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.