Whitman news since 1896

Whitman Wire

Name Change Underestimates Ability to Grapple with Complex History

Olivia Gilbert

Hang on for a minute...we're trying to find some more stories you might like.


Email This Story






word, at its most basic, is a symbol that carries meaning. Within this simple definition, however, worlds of complexities unfold: historical, cultural and political baggage, as well as context, color and complicate the use of a word. Words have the power to shape thoughts, enrich or detract from discussion and codify or dismantle stereotypes. Essentially, words do not exist in a vacuum but rather are living, breathing units of language that carry practical and symbolic weight, and how we treat them matters.

The Pioneer’s decision to change its name is based on the idea that words have the power to reinforce, however subtly, hierarchies of power. The intention is that by removing the name “Pioneer,” a small step will be taken toward making campus a more tolerant, inclusive space. However, what the supporters of the name change forget is that words also have the power to change and evolve, and rather than dismissing words as inappropriate or demeaning to certain groups, we can instead work to promote and embody those meanings of a word that reflects our progressive values. Just as Whitman College itself no longer promotes the colonialist values of the pioneers in whose memory our school was founded, the word “pioneer” has come to refer not only to people who settle a “new” (to them) area, but also describes intellectual innovators and those brave enough to traverse unknown intellectual territory—exactly the kinds of critically thinking, intellectually rigorous people Whitman strives to attract.

The decision to change the name, however, must be examined in the context of broader political movements happening on college campuses across the nation. For, just as words themselves do not exist in a vacuum but rather are connected to complex pasts, so do the actions we take surrounding words and other such symbols have significance beyond their individual scope. The change reflects a wider trend that takes a dangerous and corrosive attitude toward words—an attitude that discards words deemed out of line with an atmosphere of inclusivity to replace them with something new.

This throw-away attitude is intricately related to the rise of leftist language policing across college campuses (think trigger warnings, safe spaces and micro-aggressions), a movement which has been characterized by critics as the reaction of hyper-sensitized, coddled students who can’t handle viewpoints that don’t align with their ideology or words that make them feel anything less than wholly accepted. While this unfairly skews the image of the oftentimes thoughtful students who identify with these views and the sometimes meaningful changes they have implemented, the movement as a whole is misguided in its approach to language. By banishing certain words and phrases from the lexicon, they not only degrade openness and quality of debate by narrowing acceptable language, but they also obscure the systemic problems and inequalities that cannot be addressed with symbolic gestures.

There are other, more effective ways to respond to uncomfortable subjects of the past. Yes, sometimes renaming and removing are necessary, such as changing Whitman’s mascot, The Missionary—an overtly religious icon whose meaning has not transformed like the word “pioneer” has—and the removal of the Confederate flag, a symbol actively used by hate groups to promote racism and by conservatives throughout the country to support racial hierarchies, from state buildings and campus spaces.

But to say the word “pioneer” is governed mainly by its association with a very real and difficult part of Whitman’s history is to lay aside all of the positive, empowering and inspiring definitions it also contains. It is a word with the potential to be reclaimed to promote a more complex understanding of Whitman College and Walla Walla. Actively working to embody these positive aspects, however, is not to ignore the bad parts of Whitman’s past (something that seems more likely to happen by removing the name altogether).

Rather, we can embrace its many definitions with the knowledge that we are not endorsing colonialist values, but rather evoking a nuanced understanding of history. The word can be a gateway for sustained discussion about Whitman’s colonialist roots in a way that simply relegating the word to a dusty corner and forgetting about it will not do. To claim that keeping the name The Pioneer works to oppress groups is to underestimate the ability of the Whitman community to hold a nuanced view of words and the history behind them.

Whatever we end up calling our newspaper, we should bear in mind that solutions must confront not just the inclusiveness of words, but also how those values are reflected in actual behavior and power structures. To end, some words to remember from the February 1897 edition of The Pioneer:

“May the education of the students of Whitman College ever be broad and liberal, rather than narrow and pedantic.”

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

1 Comment

One Response to “Name Change Underestimates Ability to Grapple with Complex History”

  1. Anonymous on February 25th, 2016 11:27 pm

    “Just as Whitman College itself no longer promotes the colonialist values of the pioneers in whose memory our school was founded, the word “pioneer” has come to refer not only to people who settle a “new” (to them) area, but also describes intellectual innovators and those brave enough to traverse unknown intellectual territory—exactly the kinds of critically thinking, intellectually rigorous people Whitman strives to attract”

    Two things-
    1) At what point in time did Whitman stop promoting colonial values? To say that Whitman has no longer promotes these values is to ignore the pervasiveness of the colonial project at Whitman, evident in the spaces, symbols, and structures of the college. Whitman is nowhere near de-colonizing its campus and to claim that it does renders invisible legacies of settler colonialism.
    2) Yes it could be great if words could change meaning to reflect values, but the very etymology of the word pioneer is rooted in violence, coming from a 16th century French military term used to denote a foot soldier. Though less of an overtly loaded word than missionary, pioneer is no less imbued with the genocidal histories of settler-colonialism. Yes, it has evolved to carry new meanings in contemporary language, but even those meanings referencing “discovery” and “bravery” are just as rooted in these histories of dispossession and violence. It is arguably a larger erasure of history to devalue and deemphasize the violent histories of the word pioneer, than to remove it from a place of honor as an emblem of Whitman. Aren’t these smaller manifestations of settler colonialism more insidious and destructive in the long term?
    Also, and I think more importantly, the power and privilege associated with the ability to change or reassign meanings to words is vast. To be able to think of the word pioneer without direct association with these histories references a positionality which bears no discomfort in the face of the word pioneer; someone that has not suffered the violence of settler colonialism. Who are we (non-indigenous Whitman students) to reclaim a word which does not subject us personally to violence? Embracing words like these, not only implies privilege, but also fosters a misrepresentation of our engagement with Whitman’s histories, especially as we try to move forward into a more critical engagement.
    I think the student newspaper’s decision to change their name not only makes visible the legacies of settler colonialism inherent in the word pioneer, but is also a small, but nonetheless political act of de-colonizing Whitman.

    [Reply]

If you want a picture to show with your comment, go get a gravatar.




Whitman news since 1896
Name Change Underestimates Ability to Grapple with Complex History