Spiro’s Sight

On Superbowl Sunday (XX) in January of 1986, the Chicago Bears won their last NFL championship, soundly defeating the Patriots in New Orleans. My friends and I were watching the game on a magical snowy day in the Chicago suburbs. Or maybe it wasn't snowing at all. You see, my memory is a little fuzzy: I had suffered a mild concussion playing "touch" football the previous fall, when the back of my head landed solidly on the frozen Chicago ground during Thanksgiving Break from college.

According to National Public Radio's On the Media (OTM), "In the past two years, seven former NFL players [most recently Jovan Belcher] have killed themselves, and in each case, many argued that depression and dementia brought on by job-related concussions were to blame." Given that self- and media-based diagnoses of mental conditions are a flawed enterprise, I still think it's significant that the NFL has embarked upon a PR campaign to demonstrate what the organization is doing "to make the game safer", as seen in this staged exchange between Tom Brady and the mother of Ray Lewis.

Ok, I get it: it's supposed to be a humorous, light-hearted response to a serious issue even though I don't have a clue who these players are. Why? To be perfectly honest, that 1986 Bears Superbowl was the last football game I ever watched purposefully. Although I played football (informally) growing up, attended Illinois games with my dormmates, I've never really seen the attraction, apart from the social aspects of the stadium culture or the camaraderie of watching with friends.

I know I am an American anomaly: most Sunday afternoons I actually spend at the grocery store, and I am always wondering where the heck everybody else is. So this post is directed at you NFL fans: tell me why this violent game shouldn't be banned or significantly modified. Is is the money? Is it too sacred for Americans to consider changing?

P.S. Here is the OTM interview just in case you wanted to listen. I could go on about this, too, but purposely held back (hint, hint)...

Three years ago, historian Howard Zinn died of a heart attack at the age of 87. I was surprised how emotionally affected I was by his passing -- I certainly didn't know him, but saw him speak on several occasions, most notably at Northwestern University, days before the Iraq War.

I believe Zinn's death had such an impact on me because his writings and life were so formative in how I began to finally think for myself. Although most of us are familiar with Zinn's seminal A People's History of the United States, the book I always reference is the lesser-known Declarations of Independence, which has been since renamed.

This work always reminds me of a passage from Frederick Douglass' Narrative, in which he had secretly obtained a book, The Columbian Orator while in the depths of despair about being a slave for life. He wrote: "Every opportunity I got, I used to read this book....[It] gave tongue to interesting thoughts of my own soul, which had frequently flashed through my mind, and died away for want of utterance"(23-24). That's what Declarations was for me: an affirmation of my deepest-held beliefs, and a model for expressing them openly. Zinn had subtitled his book, "Cross-examining American Ideology", and challenged every one of the assumptions listed below.

‘Be realistic; this is the way things are; there’s no point thinking about how things should be.’

‘People who teach or write or report the news should be objective; they should not try to advance their own opinions.’

‘There are unjust wars, but also just wars.’

‘If you work hard enough, you’ll make a good living. If you are poor, you only have yourself to blame.’

‘Freedom of speech is desirable, but not when it threatens national security.’

‘Racial equality is desirable, but we’ve gone far enough in that direction.’

‘Our Constitution is the greatest guarantee of liberty and justice.’

‘The United States must intervene from time to time in various parts of the world with military power...[to] promote democracy.’

‘If you want to get things changed, the only way is to go through the proper channels.’

‘There is much injustice in the world but there is nothing that ordinary people, without wealth or power, can do about it.’

What/Who is your Columbian Orator?

As we recover from copious amounts of turkey, cranberries, and mashed potatoes, it may be instructive to consider what we really know about the origins of our Thanksgiving holiday celebration.

According to James Loewen's Lies My Teacher Told Me, the Pilgrims did not start the Thanksgiving tradition; instead, east coast Indians had celebrated autumnal harvests for hundreds of years. In fact, our modern celebration only dates back to President Lincoln's 1863 proclamation of a national Thanksgiving holiday (during the perilous times of the Civil War), when the Union badly needed a boost of patriotism. The Pilgrims of New England were not even incorporated into the tradition for another 30 years.

There are literally only two brief primary sources that deal with what happened in the Fall of 1621 in Plymouth, Massachusetts. The most familiar might be Edward Winslow's Mourt's Relation (modernized spelling below) in which he stated:

our harvest being gotten in, our governor sent four men on fowling, that so we might after a special manner rejoice together, after we had gathered the fruits of our labors; they four in one day killed as much fowl, as with a little help beside, served the Company almost a week, at which time amongst other Recreations, we exercised our Arms, many of the Indians coming amongst us, and amongst the rest their greatest king Massasoit, with some ninety men, whom for three days we entertained and feasted, and they went out and killed five Deer, which they brought to the Plantation and bestowed on our Governor, and upon the Captain and others. And although it be not always so plentiful, as it was at this time with us, yet by the goodness of God, we are so far from want, that we often wish you partakers of our plenty.

What from the traditional holiday celebration is mentioned and what is left out? Furthermore. the above-mentioned event lacks historical context. For example, why exactly were the Indians so willing to sit down with these "invaders"? Toward answering that question, some historians have argued that our yearly celebrations whitewash the permanent colonization of America that might have been impossible without the devastating (but unintentional) plagues that preceded the Pilgrim arrival. This (understated) onslaught of disease might have been the most important single occurrence in the history of America. Feel free to comment on the traditional painting embedded in this post as an another contributor to the Thanksgiving mythology.

As my family and I stood up during the halftime show in Memorial Stadium for the Minnesota-Illinois football game, the P.A. voice boomed with announcements of how American war veterans would be honored in anticipation of the day that bears their name.

In case anyone had forgotten, the announcer reminded us that the stadium we occupied was "built in 1923 as a memorial to Illinois men and women who gave their lives for their country during World War I", which I have learned was a very perilous time in our nation's history ;)

Memorial Stadium at the University of Illinois

Although the names of the dead are inscribed (as a tribute) on the 200 columns supporting the enormous structure, I often wonder what America's present-day relationship is to its armed forces. Other writers, such as blogger Zach Peltz, have written recently about a shocking lack of support for the living in his post, "The Homeless Heroes". Consider what "Support Our Troops" means to you and where that phrase might have originated.

But what really struck me yesterday was the use of a Bruce Springsteen's, "Born in the USA". The stadium voice assured the thousands of us that this was a "patriotic song" honoring veterans during the halftime show. I don't think it's any accident that this song, with its seemingly incessant and repetitive chorus was, in the eyes of the marching band, tailor-made for a mass audience. But I would argue that it is also the most misunderstood song in American history since Woody Guthrie's "This Land Is Your Land". Since 1984, the year Springsteen released it, he has constantly re-worked his song, perhaps in an effort to emphasize the lyrics beyond the chorus.

Read the lyrics. If possible, listen to the two versions linked above (see the play buttons?). And then comment on what you believe Springsteen meant for us to think about today, on Veterans Day.