Cultural appropriation mythicist angry that people have different tastes to her

[KeepTalking]

So the comfort of other people’s feelings about any particular act is certainly not a sufficient reason to ask people to stop doing those acts.



I have no idea what fucking point you think I’ve made. You claimed that copying sweat lodge ceremonies took away rights from Lakota people. I said they didn’t.

So misrepresenting something as authentic when it is not is wrong, correct?

Don’t give me this bullshit, Toni. You don’t object to cultural appropriation because it fraudulently markets itself as “authentic” (whatever that means) when it isn’t. You object to cultural appropriation qua[/] cultural appropriation.

It would not matter to you if Cracker McWhitebread marketed his sweat lodge tours as ‘authentic Lakota sweat lodge’ or ‘inspired by Lakota traditions’ or ‘inspired by native American traditions’ or ‘in the style of certain religious practises’. It’s the sweat lodge appropriation itself you object to, and you’d object to any cracker operating one for fun or profit no matter how he marketed himself.

In your example: the guy selling 'sweat lodge experiences.'

What has he done that is fraudulent?

No, you are wrong. If you see a painting in my house and have it copied so that you can hang the copy in your house--and represent it or allow it to be perceived to be by the original artist, then that is fraud. The painting is plagiarized. Depending on the value of the painting, etc., you could find yourself on the wrong end of a very expensive lawsuit.

Oy vey. There’s no “and represent it or allow it to be perceived”.

I copy the painting in your house and I put it in my house. When people ask me about it, I tell them it’s a copy of the painting.
Do you object to that scenario?

The person in the above case you would be harming would be primarily the artist. Unauthorized copies and misrepresentations of the artists' work devalues the authentic work of the artist. Secondarily, you would be harming me if you caused the value of my painting to diminish, or if you caused me to have to invest time and money to prevent you from representing the fraudulent, plagiarized painting as authentic.

Try googling art fraud.

Try making a coherent point. I have a copy of Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I in my living room. People might visit me and look at the copy and think ‘oh that isn’t very good’ and then they aren’t interested in looking at Klimt (I think it’s a very good copy, in fact).

But according to you, should this copy be confiscated from me, because the Neue Gallery paid US$135m for the original? Should all the joy I get from gazing upon it be extinguished because it’s a copy and not the ‘real deal’?

Since Lakota share the culture of their ancestors and are indeed, seeking to preserve the culture--against tremendous odds, btw, there is no plagiarism or theft.

The Lakota people alive today did not invent Lakota traditions; their ancestors did.

None of those digital copies are represented as being the 'real' Mona Lisa.

Irrelevant. You would object to Cracker McWhitebread marketing ‘sweat lodge experiences’ full stop, whether or not he used the word ‘authentic’; in fact no matter what words he used.

Nothing in your post makes even a little sense.

It makes perfect sense to me. You seemed to be saying that what makes cultural appropriation bad is by attempting to pass off that which is being appropriate as authentic. Metaphor challenged that assumption, and asserted that your position with regard to cultural appropriation is not contingent upon any attempts to pass it off as authentic. If you feel that your position is being mischaracterized, then now would be the time to make your actual position known.

You are not unintelligent so I can only conclude that you are deliberately moving goal posts, changing parameters and being deliberately obtuse. It's not worth addressing on a point by point basis.

You don't have to address his post on a point for point basis, just let us know if you think passing something off as authentic is a necessary component of cultural appropriation.

 

[Metaphor]

I am reposting the below because my questions were not rhetorical puffery: I want to know what Arctish means.

What, precisely, does it mean to 'give credit' to the source? I don't mean for you to give me an abstract platitude, I mean for you to illustrate what it means to 'give credit' to a source and when you are required to do it.

For example, if a white environmental science student wears his hair in cornrows, to whom is he meant to 'give credit'? Is this act of penance sufficient for forgiveness? What if someone still objects to his personal use of dreadlocks?

We're happy to hear how much other cultures admire American music styles like Jazz, Blues, Rock and Roll, Gospel, etc., but when white Americans think of black American culture the words" brilliant artistry" and "exceptional creativity" don't often come to mind. It's the same with public speaking. Some of the most powerful speeches in recent American history have come from black Americans like Thurgood Marshall and Martin Luther King Jr. , and whites often emulate their speaking style, but in general white Americans don't give black Americans credit for linguistic skill. Whites are more likely to simply mock the AAVE dialect. So while white Americans feel free to use the creations of black Americans, they don't give blacks credit for their creativity, artistry, innovation, and aesthetic style. That's exploitative.

Again, please explain to me what it would mean, what practical actions it entails, to 'give credit' to the black community. Let's say I am a white high-school student on the debating team, and I have learned a great deal about persuasive language and delivery from Martin Luther King's speeches (and there is indeed a great deal to learn from "I Have a Dream" and "I've Been to the Mountaintop" -- both masterpieces of rhetoric). What practical actions is the white student supposed to take in order for her actions not to be 'cultural appropriation' and exploitative?

Similarly, is a black high school student on the same debate team also required to take these actions? Why or why not?

 

[Bomb#20]

Fraud is a wrong committed against both the consumer who purchased a fraudulent good or service but also for the owner of what is genuine, whose genuine articles may be devalued or passed over in favor of the fraudulent presented by a trusted white man. Who is trusted because he is white.

Who has committed fraud? Note that you're making a serious charge.

Also, is white women twerking 'fraud'? You are against cultural appropriation qua cultural appropriation, not against only subcategories of it that are also fraudulent activities.

Stealing artifacts is very much like stealing designs, ceremonies, and so on.

No, it's actually nothing like that. It's the difference between me seeing a painting I like in your house and stealing the physical painting from you, versus me really liking the painting and getting someone with talent to copy it so I can have one in my house.

Stealing a design, ideas, intellectual property, etc. is called plagiarism. It's frowned upon, may be illegal and is grounds for dismissal from academic institutions and will get you some seriously expensive law suits.

How many Lakota people do you intend to lock up, given how they've plagiarised the ideas of their ancestors? That's pretty harsh.

When the fraudulent idea/good/work of art, etc. is so widely distributed that it overwhelms the original, the original eventually dies. When the original dies out, it causes genuine harm to the owner of the original.

So, the millions of copies of the Mona Lisa, the infinite number of its digital representations, the endless number of parodies of it, all the column and book inches that have been written about it, the multiple and conflicting theories about it, all of this served to lessen and overwhelm the original, right?

I hear when you go to the Louvre to see it, it's totally not like being cattle in a high-density feedlot, and you can totally look at it for ages before being herded through, and it's not behind super-duper bulletproof glass because it isn't that valuable or anything.

I'm reminded of something P.J. O'Rourke wrote:

By Wednesday of convention week l was pretty much confined to my hotel room with a case of the six-pack flu. I wasn’t even watching the convention on television. And neither were you. Sixty-eight percent of prime-time viewers were tuned to something — anything — else. In the Los Angeles area "Three’s Company,” "Family Ties” and "M*A*S*H” reruns topped the ratings. And in Chicago as many people watched "Wheel of Fortune” as watched all three network convention shows combined.

I did, however, want to hear Jesse Jackson speak. He is the only living American politician with a mastery of classical rhetoric. Assonance, alliteration, litotes, pleonasm, parallelism, exclamation, climax and epigram — to listen to Jesse Jackson is to hear everything mankind has learned about public speaking since Demosthenes. Thus Jackson, the advocate for people who believe themselves to be excluded from Western culture, was the only 1988 presidential candidate to exhibit any of it.

I watched Jackson’s speech, "A Call to Common Ground", on CNN in my hotel. It was a fair example of his oratory:

So many guided missiles and so much misguided leadership, the stakes are very high. Our choice? Full participation in a democratic government or more abandonment and neglect. So this night, we choose not a false sense of independence. Tonight we choose interdependency...​

Jesse Jackson's speeches are surely so widely distributed that they overwhelm Demosthenes'. Is Jackson guilty of cultural appropriation?

 

[laughing dog]

Jesse Jackson's speeches are surely so widely distributed that they overwhelm Demosthenes'. Is Jackson guilty of cultural appropriation?

On what basis would Mr. Jackson be considered guilty of cultural appropriation?

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

For a good change, that reading was pretty pleasant. Then, came the punchline.

 

[Bomb#20]

Jesse Jackson's speeches are surely so widely distributed that they overwhelm Demosthenes'. Is Jackson guilty of cultural appropriation?

On what basis would Mr. Jackson be considered guilty of cultural appropriation?

Sorry, was my implication less than transparent? Mr. Jackson would be considered guilty of cultural appropriation on the same basis as the people Toni accuses of it: none whatsoever.

 

[laughing dog]

On what basis would Mr. Jackson be considered guilty of cultural appropriation?

Sorry, was my implication less than transparent? Mr. Jackson would be considered guilty of cultural appropriation on the same basis as the people Toni accuses of it: none whatsoever.

I thought you had something intelligent and relevant to contribute. I apologize for my mistake.

 

[Derec]

I thought you had something intelligent and relevant to contribute. I apologize for my mistake.

He does. It is not his fault the point flew over your head.

 

[Angra Mainyu]

How many Lakota people do you intend to lock up, given how they've plagiarised the ideas of their ancestors?

Maybe they inherited that. But they stole the idea of riding horses.

P.S: I don't believe one can steal an idea.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

How many Lakota people do you intend to lock up, given how they've plagiarised the ideas of their ancestors?

Maybe they inherited that. But they stole the idea of riding horses.

P.S: I don't believe one can steal an idea.

Hey, I'm the one who came up with the notion that people can't steal ideas. Stop stealing my ideas!

 

[Metaphor]

I am reposting the below because my questions were not rhetorical puffery: I want to know what Arctish means.

We're happy to hear how much other cultures admire American music styles like Jazz, Blues, Rock and Roll, Gospel, etc., but when white Americans think of black American culture the words" brilliant artistry" and "exceptional creativity" don't often come to mind. It's the same with public speaking. Some of the most powerful speeches in recent American history have come from black Americans like Thurgood Marshall and Martin Luther King Jr. , and whites often emulate their speaking style, but in general white Americans don't give black Americans credit for linguistic skill. Whites are more likely to simply mock the AAVE dialect. So while white Americans feel free to use the creations of black Americans, they don't give blacks credit for their creativity, artistry, innovation, and aesthetic style. That's exploitative.

Again, please explain to me what it would mean, what practical actions it entails, to 'give credit' to the black community. Let's say I am a white high-school student on the debating team, and I have learned a great deal about persuasive language and delivery from Martin Luther King's speeches (and there is indeed a great deal to learn from "I Have a Dream" and "I've Been to the Mountaintop" -- both masterpieces of rhetoric). What practical actions is the white student supposed to take in order for her actions not to be 'cultural appropriation' and exploitative?

Similarly, is a black high school student on the same debate team also required to take these actions? Why or why not?

I've given up on Toni responding, but Arctish, are you able to address my responses to your arguments?

 

[Arctish]

I am reposting the below because my questions were not rhetorical puffery: I want to know what Arctish means.

Sorry to keep you waiting. I've been traveling and I'm just now catching up with this thread.

We're happy to hear how much other cultures admire American music styles like Jazz, Blues, Rock and Roll, Gospel, etc., but when white Americans think of black American culture the words" brilliant artistry" and "exceptional creativity" don't often come to mind. It's the same with public speaking. Some of the most powerful speeches in recent American history have come from black Americans like Thurgood Marshall and Martin Luther King Jr. , and whites often emulate their speaking style, but in general white Americans don't give black Americans credit for linguistic skill. Whites are more likely to simply mock the AAVE dialect. So while white Americans feel free to use the creations of black Americans, they don't give blacks credit for their creativity, artistry, innovation, and aesthetic style. That's exploitative.

Again, please explain to me what it would mean, what practical actions it entails, to 'give credit' to the black community. Let's say I am a white high-school student on the debating team, and I have learned a great deal about persuasive language and delivery from Martin Luther King's speeches (and there is indeed a great deal to learn from "I Have a Dream" and "I've Been to the Mountaintop" -- both masterpieces of rhetoric). What practical actions is the white student supposed to take in order for her actions not to be 'cultural appropriation' and exploitative?

Similarly, is a black high school student on the same debate team also required to take these actions? Why or why not?

Giving credit to the black community for its contributions to art, music, literature, science, etc. means exactly what it sounds like it means. It means the contributions of black Americans to American culture are not ignored, belittled or dismissed out of hand because the people who conceived, created, and crafted them are members of a denigrated and disrespected minority. It means that when people speak of black American culture, what comes to mind is creativity, artistry, oratory, poetry, and the many other cultural contributions blacks have made, not a patently racist and utterly ignorant view that black American culture is synonymous with violent thuggery.

In practical terms it means that a person who emulates blacks, or Native Americans, or Hispanics, or members of any other racial/ethnic/religious/gender/whatever group respects them and acknowledges them as the source of inspiration. That's not always the case.