and credentials as a champion of civil rights. In fact, I want to be in the room to see what happens when they waggle their pompous, collective finger in D'Alemberte's face and call him a racist. D'Alemberte places great value on the virtues of civility and gentlemanly courtesy, but our President does not suffer fools gladly. They will not be able to intimidate D'Alemberte, nor bully him, and they do not have the ability to defeat him in a contest of wills, nor of intellect.

When the time comes - and that time will come too soon - one of these sanctimonious actors from the fever swamps of America's political guerilla theater begins to take you to task about how you are a racist because you refuse to relinquish our honored tradition, tell them what you think of them and their charges. Call it what it is. Well, actually, polite society discourages us from using the precise term. The most accurate term is that two-syllable word for a specific agricultural by-product. I suppose we could employ a substitute term; 'heifer dust' would do. Or, use "spinach" if you prefer. I say it's spinach and I say the hell with it.

Let us prepare ourselves, and harden our resolve for what is surely coming. We are going to be attacked. We are going to be called names, and there will be attempts to threaten and embarrass our institution. Let us determine now, that our response in all cases will not waver.

We will endeavor to engage in the sort of measured and courteous discourse that reflects the higher purpose of our University, and to address the issue in an atmosphere of grace and good humor and civility. There cannot, however, be any doubt as to the strength of our resolve on this matter.

There can be no compromise.
There will be no "task force."
There will be no negotiations.
There will be no surrender.
No. Period.
No.

Would a great people like the Seminoles, descendants of Osceola, expect anything less from their namesakes?

This excerpt was published in March, 2004 after protests over the "Integration" statue depicting 1970 Homecoming Princess Doby Flowers wearing a Plains Indian headdress.

The usual suspects are at it again. Those who make a profession of being offended are swooning and gasping for breath over the recently unveiled statuary of our 1970 Homecoming Princess Doby Flowers.

The sculpture is actually comprised of three statues. One is of Doby, FSU's first black Homecoming Princess. The second is our first black varsity athlete, her brother Fred Flowers who played baseball for the Seminoles. Third is of the late Maxwell Courtney, FSU's first black student enrolled in 1962. The entire structure is an impressive work by local artist Sandy Proctor titled "Integration." It was dedicated several months ago in concert with a celebratory Heritage Day reunion of all black FSU alumni.

Political and historical implications of the piece were all considered carefully and amicably over the course of its creation by then-President Sandy D'Alemberte, Proctor and Fred and Doby Flowers. Because of the significance of Doby's election as the first black Homecoming Princess the decision was made to portray her appearance as accurate to the time. Up through the early 1970's our Homecoming Princess traditionally wore an elaborate feathered bonnet actually more representative of Plains Indians. Thus, Flowers' Princess headdress is represented in the sculpture as it was in reality. As in all things of this nature, FSU sought the opinion and approval of the Seminole Tribe of Florida, and such approval was granted.

Now enter one Mike Graham, activist from Oklahoma, earnestly flailing his arms and threatening lawsuits. He has already filed official letters of protest with FSU and the Florida State Department of Education and is busy planning demonstrations. His demands include removal of the statuary until it can be cleansed of its offending particulars, after which he may allow us to put it back up again.

FSU's response so far has been terse. The sculptor, Proctor, dismissed the complaint as "Ridiculous." Vice President Lee Hinkle, the University's only officially authorized spokesman on matters related to our honored Seminole symbol, said "We don't intend to take down the statue and we don't intend to take any further action." No doubt President T.K. Wetherell has also had something to say, but so far has eschewed any public comment for the record. Those of us who know the President sense that entertainment value aside, this is probably best for all concerned.

News of our small tempest here reached the University of Illinois where the ongoing controversy over Chief Illiniwek is far more contentious and far more pervasive. The UI held a campus-wide non-binding student vote on the issue this month. The referendum asked: "Do you support Chief Illiniwek as the symbol of the University of Illinois at Champaign-Urbana?" As of March 18, the unofficial results were 4,027 in the negative, and 9,161 voting affirmatively in support of the Chief.

I have dear friends among the UI alumni and they hold very strong feelings on this issue. And, recently I did get an inquiry asking for advice on how Florida State had managed to "come to terms" with the Seminole Tribe of Florida concerning Indian symbolism and our University. The objective of the inquiry was to find some way of bringing the two sides together at Illinois. I regret that my response was not more encouraging. From what I can tell there are not many parallels between our situations that they would find helpful. On the other hand, the University of Illinois does have a very large, very affluent alumni body standing very much in support of the established tradition. This resource of alumni if properly organized should be sufficient to fight off any challenges that would destroy the long Chief Illiniwek tradition.

Florida State University has certainly had an advantage in that there was never any original controversy here that we had to "come to terms" with. We never had to undo any pre-existing damage or conflict. FSU's relationship with the Seminole Tribe of Florida was built carefully over time and under amicable conditions.

The Tribe was made aware of FSU's genuine respect for their tradition and culture, and Tribe representatives participated in all aspects of the creation of the present Osceola symbol. At the unveiling of the sculpture Unconquered last fall - a work depicting no specific historical figure but rather the indomitable Human spirit expressed in the Seminole people - officials of the Tribe participated in the first ceremonial lighting.

Prior to the modern era FSU did display a few cartoon Indian images that would be inappropriate today. Fortunately for us, our University deliberately moved away from that long before it would have caused public controversy.

Those who oppose the use of Indian symbolism will always and under all circumstances use the word "mascot." The word mascot suggests a cartoonish figure or an animal. It's a way of controlling the terms of the debate. They'll say, "A person is not a mascot." I think we can all agree that a person is not a mascot, so we must define the debate in our own terms. A person - for instance a Minuteman, a Mountaineer, or Osceola - can be an honored symbol. We take great care always to refer to Osceola and to the unconquered spirit of the Seminole people as an honored symbol, never a mascot. The depiction of the Minuteman, the Mountaineer, even the Fighting Irishman as honored symbols has been successful and is widely embraced.

I do not think our two situations, Florida State and the University of Illinois, are comparable and I'm sorry that my friends are caught up in the middle of a very difficult conflict. It's unfortunate that there may be little chance of an easy resolution at UI.

The position of many of those opposed to Chief Illiniwek is rooted in political agenda. The position of alumni may have hardened beyond compromise. I'm told UI Chancellor (President) Nancy Canton makes a point of standing and turning her back every time Chief Illiniwek appears on the field. Dr. Canton is leaving Illinois this summer to take the presidency of Syracuse University (are Orangemen politically incorrect?). It is unknown whether her vocal anti-Chief comments had anything to do with her departure. It's a very disheartening atmosphere in Champaign-Urbana, and one that should make us aware of how fortunate we are here at Florida State. This fall when more than 80,000 of us gather in our gorgeous showplace stadium to ring in Bobby Bowden's twenty-ninth season, we can be assured that all of us - from the President's box to the sidelines - will cheer the arrival of Osceola together.