Are Team Canada’s Hockey Jersey’s at the Vancouver 2010 Olympics – TOO NATIVE?

I start my day the same way everyday.  Once the kids are fed and well on their way to destroying the house for the day I make a pot of coffee, open up my laptop, and I start reading the news of the day, I empty out my email box, and I “tweet” something incredibly boring about things that don’t really matter.

It was on twitter that I heard about the announcement Hockey Canada was preparing to make – the new jersey design.  It was also on twitter where I read that there was some type of backlash against the new Team Canada Hockey Jersey logo design.   The logo, designed by Musqueam artist Debra Sparrow, with help from Nike, is the standard maple leaf but does feature some iconography (a Thunderbird, an Eagle, among other animals that us Neechies adore) that apparently makes the jerseys in question – TOO NATIVE.  I haven’t heard the term “TOO NATIVE” in a long time.  The last time I heard that term it was in reference to my militant, conspiracy theorist cousin who thinks “the man” is behind facebook and that, “the man is watching every status update we post,” – he is “TOO NATIVE”.  I’ll explore what term means to me in a bit.

Included inside the design are other pieces of iconography that Sparrow and Nike put together to represent the Canadian Spirit at the games – hockey sticks, a beaver, some moose, a Fleur-De-Lise, some whales, and more.  I understand why all of these icons would be included in the artistic vision of the piece – it all makes sense to me.

The papers’ comments sections under the articles that have covered this story are alive with racist ramblings about many different points of view – most of them generally being, “I ain’t no Indian, and that logo don’t represent me.”  I’m paraphrasing a bit – but you get my point.  Maybe we could have found a bit more balance with the design by including a Tim Horton’s cup and a “big ol’ hunting truck” for the rednecks that think the jerseys that our athletes will be wearing are an outrage.  Maybe Nike could have changed their “Just Do It” slogan to “Get ‘Er Done” just for these Olympics.

I wasn’t suprised to hear the backlash.  The 2010 Olympics have been nothing short of overly dramatic in many ways.  Whether they’ve been marred by protests, shortages in funding, and overruns in building costs – the Olympics have been a major headache from the city of Vancouver, the Province of British Columbia, but most importantly, the good Native folks out on the West Coast.

What did suprise me though were the headlines, articles, and comments to those articles that  I found when I googled the whole affair.  There are quite a few comments sections on news websites that are heating up right now.  CBC Sports covered the unveiling yesterday and there are over 240 comments at the time of writing this blog post.  People are mad at the fact that Hockey Canada thought it to be in good form to not only acknowledge the traditional lands in which the games are taking place by including the iconography in question, but also, to acknowledge the rich history of contribution Indian Peoples have made to this country by using two very significant symbols in Indian Country – The Eagle and The Thunderbird.

What I’ve deduced is that people are mad because the jersey pays homage to the Native Peoples of this land, and because Native Peoples are but one people across the land, the jersey doesn’t truly represent a full picture of Canada and it’s people.  The logo on the jersey does feature some West Coast Art motifs, an Eagle, and a Thunderbird, and that, I’d say is “pretty Native” as far as “Native” goes.  But “TOO NATIVE”?  I don’t think so.  Here’s a list of ways I think the jerseys would be “TOO NATIVE”:

1. If the jerseys were mismatched, different colours, and from different “era’s” they’d be TOO NATIVE.  Have you ever been to an Indian Hockey Tournament?  THOSE are Native jerseys.  Hell, I’ve played in Native Hockey Tournaments where teams just wore their t-shirts over their equipment – that’s a NATIVE JERSEY.
2. Instead of NIKE sponsor insignia’s – the main sponsor on the jersey is HARRY’S SMOKE & MINNOW SHOP – that’d be TOO NATIVE.
3. If the jersey’s were fully beaded – TOO NATIVE.
4. If the logo is the grinning face of Phil Fontaine (a la the Chicago Blackhawk Indian) – they’d be TOO NATIVE…though I’d buy one – Fontaine is a rockstar.
5. If the jerseys were made of tanned and smoked moosehide (the real stuff too, the kind of tanning that uses the moose brains, not that old factory shit) – they’d be TOO NATIVE, though, it’d probably take the piss smell out of the hockey equipment.
6. Any other use of an overused, culturally appropriated, watered down icon like a dreamcatcher, a feather, or a wolf howling at the moon would have been TOO NATIVE.

The most disappointing thing in all of this for me is this – I talked to a friend who thought that these jersey’s were TOO NATIVE and I asked him what he thought about the Chicago Blackhawks logo, the Washington Redskin logo, or the Cleveland Indian logo?  He got mad at me and told me, “It’s not the same thing.”  To me – those jersey’s are TOO NATIVE and way more troublesome than the Hockey Canada Logo.

The only problem I can see with the Hockey Canada Logo is that it makes me hungry for a good old fashioned Indian Feast – have you seen the logo…moose (yum, moose steak), beaver (beaver tail soup), salmon (beautiful hickory and apple smoked salmon steaks), etc.  If anything – these jersey’s are TOO DELICIOUS…but that’s just the point of view of this slightly overweight Ojibway.

Tagged as: 2010 Olympics, angry indian, Debra Sparrow, ryan mcmahon, ryan mcmahon comedy, Team Canada Hockey Jersey Logo, Team Canada Hockey Jerseys, TOO NATIVE, Vancouver Olympics