Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp
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.
University of Illinois Press and American Folklore Society are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to The Journal of American Folklore.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 128.226.37.5 on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:03:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
SIMON J. BRONNER
At the end of the twentieth century,pigeon shoots, often described in media coverage
as a "folk tradition," made front-page news. Every Labor Day from 1987 to 1997,
protests by animal rights activists of a community-sponsored pigeon-shooting con-
test in the rural Pennsylvania-German hamlet of Hegins were the subject of a story
carriedon national wire services, mass-market magazines, radio talk shows, television
stations, and even the tabloid press.' The animal rights movement's major campaign
against the Hegins event was intended to protest live animal shoots nationally, but
organizations targeted Hegins because as a large public festival, the pigeon shoot
symbolized, for them, the excesses of animal abuse in traditional activities that could
This content downloaded from 128.226.37.5 on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:03:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
410 JournalofAmericanFolklore118 (2005)
be illuminated for national media. Pennsylvania drew special attention from the
animal rights movement because the state is recognized as the national center of the
tradition, with shoots at private "rod and gun clubs" on almost any weekend of the
spring and fall. Also of concern to animal rights organizations, Pennsylvania is a
major hunting state, often being a national leader in the number of hunting licenses
issued. Heads of the major national animal rights organizations-People for the
Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA),the Fund for Animals, and Trans-Species Un-
limited (TSU)-believed that, if media attention could be brought to what they saw
as an obviously horrific event, the public would immediately apply pressure to ban
the shoots and turn against hunting. Implicit in their strategy as a social movement
calling for fundamental change was to erode what they viewed as America's irrational
attachment to "tradition."
Yettargeting central Pennsylvaniawas a risky move for most national animal rights
organizations because it was one of their first forays into folk practices of the rural
American heartland.2Previously, the movement had enjoyed successes exposing the
abuses of animals in medical and commercial research, appealing therefore to the
anticorporate and antiinstitutional sentiments of many Americans (Finsen and Fin-
sen 1994:108-52; Guither 1998:73-112). Further,the image of the common or street
pigeon used at the shoot was hardly as cuddly as the petlike animals in campaigns
against medical experimentation and the wearing of fur. The movement's leaders
realized they would have to transform the public's image of the bird from dirty urban
pest to tender dove of peace. Once committed to a mass protest and civil disobedience
A
: 1 .,."g. ~r ~"
f 1(?
"? ::?L 1
a1~3~ ~;:i-a
-,...
j~l~(ia .~::i
*V?I:0?:
-YPCII-- id:* :
?13. ;r
i?$ i~ t~~i
~~b?,r
~*d::i-
CLI
'*r I:r?. I a
~
" ,.?? .c- 4 c Z"il
This content downloaded from 128.226.37.5 on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:03:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Bronner,ContestingTradition 411
41P
This content downloaded from 128.226.37.5 on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:03:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
412 JournalofAmericanFolklore118 (2005)
This content downloaded from 128.226.37.5 on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:03:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Bronner, Tradition
Contesting 413
on whatoughtto be done.Animalsdeserverespectandprotectionnotjustbecause
theyarealive,butbecausetheyarethe "subject-of-alife,"thatis, theyhavebeliefs
anddesires,perception,
memory,andinterests. Theyfeelpleasureandpainandpos-
sessan"individual
welfare"in thesensethattheirexperiential
lifefareswellorillfor
them (2004:20). This state separatesanimals from blades of grass, potatoes, or cancer
cells that can also be said to be alive. The state also gives them an "inherent value"
sharedbymoralagentsandpatientsbecausetheyareuniqueandirreplaceable.
Thus,
Regan argues that humans and animals having inherent value possess the fundamen-
tal rightto be treatedwith respectand to receivejusticebut realizesthatmanytradi-
tional moral systemsare obstaclesto these goals,especiallythe "conditional"view
thathumansaremorallyjustifiedin controllingandkillinganimalsif they areharm-
ful, dangerous,and diseased,or if they providebenefitsto humansas food or in ex-
perimentation. He observes that moral agents can do what is right or wrong in ways
that affect or involve moral patients, and animal rights activists take that pronounce-
mentto workto changeunjustmoralsystems(2004:18).
Changeis not possible,activistsoften explain,until "tradition"as a positivesocial
value is altered;as Mary Midgley states in Animals and Why They Matter (1983), the
animal rights goal is "removing barriers which our tradition has erected against
concern for animals" (1983:144). From this vantage point, tradition is a static instru-
ment of human dominion that people in culture mindlessly follow without regard
to harmful consequences to animals. Although most folklorists would argue for a
more dynamic definition of tradition, animal rights philosophers share with folklor-
ists the perspective that traditions often dismissed as play are crucial to challenge as
avenues for change of belief and moral systems (see Ben-Amos 1984; Bronner 1998).
Other philosophers argue, however, that inherent value derives from the capacity to
make moral judgments and have a consciousness of duties (Cohen 2003; Rickaby
1976; Ritchie 1976). In that sense, humans have rights that animals do not; humans
can be stewards for animals and, in most cases, humans imagine themselves as a
higher order over the lower order of animals. Presenting a symbolic contrast between
the respected human and the disrespected rat, for example, Carl Cohen states that,
"although both may have value as lives, only humans have inherent value in the sense
from which rights may be inferred" (2003:28).
A more positive view of tradition than in animal rights philosophy is implied in
the assignment of inherent value solely to humans. Because value is inherited, some
cultural transmission from one generation to another is assumed to distinguish the
experience of being human. Tradition expressing the development of community
bonds and continuity across generations rhetorically refersto a higher cultural order.
It gains prestige by giving identity not just to humanity, but also to a differentiation
by group or community set in place. Tradition-and therefore folklore-has an in-
trinsic value by representing the social basis or cultural root of identity. JayMechling
tests the boundaries implied in an anthrocentric view of tradition, however, in a study
of play traditions that humans form with their pets (1989). He recognizes that one
view of common traditions of "fetch"with dogs is that pet owners anthropomorphize
their animal companions; they attribute intentional consciousness, that is, human
qualities, to the animals (1989:315). Characteristic of folklore as a human tradition,
This content downloaded from 128.226.37.5 on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:03:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
414 JournalofAmericanFolklore118 (2005)
This content downloaded from 128.226.37.5 on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:03:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Bronner,ContestingTradition 415
This content downloaded from 128.226.37.5 on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:03:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
416 JournalofAmericanFolklore118 (2005)
This content downloaded from 128.226.37.5 on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:03:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Bronner, Contesting Tradition 417
that is, chalk up a large number of hits. Winners are declared in different categories,
but the straight, or public, shoots are celebrations of shooters' efficiency. The priva-
tized form of the shoot, still practiced at numerous rod and gun clubs, is "trap and
handle" shooting or "match shoots," which are structurally similar to male ritual
combat in that an opponent is defeated (see Canfield 1992:14-9; Krider [1853]
1966:272-7; Song 2000a:176-85). The trap is located twenty-one yards from the
shooter, and the field's bounds are forty yards from the center of the trap. If a hit bird
lands beyond the forty-yard boundary, it is considered a missed bird (Canfield
1992:14). The birds in match shoots are "brushed,"that is, trained to fly in particu-
larly designed patterns unknown to the shooter. The trapper's training device is
typically a small wire five inches long with a small bell attached to the end. The "rig,"
as it is called, is tied to the middle feathers of the bird's tail with string and is ex-
tended to either side of the head or above the head (1992:15). Crepe paper may be
inserted into the bell so that it will flutter when the bird takes flight. The jingling of
the bell and fluttering of the paper, trappers say, scare the pigeon, prodding it to fly
more quickly out of the trap.
Shooter Patrick Canfield explains the trappers' techniques: "If the trappers want
the bird to fly to the right, the rig is placed on the left side of the bird's head, and vice
versa. If the bird is to fly low and straight, the rig is placed directly above its head.
However, the birds do not always adhere to the predicted flight pattern, and some
matches are won and lost because the pigeon does not perform as programmed"
(1992:15). Most trappers have as many as three or four hundred birds in their home
pens, selecting twenty or thirty pigeons for each match to be brushed (1992:15). Most
trappers learned the skills of training pigeons and building pigeon houses as boys
from fathers or older relatives,the techniques consistently passed down to the present
generation since the nineteenth century (see Allen [1959] 1975;American Boy'sBook
[1864] 2000:332-51). Trapperswho are usually experts in the craft of breeding and
training pigeons team up with a shooter, who must shoot the bird trapped by the
opponent's trapper. Gamblers bet on the overall outcome of the shoot and on par-
ticular traps.
Pigeon matches are typically between two teams. Each team member bets money
against the opposing team on a "winner-take-all"basis, the object being to eliminate
the opponent as well as the birds. Additional bets may be placed for each shot: Bettors
yell out "ten for a hit!" or "twenty for a miss" as the shooter squares to shoot. Dra-
matic tension rises, because the shooter could intentionally miss to make money on
side bets. In fact, one resident reminded me, "One must be very careful at a pigeon
match because people will take advantage of you any way they can" (Wiscount 1989).
The bettor wants to be sure he does not become, in the local lingo, a "pigeon mark."
An association is made between the gamble potentially humiliating, and therefore
feminizing, the duped loser, along with the targeted bird. Ritualized male combat is
evident in the match between the trapper and the shooter as well as between the two
shooters. In straight shooting, the skill of the marksman, rather than that of the trap-
per and trainer, is tested. Every contestant is out for her or himself as opposed to a
team seeking to reduce the opposing side to nothing. In direct shooting, the score is
valued, while in the match shoot, the objective is elimination.
This content downloaded from 128.226.37.5 on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:03:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
418 Journal of American Folklore 118 (2005)
This content downloaded from 128.226.37.5 on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:03:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Bronner,ContestingTradition 419
for the entire valley, exceeding other events such as the fireman's carnival and com-
munity agricultural fair.
By using Coleman's name, Hegins organizers hoped to put the small town on the
shooting world map, taking advantage of Pennsylvania's large population of hunters
interested in gun skills. Lodged between imposing mountains, Hegins was not easily
accessible, but also had a reputation for boasting prime hunting lands and it vied
with the western urban settings of Chicago and KansasCity for attracting champion-
level contestants. Hegins strategically added entertainment such as dancing girls and
musical bands, brought celebrities to host the event, and lured contestants from the
state championships held around the same time. The first few shoots featured both
clay and live bird contests, but, as the town sought to distinguish the event by linking
it with a sense of pioneer heritage and differentiating it from the official trapshooting
world that had exclusively adopted day targets, it promoted the live bird games as a
festive tradition.
Whereas the renowned Grand American Trapshooting Tournament had dropped
its pigeon shoot competition in 1903 to modernize its image, Hegins retained its live
bird shoot intentionally because it was associated with the past (Trapshooting Hall
of Fame 2004). Begun with seventy-three entries in 1934, the Hegins shoot allocated
profits from the event toward the maintenance and expansion of the community
park. The shoot attracted a high of 380 entries in 1946, leveled off to around 100
during the 1960s, and grew again during the 1980s, including a figure of 335 entries
in 1983. Some of the growth during the 1980s could be attributed to an increased
number of contestants from outside the state, especially in light of the fact that live
bird shooting had been outlawed by most state legislatures. In 1984 an animal-loving
couple in the Schuylkill County seat of Pottsville alerted Trans-SpeciesUnlimited, an
animal rights organization based in Williamsport, Pennsylvania, of their objection
to the event. In ensuing years, a handful of protestors from the area demonstrated at
the Hegins shoot but attracted minimal media attention. The organization stepped
up its efforts by inviting national animal rights organizations with abolitionist zeal
such as PETAand the Fund for Animals to intervene. What was at first a loose series
of protests became highly organized, led by the Fund in 1989; many busloads of
protestors descended upon Hegins, whereas attendance from supporters of the shoot
inside the park increased dramatically into the thousands. The height of the protest
was in 1991 and 1992, when hundreds of protestors were arrested for running onto
the fields to rescue birds from their traps.
When the buses of protestors unloaded, their urban sources immediately con-
trasted with the attendees of the shoot from rural central Pennsylvania. Another
contrast frequently mentioned on both sides was the one between the predominance
of women among the protesters and that of men among the supporters. In 1991, I
estimated that 75 percent of the protestorswere women whereas more than 60 percent
of supporters inside the park were men. Major animal rights organizations repre-
sented at the shoot were led by women, and the main spokesman for the Hegins Shoot
Committee was a man. Although the supporters were not overwhelmingly male, men
were especially conspicuous and dominant as shooters, trapper boys, officials, cooks,
and vendors. The percentage of women in the protests was consistent with compos-
This content downloaded from 128.226.37.5 on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:03:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
420 Journal ofAmerican Folklore118 (2005)
This content downloaded from 128.226.37.5 on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:03:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Bronner,ContestingTradition 421
of NewYorkCity,whosponsored ananti-pigeonshootingbill,andHoraceWhiteof
Syracuse, White argued,"I don'tbelieve SenatorSlaterhaseverbeenatapigeonshoot.
Hemayhavebeenat a dogfight,butnot at a well-regulated pigeonshoot.I haveat-
tendedthem.Thebirdsarefedandstrengthened to givethemgreaterflyingpower.
Shootsarewellconductedandwoundedbirdsretrievedat once.Menstandat the
extremelimitof thekillingpowerof theirguns.I believeit is a goodsport.I believe
in all suchAmericansports,footballespecially. It is wholesomefortheAmerican
youth"("ToProhibitPigeonShooting"1901:6).
Theriseof pigeonshootsas a sportis notedin the mid-nineteenth centuryby
Philadelphia gunmaker JohnKrider. Inhiswidelycirculating chronicle
of fieldsports
of 1853,he discussed theuseof thenowextinctpassenger pigeonsfortrapshooting,
possiblya clueto theemergence of thecompetitive targetshoot.Theseshootsprob-
ablygrewout of pioneerhuntsof passenger pigeons,so abundantin thewildthat
oraltraditionreferred to thewaythey"darkened thesky"(French1919:17-22,229;
Leffingwell [1895]1967:129-46; Schorger[1955]1973:129-98). Thepigeonshoots
of thenineteenth centurydemonstrated in a moreregulated waythehunters'shoot-
ing skillsandprovidedan occasionfor gambling,or the passengerpigeonswere
considered easymarksin thewild.Thecenterof thetraditionin theMiddleAtlantic
statesmaybe explainedby the factthatpigeonswereespeciallyabundantin the
"hardwood belt"spreading westward fromtheMiddleAtlanticintotheMidwestand
Upland South (French 1919:11-4).
Thecolonialheritageof shootingpassenger pigeonswasamongthefirstprotested
huntingactivities,asindicatedin JamesFenimoreCooper'scelebrated textThePio-
neersby the disgruntlement of NattyBumppo(knownas Leatherstocking) witha
massslaughterof pigeons,whichhe calls"harmless as a gartersnake,"in Upstate
NewYork.An"uneasyspectator," Leatherstocking protests,"Thiscomesof settling
a country!HerehaveI knownthe pigeonsto flyforfortylongyears,and,till you
madeyourclearings, therewasnobodyto skearorto hurtthem"([1823]1964:235).
"Sportsman" BillyKirbyhumiliatesLeatherstocking forhis protestby feminizing
himasweak,impotent,andsentimental, callinghim an "oldcornstalk," "oldfool,"
and"sapless stub."Inlanguageechoingsomeof theHeginssupporters' resentment
of theoutsiderwhois unawareof thepigeon'seffectasa peston crops,Cooperde-
scribesKirby's responseto Leatherstocking's sympathy forthepigeons:"What!Old
he
Leatherstocking,"cried,"grumbling atthe loss of a few pigeons!Ifyouhadto sow
yourwheattwice,andthreetimes,as I havedone,you wouldn'tbe so mass-fully
feelingtowardsthedivils.Hurrah,boys!Scatterthefeathers!" ([1823]1964:235-6).
Thepilesof birdsthatresultedfromtheshootingassertedthepowerof thesettler
in the new land to reap benefits from the lush environment. Leatherstocking leaves,
saddened by the "destruction," carefully respectful of life by avoiding stepping on
the birds. The sheriff has a different take on the event, seeing play and pragmatic
consequence for what has transpired,exclaiming "Sport! ... it is princely sport! There
are some thousands of the blue-coated boys on the ground, so that every old woman
in the village may have a potpie for the asking" ([1823] 1964:239). In his plaint, the
old Leatherstocking remembers the days before the expansive new civilization dom-
inated the wild and defiled the virgin land, while the sportsmen and sheriff optimis-
This content downloaded from 128.226.37.5 on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:03:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
422 JournalofAmericanFolklore118 (2005)
This content downloaded from 128.226.37.5 on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:03:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Bronner, Tradition
Contesting 423
This content downloaded from 128.226.37.5 on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:03:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
424 JournalofAmericanFolklore118 (2005)
text was Peter Singer'sAnimal Liberation,which opened with the declaration that the
struggle against the tyranny of human over nonhuman animals was "causing an
amount of pain and suffering that can only be compared with that which resulted
from the centuries of tyranny by white humans over black humans" ([ 1975] 1990:i).
He went on to proclaim that the animal rights campaign is as important as "any of
the moral and social issues that have been fought over in recent years" ([1975] 1990:
i).7 In keeping with the struggle against human tyranny as a form of slavery and
discrimination, many animal rights activists distinguished their movement from that
of animal welfare with the rhetoric of "abolition" (Spiegel [1988] 1996). Other ani-
mal rights activists referredto genocide, the Holocaust, and male exploitation, imply-
ing that the cruel treatment of animals predisposed humans to creating destructive
social inequalities (Adams [1990] 2000; Patterson 2002). Although some observers
viewed animal rights as tangential to the struggle for human rights and social reform,
animal rights advocates insisted that its movement reached the root cause of injustice.
Josephine Donovan, writing on animal rights and feminist theory, for example, pro-
nounced that "the domination of nature, rooted in postmedieval, Western, male
psychology, is the underlying cause of the mistreatment of animals as well as of the
exploitation of women and the environment" (2003:47; emphasis added).
Calling for abolition of human exploitation of animals, the animal rights move-
ment supplanted the protectionist animal welfare organizations of the nineteenth
century, its leaders coming largely from domestic abuse and feminist ideological
backgrounds (Adams 1995; Guither 1998:35-72; Mackinnon 2004). The outrage of
violence in animal rights abuse, the national director of the Fund for Animals told
me, came directly from her experience in organizations fighting spousal battery,child
abuse, and rape. Much of the rhetoric of protest and defense of pigeon shoots was
the same in both periods, with some notable differences.During the protest of Hegins,
more of the issues raised were about the exposure of children to violence and the
moral significance of tradition in maintaining community. Fueling the heated ex-
change between opposing sides in Hegins was frightening news of serial killing. One
was the shock of JeffreyDahmer's serial killing and butchery of young boys, with the
animal rights movement playing upon reports that he and other publicized predators
allegedly abused animals as children (Clifton 1994; De Angelis 1998; Morella 1998).
In a letter from the national director of the Fund for Animals to a high school con-
sidering excusing students for working as "trapperboys" at a pigeon shoot, the argu-
ment went,
This content downloaded from 128.226.37.5 on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:03:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Bronner,ContestingTradition 425
4
o
if i
pi
iv-
.i
"i3
; ..:,b
RErPE, Y S " "
S"ta
av 1
I
? t
._.
For Hegins supporters, though, the news of serial killing, alien to the region, was
affirmation of the depravity of the cities and family values gone wrong (often associ-
ated, they said, with acceptance of homosexuality, abortion, and radical feminism).
Hegins was, supporters repeatedly told journalists, a peaceful, sociable place rooted
in the land where everyone knew each other-a rarity in urbanizing, modernizing
America. Animal rights organizations decried the pigeon shoot as extreme violence
because of the extent of the killing. In a post-Holocaust concern for social genocide
and urban decay causing fear of the rampant "random"violence propagatedby roam-
ing youth gangs, the animal rights organizations repeatedly hammered away at the
Hegins bird "holocaust," "massacre,"."slaughter,"and "murder."
Despite the growth of American folklore studies out of the concern for threatened
traditions and cultures through both fin-de-siecle periods, pigeon shoots, and shoot-
ing and general hunting practices, rarely attracted folkloristic notice before the pro-
tests, despite being widely recognized in the media as being among America's most
enduring, if privatized, folk traditions (see Bronner 1998:417-34). What made the
Hegins pigeon shoot newsworthy was the protest of animal rights activists against a
This content downloaded from 128.226.37.5 on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:03:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
426 JournalofAmericanFolklore118 (2005)
?
WOOE iit t
r-
_~
public practice they called "barbaric"and "cruel."It was also picture-worthy, as the
media often sought to find "shocking" images of a bizarre anachronistic ritual to
present for public consumption. It turned out not to be the bloodbath that animal
rights protestors predicted, although activists pointed cameras to boys wringing the
necks of the birds and the massive accumulation of dead birds in barrels.
Inevitably, the question of the tradition's meaning for communities, as well as
shooters, in a modern age came to the fore. Was it sport? Was it slaughter? Was it
festival?Wasit sickness?Wasit heritage?Journalistscould easily solicit positive answers
to all of the above questions from various sides, often attributing difference of opin-
ions to culture wars in America between the traditional values of heartland America
and the moral imperatives of cosmopolitan culture. Yetalso evident in the reporting
was a skepticism that all the fuss over pigeons was reallymerited. I stood, for instance,
with shocked wire-service reporters as protestors risked their lives running out into
the field of fire to rescue pigeons and hundreds of individuals were arrested over the
course of the protest.
Structurally,the protests featured civil disobedience characteristicof human rights
movements' struggles for racial and gender equality. The "rescues"represented the
seriousness of the issue and signified the idea that the animals had individual "lives"
worth saving. But what occurred was that the rural residents of Hegins aroused
sympathy in the court of public opinion because they appeared unfairly victimized
by animal rights protestors. They also appeared an underdog in the fight because they
claimed that they were the ones marginalized by modernizing society and that their
This content downloaded from 128.226.37.5 on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:03:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Bronner, Tradition
Contesting 427
This content downloaded from 128.226.37.5 on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:03:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
428 JournalofAmericanFolklore118 (2005)
Althoughanimalrightsorganizationsfrequentlymakecomparisonsbetweenpigeon
shoots,cockfights,anddogfightsbecauseof theirlabelingasbarbaric"bloodsports,"
some notabledifferencesexist.As "fantasyplay,"Dundesobserves,the cockfightand
dogfightareritualizedcombatbetweenmaleanimalsand extendsymbolicallyto the
fightingof men to the death.He placesthemin a patternof manymalecombatgames
by whichmenhavea needto repeatedlydemonstratetheirvirilityor manliness(1987,
1997).Thetrainersareusuallymen,andthe fight'smostlymalespectatorsareengaged
in the sport by gambling,which Dundes also arguesis symbolicallyrelatedto the
masturbatoryevents of handlingexcitedcocks in the pit or ring. Dundes finds it
ironic that in demonstratingvirility,male combatantsengagein a form of homo-
sexualattackthat feminizesthe opponent.Supportersof the pigeon shoot do not
categorizepublic pigeon shoots as a "fight,"but ratheras a trapshootingor target
sport.The shooteris human,usuallymale,armedwith a potent shotgun.
Thenwhatdoes the act of shootingrepresent? A commonFreudianinterpretation
of the male attractionto shooting is the phallic extensionof the gun and thereby
feminist outcry against gun ownership is, at least in part, a symbolic castration of
male power (Freud 1995:339;Luke 1998; Stange 1999). That being the case, shooting
the gun is ejaculation and folk speech for climax, such as "shooting a wad" or "shoot-
ing white," support this interpretation. In this perspective, virility is gained from
shooting a gun at a live targetbecause of the penetration achieved and demonstration
of potency; in fact, a "shooter"is sometimes cited as derisive street slang for a would-
be "tough," and "shooting the agate" is pursuing a woman for sexual intercourse
(Partridge 1961:621;Wentworth and Flexner 1967:470). In relation to hunting, shoot-
This content downloaded from 128.226.37.5 on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:03:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Bronner,ContestingTradition 429
ing is about pursuit of prey, and many songs and jokes refer to hunting for sexual
conquest (see "Hunting Jokes"2004; Randolph 1992:42-3). In his analytical survey
of Anglo-American traditional erotica, FrankHoffmann lists several under narratives
of seduction, particularly symbolizing female animals as targets (X724.1.4.1 Hunter
seduces girl by telling her he is hunting bonny black hare, and asking if she knows
where it is; X724.1.4.1.1 Seduction by showing girl how gun is shot; X724.1.7.1 Man
seduces girl by showing her how to play game called "shoot the cat"; Hoffmann
1973:260-1; see also Randolph 1992:42-3). Conversely, an "unloaded gun" in folk
narrative is coding for impotence (X735.9.1; Hoffmann 1973:275). In American
popular culture, Hank Williams, Jr.,had a major hit on the country charts in 1983
with the song "Gonna Go Huntin' Tonight," with lyrics about pursuing women as
"wild game": "Don't fire on the first one, Don't waste your bullets on a little bitty
baby, Get yourself a grown woman." Because the gun provides lethal power, and the
connotation of male power,the implication is that the pursuit is predatory.The action
shows complete dominance, often resulting in the elimination of an opponent, as
indicated by the folk speech of feeling "shot down." In cards, "shooting the moon"
leaves all the other players with nothing, and "shooting the works" means betting
everything.
It is important to point out that, as an example of semiotic layering in an event
such as the pigeon shoot, shooting guns at animals carries significance for residents
as provision of sustenance and independent self-sufficiency. In its imagery of the
settler drawing food and clothing from adventure in the wild, shooting guns evokes
the sense of hunting as human dominion over the land. The land, especially in pioneer
American mythology, is bountiful and capable of providing all the settlers' needs; the
city is seen as contrary to a hunting ethos of being in touch with the natural cycle of
life. Russell Nye calls this American belief the myth of superabundance, which is
related to Dundes's referenceto the American folk idea of unlimited good (Nye 1966;
Dundes 1972). The historical gun is therefore a referent to tradition; it is the tool for
control of the land, the sign of provision and independent self-sufficiency for one's
family and, in the process of clearing with other hunting settlers, the formation of
social bonds characteristic of community. Dundes adds the crucial point that the
belief in abundance breeds optimism for the future as well as social self-confidence,
but there is the risk in this worldview that change can undermine the perception of
the bounty's source (1972:98). At Hegins, there was a perception, for example, that
government regulation and cosmopolitan interference threatened the cultural insu-
lation, as well as natural bounty and socioeconomic independence, residents could
enjoy.Particularlyin the historical context of the region's economic decline, the pigeon
shoot annually provided a ritual reaffirmation of a regional worldview based on a
pioneer hunting legacy. The sense of provision and clearing is a connotation of the
pigeon shoot expressed often by hunters and a reason they do not relate the pigeon
shoot to the central image of the savage combat of cockfights and dogfights.
The phallic symbolism of the gun becomes important to consider because an-
other differencebetween cockfights and pigeon shoots is that, in the shoot, the animal
is symbolically feminine. In folk speech, a pigeon refers to a girl or young woman,
and a dove is frequently a term of endearment for a child or attractive woman (Wen-
This content downloaded from 128.226.37.5 on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:03:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
430 Journalof AmericanFolklore118 (2005)
This content downloaded from 128.226.37.5 on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:03:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Bronner, Tradition
Contesting 431
greateresteemthanEuropean
Christians. givenexampleof this
Themostfrequently
split is a riot of 1921 in Bombay that erupted after two European boys killed pigeons
in the street.Accordingto Ingersoll,"thestockexchangeand other generalmarkets
were closed, and a wide-spreadstrikeof workmenin India was threatened,as an
evidence of the deep feeling aroused by the boys' sacrilegious act" (1923:136-7).
Oneexplanationfor pigeonsbeingtargetedfor killing,despitetheirsymbolic
spiritualconnections,is theirhistoricalroleas a prime sacrificialanimalin purifica-
tion rites.The HebrewBiblegivesdetailson the purificationritewith pigeons:
If his offeringto the LORD is a burntofferingof birds,he shall choose his offering
fromturtledovesor pigeons.The priestshallbringit to the altar,pinch off its head,
and turn it into smokeon the altar;and its blood shallbe drainedout againstthe
side of the altar.He shallremoveits cropwith its feathers,and castit into the place
of the ashes,at the east side of the altar.The priest shall tear it open by its wings,
without severingit, and turn it into smokeon the altar,upon the wood that is on
the fire.It is a burntoffering,an offeringby fire,of pleasingodor to the LORD.(Le-
viticus 1:14-7)
The sacrifice of the pigeon for purity is especially imperative for a woman upon the
birth of a child and is distinguished from the lamb because the killing of the pigeon
is redemption for sin (Leviticus 12:6). This association suggests a spiritual cleansing
and regeneration after destroying the unclean bird. Wendell Levi connects this sac-
rifice to veneration of mother-goddess Astarte, the Sumerian goddess of war who is
symbolized by the dove (1957:3). Killing the dove mythologically allowed for trans-
formation from war to peace and from unclean to clean, and this imagery of the dove
as a sign of resurrection or regeneration is still evident in contemporary Easter cel-
ebrations.
Ingersoll further reports beliefs in several cultures that touching a dove would leave
a person "unclean"throughout the day (1923:129). The association of pigeons as an
omen of death and the regenerative sacrifice of pigeons for curing life-threatening
fevers are reported widely in British-American tradition (see Opie and Tatem
1989:308-9). The idea of sacrificing pigeons for regenerative human cures attracted
religious commentary when Anglican bishop Jeremy Taylor in Rule of Conscience
(1660) pronounced in favor of the idea of human dominion, "Cruelty to beasts is
innocent when it is charity to men; and therefore though we do not eat them, yet we
cut living pigeons in halfs and apply them to the feet of men in fevers" (quoted in
Opie and Tatem 1989:308). In this belief, men live, indeed come back from near death,
because pigeons die.
This ancient folk root for the symbolism of the pigeon may seem a long way from
contemporary images of the pigeon at shoots, but it is related because of the clash
over conflicting modern categorizations of the bird as symbol of both sacredness and
profanity. Indeed, the connection of the Bible as a source for opposing sides in the
pigeon shoot controversy at Hegins was explicit in protestors' appeal to protect a
sacred dove of peace, while supporters often cited the opening passages of Genesis
dictating that humans rule, master, or have dominion-depending on the transla-
This content downloaded from 128.226.37.5 on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:03:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
432 JournalofAmericanFolklore118 (2005)
tion-over the "birdsof the sky,and all the livingthingsthat creepon earth"(Gen-
esis 1:28).The dominion idea was invokedin the firstmajorcourt caseon whether
pigeonshootsviolatedanimalcrueltystatutes,Commonwealth vs.A. N. Lewisin 1891.
In maintainingthe legality of pigeon shoots, PennsylvaniaSupremeCourt Chief
JusticePaxsondeclared,"Isthe birdin the cageanybetter,or hasit anyhigherrights,
than the birdin the woods?BothwereplacedherebytheAlmighty,for the useof man
(140 Pa.261,21 A. 396, February23, 1891;emphasisadded).Animalrightsactivists
often arguedthat, definedbiblicallyas "livingsouls,"animalsdeservedprotection
andkindnessfromhumans;dominioncouldbe reinterpreted as a callto humanlove
and mercyfor animalsand vegetarianism(Fuchs2003; Linzey2003;Phelps2002;
Scully2002). Counteringthis view is frequentanthrocentricreferenceto Genesis9:
"GodblessedNoah and his sons, and said to them, 'Be fertileand increase,and fill
the earth.The fearand the dreadof you shallbe upon all the beastsof the earth,and
uponeverybirdof theair,upon everythingthat creepson the groundand all the fish
of the sea;into yourhandtheyaredelivered.Everymovingthing [creature]thatlives
shall be food for you; and as I gaveyou the green plants, I give you everything"'
(Genesis9:1-3;emphasisadded).' Withthisrhetoricalconflictin mind,someanimal
rights activistswent to churchservicesin Hegins to challengeresidents'religious
views about dominion. Indeed,an influentialanimalrightstractwrittenby Norm
PhelpscalledDominionof Love:AnimalRightsAccordingto theBible(2002) has em-
blazonedon the dedicationpage,"Forthe pigeonswho died at Hegins."
The symbolicbehaviorsof creepingor crawlingin Genesisis significantbecause
of the idea that "lowly"creaturesconnectedto the groundareunclean.The charac-
teristic"prostration"of the pigeon on the groundthat is a sourceof sacrednessin
Islamis one of profanityin Christianity.The common descriptionof the pigeonas
a "ratwith wings"is symbolicallyimportant,in fact,becauseof the profaneconnec-
tion of pigsandmice (Isaiah66:17).AnimalrightsactivistIngridNewkirkunderstood
this cognitivecategoryin her oft-quotedstatement,"aratis a pig is a dog is a boy,"
and the comparisoncame up repeatedlyin responseto pigeon-shoot supporters,
assertionsthata pigeonwas a "flyingrat"(quotedin McCabe1986:115).In fact,the
addition of the dog is importantbecauseof the symbolicreplacementof hunting
dogs in the pigeonshoot with "trapperboys";besidessuggestingequalityof species,
the analogycould also signifythat violenceto ratswas also a violationof children.
With her provocativeanalogy,Newkirktried to subvertthe traditionaldistinction
between "lowly"or dirty animals and clean humans by pointing out their emo-
tional equation.Aftershe gavethe statementto a reporter,she explained,"Theyare
all mammals.Theyall feelpain"(1986:115).In his studyof Sabbathtaboos,Dundes
interprets the predominant association of pigs and mice in the profane sphere as a
shared proclivity for eating feces (2002:117). The taboo is therefore based on the idea
that eating feces "is considered the ultimate despicable, disgusting act, which is why
God reserves it as a punishment for those who disrespect him" (117). Indeed, one of
the complaints of animal rights activists was that pigeons were kept in cages filled
with their own feces; on the other side of the debate, pigeons were associated with
polluting barns and people with droppings. Killing the pigeon as one would kill a
mouse or a rat offers sacred human redemption, because the bird is associated with
This content downloaded from 128.226.37.5 on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:03:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Bronner, Tradition
Contesting 433
This content downloaded from 128.226.37.5 on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:03:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
434 JournalofAmericanFolklore118 (2005)
This content downloaded from 128.226.37.5 on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:03:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Bronner,ContestingTradition 435
rvcvAci
$'EEII! B.IS
^ct
c$~-~
~-nsj=9
a::
Figure5. Supporterof pigeon
P~ ":x'rl
--? r X;r
~d:( shoot carryingsign stating
rrac-
.,
"PigeonsareRatswith Wings,
Shoot 'Em!"and holding
artificialratfittedwith bird
feathers.His t-shirtand hat are
?:? ?.i emblazonedwith "The
AmericanCause,"an
organizationlaunchedin 1993
whose statedmissionis to
'i "advanceand promote
., traditionalAmericanvalues."
Heginspigeon shoot, Labor
~;~?~%JrZ~?~'
?~3~s~c,3
Day, 1994. Photo by Simon J.
,a~--w~ -~5;*~~?cB~:~,:??~._?~ Bronner.
pursuit. The shooter served to eliminate the unclean from the land and thereby con-
secrate it. The result is socially regenerative. Several editorials set up the defense of
the pigeon shoot as a last stand for hunting, interpretedas a primal impulse of humans
in touch with nature, which would fall at the hands of the scourge of animal rights
protestors (Angst 1999; Slinsky 1999). I conclude from my conversations and obser-
vations at the shoot that supporters were not so much defending the shoot as they
were their agrarian tradition revolving around the idea of dominion of humans act-
ing as a community over animals and land (Berry 2003; Telleen 2003). Residents near
the park resented the mess of dead birds in their yards every Labor Day, but the shoot
gained importance as a symbol of the community's longing for ascendancy, an an-
nual ritual of regeneratingits lost glory of the past in the face of modernization. There
were times in the shoot's history when its effectiveness as a community ritual came
into question. I heard many remarks that, by the 1980s, the pigeon shoot was not so
appealing in the region as a homecoming celebration; yet, when protestors from the
cities came, they felt obliged to defend the shoot as a metaphor for the self-determi-
nation by "traditional"communities.
Huntingand ownershipof guns werepopularactivitiesin the area,and residents
wereawarethatboth werethreatenedby whatthey perceivedas urbanmoralistsig-
norantof agrarianism.The ironyis thatthe originalprotestsof the eventwereinsti-
This content downloaded from 128.226.37.5 on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:03:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
436 JournalofAmericanFolklore118 (2005)
?r"
gated by a resident of the region, but the supporters viewed the intervention of "out-
side" organizations such as PETA and the Fund for Animals from the nation's
capital as the enemy. To be sure, shooting pigeons and hunting could appear substan-
tially different because, on its surface, pigeon shoots do not engage the shooter in
pursuit of animals in the wild and some detractors say, further, that it is not a chal-
lenging "fairfight" that is part of the hunters' ethic (Eveland 1992). Nevertheless, the
shoot simulates the pursuit of prey and refersto a mythology of the virgin land when
birds were abundant and untamed. The shoot hones the skills of the hunter, many
say, because it involves guns aimed at the unpredictable target, and the shoot is a
prelude to the major fowl and deer hunting seasons of the fall. The choice of pigeons
allows for the illusion of abundant wildlife availableto the shooter and the imminent
success of the hunter in the upcoming seasons. Arguably it was not a fair or difficult
fight, but as the warmup for the fall hunting seasons it was not supposed to be. In
folk speech, there is a symbolic equivalence of the "pigeon mark" and the "easy
mark."
Especiallysignificant in the rhetoric describing the shoot and hunting is a reference
to family tradition. In a mass society where popular novelty is privileged and family
values are crumbling, many residents told me, hunting is a heritage associated with
family activities, transmitted as local knowledge from one generation to another. The
shoot built on this association by being promoted as a "familyevent"and "homecom-
ing," with children playing in a playground within the park where the shoot was held.
This content downloaded from 128.226.37.5 on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:03:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Bronner,ContestingTradition 437
This content downloaded from 128.226.37.5 on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:03:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
438 JournalofAmericanFolklore118 (2005)
shoots "one of the most bizarre forms of the violent male bonding ritual called sport
hunting." Its ultimate appeal was to "help stop the violence against women and
animals." The message was that the shoot was a metaphor for a predatory,patriarchal
society responsible for violence and social injustice.
Without directly stating so, probably because it was too disturbing to the female
protestors, the violence and injustice implied in the image of the shooter attacking
the feminine pigeon was rape. In this view, the pellets from the phallic gun penetrat-
ed the unsuspecting and unwilling bird, causing loss of feathers and blood. Several
incidents that protestors told me were especially horrifying involved male supporters
taunting them with a dead bird, as if they would meet a similar fate at the hands of
the men. Young men declared the bird to be a pernicious, profane "rat"with wings
aimed at women traditionally afraid of predatory vermin. Some even made jokes
about "flipping the bird" at the protestors, indicating the aggressive phallic gesture
of extending the middle finger and the masculinization of the pigeons. The discard-
ing of the birds, with the wringing-symbolic strangulation-after the shoots, thus
became especially disturbing as violation against women. The role of the trapperboys
in unfeelingly "bagging"the feminine birds and following the model of the potent,
predatory shooter, therefore, aroused heated emotions in many protestors, many of
whom came from backgrounds in domestic abuse counseling.
While shoot supporters found the idea of the first-aid station for birds absurd,
tearful protestors brought injured birds escaping the male onslaught to the station
for emergency treatment. Many brought feathers into the station as if they were torn
clothing. One can especially discern the metaphor of the abused woman at the hands
of men in the following reminiscence from a protestor of the 1996 pigeon shoot at
Hegins:
This content downloaded from 128.226.37.5 on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:03:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Bronner,ContestingTradition 439
has the hubris to declare that he could shoot all animals (March 2001:570-2).
For the shooter, easy sexual conquest is implicit in the shooting of the unsuspect-
ing or passive birds as a prelude to other hunting seasons, demonstrating virility
because of the risk and danger involved. In particular, the killing of pigeons, meant
to be efficient, increases manly self-confidence and validates male aggression for a
later time when the shooter engages a tougher, stronger, more elusive opponent-the
male buck. Buck season, after Thanksgiving, is usually considered the climax of the
hunting seasons; it certainly is the most popular hunting prey in Pennsylvania. At a
deer camp I attended, one member responded to sarcastic comments from other
hunters about his lack of success in "bagging a buck" with the declaration "I don't
have to prove my manhood by getting a buck every year." It was a reminder of the
virility gained from triumphing in ritual male combat against the large horny buck.
Although members of the camp hunt various animals, the heads that are mounted
as trophies on the walls are of horned bucks. The connection to symbolic castration
is evident in photographs of hunters with their fallen prey, not infrequently holding
the cut head in their groin area (Bronner 2004:38).
Some hunters find it offensive to shoot the feminine does, much as some sportsmen
consider the rapacious attack on pigeons to be somehow unsportsmanlike or "un-
manly." The "fairgame" for them that provides the challenge of combat is in meta-
phorically masculine animals, including bears and bucks. The folk saying of "shoot-
ing at a pigeon and killing a crow" to indicate a deliberate miss or bringing someone
lofty down to size through a strategic assault at an underling may be thus explained
as using the easy feminine "mark"to attacka masculine predator (Partridge1970:628).
The phrase sets up a symbolic shift from the light gentle pigeon to the evil dark crow,
from the passive to the aggressive, from the woman to the man. In contrast to the
humble cooing of the pigeon, crowing is associated with the boastful cock. One may
thus understand both the cognitive categorization of pigeon shoots with cockfights
as sexual conquest and the distancing of the pigeon shoots from cockfights because
of their lack of a male "fight."
The structure of the pigeon match shoot suggests more of a combat metaphor
between male opponents than the straight shoot, and the typical accompaniment of
gambling adds to the "action"of the match shoot, as participants like to say,therefore
connoting emotional or sexual excitement from taking aggressiverisks. From a social
structural perspective, the combat may suggest fatalism about one's status and the
future, as the goal of making money and producing thrills from the contest implies
that advancement needs the intervention of luck or chance for a context in which
wealth or "good" is limited (see Dundes 1972; Lears2003). In the system of the match
shoot, if one team advances, then the other must retreat.One does not get the impres-
sion given by Cooper in The Pioneers that the supply of value, as well as nature, is
endless. The importation of pigeons simulates a world in which the products of
nature are unlimited, but the wealth at risk with them is limited, especially in the
agrarian/mining environment of the Hegins Valley.Arguably,the fantasy of the match
shoot compensates for a loss of confidence in the future engendered by economic
decline and attendant loss of sociocultural status. One difficulty with the above social
structural interpretation is that it does not account for the historical role of gambling
This content downloaded from 128.226.37.5 on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:03:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
440 JournalofAmericanFolklore118 (2005)
This content downloaded from 128.226.37.5 on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:03:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Bronner,ContestingTradition 441
the pigeons as an extension of themselves in a way that was shocking to the protestors.
When a group of supporters spread the bird's wings in front of protestors to scare
them, they then referred to the bird as an aggressive rat.
As a contested tradition, the violence toward the animals at the shoot was pro-
jected at the human target of protestors. This view is supported by the invented
proverbial phrase, "Savea Pigeon, Shoot a Protestor,"emblazoned on the t-shirts of
many supporters. Yetthis view assumes that the shooting has one symbolic displace-
ment from the human target. It does not fully account for the layering of symbols for
hunting, masculinity, virgin land, and family in the purificatory process of the shoot.
The set of historical conditions as well as ethnographic circumstances particular to
the Hegins shoot helps explain why shooting clay targets just would not do. The
symbolic mythologizing of the bird as a narrative of clearing and provisfon offers
insight into how the shoot embodied both sacred and profane functions. Even if
residents did not shoot pigeons, they symbolized the shoot as their experience; the
shoot took on attributes of Eliade's "centre."
This content downloaded from 128.226.37.5 on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:03:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
442 Journal ofAmerican Folklore118 (2005)
This content downloaded from 128.226.37.5 on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:03:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Bronner, Contesting Tradition 443
It is less reliant on national direct action, frequently looking to litigation and legisla-
tion rather than civil disobedience (Wicklund 1998). The Hegins campaign, animal
rights leaders will tell you, attracted many more adherents to the cause, many of
whom were men. This feature has influenced a broader social agenda, although the
feature of advocacy for animals as a way to curb human violence is still prevalent.
The Fund for Animals has reached out to hunter groups to improve the hunter's
image by calling for hunting ethics that would eliminate live pigeon shoots, prairie
dog shoots, coyote killing contests, fox hunting, and pheasant tower shoots (Prescott
1995). Especially intense is the campaign against manly "blood sports" such as dog-
fights and cockfights; animal rights groups were involved in a ban on cockfighting
passed by voters in Oklahoma in 2002, leaving only two states where cockfighting is
legalized, but, to the concern of the groups, Oklahoma legislators in 2005 proposed
revising the ban to allow cockfighting without knives or gaffs (the cocks can be fitted
with muffs).1"Sensitive to the experience of being portrayed as being "against"tradi-
tion and American heritage,the Fund has been particularly carefulto work with grass
roots organizations that propose new traditions, including festivals and even shoot-
ing contests, replacing features of animal cruelty (Markarian 1997:34).
Geertz claims that events such as the cockfight show status relationships to be mat-
ters of life and death; more analysis is needed in the world of the shoot, however, to
discern the way that status relationships are symbolized-and centered. In each rela-
tionship is a tension, even a paradox,that callsfor ritualizedresolution-between sacred
and profane, redemption and sin, nature and humanity, and peace and war. In the
layered metaphorical tradition of shoots and related customs of dominion, one en-
gages relationshipsof the traditionalizedinside, conceptualized as community, and the
modern, changing outside or other, which is often conceived as mass culture or cos-
mopolitan society. In fact, much of the contestation of the shoot was about the source
of culturalproduction, from "inside"families and communities, or "outside"in urban
centers and governmental policies. The protest sought to subvert the "symbolism of
the centre"and show it as marginal,whereas supporters argued for animal rights as the
radical "fringe"and had to articulate symbolic meanings of the center to counter the
phallocentricreadingsof predatoryviolence by animal rights advocates.Both arguments
for centerednesslaid claims to representingthe heart and soul of America in Hegins.
The contestation over pigeon shoots, used widely in the media to evoke testimony
in the court of public opinion, opened for examination other dramas that had been
taken for granted-of the past and present, masculine and feminine, adult and child.
Basic to the tension of the tradition of the shoot in a modern age of sensitivity is the
use of violence and the elimination of the unclean to regenerate or redeem the past.
Killing the dirty bird appeared to consecrate the land and bless human dominion
over its wildlife, reminding one of the abundance to be gained or the bounty once
enjoyed. Ritualizing a sacrificialtradition promises a better day and purifies the path
for the provisionary season in the fall harvest of crop and animals. Challenging the
regenerativeproperty of killing unclean pigeons with reminders of their sacred fem-
inine symbolism associated with peace, animal rights protestors created a contest
frame of their own for the dominance of locally generated values. Much of the battle
This content downloaded from 128.226.37.5 on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:03:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
444 JournalofAmericanFolklore118 (2005)
was overhow to interpretthe meaningof the birdand the processof the shoot,for
thatwas a keyto the translationof humandominionin the constructionof cultural
tradition.
A claim is also apparentin the battle over the Hegins shoot for redirectingan
Americanethic,basedon perceptionof a presentstateof culturaldegradation.From
the viewpointof animalrights,Heginscentrallyrepresenteda traditionof crueltyor
"barbarism" pervasivein Americaandholdingbackprogresstowardcreatinga civil
society; from the perspectiveof sportsmen,by contrast,the animalrightsmovement
was centralto all the depravityassociatedwith modernizing,cosmopolitanAmerica
that had takenoverthe country'ssoul. Evenif the Heginspigeonshoot is no longer
front-pagenews,the majorculturalconflictsit represents,andthe potent symbolsit
articulated,continuein variousforms,especiallyin the debateoverthe moralityof
huntingin modernenvironments. A clusterof issuesregardingthe culturalinheritance
of children,patriarchalor predatoryroles enactedin "bloodsports,"tolerancefor
community-basedvalues,andthe placeof gunsandviolencein culturebubbleto the
surfacein heartlandskirmishesoveranimalrights.GeertzandDundesareboth right
in presagingthatfolk culturaltextsof animalsandviolencetell somethingprofound
in itself and seriousabout somethingelse that apparentlycan only come out in the
life frameof playand fantasy.The folkloristicchallengeis to analyzeits deepnessand
distinctivenessand, from there,to be ableto returnto how traditionfunctionsas a
cognitivecategoryfor participant,protestor,and observer.
Notes
1. I hadbeensurveyingfolkcultureandconductinginterviewswith huntersand craftsworkers in the
Hegins and Mahatangovalleysbeforeattendingmy firstpigeon shoot in 1988.From 1989 to 1994,I
documentedpigeonshoots and spenttime interviewingparticipantson both the protestand supporter
sides.In 1990,I had presscredentials,givingme entranceinto a sectionreservedfor the mediacorps.I
also attendedcourtproceedingson the suit againstthe shoot in Harrisburgand interviewedleadersof
the LaborDay Shoot Committeeand the Fundfor Animals.I am gratefulfor facultyleavegrantedin
2003-2004 by the PennsylvaniaStateUniversityto devoteto the researchon the pigeonshoot. I extend
gratitudeto JayMechlingof the Universityof Californiaat Davis for his many contributionsto the
projectandinsightsinto the event.Hejoinedme at the 1991shoot andparticipatedin a preshootconfer-
enceon animalrightstacticswhileI workedwithHeginsshootsupporters. JacquelineThursbyof Brigham
YoungUniversity also addedvaluable comments as chairof an American Folklore Societymeetingpan-
el in whichthis researchwasfirstpresented.KenThigpenof the NewYorkInstituteof Technology, who
participatedin the panel,also sharedhis experiencein Pennsylvaniawith animalrightsactivistsand
huntingculture.JanetDavisof the Universityof Texaskindlysentme herhistoricalfileson pigeonshoots
from the AmericanSocietyfor the Preventionof Crueltyto Animals,and MarjoleinEftingDijkstraof
the Departmentof Ethnology,MeertensInstitutein the Netherlands,providedinformationon com-
parativeEuropeantraditions.In Pennsylvania, VickiTerwilligerof the PottsvilleRepublican
and Jennifer
Miller,a local historianfrom the HeginsValleyand descendantof FredColeman,providedvaluable
materialson the historyof the ColemanMemorialShootandthe Colemanfamily.RobertTobash,chair
of the LaborDay Committee,andBudAngst,columnistfor the CitizenStandardin ValleyView,Penn-
sylvania,kindlysharedtheirfileson the Heginsshoot with me. On the animalrightsside,I am grateful
to HeidiPrescott,nationaldirectorof the FundforAnimals,forallowingme accessto the Fund'sarchives
on its Heginscampaignandto IngridNewkirk,presidentof Peopleforthe EthicalTreatmentof Animals
(PETA),SteveHindi, founding presidentof ShowingAnimalsRespectand Kindness(SHARK),and
DorisGitman,animalrightsactivistin SchuylkillCounty,Pennsylvania, forsharingwithme theirprivate
This content downloaded from 128.226.37.5 on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:03:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Bronner,ContestingTradition 445
This content downloaded from 128.226.37.5 on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:03:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
446 JournalofAmericanFolklore118 (2005)
This content downloaded from 128.226.37.5 on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:03:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Bronner,ContestingTradition 447
ReferencesCited
Abernethy,FrancisEdward.1971.The EastTexasCommunalHunt.In HuntersandHealers,ed. Wilson
M. Hudson,pp. 3-10. Austin:EncinoPress.
Adams,CarolJ.[1990]2000.TheSexualPoliticsofMeat:A Feminist-Vegetarian CriticalTheory.NewYork:
Continuum.
-- . 1995.Woman-Batteringand Harmto Animals.In Animalsand Women:FeministTheoretical
Explorations, ed. CarolJ.AdamsandJosephineDonovan,pp. 55-84. Durham,N.C.:DukeUniversity
Press.
Adams,CarolJ.,and JosephineDonovan,eds. 1995.Animalsand Women:FeministTheoretical Explora-
tions.Durham,N.C.:DukeUniversityPress.
Allen,WilliamH., Jr.[1959] 1975.How to Raiseand TrainPigeons.London:Sterling.
AmericanBoy'sBookof Sportsand Games:A PracticalGuideto Indoorand OutdoorAmusements.[1864]
2000.NewYork:LyonsPress.
Angst,Bud.1999.Passingof a Classic.Citizen-Standard
[ValleyView,Penn.],August18,2005.http://www.
citizenstandard.com/columns/nipped/99nip/nip0818.htm, accessedFebruary1,2004.
AnimalNews Center.2004.Appealto HaltCruelPigeonShoots Rejected.Buzzle.com: IntelligentLifeon
theWeb,January17,2004.http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/1-17-2004-49555.asp, accessedFebru-
ary 1, 2004.
Ardener,Edwin.1980.Some OutstandingProblemsin the Analysisof Events.In Symbolas Sense:New
Approaches to theAnalysisofMeaning,ed. MaryLeCronFosterand StanleyH. Brandes,pp. 301-21.
NewYork:AcademicPress.
Arluke,Arnold,and Clinton R. Sanders.1996. RegardingAnimals.Philadelphia:TempleUniversity
Press.
Bateson,Gregory.1972.Stepsto an Ecologyof Mind.NewYork:Ballantine.
Ben-Amos,Dan. 1984.The SevenStrandsof Tradition: Varietiesin Its Meaningin AmericanFolklore
Studies.Journalof FolkloreResearch21:97-131.
Bensman,Todd.1998.LoadedIssue:DallasGunClubPlanningLivePigeonShoot,SourcesSay;Animal
GroupVowsto StopEvent.[Dallas]MorningNews,August21:1, 16.
Berry,Wendell.2003. The AgrarianStandard.In TheEssentialAgrarianReader:TheFutureof Culture,
Community, and theLand,ed. NormanWirzba,pp. 23-33. Lexington:UniversityPressof Kentucky.
Boyle,John.1969.A EurasianHuntingRitual.Folklore80:12-6.
Brady,Erika.1990.Mankind'sThumbon Nature'sScale:TrappingandRegionalIdentityin the Missouri
Ozarks.In SenseofPlace:AmericanRegionalCultures,ed. BarbaraAllenand ThomasJ.Schlereth,pp.
58-73. Lexington:UniversityPressof Kentucky.
-. 1994."TheRiver'sLikeOur BackYard":Tourismand CulturalIdentityin the OzarkNational
ScenicRiverways. In Conserving A NewDiscourseon Heritage,ed. MaryHufford,pp. 138-51.
Culture:
Urbana:Universityof IllinoisPress.
Bringeus,Nils-Arvid.1988.Picturesof the LifeCycle.EthnologiaScandinavica,pp. 5-33.
Bronner,SimonJ. 1986.GraspingThings:FolkMaterialCultureandMassSocietyin America.Lexington:
UniversityPressof Kentucky.
This content downloaded from 128.226.37.5 on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:03:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
448 JournalofAmericanFolklore118 (2005)
This content downloaded from 128.226.37.5 on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:03:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Bronner,ContestingTradition 449
This content downloaded from 128.226.37.5 on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:03:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
450 JournalofAmericanFolklore118 (2005)
This content downloaded from 128.226.37.5 on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:03:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Bronner,ContestingTradition 451
OkieNoodling.2002.BradleyBeesley.Minneapolis:RedlineEntertainment. DVD.
Opie,Iona,and MoiraTatem.1989.A Dictionaryof Superstitions. Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.
Partridge,Eric.1961.A Dictionaryof the Underworld: BritishandAmerican.New York:BonanzaBooks.
.. 1970.A Dictionaryof Slangand UnconventionalEnglish.New York:Macmillan.
Patterson,Charles.2002. EternalTreblinka:Our Treatmentof Animalsand the Holocaust.New York:
LanternBooks.
Pelikan,Jaroslav.1992.SacredWritings,Judaism:TheTanakh.New York:QualityPaperbackBook Club.
PETA(Peoplefor the EthicalTreatmentof Animals).2005. About PETA.http://www.peta.org/about,
accessedMay27, 2005.
Phelps,Norm. 2002. TheDominionof Love:AnimalRightsAccordingto the Bible.New York:Lantern
Books.
PigeonShooting.1872.New YorkTimes(January1):4.
Plank,Dave. 1995.Why the CagedBirdStings:Nobody to be Prosecutedfor Role in Illegal"Hunt."
PhoenixNew Times(August17-23). http://www.urbanwildlifesociety.org/ pigeons/NTWPijShoot.
html,accessedMarch1, 2004.
Plansof the TrapShooters.1893.New YorkTimes(July3):8.
Posewitz,Jim.1994.BeyondFairChase:TheEthicandTradition ofHunting.Guilford,Conn.:GlobePequot
Press.
Prescott,Heidi.1995.How HuntersMakeMyJobEasy.Addressto the FourthAnnualGovernor'sSym-
posium on NorthAmerica'sHuntingHeritage,GreenBay,Wisc.,August.
. 1998.Letterto JodiAnderson(March31).
Puritans'FeastDay:Howthe CityGaveThanksandCausefor Thanks.1882.New YorkTimes(December
1):8.
Rachels,James.1990.Created fromAnimals:TheMoralImplicationsof Darwinism.Oxford:OxfordUni-
versityPress.
Randolph,Vance.1992.RollMeIn YourArms: "Unprintable"OzarkFolksongsandFolklore, ed.G.Legman.
Fayetteville:Universityof ArkansasPress.
Ravitch,Diane.2002. Educationafterthe CultureWars.Daedalus:Journalof theAmericanAcademyof
ArtsandSciences131(3):5-21.
Regan,Tom.1983.TheCaseforAnimalRights.Berkeley:Universityof CaliforniaPress.
-. [1983]2001.DefendingAnimalRights.Urbana:Universityof IllinoisPress.
.. 2004. The Casefor AnimalRights.In TheAnimalEthicsReader,ed. SusanJ.Armstrongand
RichardG. Botzler,pp. 17-24. New York:Routledge.
Regan,Tom,and PeterSinger,eds. 1976.AnimalRightsandHumanObligations.EnglewoodCliffs,N.J.:
Prentice-Hall.
Rickaby,Joseph.1976.Of the So-CalledRightsof Animals.InAnimalRightsandHumanObligations, ed.
TomReganand PeterSinger,pp. 179-80. EnglewoodCliffs,N.J.:Prentice-Hall.
Ritchie,D. G. 1976.WhyAnimalsDo Not HaveRights.In AnimalRightsand HumanObligations,ed.
TomReganand PeterSinger,pp. 181-4. EnglewoodCliffs,N.J.:Prentice-Hall.
Rollin,BernardE. 1981.AnimalRightsandHumanMorality.Buffalo,N.Y.:PrometheusBooks.
Rotundo,E.Anthony.1993.AmericanManhood:Transformations in Masculinityfrom theRevolutionto
theModernEra.New York:BasicBooks.
Russell,Ian.2002.The Hunt'sUp?RuralCommunity,Song,and Politics.ActaEthnographica Hungarica
47(1-2):127-41.
Ryder,RichardD. 1989.AnimalRevolution:ChangingAttitudesTowardSpeciesism. Oxford:BasilBlack-
well.
Schwartz,Jane.1989.Up on the Roof:PigeonFlyersandCitySkies.FolklifeAnnual1988-1989,ed. James
HardinandAlanJaboour,pp. 34-45. Washington,D.C.:Libraryof Congress.
Scully,Matthew.2002. Dominion:ThePowerof Man, TheSufferingof Animals,and TheCall to Mercy.
NewYork:St.Martin'sPress.
Shoemaker,HenryW. [1912] 1992.Pennsylvania Deerand TheirHorns.Baltimore:GatewayPress.
-. [1917] 1993.ExtinctPennsylvania Animals,PartsI and II. Baltimore:GatewayPress.
Schorger,A.W.[1955] 1973.ThePassenger Pigeon:ItsNaturalHistoryand Extinction.Norman:Univer-
sity of OklahomaPress.
This content downloaded from 128.226.37.5 on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:03:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
452 JournalofAmericanFolklore118 (2005)
Singer,Peter.[1975] 1990.AnimalLiberation.NewYork:Avon.
Slinsky,Jim.1999.Is BanningPigeonShootBeginningof EndforHunting?Pottsville Republican (October
A2182330.htm,accessedMarch1,2004.
28), http://archives.pottsville.com/archives/1999/Oct/28/
Slotkin,Richard.[1973] 2000. Regeneration throughViolence:TheMythologyof theAmericanFrontier.
Norman:Universityof OklahomaPress.
Smith,HenryNash. 1970.VirginLand:TheAmericanWestas SymbolandMyth.TwentiethAnniversary
Printing.Cambridge,Mass.:HarvardUniversityPress.
Smith,Johnson.1935.HumorousRecitations. Detroit:JohnsonSmith.
Song,S. Hoon. 2000a.TheGreatPigeonMassacre: TheBestiaryBiopoliticsof Whiteness in a Deindustrial-
izingAmerica.Ph.D.diss.,Universityof Chicago.
-. 2000b.TheGreatPigeonMassacrein a Deindustrializing AmericanRegion.InNaturalEnemies:
People-Wildlife Conflictsin Anthropological ed. JohnKnight,pp. 212-28. London:Rout-
Perspective,
ledge.
Sontag,Susan.2003.RegardingthePainof Others.NewYork:Farrar,Strausand Giroux.
Spiegel,Marjorie.[1988] 1996.TheDreadedComparison: HumanandAnimalSlavery.NewYork:Mirror
Books.
Spinelli,Jerry.1997.Wringer. NewYork:HarperCollins.
SportyThievz.1999.StreetCinema.CD.NewYork:SonyMusic.
Stange,MaryZeiss.1999.Armsand the Woman:A FeministReappraisal. In GunsinAmerica:A Reader,
ed. JanE. Dizard,RobertMerrillMuth,andStephenP.Andrews,Jr.,pp.351-87. NewYork:NewYork
UniversityPress.
Stein,Max.n.d. ComicSongs,FunnyStoriesandRecitations.Chicago:MaxSteinPublishing.
Swan,JamesA. 1995.In Defenseof Hunting.NewYork:HarperSanFrancisco.
--. 2003.A CountrysideUp in Arms.NationalReviewOnline(May15).http://www.nationalreview.
com/swan/swan051503.asp, accessedMarch1, 2004.
Telleen,Maurice.2003.The Mind-Setof Agrarianism... New andOld. In TheEssentialAgrarianRead-
er:TheFutureof Culture,Community, and theLand,ed. NormanWirzba,pp. 52-61. Lexington:Uni-
versityPressof Kentucky.
Terwilliger, Vicki.1999a.Concern,Celebration:ShootWinnersExpressFearsfor TheirRights.Pottsville
Republican(August19).http://archives.pottsville.com/archives/1999/Aug/19/ E255676.htm,accessed
March1,2004.
-. 1999b.DecisionSurprisesHeginsPeople:SupportersHateto SeeEventHalted.PottsvilleRepub-
lican(August18).http://archives.pottsville.com/archives/1999/Aug/18/E253035.htm, accessedMarch
1, 2004.
TLC.1999.Fanmail.NewYork:LaFace.
ToProhibitPigeonShooting:TheSlaterMeasurePassedby the SenateafterSomeDebate.1901.NewYork
Times(April20):6.
TrapshootingHallof Fame.2004.LiveBirdGrands:TheFirstTenGrandAmericans.http://www.traphof.
org/live_bird_GAH_history.htm, accessedMarch1,2004.
Weaver, WilliamWoys.1983.Sauerkraut Yankees:
Pennsylvania-GermanFoodsandFoodways. Philadelphia:
Universityof PennsylvaniaPress.
.. 1993.PennsylvaniaDutchCountryCooking.New York:AbbevillePress.
Wentworth,Harold,andStuartBergFlexner,eds. 1967.DictionaryofAmericanSlang.NewYork:Thom-
as Y.Crowell.
Wicklund,Freeman.1998.DirectAction:Progress,Peril,or Both?Animals'Agenda 18 (July/August):23-
7.
Wiscount,Joe.1989.PennsylvaniaDutch PigeonMatchesandShoots.Manuscript,Centerfor Pennsyl-
vaniaCultureStudies,PennStateHarrisburg, Middletown,Pennsylvania.
Wise,StevenM. 2000.RattlingtheCage:TowardLegalRightsforAnimals.Cambridge,Mass:Perseus.
Wolfe,Cary.2003.AnimalRites:AmericanCulture,theDiscourseof Species,and PosthumanistTheory.
Chicago:Universityof ChicagoPress.
Zemencik,Rebecca.2003.TheDuchessof theHeginsValley.Citizen-Standard (ValleyView,Pennsylvania)
(May14).Availableat http://newsitem.com/cgi-bin/citizen/articles,accessedMarch1, 2004.
This content downloaded from 128.226.37.5 on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:03:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions