Cultural Appropriation

[Murphy101]

11 minutes ago, bolt. said:

I think I hear what you mean in this post, but your vocabulary makes it “sound bad” to people who understand cultural appropriation as a clear and specific sociological concept.

I think you mean that cultures that are not shared, transferred, borrowed and/or generally spread around through interaction with neighbouring cultures will eventually die out.

That’s true. It’s an important and meaningful point.

However, ‘appropriation’ is not the right word for that process. ‘Appropriation’ is not the only way that cultures spread, interact or change the world around them. It is only *one* of the ways that happens. ‘Appropriation’ describes *only* cultural transfers that are unethical expressions of power, privilidge or oppression.

Sociology has other words for healthy, natural, and wholistic forms of culture blending and transmission.

Think of the vocabulary this way: Countries have political leadership, and those leadership structures change in a variety of ways all the time, all over the world. *One* of the ways a leadership structure can change is through a ‘coup d’etat’ — which is a clear, specific term for one type of changeover. Most people think that’s a ‘bad way’ for things to change. There are other words for ‘good ways’ to have a political changeover.

Or this way: one way that artwork changes hands is through looting in wartime. People who oppose, specifically, looting are not actually opposed to the buying and selling, giving or inheriting of artwork.

People world not say, “Art would die out without looting.” — even though it is true that art would die out with some form of transference. It just means that respectful (and lawful) forms of transfer are preferred.

 

Except you can’t steal culture like you can artwork. And the nature of being a minority is self limiting even in the best of political power dynamics. And actually, yes many do have a problem with making and selling or inheriting minority ethnic artwork. Many do think that is unethical and should only shared within or to promote that minority as a whole.

I see little difference between cultural exchange vs cultural appropriation other than the first is when someone is okay with it and the other is when they don’t.

Maybe if you could describe for me an unethical power/privledge expression of culture?

I’m willing to be enlightened and I’m bored in a hospital room so the floor is your’s.

[bolt.]

1 minute ago, Murphy101 said:

 

Except you can’t steal culture like you can artwork. And the nature of being a minority is self limiting even in the best of political power dynamics. And actually, yes many do have a problem with making and selling or inheriting minority ethnic artwork. Many do think that is unethical and should only shared within or to promote that minority as a whole.

I see little difference between cultural exchange vs cultural appropriation other than the first is when someone is okay with it and the other is when they don’t.

Maybe if you could describe for me an unethical power/privledge expression of culture?

I’m willing to be enlightened and I’m bored in a hospital room so the floor is your’s.

Yes, the difference between “cultural exchange” and “cultural appropriation” is very close to the idea you are expressing here. The former term describes exchanges that are considered to have occurred organically between peer cultures (when we are ‘okay with it’) and the latter term describes exchanges that happen in one direction between cultures with a power difference (when we are ‘not okay with it’).

Those are what the terms mean. They are quite near to one another semantically, and it makes sense that things overlap sometimes. Sometimes it’s hard to tell whether a certain exchange is or is not an appropriation. Sometimes it’s clear that something is an appropriation, but there is confusion about whether it is meaningful (mock native art for profit) or trivial (tacos). Sometimes it’s not clear whether permission, respectful treatment, and a sense that the transfer was appreciated / honoured blessed some appropriations as sort of ‘consensual’. Sometimes it matters how the respective cultures’ “power” is balanced ‘now’ — sometimes past relationships matter, and sometimes perceptions and claims of power / superiority are relevant.

Sociologists explore the nuances of this issue all the time. Facebook tents to be pretty hamfisted about it.

Sociologists also don’t define appropriation as ‘bad’ — they define it as ‘a thing that happens’ when cultures are proximate and have a power differential. (Yes, I’ve been talking like it’s ‘ok’ or ‘not okay’ — that’s me. A sociologist wouldn’t. They would just identify the presence or absence of a power difference.) 

Facebookers tend to define it as ‘bad’ and get all mixed up because some appropriation seems much ‘worse’ than others, but the definition still applies (because of the power difference). Respect and consent matter in the real world. So does significance vs triviality. Detailed analysis identifies those factors. It’s just that nuance is hard in a world of social media posts.

[Murphy101]

11 minutes ago, bolt. said:

Yes, the difference between “cultural exchange” and “cultural appropriation” is very close to the idea you are expressing here. The former term describes exchanges that are considered to have occurred organically between peer cultures (when we are ‘okay with it’) and the latter term describes exchanges that happen in one direction between cultures with a power difference (when we are ‘not okay with it’).

Those are what the terms mean. They are quite near to one another semantically, and it makes sense that things overlap sometimes. Sometimes it’s hard to tell whether a certain exchange is or is not an appropriation. Sometimes it’s clear that something is an appropriation, but there is confusion about whether it is meaningful (mock native art for profit) or trivial (tacos). Sometimes it’s not clear whether permission, respectful treatment, and a sense that the transfer was appreciated / honoured blessed some appropriations as sort of ‘consensual’. Sometimes it matters how the respective cultures’ “power” is balanced ‘now’ — sometimes past relationships matter, and sometimes perceptions and claims of power / superiority are relevant.

Sociologists explore the nuances of this issue all the time. Facebook tents to be pretty hamfisted about it.

Sociologists also don’t define appropriation as ‘bad’ — they define it as ‘a thing that happens’ when cultures are proximate and have a power differential. (Yes, I’ve been talking like it’s ‘ok’ or ‘not okay’ — that’s me. A sociologist wouldn’t. They would just identify the presence or absence of a power difference.) 

Facebookers tend to define it as ‘bad’ and get all mixed up because some appropriation seems much ‘worse’ than others, but the definition still applies (because of the power difference). Respect and consent matter in the real world. So does significance vs triviality. Detailed analysis identifies those factors. It’s just that nuance is hard in a world of social media posts.

 

Sooo. All that to say ....

There’s no difference between cultural exchange or appropriation. Appropriation is just a word used when someone doesn’t like it.

[bolt.]

51 minutes ago, Murphy101 said:

 

Sooo. All that to say ....

There’s no difference between cultural exchange or appropriation. Appropriation is just a word used when someone doesn’t like it.

No.

”All that to say” that appropriation is an exchange that happens when one culture has a different level of power than the other one.

(And that when transfers happen between peer cultures, other terms — like “transfer” — are accurate and “appropriation” is inaccurate.)

It’s not sociology's fault some people consider it unethical sometimes (when cultural appropriation happens). It’s not sociology’s fault that some people have a perfectly clear conscience about cultural appropriation.

Learning vocabulary shouldn’t be this hard. Swimming is not wading, wading is not swimming. The words just mean different things. There is a clear and specific difference between other types of cultural transfers and cultural appropriation.

Appropration is a word used when cultures are not evenly empowered. (After people use the word is when they tell you that they don’t like it. Most people don’t like it, so there may be a level of implicit disapproval colouring the word itself, in ordinary conversation. I don’t like it.)

Edited October 19, 2018 by bolt.

[Murphy101]

Oh for crying out loud. I completely understand the sociology lesson thank you very much. sociology isn’t as cut and dry as you make it seem.  For example, power imbalance is not as clear cut to define.  Being a minority in and of itself doesn’t necessarily mean power imbalance. 

[marbel]

2 hours ago, Murphy101 said:

 

I agree except I can’t underatand why a kids show can’t delve into the origins. Catholics have no problem explaining the origins to their kids. 

OK, sure.  I probably should have said I wouldn't expect a kids' show to get into the origins. (Not everyone agrees about the origins, for one thing.) 

[Scarlett]

3 hours ago, Murphy101 said:

 

Except you can’t steal culture like you can artwork. And the nature of being a minority is self limiting even in the best of political power dynamics. And actually, yes many do have a problem with making and selling or inheriting minority ethnic artwork. Many do think that is unethical and should only shared within or to promote that minority as a whole.

I see little difference between cultural exchange vs cultural appropriation other than the first is when someone is okay with it and the other is when they don’t.

Maybe if you could describe for me an unethical power/privledge expression of culture?

I’m willing to be enlightened and I’m bored in a hospital room so the floor is your’s.

Why are you in a hospital?

[Violet Crown]

Admittedly this is a little off-topic, but why do people keep talking about Easter as if it's generally admitted not to be Christian, or at best has murky origins, lost in the mists of time? It's possibly the earliest Christian feast day, dating to the 100's at latest and probably to the first century, and is well-documented. Its date was observed in relation to Passover for obvious reasons, and it's still called "Passover" (Pasch) in every language other than English and German. The only controversy over Easter was over whether the Jewish calendar should be used in determining its date, or whether the date determination should be tweaked (the latter view won).

As far as I can tell, the "really pagan" argument stems from Bede's seventh-century guess that the month it was celebrated in England, called "eostremonath," was named for a pre-Christian deity; kind of like arguing that Ascension Thursday must have started as a Norse pagan festival because, you know, Thor's Day. 

Go read Eusebius of Caesarea and Melito of Sardis, and come tell me Easter is really an early medieval Anglo-Saxon fertility festival that was taken over by second-century Mediterraneans. That's some impressive appropriation!

[Mabelen]

I think it's ok to try new recipes from different countries. I think, in fact, it's great to be open minded enough to try and enjoy different ethnic dishes.  My beef with food is that often, the original dish gets so distorted that it ends up barely having any resemblance with the real thing. I have tasted so callled Spanish dishes that were simply nothing of the sort. And that, to be honest, irritates me. Sangría, paella, patatas a la brava, are some examples of dishes that I have tried that were not at all what they claimed to be. I think one needs to exhibit some humility when cooking or selling dishes that don't come straight from the source. I would be totally fine if you presented a dish called paella inspired rice, or something like that. Just don't present it like it's the real deal when it's not.

[Murphy101]

1 hour ago, Scarlett said:

Why are you in a hospital?

 

I have no idea. Got here last night. It’s either a heart attack or nothing to worry about. I have a cold and I just want to go have a shower and a nap but I’m darn near swimming in three different forms of nitro and can’t sleep through the headache. 

So might as well argue online. ☺️

 

[Rosie_0801]

3 hours ago, Murphy101 said:

Oh for crying out loud. I completely understand the sociology lesson thank you very much. sociology isn’t as cut and dry as you make it seem.  For example, power imbalance is not as clear cut to define.  Being a minority in and of itself doesn’t necessarily mean power imbalance. 

 

Appropriation has built in injustice. 

I mentioned earlier, an example of an autistic woman feeling that the likes of 'The Rosie Project' and whatnot are cultural appropriation. There is a power imbalance there because a lack of neurotypical advantage can be a real hassle, but she was not trying to argue that neurotypical people should never write autistic characters. She was arguing that they should actually go listen to some so they could write them accurately. Otherwise, they are taking something they don't understand and telling the wider world that their (quite unflattering) fiction is Really True. That isn't creating a healthy sharing of information. That is creating more problems for autistic people, because even well meaning people say "Oh, I know all about you," thinking they've got the right idea because they've done their research. 

So, appropriation isn't just borrowing a good idea. It's turning it into some kind of lie. It's not always intentional, of course, just like the authors of 'The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night ' and such weren't intentionally misrepresenting anybody. They just thought they knew what they were talking about more than they really did.

 

[Rosie_0801]

51 minutes ago, Mabelen said:

I think it's ok to try new recipes from different countries. I think, in fact, it's great to be open minded enough to try and enjoy different ethnic dishes.  My beef with food is that often, the original dish gets so distorted that it ends up barely having any resemblance with the real thing. I have tasted so callled Spanish dishes that were simply nothing of the sort. And that, to be honest, irritates me. Sangría, paella, patatas a la brava, are some examples of dishes that I have tried that were not at all what they claimed to be. I think one needs to exhibit some humility when cooking or selling dishes that don't come straight from the source. I would be totally fine if you presented a dish called paella inspired rice, or something like that. Just don't present it like it's the real deal when it's not.

 

Yeah. There's nothing wrong with fusion-cuisine. Fusion is interesting. 

It reminds me of my aunt, when we were kids, telling her daughter that the Disney movie of Anastasia was absolutely true. My brother objected to this, and was told that it was good to let her believe the nice story. From our perspective, it would have been a whole lot more honest and more "nice" to tell her it wasn't true. That way she'd get two good stories for the price of one. The nice Disney movie she liked, and the real one.

[Murphy101]

1 hour ago, Violet Crown said:

Admittedly this is a little off-topic, but why do people keep talking about Easter as if it's generally admitted not to be Christian, or at best has murky origins, lost in the mists of time? It's possibly the earliest Christian feast day, dating to the 100's at latest and probably to the first century, and is well-documented. Its date was observed in relation to Passover for obvious reasons, and it's still called "Passover" (Pasch) in every language other than English and German. The only controversy over Easter was over whether the Jewish calendar should be used in determining its date, or whether the date determination should be tweaked (the latter view won).

 

Yeah. I don’t get it either. But it’s like the christmas freak out over how he wasn’t really born on that day and it’s based on the moon phases so it must be pagan! 

Um. Or God made moon phases and moon phases are actually a great way to keep a calendar. 

Or Christmas trees. Or or. Yeah. I know the catholic faith has long incorporated cultures into the faith.  I simply don’t think that is a negative or that it paganizes the faith. 

[LucyStoner]

Appreciation and the cultural mixing that is a byproduct of living in a multicultural society is not appropriation.  It’s easy to dismiss concerns about appropriation by pointing to examples  people applying the concept of appropriation way too far.   That said, those extremes don’t mean it doesn’t exist and isn’t a real problem.

https://everydayfeminism.com/2013/09/cultural-exchange-and-cultural-appropriation/

[Violet Crown]

17 minutes ago, Murphy101 said:

 

Yeah. I don’t get it either. But it’s like the christmas freak out over how he wasn’t really born on that day and it’s based on the moon phases so it must be pagan! 

Um. Or God made moon phases and moon phases are actually a great way to keep a calendar. 

Or Christmas trees. Or or. Yeah. I know the catholic faith has long incorporated cultures into the faith.  I simply don’t think that is a negative or that it paganizes the faith. 

To be fair, Christmas trees and Advent wreaths, so far as I can determine, started in Lutheran Germany, and Catholics are completely culturally appropriating those. Sorry Lutherans!

[Annie G]

Murphy I hope you feel better soon. 

[Bluegoat]

10 hours ago, bolt. said:

Yes, the difference between “cultural exchange” and “cultural appropriation” is very close to the idea you are expressing here. The former term describes exchanges that are considered to have occurred organically between peer cultures (when we are ‘okay with it’) and the latter term describes exchanges that happen in one direction between cultures with a power difference (when we are ‘not okay with it’).

Those are what the terms mean. They are quite near to one another semantically, and it makes sense that things overlap sometimes. Sometimes it’s hard to tell whether a certain exchange is or is not an appropriation. Sometimes it’s clear that something is an appropriation, but there is confusion about whether it is meaningful (mock native art for profit) or trivial (tacos). Sometimes it’s not clear whether permission, respectful treatment, and a sense that the transfer was appreciated / honoured blessed some appropriations as sort of ‘consensual’. Sometimes it matters how the respective cultures’ “power” is balanced ‘now’ — sometimes past relationships matter, and sometimes perceptions and claims of power / superiority are relevant.

Sociologists explore the nuances of this issue all the time. Facebook tents to be pretty hamfisted about it.

Sociologists also don’t define appropriation as ‘bad’ — they define it as ‘a thing that happens’ when cultures are proximate and have a power differential. (Yes, I’ve been talking like it’s ‘ok’ or ‘not okay’ — that’s me. A sociologist wouldn’t. They would just identify the presence or absence of a power difference.) 

Facebookers tend to define it as ‘bad’ and get all mixed up because some appropriation seems much ‘worse’ than others, but the definition still applies (because of the power difference). Respect and consent matter in the real world. So does significance vs triviality. Detailed analysis identifies those factors. It’s just that nuance is hard in a world of social media posts.

 

I think this is ultimately a useless differentiation.  Cultures meet for all kinds of reasons, and cultural transfer always happens unless there are significant cultural barriers enacted to prevent it - things most of us would not want, like a caste system.  

That cultural exchange will always reflect the particular dynamic going on, and the underlying structures of the society.  If one group is being oppressed in some way, that will necessarily be reflected in the cultural exchange.  If the society is like ours and has an advanced capitalistic structure - across the society - the cultural exchange will occur in those terms.

You can't stop an exploitative exchange by trying to restrict exchange, because it's in the nature of ideas to exchange.  In a generation the new syncretization becomes a birthright, rather than something acquired or exotic or alien, even if it means something a little different than it did to any in the generation before.

You can only change the expression of the exchange by changing the underlying fabric.  If some people are capitalizing culture for their own benefit, while others are unable to do so because of economic inequality driven by ethnicity or class,  the only way to have them benefit will be to make them equally able to benefit from cultural capital.  Of course if you don't like the idea of capitalizing culture it might be best to try and change that, but again, that is a whole system problem.

Talking about an oppressed group being culturally appropriated seems a kind of tautology.  

[Lady Florida.]

@Murphy101 I hope nothing to worry about is the answer.

[Ausmumof3]

8 hours ago, Mabelen said:

I think it's ok to try new recipes from different countries. I think, in fact, it's great to be open minded enough to try and enjoy different ethnic dishes.  My beef with food is that often, the original dish gets so distorted that it ends up barely having any resemblance with the real thing. I have tasted so callled Spanish dishes that were simply nothing of the sort. And that, to be honest, irritates me. Sangría, paella, patatas a la brava, are some examples of dishes that I have tried that were not at all what they claimed to be. I think one needs to exhibit some humility when cooking or selling dishes that don't come straight from the source. I would be totally fine if you presented a dish called paella inspired rice, or something like that. Just don't present it like it's the real deal when it's not.

I loved the patatas a la bravas we tried!  Now I’m wondering if it’s like the real version.  I know my own copy definitely is not but we all love it!

[TravelingChris]

Murphy101, praying.  And about 20 years ago, I thought I was having a heart attack.  It was about a year or two after my 34 yo sister had died from one.  I went to the ER and they started doing tests, etc,   and ended up giving me a nitro prescription.  No, I did not have a heart attack or angina.  I had esophageal spasms which have been described by people who have had both that and a heart attack as feeling the same.  Hoping it is something less than a heart attack like my episode.

[TravelingChris]

19 hours ago, Mabelen said:

I think it's ok to try new recipes from different countries. I think, in fact, it's great to be open minded enough to try and enjoy different ethnic dishes.  My beef with food is that often, the original dish gets so distorted that it ends up barely having any resemblance with the real thing. I have tasted so callled Spanish dishes that were simply nothing of the sort. And that, to be honest, irritates me. Sangría, paella, patatas a la brava, are some examples of dishes that I have tried that were not at all what they claimed to be. I think one needs to exhibit some humility when cooking or selling dishes that don't come straight from the source. I would be totally fine if you presented a dish called paella inspired rice, or something like that. Just don't present it like it's the real deal when it's not.

My s-i-l complains about this kind of thing all the time.  It embarrasses my daughter because if he is not with dh and me, he gets loud enough for workers to hear.  Last month, they went to a Cajun restaurant here in town and he pronounced it not Cajun.  The owner or chef came out and told him he was absolutely right but for economic reasons, he can't heat up and spice the food as much as would be traditionally done and stay in business.

The rest of my family likes Tacos.  I just end up eating the non=spiced beef, and fried onions, and lettuce and tomatoes.  No salsa, no tortilla.  I also prefer my BBQ chicken and pork without sauce, make a Mom's chili without pepper, etc.  My Sjogren's Syndrome makes it impossible for me to eat hot peppery food and that includes anything more than a miniscule amount of black pepper too.  But I do not claim that my substituted recipes are authentic and do not serve them to anyone else really except to family.

When we were in New Orleans this year, I did stay away from Cajun restaurants and went to ones that mentioned Creole cuisine since that is a mixed culture cuisine and not necessarily hot at all, depending on the dish. 

 

[SKL]

Most Americans are such a mix of backgrounds, and those we haven't been born into we've either enterprised into, married into, adopted into, or something similar.

How does anyone actually know by looking whether a person "appropriating" has a "legitimate" claim on a given culture or not?

Who is the legitimate cultural appropriation police?  Because to me, it seems those who call out so-called appropriation are usually more offensive than those who "appropriate."

My life is full of examples.  My kids go to a TKD dojang where all the teachers are Americans, but the ultimate owner was personally trained and continues to be guided by a Korean guy in Korea, who approves of the US business (and maybe he gets a cut, I don't know).  (I am sure similar is true of other cultural activities that are run by Americans, such as yoga etc.)  Many of my friends have given me clothes and decorations from their cultures and are most happy to see me wearing them.  My kids have been asked to model some authentic clothes they own in an international fashion show.  A great deal of our language, exercise, diet, and decor was culturally appropriated.  In fact, the house I live in was built by the original Chinese owners and they left us a lot of their furniture which came from China.  The majority of decorations added since then are from my Indian-born and Ukrainian-born friends' cultures.  Would you know any of that just by looking at me, my kids and my house?  No, and some would make all kinds of assumptions based on *their* life experience, not mine.  Since we can't know what makes others do what they do, I suggest we leave the judgment up to the omniscient if we believe such exists.

[SKL]

Also - my life experience often brings me into the world of ethnic Americans who are pro cultural transfer.  These communities put a lot of effort into spreading their culture and encouraging others to both experience and appreciate it.  A couple weeks ago I attended a cultural event at our local art museum, which included ethinc dance groups.  The dance groups were often a mix of people born into that ethnicity, and others who just find it fascinating and fun to learn ethnic dance etc.  Given the number of people I know who actively encourage people outside their culture to sample it, I see it as unfair to them if I push for the opposite approach.