Cultural appropriation

[eirias]

Pursuant to a conversation elsewhere, a poll!

NOTE! For the purpose of this poll, "foreigner" refers to someone who is foreign in several ways:

1. he has no familial claim to the culture (no relation by blood or marriage);
2. he does not and has not lived in the culture;
3. he has no deep knowledge or understanding of the culture, and/or does not speak the language.

Use the comments to clarify anything you like.

(Note: I submitted blank answers but that's only so I can easily see poll results without changing them; one should not infer from that that I think all the options are inappropriate.)

---

[Poll #1267976]

Comments

[nonnihil.livejournal.com]

I'm kinda confused as to why any of these things would be categorically "not okay" for anyone, and I feel like I must be missing something in the question.

[eirias.livejournal.com]

I left it vague on purpose; "not okay" can mean anything from "it should be illegal" to "it's in poor taste and I will look down on people who do it."

[ragnvaeig.livejournal.com]

I think the "practices" section was difficult for me. I can understand engaging in most of them on a shallow level as part of cultural awareness, and engaging in yoga and things with a proper teacher would be okay and eventually lead to cultural understanding, but I don't think it's a good idea to create artwork you're, say, intending to sell, without having lived in and understood the culture in question.

I definitely don't think you should put permanent ink on your body with symbols you don't intimately understand. You could have gibberish written on you, which cheapens the whole idea.

[ukelele.livejournal.com]

Every few months, someone comes to one of the Latin communities with the question, "Hi, I don't know Latin, but it's really awesome, and I want to get a tattoo with [pretentious emo phrase], can you translate it for me"?

Every.Single.Time. I have to stop myself from saying "Sure! 'pedicabo ego vos et irrumabo'." (And, boys and girls, if you have no idea why that's funny (or vicious...), that's why you shouldn't have been asking the question!)

[ukelele.livejournal.com]

So, uh, you can view poll results by clicking on the poll number link, and then "view poll results". Even if you haven't submitted.

[eirias.livejournal.com]

I know, but then you have to do it every time. I wanted the poll results to appear to me in my friendslist and not have to click through.

[wrenb.livejournal.com]

I've thought about this a lot in the last few years regarding Indian clothing. When I visited India (1 week, heavily sheltered by my cousin-in-law's family) I found the clothing to be incredibly comfortable and flattering. I wore my Indian clothes the entire time I was there. But I feel uncomfortable wearing them in public in the US -- like I'm playing dress-up.

[eldan.livejournal.com]

I think that's a really good point, and not only about clothing - a lot of these things feel different (mostly: less like an act) when in the place.

[ukelele.livejournal.com]

For me the issue I have filling out a lot of this poll is it's not linked so much to type of consumption as arena -- public/private. I think that's why (per our earlier discussion ;) the pet/computer names don't bug me (even though a pet is kinda condescending) and child names would; pets and computers belong essentially to the private sphere, but kids don't. This thought got itself fully formed in my head while I was totally stuck on the "decorative artwork" questionnaire. On the one hand, appreciating art is a private feeling and anyone should be able to appreciate anything (and it's a *good* thing if they can!). On the other hand, displaying it is declaring a certain kind of allegiance, or showcasing....*something* that goes beyond art into identity, and that's weird if you don't have any awareness of the cultural significance of the object. On the other hand, if it's decorate artwork *in your own home*, that shouldn't matter. Unless you entertain a lot? Having it in, say, the bedroom or home office wouldn't bug me at all. But in the guest bedroom or living room? Hm, that's trickier.

So, yeah. Fill in all of these by some kind of public/private line for me, basically. Which means that, eg, "food" is always good and "tattoos" are always bad (well, I suppose some tattoos are in seldom-public places, but then you get into this whole other argument about how much cultural respect you are demonstrating with that Ta Moko on your ass).

Several of these have an additional complication in that they're inherently group activities -- eg, participating in religious ceremonies (in most cases). I am, personally, intensely uncomfortable with participating in religious ceremonies, because I am a foreigner to them, I don't generally believe in what's on offer, and I am sick-to-my-stomach horrified at the notion that people would assume I am representing something of that importance and sanctity when I am not. On the other hand, the religious ceremonies I've been at have all been ones where I could pass as a non-foreigner -- i.e. people's default assumption may be that I am participating in the same spirit which they are. (Hi, white person in a mainline Protestant church in the US! Um, yeah.) If I were in a context where the default assumption would be that I was a foreigner, and the regular celebrants invited me to join, that would be a different thing. Well, it wouldn't be totally different because I still wouldn't be sharing some belief elements that might be assumed to be shared, but there wouldn't be as much discomfort. And the broader issue I'm trying too-verbosely to get at here is that, if people who do have that level of cultural understanding invite you to participate, when it's clear to them that you're a foreigner, that's a different situation; it's an honor, it's not a problem, and indeed it might be insulting to refuse.

Yeah. So I think you're asking sort of the wrong set of questions here; it's not behaviors, although they condition the degree of appropriateness to some extent; it's about public vs. private consumption, and it's about the intersection of insider and outsider in group situations.

[eirias.livejournal.com]

Very interesting! One intense, but small, quibble: I am really confused as to how you class "food" as a private behavior, particularly ethnic food, where the less you know, the *more* likely you are to have to involve the public somehow in your consumption (eating out or, at the very least, ordering in).

My conclusion: If and when I name a son Ravi, I will confine him to the closet. That should solve the issue. Though I suppose if I entertain, I should do the same if I name the cat Perseus. Hmmm.... that's going to be a crowded, and smelly, closet. Maybe I need two closets.

[leora.livejournal.com]

I think my problem is I don't see how having a shallow tie makes any of it better. I have a blood ties to Russia, Poland, and Spain... that makes me an expert in - none of them. I only have basic knowledge of their histories and cultures, but it's somehow okay for me to grab from any of them. (Although still a really bad idea to get something tattooed on me in Polish if I don't know what it means).

I suppose the poll does not assume that having a shallow tie makes it all okay. It's just sometimes I find the whole if you're part of the group it's okay attitude a bit weird. And this is one of those issues where it seems like having had ancestors whom I never knew who were part of the group just doesn't seem to endow me with any special right that someone else with equal knowledge and respect shouldn't have.

[ukelele.livejournal.com]

(Oh, and capsicumanuum and slit are really good people to talk to about cultural appropriation issues -- capsicumanuum is mostly f-locked but slit is pretty open. They both have fascinating and complex journeys through foreign/nonforeign, in totally different directions.)

[smarriveurr.livejournal.com]

This is a thorny one, that I end up discussing now again, mainly on the spiritual/religious angle. I haven't really answered the poll proper, because I haven't broken it down to this level, and, frankly, I think a lot depends more on the context, and from whom you're appropriating.

There are, for example, inclusive and proselytizing religions that actively want to spread their doctrine and bring in others. They would be glad to have people who don't fully understand the practices follow them to the letter - but the Catholic Church, for example, would frown on a neopagan performing Mass as part of their own practice, regardless of whether the person has a cultural connection, and I wouldn't want someone trying to grab the symbolism etc because they think it's "cool" without considering the deeper implications. On the other hand, I'm told that everyone is a good Hindu, and there are religious leaders in the community who would be glad to find you incorporating their beliefs respectfully into any practice.

However, with the kind of person you describe, I'm not sure they're capable of respectful incorporation on their own. That takes research and knowledge of the context of the things you're appropriating.

On the fourth hand, if you are "celebrating holidays" in the sense that you're coming together with actual adherents of the cultural structure as a guest and they're running the show, I think that's fine. I started going to Seder when I was 5, and I certainly didn't speak Hebrew, my family wasn't Jewish within the last 4 generations, and I certainly didn't have any in-depth knowledge of the culture. Attending Seder every year though, as a respectful participant, is part of how I gained a greater understanding of Jewish practice and culture. There are those who'd say that a gentile probably doesn't belong at Seder in the first place, regardless. It didn't bother Murry and his family, though, so I don't consider it inappropriate, because I was just along for the ride and didn't interfere.

Now consider one of the most common cultural theft targets, Native American belief structures. A whole lot of people incorporate them whole hog as "new age practices" without any attempt to make connection to the culture and understand the context. Some tribes now actively refuse to give out any more information on their beliefs, having decided that what they said in the past was incautious, got abused, and damages their own practices. I'd say if no member of the culture is willing to engage with you on the practice, that's always right out, so celebrating... well... anything of theirs would be an inappropriate appropriation.

Once we get beyond that, my standards relax a lot. I think it's generally AOK for utter foreigners to enjoy ethnic foods, to seek out training in cultural practices that would hopefully give the person a better grounding in the culture. I do not think that those who haven't studied the context should pass on those practices, at all. The inevitable "transcription errors" would be massively disrespectful, and over time would neuter the practice, I should think.

Tattoos I don't think of nearly as much on the "cultural appropriation" plane, unless they're especially significant - you're getting a tattoo of a symbol or phrase that has deep cultural implications, for example, symbols, names of gods or cultural movements, etc. Beyond that, it's more a question of practicality - if you don't know what's written on your ass, the phrase you translated as "devilish flirt" might just mean "total bitch", etc. You don't know the connotations, and you don't know how much semantic overlap the native and foreign words might have, so you don't know what you're getting and even a friendly translator might not know what you're really aiming for if you can only present the idea in your own language. A tat might signal familiarity with the culture erroneously, but nowadays, the tribal tattoos and Eastern pictographs have been stripped of that value on foreigners by the hordes of frat boys and sorority girls.

This is of course an immensely huge topic, that I probably shouldn't handle just after waking up at all, but that's a small slice of my thought process, muzzily explained.

[leora.livejournal.com]

We regularly have gentiles at my family's Sedar. :)

Although there are two points worth noting about why any Jew who said you didn't belong at a Sedar would have serious conflicts with Judaism:

The biggest one is that one of the requirements of the Sedar is to open your door and invite anyone who wants to come in to come in. Sure, that's just for the meal and the rest of the Sedar, but coming by slightly early... it is hard to justify excluding someone from a Sedar when the family invites them.

The second is that the Sedar is partly about teaching the story and teaching understanding of what happened. Generally that is meant to be for the children, but gentiles can count if they're not yet familiar with it.

... I also think there's a difference between being a guest at someone else's celebration, which I think is always okay and creating your own celebration. It can be a bit insulting to celebrate someone else's holiday when you don't even understand it. I wouldn't want to make it illegal, but I might think less of someone or find it in poor taste for them to do it. I especially dislike when people take things of deep meaning and significance to some people and do them simply for their fun value or aesthetic value. However, if you do so significantly privately, then I'm okay with it.

Meh, too many subtle distinctions for me to come up with any clear position on this. Just too many possible factors for what people are doing and how they are doing it.

[kirin]

Ok, I spent a while pondering a few of these, until I finally decided, you know, all of these are personal choices of the kind that I don't believe I can call *categorically* not okay without knowing the extenuating circumstances, so I went ahead and checked everything. This doesn't mean I don't think several of them are going to end up being a Bad Idea 90+% of the time.

If you want details:

Everything in the first section is no-brainer okay to me. I cannot imagine proscribing anyone from consuming or creating any kind of entertainment they damn well please.

Second section - several of these fall in the above category. Other than that, *giving* medical treatment has obvious pitfalls, but I think it would be possible to learn most of the relevant ones without having a deep understanding of the culture. For religious rituals, I'd want people to show a certain minimal level of respect at least, and it can be hard to know *how* to show that without knowing the culture, but in some cases you could manage.

Third section - all of these of course have potential to go hilariously wrong and thus it would be in people's best interest to proceed cautiously, but really it's no skin off my nose if they screw up. The one borderline case is child-naming, but to me that's more of a general "will it make their life needlessly miserable?" sort of issue.

Really all of this boils down to the same thing - all I'd want out of people in any of these cases is a minimum level of respect for all cultures. Not knowing what the heck you're doing makes that harder, but not necessarily impossible. And in the end, people can do whatever the hell they want - I'll just think less of them if it looks like they're belittling people or cultures that are different from them.

[glasseye.livejournal.com]

People can do what they want. Borrowing from other cultures does not offend me in the least.

[paperkingdoms]

Put me in with most everyone else with fuzzy responses... the public/private line is interesting. But what's sort of coalescing for me is an intent to claim the cultural bit as your own, or the likelihood of perceived intent. So eating food is something that's done by lots of people as a way to try something new; it'd be unusual for "foreigners" to portray it as their own. But there's a strong sense of ownership with tattoos [aside from the "writing things you don't understand" issue]. With a slightly different twist, giving medical treatment puts you in a position of authority [which could be actively negated, but it would be very difficult to do so].

I don't know if that's *quite* it, but it's close to the gut feeling I have, at least.

That might be a more productive line...

[smarriveurr.livejournal.com]

I think that's a large part of it - whether your particular "appropriation" seems to imply you are an authority on a culture you know next to nothing about. Eating in the restaurant implies nothing. Even cooking a dish at home doesn't imply much. Leading a religious/cultural service does. Getting a culturally important image or phrase as a tattoo does. It "claims" the culture much more distinctly.

The latter, authority-laden activities tend to imply cultural knowledge and continuity, so it's disingenuous to perform those actions without the appropriate contextual knowledge, and could lead to a lot of misunderstandings about the source culture (transcription errors, like I mentioned above). That's disrespectful to the source.

Maybe the "claim on culture" is the real dividing line - though obviously it's a fuzzy one that different people will interpret differently.

The way I feel about it...

[nein09.livejournal.com]

This is an interesting poll for me, because I've been having to deal with learning vs. appropriation on several fronts: my town, my coworkers, and the family I married into.

The line I use is that if it helps me learn more about a culture or fit in while I'm there, I'll go for it. If I'm borrowing something you don't understand just because it looks cool, it's appropriation. I think food always goes in the "learning" bucket (to the extent that I really enjoy visiting foreign grocery stores, because it's a learning experience), while tattoos almost always go in the "appropriation" bucket, for example.

I will admit to a certain amount of appropriation on my part, however.

[chilimuffin.livejournal.com]

I think that I can find places where almost all of these things are acceptable and where they're not. And for me, I suspect what may contribute strongly to that line is the sense of "will it bring us together, or will it set us further apart?" Ironically, it's a concept I've possibly appropriated from the Amish, having spent most of my life in "Amish country" (but then, is that appropriation? hmmm).

I think some things, like food, lend themselves to coming together ("I'm trying to make this interesting Moroccan dish, can I get your expertise?") while others require more work - I can't think of a particularly good way, for example, for me to wear the native clothing of most countries without making myself look posturing.

For most things, I think I'd have to decide on an individual basis, depending on how the topic is approached. It's one thing, for example, to experiment with cooking ethnic cuisines, and even to get really good at it, perhaps even become an expert. It's another to pretend expertise, or to somehow equate expertise in a particular food preparation technique with a deep understanding of the culture in which it is developed.

At what point does the acquisition of knowledge about a culture make you less of a foreigner? Is it even possible to ever get beyond "deeply educated expert, and therefore accepted outsider"? At what point does it no longer matter? I think a lot of these things hinge on humility and respect, rather than the actual quantity of knowledge.

Then again, is appropriation a bad thing in all cases? In any case? Again, to what end is the appropriation being used? Will it bring us together, and is that inherently good? I think it's all very fuzzy.

[eirias.livejournal.com]

Interesting. My only response is, who is "us"?

1. To the extent that cultural differences ensure solidarity through separation of Other, outside participation is inherently bad for that culture.

2 To the extent that what you want is elimination of cultural boundaries, I cannot see how, in the long run, outside participation can be anything but good.

3. To the extent that you're just talking about two randomly selected people from a culture, I think it'll vary a lot, probably depending on whether the people's priorities look more like 1. or 2.

[leora.livejournal.com]

Some of these depend on context. However, I want us to move toward the following view, which I often hold.

It isn't really okay to coopt things from foreign cultures. I am an Earth human. I can use things from Earth human culture.

I mean... seriously... what is my culture? I'm a mutt. I am Russian, Polish, Spanish, slightly Mongol... go back far enough and presumably I'm middle Eastern and African... and what's the difference? What's the difference between trying to regain culture from your roots and from things nearby? Does anyone even really know their lineage that far back?

I'm a human. And if we were out in space living on multiple planets for long enough, especially if there were any intelligent aliens out there, I bet we'd get to a point of considering it Earth culture. And I prefer to pretend we've united already. I like to read science fiction anyhow.

[smarriveurr.livejournal.com]

I actually made this argument in a "Cultural Analysis" course in college. Someone contended that "Eastern" and "Western" were somehow the end-all-be-all of overarching cultures the couldn't find common ground. I pointed out that "culture" is really something we define by comparison.

When someone asks me where I'm from, they get different answers depending on context. When I lived in North Jersey, and was in the vicinity of my house, they'd get a town name, maybe even the neighborhood. Ask that same question in South Jersey, and I'd say North Jersey or "just outside Newark". In PA, I'm just from Jersey. While I was in Germany, I was from the US East Coast.

It seems to me we define our culture by exclusion. Put someone from Osaka and someone from rural China in a room, and they'll say they come from different cultures. Put someone from England in that room, and "Eastern Culture" is born by the comparison. Put someone from a posh part of London in the room with a scouser, you'll see two different cultures. Throw someone from Paris in the mix, and... you'll see two different cultures.

So, yeah, I posited that the reason we couldn't envision a "human culture" was just that we had nothing alien enough to compare it to. That got me a lot of incredulous looks and a bit of flak, but I think it's a sound proposal.

[eponis.livejournal.com]

See, I'm hesitant to label any of these "not okay." As with language, while my instincts are prescriptionist ("'ain't' is wrong! white people getting chinese characters tattooed is silly!"), my ultimate ideology is descriptionist. I just can't justify saying, "no, you may not learn yoga/watch Bollywood films/wear an ankh necklace," just because the person in question isn't part of, or isn't that familiar with, those cultures.

Plus, engaging in those things is often how one becomes familiar. I learned about Indian culture from watching Bollywood and reading (authentic) cookbooks, not by looking up a textbook in the library. I personally wouldn't be comfortable tattooing myself in Sanskrit, but cultures throughout history have gleefully (and usually inaccurately!) appropriated from each other, so who am I to stop other people from doing it?

The point at which it is offensive or "not okay," to me, is when one pretends to be an authority rather than a student. For example, the tendency of certain chefs or cookbooks to say "toss in some curry powder, coconut, and raisins, and it's Indian!" bothers me. It's not that you can't make tasty food like that, or that I would stop people from doing so. It's just that to call it Indian -- rather than, say, "British food with Indian influences" -- is to imply a level of knowledge that isn't there. Same thing with most of the stuff that people call "Celtic": I have no problem with them liking it, but I'm more troubled when they claim that it's authentic and ancient, rather than a modern fusion of various influences.

Does that distinction make sense?

[leora.livejournal.com]

Hmm, thinking about foods... if you had actual blessed communion wafers, I think it'd be disrespectful to take the home and munch on them in front of the tv. However, before they are blessed, they are just crackers. Are there any foods considered to be inherently religious? Not an ingredient, really, because I think it's a bit unfair for a group of people to say nobody else can eat this ingredient without being inherently disrespectful to us and expect us to follow that (Hinduism does say eating cows is disrespectful, but they don't seem to impose that on others, and it doesn't quite follow because I mean something they eat for a religious purpose and get upset with others for eating for their own purposes), but maybe a dish.

Challah has a lot of significance in Judaism and it is eaten symbolically on the Sabbath. However, it is also consumed in completely non-religious ways at other times just because it is tasty, so I think non-Jews can safely do whatever they want with challah with no disrespect involved (personally, I recommend challah french toast - quite yummy).

But I think if there were a really religious dish that that group never eats outside of its ritual then making it and eating it might be a bit tacky.

On a side note, I don't know why people don't make and eat charoset more often. I only have it during Passover, but it's fairly tasty. It's a mix of apples, spices, nuts, wine, and sometimes other things. Recipes vary, but it can be quite nice. Of course, similar apple recipes that don't quite taste like charoset probably do get made reasonably often.

[vfoxy.livejournal.com]

I answered ok for every single one except naming a child and naming yourself, because I saw those as a form of identifying with the culture without belonging. But then I realized, I have a Norwegian name, and not a drop of Norwegian blood; although I'm a Norwegian wannabe. I've always been really proud of the name, and more and more proud of it the more I understand its cultural history (goddammit, I'm a Valkyrie!!)

Also having a Norwegian name is responsible for my learning of German, at least initially-so therefore kicked off more cultural awareness-because people would always ask me what nationality my name was, and I would say German (because I thought it was German). They would then always ask me if I spoke German, and I would have to say no. So I finally got sick of that and started learning German. Of course now I know the name is firmly Norwegian-so I guess now I have to learn Norwegian.

Anyway, so I want to change my answers!

[rshruti.livejournal.com]

This is a really odd question. I'm reading the responses, but I'm confused about why it would be weird in any way. I'm always very flattered when people want to participate in my culture (food, clothing, yoga, naming their children, whatever), even if they know nothing about it. I saw a guy with a huge OM tattoo (the Sanskrit symbol) on his arm, and sure, I wondered if he knew what it was and what it meant, but thought it was really cool that he liked it and wore it. Same for the Random White Guy named Govind. I mean, it is out of the ordinary, but it was cool nonetheless.

I get upset when people mock my culture (so, for example, I found the "Love Guru" movie trailers offensive). So I guess it annoys me when people are disrespectful. None of the things you mention above is inherently disrespectful, without context. But it's fine when people just want to participate. So feel free to wear your lehenga at all dress up occasions and name your son Ravi and eat lots of Indian food and watch Bollywood movies. I will have no problem with it.