Cultural Appropriation
A complex topic. It raises emotions and hackles in many.
Personally, I see it as partly a natural part of cultural evolution but also partly wrong. I also have some differing views on its use in all current contexts and definitions. I ask that you read to the end so you understand what I mean.
Culture itself, as defined by Wikipedia (don’t judge me yet, it’s an easy summary), is:
- The sum of the intellectual and material achievements of a community or all humankind.
- A system of distinctions that allows people to classify the environment, evaluate themselves and others, and build identity.
- A collection of shared attitudes, values, goals, and practices characteristic of an institution, organization, group of people, or “society.”
- Behavioral traits that vary geographically by region.
Today, cultural appropriation is often defined as “using elements of another culture.” However, some divide cultural appropriation into subcategories of cultural borrowing and cultural stealing, which I agree with. I believe cultural appropriation is split into these subcategories: Cultural Borrowing—which I see as acceptable and supports the growth of both humanity and the culture into which it is borrowed—and Cultural Stealing, where an aspect of another culture is taken and altered to mean something different from what it originally represented, thus distorting the original culture. I believe the latter should generally be avoided and condemned.
Cultural Stealing
I define it here as follows and see it as truly harmful: A feature is taken from another culture and changed to represent something other than what it originally meant. For example, saying Santa Claus lives in Sweden instead of Finland. Or if an American amusement park started handing out cheap, China-made plastic copies of Finnish Winter War medals as prizes in carnival games. Not very respectful. Or if the Finnish Lion symbol were to be used by neo-Nazis or Putinists, trying to change its meaning to mainly represent their group. This is what happened with the swastika, borrowed from Hinduism but now widely understood as a Nazi symbol. From this basis, I ask for understanding why, for example, using a Native American headdress as a fashion accessory or as a “statement” on a show is absurd and wrong, especially when you understand what the feathers means and symbolizes. “A feathered headdress is one of the highest symbols of respect among Native Americans. An honored person must earn their feathers through selfless bravery and honor or receive them as a gift for service to their community or nation.” In this context, awarding oneself such an honor is extremely embarrassing and doesn’t represent the original meaning in the slightest.
Cultural Borrowing
So why is it okay, in my view? I believe culture should move forward and absorb good and useful traits from its surroundings. I can’t understand why anyone would want to own something good for themselves and not share it with others if it is respected. Of course, it’s justified and reasonable to preserve one’s culture unchanged and thus limit its borrowing out of fear that people might try to change it by “infiltrating” and thereby altering its characteristics. However, I believe that if participation in a culture is limited based on ethnic traits instead of the sharing and respect of values or practices, this only creates divisions among people and is a fundamentally flawed way to operate in humankind.
I also think this way because I don’t feel I have any specific, closed-off culture of my own, or all its most important contents and values have already been or should be copied elsewhere. I would at least consider it good if things like the rule of law and human dignity were borrowed to replace problematic approaches to these topics in other cultures. I don’t see any reason as a Finn to forbid foreigners from using a sauna, drinking Lion vodka, or eating rye bread. Well, maybe I would want to correct that Santa lives in Finland, not Sweden. Here it’s clear that no central part of my culture has been copied and distorted, at least not in a way that makes me feel bitterness or anger. This is why I’m cautious about modifying my culture by borrowing the best bits from others, as these have been mixed and altered by so-called outsiders for quite some time, and I don’t want to distort them accidentally. I see the result of borrowing more as a unifying and advancing factor when done respectfully. Culture should absolutely move forward, and this succeeds by combining good ideas from everywhere. It would be completely foolish to reinvent the wheel or not use it at all just because someone else invented it first. But it would be equally foolish to upload Sandstorm to YouTube and claim yourself to be its creator rather than Darude. Or to release a fart remix of it and claim it’s the original—it makes no sense.
I don’t think all cultures and their features are good or worth preserving; my own has a lot of faults (stabbing your neighbor in drunken brawls, driving family out in the snow with an ax, the “classics”). However, I believe that different cultures and their representatives should be respected so that things belonging to them are not offensively distorted. I see no problem if someone has dreadlocks or plays electric guitar, no matter where in the world they come from. I would reserve the concept of cultural appropriation for more significant matters (such as the honors discussed in this text, specific traditions, religious or cultural garments with precise meanings) and for specific and critical core aspects of culture.
I believe it’s more important to understand why certain things are important in a specific culture, where they come from, and what they really mean. I would focus on admiring and respecting culture so that its meaning remains for future generations to understand the same significance. Let’s respect the original purpose. Instead of drawing boundaries based on people’s DNA and deciding who they are allowed to be and what they are allowed to do.
So, in summary, cultural appropriation, in my opinion, should be divided into subcategories or used only in connection with actual cultural stealing: The exclusive core elements of another culture should not be used outside their contexts or altered to mean something different from their true meanings. Cultural Borrowing is fine: portraying or using parts of another culture in their correct contexts and respectfully, without distorting their meanings. Naturally, within the bounds of good taste.
My opinion is primarily based on reasonableness and well-intentioned principles of humanity’s overall development rather than “protectionism” or genetics.