and then our world changed by JW Harrington

Note that I didn’t title this “and then the world changed.”  Most elements of our physical world have not changed – the buildings and mountains still stand, birds and insects move about and reproduce, and we certainly still have weather.  Continuity abounds.

John and I are fine and grateful.  I do most of my academic work and my painting at home anyway, and I have always cooked most of our meals.  I’ve reformatted my courses to be accessed entirely through a “learning management system,” but the fine-tuning and grading continues apace.   

I’ve started a series of paintings in my current favorite format – smooth 12”x 12” hardwood panels, cradled atop a 1½“ frame, so they present well without any further framing.  The series is Dovic, and generally entails straight-sided figures in muted colors, with the shape and shade of the figures implying spatial relationships. The minimalist approach seems in keeping with these fluid, shape-changing times.

(Cross) cultural appropriation in the arts, 4 by JW Harrington

Think about this, though:  cultural appropriation, which is indeed a basis for much art, is a problem when it reduces the ability of some artists to get their (perhaps more authentic) work before and accepted by the broader public.  Quoting Lauren Michelle Jackson’s brief article “When We Talk About Cultural Appropriation, We Should Be Talking About Power”:    

[Most] discussions about appropriation have been limited to debates about freedom and choice, when [we] should be [dissecting] power.  The act of cultural transport is not in itself an ethical dilemma.  Appropriation can often be a means of social and political repair….  And yet.  When the powerful appropriate from the oppressed, society’s imbalances are exacerbated and inequalities prolonged.

 

Art production should certainly celebrate and question the influences on the artist:  how could it not? However, when the borrowing is from – and especially in – the voices, images, or styles of others, those others and their paths need to be acknowledged in ways that lead the listener, viewer, or reader to seek their work and their stories.

 

(Cross) cultural appropriation in the arts, 3 by JW Harrington

The arguments favoring versus condemning cross-cultural appropriation grow from very different conceptions of art, artists, and cultures.  Legal scholar Rosemary Coombe [1993] has identified two seemingly opposing bases for the defense of and arguments against intangible cross-cultural appropriation, which she calls “possessive individualism” versus “cultural essentialism.”  

  “Possessive individualism” is the Western Romantic ideal of the artist (writer, composer, choreographer) who takes all ideas to which “he” has been exposed, and through force of will, discernment, and creativity brings forth a new work.  If the work becomes highly regarded, it is a result of “his” genius.

                   “Cultural essentialism” implies that each person belongs to a single cultural tradition from which that person draws most of their identity or “voice,” and that the strength of their identity, the integrity of their voice, is diminished when others use elements of that tradition in their own voices.  It relies on the equally Romantic ideal of a homogeneous “people” or “culture” which jointly create and own artworks, stories, and styles. 

 There are important reasons why members of less-dominant groups (and I don’t necessarily mean ethnic minorities – this could pertain to women in our broader current culture) may use themes or styles from the dominant culture without causing harm.  The most fundamental is this:  The dominant culture is promulgated broadly – in some cases, has been forced on Native Americans and Australians, or on Africans brought to North America as slaves – and members of these less-dominant groups also belong to or “own” elements of the dominant culture.

 

_________________

Coombe, R.J.  1993.  The properties of culture and the politics of possessing identity: Native claims in the cultural appropriation controversy.  Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence 6(2): 249-286.

(Cross) cultural appropriation in the arts, 2 by JW Harrington

Intangible cross-cultural appropriation refers to an artist’s use of “artistic elements” from another culture – style, motifs, plot, characters.  Generally, at least until the late 20th century, intangible cross-cultural appropriation was largely considered beneficial.  It disseminates styles, stories, motifs, and lessons from one culture to another, thereby increasing cross-cultural awareness and enriching the lives of everyone.  However, writers and observers have increasingly voiced concerns.

a) It can reinforce stereotypes about the origin culture:  valuing the artifacts or artistic elements because they evoke an imagined time, place, or circumstances of the origin “group,” rather than expressions of individuals or subgroups engaged in struggle and in change.  Members of any group or tradition desire to be represented as agents rather than passive observers or victims, and as part of a living tradition rather than a static, imaginary past.  Poor, long-suffering, ultimately tragic Cio Cio San.  Strong, long-suffering, noble Native Americans.

b)    It can literally enrich the producers within the destination culture.  Members of non-dominant groups may resent the commodification of their practices, words, styles, or stories by non-members, packaged for anyone who is willing to pay.

 c)     In the marketplace, appropriating minority cultures’ images, stories, characters, or styles can displace the artistic work produced by those within the minority culture – because writers, musicians, actors, painters from the majority have more acceptance by mainstream audiences and more access to mainstream distribution channels.  Consider the white anthropologist’s research career explicating the stories of other cultures, the white jazz or blues musician (especially in the first half of the 20th century), the already-famous and taste-making New York visual artist “discovering” themes and styles from other cultures.