Major League Baseball held its inaugural "Civil Rights Game" this past Saturday. The plan is to play the game every year in Memphis, the site of Martin Luther King's assassination and the location of the National Civil Rights Museum. According to Commissioner Bud Selig, "In our modest way, Major League Baseball has a chance to preserve the memory of Dr. King and all the people who sacrificed their lives to the civil rights movement."
Indeed, there are some reasons to celebrate MLB's efforts. The game and accompanying ceremonies honored King, as well as Jackie Robinson and other pioneers who were integral to the Civil Rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s. Additionally, MLB officials used the occasion to increase discussions about the declining interest in baseball among African Americans, an issue I have previously suggested merits attention.
But if MLB deserves some praise for organizing the Civil Rights Game, it should also be criticized for missing an obvious irony. While clapping each other and themselves on their backs for their attention to "diversity," baseball's leadership erred by having the World Series champion St. Louis Cardinals play against the Cleveland Indians. Yes, the Indians. Given that Native American groups have long criticized the use of their images and heritages by sports teams, it is an egregious and embarassing oversight from MLB to promote a continuing violation of civil rights. In the case of the Cleveland Indians, protestors have regularly objected to the name and to the imagery of the "Chief Wahoo" mascot. How is it, then, that Selig and other baseball officials can claim to be honoring racial diveristy as they ignore the voices of the very people who have had their culture appropriated by the game? It is blind hypocrisy, pure and simple.
2 comments:
You beat me to the punch, Mike. In addition to the Civils Rights game, there is now a season-long celebration of Jackie Robinson on "Baseball Tonight" on ESPN. The segments are titled "After Jackie" and consist of stats, incidents, events, and other cultural and sports feats regarding the great #42.
I'm not quite sure what to say regarding the commemorative discourse at this time, but between the Civil Rights game and the new Jackie Robinson segments, I know I have a new chapter for my dissertation. Not sure if that's good or bad.
I have been following the "After Jackie" segments, if only casually. Not surprisingly, these features (rightly) celebrate Robinson, but do so at the expense of the many others who helped shape the modern game. On a brighter note, they do seem to be fostering more discussion about the current relationship between baseball and the African American community.
Post a Comment