The Baseball-Politcal Color Barrier

It is only the end of April, but I am nonetheless looking very much forward to the Rhetoric Society of America conference that will take place about a month from now in Minneapolis, MN. As someone who studies the rhetoric of sexism and racism in sports I am excited whenever I run across a scholar who dabbles in the same kinds of conversations that I do. That’s why I was pleased to find that Dr. Michael Butterworth of Bowling Green’s Communications Department will be presenting at the RSA conference. Butterworth has written a couple of notable baseball-related scholarly articles, with the most recent being “Race in ‘The Race’: Mark McGwire, Sammy Sosa, and Heroic Constructions of Whiteness,” which appeared in Critical Studies in Media Communication in August 2007.

Butterworth’s blog is also a worthwhile read. Coinciding with Jackie Robinson’s MLB-wide recognition, Butterworth wrote an entry prefacing a talk he was to give regarding parallels the media has drawn between Robinson and Barack Obama. (The blog entry disucssing this is brief, as he went more in depth in his panel, I'm sure, but it got me thinking nonetheless.)

The parallels are clear, but there are also significant arguments that reveal that these parallels are overly-specific, if not false altogether. I won’t try to populate a list of all these links (for one because I don’t know what all of them are, but also because there are many, many of them), but there are some that are quite significant.

For the purposes of this blog, I’ll note that President Obama, like Robinson, is “the first person of color to do X.” While societal trends regarding Jim Crow Laws place Robinson as the man who broke the “Color Barrier,” and not “Fleetwood” Walker, so to is Obama considered the first “African American US President” despite the fact that he, as many have described him, “raised white” and is not by colloquial definition “African American” at all (that is, having ancestry in this country that traces back to slavery).

Obviously there is no precedent for arguing “someone came before” in the case of Obama and the US Presidency, as there is for Robinson. The point, though, is that greater societal perceptions do not necessarily reflect reality. In that sense, thinking about the mythology surrounding Robinson becomes quite interesting.

What is the mythology surrounding Robinson? For me the story of Jackie Robinson is still linked to a children’s storybook that was read to me at some point early in grade school. The book was Teammates by Peter Golenbock, and I still remember the drawing near the book’s conclusion portraying Dodgers shortstop, Pee Wee Reese walking up to Robinson and putting his arm around him in support.

The abuse and other challenges faced by Robinson are difficult to wrestle with for those who grew up in the post-Jim Crow Era given our exposure to New Racism, but most today agree with the fact that the trend Robinson initiated in 1947 was a positive. And it was. But the mythology surrounding Robinson suggests an absolute positive. On the macro level this is certainly true, but on a micro level there were some negative repercussions. The most prominent of these is the fact that Robinson’s MLB debut ultimately lead to the folding of the Negro Leagues, which was not a negative for the players but the fans, who lost an outlet for participation that was otherwise restricted to many black Americans at the time. Over time segregation was abolished and this outlet was regained, but I wonder what reactions at the time were for black Americans.

Are there hidden, albeit short term, negatives to the reality and/or mythology being created around President Obama? It is impossible to say if there are any in the Robinson-Negro League-fan mold. However, what is important to remember that the “progress” observed by Obama’s election is not an indication of 2008 marking the beginning of the “Post Racism Era.” On the contrary, many responses to Obama’s election have been baffling. An example of this is seen in “Birthers,” who claim Obama was not born in the United States. This in contrast to his election opponent John McCain who, everyone knows and acknowledges, was born in Panama, albeit as part of an occupying American military force (or more specifically, the child of a soldier in that force).

Note that there is currently only one African American senator (out of fifty total), and 42 house representatives (out of 435, less than 10%). This following the first break of the “Governmental Color Barrier” which occurred in 1870, when both the first African American senator and house representative were elected. Like “Fleetwood” Walker in baseball, Hiram Revels (Senate) and Joseph Rainey (House) were elected during reconstruction – a time that was itself lauded as a “Post Racism Era.” As I stated above, Jim Crow proved this not to be the case.

The point here is that a mythology has and will continue to emerge surrounding Barack Obama’s presidency. Further, we are encouraged to believe that because Obama is in office we are in an era and society that is “post racism.” Understanding this mythology, along with historical precedent, and the fact that New Racism encourages us to believe “things are better than they used to be,” we can observe that something more complicated is going on. And just as “Fleetwood” Walker didn’t mark the end of racism in baseball in 1884, nor did Robinson in 1947, Obama does not represent an end to racism in the way our government is run in 2010.