The Cult of Personality
When Nikita Khrushchev addressed his fellow Soviets in 1953 following his succession to leadership of the USSR, he delivered what would become known as “the Secret Speech”. Its content sought to unveil his predecessor, Josef Stalin, the mass murderer and ruthless dictator that had maintained public opinion steadily in favor of him, whether by appeal or fear. These methods were captured in the phrase “cult of personality”. Despite Stalin’s horrendous acts (many of which Khrushchev still refused to condemn, as he would need the same actions to retain power) the Russian people continued to veritably worship their leader, something which Khrushchev needed to correct both to fall in line with Party ideology and lead effectively.
Joe Paterno has forged a similar cult at State College for over sixty years. This past week, the curtain has been pulled back. The king is dead.
While Paterno did not doctor photos, order assassinations of rivals, or produce propaganda to keep his job as head coach and de facto autocrat of the small Pennsylvania town, he used his aw-shucks demeanor and commitment to worthy ideals to centralize his authority and mold the football program, in an already tight-knit community, into a fortress. Football coaches across the country have long sought the personality cult that “Joe Pa” crafted for Penn State football. The Nittany Lions were embodied in him so completely that the surreal scenes of students rioting in State College ought come as no surprise.
Jerry Sandusky’s disgusting and unconscionable tale has already been recounted many times, and I have no desire to go into that again. What remains is the fallout.
Before late Wednesday night it appeared that while the university president and athletic director would be immediately removed, the coaching legend would be allowed to retire in a relative amount of style. Before late Wednesday night, he would coach his final home game Saturday and continue leading his team in oblivion towards winning the Leaders division, to the B1G championship game, and yet another bowl. Before late Wednesday, the person ultimately morally responsible for the actions of the football program at Penn State would retain (albeit for a time) at least titular, and as I suspect, quite tangible control of the program.
The board of trustees’ choice to depose Paterno is obviously the right one, and they should be commended for it. The backlash in State College from disgruntled students and bewildered players is amplified by the thousands of PSU alums voicing their support for Paterno on the internet. And it is absolutely despicable, yet absolutely understandable.
When a person of such lauded moral high ground as Paterno fails, it shocks the world, and too often appalls little. Regardless of your metaphysical and religious views, the fact is that any human can and often will fail. It’s cases where the failure shreds the work of a lifetime into scraps of what legacy had previously been taken for granted. The risk of embodiment of a football program in one person, from Paterno to Wooden to Krzyzewski to, dare I say, Schembechler, is inherently risky. Trusting the ruler to tread flawlessly always is what we expect is impossible. Everyone does make mistakes (insert Terrelle Pryor joke here). It’s the degree and management of these mistakes that separates the legends from the ordinary.
And of those names I just dropped, one clearly does not belong with the others any more. Its time to destroy Paterno’s cult of personality. The victims cry for justice and PSU students would rather “demonstrate” outside their leader’s home, rather than look the harsh realities in the face as Khrushchev did. It’s easier that way, but it’s also wrong.
P.S. I am not a Communist nor do I think Khrushchev is by any means a stellar person. Just wanted to illustrate the most prominent reference of the term. Nor are Stalin and Paterno equivalents. Their followers have acted in a similar manner.
November 10th, 2011 at 11:07 AM ^
Many are trying to paint this as "one horrible mistake" by JoPa. It was no such thing.
This was a conspiracy and coverup by at least 5 high ranking officials at PSU that lasted over a decade. Jo Pa and the others made horrendous mistakes over and over again in their attempt (almost successful) to cover it all up.
November 10th, 2011 at 11:13 AM ^
It's tough to understand why Paterno and the university thought it would be better to try and handle something this awful internally. Easier, yes. But the conflicts of interest were too great...
ESPN has a timeline of the events that shows just how far the knowledge and suspicion of wrongdoing by Sandusky goes...to 1998.
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/7212054/key-dates-penn-state-sex-abuse-case
November 10th, 2011 at 11:13 AM ^
and the reactions are not positive:
http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2011/11/something-is-rotten-at-…
November 10th, 2011 at 11:16 AM ^
Nor should it be. The NYT article on the riots had a really good quote from a student who said:
“The hardest part, because he was a hero to me, is coming to grips with what he did, or actually what he didn’t do”
But it's easier for people to protest the unthinkable.
November 10th, 2011 at 11:13 AM ^
but I am aware of Coach Paterno's dedication to the university; I doubt there is another coach in America that has done so much for the university he works for. He has been at Penn State for like 45 years and during this time he has done much that is considered good; should this mark against him cost him so much? I am so revolted by what occurred I don't want to look into it to deeply, but others have so I ask them what is it that Joe did and did not do? How much did he truly know?
What I know is that he knew of SOMETHING. I find it hard to believe he was aware of the scope of Sandusk's misdeeds, to put it mildly. I also know he did inform his superiors; I believe he was supposed to do this, and while it is the bare minimum, this is what he was supposed to do.
Morally, some argue, he was obligated to do more, and this is true, however morally and legally are two different things; how can we punish someone who is morally in the wrong if there isn't a law against it?
I/we could write about this for days (probably will be) but the jist of my entry is that I'm conflicted as to what is the 'justice' in this situation for coach Paterno; If I, one who doesn't have any bond with the university am unsure, how much more would supporters of PSU and admirers/follwers of the football program be unsure or perhaps biased as to what to do?
November 10th, 2011 at 11:28 AM ^
Really well said...If I had to guess it seems that Paterno and Penn State were acting out of loyalty to one of his guys and thought he could better discipline and help Sandusky internally. He may and probably did have the best intentions in this...
And the legal/moral question is such a huge can of worms, which is a large part of the questions in the Penn State fanbase.
November 10th, 2011 at 2:49 PM ^
If I had to guess it seems that Paterno and Penn State were acting out of loyalty to one of his guys and thought he could better discipline and help Sandusky internally. He may and probably did have the best intentions in this...This is EXACTLY what happened at tOSU with Tressel and Pryor (and others). Tressel knew of the misdeeds of his players, but honestly felt that he could handle it better than any outsider could. I have no doubt that Tressel had the best of intentions, that he really did see himself as a reformer of troubled young men... Both Tressel and the PSU administration made the same fatal error: if 'handling' it internally requires a cover-up, you can't handle it internally.
November 10th, 2011 at 9:09 PM ^
what transpired was a serious crime....you can't 'handle that internally' unless PSU has the ability to manage a private trial and incarcerate Sandusky for a looong time. Not to mention the did NOT handle it by any means......that is the point, Sandusky continued to have access to young boys for 10-12 more years......after 2 reported incidents!
All they did was take away his keys!? That is essentially making it okay to do what he is doing, just don't do it in our showers....that is NOT okay! That is trying NOT to do something
I do not believe they were trying to handle it, I believe they were trying to cover it up, beause doing anything meaningful about it meant going public.
November 10th, 2011 at 10:11 PM ^
joepa and the psu admin's primary objective was to protect the image of their university. and they hoped by covering this up, the situation would disappear. well, they were wrong. the psu name is now mudd and who knows how many children have been injured as a result.
November 10th, 2011 at 12:24 PM ^
Do you really believe that the decisons by JoPa, AD, Prez, etc. were made over a cup of coffee? No way!
These people had meeting after meeting to discuss what to do about Sandusky. In 2002, they all were aware of the 1998 police investigation. They overtly decided to cover it up. Pure and simple. That is why all of them (JoPa included) are so disgusting. And they maintained the cover up for years as more and more children were abused. How can anyone condone that?
November 10th, 2011 at 2:04 PM ^
Schultz is the only individual that testified that he was aware of the 1998 incident. Neither Spanier nor Paterno were identified in the Grand Jury Report as being aware of this incident, and Schultz himself was unaware that a lengthy police report resulted from this investigation.
This is an example of my greatest frustration with the discourse around this situation. A lot of inferred conclusions that are not supported by facts are repeated as fact, and only act to cloud an already cloudy subject.
November 10th, 2011 at 2:54 PM ^
Paterno knew in 2002 about the allegations. At least one child ("Victime 1") was molested after that date. If you were the father of "Victim 1," would you feel conflicted about what the "justice" is in this situation? This is reprehensible. I don't care about whether he was required, legally, to report it. Any person with a conscience knows exactly the right thing to do, and that is to make sure that no one else is abused, and to try to care for the victims. In this, Paterno failed--completely and miserably.
I understand fans of Paterno feeling conflicted. They haven't come to terms yet with what has happened. In time, hopefully, they'll have a bit less emotion and a bit more clarity. But the morality of the situation could not be more clear.
November 11th, 2011 at 12:11 PM ^
Legal compliance does not spare Paterno from punishment here, nor should it. Paterno's prominant position as a head coach, but more importantly as a public face of and embassador for the university comes with a greater moral responsibility. He represents the school publicly, and is part of its public image. Any corporation or institution would demand that its members behave in a manner than favorably represents the entity.
If Paterno broke no laws, he won't be punished by the legal system. However, the penalties levied by society against his legacy and reputation are deserved in light of his moral failures.
His actions, or inactions, clearly do not reflect the standard that Penn State strives to adhere to, and removing him from his position is exactly what they needed to do.
November 10th, 2011 at 11:15 AM ^
Who are you to paint the PSU fanbase with such a broadbrush? Many of them are crushed and yet you want to declare them all to be sycophants. Nevermind that this is a ridiculous comparison to draw and completely undermined in the very fact that he was fired and has offered nothing but remorse and submission to the Trustee's decision.
I suppose the fact that Paterno had removed Sandusky from the PSU football program in 1999 despite the refusal of the AG and police to prosecute and press charges in 1998 matters little to you at all. He reported the incident in 2002 to his immediate superios which is what every policy handbook instructs someone to do. Said superiors chose not to report it to the police and then perjured their testimony later.
There's a reason why those two are being indicted and JoePa is not. He did what he was supposed to do. Had he known they didn't report it to the police, I'm sure he would have.
In no way do I commend the Trustee's decision or execution of the matter. You don't fire an icon like Joe Paterno by phone and certainly not while retaining the former Grad Assistant who was the only one with a direct opportunity to intervene while that child was being assaulted in the facilities.
Support for a human being while acknowledging faults and mistakes is not despicable. Its called loyalty and compassion. The alternative is kicking everyone to the curb the minute they let us down- which is exactly what the BOT is doing in this case; cut ties AND the liability that comes with those ties. As soon as JoePa expressed regret for not doing more he became a major liability for civil suits against PSU.
November 10th, 2011 at 11:23 AM ^
As I stated I am not comparing Paterno to Stalin. I consider Joe Paterno to still be a good person. I have never considered Stalin as such. But he had to be aware of, at the very least, allegations against Sandusky, and his failure to care, prioritize, or overcome loyalty to do right must be dealt with by Penn State.
The point is, his legendary status has created this cult. The fanbase now has to break away from it. I will say that most Penn State fans regarded Paterno as more than just a coach. Many are coming to grips with his failure (and, yes, the AD and President and their respective offices are equally if not more responsible) in a way that will better Penn State. Some are clinging to Paterno and acting stupidly. Those are who I have an issue with.
November 10th, 2011 at 11:29 AM ^
"Some" is not suggested in anyway by the tone of your original post. You took down everyone.
November 10th, 2011 at 12:00 PM ^
Lol, you are a fine one to talk about a broad brush!
Sycophants? Really? I don't see that in what A-train wrote.
I don't think you need to be an expert to suggest there is great support for JoPa in the Penn State Nation; I'm sure there are plenty of JoPa 'naysayers' but there are enough supporters for the media and the nation to accept that JoPa is the 'Personality' A-Train suggests.
Everything else you write I agree with, however. And no, I am not a sycophant.
November 10th, 2011 at 12:54 PM ^
Oh c'mon... are you seriously asserting that Paterno had no clue as to whether a report was ever made to the police? That a guy who was virtually as powerful as the university president had no way of knowing if the police were contacted?
Give me a break. The only way he would not know is by choosing to not know.
But Paterno is far from the only adult culpable here. What I read in the NYT this morning about McQueary's father is just the latest in a string of mind-boggling facts:
"A former medical corpsman with the Navy’s special warfare operations, John became a physician assistant, and later, the chief operating officer of a large medical and surgical group in State College."
How in the name of all that's holy does someone with MEDICAL training fail to tell his own son to contact law enforcement immediately if they witness a sexual assault on a child? For chrissakes, it's been drummed into the medical and education profession for many years to be constantly on the lookout for signs of sexual abuse of children, and teachers and doctors and nurses are legally obligated in most states to report any such signs to the police without delay.
If John McQueary had taken that single, simple step of dialing 911 himself as soon as Mike told him what he saw in the locker room, he would have spared Paterno, PSU administrators, his own son, and most importantly all the subsequent victims of Sandusky after 2002 untold trauma. For want of a phone call, a kingdom was destroyed.
November 10th, 2011 at 2:10 PM ^
that the facts, at this point, do not assert that Paterno was aware of the 1998 police report. I'm not saying they eventually won't, just that they don't currently.
November 10th, 2011 at 3:39 PM ^
If I were a head football coach and my defensive coordinator were investigated for raping a minor, how could I possibly not know that? I think the burden of proof has to fall in the opposite direction here. It beggars belief that the police could have investigated Sandusky right under Paterno's nose without him possibly knowing.
November 10th, 2011 at 3:41 PM ^
And JoePa encouraged/forced Sandusk'y retirement after telling him in '99 that he wouldn't succeed him as coach. What else was he supposed to do after the '98 incident when the AG refused to pursue the matter further?
November 11th, 2011 at 12:43 AM ^
"What else was he supposed to do after the '98 incident when the AG refused to pursue the matter further?"
He was supposed to call the police in 2002 when an eye witness reported new crimes to him directly.
November 10th, 2011 at 3:39 PM ^
"Oh c'mon... are you seriously asserting that Paterno had no clue as to whether a report was ever made to the police? That a guy who was virtually as powerful as the university president had no way of knowing if the police were contacted?"
You and I are both forced to assume whether JoePa knew or didn't know - we have no evidence for either. The AD and VP told a Grand Jury they reported it to police and DCS, why can't we assume that they would've lied to JoePa as well?
Also, JoePa and the others have stated that what McQueary told them is not what he told the Grand Jury. I have a hard time believing that Joe Paterno was told that Sandusky was raping a child in his facilities and he didn't go apeshit over it. If nothing else I cite Exhibits A-ZZZ on this board of everyone citing what they would have done or would like to see done to Sandusky. I'm 28 (same age McQueary was in 2002) and I'm near positive I would have beaten Sandusky's head against the wall in that shower, not left him raping a child while I ran to call my dad.
November 10th, 2011 at 1:32 PM ^
When I saw the headline, I thought this was going to be a fun post. Instead, it's just more piling on by the torch and pitchfork contingent.
Funny how many of the same people who don't like to see posts about Sparty because this is a Michigan blog are now turning mgoblog into a contest to see who can throw the most bile toward Happy Valley. Well, actually, it's not really funny; it's very, very sad.
November 10th, 2011 at 1:53 PM ^
Thanks for sharing your perspective on the "Cult of Personality."
Regarding judgement, I can think of several things:
- Joe Paterno has been fired, and not under his terms.
- He has to live with the continued reminders of his failings.
- His legacy is tarnished, and this will be a stain on what he's done.
In retrospect, it is clear to everyone what should have happened. I can say, as a mandated reporter, that these issues can be a bit thorny to sort out. What people forget (particularly Joe & McCreary, in this regard,) is that inaction, or lack of action, is a decision in and of itself.
I am not sure but that Paterno found this so distasteful, he failed to think about it, and failed to think through what was likely still happening with Sandusky. Often enough, if we aren't faced with something directly, we can ignore it. Sticking our heads in the sand and turning the other way is a very, very common think for many people to do.
November 10th, 2011 at 2:08 PM ^
Both ESPN and CNN are running internet polls on whether Paterno should have been fired. Obviously neither of these are scientific polls since they don't use random samples, but I think they're comparable to each other. The CNN poll is running 74-26 in favor of the firing, but the ESPN poll is just 58-42 that he should have been fired. I take from this that a disproportionate fraction of avid sports fans lack the proper perspective when a big sports figure is involved, and also maybe that ESPN's user base is younger than CNN's and less likely to have kids of their own.
November 10th, 2011 at 3:38 PM ^
PSU fans are probably more aware of the ESPN survey and may have linked it on their message boards to "show support for Joe."
November 10th, 2011 at 2:31 PM ^
I'm assuming the allegations are true with this statement, but Joe Paterno enabled the acts to be committed on Penn State grounds and facilities. It would be one really bad act among many good acts is the 1999 retirement was covering up a single incident that Paterno was aware of. But to then let that guy use Penn State for his charity that supplied his depravity is just as horrible as the acts themselves. I mean it's not even turning a blind eye to it, it is ENABLING IT.
The rational conclusion is that Joe Paterno sees nothing wrong with what Sandusky did, which tears apart his entire image. And the students rallying in support are delusional or just plain too lazy to remove their ignorance. There act is one of "turning a blind eye to facts".
Granted the facts are at an allegation stage and Sandusky will have his day in court. But usually grand jury findings aren't easily dismissed or explained away.
Personally, I think Paterno should have stepped down even if he thought he was innocent so as not to distract his team and staff. But he's not acting like an innocent man protesting allegations, or even protecting his team. He's stated that he wanted to keep coaching but his boss said he couldn't.
I'm personally still shocked by the gravity of these allegations and what they mean. But I'm not over burning candles at Joe Pa's house, even figuratively.
November 10th, 2011 at 3:28 PM ^
Well, legends only exist in our minds. Turns out we're all just dudes that screw stuff up every day we're alive. JoePa is no better than anyone else, and it's a bit of a shame that we as a society are surprised by that.
November 10th, 2011 at 3:34 PM ^
for critical thought. This is the best blog on the internet because of posts like this. Regardless of whether you agree with the OP, the fact that this blog offers a medium for deep, critical thought and discussions like this is proof that Michigan fans and MGoBlog in particular are a cut above the rest.
November 10th, 2011 at 10:56 PM ^
you are absolutely right. so i upvoted too, and i rarely do so. i don't really get into that up/down voting stuff.
if i had one of those smiley emoticon things, i would post it here. /s
November 10th, 2011 at 10:37 PM ^
A little history goes a long way. At first, I didn't want to believe the problem went as deeply as I now do, but the longer I looked it, the more inevitable I found the conclusion. I only had trouble believing what the facts were telling me because I didn't want to accept JoePa as that kind of fallible. I, like so many of us, was a slight victim of the Cult of Personality. As a Michigan fan, it was ealier for me to move past this and see the truth. This is a bit like us trying to accept that Lloyd Carr wasn't Uncle Lloyd, but a thousand times worse. It will hurt PSU fans, and it will take them a long time to come to grips with what it means for them.
Comments