Me and Muhammad

2019

Cassius Marcellus Clay Jr. publically changed his name to Muhammad Ali on 6 March 1964. In doing so, he signalled his allegiance to the Nation of Islam -a controversial religious sect that advocated racial separatism and black nationalismas well as his intention to defy established cultural expectations for black athletes in the United States. Through his name change, he provoked diverse reactions from the media that changed over time. This study analyses the discursive significance of Ali's two names -Clay and Ali -as a way to analyse complex and shifting journalistic attitudes toward him between 1960 and 1975. To do so, it employs a mix of digital and traditional methodologies: specifically, distant and close reading. As such, this thesis is part of a growing body of digitally driven scholarship that is re-shaping sport history in the new millennium. The foundation of this study is a distant reading of almost 40,000 articles written about Ali between 1960 and 1975 from 13 newspapers. This group of publications was selected to be geographically and culturally diverse, and includes three major white-run dailies and ten black newspapers from across the United States. Distant reading -a form of quantitative analyses that uses graphical representations to visualise trends and themes within large bodies of literature -indicates that rather than moving gradually toward acceptance of his Muslim name and its associated identity, journalists shifted their attitudes toward Ali at three key junctures. In March 1964, journalists overwhelmingly referred to him as Cassius Clay, not Muhammad Ali. This practice continued until September 1967, when newspapers began to print the two names almost interchangeably. The final shift occurred in March 1971, when journalists reversed their earlier rejection of the Muslim name completely and began referring to him almost exclusively as Muhammad Ali. Guided by the shifts identified by distant reading, this thesis then moves to a detailed close reading of individual articles with the aim of uncovering the deep, discursive forces that shaped usage of Ali's two names. An analysis of articles published between March 1964 and September 1967 reveals that although both black and white newspapers comprehensively rejected Ali's Muslim name, there were important differences in their motivations. The rejection of the name by white newspapers was symptomatic of their broader refusal to engage critically with racial issues during the mid-1960s. By comparison, the black press rejected the name

Muhammad Ali will always be known and remembered for all of the glorious victories and triumphs inside the ring and outside of the ring. However, he has yet to be given proper dues for his influence on the Vietnam boycott and overall role in creating public resentment of the war in Vietnam. Not only did Ali brake records and racial boundaries, he established a public voice in the opposition of the American government, in a time of war at that. Muhammad Ali is without a doubt one of several significant leaders of the 20th century.

Sport in History, 2018

When Muhammad Ali died in June 2016, he was remembered by the media as a hero in the fight for racial equality. Tributes for the great boxer were meaningful in many respects, but they were also incomplete, sanitised and misleading. This paper aims to re-complicate our understanding of Ali's portrayals in the media by analysing newspaper discourse in the years immediately following his conversation to the Nation of Islam. Specifically, this investigation compares and contrasts the complex ways that black and white journalists used both his birth name (Cassius Clay) and his adopted name (Muhammad Ali) as a way of signalling their attitudes toward him. Close reading of newspaper articles published between March 1964 and September 1967 reveals that black journalists rejected Ali's adopted name and identity almost as comprehensively as their white colleagues. This aspect of Ali's legacy has been largely forgotten by the contemporary media, which calls us to consider the cultural construction of social memory, particularly when it revolves around sporting icons.

MIRDEC-15th, International Academic Conference on Economics, Business, Globalization and Social Science Studies / SPAIN, 2019

In this research, we will try to understand the change of an Afro-American boxer Cassius Clay to the "global icon" Muhammad Ali. He not only changes his fate of himself by rejecting Christianity and joining the army service against Vietnam, he also became an icon for the Third World countries and especially in the Middle East and Africa where his ancestors came from. His change also gave him popularity in Turkey as a developing country. By converting and embracing Islam, he also rejected the White-Anglosaxon's American lifestyle and his boxing matches became meaningful for the other Muslim and African countries and the rings became "political pulpits". Our aim is to tell the change of Cassius to Ali and his effect on the Turkish audience. Along with the literature review method, this research aims a descriptive study. In order to understand the structure, we used the Turkish newspapers, testimonies, and folk songs dedicated to Muhammad Ali in Turkey.

The International Journal of the History of Sport, 2003

According to some commentators, 'When the 1990s began, Mike Tyson was simply the most feared fighter the sport of boxing had known.' 1 However, in a tumultuous career the former world heavyweight champion has attracted considerable media attention as a result of his behaviour both inside and out of the ring. In the USA he has been described at various times as 'the most dangerous man in sport', 'an animal', 'a monster', 'a savage', 'an American pit bull' and 'evil incarnate'. His very physique, revealed at weigh-ins, appeared frightening, with 'muscle piled on muscle', and neck and head like a 'death's head'. 2 His visits to Britain in 2000 were met with widespread condemnation in the media and from women's rights groups because of his record of violence both in the ring and outside, and especially against women. This tide of condemnation rose even higher following his pre-match brawl with Lennox Lewis on 22 January 2002 which, coupled with further possible charges of sexual assault, led the Nevada State Athletic commission to deny him a licence to box. Although recognizing him as 'boxing's most fearsome and dangerous attraction', the press was filled with references to his 'uncontrolled savagery', 'animal behaviour', 'mental instability' and 'depraved outbursts'. 3 One respected British sports commentator, Hugh McIlvanney, looked forward in anticipation to Lewis 'Taming The Beast' in Memphis in June 2002 and removing 'sport's most pervasive and toxic pollutant'. 4 Yet as McIlvanney pointed out, many people felt Tyson was 'more sinned against than sinning', and the boxer continued to be a source of 'fascination'. Indeed Tyson met with as much adulation from young black (and indeed some white) followers when he visited Brixton, Manchester and later Glasgow in 2000, as he did among similar groups in America; throughout his career he has had as many defenders as detractors. These differing responses reflect the fact that, as John M. Sloop has said, Tyson as boxer, African American and male 'is constructed rhetorically', the subject of 'multiple cultural representations'. 5 In this Tyson is little different from many other black boxers before him. However, an examination of the interplay between race and masculinity may offer a wider insight into these readings of the boxer as cultural 'text'. While 203sh06.

American Journal of Sociology, 2004

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

British Journal of Sports Medicine, 2012