If The Blackhawks Win, Do Native Americans Lose?

Posted by Abe Sauer on June 9, 2010 10:00 AM

The Chicago Blackhawks could win the National Hockey League's Stanley Cup tonight, when it faces the Philadelphia Flyers. One of these teams boasts a name and logo that many find insulting and insensitive. Can you guess which one?

A sports columnist at The Star sums up the possible hockey champion's branding problem: "At a time when sports leagues and schools around North America are either debating the dubious value of having native peoples used as mascots and nicknames or getting rid of those mascots and nicknames entirely, the NHL and the Chicago Blackhawks seem awfully casual about it, supremely confident that no one will dare question the racial sensitivity of the large aboriginal likeness that serves as the logo of the hockey club."

According to the team's official history, the Blackhawks took their name from their founder's WWI division: "Members of his division called themselves Black Hawks in honor of the Sauk Indian chief who sided with the British in the War of 1812. Surely, the Major felt, it would be a fitting name for the newest entry into the National Hockey League."

Today, many Native Americans claim that the logo is insensitive and insults their heritage. Of course, multitudes of Blackhawk fans say the logo honors Native Americans and that fans treat the mascot with nothing but respect. Yet, the logo does invite stereotypes.

In recent years, both the University of North Dakota (Fighting Sioux) and the NFL's Washington Redskins have been inundated with lawsuits attempting to force the respective organizations to discontinue their use of such logos.

Will the Blackhawks be next? If the team wins the Stanley Cup, the logo will only be further ingrained in the team's deep history and, consequently, even more difficult to change. Those interested in seeing the Blackhawk logo disappear from Chicago may find themselves cheering for Philadelphia tonight.

More about: Sports, Naming, Chicago Blackhawks, Philadelphia Flyers

Tom says:

This is a response that I sent to the sports columnist to which you refer, I found great irony in his story being laid out next to a poll regarding the Boston Celtics. Considering that the Celtics are named for European tribes, I wonder if either of you would advocate for changing team names such as these? How about the Vikings, Trojans, Spartans, etc?

I am not fundamentally opposed to the idea of ridding sports of degrading or insulting names and images. I do find it the height of hypocrisy that we are very quick to vilify those who support teams named for a minority as culturally insensitive at best and more often as racists, but as long as a tribe is "white" all is kosher. I can get behind the idea of removing names like Redskins that can be offensive. However, to advocate removing sincere tributes to tribal heroes seems to actively slight historical contributions of those groups and trivialize them as a source of inspiration for people of different ethnic groups. This is not the cartoonization of a generalized concept of a tribe, this is hero worship of an inspiring warrior who happens to be nonwhite. Apparently whites can only pay tribute to white heroes. Would it be offensive if the team was the Chicago MacArthurs or Pattons? I suspect not, even if the logo was a somewhat stylized exaggeration of reality complete with ivory handled pistol (the Sauk traditionally were woodlands indians and the logo is a simplified representation of some woodlands ceremonial head decorations, check out some of the photos and painted portraits of Chief Black Hawk and some other tribe members). My guess is you would are would only be offended if teams were named were the Shakas, the Atilas, the Zapatistas, or that's right the Blackhawks; I assume you have no problem with Rebels, Yankees (Civil war era slurs), Vandals, or Minutemen.

By the way Roberto Luongo's mask has a lumberjack on it, should he be bared from using the image for fear of offending Canadians?

I actually do not begrudge people seeking to do away with offensive names and imagery, but not all teams named for non-whites are cartoonish and offensive. To act as though they are, is a huge mistake and only leads to a greater degree of resentment among all ethnic groups.

June 9, 2010 10:26 AM #

brian brown says:

It is different than the Celts and other non-white groups, because the Native Americans, this country, was stolen by force, brutality, with basically genocide being committed against them, and now there is some sort of pretendish attitude, especially with sports logos, that we are respecting them, when what the founding people did to them, is rarely spoken about or acknowledged.

Has nothing to do with being "white", or color for that matter.

Where do you come off with this discussion being about non-white peoples?  That has nothing to do with the argument or point being made here.

If you want to take up the initiative of getting rid of the "white" symbols, start doing so.

Do we just commit genocide against someone, then pretend to celebrate them with sports logos?

Should the German sports teams wear Jewish symbols as logos, or might that be a little insensitive?

The Celts have strong roots in the Irish population of Boston.  I think if you polled them, they would have little or zero problems with the name being used.

Ask Native Americans, and they have many issues with their logos being used, and many do.

So start asking white people from the north if they feel offended from the name Yankees, or persons from the south, having a team called the Rebels.
I doubt you will find many.

This discussion has nothing to do with your points that you bring up,

June 10, 2010 10:14 AM #

Ann says:

The logo of the Blackhawks is the typical stereotype of the Native American that has been romanticized, the male savage or warrior, the female Pocahontas and her alter the skwua. This is not how Native American's define themselves and their culture. It is a creation of western society and that is why they find it offensive.

June 9, 2010 06:37 PM #

Bob says:

The Blackhawk's logo is rather respectful example of Native American iconography, especially in juxtaposition to the logo of the Cleveland Indians or the name Washington Redskins. Get over it. It's widely considered one of (if not the) best logos in sports.

June 10, 2010 09:27 AM #

The Irish also don't self identify as a boxing Leprachaun.

Realize that when you are naming a team or military unit after a person or race of people you are adopting their more warlike attributes. You don't name a football or hockey team after a tribe for their artistic styles. The Saxons gave us great epic poetry, but highschool teams are not so named for their writing prowess. No one names a team for Ghandi because you are not looking to inspire peaceful resistance, you are cherry-picking aggressive attributes to inspire agressive play.

Once again, this is hero worship of a person not stereotyping a tribe. The original Blackhawks owner studied the exploits of Cheif Black Hawk as a military officer, found them inspiring and named his division (and later his team) after him.

June 10, 2010 09:58 AM #

A Sauer says:

One point that somewhat illustrates how, despite the rhetoric, there is little true honor of individual tribes in "Indian" logos: The Blackhawk logo has been used interchangeably to represent other "honored" tribes, including the Fighting Sioux in North Dakota which used the Blackhawk logo to "honor" its Sioux mascot from the 1960s through the 90s. This seems to run counter to common claims that a team's specific logo has a connection to the tribe it supposedly honors.

June 10, 2010 10:29 AM #