Do you understand the following?

[Metaphor]

Not asking if you agree or disagree,

do you understand it?

"There are, broadly speaking, cultural appropriation, cultural appreciation, and cultural exchange. Cultural exchange is when both sides enter into relationship as equals and both sides give and take, and both sides benefit. Ex. When trade routes first open between countries. Cultural appreciation is when one engages in the cultural practices traditional to another group of people not as parody or commodity but in deference and as an act of respect. Ex. A business associate from another country in having dinner in your home and you cook dishes from her native country or you perform a ritual custom like the Japanese tea ceremony. And then there is cultural appropriation, which includes such things as using native cultures as sports mascots, having ghetto themed black-face parties, or stereotypical representations of Arabs in action films. What appropriations have in common is that they use the cultural archetype, ritual or artifact in a incorrect or even deliberately disrespectful way.

Now any combination of those three classifications can occur at the same time and both the borrower and the borrowie can get their signals crossed. Hence the contention."

"Traditional to another group of people"
"Both sides".

How do you define a culture and how do you decide who's the outsider?

I was raised a Catholic and my entire family is Catholic. What if I used the symbols of Catholicism, not as respect or because I liked the aesthetic, but as parody or criticism of Catholicism? Am I safe from the accusation of 'cultural appropriation'? Isn't the using of the symbols in a hurtful way what's wrong, not that I do, or do not, belong to the culture?

What if I use something not in a way that's mutually beneficial, and not out of 'respect' or 'deference' but because I like the way something looks?

 

[Achwienichtig]

Not asking if you agree or disagree,

do you understand it?

"There are, broadly speaking, cultural appropriation, cultural appreciation, and cultural exchange. Cultural exchange is when both sides enter into relationship as equals and both sides give and take, and both sides benefit. Ex. When trade routes first open between countries. Cultural appreciation is when one engages in the cultural practices traditional to another group of people not as parody or commodity but in deference and as an act of respect. Ex. A business associate from another country in having dinner in your home and you cook dishes from her native country or you perform a ritual custom like the Japanese tea ceremony. And then there is cultural appropriation, which includes such things as using native cultures as sports mascots, having ghetto themed black-face parties, or stereotypical representations of Arabs in action films. What appropriations have in common is that they use the cultural archetype, ritual or artifact in a incorrect or even deliberately disrespectful way.

Now any combination of those three classifications can occur at the same time and both the borrower and the borrowie can get their signals crossed. Hence the contention."

I am going to go out on the limb here and say that the meaning is not 100% clear. It is hard to understand in what way trade relationships amount to "cultural" exchange. Are cultures bought and sold? If I buy curry powder, am I buying Indian culture? Are we talking about the culture exchange that takes place concurrently with trade, or is this exchange a feature of the trade itself? Or perhaps the opening of the trade agreement is itself somehow cultural?

ETA: This is an honest attempt at addressing the OP. I don't see the necessary connection between trading goods and exchanging cultures, and therefore this example seems weak to me.

 

[Bronzeage]

"borrowie"??

Yeah, goes back to when my folks were ripped off back when I was a kid. The metropolitan police were treating my father like he stole from himself. His quote, "You seem confused son. I am not the robber, I am the robbie."

I had a similar conversation with my stock broker.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Not asking if you agree or disagree,

do you understand it?

I am going to go out on the limb here and say that the meaning is not 100% clear. It is hard to understand in what way trade relationships amount to "cultural" exchange. Are cultures bought and sold? If I buy curry powder, am I buying Indian culture? Are we talking about the culture exchange that takes place concurrently with trade, or is this exchange a feature of the trade itself? Or perhaps the opening of the trade agreement is itself somehow cultural?

When you trade goods, you usually trade the ways the goods are used, how best to care for said goods, and you learn whatever lore and legend that might be associated with said goods. You also learn what is acceptable behavior in given situations, how to make your trading partners feel at ease with you and they learn how to make you feel at ease is order to make the trading experience as comfortable and profitable as possible..


But you already know that, or could have figured it out for yourself, since what I have said is common knowledge and common sense.

 

[Achwienichtig]

I am going to go out on the limb here and say that the meaning is not 100% clear. It is hard to understand in what way trade relationships amount to "cultural" exchange. Are cultures bought and sold? If I buy curry powder, am I buying Indian culture? Are we talking about the culture exchange that takes place concurrently with trade, or is this exchange a feature of the trade itself? Or perhaps the opening of the trade agreement is itself somehow cultural?

When you trade goods, you usually trade the ways the goods are used, how best to care for said goods, and you learn whatever lore and legend that might be associated with said goods. You also learn what is acceptable behavior in given situations, how to make your trading partners feel at ease with you and they learn how to make you feel at ease is order to make the trading experience as comfortable and profitable as possible.

Allow me to be a cynic for a second. All this making each other "feel at ease" sounds a lot like cultural appreciation, not cultural exchange. Indeed, the example you gave of cultural appreciation is that of a businessman (i.e. a trades person) entertaining a foreigner according to the foreign custom. These are the same examples.

In addition, if you classify "the ways the goods are used" as cultural exchange, and you then say that using "an artifact [of another culture] in an incorrect . . . way" is cultural appropriation, it makes it seem as though using items obtained from trade in a manner inconsistent with their use in the original culture is cultural appropriation. But this goes too far.

I am asking for a better example of cultural exchange. The history of trade is loaded with too many injustices for me to not be a cynic. Trade is not an example. It is simply an action that is sometimes associated with cultural exchange.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Not asking if you agree or disagree,

do you understand it?

"Traditional to another group of people"
"Both sides".

How do you define a culture and how do you decide who's the outsider?

Culture -- Culture is the characteristics and knowledge of a particular group of people, defined by everything from language, religion, cuisine, social habits, music and arts.

Who said anything about outsiders?

I was raised a Catholic and my entire family is Catholic. What if I used the symbols of Catholicism, not as respect or because I liked the aesthetic, but as parody or criticism of Catholicism?

What if you did?

Am I safe from the accusation of 'cultural appropriation'?

Have you ever been accused of appropriating the religion into which you were born? If you haven't then you probably won't.

Isn't the using of the symbols in a hurtful way what's wrong, not that I do, or do not, belong to the culture?

Disrespecting the religion of your family, can be justified and necessary and it can also be petty and cruel. Why would you think it appropriation? Or are you just trying to think up a situation where you can beat me and win ... what exactly?

What if I use something not in a way that's mutually beneficial, and not out of 'respect' or 'deference' but because I like the way something looks?

What if you do? I mean, I have use a chef's knife to cut cardboard. Don't think I appropriated anything. Your sentence can is devoid of direct reference and divorced for historical and social context so how can it be answered with regards to cultural appropriation.

But I think that's probably the point.

 

[Bronzeage]

Cultural appropriation is part of the human condition. It's what we do.

If I want to put on a grass skirt and roast a pig in the hole in the ground, am I dishonoring the Polynesian Gods the hula is supposed to appease?

Maybe I'm missing something, but the only culture which doesn't take and give to other cultures is a dead culture. Cultures are always in change, especially when in contact with others. I'm a white man if I dressed like I just stepped out of a Rembrandt painting, I would attract some attention. If I could turn the clock back a couple centuries or so, I'd be one of the guys on the front row of The Night Watch.

I'm not totally insensitive to people's feelings, and that is what we are talking about, hurt feelings.

This bit of cultural appropriation hurt a lot of feelings back in it's day:

 

[Achwienichtig]

Athena, I am curious, why did you create a post about whether people understood a particular set of definitions as opposed to a post that discussed whether those were the correct definitions or whether they were the best best definitions? Obviously, that is the direction most of the conversation has gone. I'm just curious.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Athena, I am curious, why did you create a post about whether people understood a particular set of definitions as opposed to a post that discussed whether those were the correct definitions or whether they were the best best definitions? Obviously, that is the direction most of the conversation has gone. I'm just curious.

Because in the thread where this post originated, I kept reading how certain posters here didn't understand what I was saying. I thought I had to perhaps typed in some unknown tongue.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

When you trade goods, you usually trade the ways the goods are used, how best to care for said goods, and you learn whatever lore and legend that might be associated with said goods. You also learn what is acceptable behavior in given situations, how to make your trading partners feel at ease with you and they learn how to make you feel at ease is order to make the trading experience as comfortable and profitable as possible.

Allow me to be a cynic for a second. All this making each other "feel at ease" sounds a lot like cultural appreciation, not cultural exchange. Indeed, the example you gave of cultural appreciation is that of a businessman (i.e. a trades person) entertaining a foreigner according to the foreign custom. These are the same examples.

In addition, if you classify "the ways the goods are used" as cultural exchange, and you then say that using "an artifact [of another culture] in an incorrect . . . way" is cultural appropriation, it makes it seem as though using items obtained from trade in a manner inconsistent with their use in the original culture is cultural appropriation. But this goes too far.

I am asking for a better example of cultural exchange. The history of trade is loaded with too many injustices for me to not be a cynic. Trade is not an example. It is simply an action that is sometimes associated with cultural exchange.

You did read the last sentence, right?

Now any combination of those three classifications can occur at the same time and both the borrower and the borrowie can get their signals crossed. Hence the contention."

 

[Achwienichtig]

Athena, I am curious, why did you create a post about whether people understood a particular set of definitions as opposed to a post that discussed whether those were the correct definitions or whether they were the best best definitions? Obviously, that is the direction most of the conversation has gone. I'm just curious.

Because in the thread where this post originated, I kept reading how certain posters here didn't understand what I was saying. I thought I had to perhaps typed in some unknown tongue.

I see.

I think the issue is, for many people, these three terms are descriptive terms with no moral connotations. When these terms get brought up in moral discussion, however, they very often are used with moral connotations. For instance, your definition of cultural appropriation has moral elements in it, whereas others do not view it that way. In actual conversation, this translates into people using the same words with similar meanings but different connotations.

I don't know if this is what you were experiencing, but I suspect this happens alot.

 

[Achwienichtig]

Allow me to be a cynic for a second. All this making each other "feel at ease" sounds a lot like cultural appreciation, not cultural exchange. Indeed, the example you gave of cultural appreciation is that of a businessman (i.e. a trades person) entertaining a foreigner according to the foreign custom. These are the same examples.

In addition, if you classify "the ways the goods are used" as cultural exchange, and you then say that using "an artifact [of another culture] in an incorrect . . . way" is cultural appropriation, it makes it seem as though using items obtained from trade in a manner inconsistent with their use in the original culture is cultural appropriation. But this goes too far.

I am asking for a better example of cultural exchange. The history of trade is loaded with too many injustices for me to not be a cynic. Trade is not an example. It is simply an action that is sometimes associated with cultural exchange.

You did read the last sentence, right?

Now any combination of those three classifications can occur at the same time and both the borrower and the borrowie can get their signals crossed. Hence the contention."

Perhaps these three classifications occur at the same time because they are not discrete elements? I suspect that one could describe cultural exchange entirely in terms of appreciation and appropriation without a separate definition of its own.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

This whole concept of "cultural appropriation" strikes me as similar to that of the "sacred". If I think aboriginal beads look cool and decide to wear them and they come into fashion, and I have no appreciation of native heritage, I see nothing wrong with that. Same as if I decide to draw a cartoon including Mohammed or eat pork in the presence of a jew. I wouldn't do it for the sole purpose of upsetting them, but I woudln't refrain from doing it just to please them. If I want to sing blues music and wear a poncho, I will.

 

[Jayjay]

Ask the people involved, Personaly I have never seen the purpose in using something incorrectly, regardless of what it is. And as for commodification, Rome took the practices and artifacts of a small jewish sect and sold it to the rest of the world as Christianity. I think the damage done by that speaks for itself.

Sometimes, that kind of appreciation creates a completely new and interesting mix that's worthy in its own right.

And if you read the end of the quote, you will see this.

Now any combination of those three classifications can occur at the same time and both the borrower and the borrowie can get their signals crossed. Hence the contention."

If it is appreciation, then there is no problem. And yes i noticed the change in words.

The words themselves are just labels. Some appropriation is perfectly harmless, some appreciation can be bad. The author seems to want to come to a definition that equates appropriation with exclusively negative connotation. I think that tells more about the author's bias than anything else.

 

[Metaphor]

Who said anything about outsiders?

For someone to appropriate something from a culture, I assume it means they have to not be part of the culture to begin with, that is, they are outside the culture.

So, who decides who is an insider and an outsider to a culture? What makes AB think she is a hip-hop "insider" and IA a hip-hop "outsider"?

Please note you don't have to answer for AB. Answer for yourself. Who is a hip-hop insider, and who is an outsider?

Have you ever been accused of appropriating the religion into which you were born? If you haven't then you probably won't.

I'm not asking about my future likelihood of being accused of cultural appropriation. I'm asking as to whether it is possible for me to be an appropriator of Catholic culture.

Disrespecting the religion of your family, can be justified and necessary and it can also be petty and cruel. Why would you think it appropriation? Or are you just trying to think up a situation where you can beat me and win ... what exactly?

So we've established that disrespecting the religion of your family is not appropriation, and it can be petty and cruel. So the fact that it can be petty and cruel is separate from the question about whether it's 'appropriation'.

What if you do? I mean, I have use a chef's knife to cut cardboard. Don't think I appropriated anything. Your sentence can is devoid of direct reference and divorced for historical and social context so how can it be answered with regards to cultural appropriation.

It's divorced of historical and social context because it's a general question. Of course, you haven't answered any of my specific questions either.

 

[Bacillus anthracis]

Ask the people involved, Personaly I have never seen the purpose in using something incorrectly, regardless of what it is.

So who do we write to when we like something about a culture and want to incorporate into something? For example, if I heard a song from X Culture, will I need to get the address of the people who oversee songs from X culture and get their permission and advice before I can incorporate into something I wish to? And when I'm done with it, do I need to send it to them for approval to ensure that I'm using it correctly? If I don't use it correctly, what will happen to X Culture?

Will it devastate X Culture like when Gym Class Heroes appropriated Supertramp, which was shortly followed by the collapse of all European civilization?

Or maybe this conversation about cultural appropriation is abstract, tedious, and meritless at best, and a minimal threat to free expression at worst.

 

[ronburgundy]

I suppose I understand what the author intended to say, but don't agree. What's wrong with engaging in practises of another culture as a commodity or "incorrectly"? Sometimes, that kind of appreciation creates a completely new and interesting mix that's worthy in its own right.

^^THIS^^ To expand on it, the OP wrongly presumes that culture is a stable thing and that their definitive boundaries of who and what is within and outside each culture. Every "culture" is fluid, fuzzy, changing, and practiced in highly variable ways. Only with top-down oppressive authoritarian control is it otherwise. Ei
IOW, appropriation is inherent to the culture. IT is analogous to genetic variation. Some of it is good, some bad, most neutral, but in the aggregate it is a positive thing and vital to cultural evolution.

Where does the OP presume that culture is a stable thing?

It is presumed by the entire notion that variations from normative manifestations of culture are "incorrect ways". Since there is no other referent, incorrect must mean they are outside of culture,rather than just the inherent variance and instability that is part of culture.

The reality is that so-called "incorrect" variations happen all the time by people within a culture but are often viewed positively or ignored, and not attacked as incorrect or appropriations, unless the person doing it is presumed a different race from those presumed to "own" that cultural practice manifestation, etc..

 

[laughing dog]

I suppose I understand what the author intended to say, but don't agree. What's wrong with engaging in practises of another culture as a commodity or "incorrectly"? Sometimes, that kind of appreciation creates a completely new and interesting mix that's worthy in its own right.

^^THIS^^ To expand on it, the OP wrongly presumes that culture is a stable thing and that their definitive boundaries of who and what is within and outside each culture. Every "culture" is fluid, fuzzy, changing, and practiced in highly variable ways. Only with top-down oppressive authoritarian control is it otherwise. Ei
IOW, appropriation is inherent to the culture. IT is analogous to genetic variation. Some of it is good, some bad, most neutral, but in the aggregate it is a positive thing and vital to cultural evolution.

Where does the OP presume that culture is a stable thing?

It is presumed by the entire notion that variations from normative manifestations of culture are "incorrect ways". Since there is no other referent, incorrect must mean they are outside of culture,rather than just the inherent variance and instability that is part of culture.

Why would you assume that variations from the norm are necessarily "incorrect"?

 

[AthenaAwakened]

I suppose I understand what the author intended to say, but don't agree. What's wrong with engaging in practises of another culture as a commodity or "incorrectly"? Sometimes, that kind of appreciation creates a completely new and interesting mix that's worthy in its own right.

^^THIS^^ To expand on it, the OP wrongly presumes that culture is a stable thing and that their definitive boundaries of who and what is within and outside each culture. Every "culture" is fluid, fuzzy, changing, and practiced in highly variable ways. Only with top-down oppressive authoritarian control is it otherwise. Ei
IOW, appropriation is inherent to the culture. IT is analogous to genetic variation. Some of it is good, some bad, most neutral, but in the aggregate it is a positive thing and vital to cultural evolution.

Where does the OP presume that culture is a stable thing?

It is presumed by the entire notion that variations from normative manifestations of culture are "incorrect ways".

Where did I say that? Where has anyone said that?

Since there is no other referent, incorrect must mean they are outside of culture,rather than just the inherent variance and instability that is part of culture.

Why "must" it mean "That they are outside the culture?"

The reality is that so-called "incorrect" variations happen all the time by people within a culture but are often viewed positively or ignored, and not attacked as incorrect or appropriations, unless the person doing it is presumed a different race from those presumed to "own" that cultural practice manifestation, etc..

It's not about ownership but origination.

 

[Togo]

I understand the OP in the sense that it is trying to make a particular distinction. I don't agree that it actually succeeds in making that distinction.

Maybe I'm looking at this in too simplistic a fashion, but it seems to me that the problem with cultural appropriation is the appropriation bit - treating someone else's culture as if it were your own. It's a problem that is particularly prevalent in the US, where the native culture there makes a number of unfortunate culture assumptions - that all the world works on the same the principles and values and can be judged and evaluated according to those values, and that symbols are a tremendously important part of what they represent. Add that to the typical rich country problem of being able to afford mass transport and enabling mass appropriation in a way that can swamp the origin culture, and you have a potential problem, and may offend people.

But the problem is not the fact of person A using symbols or items native to another culture, since there's a great deal of positive that can come from that. The problem is the manner in which they are doing it. People in the US getting excited about Peruvian history and the Nazca lines is a good thing. Combining that with American Mysticism and UFO culture is probably harmless, at least to the Peruvians. Travelling to Peru en masse and ensuring that any local guide that doesn't indulge in US-style UFO theories can't keep their business, is more of a problem. But again, it's the manner of cultural interaction, not the fact of it.

What I don't have much patience with is the idea that certain symbols and practices somehow 'belong' to particular sub-cultures within America - particular hairstyles, particular icons, particular clothing - and that people who aren't of that culture are somehow not entitled to use them. Because that is cultural appropriation, and of a particularly nasty and virulent kind.