Oregon's amputated Civil War memory

While Oregonians celebrate the coming of "The Civil War” football game on Saturday, we will continue to blindly forget that the words "Civil War" have chilling meaning.

In is now believed that some 700,000 Americans died in our American Civil War. That’s a number larger than the population of Portland. Imagine a city erased by death.

And yet we persist in calling a football game “The Civil War.”
 
For decades Americans and fought and died abroad in what were civil wars: in Korea, in Vietnam, in Iraq. Today they fight and die in Afghanistan. Tomorrow young Americans could join the civil war in Syria. As I write the fighting going is going on in Gaza, a battlefield in an endless, intermittent civil war between Palestinians and Israelis.

And yet we persist in calling a mere football game “The Civil War.”

To Duck and Beaver fans and other Oregon sports spectators, I commend reading THIS in today's New York Times:

The article closes with the following words:

Amputation was the most common Civil War surgical procedure. Union surgeons performed approximately 30,000 compared to just over 16,000 by American surgeons in World War II. One postwar British traveler noted that amputees were “everywhere in town and farm communities through the South.” The men who had survived the surgeon’s knife were a visible reminder of the Civil War for decades.
No longer. Today's veterans more often suffer from the torment of memory. The haunted have taken their own lives by the thousands.

Yet today, in Oregon, we and the media have amputated the darker meaning of “Civil War” from our minds. We are victims of our own ignorance and insensitivity.

Oregonians, it is well past time for us to come up with a joyful, playful name for our friendly, passionate rivalry — and to end our "Civil War."

Speaking of offensive names, drop "The Civil War"

Now that the Oregon Board of Education has demonstrated ethnic sensitivity by ordering the dropping of high school sports mascots variously representing stereotypes of Native Americans, isn't it time the Oregon Board of (allegedly) Higher Education showed the same sensitivity about "The Civil War," the pathetic name of the overheated and much hyped rivalry between Oregon State and the University of Oregon.

If we can mandate the end of the 'Braves," the "Warriors" and the "Indians," we can certainly end "The Civil War," a name which celebrates death, destruction and internal strife without regard to skin color, ethnicity, gender or combat status.

It should offend us all.

Consider the view of Tom Ball, an assistant vice president at the University of Oregon’s Office of Institutional Equity and Diversity, regarding the Native American names.

In a March 8 Oregonian article, Ball, who is a member of the Klamath Tribes, recalled a 1978 incident at Siletz Valley High School, whose mascot is the Warrior. A coach loudly yelled to his players to “kill” their opponents, using an expletive and a pejorative term for Native Americans.

“That’s what this kind of stuff allows,” Ball said. “It builds up over time. Little cuts and big ones. They build up and build up.”

Likewise, this is the kind of "stuff" "Civil Wars" allow. And they too build over time.

Campus culture clash: Scholarship and Athletics

Be careful of the metaphor you choose. It can put a lock on your mind.

Take the case of NCAA Division I college sports and how the University of Oregon’s athletic program was described in a New York Times story today.

The story displays a parade of useless metaphors all trying to address a serious problem.

At UO they have a star quarterback, Jeremiah Masoli who has been suspended from the football program after pleading guilty to burglary. (He stole a computer, even though the football program lends laptops to players free. Steal a computer when you can have one for free? And this guy's on a SCHOLARship?)

Then we have the handshake agreement to pay the departing athletic director Mike Bellotti a cool $2.3 million to leave. This sounds like something that might happen at a high-stakes poker game or in golf match between very rich executives. But on a college campus?

There’s more. The University must make bond payments on a new $227 million basketball pavilion. Here a little context is in order: The University of Oregon’s faculty is grossly underpaid and tuition is skyrocketing.

Go figure.

And somewhere lurking in the background is one Phil Knight, NIKE gazillionaire. The story doesn’t delve into the NIKE influence, but clearly Phil lives by his own rules — and he applies them to UO.

Back to the push and pull in the Times story. The quotes from critics of UO athletics frame the issue in metaphors that lock out solutions.

“It’s time for the athletic department to do a little soul searching on how they can serve the university,” said one professor. “The athletic department is out of control here.”

Implied answer: search your soul, serve the university and get things under control.

Also, take three aspirin and go to bed.

A sports psychologist, tipsy on metaphors, says, “We have reached a tipping point. You have to have this homeostatic balance — you can’t just run athletics as an entity by itself. What I think is important is that the University of Oregon is a unique place — most alums and most donors want to see a healthy balance. They want to see a school jump up in the academic rankings and not just see a top-five football team. We are really at a crossroads. I would hope the new administration would see this as a new opportunity and not a Band-Aide.”

Band-Aides, tipping points, homeostasis, healthy balance, crossroads. Got that?

Let me try a straight-forward metaphor.

What we have on this campus — and all NCAA Division I campuses to some degree — is a clash of cultures.

The cultures don’t belong in the same place. They are at odds. They have utterly different goals and values.

Football is mass entertainment, not education. Education is learning, not spectator entertainment. Sure one can, and should, have elements of the other, but that’s where it ends.

Wide receivers “learn” how to run pass routes; physicists and lit majors should get a some entertaining exercise. A little Frisbee perhaps? A jog through an academic glen?

But that’s about it.

Let's stop pretending that high-profile, televised, hyper-commercial, monetized athletics as anything to do with higher education.

Just note the tension in the term “athletic scholarship.” Note the absurdity of calling a collegiate sports rivalry “The Civil War,” which, as students of history know, was a great national tragedy. Note how supposedly educated adults behave like buffoons at athletic events.

Note that this weekend we have headlines screaming that a Portland high school backetball star, Terrence Jones, has chosen to go to the University of Washington, where he will receive a full ride “scholarship.” We all know he will use the Seattle campus/stage as a stepping stone to the professional sports fame. Call me crazy but my guess is that he will not leave the great University of Washington versed in history, literature or philosophy.

Where are the best high school students going? And why don’t we, the general spectator public, care? Why isn’t it news? And will these scholars receive full-ride scholarships? And why will they stay and graduate? And what are their chances for employment out of college? Will they command the same seven-digit salaries that the likes of Terrence Jones will?

Two cultures. Different values. Worlds apart.

The universities, their administrations and their alumni need to choose one. They can’t live in both at once.

The answer is a “National Athletic Association” minus “Collegiate.” It’s where young, talented athletes go to prepare for the professional leagues. If those NAA teams want to locate in college towns and wear college colors and even be “sponsored” by the local university, fine.

But let’s not conflate the two.

Bring on the enemy

Somebody at Portland State needs to clue in Viking football coach Jerry Glanville that his team is not an army, the game is not a war, and the other side is not “the enemy.”

A recent Oregonian story notes Glanville’s advice to freshman starters: “….the enemy doesn't care that this is your first college game.”

The world has enough enemies without Glanville creating more for Portland State.

Two and a half years ago, I wrote about Glanville's twisted rhetoric. In that post, I noted at least one PSU grad shared my view and I quoted him at length.

Glanville hasn't changed over time. Sadly, he is typical of the battleground atmosphere that surrounds collegiate football. And here we thought that college might have something to do with being collegial. That includes inter-collegial.

Glanville’s field-marshal posturing is part of the same violent atmosphere in which LeGarrette Blount slugged a Boise State player in the face following the Ducks' season-opener loss.

In collegiate football, a Glanville keeps his “teaching” job, while Blount keeps his “athletic scholarship.” (The only thing Blount should be keeping is a date before the judge on assault charges.)

It’s all part of the misguided, testosterone-fueled, media-hype madness that still dubs the rivalry between UO and OSU “The Civil War.” (Yes, dear Ducks and Beavers, I'm not letting go of this one.)

And here’s the strange part: Our most highly educated citizens, college graduates, buy into the craziness — wallets wide open. Bring on the season tickets, the car pennants, the pom-pons, the logo-laden paraphernalia.

And, at PSU, bring on the enemy! Let the blood flow.

"The Civil War" — unworthy of Oregon

Each year in the week before the UO/OSU "Civil War,” I rail against this over-the-top name for a simple football rivalry.

I argue that the universities' stature is lessened because of their rivalry’s appellation.

Today’s Oregonian sports page gave me a “peg” for this year’s lament.

The headline reads, “It’s not civil nor is it war.”

Well, duh, if it’s not civil and not a war, in the name of mere accuracy, LET'S CALL IT SOMETHING ELSE!

The Oregonian's writer, Ryan White, tells those of us who are agitated (outraged?) by this abominable name, to lighten up. It’s only a metaphor. He might have added that “Beavers” aren’t really beavers, and “Ducks” aren’t really ducks.

Problem is, thanks to “The Civil War” and the name's inhumanity, I’m not so sure.

To Ryan, I recommend George Lakoff and Mark Johnson’s little book, “Metaphors We Live By.” Metaphors (and words, for that matter) shape how we think about our world. When we say “I fell in love,” we do in a way surrender ourselves to the helplessness of falling.

Metaphors reinforce and even guide how we behave, write Lakoff and Johnson.

“The Civil War,” as a name for a mere intercollegiate rivalry, also cheapens the word “War.” It also dishonors the 500,000 American lives lost in the real American Civil War.

Worse it suggests an ignorance and lack of respect for that event by the faculty, administration, students and alumni of Oregon’s two major universities.

After 9/11, I actually wrote the presidents of the University of Oregon and Oregon State University to urge them to drop the name once and for all because of anguish about real war, violence and terror. To my surprise, the president of OSU wrote to say that the administration had taken the name change under consideration. Nothing became of it.

White’s story in today’s Oregonian refers to an enlightened past sports editor who banished the term from the sports page. Writes White, “The Civil War, he told reporters, was between the North and the South and took place between 1861 and 1865.”

Exactly.

White doesn’t tell us the name of the editor, but it should be inscribed on the tombstone of Oregon's "Civil War.” Metaphorically speaking, of course.

Enough with the "Civil War"

Each year at this time, I rail against the use of “The Civil War” as the name for the rivalry between the University of Oregon and Oregon State.

The over-the-top appellation was invented by sportswriters back in the ‘20s, a mere 60 years after this nation suffered through a real Civil War.

I won’t go into my litany of reasons for dumping “the Civil War,” except to say that the play on words is stale, obtuse (It hinges on the word “civil.” Get it?) and decidedly unfunny.

Civil Wars, including our own, are blood-drenched, soul-wrenching tragedies. (see Mathew Brady's photograph)

Back in 2001, I actually thought I had some traction on the issue when I wrote the presidents of the two universities following 9/11. You may recall that in that wrenching time of reflection we were allegedly experiencing an “end of irony.”

In the spirit of ending the irony of a mere college rivalry escalating to "war," both presidents responded with moderate interest in my proposal. Nothing came of it. The country was too busy preparing to foment a real civil war in Iraq.

Now, through my Portland Community College teaching and other activities, I have contacts among students at the University of Oregon. I am urging one of them, Daniel Ronan (Wilson High School, ’07), to form “Students, Teachers and Alumni for Ending ‘The Civil War.’” Daniel was one of the organizers of this spring’s Wilson senior prank, the planting of marigolds in the shape of a peace symbol on the school grounds.

He stuck his toe in the war with a recent letter to the editor to UO’s Daily Emerald.

More than getting rid of the name Civil War, I hope this group, if it ever gets off the ground, can come up with a clever alternative name for the rivalry.

I’ve thought of a few over the years. “The Clear Cut,” “The Wet One,” and “Venue in the Valley.”

Don’t like those?

It’s your turn ….

P.S. The Oregonian sports page was in sync with its war metaphor today when it ran a story about injured Duck and Beaver players. The headline read: “The Wounded.” The story tells us that the “wounds” are all part of “a battle of attrition.”

Hey, it’s time for a journalistic armistice.

Peace already.

(To the right: Real Civil War wounded. Photo by Mathew Brady)

Putting U of O Academics before Athletics

Ninety-two University of Oregon senior faculty members are calling for the university's administration to ration back funds for the school's gluttonous athletic department and to start nourishing the university's languishing academic programs.

The professors laid out their case in a letter to the Eugene Register-Guard last week.

Unfortunately, the signers don't adequately address the role of major athletics in anesthetizing alumni in a consumptive/escapist, post-graduation culture.

Just as we need the moral equivalent to war, we need the imaginative/creative equivalent to tailgate parties, bouncy cheerleaders and the 90-yard kick-off return.

One symptom of the problem is the perverse hyping of the annual Duck-Beaver game as "The Civil War." The sad, tired tradition calls for a reminder: Civil war is being waged on the bloody streets of Baghdad. It is nothing to cheer about.

As I've said before, it's well past time for a new name for the game, one that puts the rivalry, the teams and the athletic budgets in proper perspective. The name change, and even the debate about it, would certainly help the cause of academics, knowledge and awareness.