Cultural Appropriation
I recently read an internet article “A much needed primer on
cultural appropriation”.
(http//jezebel.com/5959698/a-much-needed-primer-on-cultural-appropriation)
So, what does “appropriate” mean? According to the dictionary the word appropriate means to take as
ones own, to take for ones own: hence to steal. We are all familiar that taking an invention protected by
patent is fraudulent. Using another’s words either orally or in
print is plagiarism. However, it
becomes more murky when we speak of intellectual properties or cultural
values. The reason I was intrigued by
this article is that it addressed the issue of fashion and designers that have
(and are) using cultural references in their designs with little appreciation
to their true significance.
There has always been the idea that design (in whatever
form) is derivative, that is, it is
based upon previous concepts , sometimes very explicit references,
sometimes only a vague hint of a
precursor. In Textile Designs (Meller
and Elffers, Abrams, 1991) the authors state “…the recycling wheel, which sets
the motif of textile designs on a circular road of eternal return. Nothing disappears, and nothing appears out
of nowhere.” This might be taken to
imply certain permission to copy. But
this is not what I am talking about in appropriation of culture. Certainly we are seeing in the past few
years a return to mid-century style, design and color patterns.
Cultural appropriation is very different. It is taking the values and beliefs of a
people, their physical characteristics and/or lifestyle. It is removing these symbols from their
original context and using them in
fashion , let’s be real here, for a profit.
The meaning of these cultural references is nowhere addressed, and,
indeed often far, far removed from any original significance. This is not a new problem. In the 1950’s there was great interest in
so-called “ethnic” designs. Yards of printed fabric presented Mexican senores
in sombreros asleep beneath palms or with burros and senoritas with baskets of
flowers. There were “Little Black
Sambo” pajamas and “Aunt Jemima” aprons.
Today this is not only considered sooo politically incorrect, but
down-right inflammatory. And yet today
it continues with many ethnic groups.
The problem is, I think, the consumer sees a pleasing, or
intriguing design, either in the print of the fabric or the construction of the
final product. Perhaps the offense lies
in the glossy advertising. Because the real symbolism is unfamiliar the consumer is unaware that this is perhaps
offensive and derogatory to some. Is
there a solution? Of course, but it
may be a complicated one. The onus is
on both the consumer and the producer.
We must be more aware and receptive to the idea that everyone does not
live, think and believe as we do. If
there is no market, there will be no further production. Fashion manufacturers must be held
accountable. Apologies after the fact should not be the final word.. If there
is an instance of such breach of good faith the public should make their voices
heard. Afterall everyone is entitled to
their heritage and beliefs
