![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Jun. 24th, 2018 12:46 pm(I've been trying to write this for several days and haven't managed to express what I want/need to say. I also feel like I should attach a big 'My feelings, my reactions' disclaimer to the whole thing.)
I read a book of poetry the other night that made me wish for a less neutral term than 'cultural appropriation' because that sounds like it's trivial or harmless, maybe the equivalent of farting in a crowded elevator when it's not.
Or not necessarily.
Sometimes, it's the equivalent of attending an orchestra concert by kids who've been learning for a year. It's not pleasant, but maybe they'll improve and maybe they'll appreciate other people's music more. Other times... Well, 'cultural appropriation' sounds like no one gets hurt, like no one ever could get hurt.
Like anyone who says they have been or are must be exaggerating.
I understand wanting a neutral term because people in a position to punch down tend to do exactly that when they feel threatened or like someone's telling them they're wrong. Neutral language potentially decreases the violence (physical, emotional, economic, legal, etc.) of the response. That's generally desirable, especially if there's a risk of splashing bystanders, but it also leaves a lot of wiggle-room for 'good intentions' as excusing everything.
The neutral term can serve as a useful shorthand for people who share a vocabulary, but it also obscures a lot of ugly details and assumes that the repercussions and problems are the same for every culture experiencing appropriation and the same for each individual in a particular culture.
As a white woman from the US, I hesitate to label things as cultural appropriation because my entire context is from the appropriative side. This particular book had beautiful illustrations and some turns of phrase that I liked a lot, but I was also uncomfortable with it.
The author anchored the poems, in a preface, to the traditions of a particular Native American community where she'd been a guest many times over a period of decades. She says that she's white and that it's not possibly for white people to fully understand the things that Native Americans just know because of who/what they are. I was okay with the not understanding because people from different cultures never quite understand everything about each other, but the phrasing exoticized the people she claimed as friends.
It was creepy.
The illustrations were done by a well known artist who specialized in stylized portraits of Native Americans, edging into 'the spiritual' and what I'd call fantastical. As far as I can tell from Google, the guy was white (I found no definitive statements about it anywhere, and I really strongly suspect that, if he had been Native American, one of the sites I looked at would have said so. No one says he was white, either, but that's generally the unmarked state, so...).
The illustrations are beautiful, but they made me uncomfortable.
I don't feel right in delivering a judgment about the poems and illustrations being appropriative, but I certainly reacted to the book, emotionally, as if it was.
I read a book of poetry the other night that made me wish for a less neutral term than 'cultural appropriation' because that sounds like it's trivial or harmless, maybe the equivalent of farting in a crowded elevator when it's not.
Or not necessarily.
Sometimes, it's the equivalent of attending an orchestra concert by kids who've been learning for a year. It's not pleasant, but maybe they'll improve and maybe they'll appreciate other people's music more. Other times... Well, 'cultural appropriation' sounds like no one gets hurt, like no one ever could get hurt.
Like anyone who says they have been or are must be exaggerating.
I understand wanting a neutral term because people in a position to punch down tend to do exactly that when they feel threatened or like someone's telling them they're wrong. Neutral language potentially decreases the violence (physical, emotional, economic, legal, etc.) of the response. That's generally desirable, especially if there's a risk of splashing bystanders, but it also leaves a lot of wiggle-room for 'good intentions' as excusing everything.
The neutral term can serve as a useful shorthand for people who share a vocabulary, but it also obscures a lot of ugly details and assumes that the repercussions and problems are the same for every culture experiencing appropriation and the same for each individual in a particular culture.
As a white woman from the US, I hesitate to label things as cultural appropriation because my entire context is from the appropriative side. This particular book had beautiful illustrations and some turns of phrase that I liked a lot, but I was also uncomfortable with it.
The author anchored the poems, in a preface, to the traditions of a particular Native American community where she'd been a guest many times over a period of decades. She says that she's white and that it's not possibly for white people to fully understand the things that Native Americans just know because of who/what they are. I was okay with the not understanding because people from different cultures never quite understand everything about each other, but the phrasing exoticized the people she claimed as friends.
It was creepy.
The illustrations were done by a well known artist who specialized in stylized portraits of Native Americans, edging into 'the spiritual' and what I'd call fantastical. As far as I can tell from Google, the guy was white (I found no definitive statements about it anywhere, and I really strongly suspect that, if he had been Native American, one of the sites I looked at would have said so. No one says he was white, either, but that's generally the unmarked state, so...).
The illustrations are beautiful, but they made me uncomfortable.
I don't feel right in delivering a judgment about the poems and illustrations being appropriative, but I certainly reacted to the book, emotionally, as if it was.
