"Cultural Appropriation" by Jim Lassiter, August 29, 2020
After an eight-month break, Owl & Ibis - A Confluence of Minds resumed holding meetings on August 29, 2020. This internationally attended meeting was held via Zoom. A PDF of the slideshow accompanying the meeting’s presentation may be viewed here. The recorded narration accompanying the slideshow is below. Also, readers may find links to the slideshow and narrative located in the upper left drop down menu.
The next meeting of Owl & Ibis will be held on September 26, 2020 from 4-6PM Eastern US Time. Mona Leiter will chair and present “The Role of Museums in the 21st Century.”
Send me an email if you would like to join future meetings.
JEL }:> & ~:)
Cultural Appropriation Narration*
Jim Lassiter
August 29, 2020
SLIDE 1
In 1727, Philadelphia newspaper printer Benjamin
Franklin, then 21, formed the Junto, also known as the Leather Apron Club,
a group of "like minded aspiring artisans and tradesmen who hoped to
improve themselves while they improved their community." The Junto was a
discussion group for issues of the day; the purpose was to debate questions of
morals, politics, and natural philosophy, and to exchange knowledge of
business affairs.
The Junto was modeled after
English coffee houses which had become the center of the spread of Enlightenment
ideas in Britain. Reading was a great pastime of the Junto, but books were rare
and expensive. The members created a library initially assembled from their own
books.
Inspired by Franklin’s Junto
I started a similar discussion group here in Fayetteville, Georgia, just south
of Atlanta where my wife Immy Rose and I retired in 2008.
I chose as totems two icons from the European
and African intellectual traditions. Athena, Greek goddess of wisdom and war
and Thoth, Egyptian god of knowledge and engineering. Note the owl with Athena
and that Thoth has the head of a sacred African ibis.
I named the gathering Owl
& Ibis then created a logo. I added the subtitle A Confluence of Minds to
emphasize the group’s collegial, egalitarian nature.
Tonight, after a seven month
pause, I am making the first presentation of a restart of Owl & Ibis – Cultural Appropriation.
This title slide hints at
some of the issues I will discuss. Did I appropriate Franklin’s idea of a
discussion group? Another person’s or another culture’s images? Whose fonts did
I use? Whose shades of color have I chosen? What about the English language
itself? As an Anglo-American African, not an Englishman, did I appropriate the
English language?
SLIDE 2
Let us begin with some fundamental definitions. This is said to be the first social scientific definition of “culture.”
Edward Tylor was an English
social anthropologist. Over the past century and a-half anthropologists have
argued about this definition, offered many revisions to it, and created totally
new alternatives.
I still find Tylor’s
definition useful, with one caveat. For the anachronism “man” in Tylor’s
rendering we shall use “humankind.”
Our interest in this
presentation will focus on Tylor’s “knowledge, belief, art, morals, law,
custom, and any other capabilities and habits.” Who owns such culture content if
anyone? Who possesses rights limiting or otherwise circumscribing their use,
again, if anyone? And how are such purported ownership and rights to be protected
and enforced?
First, let us consider what
appropriation means.
SLIDE 3
I found Merriam-Webster’s
and the Oxford English Dictionary inferior to the University of Cambridge
definition given in this slide.
There is also a legal usage
of the term appropriation. For our purposes, this Cambridge definition highlights
matters I want to focus on – “taking, use, permission, idea, custom, style, and
member of.”
SLIDE 4
The University of Oxford, on
their Oxford Reference website, does bring up other important cultural
appropriation concepts.
SLIDE 5
Finally, the last of the
reading for a while, is this description of cultural appropriation. Keywords here are: “controversial,
colonialism, adopt or exploit, cultural elements, disadvantaged or minority
culture(s), against the expressly stated wishes, and originating culture.”
Let us now look at some
images of what many consider cultural appropriation. Questions to ask ourselves
are: Is this an example of cultural appropriation? If it is, is it harmful and if
so, to whom and how?
SLIDE 6
Al Jolson was a
Lithuanian-born American singer, comedian, and actor. Jolson has been dubbed
"the king of blackface" performers, a theatrical convention begun
in the mid-19th century. He was also dubbed "The World's Greatest
Entertainer" at the peak of his career.
In the 1920s, Jolson was
America's most famous and highest-paid entertainer. Although best remembered
today as the star of the first talking picture, The Jazz Singer in
1927, he starred in a series of successful musical films during the 1930s.
As mentioned, Jolson often
performed in blackface makeup. Performing in blackface, having its origins in
the minstrel show, remained a theatrical convention of many entertainers well
into the 20th century.
According to film
historian Eric Lott: "For the White minstrel man to put on the
cultural forms of 'blackness' was to engage in a complex affair of manly
mimicry. To wear or even enjoy blackface was literally, for a time, to become Black,
to inherit the cool, virility, humility, abandon, or [purported
light-heartedness and cheerfulness] that were the prime components of White
ideologies of Black manhood."
In the retrospective view of
the present, the use of blackface is now viewed as implicit racism.
Music critic Ted Gioia,
commenting on Jolson's use of blackface, wrote: "Blackface evokes memories
of the most unpleasant side of racial relations, and of an age in which White
entertainers used the makeup to ridicule Black Americans while brazenly
borrowing from the rich Black musical traditions that were rarely allowed
direct expression in mainstream society. This is heavy baggage for Al Jolson.”
SLIDE 7
Amos 'n' Andy was a mid-20th
Century American radio and television situation comedy. It was set
in Harlem, the historic center of African American culture in New York
City.
The original radio show,
which ran from 1928 to 1960, was created, written, and voiced by two White
actors. When the show moved to
television, Black actors took over a majority of the roles.
SLIDE 8
Cultural appropriation of
African American life also appeared in US literature beginning in the late
1800s, and subsequently on stage and film.
Uncle Remus is the
fictional title character and narrator of a collection of African American
folktales compiled and adapted by White native Georgian, Joel Chandler
Harris, and published in book form in 1881. Harris was a journalist in
post-Reconstruction Atlanta, and he produced seven Uncle Remus books. He
wrote these stories to represent the struggle in the Southern United
States, and more specifically in the plantations. He did so by introducing
tales that he had heard and framing them in the plantation context. He wrote
his stories in a dialect which was his interpretation of the Deep South Negro English
dialect of the time. For these framing and stylistic choices, his collection
has encountered controversy.
Chandler’s stories inspired
Walt Disney’s controversial 1946 film, Song of the South.
Porgy and Bess is an
English-language opera written by Jewish American
composer George Gershwin with his brother, lyricist Ira Gershwin.
Porgy and Bess was first performed in Boston in 1935, before it moved
to Broadway in New York City. It featured a cast of classically
trained African American singers.
After an initially unpopular
public reception, a 1976 Houston Grand Opera production commemorating
the US Bicentennial gained Porgy and Bess a new popularity, and it is now one
of the best-known and most frequently performed operas.
Porgy and Bess tells
the story of Porgy, a disabled Black street beggar living in the slums of
Charleston, South Carolina. It deals with his attempts to rescue Bess from the
clutches of Crown, her violent and possessive lover, and Sportin' Life, her
drug dealer. Did the Gershwins appropriate African American history and
culture?
SLIDES 9-12
The next few slides depict
cultural appropriation by the private, commercial sector of US society for more
than a century. Again, questions to
consider include: Is this cultural appropriation? If it is, is it harmful and if so, to whom and
how? Also, note the changes of the
caricatures that have occurred over the years in some instances, and consider
why they have taken place – Expanded consumer markets that included minorities?
Increased cultural sensitivity from more widespread education? Human and civil
rights activism? Some
depictions, for example the Frito Bandito and Warner Brothers’ Speedy Gonzales
cartoon, have been abandoned outright.
SLIDE 13
Here are two examples of cultural
appropriation regarding indigenous American societies and cultures – Two men at
Carnivál in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil in 2017. And here, women on the catwalk for Victoria’s
Secret in 2017.
SLIDE 14
(Image: My Culture is Not a Costume.)
SLIDE 15
Here is the Jeep Cherokee
automobile when it was introduced 1974. And here is an image of what led to the Urban
Outfitters versus The Navajo underwear lawsuit that was settled in 2016, items
Urban Outfitters named “Navajo hipster panties” and the “Navajo print flask,” not
pictured.
SLIDE 16
Now consider the cultural
appropriation of Indigenous American images in US sports entertainment. Here are
a few among very many. From the Chicago Blackhawks hockey team logo, to the
Cleveland Indians and Atlanta Braves baseball teams. Appropriated college sports mascots include
Florida State University’s Seminole, and the Fighting Illini of the University
of Illinois, their mascot seen here, grim-faced and warrior-like, during a
basketball halftime performance.
Again at the professional
level of American sports, here are the Kansas City Chiefs and Washington
Redskins American football teams. And
what more culturally appropriated entertainment could corporate America come up
with than a Sunday afternoon head-to-head battle between the Cowboys and Indians,
where most team members are African Americans.
Here’s another facet of
indigenous American cultural rights to consider. The history of relations
between indigenous Americans and non-indigenous others in the US has been
mixed. Indigenous American responses to outsiders on their lands and in their
midst have varied over time. This includes government and academic researcher intrusions
into their lands and lives; the recording and publishing of their ideas, ritual
practices, and other intimacies; and the taking, museum displaying, and warehousing
of their artifacts and skeletal remains.
From the end of their defeat
and near total land dispossession at the hands of the US federal government in the
19th Century, US indigenous American response to government agents
and outsider researchers has evolved. Over this period it has gone from powerless acquiescence, to voiced objections and law suits, to occupations
of lost indigenous lands, and to an insistent,
engaged and negotiated accommodation, and now, more often than ever before, to collaboration on terms favorable to indigenous
Americans.
SLIDE 17
Turning to African cultural
appropriation, consider the following images. Here, in 1980, is yours truly in
rural Eswatini, formerly Swaziland, southern Africa. I am studying the SiSwati
language with the help of my adoptive Swazi brother, George Mkhonta, as my young
nephew Sipho looks on.
Here, still in Eswatini a
year later, I am at my rural US Peace Corps Volunteer posting wearing
traditional Swazi attire for men. Have I appropriated Swazi culture and
clothing?
Here, nearly four decades
later, is a book I published in 2017. It relates the cultural prehistory and history
of my wife Immy Rose’s eastern Uganda ethnic group, the Bamasaaba. Did I
appropriate her people’s culture?
Finally, here are certain members of the US Congress wearing kente
cloth, traditional Ghanaian attire. In all four instances were permissions
sought and granted? Granted by whom?
SLIDE 18
Here are some things to
consider regarding cultural appropriation.
What is culture? Who owns its content? What are we, as individuals and groups, doing
when we take, borrow, use people’s cultural content other than that of our own
culture?
For example, pizza is now
widely considered by many Americans to be American food yet dining at an
Italian restaurant is said to be having an Italian meal. Hot dogs and
hamburgers originated in Germany but are now as American as, well, apple pie, a
dessert that originated in England over six and a-half centuries ago.
What are the checks and
boundaries, if any, on appropriation?
What makes cultural
appropriation a problem: intent, exploitation, harm?
Where and in what ways may
cultural appropriation be responded to: socially, morally, ethically, legally, in
terms of personal virtue?
It is widely accepted that
for the vast majority of human prehistoric time, over 180,000 years, human
ideas, styles, and methods have been almost totally the possession of groups,
not individuals. Methods, motifs, and products were shared freely within
groups, and traded between groups throughout that period.
Formalized responses to the appropriation
of ideas, styles and methods first appear in the written record in 500BCE when Greek
chefs at Sỳbaris colony in southern Italy were granted culinary monopolies.
Thereafter group protection
of ideas and artifacts became more formalized and widespread especially between
the 12th and 15th Centuries in Florence, Italy. There, franchises,
privileges, royal favors were granted as individual rights to intellectual
works.
From then on, legal formalization
became the primary method of protecting individual’s ideas and their material products.
These laws, first enacted in England in the early 1600s, addressed print
material copyrights, invention patents, trade secrets, and trademarks. These
laws were only enforced in-country.
Thereafter, more laws
regarding copyrights, patents, trade secrets, and trademarks were enacted in various
European countries. They usually addressed issues over an individual’s
submission of ideas to business enterprises in exchange for compensation.
As for the international
protection of ideas and artifacts, the Berne Convention for the Protection of
Literary and Artistic Works was enacted in 1886, and has been revised multiple
times since. This convention emphasized the rights of creators, as distinguished
from their economic rights. More about international efforts in these areas and
cultural appropriation in particular, follows.
SLIDE 19
The Centre for
International Governance Innovation, founded in 2001, is an
independent, non-profit, non-partisan think tank based in Waterloo, Ontario,
Canada. What follows is information on the current state of actions
addressing cultural appropriation at various levels of society. It is adapted
from a 2019 C.I.G.I. essay titled “Cultural Appropriation Keeps
Happening Because Clear Laws Simple Don’t Exist” by Brigitte Vézina.
Nationally: Rules prohibiting the
harmful exploitation of Indigenous designs do not exist. There is no legal
definition of cultural appropriation.
The term has been so
overused it is hard for anyone to say for sure if something is culturally
appropriated or not. To help make that determination, here are four
things to consider and question: Is
the design used outside of its traditional context? Is there a power imbalance? was there any involvement, acknowledgment or
permission asked of the source culture? Did
it cause social, economic or cultural harm?
Designers and others are in
the dark about what is acceptable and what is not when borrowing from
Indigenous cultures.
Yes, policy makers should
implement effective laws, but the fashion industry and consumers can also lead
the way out of the maze of cultural appropriation. The problem is not just
economic injustice. Misusing traditional designs has moral, social, cultural,
and spiritual ramifications.
Copyright law protects
products of creativity, but most traditional forms of creativity — like
designs, songs or stories — fall outside of its scope. What happens is that
anyone can copy them — no need to ask; no need to pay.
Internationally: The United Nations Educational,
Scientific and Cultural Organization, UNESCO, Convention for the Safeguarding
of the Intangible Cultural Heritage was signed in 2003 and entered into force in
2006. It is the first binding multinational instrument for the protection of
intangible expressions of culture.
In this convention, cultural
heritage is defined as “the practices, representations, expressions, knowledge,
and skills – as well as the instruments, objects, artifacts and cultural spaces
associated therewith – that communities, groups and, in some cases, individuals
recognize as part of their cultural heritage.” Consideration is given solely to
“intangible cultural heritage as it is compatible with existing international
human rights instruments.”
The 178 country signatories
are to take necessary measures to ensure the safeguarding of the intangible
cultural heritage present in its territory. These measures must include identification
and recording of the intangible cultural heritage, adoption of appropriate
policies, and the promotion of intangible heritage education. In taking
these measures, each government must ensure the widest possible participation
of communities, groups, and, where appropriate, individuals that create,
maintain, and transmit such heritage, and to involve them actively in its
management.
This UNESCO
convention has been criticized because it does not address activities that some
groups consider as culturally defining essentials such as male and female
genital mutilation, and essential ideologies that define a group as being in
opposition to another group. In terms of inter-group cultural opposition some
songs and stories glorifying empire, victorious kings, and religious conversion
do not meet the convention standard of “mutual respect.” Conversely, this would
also include songs and stories that glorify resistance to perceived injustice,
martyrdom, and the defeat of enemies. It is also asked does intangible cultural
heritage apply only to “traditional cultural activities” and not more modern forms
of culture such as rap music, Australian cricket, modern dance, postmodern
architecture, and karaoke bars?
Some say
dividing culture into individual units is inconsistent with modern academic
views of cultures. Questions have also been raised as to how a state can safeguard
a cultural practice by force, such as when there is insufficient unanimity or
interest from local practitioners.
Related to the protection of
intangible cultural heritage, the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous
Peoples was adopted by the General Assembly in 2007. It establishes a universal
framework of minimum standards for the survival, dignity, and well-being of the
indigenous peoples of the world; and elaborates on existing human rights
standards and fundamental freedoms as they apply to the specific situations of
indigenous peoples.
In line with the United
Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, state policy makers
are asked to reform their copyright system to prevent the disrespectful and
offensive use of traditional cultural expressions. In many countries copyright
law already states that creators must be acknowledged and their works
respected. Many believe that that protection should be extended to traditional
cultural expressions where a sole creator is impossible to track down.
In the Private Sector: The fashion industry, for
example, needs to reconsider the way it deals with cultural appropriation by
setting a standard. It has to make sure inspiration and borrowing from
Indigenous cultures take place in a fair and respectful manner. It has to send
out a clear message that disrespectful knock-offs cause harm. Here are some
suggestions for fashion designers: use
with respect for the cultural meaning; give credit; use as little as
possible; ask for permission by engaging in a genuine conversation; enter into
collaborations and share benefits.
Among Consumers: As consumers, we can all
blow the whistle on cultural appropriation. We can encourage fair fashion and
buy authentic clothing, jewelry and accessories from Indigenous designers and
Indigenous-approved collaborations.
At the Community Level: Social media can be a
powerful way to draw attention, voice concerns and call out appropriators, yet
it falls short of providing any effective solution. Indigenous peoples must
have control over their own culture. Without legal protection, their cultures remain
vulnerable to harmful exploitation.
SLIDE 20
Here is information provided
by Cultural Survival, an international organization based in Cambridge
Massachusetts that draws attention to, voices concerns, and calls out cultural
appropriators. They note that there are over 476 million indigenous people in
the world belonging to 5,000 different groups, of which over half are in Africa.
They live in 90 countries and speak over 4,000 languages.
SLIDE 21
Here is Cultural Survival’s
website, culturalsurvival.org. Founded in 1972, Cultural Survival partners with
indigenous communities and human rights groups around the world to amplify and
empower indigenous peoples as they work to claim their rights to
self-determination, their lands, their cultures, and their ecosystems. This is
done through advocacy, media, and public education programs.
SLIDE 22
Here is the Statement of my
point of argumentation about cultural appropriation.
Human culture emerged on
Earth, in Nature and has been perpetuated in various forms in response to the
human need for survival and a desire for human flourishing. In that we are all
members of the family of humankind, access to and usage of all human culture
content is, in principle, a human birthright.
SLIDE 23
Here are my facts, assumptions,
or premises supporting my point of argumentation:
1. Human culture has existed
for at least 200,000 years.
2. It has evolved over time and
spread diversely throughout the planet through invention, innovation, and
diffusion.
3. From the beginning until
now, cultural ideas, beliefs, values, and behaviors have been modified,
remembered, stored, borrowed, traded, bought, stolen, and fought over.
SLIDE 24
4. Acts of cultural appropriation
are matters of: individual decision and social and legal sanctioning.
5. CA becomes a problem: when it
damages or is thought to damage a person or group economically; that is, their
ability to do work and sustain themselves materially; and when it threatens or harms the wellbeing
or continuing existence of a group and its members, in its members eyes or the
eyes of other groups.
SLIDE 25
Here is my conclusion:
All human culture content,
past and present, exists in the Ethnosphere, a term coined by Canadian
anthropologist and ethnobotanist Wade Davis in the late 1990s. The Ethnosphere
is the sum of all the thoughts, dreams, myths, ideas, inspirations, and intuitions
brought into being from the human imagination since the dawn of consciousness. As
such, culture is owned by all humankind. Unless one is prohibited formally by
law, constrained by acts of social sanctioning, or restrained by their
conscience, an individual is free to use the Ethnosphere’s culture content
when, where and how they want or need for their survival and flourishing. The
onus for responding to cultural appropriation rests equally on individuals and
groups.
SLIDE 26
More on the anthropological
concept of culture, its evolution, its appropriation, and other aspects may be
found in my forthcoming book, We: A Theory of Cultural Evolution.
SLIDE 27 Thank you for your time and attention. I look forward
to our discussion.
_______________________
*
In part adapted from Wikipedia and other sources.
Comments
Post a Comment