Let me start by saying this blog is a bit weightier and controversial than most blogs on the site. I do not pretend to have all the answers, and I am not sure I am even asking the right questions. But I do believe the topic is worthy of a discussion. Two recent events, one public: the news that the North Carolina Legislature introduced a bill to ban participation trophies, and one personal: a recent trip to Charlottesville and seeing that a monument to Lewis and Clark had been removed from Main Street, have inspired me to take a stab at framing the discussion.
It basically comes down to who should we recognize and why. Clearly, recognition and appreciation play a crucial role in our society. Who we honor shapes our collective values, contributes to our sense of identity, and affects the motivation and aspirations of individuals.
First let’s address the issue of participation trophies. Set aside the absurdity of the North Carolina Legislature wasting time and resources debating local recreation league marketing and operations decisions, and focus on who should receive award recognition. On the surface, it might seem more natural only to recognize those who have reached the pinnacle of their fields, like Oscar winners, as their achievements often inspire awe and admiration. However, there is a case to be made for recognizing and appreciating lesser-known participants who may not receive the same level of public adoration. Here are just a few ways “participating” recipients can benefit.
Emotional Benefits: While the recognition of Oscar winners may reinforce their sense of achievement, they are already celebrated and financially secure. Will Meryl Streep’s confidence or bank account suffer if she is not awarded another Oscar Trophy. She will still be rightfully admired and recognized as an exceptional artist. On the other hand, recognizing lesser-known participants can provide them with a significant boost in self-esteem, motivation, and mental well-being.
Social Impact: Recognizing the achievements and contributions of ordinary individuals can promote a more inclusive and egalitarian society, where everyone’s efforts are valued. This approach can inspire others to strive for excellence and innovation, regardless of their backgrounds or social status.
Diversification: By recognizing a broader range of individuals, we can bring attention to diverse perspectives, ideas, and talents, leading to a richer and more vibrant cultural landscape.
Team Building: In a team sport, you often are truly only as good as your weakest link. Singling out certain team members can be disruptive. A case in point is the way the Philadelphia Eagles approached contract extensions – the ultimate form of recognition in the NFL – by not signing anyone during the regular season to long term contracts for fear of disrupting team cohesion on their run to the Super Bowl.
The issue of who to recognize gets a bit more controversial when bringing up historic figures like the Lewis and Clark statue in Charlottesville. The statue was removed because it was determined that the statue showed Sacagawea, a valued and important native American member of the expedition, cowering below the upright figures of Lewis and Clark. Proponents of keeping the statue argued that Sacagawea was depicted as tracking and not cowering. It should be noted that the removal of the statue coincided with the removal of the statues of Confederate generals around the same time. I would argue the rationale for removing a Lewis and Clark is quite different than for Confederate general statues due to important questions about the nature of recognition and the values we want to uphold as a society.
Historical Context:
While it’s crucial to acknowledge and learn from our history, it’s essential to distinguish between recognizing history and glorifying figures associated with morally reprehensible actions or ideologies. The Lewis and Clark Expedition as presented in Stephen Ambrose’s 1997 classic about the journey, “Undaunted Courage“, leaves no doubt that Lewis and Clark, and indeed the resilient and talented Sacagawea are worthy of recognition. Recognizing the bravery and contributions of the expedition to science and geography seems worthy. Removing this statue seems odd to me. Conversely, the statues of Confederate generals were erected to promote the Lost Cause long after the end of the Civil War and heralded individuals who fought against the United States and, in part, the continuation of slavery. Removing these statues doesn’t erase history; instead, it helps to reevaluate the narrative and refocus on values that promote inclusivity and equality.
b. Values and Representation: Public recognition should reflect our collective values and aspirations. Confederate statues have become symbols of racial oppression, and their continued presence can be interpreted as endorsing the values they represent. By reassessing who we choose to honor, we can foster an environment that encourages unity, empathy, and social progress.
Conclusion: Recognition is more than just an individual reward; it reflects and shapes our society’s (team’s or business’s) values and aspirations. By making thoughtful decisions about who we choose to recognize, we can create a more inclusive, equitable, and diverse environment that encourages everyone to strive for excellence and contribute positively to our world.
Leave a Reply