In the context of this argument I don’t think I was ever saying musicians (and in particular the musicians that were mentioned like Chuck Berry, et al.) ever worked for exposure, but exposure in the form of a hit record would also mean bigger concert receipts. Do you deny this?
You seem to be addressing the current trend where artists (typically visual artists) are asked to do work on a promotional basis, something that has been discussed here on boing boing before. This is a separate issue, and hadn’t entered my mind until now.
I doubt anyone said to Chuck Berry “hey, we aren’t going to pay you for this show, but think of all the publicity you’ll get.” And if they did I’m sure Chuck told them to go screw.
Is it necessary that one always mention America’s many moral crimes in discussions like this, or else be accused of whitewashing history? I never once questioned that black artists were ripped off by record companies, but I also wasn’t initially addressing it since I didn’t think it was debatable.
I think this could be true and often was, but you have to remember that touring is a whole another industry within the industry and there is plenty of exploitation there as well, yeah? [quote=“generic_name, post:122, topic:101818”]
You seem to be addressing the current trend where artists (typically visual artists) are asked to do work on a promotional basis
[/quote]
I think that’s the current iteration of artists not being understood as doing a job, yes. I don’t think that’s a new thing, however. From what I’ve seen in my several years of research, the rock era really gave rise to the idea that a musician was an artistic genius and the work that goes into songwriting was really hidden away from public view. Prior to the modern era of popular music (from the centralization of rock in the industry until now), the division of labor was much different. The songwriter wasn’t the star, the performer was. They were compensated in different ways (for different jobs) with performers making their living touring more often than not.[quote=“generic_name, post:122, topic:101818”]
or else be accused of whitewashing history?
[/quote]
I never accused you of such. [quote=“generic_name, post:122, topic:101818”]
Well, duh.
[/quote]
There seems to be an awful lot of people questioning if this was the case or if the music industry functioned as a special case with regards to race, because black artists were seemingly more prominent.
But my apologies if my weighing in was somehow not welcomed. I did figure since I’ve read at least some on the history of the music industry, I might have something to offer. Going by the reaction here, I’m guessing not.
Sorry, it seemed like your reply was in disagreement with what you were replying to. Also, you were just telling me shit I already knew as well. ¯_(ツ)_/¯
I’m not saying I haven’t seen example of objectionable conduct from some people, mostly I just put that down to straight bigotry/racism though, rather than attempts to ‘steal’ someone’s culture. Commercialisation is possibly a slightly different thing again though, I don’t think it targets minority or disadvantaged cultures any more than it does majority cultures for example (see Olive Garden, Irish theme pubs, numerous forms of franchised Americana, Disneyland itself, etc.), it’s just a natural consequence of capitalism (which I’m fine with, being an unconflicted capitalist) - Burritogate wouldn’t be an example of that obviously, that was just a small independent business.
I would say that there is now a pretty good market for Koa Ukes made in Hawaii. But well made instruments have never been cheap. It is conceivable that during the various periods where Uke music was trendy, much of the demand was for cheap souvenir-quality instruments. But each resurgence likely led to some serious purchases of handmade instruments.
But the turn in conversation led me to go down to the music room:
My Daughter’s uke is not a fabulous one. a Taiwanese aNueNue U900. but above and to the left of the Uke is my great grandmothers banjo-ukulele, which was made in that 19-teens wave of popularity. The one on top and mostly cut off in the image is a banjo-mandolin. There is all sorts of musical cultural mixing on that wall. but no appropriation that I am aware of.
I was? My apologies for phd-splaining then? Or is that woman-splaining? I don’t even know anymore!
I disagree that it’s “natural.” Capitalism isn’t natural, it involved people making deliberate choices about what to commodify and why.
I think you have to look at who benefits most from commercialization, it tends to be the people who have access to capital and markets, and that still tends to be white men, overwhelmingly. [quote=“caze, post:124, topic:101818”]
Irish theme pubs
[/quote]
Some people see this as cultural appropriation and it kind of is, but in the US Irish Americans have pretty much become a part of the power structure. From what I understand there are several companies that go around creating these “authentic” pubs, because, we all want authentic right? But of course, there isn’t the same kind of culture around bars here in the states, as there is in Ireland or Britain. What people want to see replicated as an Irish pub just can’t be here, because it’s not something that has been in business in a village for a few hundred years (and honestly, that characterization of the Irish pub is probably pretty misleading as it’s read through the lens of American fantasies about Ireland as much as any reality of what it’s like to live in a small village in Ireland.
Nice music room! Is that blue and yellow thing a theremin?
I love these! [quote=“Max_Blancke, post:125, topic:101818”]
There is all sorts of musical cultural mixing on that wall. but no appropriation that I am aware of.
[/quote]
Well, are you exploiting a culture for your own financial gain, denying that there is a history of the music that might not involved you, or are you attempting to make music that brings you and others joy and engaging with that history?
No one is saying that playing an instrument that isn’t from your particular cultural heritage is bad or that enjoying and respecting that music is appropriation. People are saying that exploiting that culture (especially for economic gain) and pretending that you have some sort of ownership or right to it, when it doesn’t come from your heritage, especially when it’s the culture of groups that have historically been exploited in a number of ways is appropriation.
Yes, it is a Moog theremin. And no, I don’t do any of those exploitative things. I only posted it because we were talking about both banjos and ukes, and I have a crossover… Instruments are an interesting way to track migration and trade routes. It sounds like a good thesis topic.
Except the sour cream part. It most likely is a Sephardic pastry. FWIW, most of what we consider both Ashkenazi & sephardic Jewish cuisine is appropriated from the countries Jews were living in.
Indeed. I’m sure someone must have written that by now. I know there is a subfield in atlantic world studies that focus specifically on commodity chains, no reason why art and culture wouldn’t be part of that. If I think of a book along those lines, I’ll post it here.
I took a class on the (mostly pornographic) work songs passed around by sailors and cowboys. It was very interesting stuff. Some of them have very ancient origins.
This would depend on what era we’re talking about. For most of the 40’s and 50’s the pop charts were still packed with white artists (Doris Day, Mitch Miller, Perry Como, Dinah Shore, Andy Williams, Sinatra, etc.) and these would have been the big money makers for Columbia, Capital, RCA, etc. The music industry has always been evolving and changing. You can slowly follow how race became less and less of an issue, from Chuck Berry to Michael Jackson, to where the “pop” charts intersected with the R&B charts regularly.
In regards to a lot of the comments here, you are using outliers in an unsupportable fashion in attempt to disprove the mean- systemic institutional racism giving rise to cultural appropriation for the benefit of one class over the culture’s creators. The existence of famous black people does not invalidate the experiences the average black person has or had across the social spectrum. In the music industry we have examples of what is called cultural genocide in Jazz and Rock and Roll where the black origins of the cultural production have been erased from popular consciousness. This is what I mean when I say Elvis is the King of Rock and Roll. It is an acute symbol of the pervasiveness of white supremacy. A black music form ruled over by a benevolent white man.
Knitting is an example of the blending of cultures: the Cowichan picked it up from Europeans and added their own twist. Appropriation comes in when big companies with no connection to the Cowichan (except for historically taking advantage, looking at you, HBC), began selling their own version of the very distinct design of sweater, some even trading off the Cowichan name.
Where the Cowichan got lucky is that unlike a great many of things that are appropriated, the sweater was developed in an age where copyright was available, and they took out that copyright early (see, sometimes it does benefit the little guy). They could prove the appropriation, but even then they only won a partial victory.
So, yes, both cultural mixing and cultural appropriation can occur, sometimes even around the same thing. The difference is pretty clear and apparent, too.
Actually, the wiki and other sources says they had a trademark on the name Cowichan, not a copyright, which is a very different thing. I’ve know several fashion entrepreneurs and copyright is almost impossible to enforce in that industry. Legally, they’d have to have copied the decorative pattern exactly to have a copyright infraction. They didn’t treat the Cowichan any different than anyone else in a cutthroat business.
The trademark thing, while apparently effective, looks like a slippery slope to me. Once you concede a population control over the use of the name of their place what other products can we get worked up over? Bermuda shorts and Argyle socks? Peking Duck, Kansas City BBQ or Chicago Pizza? What if the population has no central authority, who do you ask for dispensation? Bring us back to Hamantaschen doesn’t it? Even the chief Rabbi of Israel doesn’t speak for all Jews. And it appears to me that if a producer of Cowichan sweaters did what @orenwolf suggested of respectfully explaining the origin, it would make things worse not better in many eyes.
Even determining who should be able to own IP is not easy. Does anyone remember a couple of years ago U of Kentucky asserted trademark rights to the word KENTUCKY when a distillery tried to name some booze “Kentucky Mist”?
This is bullshit, Elvis was an important figure in musical history and is rightly remembered as such, Chuck Berry is viewed in much the same manner. There’s no erasure going on here. And who in Jazz is being erased? The great figures of jazz are nearly all black, and no-one is attempting to remove any of them from popular consciousness (aside from perhaps the fading from popular consciousness of all jazz musicians, which is merely a reflection of changing tastes) and the many important non-black figures are rightly remembered as well (Bill Evans deserves as much recognition as Miles Davis for example).
This is bullshit, Blalock was an important figure in medical history and is rightly remembered as such, Vivian Thomas is viewed in much the same manner.
