Really? You have to “understand” a culture before incorporating something desirable from that culture?
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
I agree with the first part but not with the idea that it’s inappropriate when “commercializing”. That’s as much human nature as anything else is.
Watch Paris Is Burning and you’ll get a better idea of where that phrase comes from."Throwing shade" - how did THAT become a phrase indicating one person insulting/denigrating another?
Oh I don't care if people in the USA eat pizza or fish&chips, that's not "cultural appropration" that trivializes anything. On the other hand I totally disagree that "there's no need etc" when it comes to certain traditions or features that have an actual MEANING behind them. That's just plain stupid.
For example, people getting a "tribal" tattoo
How about those German folks who are into getting dressed in full Native American traditional dress/regalia and playing around like they're living like they (Native Americans) did way back in the day?
Most Native Americans - or in my case, Native Canadians (AKA First Nations) - that I have met/gotten to know have a pretty good sense of humour, and would probably burst out laughing (as opposed to being insulted about it) at these Deutschlanders "getting their native on". But I wouldn't blame them if they did, in fact, feel a bit offended...
I thought it was said in jest. There are actually people being serious when they say that?
D
Deleted member 165050
Guest
Oh I don't care if people in the USA eat pizza or fish&chips, that's not "cultural appropration" that trivializes anything. On the other hand I totally disagree that "there's no need etc" when it comes to certain traditions or features that have an actual MEANING behind them. That's just plain stupid.
For example, people getting a "tribal" tattoo
Actually cuisine is one of the things that's been focused on here, particularly with Caribbean dishes like rice & peas or goat curry. I'm hungry now.
I want a tattoo like Björk's viking compass
It seems irrational at best to urge and advocate for a pluralistic society, yet demand people stay in their own cultural lane.
Sometimes you do get something extra when you pay more: an expensive lesson!
D
Deleted member 165050
Guest
Although don't forget that one of Coudenhove-Kalergi's theories about making populations more easily governable for the ruling elite was by mixing them together and diluting cultural identity...
I don't see how your quoted statement in any way refutes mine. And some degree of refutation is implied by your choice of "although."
As for the stated theory, it seems valid. But equally valid to assert that power retains control of power by leveraging class and cultural differences.
I guess the bottom line, power uses a bag of tricks to retain power, and does not limit itself to one strategy.
For that matter, William Burroughs has asserted that state power rarely presses for "total control" in part because it would be the end of the dualistic and dialectic game that is the real point. Our realm is for gamesmanship and war, says Burroughs.
Are you referring to Dawn Butler getting her knickers in a twist over Jamie Oliver?Actually cuisine is one of the things that's been focused on here, particularly with Caribbean dishes like rice & peas or goat curry. I'm hungry now.
I want a tattoo like Björk's viking compass
As I understand it, cultural appropriation is largely an accusation from an underprivileged colonized people towards a priviledged colonial force.
Well precisely. And on a more diabolical level, it's crazy-making.
One great example? Any antagonism/belligerengency "punk" ever expressed being totally neutralized by assimilating it in the fashion industry/crap music industry. Now anyone who knows what punk actually meant, can only cringe when hears that word.
Last edited:
Actually, it’s generally an accusation by members of the privileged class “on behalf of” those deemed oppressed by the majority group - even though no one asked these guardians of righteousness to represent anyone or their interests in the first place.
Last edited:
I'm not sure corporate record labels attempting (and largely failing) to monetize the first wave of punk would qualify as "cultural appropriation," because I'm not sure punk really qualified, at least in its infancy, as a "culture." It was a (largely self-contradictory) aesthetic that was constructed to bring to the marketplace.
Joe Strummer in "White Riot" is lamenting what he felt was a lack of cultural identity, which made a more unified "rebellion" possible.
In fact The Clash and John Lydon both abandoned the earlier three-chord format for new styles which were "appropriated" largely for reggae and dub. This was necessary as they were running out of alternate ways to serve their thin gruel as initially formulated.
