I hate that the internet allowed cultural appropriation to even be a thing. Pre-internet it would've been resigned to some academic loon's obscure and widely disregarded book. But because people love to be outraged, and the fact is, as a concept it is bloody ridiculous, it had a certain virality to it and it caught on.
I'm only 20 seconds in but here's some commentary thus far:
Pie presents the idea as "lefty lunacy". Right, well we know where his ideological bent might be (that said, he does have a go at everyone and everything to be fair).
He refers to it as "this idea that if you are inspired by, or borrow from another's culture, that is in effect an act of stealing, and is therefore an offensive act".
WRONG. While he has many of the basic aspects down, there are so many qualifiers to this that are conveniently missed out so that Pie can present a nice idea as being opposed by the irrational left. There's a lot more nuance than that. But he's defining it on his terms in order to rant, which plays to his audience.
Cultural appropriation can also be a good thing. Afrobeat music, or fusion food, for instance - this is good. However, where people are critical of the practice is where a dominant culture exploits a minority culture (be it for profit or simply miles out of context). A few examples:
- Warbonnets on the runway (it groups every distinct indigenous American tribe as one entity, and disregards the need for it to be earned - see Adrienne Keene's writing; she is a Cherokee).
- Since rectified, but referring to Uluru as Ayers Rock (perhaps this is more cultural marginalisation and erasure)
- In some instances, tribal tattoos/foreign language tattoos/use of the Christian crucifix, when worn without knowledge of their origins, or otherwise divorced from the original cultural context. (Already touched on with the warbonnet)
------------------
Pie has started to talk about one example I've just seen re a Students' Union confiscating sombreros. Yeah, sure. This is not a good move, but what he's done - in forty seconds - is tar "The Left" with the same brush. I don't think that a Mexican restaurant handing out sombreros is appropriation. Of course it isn't. They chose to share something. So he's strawmanning.
"Chippewa artist Jay Soule was among those leading the charge. He argues PL blatantly copied Morrisseau with virtually no regard for the storytelling behind his work."
It is incredibly important to listen to those of the minority culture in this instance. I cannot claim to know anything about the art in question, but context is vital here.
Pie strawmans yet again when ignoring the word "cultural" in front of genocide. I agree the term is stupid as all hell, but even so, Pie is exaggerating because OOH! those crazy lefties are at it again!
------------------
His third argument about dreadlocks - knew it was coming. Don't think it's racist at all. To focus on the hard HARD left, insular world of student politics is all done to create outrage. And the Little Mix thing - yes, he's right. That shouldn't be apologised for: Celtic people wore their hair in dreadlocks, for instance.
He's right that white people shouldn't "decide what black people are offended by" (vel sim). It's patronising. But he himself, a minute before saying that, neglected to mention a minority voice so he could continue to paint outrage. That might be a bit wrong.
Sushi, the macarena, shopping at IKEA, kama sutra - these are examples of *good* or indeed acceptable cosmopolitan cultural appropriation and assimilation.
"You take this to its logical conclusion and it's the end of art, it's the end of fiction" - no it isn't. You're telling me that Maya Angelou's works wouldn't exist? Do one. This is a bollocks argument that I don't want to waste my time addressing.
"Segregated restaurants" - again, no. You are wildly missing the point, Pie. (Appropriate name given you mention Greggs.) Cultural appropriation in the bad sense is when erasure occurs, or a minority culture is not listened to/respected, when aspects of it are shared in the wrong way. (See my examples above.)
Music is separate, too. I don't know how long he carries on in this vein, so I will bookmark the 3-minute mark and come back if there are any more thoughts to offer on this piece that... Well, just doesn't get it.
agreed, problem is the lack of anything interesting about CAFC on here has led to a need for any old topic to keep us all motivated and to stave off extreme boredom
I'm only 20 seconds in but here's some commentary thus far:
Pie presents the idea as "lefty lunacy". Right, well we know where his ideological bent might be (that said, he does have a go at everyone and everything to be fair).
He refers to it as "this idea that if you are inspired by, or borrow from another's culture, that is in effect an act of stealing, and is therefore an offensive act".
WRONG. While he has many of the basic aspects down, there are so many qualifiers to this that are conveniently missed out so that Pie can present a nice idea as being opposed by the irrational left. There's a lot more nuance than that. But he's defining it on his terms in order to rant, which plays to his audience.
Cultural appropriation can also be a good thing. Afrobeat music, or fusion food, for instance - this is good. However, where people are critical of the practice is where a dominant culture exploits a minority culture (be it for profit or simply miles out of context). A few examples:
- Warbonnets on the runway (it groups every distinct indigenous American tribe as one entity, and disregards the need for it to be earned - see Adrienne Keene's writing; she is a Cherokee).
- Since rectified, but referring to Uluru as Ayers Rock (perhaps this is more cultural marginalisation and erasure)
- In some instances, tribal tattoos/foreign language tattoos/use of the Christian crucifix, when worn without knowledge of their origins, or otherwise divorced from the original cultural context. (Already touched on with the warbonnet)
------------------
Pie has started to talk about one example I've just seen re a Students' Union confiscating sombreros. Yeah, sure. This is not a good move, but what he's done - in forty seconds - is tar "The Left" with the same brush. I don't think that a Mexican restaurant handing out sombreros is appropriation. Of course it isn't. They chose to share something. So he's strawmanning.
"Chippewa artist Jay Soule was among those leading the charge. He argues PL blatantly copied Morrisseau with virtually no regard for the storytelling behind his work."
It is incredibly important to listen to those of the minority culture in this instance. I cannot claim to know anything about the art in question, but context is vital here.
Pie strawmans yet again when ignoring the word "cultural" in front of genocide. I agree the term is stupid as all hell, but even so, Pie is exaggerating because OOH! those crazy lefties are at it again!
------------------
His third argument about dreadlocks - knew it was coming. Don't think it's racist at all. To focus on the hard HARD left, insular world of student politics is all done to create outrage. And the Little Mix thing - yes, he's right. That shouldn't be apologised for: Celtic people wore their hair in dreadlocks, for instance.
He's right that white people shouldn't "decide what black people are offended by" (vel sim). It's patronising. But he himself, a minute before saying that, neglected to mention a minority voice so he could continue to paint outrage. That might be a bit wrong.
Sushi, the macarena, shopping at IKEA, kama sutra - these are examples of *good* or indeed acceptable cosmopolitan cultural appropriation and assimilation.
"You take this to its logical conclusion and it's the end of art, it's the end of fiction" - no it isn't. You're telling me that Maya Angelou's works wouldn't exist? Do one. This is a bollocks argument that I don't want to waste my time addressing.
"Segregated restaurants" - again, no. You are wildly missing the point, Pie. (Appropriate name given you mention Greggs.) Cultural appropriation in the bad sense is when erasure occurs, or a minority culture is not listened to/respected, when aspects of it are shared in the wrong way. (See my examples above.)
Music is separate, too. I don't know how long he carries on in this vein, so I will bookmark the 3-minute mark and come back if there are any more thoughts to offer on this piece that... Well, just doesn't get it.
It's comedy not an academic essay. You laugh at things that you find funny rather than analyze them to decide if they're acceptable or not.
You can be left wing and think cultural appropriation is a load of bollocks.
I should probably clarify that I do know Pie is fictitious. But the above rant is presented as opinion, and not satire, hence my response.
It's obviously satire - not a recent invention.
Yoiu've also said: It's comedy not an academic essay. You laugh at things that you find funny rather than analyze them to decide if they're acceptable or not.
But you're calling it a "brilliant summary", implying it is to be taken at face value. So I stand by what I've said. (I don't really find the character funny tbf)
I should probably clarify that I do know Pie is fictitious. But the above rant is presented as opinion, and not satire, hence my response.
It's obviously satire - not a recent invention.
Yoiu've also said: It's comedy not an academic essay. You laugh at things that you find funny rather than analyze them to decide if they're acceptable or not.
But you're calling it a "brilliant summary", implying it is to be taken at face value. So I stand by what I've said. (I don't really find the character funny tbf)
Just watched it out of curiosity. It's his attempt at humour and the audience obviously found him funny. I don't believe for one moment that he believed half of what he said himself. Nothing to get upset about.
I should probably clarify that I do know Pie is fictitious. But the above rant is presented as opinion, and not satire, hence my response.
It's obviously satire - not a recent invention.
Yoiu've also said: It's comedy not an academic essay. You laugh at things that you find funny rather than analyze them to decide if they're acceptable or not.
But you're calling it a "brilliant summary", implying it is to be taken at face value. So I stand by what I've said. (I don't really find the character funny tbf)
I think it's clear you didn't find it funny.
At least that's clear, unlike your motivations for posting this on the main forum. Was it satire? Was it to highlight how ridiculous lefty outrage culture is? Was it to bait people like me? WHO WILL EVER KNOW
I should probably clarify that I do know Pie is fictitious. But the above rant is presented as opinion, and not satire, hence my response.
It's obviously satire - not a recent invention.
Yoiu've also said: It's comedy not an academic essay. You laugh at things that you find funny rather than analyze them to decide if they're acceptable or not.
But you're calling it a "brilliant summary", implying it is to be taken at face value. So I stand by what I've said. (I don't really find the character funny tbf)
I think it's clear you didn't find it funny.
At least that's clear, unlike your motivations for posting this on the main forum. Was it satire? Was it to highlight how ridiculous lefty outrage culture is? Was it to bait people like me? WHO WILL EVER KNOW
I thought it was funny - it's comedy. We all like different things.
I've laughed at things that mock my beliefs - I think that's a healthy thing. We all need to have a sense of the ridiculous.
This debate goes back as far as the Bonzo's asking if blue men can sing the whites and even further back than that. For me criss crossing and fusion and such stuff is part of the essence of creativity. Stealing and passing it off as your personal original creation is a different thing altogether.
I should probably clarify that I do know Pie is fictitious. But the above rant is presented as opinion, and not satire, hence my response.
It's obviously satire - not a recent invention.
Yoiu've also said: It's comedy not an academic essay. You laugh at things that you find funny rather than analyze them to decide if they're acceptable or not.
But you're calling it a "brilliant summary", implying it is to be taken at face value. So I stand by what I've said. (I don't really find the character funny tbf)
I think it's clear you didn't find it funny.
At least that's clear, unlike your motivations for posting this on the main forum. Was it satire? Was it to highlight how ridiculous lefty outrage culture is? Was it to bait people like me? WHO WILL EVER KNOW
I thought it was funny - it's comedy. We all like different things.
I've laughed at things that mock my beliefs - I think that's a healthy thing. We all need to have a sense of the ridiculous.
I've no interest in baiting you.
Yeah, the bait thing of course wasn't your motivation - fair enough; I shouldn't have been flippant.
I suppose my vigorous defence of my beliefs here stems from the fact that there *will* be people who unironically agree with all the points in the OP (esp the weaker ones I've highlighted), and if "lol the loony left what are they like" is reinforced by satire, then that isn't going to be constructive moving forward.
I should probably clarify that I do know Pie is fictitious. But the above rant is presented as opinion, and not satire, hence my response.
It's obviously satire - not a recent invention.
Yoiu've also said: It's comedy not an academic essay. You laugh at things that you find funny rather than analyze them to decide if they're acceptable or not.
But you're calling it a "brilliant summary", implying it is to be taken at face value. So I stand by what I've said. (I don't really find the character funny tbf)
I think it's clear you didn't find it funny.
At least that's clear, unlike your motivations for posting this on the main forum. Was it satire? Was it to highlight how ridiculous lefty outrage culture is? Was it to bait people like me? WHO WILL EVER KNOW
I thought it was funny - it's comedy. We all like different things.
I've laughed at things that mock my beliefs - I think that's a healthy thing. We all need to have a sense of the ridiculous.
I've no interest in baiting you.
Yeah, the bait thing of course wasn't your motivation - fair enough; I shouldn't have been flippant.
I suppose my vigorous defence of my beliefs here stems from the fact that there *will* be people who unironically agree with all the points in the OP (esp the weaker ones I've highlighted), and if "lol the loony left what are they like" is reinforced by satire, then that isn't going to be constructive moving forward.
You can be left wing and think that cultural appropriation is a ridiculous idea. That's the point.
I should probably clarify that I do know Pie is fictitious. But the above rant is presented as opinion, and not satire, hence my response.
It's obviously satire - not a recent invention.
Yoiu've also said: It's comedy not an academic essay. You laugh at things that you find funny rather than analyze them to decide if they're acceptable or not.
But you're calling it a "brilliant summary", implying it is to be taken at face value. So I stand by what I've said. (I don't really find the character funny tbf)
I think it's clear you didn't find it funny.
At least that's clear, unlike your motivations for posting this on the main forum. Was it satire? Was it to highlight how ridiculous lefty outrage culture is? Was it to bait people like me? WHO WILL EVER KNOW
I thought it was funny - it's comedy. We all like different things.
I've laughed at things that mock my beliefs - I think that's a healthy thing. We all need to have a sense of the ridiculous.
I've no interest in baiting you.
Yeah, the bait thing of course wasn't your motivation - fair enough; I shouldn't have been flippant.
I suppose my vigorous defence of my beliefs here stems from the fact that there *will* be people who unironically agree with all the points in the OP (esp the weaker ones I've highlighted), and if "lol the loony left what are they like" is reinforced by satire, then that isn't going to be constructive moving forward.
You can be left wing and think that cultural appropriation is a ridiculous idea. That's the point.
Absolutely. You can also think it's not as ridiculous as articulated in the above video, even if people are overzealous in their pursuit of "appropriators", hence my response.
I have now watched it. Not one of Pie's funniest moments, but fair points as far as this "lefty" is concerned. I don't think for one minute that tiny number of people who get massively out of proportion coverage in the right wing press and from right wing social media represent me. I get the hump that their actions allow the media to portray anyone else with left wing leanings as the same as them, so a fellow "lefty" pointing that out is fine by me.
People get satire mixed up with the real world all the time, girls who think being like Vikki Pollard is something to be proud of, right wingers thinking Alf Garnet is a role model. They need to change, not the world.
Final though - who gets to police what is cultural appropriation and what is not? Like VAR - it's all or nothing, and it should be nothing.
https://youtu.be/Rq74bZqbOqA
Comments
Pie presents the idea as "lefty lunacy". Right, well we know where his ideological bent might be (that said, he does have a go at everyone and everything to be fair).
He refers to it as "this idea that if you are inspired by, or borrow from another's culture, that is in effect an act of stealing, and is therefore an offensive act".
WRONG. While he has many of the basic aspects down, there are so many qualifiers to this that are conveniently missed out so that Pie can present a nice idea as being opposed by the irrational left. There's a lot more nuance than that. But he's defining it on his terms in order to rant, which plays to his audience.
Cultural appropriation can also be a good thing. Afrobeat music, or fusion food, for instance - this is good. However, where people are critical of the practice is where a dominant culture exploits a minority culture (be it for profit or simply miles out of context). A few examples:
- Warbonnets on the runway (it groups every distinct indigenous American tribe as one entity, and disregards the need for it to be earned - see Adrienne Keene's writing; she is a Cherokee).
- Since rectified, but referring to Uluru as Ayers Rock (perhaps this is more cultural marginalisation and erasure)
- In some instances, tribal tattoos/foreign language tattoos/use of the Christian crucifix, when worn without knowledge of their origins, or otherwise divorced from the original cultural context. (Already touched on with the warbonnet)
------------------
Pie has started to talk about one example I've just seen re a Students' Union confiscating sombreros. Yeah, sure. This is not a good move, but what he's done - in forty seconds - is tar "The Left" with the same brush. I don't think that a Mexican restaurant handing out sombreros is appropriation. Of course it isn't. They chose to share something. So he's strawmanning.
------------------
The next example he gives - he conveniently forgets to mention that one of those who got the art show cancelled was Indigenous Canadian themselves. Here's the article: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/toronto-gallery-indigenous-art-cancels-amandapl-1.4091529
"Chippewa artist Jay Soule was among those leading the charge. He argues PL blatantly copied Morrisseau with virtually no regard for the storytelling behind his work."
It is incredibly important to listen to those of the minority culture in this instance. I cannot claim to know anything about the art in question, but context is vital here.
Pie strawmans yet again when ignoring the word "cultural" in front of genocide. I agree the term is stupid as all hell, but even so, Pie is exaggerating because OOH! those crazy lefties are at it again!
------------------
His third argument about dreadlocks - knew it was coming. Don't think it's racist at all. To focus on the hard HARD left, insular world of student politics is all done to create outrage. And the Little Mix thing - yes, he's right. That shouldn't be apologised for: Celtic people wore their hair in dreadlocks, for instance.
He's right that white people shouldn't "decide what black people are offended by" (vel sim). It's patronising. But he himself, a minute before saying that, neglected to mention a minority voice so he could continue to paint outrage. That might be a bit wrong.
Sushi, the macarena, shopping at IKEA, kama sutra - these are examples of *good* or indeed acceptable cosmopolitan cultural appropriation and assimilation.
"You take this to its logical conclusion and it's the end of art, it's the end of fiction" - no it isn't. You're telling me that Maya Angelou's works wouldn't exist? Do one. This is a bollocks argument that I don't want to waste my time addressing.
"Segregated restaurants" - again, no. You are wildly missing the point, Pie. (Appropriate name given you mention Greggs.) Cultural appropriation in the bad sense is when erasure occurs, or a minority culture is not listened to/respected, when aspects of it are shared in the wrong way. (See my examples above.)
Music is separate, too. I don't know how long he carries on in this vein, so I will bookmark the 3-minute mark and come back if there are any more thoughts to offer on this piece that... Well, just doesn't get it.
You can be left wing and think cultural appropriation is a load of bollocks.
Yoiu've also said: It's comedy not an academic essay. You laugh at things that you find funny rather than analyze them to decide if they're acceptable or not.
But you're calling it a "brilliant summary", implying it is to be taken at face value. So I stand by what I've said. (I don't really find the character funny tbf)
It's his attempt at humour and the audience obviously found him funny.
I don't believe for one moment that he believed half of what he said himself.
Nothing to get upset about.
I've laughed at things that mock my beliefs - I think that's a healthy thing. We all need to have a sense of the ridiculous.
I've no interest in baiting you.
For me criss crossing and fusion and such stuff is part of the essence of creativity.
Stealing and passing it off as your personal original creation is a different thing altogether.
I suppose my vigorous defence of my beliefs here stems from the fact that there *will* be people who unironically agree with all the points in the OP (esp the weaker ones I've highlighted), and if "lol the loony left what are they like" is reinforced by satire, then that isn't going to be constructive moving forward.
Might put a few Buddhist noses out of joint though (especially overweight ones).
People get satire mixed up with the real world all the time, girls who think being like Vikki Pollard is something to be proud of, right wingers thinking Alf Garnet is a role model. They need to change, not the world.
Final though - who gets to police what is cultural appropriation and what is not? Like VAR - it's all or nothing, and it should be nothing.