1968 Black Power Salute Statue: Where is Peter Norman?
Tickers said 10/11, 09:07 PM
At the University of San Jose is a memorial to the black power salute performed by Tommie Smith and John Carlos at the 1968 Olympic games.
After finishing first and third n the 200m Smith and Carlos raised their fists as a sign of protest at treatment of black people in America. It has become famous image of the civil rights movement in America.
However something is missing from this memorial, Australian silver medalist Peter Norman does not appear in this recreation, instead the spot is left empty so that tourists can take a stand with Tommie and John.
My argument is simple - Peter Norman should be present on this memorial.
Cheers
Tickers
An image can be found at:
http://img.groundspeak.com/waymarking/display/3e8afb1e-bd04-4ac0-9e8c-01f56e1a2d5b.jpg
xspore said 10/12, 07:06 AM
I would modify your last statement saying that your premise (not your argument) is simple. You have not given one reason why Peter Norman should be included.
The statue to which you refer to is on San Jose State University campus and is honor of Tommie Smith and John Carlos, two African-American athletes, for their iconic black power salute. They did this during the medal ceremony and the playing the U.S. national anthem as a supreme act of defiance and bravery in an attempt to heighten global awareness to the plight of blacks in America.
Other than for realism, why include Peter Norman?
Yes, Norman supported their stance and ideals by wearing a Olympic Project for Human Rights (OPHR) badge, but it was the two American athletes who took the stance.
Lastly, Smith and Carlos were students at San Jose State University. The statue is a way for the school to honor their alumni. To the best of my knowledge, Peter Norman did not attend SJSU.
Tickers said 10/12, 10:44 AM
Thank you for accepting; I wanted to see who would accept before going fully into the argument, since admittedly the amount for debate is somewhat limited.
The reason I believe Norman should be a part of the memorial is that he took an active part in supporting the salute conducted by Carlos and Smith. After Carlos left his gloves at home it was Norman who suggested they each wear one glove, and Norman actively sought out an OPHR badge to wear on the podium in support of the American athletes and in opposition of similar racial discrimination from Australian authorities. Following his decision Norman was ostracized by the Australian media and prevented from attending the 1972 olympics.
The statue serves as an honor to alumni, but also surely also to capture one of the iconic moments of the civil rights movement. Would there have been a statue of the two men had they not raised their fists, or would there more likely be a framed photograph of their ceremony instead?
What Norman did shows that the struggle for civil rights transcends nationality and also race itself. His absence suggests that Norman just stood next to the Americans, rather than actually standing with them.
xspore said 10/13, 05:09 AM
I agree that Norman is a shining example that civil rights transcends nationionality and race.
But the argument you make is Norman should be included on the statue. To this point, you need to make the case that the artist, Rigo, failed in his objective. Since I don't have Rigo's mobile, I'm going to take a stab at what I think is goals are.
1.) To capture an iconic moment in time
2.) To create a living piece of art
3.) To honor former San Jose State University students
To goal #1. What is the iconic moment? Is it the three medalists of the 200 m at the 1968 games? Or is it the two American athletes, Smith and Carlos, posed in a Black Power salute during their national anthem? I would answer the latter. (Peter Norman had his hands at his side)
To goal #2. By leaving one space free on the podium of the statue, it allows us to join Smith and Carlos in their protest for equality. What you dismiss a touristy gimmick in your opening statement, I see as an opportunity to bring the public closer to the moment.
To goal #3. Since the statue is on SJSU campus, it is clear that the statue is to honor its former students. Peter Norman isn't one.
Tickers said 10/15, 06:16 PM
Given the monument is designed to capture an iconic moment in time, a moment when the eyes of the world were on just three people I do not think it demeans the achievements or honor bestowed on Carlos and Smith to recognise who Norman was and the stance he took.
What I feel is disappointing is that this is a moment that involves three people, and even though Norman plays a small part (certainly the salute would have gone ahead with any athlete on the second spot) I don't think it is right that he is effectively erased. The aim to create a living piece of art to me sends a flawed message. We ask people in the present day to stand with Carlos and Smith and in doing so forget to let people know that in fact someone did stand with them in 1968.
I realise that this is largely a matter of opinion and I fear to repeat myself. So in closing let me say that monuments of this nature, that aim to capture a moment in time, should attempt to catch that as fully as possible in order to educate about the event. For me it fails to do that and without recognizing the support of Norman and asking us to fill in the blanks the statue becomes (slightly less) powerful.
Cheers
Tickers
xspore said 10/15, 07:18 PM
I actually disagree with your last statement. Asking us to fill in the blanks makes the statue something more powerful. Art should not only educate, but ask something of its audience.
If the artist included Norman, hands by his side, on the statue, do people really take notice of him? Or is he overshadowed by his fellow runners who are giving the Black Power salute?
Now, remove Norman from the stand. As viewers, we know there was another medalist, but he is not included. The empty space makes the piece more provacative. It more forcefully creates the question in our (the viewers') minds, "Who was the other runner?". With a little investigation, the we uncover Norman's inspiring story.
Next debate question ... Should Mona Lisa have been a blonde? :-)
Cheers,
xspore
Comments
Add Your Comment
Thanks for starting this debate, Tickers. Definitely a nice change as you say in your comment. Looking forward to 3rd round.
xspore | 10/14/08
Report Offensive Comment
Sorry for the delayed response xspore, got snowed under with other things. Best wishes, Tickers.
Tickers | 10/15/08
Report Offensive Comment
Post A Comment
Please keep it clean. Bad words will get filtered, and offensive comments will be removed.
CNN TOP POLITICAL STORIES
TOP STORIES on TIME.COM
TIME PHOTO ESSAYS
Photos: The Hajj Goes High-Tech
Advances in infrastructure and security improve the experience of Islam's holiest pilgrimage
( )
Athens in Flames
A massive student protest against proposed government reforms of state universities developed into major rioting in the streets of the Greek capital following the shooting of a teenage boy by riot police.
(Louisa Gouliamaki / AFP / Getty)
By the way: Part of the reason I made this was I felt we could do with a discussion that wasn't about Obama being arab, Palin being a lunatic, republicans being hatemongers or democrats being socialists.
Tickers | 10/12/08
Report Offensive Comment