Cultural appropriation is a topic that I have struggle with
greatly. I am extremely interested in Eastern culture. I am fascinated with
their philosophies, their medicine, and their overall aesthetic. This is not a
new fascination either; I have been intrigued by Eastern ideas since I did a presentation
on ancient Japanese mythology in 2nd grade. As a kid, it never even crossed
my mind that I may be doing something wrong. It wasn’t until my senior year in
high school that I heard about cultural appropriation. I immediately became
self-conscious. As I have mulled over the subject for some time now, I have
come to find that there is a pretty clear line between appropriation and
appreciation. From my own personal experience, I know that exploring cultures
that are not your own not only broadens your worldview, but it also enhances
your life. I don’t know how I would have gotten through the deepest lows in my
life it wasn’t for Buddhist writings including the writings of the current Dalai
Lama. Professionally, all of my work in the field of market economics is
directly rooted in Eastern concepts of harmony and balance. My most important
work to date directly quotes Laozi and Sun Tzu. I would not be who I am without
Eastern culture. So, I am still left with a question: am I wrong? Am I stealing
from the East? I don’t think so. So, what does that mean for cultural appropriation?
Is it just some stupid “social justice warrior” idea that isn’t actually real?
Well, I don’t think that either. Cultural appropriation is absolutely wrong, but
I think the crusade against cultural appropriation is coming dangerously close
to censoring the most import aspect of being in a human, and that is learning
from each other. The distinction between cultural appropriation and appreciation,
in my opinion, comes down to the intentions of the person in question.
One of the
problems with the debate within cultural appropriation is that there isn’t a
clear definition of what it actually is. In the SFSU video, it is said that the
white student with dreadlocks is stealing from black culture. Personally,
I don’t think that this is cultural appropriation. In contrast, the article discussing celebrities and cultural appropriation mentions Taylor Swift’s video for “Shake It Off.” I do
believe this to be cultural appropriation, and rather appalling cultural
appropriation at that. So, we are left with a question: how are these examples
different? Both include white people emulating black culture. Both seem like
they could fit within the definition of cultural appropriation. But, like any
good student of Kant would say, it comes down to intention.
Why did the
SFSU student have dreadlocks? Why did Taylor Swift emulate black culture in her
video? The SFSU student with the dreadlocks had dreadlocks because they made
him feel good about himself. He was able to express himself through his hairstyle,
and I think that individual self-expression should never be censored. On the
other hand, Taylor Swift was not emulating black culture to express herself
through her preferred aesthetics. She was making fun of black culture. When you
place this in context with her ever-lasting feud with Kanye West, this becomes
quite disconcerting. What Taylor Swift did was wrong. What the SFSU student did
was a very human thing to do. He saw something he liked, and he wanted to
emulate it. It added to his life. To me, this is where the line should be
drawn.
So, what
are practical examples of this line between appreciation and cultural appropriation
in everyday life? When a bunch of white guys who chanted “build that wall” in
November 2017 get together on the 5th of May, put on Sombreros and
fake mustaches, and proceed to drink margaritas and eat tacos while making fun
of Mexican accents and culture, you have cultural appropriation. It’s
disgusting and should be called out. When you have a skinny white kid growing
up in the country and trying to figure out life who then turns to Eastern culture
for inspiration and enlightenment, I think you have appreciation. When you boil
it down, it comes back to Kantian philosophy. Kant states you should always
treat people, and as extension people’s culture, as means in themselves, not means
to an end. If you are treating the culture you admire as a means in itself, you
are appreciating. When you treat a culture as a means to an end, you are
appropriating. The first progresses humanity, because when it comes down to it,
we are all human. If an alien came to Earth, it wouldn’t see separate cultures,
but rather subcultures within the overall culture of the Earth. But when you
treat a culture as a means to an end, you are engaging in racist behavior that
takes humanity backwards towards periods of ignorance and monstrous acts.
I think that this is a great analysis of the use of cultural appropriation. On the contrary though, there is an argument that I have seen that says if the portrayed culture is offended then it is should not be done. I have never seen an argument such as yours but now that I have seen it, I think that this another great argument being contributed to the discussion.
ReplyDelete-Kyra Moore