When we think of "Mr. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar" as "Kareem" or "Ms. Aretha Franklin" as Aretha we are taking these people into our lives in an intimate way. It is a subtle form of domination in which these people come to have symbolic value and we expect them to live according to the values we impute to them, whatever they may be. We expect them to be gracious when we ask for autographs, even if, for example, they are dining with friends and we just happen to be at the next table. They must be equally accommodating to reporters who snoop into their private lives to satisfy the curiosity of our enquiring minds. The one thing these people cannot do is to rebel against the demands of this jive Celebrity Land. The symbolic domination implicit in granting celebrity status is subtle, but exacting. And we are the ultimate masters of this domain.

I would like to suggest that, in thinking about this so-called "Trial of the Century" we work to free ourselves of the symbolic baggage which is attached to this trial. We can take a step in this direction by thinking of O.J. as "Mr. Simpson" or even "Mr. O.J. Simpson" but no longer "O.J." The matters at trial are most grave and need to be free of myth and hype. Let us take ourselves, and Mr. Simpson, out of the glittery bonds of Celebrity Land.

How would it change the tone of media coverage if the press followed this same rule? Think of every TV report you've seen and heard and imagine what it would be like, how it would sound, how it would feel, the subtle textural shift, if reporters and anchor persons always referred to "Mr. Simpson" or "Mr. O.J. Simpson"? What if all newspaper and magazine articles followed the same convention? It seems like a small matter.

Indeed, it is a small matter. But some small matters have significant consequences for how we think. When Cassius Clay changed his name to Muhammad Ali he rebelled against one system of symbolic values and chose a different one. Some sports traditionalists were upset that the heavyweight champion of the world seemed to turn his back on the greatest nation in the world. After all, where else could a poor colored boy rise to become the heavyweight champion of the world? So why is he acting like an uppity nigger with this Black Muslim stuff instead of being grateful for his opportunities in the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave? Another set of folks thought it was about time the first set of folks got used to the idea that they don't own African-Americans any more, that it's about time the greatest nation in the world acted according to its highest ideals instead of its lowest fears.

It is time that "O.J." becomes "Mr. O.J. Simpson." As "O.J." or "the Juice" he was a symbol, a symbol of athletic greatness, a symbol of rags to riches, a symbol of black success. The man on trial is not a symbol, not anymore. Two people, real people, not symbols, not characters in a soap opera, are dead, and many lives are ruined. If Mr. Simpson is convicted a real man will do real time in a real prison. In the courtroom the defendant is referred to as Mr. Simpson. It is time the so-called court of public opinion give the defendant the same courtesy. It is time that we all give up our symbolic claims on Mr. Simpson and give him the respect due a man.

This respect is deeper than mere courtesy. Such respect is inherent in the modern Western view of human affairs. This respect is not something one has to earn, nor can it be taken away, though white people have often had difficulty in extending that respect to peoples of color, a difficulty which continues--a matter we'll take up shortly. It is, in the words of the Declaration of Independence, an inalienable right. The fact that Mr. Simpson beat his wife does not deprive him of this respect, though his brutality denied that respect to this wife. The fact that his life was filled with lies and evasions does not deprive him of that respect. The possibility that he murdered two people does not deprive him of that respect. Nor would a conviction deprive him of that respect--that's what the Constitutional prohibition against "cruel and unusual punishment" is about, preserving the dignity of those convicted of crimes.

In the end there are no celebrities, only men, women, and children trying to live the best they know how. Let us face Mr. Orenthal James Simpson simply as a man and try him accordingly.