Skip to Content

Share

Bethlehem Shoals: Why Do Progressive Athletes Still Get All the Crap for Speaking Out?

May 10, 2011

Bookmark and Share


Longtime Celtic and outspoken political firebrand Bill Russell is being honored with a statue, but professional sports still have a long way to progress politically.

By **Bethlehem Shoals**

By arrangement with AlterNet.Org.

Bill Russell, the greatest Boston Celtic ever and arguably the NBA’s single most dominant player, probably didn’t want a statue. I don’t know that for sure, and even Russell—uncompromising and outspoken in the public eye, reclusive and cranky since—has his soft spots. When President Obama awarded him the Presidential Medal of Freedom this past fall, the 77-year-old giant made it clear that he wasn’t owed this honor. It was validation, recognition, that his struggles off the court had not been in vain.

With the exception of Muhammad Ali and Jim Brown, no athlete of the turbulent ‘60s more readily shared his opinions on race relations, the war in Vietnam, and the culture of sports, than Russell. And while Ali waxed poetic, and Brown talked tough, Russell was the era’s jock-intellectual. Russell was as restless as he was passionate, and part of what made fans so uneasy—including those in Boston—was just how hard it was to anticipate Russell’s next move. This was true on the court, and certainly, both during his career and in the years immediately following, defined him off of it. Nor did Russell share Ali or Brown’s penchant for the spotlight. Much of his most important work for civil rights was conducted without mainstream visibility. Speaking out is one thing; backing it up is, by comparison, thankless, or at least a far different, and less glamorous, job than inflaming the mainstream press.

But the fact remains that, if Boston was going to honor the likes of Bobby Orr, Ted Williams, and Russell’s coach Red Auerbach with statues, it was only right that Russell be granted one, too. It’s not a question of what Russell himself wanted or craved, or even what form of public recognition best matched his legacy. This question, posed first by Paul Flannery in Boston Magazine back in November, was a matter of justice (in that Greek sense we all learned back in college). Neither Orr nor Williams brought as many championships to the city, or looms as large in his sport as Russell.

During Russell’s playing days, the city eventually came to ignore his complexities. He was a good soldier on the court, albeit one whose talent was off the charts, and he didn’t make a spectacle of himself when it came to voicing his opinions or revealing his political leanings. But Russell’s best years were stung by Boston’s racial tensions, which lasted well into the ‘70s. The Celtics, however successful they were, remained the city’s third-most popular team—due in part to the racial milestones they broke during this period. The Celtics were the first to draft a black player (Chuck Cooper, 1950); the first to field an all-black starting line-up (1964); and in Russell’s last years, the first to have a black head coach (he won titles in 1968 and 1969). Russell called Boston “a flea market of racism” in his 1979 memoir Second Wind, but by that point, the relationship between that city and its championship magnate had already gone into deep freeze.

Bill Russell may be getting his statue, because it’s the right thing for Boston and the Celtics to do…But that statue shouldn’t just be about making things right—it should symbolize the contributions he made to sports writ large.

Plenty of folks in Boston probably could care less about Russell getting honored in the same way as Orr and Williams. Sure, great Beantown athletes. Those who still harbor some ill will against Russell probably wouldn’t outright object to it. Conveniently, Russell’s distance from the city and the team, which has only recently been resolved, as well as the seeming pettiness of denying the man a statue, provide cover for those who still might not like Russell. The point, though, is that if public monuments were a given for Williams and Orr, then Russell receiving any treatment but this stands out as unfair. Russell may be a very different kind of athlete, but with this kind of rote remembrance, Boston simply could not rationalize not treating him like his peers.

The Russell news came one day after President Obama’s dramatic announcement of Osama Bin Laden’s death. “Bin Laden Day” has the wrong ring to it; it connotes either solemnity or official celebration. “Bin Laden Night” isn’t only more accurate—it’s got an ambiguity to it that captures the confused frenzy of the evening. College students took to the streets, cheering about death; Twitter, where I spent most of my night, was an odd combination of meta-commentary, reflection, and typical right/left trolling. One thing’s for sure: whatever your chosen definition of “American,” this was an American moment. Jingoism and informed debate shared the same space, simply because the energy was so overwhelming, and the personal reactions so strong, that mostly it was about what that night meant to you.

Except, of course, for professional athletes. Sports are almost inherently conservative, in both their cultural underpinnings and their close ties to mounds of money and big business. Pittsburgh Steelers running back Rashard Mendenhall felt compelled to publicly apologize after using Twitter to question whether Osama really did it, or was really as evil as we had been told. Of course, that was after his comments—admittedly fringe-ish and misguided—started getting widespread media attention. Far more troubling is the case of Chris Douglas-Roberts, the Milwaukee Bucks swingman who simply asked whether all the money, war, and death had been worth it to get Osama. He also dared question whether all of it had been even pointed in the right direction. Standard-issue left-wing views. But CDR was almost immediately attacked. He stood his ground, fought back, and even refused to mitigate his stance in the next day.

Douglas-Roberts has a reputation for speaking his mind, but has hardly been considered “political” or an “activist” in the past. He’s not big man Etan Thomas, known for his poetry slams, dreadlocks, and on-call lefty opinions. It’s a lot more like the case of Josh Howard, currently with the Washington Wizards. In the summer of 2008, Howard, then with the Dallas Mavericks, told a camera phone at a charity softball game that he “didn’t celebrate that shit” during the national anthem. Immediately, he became a hot-button topic. Having a certain kind of political consciousness is, for professional athletes, a good way to earn a bad reputation. Right-wing baseball mouthpiece Curt Schilling, whose views were of the FOX News variety, were allowed to pop off without incident. For the last few weeks, Orioles outfielder Luke Scott has gotten to expound on his birther theories much blowback.

Bill Russell may be getting his statue, because it’s the right thing for Boston and the Celtics to do. They have no excuses left, and frankly, it makes both parties look bad if they don’t. But that statue shouldn’t just be about making things right—it should symbolize the contributions he made to sports writ large. Judging from this week, we’ve still got a long way to go before that’s going to happen.

Copyright 2011 Bethlehem Shoals ________________________________________________________________________

This essay originally appeared at AlterNet.Org.

Bethlehem Shoals is the founder of FreeDarko.com and the co-author of The Undisputed Guide to Pro Basketball History.

  Matt Kailey: Kye Allums, Trans Athletes, and a Modest Proposal for Inclusive Sports: Transgender athletes make a good case for why sports should be inclusive—regardless of gender—in the U.S. More
 
  Stephen Puleo: Boston and the Irish, on the Anniversary of the Ursuline Convent Riots: In this excerpt from A City So Grand, Stephen Puleo examines the height of Irish immigration to the city in the years following the riot, and the deeply anti-Catholic and anti-Irish discrimination the new arrivals faced. More
     
  La Estocada: Fortunato Salazar interviews Bette Ford: The famed American matador on Catalonia’s impending bullfighting ban, the art of killing well, and her friendships with Hemingway and Norman Mailer. More
 
  On the Beauty of Violence: Mateo Hoke interviews Katherine Dunn: On the twentieth anniversary of Geek Love, Dunn discusses her new book, One Ring Circus, the cultural value of boxing, and why some sports are superior to the arts. More

To read more blog entries from GUERNICA click HERE .

SUBSCRIBE TO GUERNICA’S RSS FEED

Readers like you make Guernica possible. Please show your support.

Tagged with:

Share on FacebookShare on TwitterAdd to BufferShare on LinkedInShare on TumblrSubmit to StumbleUpon
Submit to redditShare on App.netShare via email

You might also like

Leave a comment




Anti-Spam Quiz:

Subscribe without commenting