Cultural appropriation in writing?

tomBitonti · Mar 24, 2014

Wait. What measure are we using to decide?

For a writer trying to reach a particular audience, or to navigate an editorial process, or to reach past censors of various ilk, is the measure whether the work sells to the particular audience, or, say, escapes the editors or censors?

Is the measure based on whether the material is either respectful or is accurate to the source culture? Is any part of the measure whether the work shows a high degree of artistry? Or whether the work provides a deep or insightful or revealing commentary?

An author can be wildly successful while being hugely disrespectful or inaccurate (perhaps deliberately).

Thx!

TomB

Kaodi · Mar 24, 2014

Is this thread really even talking about cultural appropriation or is it really talking about the more general case of cultural ignorance? Or is the latter just what it morphed into?

I am not a huge fan of how the notion of cultural appropriation is used. The notion certainly has a place and does important work, but it is all too easily taken too far in a direction that I think is more likely to produce small mindedness and cultural ignorance than prevent it. If it is forbidden to apply things you have learned about other cultures in creative ways, why bother learning about them in the first place?

Tom Strickland · Mar 24, 2014

Kaodi said:
If it is forbidden to apply things you have learned about other cultures in creative ways, why bother learning about them in the first place?

<darkhumor> {grimHumor} Creative are the ways used to portray the enemies of a nation to stir up the populace to war. {/grimHumor}</darkhumor>

Anecdote: A modern country years ago contained a business that exactly copied "Snow White and the Seven Dwarves" and just gave them different names. Disney at least was understandably concerned about this.

Comment: It could be argued that there are analogies to long-established legal principles regarding how, when, and under what conditions intellectual, cultural, ephemeral or other "properties" might acceptably--by those who subscribe to the notion of the advantages of legal (and moral) societies--be used by others for fair and even commercial purposes.

Since the legal principles are extensive and nuanced, how can we do less justice to the concept of human opinions regarding what may "appropriately" be done to and with other people's dress, language, myths, history, festivals, etc.

Anecdote: Some citizens of some less (militarily) powerful nations are concerned when businesses in powerful nations come and take their natural/scarce/unique (bio) resources for massively lucrative products without providing any compensation whatsoever.

Comment: Consider "knock-offs" of video games, songs and books. "Candy Crush vs. CandySwipe" "A very old song whose trumpet melody sounds amazingly similar to the Star Wars theme" And consider whether the author of the "Harry Potter" series would be interested in how closely other "creative" expressions borrowed themes--or more concernedly--exact textual descriptions of magic and creatures.

Since the real world has many force-backed and consequence-ridden examples of how presentations of fiction and reality can be used--creatively or otherwise, and for what length of time--it could be useful to reference those when forming opinions about how much creativity would be "acceptable" to the modern, morally conscious community regarding the use of any culture's clearly and uniquely representative expression.

When one successfully navigates all of that--by all means write and produce anew. After all, we "stand upon the shoulders of giants who came before" and nobody wants to "reinvent the wheel".

And personally: learning about ancient and modern cultures is an experiential and pleasurable feast that--as with virtual resources whose use does not diminish the original--may be enjoyed repeatedly and by others concurrently regardless of whether I may desire or be allowed to closely and creatively adapt their presentations of self and culture, or whether I may be inspired to create something significantly different which nevertheless owes thanks and attribution to the source.

Kaodi · Mar 25, 2014

All of this "failure to properly attribute" stuff is besides the point when applied to mythology. If your depiction of something is familiar enough to a cultural community to be offencive they you were probably not making an effort to hide your inspiration. Exactly replicating Disney's version of Snow White and the Seven Dwarves except for changing the names is not analagous at all: The original fairy tale is there to be drawn on by anyone, and not using that inspiration to do something of your own is the tell-tale difference between "intellectual property theft" and inspiration.

Elf Witch · Mar 25, 2014

Grumpy RPG Reviews said:
Bringing this closer to home, consider Chakotay, of Voyager, and the Gypsies book from White Wolf. Both were in theory supposed to be positive things, one a Native America, the other about the Rom. Both failed in execution and became insulting. Good intentions mean di... very little. However, leaving all such characters out means a production will be guilty of white washing.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

I am not sure how Voyager failed in the portrayal of Chakotay. I remember the hoopla at the time was based on the fact that actor Robert Beltran was not an "American" Native American but is of Mexican and Meso Indian descent. But in the context of Star Trek I thought they handled his spirituality rather well for a SF TV show that takes places 400 years from now.

I think some people look for reasons to be offended. I remember a group getting offended over Stargate making the ancient Egyptian gods aliens.

I do think if you are writing a historical or modern piece using a different culture then you should try to portray the culture as realistic as possible. That includes both the good and the bad. Now fantasy is another matter. In Voyager for example they speculated that the tribes that settled on Chakotay home planet shared some cultural and religious practices which is why the vision quest and the medicine bag which is more plains Indian was something he used.

In Stargate they were not trying to demean the Ancient Egyptians they were doing a what if.

Nellisir · Mar 25, 2014

Elf Witch said:
I am not sure how Voyager failed in the portrayal of Chakotay. I remember the hoopla at the time was based on the fact that actor Robert Beltran was not an "American" Native American but is of Mexican and Meso Indian descent.

I'm not a Star Trek follower at all, so I had to look up about Chakotay. Apparently he was intended to be of Meso-American descent, so if the actor's geneology actually matched that...well, that's pretty darned incredible in Hollywood.

I think I had assumed he was Maori.

Elf Witch · Mar 25, 2014

Nellisir said:
I'm not a Star Trek follower at all, so I had to look up about Chakotay. Apparently he was intended to be of Meso-American descent, so if the actor's geneology actually matched that...well, that's pretty darned incredible in Hollywood.

I think I had assumed he was Maori.

Originally when planning the series they knew they wanted a Native American from the planet Darvon. In Next Gen the Native Americans on that planet chose to give up their federation citizenship and become Cardissian citizens. Eventually this lead to the resistance group the Maquis. So they knew they knew they wanted to reuse this for Voyager. At the time in pre planning they were going for more of a plains or pueblo style Native American. When they cast Robert Beltran that is when they went with the Meso American Indian.

But it made a lot of people mad that they didn't hire a full native American actor. Though they read many of them. I thought at the time a lot of ignorance was being thrown around. That so many people didn't seem to understand that many Mexican families are of mixed heritage they have both Spanish and Native blood in their lineage.

Nellisir · Mar 25, 2014

Tom Strickland said:
Anecdote: A modern country within the past few years contained a business that exactly copied "Snow White and the Seven Dwarves" and just gave them different names. Disney at least was understandably concerned about this.

Why would anyone but Disney be concerned?

Since the real world has many force-backed and consequence-ridden examples of how presentations of fiction and reality can be used--creatively or otherwise, and for what length of time--it could be useful to reference that when forming opinions about how much creativity would be "acceptable" to the modern, morally conscious community regarding the use of any culture's clearly and uniquely representative expression.

I think the problem -and I'm have a little trouble parsing your sentences, so maybe I'm getting something wrong - is that most of those consequences involve copyright violation, which is not a static area of law, and far less personal to the public than cultural transgression. Copyright also is very specific. Disney does not own "Snow White and the Seven Dwarves". They own the copyright to images and a presentation of the story, but the story itself is public domain in virtually every sense of the word. Copyright in the US has gone from 15 years term to life + 75, at which point it's public. I don't think you can put a neat point on a time when a "culture" becomes "public". Name a religion, and there is someone out there who believes it to be true. Name a country and culture, and there is someone out there who is descended from it.

I've been working on an OSR bestiary utilizing lesser-known but "real-world" mythical creatures, and some of that has edged up against current real-world religions. Is it appropriate to make Ganesh into a monster? A race? What about Hanuman? What about lesser beings in the same cycle? I think ultimately those are questions people need to answer for themselves. (FWIW, I decided not to use Ganesh right now; I'm undecided about Hanuman; but I'm OK with using Sekhm(et) as the name and basis for a lion-headed race.)

Nellisir · Mar 25, 2014

Elf Witch said:
That so many people didn't seem to understand that many Mexican families are of mixed heritage they have both Spanish and Native blood in their lineage.

Therein lies the difference between conquering armies, and settlers with families. The soldiers finish out their tours and don't want to go back to Spain, so they marry native.

Tonguez · Mar 25, 2014

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/1619406.stm

After a Maori lawyer wrote to Lego concerned at the use of Maori words and imagery in the Bionicle Mata Nui line, Lego agreed to remove some words and to work with Maori to devolop a code of conduct