"Eyes Of Texas"

[SilverEagle]

Is anyone surprised at the outcome/report of the "committee" that was looking into allegations that the Texas ALMA MATER (not fight song, and not anthem of the state of Texas as it's often portrayed) had a racist background?  They didn't intend for the words to be racist?

Whilst reading about this I thought of our own Alma Mater "Glory to the Green and White", which is coming up on it's 100 anniversary. It was adopted in 1922. 

Quote

In 1919, Julia Smith (1905–1989), while a music student, and Charles Kirby Langford (1903–1931), then a third-year letterman on the football team and an outstanding overall athlete, composed "Glory to the Green and White" which was adopted as the school's alma mater in 1922. Smith wrote the music and Langford wrote the lyrics.

In light of previous posts on GMG about the school of music being anti-athletic, I find the collaboration for our Alma Mater rather.....ironic. Enjoy.

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=glory+to+the+green+and+white+youtube&docid=607992765880367062&mid=FA7DD6CD7105E4AB3CA7FA7DD6CD7105E4AB3CA7&view=detail&FORM=VIRE

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=glory+to+the+green+and+white+youtube&docid=608054493142998610&mid=679C25BC59279C434C9D679C25BC59279C434C9D&view=detail&FORM=VIRE

 

[Hunter Green]

Not surprised at all. Racism is in the eye of the beholder.

[Hunter Green]

16 minutes ago, Hunter Green said:

Not surprised at all. Racism is in the eye of the beholder.

Or is that, beer holder?

[Mean Green 93-98]

Mr. Langford seemed to have his life cut awfully short.  I wonder what happened to him(?)

[Censored by Laurie]

36 minutes ago, Mean Green 93-98 said:

Mr. Langford seemed to have his life cut awfully short.  I wonder what happened to him(?)

https://www.newspapers.com/clip/14339816/charles-kirby-langford-death/

oof

[Mean Green 93-98]

1 hour ago, Censored by Laurie said:

https://www.newspapers.com/clip/14339816/charles-kirby-langford-death/

oof

Sad to hear.

The article mentions that the co-writer of our alma mater is "Miss Mamie Smith."

[El Paso Eagle]

1 hour ago, Mean Green 93-98 said:

Sad to hear.

The article mentions that the co-writer of our alma mater is "Miss Mamie Smith."

From way in the past

 

 

[LongJim]

Though-provoking comment I read about the subject:

**************************************************

"The entire premise of being offended by "The Eyes of Texas" was ridiculous from the start, regardless of the findings of the committee.

From 1883 - 1956, the University of Texas banned people of color from attending the university. And then once on campus, put them into segregated housing & seating, while also banning them from representing the university in athletics until 1970....going so far as threatening to cancel games against schools that had blacks on their team. The university also permitted and provided the facilities for minstrel shows on campus until 1965, 10 years AFTER the university was desegregated.

What's more racist--banning people from an education for 73 years, then subjecting them to second class treatment for another 14+ years once on campus...or possibly singing a song in black face at a UT sponsored minstrel show 118 years ago?

If The University of Texas has been whitewashed from an unquestionable racist & frankly, evil, past...why isn't "The Eyes of Texas" likewise whitewashed, when it has 1/100,000th the connection to racism of the university itself...AND...it's connection is brief and 118 years old?"

[Censored by Laurie]

17 hours ago, LongJim said:

Though-provoking comment I read about the subject:

**************************************************

"The entire premise of being offended by "The Eyes of Texas" was ridiculous from the start, regardless of the findings of the committee.

From 1883 - 1956, the University of Texas banned people of color from attending the university. And then once on campus, put them into segregated housing & seating, while also banning them from representing the university in athletics until 1970....going so far as threatening to cancel games against schools that had blacks on their team. The university also permitted and provided the facilities for minstrel shows on campus until 1965, 10 years AFTER the university was desegregated.

What's more racist--banning people from an education for 73 years, then subjecting them to second class treatment for another 14+ years once on campus...or possibly singing a song in black face at a UT sponsored minstrel show 118 years ago?

If The University of Texas has been whitewashed from an unquestionable racist & frankly, evil, past...why isn't "The Eyes of Texas" likewise whitewashed, when it has 1/100,000th the connection to racism of the university itself...AND...it's connection is brief and 118 years old?"

sorry...help me understand the logic of this argument...because something like a song isn't as racist as other aspects/history of an institution then it should be tolerated?

[LongJim]

39 minutes ago, Censored by Laurie said:

sorry...help me understand the logic of this...

No.

It's not my argument. 

[SteaminWillieBeamin]

1 hour ago, LongJim said:

No.

It's not my argument. 

I am curious what thought this is supposed to provoke. I read it like CBL. Like it could be way worse, so why bother with this level of minstrel irritants? 

[Mean Green 93-98]

The argument seems fairly obvious.  The song itself is not racist, but it has associations with a racist past.  The University of Texas has much more past racist associations than those related to its alma mater.  To be consistent in their outrage, if the outraged are going to demand UT's alma mater be eradicated, they will demand the University of Texas itself be eradicated.

[LongJim]

59 minutes ago, SteaminWillieBeamin said:

I am curious what thought this is supposed to provoke. I read it like CBL. Like it could be way worse, so why bother with this level of minstrel irritants? 

Yes.  That's one way to read it.  Perhaps others will read it differently.  

[LongJim]

2 minutes ago, Mean Green 93-98 said:

The argument seems fairly obvious.  The song itself is not racist, but it has associations with a racist past.  The University of Texas has much more past racist associations than those related to its alma mater.  To be consistent in their outrage, if the outraged are going to demand UT's alma mater be eradicated, they will demand the University of Texas itself be eradicated.

Yep.  Another way to read it.

[Censored by Laurie]

3 hours ago, Mean Green 93-98 said:

To be consistent in their outrage, if the outraged are going to demand UT's alma mater be eradicated, they will demand the University of Texas itself be eradicated.

no...that actually wouldn't be intellectual consistency.  there is zero threat...actual or intellectual...to the UT institution. UT itself isn't racist...it had/has racist people/policies/symbols that it has had to address throughout it's history. perhaps 150 years of not changing those racist people/policies/symbols, then maybe its best to just burn the whole thing down, but that hasn't been the case and it's a bad faith argument here. 

to pull examples from the article...UT isn't whites only anymore, isn't segregated, has an integrated athletics program and (hopefully) no longer hosts minstrel shows. the people who supported those racist policies are no longer in positions of power (or at bare minimum, not attempting to further those policies)...and to some degree or another there have been public reckonings and recognitions around those past racist policies. "The Eyes..." conversation/controversy is another step in that process

if a building is named for a racist, you don't tear down the building...you give it a new name (and preferably acknowledge why you're doing it). which, by the way, UT had kinda better be learning from this situation when some questions start being asked about Darrell K. Royal... 

[Mean Green 93-98]

46 minutes ago, Censored by Laurie said:

no...that actually wouldn't be intellectual consistency.  there is zero threat...actual or intellectual...to the UT institution. UT itself isn't racist...it had/has racist people/policies/symbols that it has had to address throughout it's history. perhaps 150 years of not changing those racist people/policies/symbols, then maybe its best to just burn the whole thing down, but that hasn't been the case and it's a bad faith argument here. 

to pull examples from the article...UT isn't whites only anymore, isn't segregated, has an integrated athletics program and (hopefully) no longer hosts minstrel shows. the people who supported those racist policies are no longer in positions of power (or at bare minimum, not attempting to further those policies)...and to some degree or another there have been public reckonings and recognitions around those past racist policies. "The Eyes..." conversation/controversy is another step in that process

if a building is named for a racist, you don't tear down the building...you give it a new name (and preferably acknowledge why you're doing it). which, by the way, UT had kinda better be learning from this situation when some questions start being asked about Darrell K. Royal... 

You haven't touched the argument; you're merely deflecting.

The song itself is not racist.  It has a racist past, just the same as the University of Texas.

[SteaminWillieBeamin]

Seems like playing with loose logic to say a song isn't racist. Like an inverted cross is not Satanic or the swastika is not a symbol of hate . That is true - sure - they are just shapes and have histories outside of what we in the Western world associated with them. However in a culture, in societies, the history of it has the weight and the implied damage.

You get that. I am certain of it.

You wouldn't allow your kid to put a swastika design on their new Civic with the dark tint merely because they happen to like the shape ... or that they saw it on some old Hindu book floating around from your college years and developed some personal attachment to it. I am sure you would explain there are some better shapes out there and definitely other Hindu symbols they can find for their tint job. I mean, maybe the swastika doesn't phase you, but you know for sure that it will ruffle the features as you drive your kid by the Torah Day School when headed to their Prince of Peace Catholic school.

Same goes for  minstrel music in our country. Which... the railroad song/levee song definitely fits the definition.

I don't think it is deflecting. It is addressing the problem. Like the building analogy - just rename it, address the topic and move on. Or - go ahead and drive that Civic around town with that sweet swastika tint. 

If the glory to the green turned out to be a song they played while death marching on the trail of tears - I'd have ZERO hesitancy to find a new song. But - I guess that is just woke? I am not really that woke. Just considerate? Or ... aware? Or maybe living by Golden Rule. Who is to say?  

[SteaminWillieBeamin]

I have plenty of gaps in my caring and plenty of topics that give me a "get off my lawn" response. I use it to try and be aware of my audience and surroundings. I mean, I think saying "God bless you" when someone sneezes is archaic and irritating - though I fully understand the intention.

When my kids want to say "Oh My GOD!!!" surprised or upset, I remind them that it can be offensive to their grandparents and act like they are standing beside them. Just a sign of respect. Instead they should use "gosh."  To me - saying "Jesus H Christ!!!!" when I drop my beer in the yard - is perfectly non-offensive. It does not offend me in the slightest. I have a friend many years ago that heard me say to myself "Jesus F'ing Christ" when I was irritated about something. He didn't hesitate to tell me that it bothered him and he knows that I am better than that. Sure thing - I don't care about the phrase or religion at all so it is not a big deal to me. However, I respect this guy and respect his feelings toward his whole being and if just using a different word can make him feel better - I do it. It's no big deal. When my kids were tiny I would say "Good Gravy kids! Hurry up!" when they were dragging to get out the door to school.

Just and example for the incoming downvotes. I've spent my whole life side-stepping and being non-offensive out of respect for the community I live in. 

Edited March 14, 2021 by SteaminWillieBeamin

[El Paso Eagle]

6 minutes ago, SteaminWillieBeamin said:

I have plenty of gaps in my caring and plenty of topics that give me a "get off my lawn" response. I use it to try and be aware of my audience and surroundings. I mean, I think saying "God bless you" when someone sneezes is archaic and irritating - though I fully understand the intention.

When my kids want to say "Oh My GOD!!!" surprised or upset, I remind them that it can be offensive to their grandparents and act like they are standing beside them. Just a sign of respect. Instead they should use "gosh."  To me - saying "Jesus H Christ!!!!" when I drop my beer in the yard - is perfectly non-offensive. It does not offend me in the slightest. I have a friend many years ago that heard me say to myself "Jesus F'ing Christ" when I was irritated about something. He didn't hesitate to tell me that it bothered him and he knows that I am better than that. Sure thing - I don't care about the phrase or religion at all so it is not a big deal to me. However, I respect this guy and respect his feelings toward his whole being and if just using a different work can make him feel better - I do it. It's no big deal. When my kids were tiny I would "Good Gravy man! Hurry up!" when they were dragging to get out the door to school.

Just and example for the incoming downvotes. I've spent my whole life side-stepping and being non-offensive out of respect for the community I live in. 

You bring up good points and side-stepping is something most of us have done many times, as you said, out of respect.  As you alluded to, saying something does not mean you are something. Sometimes inappropriate things are said but that does not necessarily mean they person is rooted in those beliefs. For me, and I know others will passionately disagree, I have a problem when people say, for example, song "X" is racist or inappropriate and then justify why rap songs that are full of directed words are somehow OK because of who is saying them. Maybe you or others think it's simplistic to say right is right and wrong is wrong, but as long as the grey area as wide as it has become we are leaving it wide open for many songs, book, names, etc. to be considered racist or inappropriate.
 

[SteaminWillieBeamin]

I can get that feeling, but to use my kids again - they constantly get into the "but, but, but" arguments with one another. The oldest, I hold to a higher level of thinking and feeling. When he tries to complain about the youngest doing something and therefore he shouldn't have to apologize or find a common ground -- I always have to remind him that his brother may be in the wrong, but so is he and it is always the right time to do the right thing. He loves his brother, doesn't want his brother to feel hurt or wronged and it is simple to apologize for the issue at hand and to learn to stop doing that. I tell him that if he continues with this, his brother will never learn the right way to handle conflict properly and a wedge will develop between them. 

I am not a fan of mumble rap or trap music ... I am not a fan of some girl group singing about "chicken heads" or whatever... but I don't use their wrongs to do wrong myself. It's hard to live life with the "what about them?!?" mind frame. You'd never be at ease and lead directly into the incel lifestyle. Oh my lands - if my boys end up identifying as incels because they don't like some unreal social pressure of how boys need to 'be' - I will lose it. I will have failed them and society. 

Edited March 14, 2021 by SteaminWillieBeamin

[CMJ]

Speaking of Mr. Langford, some twenty years or so ago, I bought a 1922 Yucca.  In it he penned a note and signed the yearbook.  Said something about sleeping through the class they shared together.

 

College students don't change.   🙂

[Cr1028]

On 3/13/2021 at 12:13 PM, Mean Green 93-98 said:

To be consistent in their outrage, if the outraged are going to demand UT's alma mater be eradicated, they will demand the University of Texas itself be eradicated.

Edited March 17, 2021 by Cr1028

[letsgiveacheer]

On 3/10/2021 at 2:24 PM, SilverEagle said:

Is anyone surprised at the outcome/report of the "committee" that was looking into allegations that the Texas ALMA MATER (not fight song, and not anthem of the state of Texas as it's often portrayed) had a racist background?  They didn't intend for the words to be racist?

Whilst reading about this I thought of our own Alma Mater "Glory to the Green and White", which is coming up on it's 100 anniversary. It was adopted in 1922. 

In light of previous posts on GMG about the school of music being anti-athletic, I find the collaboration for our Alma Mater rather.....ironic. Enjoy.

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=glory+to+the+green+and+white+youtube&docid=607992765880367062&mid=FA7DD6CD7105E4AB3CA7FA7DD6CD7105E4AB3CA7&view=detail&FORM=VIRE

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=glory+to+the+green+and+white+youtube&docid=608054493142998610&mid=679C25BC59279C434C9D679C25BC59279C434C9D&view=detail&FORM=VIRE

 

It is all but unknown that we only sing the chorus from our Alma Mater, originally named "Our College Song".  I have no idea when that change was made.  For anyone that can read music, here is our complete Alma Mater:  

[UNTLifer]

Sexist.

[SilverEagle]

On 3/16/2021 at 12:59 PM, letsgiveacheer said:

It is all but unknown that we only sing the chorus from our Alma Mater, originally named "Our College Song".  I have no idea when that change was made.  For anyone that can read music, here is our complete Alma Mater:  

Here's my question. When did the line "for we know our University is forever in the right", get changed to "striving for the right"?  Because when I first attended North Texas games in the 60's everyone was singing "forever in the right". 

 Who authorized the change and what was the rationalization?