Cultural appropriation
Sep. 27th, 2008 10:04 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
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]
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]
(no subject)
Date: 2008-09-27 06:49 pm (UTC)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?