(Cross) cultural appropriation in the arts, 3

The arguments favoring versus condemning cross-cultural appropriation grow from very different conceptions of art, artists, and cultures.  Legal scholar Rosemary Coombe [1993] has identified two seemingly opposing bases for the defense of and arguments against intangible cross-cultural appropriation, which she calls “possessive individualism” versus “cultural essentialism.”  

  “Possessive individualism” is the Western Romantic ideal of the artist (writer, composer, choreographer) who takes all ideas to which “he” has been exposed, and through force of will, discernment, and creativity brings forth a new work.  If the work becomes highly regarded, it is a result of “his” genius.

                   “Cultural essentialism” implies that each person belongs to a single cultural tradition from which that person draws most of their identity or “voice,” and that the strength of their identity, the integrity of their voice, is diminished when others use elements of that tradition in their own voices.  It relies on the equally Romantic ideal of a homogeneous “people” or “culture” which jointly create and own artworks, stories, and styles. 

 There are important reasons why members of less-dominant groups (and I don’t necessarily mean ethnic minorities – this could pertain to women in our broader current culture) may use themes or styles from the dominant culture without causing harm.  The most fundamental is this:  The dominant culture is promulgated broadly – in some cases, has been forced on Native Americans and Australians, or on Africans brought to North America as slaves – and members of these less-dominant groups also belong to or “own” elements of the dominant culture.

_________________

Coombe, R.J.  1993.  The properties of culture and the politics of possessing identity: Native claims in the cultural appropriation controversy.  Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence 6(2): 249-286.

(Cross) cultural appropriation in the arts, 2

Intangible cross-cultural appropriation refers to an artist’s use of “artistic elements” from another culture – style, motifs, plot, characters.  Generally, at least until the late 20th century, intangible cross-cultural appropriation was largely considered beneficial.  It disseminates styles, stories, motifs, and lessons from one culture to another, thereby increasing cross-cultural awareness and enriching the lives of everyone.  However, writers and observers have increasingly voiced concerns.

a) It can reinforce stereotypes about the origin culture:  valuing the artifacts or artistic elements because they evoke an imagined time, place, or circumstances of the origin “group,” rather than expressions of individuals or subgroups engaged in struggle and in change.  Members of any group or tradition desire to be represented as agents rather than passive observers or victims, and as part of a living tradition rather than a static, imaginary past.  Poor, long-suffering, ultimately tragic Cio Cio San.  Strong, long-suffering, noble Native Americans.

b)    It can literally enrich the producers within the destination culture.  Members of non-dominant groups may resent the commodification of their practices, words, styles, or stories by non-members, packaged for anyone who is willing to pay.

 c)     In the marketplace, appropriating minority cultures’ images, stories, characters, or styles can displace the artistic work produced by those within the minority culture – because writers, musicians, actors, painters from the majority have more acceptance by mainstream audiences and more access to mainstream distribution channels.  Consider the white anthropologist’s research career explicating the stories of other cultures, the white jazz or blues musician (especially in the first half of the 20th century), the already-famous and taste-making New York visual artist “discovering” themes and styles from other cultures. 

(Cross) Cultural appropriation in the arts, 1

In today’s common usage, the phrase “cultural appropriation” usually refers to cross-cultural appropriation, rather than artistic appropriation between actors or artists within a culture.  I’ll adopt the prefix “cross” rather than “inter,” following the distinctions drawn among (a) multi-, (b) cross-, and (c) inter-cultural relationships:  (a) cultures existing alongside one another, (b) interactions across cultures, and (c) deep engagement and understanding among members of each culture [Spring Institute 2020].

Let me distinguish arguments against cross-cultural appropriation of physical objects, with much credit to philosopher and media-studies specialist Elizabeth Burns Coleman [2005]. 

a)     People have the right to possess collectively those artifacts that define, protect, or promote their cultural and historical identities.

b)    Nations and national governments, as the institutional representatives of a people, have the right and responsibility to possess institutionally those artifacts that define, protect, or promote their cultural and historical identities.

c)     Individuals and national governments have the right to artifacts that were taken or purchased during war or colonial occupation.

d)    Cultural artifacts are best appreciated in their cultural and geographic contexts – not as displaced objects.

_______________

Coleman, E.B.  2005.  Cultural appropriation.  Ch. 2 in Aboriginal Art, Identity and Appropriation.  Aldershot:  Ashgate.

Impressions of the Whitney Biennial

This summer John and I spent two art-filled weeks in New York City and the Hudson Valley.  I shared photos of a few of the things we saw, with a little commentary, in posts on Facebook and Instagram.  (If you don’t follow me on Instagram – @jwharringtonjr – please consider doing that!)  In the months beforehand, I’d been ambivalent about viewing the 2019 Whitney Biennial, thinking it would be extremely crowded and very white, New York centered.  Then I read about the two curators, Jane Panetta and Rijeko Hockley, their vision for the show, and their many travels around the country to the studios of artists far from the crowd -- and bought tickets.

We spent four exhausting and rewarding hours in the museum.  The only crowding we experienced was on the elevator to the 6th floor (we used stairs thereafter).  Featuring painting, sculpture, photography, performance, and video from 75 artists or art collectives, the only quite-accurate generalization is the focus on the strife, misfortune, and inequality of the current moment. 

However I also perceived an emphasis on what I’ll call the materiality of visual art.  Here are some examples, go to https://whitney.org/exhibitions/2019-Biennial#exhibition-artworks for more, and for images, since I don’t think this platform allows me to insert images! (If you’d like to get my newsletter with images, let me know at jwharringtonjr@gmail.com).

Eddie Arroyo (Miami FL) presented a series of four works of special interest to my geographer and urbanist friends.  5825 NE 2nd Ave., Miami, FL 33137 is painted expressionistically four times, illustrating its façade transformed from a locally owned, low-key eatery in Little Haiti  to an abandoned, graffiti-covered storefront, to a white-washed storefront over the years 2016-19.  This de-materialization of culture in a changing city with rapidly rising property values struck me.

Nicole Eisenman (Brooklyn NY) exhibited  a set of large-scale sculptures, titled Procession, using a verywide variety of materials and objects to speak to bodies, bodily functions, human interaction, and human disenfranchisement.

You may know that several artists selected for the exhibition refused to present their work after (a) the discovery that a company co-owned by a vice-chair of the Whitney’s board manufactures and distributes “less-lethal” (but often, nearly so) munitions, (b) that these specific products have been used against civilians in Gaza, the US, and other countries, (c) a written demand that the board member (Warren B. Kanders) leave the Whitney board, and (d) the refusal of the board to expel Kanders.  Among the most riveting of the Biennial’s displays was a video presentation by the collaborative Forensic Architecture(London, England;  with Praxis Films) titled Triple Chaser, which is one trade-name for a particularly awful tear-gas canister manufactured by a subsidiary of Kanders’ company.  Video was needed, because words are inadequate for the horror inflicted by governments (in many cases, against their own citizens) and the elaborateness of the research that Forensic Architecture engaged to show the exact incidences of these specific devices’ use.  Here is the art of uncovering materiality.   See my photo of the descriptive placard, and see these articles (among many others):  https://www.thedailybeast.com/forensic-architecture-the-artists-who-blew-up-the-whitney-biennial and https://hyperallergic.com/500055/forensic-architecture-whitney-biennial/

Daniel Lind Ramos (Loiza PR) presented a set of large sculptures to which the viewer can ascribe various interpretations, until closer examination reveals the materials of which they’re made, and with that, reveals other meanings.  I photographed Maria-Maria, which seems to be an other-worldly female with an elaborate headdress, no face, sagging breasts, and a striking blue robe.  The accompanying placard lists the materials as “metal basin, wooden seat, lamp, tarp, coconuts, palm-tree trunk, steel sheet, rope, beads, fabric, tacks, wood, plastic tubing, steel bars, scissors, and wooden box.”  The materials relate to the destruction that Hurricane Maria brought to Puerto Rico;  the title refers to the hurricane and to the Virgin Mary, who was so often rendered in Medieval Europe with brilliant blue robes because of the rarity and expense of rich blue pigments.

Wangechi Mutu (Brooklyn NY and Nairobi, Kenya) showed a set of larger-than-“life” sculptures of found wood, clay, fired clay pots, a cow horn, and paper pulp.  The forms definitely evoke women, in strong poses, warm tones, and provoking use of material and texture.  I photographed Sentinel II.

Heji Shin (New York NY) presented large, vividly detailed and colored photographs of human childbirth:the actual moment of crowning, when the baby’s head emerges in full.These photographs shocked and deeply disturbed me – only because I’ve never been close to childbirth since it produced me, and I’ve never seen any other images that portray the bloodiness that accompanies the start of our lives and the pain of our mothers.Childbirth is deeply material.