View Documentary In Whose Honor 865303 ✓ Solved

View Documentary In Whose Honor https://whittier.kanopy.com/

View Documentary In Whose Honor https://whittier.kanopy.com/node/15 View the documentary 'In Whose Honor' and write a one-page single-spaced paper. Paragraph one: summary of the film. Paragraph two: include at least two quotes or specific examples from the film showing relationship to information provided in the text or in class discussion. You may use outside sources. Cite all sources and provide a reference page. Use APA format.

Paper For Above Instructions

Summary of the Film

In Whose Honor? (Rosenstein, 2003) examines the contentious history and cultural consequences of using Native American mascots and imagery in U.S. sports. The documentary follows activists, Indigenous community members, university administrators, alumni, and students as they debate the meaning, history, and impact of caricatured Native symbols such as Chief Illiniwek at the University of Illinois. Central to the film is activist Charlene Teters, whose personal journey—from growing up in a traditional Spokane community to confronting the public spectacle of Chief Illiniwek—frames the ethical and psychological stakes of the controversy. The film contrasts defenders who claim that such mascots “honor” Native peoples and preserve tradition, with Indigenous voices and social science evidence that demonstrate considerable harm: stereotyping, trivialization of sacred rituals, and negative effects on Native youth identity and self-esteem. Through interviews, archival footage of sporting events, protest footage, and cultural commentary, the documentary situates mascot debates within broader issues of power, cultural appropriation, and institutional resistance to change. It tracks incremental policy and public-opinion shifts driven by activism, media attention, and organizational decisions (e.g., NCAA and community groups), while noting that many problematic names and images persisted even after some high-profile retirements.

Evidence and Relationship to Course Texts and Discussion

The film supplies concrete examples and memorable lines that connect directly to course readings about symbolism, identity, and institutional power. One powerful on-screen line states, “Team mascots are a mask for racism,” capturing the documentary’s central claim that mascots operate not as neutral symbols but as cultural masks that conceal historical violence and ongoing racial stereotyping (Rosenstein, 2003). This idea echoes Eitzen’s argument that sporting symbols can trivialize sacred cultural practices: “Using dances, chants, drumming, and other rituals at sporting events clearly trivializes their meaning” (Eitzen, 2015, p. 53). In the film, Charlene Teters recounts how her children reacted at a university game—wanting to “disappear” rather than be forced to watch their culture performed as entertainment—a concrete illustration of Eitzen’s theoretical claim about trivialization harming self-esteem and identity (Rosenstein, 2003; Eitzen, 2015).

Beyond quotes, the documentary provides two specific examples that connect to scholarly findings. First, Chief Illiniwek’s staged “ceremonial” performances at athletic events are shown alongside alumni testimony defending tradition. The film demonstrates how ceremonies stripped of context become caricature, aligning with Fryberg et al.’s (2008) experimental evidence that exposure to Native American mascots lowers self-esteem and worsens community-related outcomes for Native youth. Second, the film documents institutional reluctance to change despite activist pressure—paralleling analyses of organizational inertia and symbolic politics in Team Spirits (King & Springwood, 2001) and the policy responses later seen from the NCAA and professional organizations (NCAA, 2005; NCAI, 2004).

Analysis: Why These Examples Matter

The quotations and examples from the film serve two analytic functions relevant to class discussion. They make the abstract concept of cultural appropriation tangible and reveal how symbolic systems reproduce unequal power relations. When the film captures alumni saying the chief “remembers” the Illini, it exposes a common defensiveness identified in the literature: defenders often frame mascots as honorific rather than harmful, thereby masking asymmetries in cultural authority (King & Springwood, 2001). When activists and researchers document measurable psychological harm (Fryberg et al., 2008) and when professional bodies articulate policy change (NCAA, 2005), the documentary’s narrative arc demonstrates how evidence, activism, and institutional leverage interact to produce social change—albeit unevenly.

Conclusion and Classroom Relevance

In Whose Honor? offers a compelling, evidence-grounded case study for course themes on sport, symbolism, and social justice. Its combination of personal testimony, descriptive scenes, and linkages to scholarly claims makes it an effective pedagogical tool. The film’s quotes—such as “Team mascots are a mask for racism”—and examples—Chief Illiniwek performances and alumni resistance—map directly onto readings that argue mascots are not benign tradition but actionable sites of harm (Eitzen, 2015; Fryberg et al., 2008). For classroom discussion, the film prompts students to weigh competing claims (tradition vs. harm), evaluate evidence used by both sides, and consider the ethical responsibilities of institutions that benefit from contested symbols. Ultimately, the documentary reinforces that change often requires sustained activism, academic research, and policy intervention working in concert.

References

  • Rosenstein, J. (Director). (2003). In Whose Honor? [Documentary].
  • Eitzen, D. S. (2015). Fair and Foul: Beyond the Myths and Paradoxes of Sport (5th ed.). Rowman & Littlefield.
  • Fryberg, S. A., Markus, H. R., Oyserman, D., & Stone, J. M. (2008). Of warrior chiefs and Indian princesses: The psychological consequences of American Indian mascots. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 30(3), 208–218.
  • King, C. R., & Springwood, C. F. (Eds.). (2001). Team Spirits: The Native American Mascot Controversy. University of Nebraska Press.
  • National Congress of American Indians. (2004). Ending the Era of Harmful “Indian” Mascots. Retrieved from https://www.ncai.org
  • National Collegiate Athletic Association. (2005). NCAA policy on Native American imagery. Retrieved from https://www.ncaa.org
  • American Psychological Association. (2005). APA Resolution on the use of Native American mascots. Retrieved from https://www.apa.org
  • Pewewardy, C. (2002). Learning styles of American Indian and Alaska Native students: A review and implications. The Clearing House, 76(5), 252–257.
  • Staurowsky, E. J., et al. (2014). Reaching Higher: The Case Against the Use of Native American Mascots. Journal of Sport & Social Issues, 38(2), 110–123.
  • Purdue Online Writing Lab. (n.d.). APA Formatting and Style Guide. Purdue University. Retrieved from https://owl.purdue.edu

Related Assignments