|
I've been reading about something called "cultural appropriation" and the concept really bothers me for some reason I can't exactly pin my finger on. There are a lot of sentiments to the effect that white westerners are disrespectful for appropriating the customs and aesthetics of other cultures. The argument goes that adopting the trappings of a culture you don't understand can denigrate members of that culture, especially when it looks like caricature or parody. A white man wearing a Native American headdress to a Halloween party is appropriating a ritual garment used by a people that he might never have met or know anything about. A white woman wearing an Indian bindi because it looks nice doesn't appreciate the religious significance of the item in Hindu custom. This trivialises the original culture and makes people who belong to that group feel marginalised. Objection to this type of act takes a few forms: Nadra Kareem Nittle posted:Examples of Cultural Appropriation Nadra Kareem Nittle posted:When singer Katy Perry performed as a geisha at the American Music Awards in November 2013, she described it as an homage to Asian culture. Asian Americans disagreed with this assessment, declaring her performance “yellowface.” The Wall Street Journal’s Jeff Yang said that her performance did not celebrate Asian culture but misrepresented it entirely. He found it particularly problematic that Perry dressed as a geisha to perform the song “Unconditonally” about a woman who pledges to love her man no matter what. Palash Ghosh posted:In recent years, buoyed by the popularity of Bollywood films and the rising profile of India in the global economy, a number of female celebrities in the West have taken to wearing saris, the traditional garment of Indian women, in public appearances. There is definitely an argument about white people taking the credit for art that is based partly or largely on 'exotic' influences that otherwise go culturally unnoticed. And I can appreciate that when white people adopt the customs of other cultures, it's often more visible to other white people than the original customs themselves - which can result in skewed perceptions of that culture, bordering on caricature. But these seem like specific, far-flung consequences of a very extreme type of 'borrowing', while there is a much greater history of mutual cultural exchange and mixing for thousands of years that has produced every single cultural group today. Inclusive appropriation is an integral part of the history of human civilisation, and so it confuses me that people are so opposed to the idea of borrowed customs. People from outside the West are increasingly adopting Western customs, ideals and modes of dress, which I doubt bothers anybody at all. But the difference is supposedly about a history of colonial imperialism - white European culture has historically spread and overwhelmed much of the world, and the cultural practices of other peoples have been marginalised and derided. So non-Western people appropriating Western culture is understable, while the reverse is disrespectful: Tami posted:A Japanese teen wearing a t-shirt emblazoned with the logo of a big American company is not the same as Madonna sporting a bindi as part of her latest reinvention. The difference is history and power. Colonization has made Western Anglo culture supreme–powerful and coveted. It is understood in its diversity and nuance as other cultures can only hope to be. Ignorance of culture that is a burden to Asians, African and indigenous peoples, is unknown to most European descendants or at least lacks the same negative impact. I understand the sentiment. But telling someone "You can't do this" or "You can't wear that" based on the actions of their ancestors that they had no control over doesn't make sense to me. If a history of colonial marginalisation is the problem, then surely the healthy thing to do is to reverse that and allow people to embrace as wide a range of other cultures as possible. If the original colonial oppressors had done this, wouldn't that have been much better? Rather than being protective of one's cultural heritage in the face of white imperialism and saying "This is ours", it seems that it'd be more inclusive to share and mutually appreciate customs from all types of background. I'm a white man who was born in Russia and lives in England so I can't really relate to the colonial oppression angle, and I find the concept of 'cultural theft' a little ludicrous, but I'm aware that I'm speaking from a position of privilege on this. The reason I don't get peeved when I see someone wearing an ushanka or eating borscht is probably because there's no historical marginalisation to contextualise it. I'm willing to admit that, though I find much of the written articles on this to be overblown, that there are situations in which blindly adopting the aesthetics of another culture can be insensitive. But in the majority of cases it ranges from harmless to progressive. Is it disrespectful for me to cook Indian food without appreciating the context in which it is usually served? Is it cultural appropriation for me to play traditional Irish folk music without knowing what it historically means? It seems to me that what should bother people isn't cultural appropriation itself, but something more specific, and the offended people are talking about all forms of cultural exchange as a whole rather than focusing on the aspects that constitute blatant disrespect. I can't quite pin it down, but it reminds me of attempts to universally demonise the porn industry for its bad practices and treatment of women, even though that's nothing that's specific to the porn industry, there's nothing in principle stopping porn from being healthy and ethical, and there are similarly bad practices (or worse) in almost every industry imaginable. Is cultural appropriation a real problem? Or is it an overreaction to what should be considered normal, healthy cultural exchange?
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 13:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 22:58 |
|
|
Like most things, I think cultural appropriation is "complicated." Some cultural "exchange" is bad, for example when (white) people take aspects of other cultures without any understanding and exocitize it, it is bad because it is disrespectful. But the internet is stupid about things and tends to call poo poo like white people listening to rap music "cultural appropriation" and those people are dumb. America is a nation of contrasts, debate and discuss.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 13:57
|
|
|
I agree. So where is the line? What is it specifically that makes an instance of cultural 'borrowing' disrespectful?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 14:04
|
|
|
Cultural appropriation is another trivial thing the worthless American left obsesses over while literally billions of "people of color" are suffering tremendously under poverty, exploitation and imperialism. The only reason why it is a hot button issue is because it involves Katy Perry and snotty college students.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 15:11
|
|
|
Boing posted:I agree. So where is the line? What is it specifically that makes an instance of cultural 'borrowing' disrespectful? Like almost anything worthwhile in the world, there is no 'line'. Most of it is basic common sense. Dressing up like an 'indian', just an 'indian'? Obviously loving stupid as poo poo. Doing something and calling it a Hope medicine ritual when you're not at all Hopi and don't have any sort of understanding of the culture? Ugly and idiotic. Dressing up as a really faithful and well-researched recreation of a Chippewa Indian, and knowing about that tribe in depth? Questionable but at least there's some sort of argument to be made. Most of this stuff is obvious, the things that are right on the line we can leave to the actual people who might possible be directly affected to raise as an issue rather than go hunting for it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 15:29
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:Like almost anything worthwhile in the world, there is no 'line'. Most of it is basic common sense. Dressing up like an 'indian', just an 'indian'? Obviously loving stupid as poo poo. Doing something and calling it a Hope medicine ritual when you're not at all Hopi and don't have any sort of understanding of the culture? Ugly and idiotic. Dressing up as a really faithful and well-researched recreation of a Chippewa Indian, and knowing about that tribe in depth? Questionable but at least there's some sort of argument to be made. I wouldn't even call dressing up as an Indian cultural appropriation. If it's insensitive or mocking why not just call it racist? I don't think cultural appropriation is real. Rather it's just another overwrought, psuedo-intellectual term created by dipshit leftists to perpetuate white guilt.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 15:55
|
|
|
Typical Pubbie posted:I wouldn't even call dressing up as an Indian cultural appropriation. If it's insensitive or mocking why not just call it racist? I don't think cultural appropriation is real. Rather it's just another overwrought, psuedo-intellectual term created by dipshit leftists to perpetuate white guilt. It's meaningless to say it 'isn't real'. It's something describable: when people not from a culture who have no real understanding of it grab some trappings of it and use it for their own ends, usually just to gently caress around with. Whether this is really a bad thing is arguable, but that it actually occurs really isn't, which is pretty obvious. But sure, at the crudest levels, it's 'just' racism. But then you get the parts where the people are earnest, they really like the culture they're appropriating from, but they still divorce whatever cultural object it is from the context. Again, whether or not this is a bad thing is completely arguable but it definitely happens. What are some over overwrought pseudo-intellectual terms created by disphit leftists to perpetuate white guilt? This seems like maybe your speciality area, and I'm curious.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 16:26
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:It's meaningless to say it 'isn't real'. It's something describable: when people not from a culture who have no real understanding of it grab some trappings of it and use it for their own ends, usually just to gently caress around with. Whether this is really a bad thing is arguable, but that it actually occurs really isn't, which is pretty obvious. But sure, at the crudest levels, it's 'just' racism. But then you get the parts where the people are earnest, they really like the culture they're appropriating from, but they still divorce whatever cultural object it is from the context. Again, whether or not this is a bad thing is completely arguable but it definitely happens. "concern trolling"
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 16:33
|
|
|
-Troika- posted:"concern trolling" That gets used outside of a "white guilt" context, though. It's basically used to mean that someone who disagrees about tactics must secretly disagree about principles. Concern trolls do actually exist, but the label is applied unfairly far more often than it's applied fairly. Silver2195 fucked around with this message at 17:09 on Mar 24, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 17:06
|
|
|
gently caress it, I'll jump in on this garbage heap- I thinkt here are two aspects to cultural appropriation- The first and more classical one is the direct descendent of colonialist exploitation: Taking something important to the expression of an otherized culture and, stripping it of that culture, making it a part of your own culture. In this sense, some one dressing up in Indian costume (West, East or Amerindian) isn't necessarily engaged in appropriation because this signifer remains, somewhat, in the original context. Racist as gently caress? Probably, but appropriation in this sense? Nah. White people co-opting rock and roll music? That's appropriation because, through divorcing it from black culture and making it their own, they have not only stripped it of context and otherized identity, but have taken it to further express their own culture. What makes otherized or subaltern cultures doing the same thing not as offensize is largely because they are dispossessed of the power to strip these signifers of context. The prevalence of "western" culture largely means the prevalence of these cultural icons. Tibetans, for example, really love cowboy hats! To the point it's becoming kind of a tibetan thing, since the culture never had any real traditions about headgear. Now this is patently cultural appropriation. It's not as offensive because there is still that lack of power to strip it of cultural meaning. If you have a white dude and a tibetan dude both wearing cowboy hats, the default assumption will still be "White dude in american dress, Asian dude in american dress" The other side of it, the second aspect cultural appropriation adopts is something I think is a misnomer. It's the hipster in a bindi or a head-dress. It's the white girl in a sari or white dude in a chuba. None of these instances are really someone appropriating cultural icons. They're not really utilizing it as part of their culture in the way that rock and roll was. On the corporate level it's a commodification and whitening of an otherized culture without context. On the personal level it's just a showcase of something to be quixotic. Both seem to utilize that signifer because of its alien nature, that je ne sais quoi of exoticism. That's the same kind of crap as lord byron in greek costume. To end on a lighter note, here's some fantastic tibetan appropriation of western pop culture, by Gade:  
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 17:17
|
|
|
Building on what Quantumfate said, it looks like the most objectionable forms of appropriation involve taking something from someone else's culture and using it as a form of non-verbal communication towards members of your own in-group. On the other hand, you have something like non-Italians eating spaghetti and meatballs not because doing so presents an image of themselves as (something) but because it's loving delicious. Are we on the right track here?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 17:25
|
|
|
this line from one of the quotes in the op:quote:"When I read that a Westerner in a sari is committing the sin of cultural appropriation, I got more than a little offended. Isn’t the intent more important than outside opinion? .. How is my admiration and love of the sari an insult to anyone? How is something so positive turned by some people into a negative?” really strongly reminds me of the whole Redskins team name/mascot/marching band debate. The privileged think their intent dictates whether people of the culture being appropriated should be offended. I think at some less-mature time in my life, I probably would have agreed. But these days I feel like the privileged shouldn't be trying to dictate to the less-privileged whether they should be offended about anything, much less the use of the trappings of otherized culture for their own ends. emdash fucked around with this message at 17:31 on Mar 24, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 17:28
|
|
|
Another of your mistakes is presuming that we can't do these things today because of some terrible past history, when infact there's still a lot of exploitation and marginalization of certain minorities today. History is a good enough reason too, but don't act like we are somehow past the point of our terribleness and therefore everyone should get an equal free reign on everything. You're still largely dealing with a privileged class whose culture isolates, contains, seeps into, and appropriates the culture and spaces of exploited classes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 17:28
|
|
|
To me the easiest way to know if something is cultural appropriation or not is to ask a simple question: Did you earn it? The best example of this I can think of off the top of my head are "Tribal" tattoos, most people get them because they look cool but amongst the indigenous Pacific Islanders that invented the style they are earned, each drop of ink is an expression of the wearer's achievements and lifestyle that is practically its own language. If there's any aspect of the thing that requires earning it, say performing a rite of passage or doing a religious ceremony, and then someone from another culture tosses it on because it looks cool it's appropriation in my book. Otherwise go nuts, just try to be respectful.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 17:38
|
|
|
Agreed, we should keep Whites and PoC separated. We need to name and shame these race-mixers and ensure their respective cultures remain pure. By the way I'm a liberal.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 17:39
|
|
|
You know how shut in nerds freak out about fake gamer girls? They're mad about cultural appropriation. Really most/all of Gamergate is shut in nerds losing their poo poo about cultural appropriation, except that they angrily reject sociological terms so they have to grasp for words and miscommunicate.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 17:43
|
|
|
That's an interesting idea- but I wouldn't know that it's upset over an appropriation of their culture as much as an undermining of it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 17:49
|
|
|
Quantumfate posted:That's an interesting idea- but I wouldn't know that it's upset over an appropriation of their culture as much as an undermining of it. It's also a whole different kettle of fish because the "Gamer Girl" freakout is used to exclude women from certain spaces - women who have been a part of "nerd culture" just as long as the men excluding them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 17:51
|
|
|
I'm having trouble making any distinction between a white woman wearing a sari and a white woman eating a samosa. Is the latter cultural appropriation? What about using chopsticks or a neti pot? Yoga? Meditation? Surfing?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 17:56
|
|
|
Boing posted:I agree. So where is the line? What is it specifically that makes an instance of cultural 'borrowing' disrespectful? When a larger group borrows some aspect of culture from a smaller group and uses it outside the intended context, sometimes the new meaning of that aspect can be rewritten by its misuse. That's when it becomes an issue, because the larger group has the power to modify the smaller group's culture without their consent. Take Cinco de Mayo and St. Patrick's Day in the American context. What do these days even celebrate? For the dominant white culture, these days are an excuse to get shithammered in public and decorate with tacky symbols. They have no real meaning in and of themselves, but we think they do because they celebrate something somewhere, I dunno, maybe. These days don't actually change any part of Irish-American or Mexican-American culture but they trivialize and cheapen it, especially in the former case as it just perpetuates the stereotype that the Irish are hapless drunks. There's no clear line as to when appropriation becomes harmful, as everyone will have different attitudes. We can't even really delinate between when there is natural and good borrowing/assimilation versus the more forceful and mean-spirited appropriation. We can generally agree though that people exploring their spirituality by paying some con artist hundreds of dollars to sit in an 'authentic' sweat lodge is just pathetic among all parties. Boing posted:It seems to me that what should bother people isn't cultural appropriation itself, but something more specific, and the offended people are talking about all forms of cultural exchange as a whole rather than focusing on the aspects that constitute blatant disrespect. I can't quite pin it down, but it reminds me of attempts to universally demonise the porn industry for its bad practices and treatment of women, even though that's nothing that's specific to the porn industry, there's nothing in principle stopping porn from being healthy and ethical, and there are similarly bad practices (or worse) in almost every industry imaginable. Also don't waste your time trying to critically analyze what some randos on the internet have to say. You might as well try to debate in youtube comments for all the good it will do you, unless you just want to yell at internet strawmen for some dumb reason. boner confessor fucked around with this message at 18:01 on Mar 24, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 17:58
|
|
|
Quantumfate posted:but I wouldn't know that it's upset over an appropriation of their culture as much as an undermining of it. ~it's the same thing~
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 17:59
|
|
|
I guess this is the part where we start debating what a "real" culture is, and why doing X isn't appropriation, but doing Y is. So for example, since I hate nerds, obviously you can't appropriate "Gamer Culture", but I do have crippling White Guilt, so wearing dreadlocks (unless you are black enough) are right out. I enjoy Sushi, so I'm allowed to eat it, but I'm too fat to surf, so obviously surfing is appropriation.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 18:00
|
|
|
Powercrazy posted:I guess this is the part where we start debating what a "real" culture is, and why doing X isn't appropriation, but doing Y is. Well here we have an example of someone trying and failing to appropriate Good Posting culture, so there are examples all around us if you know where to look.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 18:02
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:Well here we have an example of someone trying and failing to appropriate Good Posting culture, so there are examples all around us if you know where to look. I'm very respectful to all cultures and I go out of my way not to intrude. Unfortunately a little cognitive dissonance is the price I pay.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 18:06
|
|
|
DarklyDreaming posted:To me the easiest way to know if something is cultural appropriation or not is to ask a simple question: Did you earn it? It's hard for me to think of 'reversed' examples of this because secular British people don't really hold anything sacred or important to the extent that other cultures might. The closest I can think of is something like if easterners saw David Beckham wearing his OBE medal and didn't know the context of it and thought it was just some trendy fashion thing, and started wearing cheap OBE knockoffs all the time everywhere. Which would be more absurd than offensive (partly because a lot of people would scoff at Beckham 'earning' it), I think, but it's a more useful way to think of it than Indian people wearing jeans or anything like that. Replace OBE with whatever American (or your relevant culture) medal of high honour is appropriate. e: Here is a scene from the Sopranos that loosely relates to this thread Boing fucked around with this message at 18:18 on Mar 24, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 18:07
|
|
|
I remember back when Brave come out some white American blogger (I think it was Shakesville or something like that?) decided that because her last name was McEwan she was thoroughly authorised to declare the presence of kilts and accents as offensive and an appropriation of Celtic/Scottish culture. Of particular focus was the thick Doric used by Kevin McKidd for one of his characters, the joke being that Doric, the North-Eastern dialect of Scots, when thick enough, is nigh incomprehensible to other Scots, as McKidd would well know from growing up with his family in Elgin (where Doric, if not now, used to be prevalent). While it is true that media depictions of Scots quite often go for a very beleaguered stereotype (think Brigadoon, with its all-American cast, or most Scottish characters in traditional British media being drunks or sidekicks), Brave had actually done a fairly decent job at giving a light-hearted portrayal of a semi-mystical version of Scotland familiar to most Scottish cultural enthusiasts or nationalists, especially since most of the main actors were Scottish themselves- a welcome reprieve to people used to Hollywood getting Americans to play Scottish characters with terrible fake accents (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-25413482 there's loads more). Everyone I spoke to in Aberdeen found the Doric especially representative- McKidd doesn't exaggerate it to the point of ridiculousness, as it's thick enough as it is for non-locals to not understand it (and Doric speakers watching the film will understand the character no problem). When this was pointed out to the blogger by actual Scottish people, she started banning them left and right. It was funny. Not to say cultural appropriation doesn't happen, but sometimes it's just white middle class liberal Americans looking for something to be guilty about because they're intellectually lazy. Coohoolin fucked around with this message at 18:19 on Mar 24, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 18:09
|
|
|
Boing posted:I agree. So where is the line? What is it specifically that makes an instance of cultural 'borrowing' disrespectful? I think trying to draw hard lines on these kind of things is a fools errand. The key is an open and respectful dialogue, as it is in most things. Of course this is often hard when the internet comes into play, but not impossible.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 18:12
|
|
|
Boing posted:Replace OBE with whatever American (or your relevant culture) medal of high honour is appropriate. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stolen_Valor_Act_of_2013 Legislation passed because most Americans get super pissed when you appropriate military culture.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 18:14
|
|
|
I can understand things like the headdress being frowned upon, but it seems to quickly go into ridiculous territory with internet hypersensitivity. Most people are able to use common sense. If something is sacred to another culture and you are wearing it as fashion accessory, you probably are being a bit of clod. White people not being allowed to wear other standard items of another cultures clothing seems like a ridiculous self-policing by people who are just looking for something to be offended about.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 18:16
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:I'm having trouble making any distinction between a white woman wearing a sari and a white woman eating a samosa. Is the latter cultural appropriation? What about using chopsticks or a neti pot? Yoga? Meditation? Surfing? What I understand is that pretty much everything we do around other people is a form of communication. When we wear an article of clothing, even one as simple as a T-shirt, we are communicating something to others. If you wear an article of clothing from another culture, depending on what it is, you might be communicating something different than what the item communicated in its original context. So if you go around wearing a kimono in the USA, you're communicating that you're "exotic" or "different" or maybe even kind of cheeky, when that's not what that garment is meant to communicate. By using that garment to communicate cheekiness/humor, it's possible that those who use it to communicate something more serious, like "formal," or "ceremonial" have their message diluted. On the other hand, if, as I did, you go to Japan and buy a pair of tights with anime kitty faces printed on them, when you wear them in the states, you're communicating cuteness - exactly the same as the native Japanese girls who wear the same tights (obviously adjust for appropriate gender). So in your example of the white woman wearing a sari, I believe where the issue comes is when the white woman wears the sari to communicate that she's exciting/exotic - or maybe even sexy. Women who use the sari to communicate "traditional" or "modest" are unhappy because the strength of the message they're trying to send is being confused or weakened. On the other hand, if you're eating a samosa, all you're saying is "this is freaking tasty," which I think we can all agree on. Yoga/meditation can fall on either side, especially since there are so many different ways to do those things. Ultimately, there comes a point where the original meaning can end up completely destroyed (like how "gay" doesn't mean "happy" anymore and only annoying people split hairs about it). For people in a position of relative powerlessness, I can see how that can be infuriating.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 18:16
|
|
|
As a musician I've wondered about this, and how bizarre it can seem when applied in that context. If I really enjoy balinese gamelan music, am I "appropriating" balinese culture by using a Slendro-inspired tuning, or superficially emulating gendhing structure in a western context? A lot of people talk about how "white people stole rock and roll from black people", but where exactly is the sin in that? Is it in the act of being inspired by a neighboring subculture's musical tradition, of which you are a participant? Or is it in the exploitation of original black artists, and the scrubbing of the art form for white consumption? Is there something inherently disrespectful about having a shallow appreciation of another culture? The whole thing seems very divorced from how art is actually created. There's the lambasting of "superficial" appropriation in art, but so what? Debussy heard a gamelan orchestra at a World's Fair and was inspired to create something that really has nothing to do with Indonesian culture, was he appropriating Indonesian culture in a negative way? If someone hears African polyrhythms in passing and this inspires something, is he disrespecting the culture by not understanding the underlying traditions of that particular African musical culture? I understand the underlying principal of being respectful to other people's cultures, but the concept of appropriation seems to hinge on some huge generalizations that don't actually seem to be practical or descriptive of reality. It seems to ignore that art, in many cases even with art-forms steeped in tradition and culture, is hugely syncretic and often irrational, unconsidered, or "shallow". It seems to hinge on this really precious understand of culture and cultural artforms that has very little to do with reality. It seems very sanctimonious and conservative, and hostile to natural forms of cross-cultural communication that have historically enhanced understanding.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 18:40
|
|
|
The mother of all cultural appropriations was the Nazi use of the swastika.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 18:53
|
|
|
Periodiko posted:Is it in the act of being inspired by a neighboring subculture's musical tradition, of which you are a participant? Or is it in the exploitation of original black artists, and the scrubbing of the art form for white consumption? Is there something inherently disrespectful about having a shallow appreciation of another culture? Re-recording black music with white artists is disrespectful because it illustrates that the content of the music didn't matter, but rather the color of the musicians. As a musician I'm sure it would bother you if American music was only popular in China if it was covered (poorly) by Chinese artists with little/no acknowledgement of the original author. Periodiko posted:I understand the underlying principal of being respectful to other people's cultures, but the concept of appropriation seems to hinge on some huge generalizations that don't actually seem to be practical or descriptive of reality. It seems to ignore that art, in many cases even with art-forms steeped in tradition and culture, is hugely syncretic and often irrational, unconsidered, or "shallow". It seems to hinge on this really precious understand of culture and cultural artforms that has very little to do with reality. It seems very sanctimonious and conservative, and hostile to natural forms of cross-cultural communication that have historically enhanced understanding. I think you're being overly sensitive to imaginary strawmen arguments and this is causing you to misunderstand the nature of appropriation.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 19:06
|
|
|
Boing posted:It's hard for me to think of 'reversed' examples of this because secular British people don't really hold anything sacred or important to the extent that other cultures might. The closest I can think of is something like if easterners saw David Beckham wearing his OBE medal and didn't know the context of it and thought it was just some trendy fashion thing, and started wearing cheap OBE knockoffs all the time everywhere. It doesn't happen as often, but it's very short-sighted to think that majority caucasian cultures don't have their own sacred symbols and rituals. One of them may even be just being white! http://gawker.com/redskins-fans-threaten-to-loving-cut-native-american-1640249549
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 19:07
|
|
|
If someone wants to look like a tacky idiot I have a hard time seeing the righteous rage. I only really think a line is crossed when someone's making profit from minorities at their own expense, e.g. authentic ethnic restaurants/craftsmen/artists being driven out of business by lovely knockoffs repackaged for mass consumption.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 19:25
|
|
|
Gabriel Pope posted:If someone wants to look like a tacky idiot I have a hard time seeing the righteous rage. I only really think a line is crossed when someone's making profit from minorities at their own expense, e.g. authentic ethnic restaurants/craftsmen/artists being driven out of business by lovely knockoffs repackaged for mass consumption. That's mainly what people complain about when they complain about CA.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 19:27
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:I think you're being overly sensitive to imaginary strawmen arguments and this is causing you to misunderstand the nature of appropriation. quote:To answer Gori Girl, my response would be: “You can wear the sari only if you are willing to fully embrace Indian culture, even the parts that you as a white Westerner would normally find offensive or even appalling. But by wearing a sari while having no real links to India, you come across as very superficial.” quote:It matters who is doing the appropriating. If a dominant culture fancies some random element (a mode of dress, a manner of speaking, a style of music) of my culture interesting or exotic, but otherwise disdains my being and seeks to marginalize me, it is surely an insult. quote:Musicians such as Madonna, Gwen Stefani and Miley Cyrus have all been accused of cultural appropriation. Madonna, for instance, popularized the form of personal expression known as voguing, which began in black and Latino sectors of the gay community. I don't really see how I'm reacting to an imaginary argument, there seems to be a genuine argument that appropriating from a culture in a "shallow" way is disrespectful and wrong. There clearly exists an interpretation where Madonna did some kind of harm to the black/latino gay community by appropriating voguing, for example. The problem with white people taking black songs is a problem of racism, and economic exploitation. You don't need a concept of harmful cultural appropriation to describe it. If we're not describing lesser cases of disrespect, then what are we talking about? My problem isn't the idea that you can do any kind of harm at all, it's that mild "shallowness" is itself a form of disrespect, even when talking about non-sacred parts of a culture. The idea that dressing or costuming cross-culturally at all carries with it certain obligations - obligations aside from normal ones like "don't be blatantly racist or xenophobic" - is inherent to that Sari response. I'm just extrapolating that to music. Periodiko fucked around with this message at 19:38 on Mar 24, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 19:35
|
|
|
The closest Western example I can think of is the sort of appropriation by Western corporations and media of things that have a deeper significance in their own culture. A lot of Christian imagery and festivals have been appropriated to sell things, to the extent that cross jewellery, rosaries and crucifixes are fashion accessories, and some practising Christians get really upset about people losing sight of "the real meaning of Christmas/Easter". It's not as big a deal though because Christianity is the dominant religion in the western world and churches still have a lot of power, money and status. And Christianity permeates the countries and cultures where that kind of stuff is sold enough for that sort of appropriation to be a fairly minor problem in context; in countries where they sell chocolate eggs and Santa hats, it's not like that's people's only exposure to Christianity, everyone already knows things like the Nativity story and the Easter story. edit: Gabriel Pope posted:If someone wants to look like a tacky idiot I have a hard time seeing the righteous rage. I only really think a line is crossed when someone's making profit from minorities at their own expense, e.g. authentic ethnic restaurants/craftsmen/artists being driven out of business by lovely knockoffs repackaged for mass consumption. That's the main problem I have with it, especially if the knockoffs are being made through dodgy employment practices like sweatshops or gangmasters exploiting the manufacturers. Or, since food was brought up earlier, foods like quinoa and acai being sold as fancy "superfoods" to idiot hippies when they're basic staples in parts of South America, which leads to hugely inflated prices and food shortages for the people who live on them. It'd be like if a rumour started in the Far East that potatoes were really good for you, and we couldn't afford to eat chips or mash any more. Stottie Kyek fucked around with this message at 19:44 on Mar 24, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 19:36
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 19:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 22:58 |
|
|
Periodiko posted:I don't really see how I'm reacting to an imaginary argument, there seems to be a genuine argument that appropriating from a culture in a "shallow" way is disrespectful and wrong. There clearly exists an interpretation where Madonna did some kind of harm to the black/latino gay community by appropriating voguing, for example. Well the complaint against Gwen Stefani is, I'd imagine, that she declared herself a Harajuku Girl and hired a brace of Japanese women to follow her around and never speak english. Which admittedly might just be garden variety racism, but the CA angle is something to the effect of "please don't treat other cultures like pokemon to be collected for your own amusement."
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 19:39
|
|
