After an eight-month break, Owl & Ibis - A Confluence of Minds resumed holding meetings on August 29, 2020. This internationally attended meeting was held via Zoom. A PDF of the slideshow accompanying the meeting’s presentation may be viewed here. The recorded narration accompanying the slideshow is below. Links to the slideshow and narrative are located in the Owl & Ibis upper left drop down menu.
The next meeting of Owl & Ibis will be held on September 26, 2020 from 4-6PM Eastern US Time. Mona Leiter will chair and present “The Role of Museums in the 21st Century.”
Send me an email if you would like to join future meetings.
JEL }:> & ~:)
Cultural Appropriation Narration*
An Owl & Ibis – Confluence of Minds Presentation (33 minutes)
Jim Lassiter
August 29, 2020
SLIDE 1
In 1727, Philadelphia newspaper printer Benjamin Franklin, then 21, formed the Junto, also known as the Leather Apron Club, a group of "like minded aspiring artisans and tradesmen who hoped to improve themselves while they improved their community." The Junto was a discussion group for issues of the day; the purpose was to debate questions of morals, politics, and natural philosophy, and to exchange knowledge of business affairs.
The Junto was modeled after English coffee houses which had become the center of the spread of Enlightenment ideas in Britain. Reading was a great pastime of the Junto, but books were rare and expensive. The members created a library initially assembled from their own books.
Inspired by Franklin’s Junto I started a similar discussion group here in Fayetteville, Georgia, just south of Atlanta where my wife Immy Rose and I retired in 2008.
I chose as totems two icons from the European and African intellectual traditions. Athena, Greek goddess of wisdom and war and Thoth, Egyptian god of knowledge and engineering. Note the owl with Athena and that Thoth has the head of a sacred African ibis.
I named the gathering Owl & Ibis then created a logo. I added the subtitle A Confluence of Minds to emphasize the group’s collegial, egalitarian nature.
Tonight, after a seven month pause, I am making the first presentation of a restart of Owl & Ibis – Cultural Appropriation.
This title slide hints at some of the issues I will discuss. Did I appropriate Franklin’s idea of a discussion group? Another person’s or another culture’s images? Whose fonts did I use? Whose shades of color have I chosen? What about the English language itself? As an Anglo-American African, not an Englishman, did I appropriate the English language?
SLIDE 2
Let us begin with some fundamental definitions. This is said to be the first social scientific definition of “culture.”
Edward Tylor was an English social anthropologist. Over the past century and a-half anthropologists have argued about this definition, offered many revisions to it, and created totally new alternatives.
I still find Tylor’s definition useful, with one caveat. For the anachronism “man” in Tylor’s rendering we shall use “humankind.”
Our interest in this presentation will focus on Tylor’s “knowledge, belief, art, morals, law, custom, and any other capabilities and habits.” Who owns such culture content if anyone? Who possesses rights limiting or otherwise circumscribing their use, again, if anyone? And how are such purported ownership and rights to be protected and enforced?
First, let us consider what appropriation means.
SLIDE 3
I found Merriam-Webster’s and the Oxford English Dictionary inferior to the University of Cambridge definition given in this slide.
There is also a legal usage of the term appropriation. For our purposes, this Cambridge definition highlights matters I want to focus on – “taking, use, permission, idea, custom, style, and member of.”
SLIDE 4
The University of Oxford, on their Oxford Reference website, does bring up other important cultural appropriation concepts.
SLIDE 5
Finally, the last of the reading for a while, is this description of cultural appropriation. Keywords here are: “controversial, colonialism, adopt or exploit, cultural elements, disadvantaged or minority culture(s), against the expressly stated wishes, and originating culture.”
Let us now look at some images of what many consider cultural appropriation. Questions to ask ourselves are: Is this an example of cultural appropriation? If it is, is it harmful and if so, to whom and how?
SLIDE 6
Al Jolson was a Lithuanian-born American singer, comedian, and actor. Jolson has been dubbed "the king of blackface" performers, a theatrical convention begun in the mid-19th century. He was also dubbed "The World's Greatest Entertainer" at the peak of his career.
In the 1920s, Jolson was America's most famous and highest-paid entertainer. Although best remembered today as the star of the first talking picture, The Jazz Singer in 1927, he starred in a series of successful musical films during the 1930s.
As mentioned, Jolson often performed in blackface makeup. Performing in blackface, having its origins in the minstrel show, remained a theatrical convention of many entertainers well into the 20th century.
According to film historian Eric Lott: "For the White minstrel man to put on the cultural forms of 'blackness' was to engage in a complex affair of manly mimicry. To wear or even enjoy blackface was literally, for a time, to become Black, to inherit the cool, virility, humility, abandon, or [purported light-heartedness and cheerfulness] that were the prime components of White ideologies of Black manhood."
In the retrospective view of the present, the use of blackface is now viewed as implicit racism.
Music critic Ted Gioia, commenting on Jolson's use of blackface, wrote: "Blackface evokes memories of the most unpleasant side of racial relations, and of an age in which White entertainers used the makeup to ridicule Black Americans while brazenly borrowing from the rich Black musical traditions that were rarely allowed direct expression in mainstream society. This is heavy baggage for Al Jolson.”
SLIDE 7
Amos 'n' Andy was a mid-20th Century American radio and television situation comedy. It was set in Harlem, the historic center of African American culture in New York City.
The original radio show, which ran from 1928 to 1960, was created, written, and voiced by two White actors. When the show moved to television, Black actors took over a majority of the roles.
SLIDE 8
Cultural appropriation of African American life also appeared in US literature beginning in the late 1800s, and subsequently on stage and film.
Uncle Remus is the fictional title character and narrator of a collection of African American folktales compiled and adapted by White native Georgian, Joel Chandler Harris, and published in book form in 1881. Harris was a journalist in post-Reconstruction Atlanta, and he produced seven Uncle Remus books. He wrote these stories to represent the struggle in the Southern United States, and more specifically in the plantations. He did so by introducing tales that he had heard and framing them in the plantation context. He wrote his stories in a dialect which was his interpretation of the Deep South Negro English dialect of the time. For these framing and stylistic choices, his collection has encountered controversy.
Chandler’s stories inspired Walt Disney’s controversial 1946 film, Song of the South.
Porgy and Bess is an English-language opera written by Jewish American composer George Gershwin with his brother, lyricist Ira Gershwin. Porgy and Bess was first performed in Boston in 1935, before it moved to Broadway in New York City. It featured a cast of classically trained African American singers.
After an initially unpopular public reception, a 1976 Houston Grand Opera production commemorating the US Bicentennial gained Porgy and Bess a new popularity, and it is now one of the best-known and most frequently performed operas.
Porgy and Bess tells the story of Porgy, a disabled Black street beggar living in the slums of Charleston, South Carolina. It deals with his attempts to rescue Bess from the clutches of Crown, her violent and possessive lover, and Sportin' Life, her drug dealer. Did the Gershwins appropriate African American history and culture?
SLIDES 9-12
The next few slides depict cultural appropriation by the private, commercial sector of US society for more than a century. Again, questions to consider include: Is this cultural appropriation? If it is, is it harmful and if so, to whom and how? Also, note the changes of the caricatures that have occurred over the years in some instances, and consider why they have taken place – Expanded consumer markets that included minorities? Increased cultural sensitivity from more widespread education? Human and civil rights activism? Some depictions, for example the Frito Bandito and Warner Brothers’ Speedy Gonzales cartoon, have been abandoned outright.
SLIDE 13
Here are two examples of cultural appropriation regarding indigenous American societies and cultures – Two men at Carnivál in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil in 2017. And here, women on the catwalk for Victoria’s Secret in 2017.
SLIDE 14
(Image: My Culture is Not a Costume.)
SLIDE 15
Here is the Jeep Cherokee automobile when it was introduced 1974. And here is an image of what led to the Urban Outfitters versus The Navajo underwear lawsuit that was settled in 2016, items Urban Outfitters named “Navajo hipster panties” and the “Navajo print flask,” not pictured.
SLIDE 16
Now consider the cultural appropriation of Indigenous American images in US sports entertainment. Here are a few among very many. From the Chicago Blackhawks hockey team logo, to the Cleveland Indians and Atlanta Braves baseball teams. Appropriated college sports mascots include Florida State University’s Seminole, and the Fighting Illini of the University of Illinois, their mascot seen here, grim-faced and warrior-like, during a basketball halftime performance.
Again at the professional level of American sports, here are the Kansas City Chiefs and Washington Redskins American football teams. And what more culturally appropriated entertainment could corporate America come up with than a Sunday afternoon head-to-head battle between the Cowboys and Indians, where most team members are African Americans.
Here’s another facet of indigenous American cultural rights to consider. The history of relations between indigenous Americans and non-indigenous others in the US has been mixed. Indigenous American responses to outsiders on their lands and in their midst have varied over time. This includes government and academic researcher intrusions into their lands and lives; the recording and publishing of their ideas, ritual practices, and other intimacies; and the taking, museum displaying, and warehousing of their artifacts and skeletal remains.
From the end of their defeat and near total land dispossession at the hands of the US federal government in the 19th Century, US indigenous American response to government agents and outsider researchers has evolved. Over this period it has gone from powerless acquiescence, to voiced objections and law suits, to occupations of lost indigenous lands, and to an insistent, engaged and negotiated accommodation, and now, more often than ever before, to collaboration on terms favorable to indigenous Americans.
SLIDE 17
Turning to African cultural appropriation, consider the following images. Here, in 1980, is yours truly in rural Eswatini, formerly Swaziland, southern Africa. I am studying the SiSwati language with the help of my adoptive Swazi brother, George Mkhonta, as my young nephew Sipho looks on.
Here, still in Eswatini a year later, I am at my rural US Peace Corps Volunteer posting wearing traditional Swazi attire for men. Have I appropriated Swazi culture and clothing?
Here, nearly four decades later, is a book I published in 2017. It relates the cultural prehistory and history of my wife Immy Rose’s eastern Uganda ethnic group, the Bamasaaba. Did I appropriate her people’s culture? Finally, here are certain members of the US Congress wearing kente cloth, traditional Ghanaian attire. In all four instances were permissions sought and granted? Granted by whom?
SLIDE 18
Here are some things to consider regarding cultural appropriation.
What is culture? Who owns its content? What are we, as individuals and groups, doing when we take, borrow, use people’s cultural content other than that of our own culture?
For example, pizza is now widely considered by many Americans to be American food yet dining at an Italian restaurant is said to be having an Italian meal. Hot dogs and hamburgers originated in Germany but are now as American as, well, apple pie, a dessert that originated in England over six and a-half centuries ago.
What are the checks and boundaries, if any, on appropriation?
What makes cultural appropriation a problem: intent, exploitation, harm?
Where and in what ways may cultural appropriation be responded to: socially, morally, ethically, legally, in terms of personal virtue?
It is widely accepted that for the vast majority of human prehistoric time, over 180,000 years, human ideas, styles, and methods have been almost totally the possession of groups, not individuals. Methods, motifs, and products were shared freely within groups, and traded between groups throughout that period.
Formalized responses to the appropriation of ideas, styles and methods first appear in the written record in 500BCE when Greek chefs at Sỳbaris colony in southern Italy were granted culinary monopolies.
Thereafter group protection of ideas and artifacts became more formalized and widespread especially between the 12th and 15th Centuries in Florence, Italy. There, franchises, privileges, royal favors were granted as individual rights to intellectual works.
From then on, legal formalization became the primary method of protecting individual’s ideas and their material products. These laws, first enacted in England in the early 1600s, addressed print material copyrights, invention patents, trade secrets, and trademarks. These laws were only enforced in-country.
Thereafter, more laws regarding copyrights, patents, trade secrets, and trademarks were enacted in various European countries. They usually addressed issues over an individual’s submission of ideas to business enterprises in exchange for compensation.
As for the international protection of ideas and artifacts, the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works was enacted in 1886, and has been revised multiple times since. This convention emphasized the rights of creators, as distinguished from their economic rights. More about international efforts in these areas and cultural appropriation in particular, follows.
SLIDE 19
The Centre for International Governance Innovation, founded in 2001, is an independent, non-profit, non-partisan think tank based in Waterloo, Ontario, Canada. What follows is information on the current state of actions addressing cultural appropriation at various levels of society. It is adapted from a 2019 C.I.G.I. essay titled “Cultural Appropriation Keeps Happening Because Clear Laws Simple Don’t Exist” by Brigitte Vézina.
Nationally: Rules prohibiting the harmful exploitation of Indigenous designs do not exist. There is no legal definition of cultural appropriation.
The term has been so overused it is hard for anyone to say for sure if something is culturally appropriated or not. To help make that determination, here are four things to consider and question: Is the design used outside of its traditional context? Is there a power imbalance? was there any involvement, acknowledgment or permission asked of the source culture? Did it cause social, economic or cultural harm?
Designers and others are in the dark about what is acceptable and what is not when borrowing from Indigenous cultures.
Yes, policy makers should implement effective laws, but the fashion industry and consumers can also lead the way out of the maze of cultural appropriation. The problem is not just economic injustice. Misusing traditional designs has moral, social, cultural, and spiritual ramifications.
Copyright law protects products of creativity, but most traditional forms of creativity — like designs, songs or stories — fall outside of its scope. What happens is that anyone can copy them — no need to ask; no need to pay.
Internationally: The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, UNESCO, Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage was signed in 2003 and entered into force in 2006. It is the first binding multinational instrument for the protection of intangible expressions of culture.
In this convention, cultural heritage is defined as “the practices, representations, expressions, knowledge, and skills – as well as the instruments, objects, artifacts and cultural spaces associated therewith – that communities, groups and, in some cases, individuals recognize as part of their cultural heritage.” Consideration is given solely to “intangible cultural heritage as it is compatible with existing international human rights instruments.”
The 178 country signatories are to take necessary measures to ensure the safeguarding of the intangible cultural heritage present in its territory. These measures must include identification and recording of the intangible cultural heritage, adoption of appropriate policies, and the promotion of intangible heritage education. In taking these measures, each government must ensure the widest possible participation of communities, groups, and, where appropriate, individuals that create, maintain, and transmit such heritage, and to involve them actively in its management.
This UNESCO convention has been criticized because it does not address activities that some groups consider as culturally defining essentials such as male and female genital mutilation, and essential ideologies that define a group as being in opposition to another group. In terms of inter-group cultural opposition some songs and stories glorifying empire, victorious kings, and religious conversion do not meet the convention standard of “mutual respect.” Conversely, this would also include songs and stories that glorify resistance to perceived injustice, martyrdom, and the defeat of enemies. It is also asked does intangible cultural heritage apply only to “traditional cultural activities” and not more modern forms of culture such as rap music, Australian cricket, modern dance, postmodern architecture, and karaoke bars?
Some say dividing culture into individual units is inconsistent with modern academic views of cultures. Questions have also been raised as to how a state can safeguard a cultural practice by force, such as when there is insufficient unanimity or interest from local practitioners.
Related to the protection of intangible cultural heritage, the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples was adopted by the General Assembly in 2007. It establishes a universal framework of minimum standards for the survival, dignity, and well-being of the indigenous peoples of the world; and elaborates on existing human rights standards and fundamental freedoms as they apply to the specific situations of indigenous peoples.
In line with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, state policy makers are asked to reform their copyright system to prevent the disrespectful and offensive use of traditional cultural expressions. In many countries copyright law already states that creators must be acknowledged and their works respected. Many believe that that protection should be extended to traditional cultural expressions where a sole creator is impossible to track down.
In the Private Sector: The fashion industry, for example, needs to reconsider the way it deals with cultural appropriation by setting a standard. It has to make sure inspiration and borrowing from Indigenous cultures take place in a fair and respectful manner. It has to send out a clear message that disrespectful knock-offs cause harm. Here are some suggestions for fashion designers: use with respect for the cultural meaning; give credit; use as little as possible; ask for permission by engaging in a genuine conversation; enter into collaborations and share benefits.
Among Consumers: As consumers, we can all blow the whistle on cultural appropriation. We can encourage fair fashion and buy authentic clothing, jewelry and accessories from Indigenous designers and Indigenous-approved collaborations.
At the Community Level: Social media can be a powerful way to draw attention, voice concerns and call out appropriators, yet it falls short of providing any effective solution. Indigenous peoples must have control over their own culture. Without legal protection, their cultures remain vulnerable to harmful exploitation.
SLIDE 20
Here is information provided by Cultural Survival, an international organization based in Cambridge Massachusetts that draws attention to, voices concerns, and calls out cultural appropriators. They note that there are over 476 million indigenous people in the world belonging to 5,000 different groups, of which over half are in Africa. They live in 90 countries and speak over 4,000 languages.
SLIDE 21
Here is Cultural Survival’s website, culturalsurvival.org. Founded in 1972, Cultural Survival partners with indigenous communities and human rights groups around the world to amplify and empower indigenous peoples as they work to claim their rights to self-determination, their lands, their cultures, and their ecosystems. This is done through advocacy, media, and public education programs.
SLIDE 22
Here is the Statement of my point of argumentation about cultural appropriation.
Human culture emerged on Earth, in Nature and has been perpetuated in various forms in response to the human need for survival and a desire for human flourishing. In that we are all members of the family of humankind, access to and usage of all human culture content is, in principle, a human birthright.
SLIDE 23
Here are my facts, assumptions, or premises supporting my point of argumentation:
1. Human culture has existed for at least 200,000 years.
2. It has evolved over time and spread diversely throughout the planet through invention, innovation, and diffusion.
3. From the beginning until now, cultural ideas, beliefs, values, and behaviors have been modified, remembered, stored, borrowed, traded, bought, stolen, and fought over.
SLIDE 24
4. Acts of cultural appropriation are matters of: individual decision and social and legal sanctioning.
5. CA becomes a problem: when it damages or is thought to damage a person or group economically; that is, their ability to do work and sustain themselves materially; and when it threatens or harms the wellbeing or continuing existence of a group and its members, in its members eyes or the eyes of other groups.
SLIDE 25
Here is my conclusion:
All human culture content, past and present, exists in the Ethnosphere, a term coined by Canadian anthropologist and ethnobotanist Wade Davis in the late 1990s. The Ethnosphere is the sum of all the thoughts, dreams, myths, ideas, inspirations, and intuitions brought into being from the human imagination since the dawn of consciousness. As such, culture is owned by all humankind. Unless one is prohibited formally by law, constrained by acts of social sanctioning, or restrained by their conscience, an individual is free to use the Ethnosphere’s culture content when, where and how they want or need for their survival and flourishing. The onus for responding to cultural appropriation rests equally on individuals and groups.
SLIDE 26
More on the anthropological concept of culture, its evolution, its appropriation, and other aspects may be found in my forthcoming book, We: A Theory of Cultural Evolution.
SLIDE 27 Thank you for your time and attention. I look forward to our discussion.
_______________________
* In part adapted from Wikipedia and other sources.
