Cultural appropriation is an adoption of an element or elements of culture or identity by members of another culture or identity in a manner perceived as inappropriate or unacknowledged. Charges of cultural appropriation typically arise when members of a dominant culture borrow from minority cultures. Cultural appropriation can include the adoption of another culture's religious and cultural traditions, customs, dance steps, fashion, symbols, language, history and music.
Indigenous peoples working for cultural preservation,Mesteth, Wilmer, et al (10 June 1993) "Declaration of War Against Exploiters of Lakota Spirituality". . "At the Lakota Summit V, an international gathering of US and Canadian Lakota, Dakota and Nakota Nations, about 500 representatives from 40 different tribes and bands of the Lakota unanimously passed a 'Declaration of War Against Exploiters of Lakota Spirituality'. The following declaration was unanimously passed." advocates of collective intellectual property rights of the originating cultures,"Special System for the Collective Intellectual Property Rights of Indigenous Peoples at World Intellectual Property Organization. Accessed 18 April 2019.Santilli, Juliana. 2006. "Cultural Heritage and Collective Intellectual Property Rights ". Indigenous Knowledge (IK) Notes; No. 95. World Bank, Washington, DC. Accessed 18 April 2019. and some who have lived or are living under colonial ruleFourmile, Henrietta (1996). "Making things work: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Involvement in Bioregional Planning" in Approaches to bioregional planning. Part 2. Background Papers to the conference; 30 October – 1 November 1995, Melbourne; Department of the Environment, Sport and Territories. Canberra. pp. 268–269: "The [western] intellectual property rights system and the (mis)appropriation of indigenous knowledge without the prior knowledge and consent of indigenous peoples evoke feelings of anger, or being cheated"Working Group on Indigenous Populations, accepted by the United Nations General Assembly, Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. ; UN Headquarters; New York City (13 September 2007).Rainforest Aboriginal Network (1993) Julayinbul: Aboriginal Intellectual and Cultural Property Definitions, Ownership and Strategies for Protection. Rainforest Aboriginal Network. Cairns. Page 65. have criticized cultural appropriation. According to American anthropologist Jason Baird Jackson, cultural appropriation differs from other modes of cultural change such as acculturation, assimilation, or diffusion. Jackson describes cultural appropriation as something that is thought of as focused outward and done to a certain party. According to Jackson, cultural appropriations can be sources of pain and can bring about feelings of loss or violation for the community affected.
Opponents of cultural appropriation see cultural appropriation as an exploitative means in which cultural elements are lost or distorted as they are removed from their originating cultural contexts. On imitation Native headdresses as "the embodiment of cultural appropriation ... donning a highly sacred piece of Native culture like a fashion accessory". Cultural elements that may have deep meaning in the original culture may be reduced to "exotic" fashion or toys by those from the dominant culture.Johnson, Kjerstin (25 October 2011) "Don't Mess Up When You Dress Up: Cultural Appropriation and Costumes". ; at Bitch Magazine. Accessed 4 March 2015. "Dressing up as 'another culture', is racist, and an act of privilege. Not only does it lead to offensive, inaccurate, and stereotypical portrayals of other people's culture ... but is also an act of appropriation in which someone who does not experience that oppression is able to 'play', temporarily, an 'exotic' other, without experience any of the daily discriminations faced by other cultures."
The concept of cultural appropriation has also been subject to heavy criticism, debate, and nuance. Critics note that the concept is often misunderstood or misapplied in popular and academic discourse. Others state that the act of cultural appropriation, as defined usually, does not meaningfully constitute social harm or that the term lacks conceptual coherence. Critics also say that the concept sets arbitrary limits on intellectual freedom and artists' self-expression, reinforces group divisions, and promotes enmity or grievance rather than liberation.
Overview
Cultural appropriation can involve the use of ideas, symbols, artifacts, or other aspects of human-made visual or non-visual culture.Schneider, Arnd (2003) On 'appropriation'. A critical reappraisal of the concept and its application in global art practices. ; published in Social Anthropology (2003), 11:2:215–229, Cambridge University Press. As a concept that is controversial in its applications, the propriety of cultural appropriation has been the subject of much debate. Opponents of cultural appropriation view many instances as wrongful appropriation when the subject culture is a minority culture or is subordinated in social, political, economic, or military status to the dominant culture or when there are other issues involved, such as a history of ethnic or racial conflict.
Linda Martín Alcoff writes that this is often seen in cultural outsiders' use of an oppressed culture's symbols or other cultural elements, such as music, dance, spiritual ceremonies, modes of dress, speech, and social behaviour, when these elements are trivialised and used for fashion, rather than respected within their original cultural context. Opponents view the issues of colonialism, context, and the difference between appropriation and mutual exchange as central to analysing cultural appropriation. They argue that mutual exchange happens on an "even playing field", whereas appropriation involves pieces of an oppressed culture being taken out of context by a people who have historically oppressed those they are taking from and who lack the cultural context to properly understand, respect, or utilise these elements.
In her book Outspoken: A Decade of Transgender Activism and Trans Feminism, Julia Serano defines cultural appropriation as problematic only when it involves at least one of three interrelated harms: erasure, exploitation, or denigration (EED). According to her analysis, appropriation becomes harmful (what she calls EED appropriation) when members of a dominant or majority group adopt aspects of a marginalized group’s identities, culture, or expressions — while simultaneously:
Erasing the context in which those identities or cultural forms emerged, ignoring or obscuring the voices and lived experiences of the original community. Exploiting those cultural forms for material, symbolic, or commercial gain — benefiting appropriators financially or socially without returning value to the marginalized group. Denigrating the marginalized group by treating those borrowed identities or cultural elements as trivial, exotic, or disrespectful — reducing them to stereotypes or mocking them, rather than respecting their meaning and significance.
Serano further distinguishes these harmful “EED appropriations” from what she calls non-EED appropriation — cases where adoption or borrowing does not result in erasure, exploitation, or denigration, and may even positively support or amplify the minority community. She argues that not all acts of borrowing or cultural exchange are inherently oppressive; rather, the ethical problem lies in whether the action inflicts structural harm through erasure, exploitation, or denigration.
The Oxford English Dictionarys earliest citation for the phrase was a 1945 essay by Arthur E. Christy, which discussed Orientalism. The term became widespread in the 1980s in discussions of post-colonial critiques of Western expansionism, though the concept of "cultural colonialism" had been explored earlier, such as in "Some General Observations on the Problems of Cultural Colonialism" by Kenneth Coutts‐Smith in 1976.
Cultural and racial theorist George Lipsitz has used the term "strategic anti-essentialism" to refer to the calculated use of a cultural form outside of one's own to define oneself or one's group. Strategic anti-essentialism can be seen in both minority and majority cultures and is not confined only to the use of the other. However, Lipsitz argues that when the majority culture attempts to strategically anti-essentialize itself by appropriating a minority culture, it must take great care to recognize the specific socio-historical circumstances and significance of these cultural forms so as not to perpetuate the already existing majority vs. minority unequal power relations.
Historically, some of the most hotly debated cases of cultural appropriation have occurred in places where cultural exchange is the highest, such as along the trade routes in southwestern Asia and southeastern Europe. Some scholars of the Ottoman Empire and ancient Egypt argue that Ottoman and Egyptian architectural traditions have long been falsely claimed and praised as Persian or Arab.Ousterhout, Robert. "Ethnic Identity and Cultural Appropriation in Early Ottoman Architecture." Muqarnas Volume XII: An Annual on Islamic Art and Architecture. Leiden: E.J. Brill. 1995. Retrieved 3 January 2010.
In 2021, Jason Baird Jackson attempted to create a model by which instances of cultural appropriation could be understood systematically. He argues that understanding the modes of cultural change most similar to cultural appropriation is key to discussing the outcomes and implications of instances of appropriation as their meaning are often used interchangeably. Jackson offers his definition of appropriation as the "structural inversion of assimilation", being that it is an instance in which "a powerful group takes aspects of the culture of a subordinated group, making them its own."
Rationale
Exploitation Among critics, the misuse and misrepresentation of indigenous cultures are seen as an exploitative form of colonialism and one step in the destruction of indigenous cultures.Wernitznig, Dagmar, Europe's Indians, Indians in Europe: European Perceptions and Appropriations of Native American Cultures from Pocahontas to the Present. University Press of America, 2007: p.132. "What happens further in the Plastic Shaman's [fictitious] story is highly irritating from a perspective of cultural hegemony. The Injun elder does not only willingly share their spirituality with the white intruder but, in fact, must come to the conclusion that this intruder is as good an Indian as they are themselves. Regarding Indian spirituality, the Plastic Shaman even out-Indians the actual ones. The messianic element, which Plastic Shamanism financially draws on, is installed in the Yoda-like elder themselves. They are the ones – while melodramatically parting from their spiritual offshoot – who urge the Plastic Shaman to share their gift with the rest of the world. Thus Plastic Shamans wipe their hands clean of any megalomaniac or missionizing undertones. Licensed by the authority of an Indian elder, they now have every right to spread their wisdom, and if they make (quite more than) a buck with it, then so be it.—The neocolonial ideology attached to this scenario leaves less room for cynicism."
The modern New Age movement frequently adopts spiritual ideas and practices from non-Western cultures; according to York, these may include "Hawaiian Kahuna magic, Australian Aboriginal dream-working, South American Amerindian ayahuasca and San Pedro ceremonies, Hindu Ayurveda and yoga, Chinese Feng Shui, Qi Gong, and Tai Chi." The movement has faced criticism for cultural imperialism exploiting intellectual and cultural property of indigenous peoples.