MLB 2016 Changes

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

When the Braves announced the intent to use the "screaming Indian" logo on a batting practice hat...

 

...people complained.  And the team scrapped it.

 

When the Indians announced the use of that font on a throwback game cap and jersey, no one opposed the idea.

That should tell you all you need to know.

[Gothamite]

Yes, that one is wholly unacceptable and the other is just mostly unacceptable. 

[Rj0498]

And that is why you don't hear many people complain about the tomahawk

[Sport]

1 hour ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

Those look nice.  Buuuuuut the use of the feather doesn't get us away from Native imagery.  While a pair of feathers is certainly not as overtly demeaning as the Wahoo face is, this logo would still suffer to some degree from the same flaw of the Wahoo logo, namely, using Native symbols.

So a new logo could not have depictions of feathers, tomahawks (even if one weren't being used by the Braves), moccasins, totem poles, tee-pees, or any other object associated with Native American people.  It will have to be solely letter-based.

 

<cough>     <cough>

The wordmark you advocate for is more offensive as a font than my logo is as a logo. As Admiral pointed out it's supposed to be some primitive wildling writing. It's reminiscent of something you'd see on a sign for a summer camp called like "Camp Wigwam" or "Camp Arapahoe". It's as much from a bygone era of racial insensitivity as Wahoo. 

 

As far as I know the issue from NA groups with the Cleveland Indians hasn't ever really been with the name, it's always been with Chief Wahoo. It's the opposite of the Washington Redskins. That name is unacceptable, but the logo is a respectful depiction and most of the objection is directed at the name and less the logo. I am not Native American so I can't speak for them, but it seems to me they would sign off on a respectful representation so long as it isn't a racist caricature. 

 

Even if all that weren't true I don't like that cap. The C is a weird shape that I don't think looks good, frankly. 

[BadSeed84]

So anything referencing native americans/indians is offensive now?

[(probably)notabandwagonfan]

1 hour ago, Gothamite said:

Yes, that one is wholly unacceptable and the other is just mostly unacceptable. 

I'd say the Braves cap is mostly unacceptable. At least he actually looks human.

[The_Admiral]

1 hour ago, McCarthy said:

The wordmark you advocate for is more offensive as a font than my logo is as a logo. As Admiral pointed out it's supposed to be some primitive wildling writing. It's reminiscent of something you'd see on a sign for a summer camp called like "Camp Wigwam" or "Camp Arapahoe". It's as much from a bygone era of racial insensitivity as Wahoo. 

 

 

The 1970s Cleveland Indians script: it makes me wanna fart

[The_Admiral]

 

Old West imagery

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

13 hours ago, Rj0498 said:

And that is why you don't hear many people complain about the tomahawk

The Braves reintroduced the tomahawk in 1987; if they hadn't done so then, it's extremely unlikely that they could do it now. Any team introducing that imagery nowadays would meet resistance; this act would draw the reaction that the Braves got with the "screaming Indian" batting practice cap, not the non-reaction that the Indians got this year with the 70s cap and wordmark.

 

13 hours ago, McCarthy said:

The wordmark you advocate for is more offensive as a font than my logo is as a logo. As Admiral pointed out it's supposed to be some primitive wildling writing. It's reminiscent of something you'd see on a sign for a summer camp called like "Camp Wigwam" or "Camp Arapahoe". It's as much from a bygone era of racial insensitivity as Wahoo. 

The font is evocative of a period -- the mid-19th Century old West. The Texas Rangers' original wordmark used a font that evokes that same era. And there are fonts that represent other eras, such as Art Deco fonts and psychedelic fonts.

 

The Indians' font is conceptually linked to Natives just as an Art Deco-style font is conceptually linked to F. Scott Fitzgerald or the psychedelic font to the Beatles. But it is not Native imagery.

 

 

13 hours ago, EddieJ1984 said:

So anything referencing native americans/indians is offensive now?

If the Native imagery in question is not created by Native people themselves (as in the case of several Native schools) or is not explicitly approved by a tribal government (as in the case of the Florida State Seminoles), then the use of it would be improper. Given the history of Native people in this country, the appropriation of their symbols by entities not connected to any Native people or organisation is wrong in a way that the appropriation of symbols of other peoples (Trojans, Vikings) is not.

 

And, again, the absence of any reaction to the Indians' use this year of the 70s cap and uniform strongly suggests that Native people don't see that font as imagery that mocks or degrades them. If there were such an opinion, the holders of this view would not have been shy to express it; and the team would have tossed out the promotion in response. 

 

So, unless there was some protest by Natives which we all missed, then the question regarding the Indians' 70s cap logo is down entirely to aesthetics. 

[damnyoutuesday]

I'd say Cleveland should use the current red C cap with the home uniform, and the blue C cap (with a white outline around the c) with the road uniform and alternate on the road, and the starting pitcher could choose which cap to use with the alternate at home. This would eliminate chief wahoo (yes, they would get rid of him on the jersey), while mostly keeping the current identity

[FiddySicks]

45 minutes ago, the admiral said:

 

Old West imagery

 

That Indians script is a little wild, it's a little strange...

[Ray Lankford]

Chief Wahoo is absolutely offensive and he's also not a good logo. He looks like he was designed to sell cigarettes to children in the 50s.

[Silent Wind of Doom]

3 hours ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

Those look nice.  Buuuuuut the use of the feather doesn't get us away from Native imagery.  While a pair of feathers is certainly not as overtly demeaning as the Wahoo face is, this logo would still suffer to some degree from the same flaw of the Wahoo logo, namely, using Native symbols.

So a new logo could not have depictions of feathers, tomahawks (even if one weren't being used by the Braves), moccasins, totem poles, tee-pees, or any other object associated with Native American people.  It will have to be solely letter-based.

 

<cough>     <cough>

 

There's no reason to get away from Native imagery at all.  No one's changing the team identity.  Maybe it's because of the fact that Wahoo is such a magnet to controversy, but I've honestly little... maybe never seen anyone shout over the name.  People fight over Wahoo.  Manfred is going to talk to the owner over Wahoo.  It just doesn't seem like the general public cares about the name.  Maybe if that is dealt with then people will move on to the name.  However, while one can argue the text is an offensive stereotype, no one can cry over putting a couple feathers on a C.

 

I honestly loved that C.  I supported it as a replacement of the The problem was that I didn't see the real version.  The website originally had a much different version that was actually very inaccurate, with even lineweight and a small curve on the end.  It looked more avant garde than trying to look like anything.

 

 

But seeing the actual version, I dunno.

[Cosmic]

On 10/26/2016 at 0:02 PM, the admiral said:

Why do you separate exclamation points from their sentences? That's done in French but not English.

¡Just let people do what they want!

[Cosmic]

8 hours ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

The font is evocative of a period -- the mid-19th Century old West. The Texas Rangers' original wordmark used a font that evokes that same era.

[The_Admiral]

7 hours ago, Ray Lankford said:

Chief Wahoo is absolutely offensive and he's also not a good logo. He looks like he was designed to sell cigarettes to children in the 50s.

 

Haha, he does!

 

I've always been a Chief Wahoo defender because for better or worse, it's a classic baseball logo with a tremendous amount of recognition, but the more I see it in the World Series with these face-painted dopes in the crowd, the more I'm coming to terms with seeing it phased out for good. 

[CS85]

Question:

 

Let's say teams with Native American imagery (Blackhawks, Indians, Redskins) all convert to logos that don't feature a native in any capacity yet, for example, have imagery associated with their culture in a rebrand (feathers, tomahawks, spears, etc)?  Does this assuage the problem enough to make it tolerable or does this need to be an all-or-nothing move? 

Sorry for perpetuating this discussion; I know the mods are a bit leery of Native American/Logos talk.

 

 

[Sport]

11 hours ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

The font is evocative of a period -- the mid-19th Century old West. The Texas Rangers' original wordmark used a font that evokes that same era. And there are fonts that represent other eras, such as Art Deco fonts and psychedelic fonts.

 

It's evocative of one thing - a 1970's idea of how Native Americans would script a wordmark. That's it. Your old west argument is bunk. Look at this: http://www.fontspace.com/category/wild+west?p=2 

http://www.dafont.com/theme.php?cat=106

 

fonts designed to match that period are characterized by straight up and down lines, ornate flourishes on the serifs, points in the middle of letters, nothing that resembles that wordmark from the 1970's Indians. It's okay to like that Indians wordmark for what it is, but to claim it's even in the same ballpark as Western fonts simply isn't true. 

 

 

11 hours ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

The Indians' font is conceptually linked to Natives just as an Art Deco-style font is conceptally linked to F. Scott Fitzgerald or the psychedelic font to the Beatles. But it is not Native imagery.

 

 

It's not native imagery, it's faux-native imagery, which is worse. It's lettering you would see on signage for a roadside tourist trap. It's from a by-gone era of racial insensitivity. If it wasn't conceptually linked to American Indians then the Cleveland INDIANS wouldn't have used it. 

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

19 minutes ago, McCarthy said:

 

12 hours ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

The Indians' font is conceptually linked to Natives just as an Art Deco-style font is conceptually linked to F. Scott Fitzgerald or the psychedelic font to the Beatles. But it is not Native imagery.

 

It's not native imagery, it's faux-native imagery, which is worse. It's lettering you would see on signage for a roadside tourist trap. It's from a by-gone era of racial insensitivity. If it wasn't conceptually linked to American Indians then the Cleveland INDIANS wouldn't have used it.

 

Right; as I mentioned, the team used that font because it is conceptually linked to Natives.  

In the end, the opinions of non-Natives don't really matter.  If Native people tended not to like the script, then it would be as off-limits as any actual Native imagery, no matter what non-Natives think.  But we cannot ignore the fact that this script was used by the team this very season without any controversy surrounding it at all.  From that we can draw the reasonable conclusion that the script is inoffensive.

[Sport]

2 hours ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

Right; as I mentioned, the team used that font because it is conceptually linked to Natives.  

In the end, the opinions of non-Natives don't really matter.  

 

I agree. You have to listen to them. My white guy opinion doesn't matter in this discussion. Maybe Native Americans don't even care about that font. I find it to be an inaccurate representation from a previous time, but I tend to derive more meaning from fonts than the average person. 

 

Quote

If Native people tended not to like the script, then it would be as off-limits as any actual Native imagery, no matter what non-Natives think.  But we cannot ignore the fact that this script was used by the team this very season without any controversy surrounding it at all.  From that we can draw the reasonable conclusion that the script is inoffensive.

 

I don't think that's a fair conclusion to draw and would require a lot more focus testing than your subjective perspection of the response to one throwback game. Being that it was part of a throwback to a uniform that also had pitching Chief Wahoo on the sleeve there's only so much a group can target. If they were to bring that wordmark back full time I think you'd hear more about the script from NA groups. 

 

I don't know why we're even having this discussion about the 1970's wordmark when the current script is far superior and (to my knowledge) in no way disrespectful to NA groups aside from the tender issue that it reads "Indians". The obvious solution is just to break from all Native American imagery, 1970's wordmark and cap logo included, and go with the block C in a roundel or something as the primary logo. It'd be boring, but then the logo problem would be solved.