Fully appreciating culture without appropriation: a guide in 15 steps

Moderator: Saria Dragon of the Rain Wilds

User avatar
Sim Kid
Posts: 13412
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2001 1:00 am
Location: The state of Denial
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 51 times

#21

Post by Sim Kid » Sat Jun 04, 2016 9:38 pm

^ it's reaching the point to where I think I can take arguments in favour of Apartheid and for segregation, perform a simple Word Swap, ask people if they agree with it it or not, and expect to hear "Yes".

User avatar
Kil'jaeden
Posts: 3878
Joined: Thu May 08, 2003 1:00 am
Location: in your mind

#22

Post by Kil'jaeden » Sat Jun 04, 2016 11:36 pm

[QUOTE="International Space Stalin, post: 1597808, member: 25415"]Which oppressed peoples are they shunting out of the spotlight so they can take credit as the best and only important bluegrass players who introduced the world to the joys of this music? I don't really see the comparison here. It's not the same as having Depp play a generic 'Native' in Lone Ranger, that's for certain. It's not the same as casting Japanese-Americans in your kill-all-the-redskins shoot-em-up because it villified people of an existing culture and had the nerve to say 'this is how it was' - or exclusively casting Anglo-Americans as cowboys when the lifestyle belonged to Mexican-Americans, Asian-Americans, etc. There is a long history of appropriation which does not make adequate comparison to whether some guys in Europe decided to start playing an already-popular genre of music, unless their performance is being pre-empted as reason not to hire a blue-collar American from Appalachia by way of cultural bias? Would you find that behavior appropriate?[/QUOTE]

Mr. Upscale Suburbia, the people that bluegrass came from were oppressed. They got bombed for striking, something has happened to no one else in America. Many of them lived and still do live as practical slaves of mining and power companies, but no one cared to take up for them. Others scratched out a living as small farmers in the hills. In addition to this, most of these people were poor Irish that came from indentured servants, or poor Scots that got kicked off of their land in Scotland during the period where land enclosures were being put up at the behest of the English.

I don't care is a Czech plays bluegrass or even rap. I am not trying to police culture like some other people actually are. Many people, especially Europeans, have always been interested in other people. Many now would be surprised to learn about a niche trend in late 19th century Europe for Japanese art and aesthetics, both imported and European imitations. Van Gogh is a well known artist that did something like this, and there were others. This went on while the Japanese were doing the same thing with European things. These trends did not steal anything from anyone or change the culture radically. There had actually been a longstanding interest among niche intellectuals in Japan for European learning of all kinds that was well before Commodore Perry or the Meiji Era. The Japanese term for this is rangaku.

[QUOTE="Bomby, post: 1597816, member: 17840"]I think this article really highlights the matter here.

It seems like the older generation of Japanese-Americans are more than happy to share their culture, and don't really care if a non-Japanese person wears a kimono. The younger generation (several of whom are not Japanese at all) are quick to jump on the "everything is offensive" bandwagon.

I think this kind of plays into my frustration with young activists. The discussion began with actually racist things like whitewashing, blackface/yellowface, etc. Then groupthink happened, and all of the sudden more and more things started being considered offensive - things that older generations who actually have closer ties to the culture they came from are much more lax about.

The sad thing is that, in concept, I agree with young social activists on the general ideas they're advocating, but the totalitarian movement they've created around these ideas disgusts me, and groupthink like this that has turned legit issues into cultural separationism is a symptom of a bigger problem.[/QUOTE]

Some separationism is needed if you want to keep your group's cultural heritage. It can't all just be common property, someone has to say "this is ours, this is from us". There was no problem with white people "appropriating" culture until some leftist agitators found that as yet another tool to turn their little coalition against white people even more. In the past, other people were the ones wanting to copy white people because what is perceived as successful, dominant, and prosperous gets people's attention. The Japanese did this kind of copying extensively in their own country, while keeping a balance with their own traditions. These older Japanese are different because of this.

White people in the past had no problem being white and doing white people things. Nowadays, what are young people's heads filled with? White is bad, whites stole all their inventions(the reverse is true), you should never identify with any European origin as a group. Whites can't have interests or organizations. Just shame and self hate, all pushed by people that hate white people anyway, especially the white working class. And now you find young whites wanting to be something else, so they take up black popular culture, or Asian culture, or weaboo culture, or identify as Native Americans because they might have 1/64 descent from some tribe. Sorry, but the racist Native Americans have blood quantum laws for who is in their tribe and who isn't. If you want someone to blame, look to your own camp and these young activists you complain about. This state of affairs was planned decades ago by the intellectual and political forebears of these modern activists. I just tell people to explore their own past and culture, not try to take on someone else's or be something you aren't. Get white people of all stripes, Celtic, Germanic, Latin, and Slav interested in their own culture and past. Then maybe they would not be appropriating someone else's culture because they are desperate to belong to a group.
The man who is blind, deaf,and silent lives in peace.

User avatar
Bomby
Moderator
Posts: 22972
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2000 1:00 am
Location: Bellin' through the streets, y'all
Has thanked: 28 times
Been thanked: 32 times
Contact:

#23

Post by Bomby » Sun Jun 05, 2016 7:05 am

Culture is constantly changing, fluid entity. Cultural heritage is interesting, but trying to preserve a culture and keep it from changing is an act of futility. And honestly, I'd rather live in the mixed culture I exist in today than the Italian culture from which I descended. It's fun to practice some traditions, no doubt. Hell, I was at an Italian cultural festival last night, and it was a blast. But it's something I'd rather visit than live in, and I encourage non-Italians to come celebrate the food and culture with us.

User avatar
Kil'jaeden
Posts: 3878
Joined: Thu May 08, 2003 1:00 am
Location: in your mind

#24

Post by Kil'jaeden » Sun Jun 05, 2016 10:22 pm

It is changeable to an extent, but this idea that it is just completely fluid is not so. We have groups of dominant cultures that go back a very long time. They did not get there overnight, nor are they going anywhere any time soon. This whole idea of there being only change seems to only be targeted at people that are already rootless. We did not live in such a mixed culture until some people set out to make it that way. What you get from mixed culture in the end is one of several options. A new culture from synthesis, or constant conflict. And yes, that includes America. Every culture that has embraced cosmopolitanism to a great extent has been eliminated or just taken over by others. It happened to the Egyptians, though some of that was because of being conquered. The Greeks and Romans were great, but they made huge cosmopolitan empires. Germanics and Orientals took them over long before any dramatic "fall" happened. Rome was a hollow shell, and the Romans reduced to a nonentity, before Rome fell to the Goths. Note though, that the people that did the taking over of the pieces of Rome are mostly still around and doing pretty well, especially the Arabs. Nowadays it is all being replaced by a corporate made consumer culture, at least in the West. Other places are going to face this at some point too. And what this consumer culture needs is rootless and materialistic individuals. This is one of the reasons why the issue is important to me.

I largely descend from Scots-Irish myself, by the way. My most distant ancestor that I know of(thanks to an extended family project) was an Irish indentured servant that was owned by a Virginia planter. He appears in records of a court case over his freedom and again over his children's inheritance of his meager possessions. Most of my family line's names are Scots-Irish. Except for that half Native great grandparent on my father's father's side. But I don't really identify as Irish like someone from Ireland would, as I would put America first even though I hate much about the society at large and the government. Though I do see a lot of similarities between the Irish and the hill folk from which I mostly descend. Those people are mostly transplanted Scots-Irish, after all. They are very clannish, like to drink, are long suffering, have a lot of sad songs, keep close ties to family lore, and things like that. Just changing the dirt is not going to change the deep rooted traits of a people, not completely.
The man who is blind, deaf,and silent lives in peace.

User avatar
Deepfake
Supermod
Posts: 41465
Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2002 1:00 am
Location: Enough. My tilde has tired and shall take its leave of you.
Has thanked: 387 times
Been thanked: 185 times
Contact:

#25

Post by Deepfake » Mon Jun 06, 2016 4:59 am

[QUOTE="I am nobody, post: 1597810, member: 34539"]No, and I didn't say your examples are okay. Reinterpreting someone's dance or art is not the same as pretending to be them and denying them the opportunity to play themselves.[/QUOTE]
Those are the kinds of scenarios that should be held in mind when 'cultural appropriation' is appreciated and addressed fully. Somebody who practices a culture by participating doesn't really need to be criticised for it, unless they're being disrespectful of that culture while doing so. Any lesser offense is just a faux pas, not What's Wrong With the World.
I muttered 'light as a board, stiff as a feather' for 2 days straight and now I've ascended, ;aughing at olympus and zeus is crying

User avatar
I REALLY HATE POKEMON!
Posts: 30213
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2000 1:00 am
Location: California, U.S.A
Has thanked: 2126 times
Been thanked: 156 times

#26

Post by I REALLY HATE POKEMON! » Mon Jun 06, 2016 5:44 am

[QUOTE="Bomby, post: 1597816, member: 17840"]I think this article really highlights the matter here.

It seems like the older generation of Japanese-Americans are more than happy to share their culture, and don't really care if a non-Japanese person wears a kimono. The younger generation (several of whom are not Japanese at all) are quick to jump on the "everything is offensive" bandwagon.

I think this kind of plays into my frustration with young activists. The discussion began with actually racist things like whitewashing, blackface/yellowface, etc. Then groupthink happened, and all of the sudden more and more things started being considered offensive - things that older generations who actually have closer ties to the culture they came from are much more lax about.

The sad thing is that, in concept, I agree with young social activists on the general ideas they're advocating, but the totalitarian movement they've created around these ideas disgusts me, and groupthink like this that has turned legit issues into cultural separationism is a symptom of a bigger problem.[/QUOTE]

The whitewashing and Japanese thing actually reminds me of something. The Ghost in the Shell movie got criticism for "whitewashing," but what's interesting is the only people who are outraged are non-Japanese. Without prodding and framing questions certain ways nobody had anything negative to say about Ghost in the Shell, only positive or neutral things. The video is pretty interesting:

[MEDIA=youtube]2DhoBuU1Dtc[/MEDIA]

It really goes to show that a lot of the whining isn't even from people who "should" be offended, and something to note is that other countries do this ALL the time with white characters. Whites are the only ones who get heat for it, and Westerners are the only ones who even care that is happens. Just people starting trouble, frankly. Just because Ghost in the Shell doesn't feature a white actress doesn't make it bad or racist, and takes attention away from legitimate issues. Here's another good video about the subject:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WUdQpuVRtw

User avatar
Sim Kid
Posts: 13412
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2001 1:00 am
Location: The state of Denial
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 51 times

#27

Post by Sim Kid » Tue Jun 07, 2016 5:26 pm

Didn't something similar happen with that whole Avril Lavinge video? (Or whoever her name is)

And Speedy Gonzalez years ago?

Post Reply

Return to “Life”