Wahoo Wariness

Nov. 17, 2000 Letter

To the Editor:

I am writing to expand on the comments I made in Adrian Leung’s story of Nov. 3, “Wahoo Owner Now a Trustee.”
I am a baseball fan. Ever since I came to this area in 1992 and Len and JoAnne Podis took my husband, Scott, and me to the old lakefront stadium, I have been in love with this game — its angles and arcs, its grace and grit. I think my affection for the Cleveland Indians is enhanced by the memories of those hard years before the team began to win. But I have never loved Wahoo — that buck-toothed, red-faced mascot. Often when I see the insignia, it looks to me like an image of someone “giving the bird,” as we used to say. The name of the team is weird enough, the sign of a mistaken identity; but the mascot I find especially irksome. Native Americans and others have protested the use of this image for years now; what puzzles me is the persistence with which local fans cling to it. I suspect that the image is now so popular, so ubiquitous that people don’t really see it, let alone object to it. This caricature has come to mean something like “all of us around here” — “the Tribe.” Some will argue that, really, the image is harmless. But I contend that it’s time to rethink it.
There are those who will defend Wahoo on the grounds that it honors “Indians” or even a particular Native American player, but I doubt it. For one thing, many Native Americans don’t feel honored by the logo. For another, it is possible to see the use of Wahoo as an extension of a European-American habit of covering up violent encounters with a commemorating name. Richard Grounds, an historian of Native American religions, has argued that when and where European Americans had managed to displace or wipe out Native Americans, they frequently gave an “Indian” name to the place, such as Tallahassee or Winona. Grounds argues that, instead of being an honor, such naming practices deny the history and violence of the encounter.
This argument might also be extended to the habit of giving American vehicles “Indian” names; as Amitav Ghosh notes, Winnebagos, Cheyennes, Dakotas and Pontiacs now traverse the land while the people from whom those names have been borrowed are relegated to reservations. And I think we can use Grounds’ argument to think about the use of Native American terms for team names (Braves, Redmen, Redskins, Indians): such mascots tend to put a benign face on histories of violence and displacement. Instead of honoring Native Americans, these logos and mascots cover up a history some of us would rather forget.
And while many adults claim to know better than to think that Wahoo represents “real” Indians, I maintain that such caricatures do have an impact on us. Perhaps one example will suffice: My 5-year-old son was given a pair of socks with the Wahoo insignia for his birthday. I tried to explain to him why I didn’t like the mascot but left the choice of wearing them up to him. He put them away for a while, I suspect out of respect for my authority rather than any real commitment to the issue. A few months later he pulled the socks out and protested to me, “But Mom, this is what Indians look like!” I am afraid that the caricature of Wahoo has already become part of the way he imagines Native American people and culture, despite my attempts to teach him otherwise.
From my point of view, it’s time for Wahoo to go.

–Laurie Hovell McMillin
Assistant Professor of Rhetoric and Composition