The battle over the tradition of USC students hanging the Bruin before the USC-UCLA football game each year has produced an argument over whether the tradition should continue, and it is an argument that is steeped in issues of political correctness, racial concerns, and adherence to tradition. Over a period of weeks, articles, letters, editorials, and other writings appeared in the campus newspaper at USC offering views on one side or the other of this debate. Indeed, the argument continued a year later, with no clear resolution or settlement of the matter. The side calling for an end to the practice offered the best arguments, though many elements of their position are refutable and are based on doubtful premisses. Those on this side, however, shaped their arguments more clearly and had a stronger idea of what issues to raise, while those on the other side often did little to refute what was wrong with the arguments of their opponents and relied too heavily on tradition as an argument.
The discussion was started by opponents, who called for an end to the lynching and burning of the Bruin bear because of the similarity between this action and the earlier practice in the deep South of lynching blacks. The argument was that the reader would surely be able to see how this tradition was hurtful to black students and generated anger and disgust. The writers point to the event and find a different symbolic value in it than is intended by those participating. It should be clear that the burning of the Bruin is an act intended to generate school spirit and to send a message to the opposing team at UCLA. Students at UCLA are the target of the act, and any symbolic meaning is directed at them. The response here is coming from two students at USC who perceive a different symbolic meaning in the act of burning the Bruin. The rhetors see the act not for what it means now but for what it would have meant in another time and another pl...