Cultural Appropriation - the obvious, the not-so, and double standards

My answer would be that “culture” is a group endeavour, and entitlement to the culture is proportional to your participation in that culture.

For instance, if I learned that I had First Nations ancestry, that doesn’t immediately entitle me to wear a feathered headdress. If, however, I live with that tribe, learn what the symbols mean, gain the proper understanding an respect for them, and then wear something that is appropriate to my station within that culture, that would be something that I was entitled to.

The problem with appropriation isn’t that you’re doing something that another culture did first; as you noted, the cultures within which Christianity exists are very different from the culture it originated from. However, the rituals as practiced today maintain a reverence towards the initial rituals; whereas “cultural appropriation” usually involves trying to make something part of your own culture while stripping it of its original context and meaning.

So, to use Hinduism as an example: if you have been taught by Hindu teachers, study the sacred Hindu texts, participate in the Hindu rituals and holy days, and do all of these things earnestly and with respect, devotion, and an understanding of their meanings and history, then sure. You’re participating in the culture, and that entitles you to it.

However, if you just have read Wikipedia entries on various religions and feel, “Yeah, Hinduism suits me best,” and so you say a prayer to Vishnu once a week and do yoga when you feel like it, then you’re appropriating their culture. At that point, you’re no more a Hindu than a megachurch pastor who uses choice snippets from the Bible to make himself rich is a Christian, and you shouldn’t be wearing Hindu symbols or invoking the name of Hindu gods as curse words. You’re not giving the innermost concepts of the religion their proper consideration, and thus you shouldn’t be putting on its outermost garments as if you did.

In one sense, “individual culture” is an oxymoron. In another sense, since every person is a member of different groups, each with their own culture, “individual culture” might be the only culture that can be said to exist.

I would say to define your own individual culture, you need to:

  1. Think of a group that you belong to (in my case, Scouts).
  2. List off the values that define the culture of that group (for Scouts: honour, community service, outdoor activities, hard work, courtesy, conservation, self-development, leadership, parenting, self-sufficiency, spirituality, minimalism, etc.)
  3. Take the values that you share with that particular group (I share the following values with the Scouts: honour, community service, outdoor activities, hard work, courtesy, conservation, self-development).
  4. Repeat steps 1-3 for every other group that you actively participate in.
  5. That list, of groups that you belong to and the values which tie you to them, is your culture.

To give a personal example of my ideas of appropriation vs. non-appropriation:
As a former Catholic, to wear a cross (especially a crucifix), or a dove, or a clerical collar, or a rosary, would be appropriation. I no longer bear these symbols the reverence that a practicing Catholic should. However, I still hold the words of Jesus in high esteem; I think that they’re excellent teachings on how to live life, which is exactly how they were meant to be interpreted. So, I do not feel I am “appropriating” anything if I quote from the Beatitudes; as a former Christian who participated in Christian culture enough to gain an understanding of their context, and who still takes to heart their lessons, they are part of my culture.

I would not feel the same about taking a passage from the Quran, even one with an identical meaning. I just don’t know enough about the Quran, and I do not have enough reverence towards Mohammed, to clothe myself in Islam’s teachings.

3 Likes