DEBUNKING CULTURAL APPROPRIATION: AN ARGUMENTATIVE ANALYSIS

American singer Gwen Stefani has been accussed of cultural appropriation multiple times throughout her career, to which she has replied that, rather than "appropriating", she is appreciating different cultures. This 2004 picture shows the artist with her backup dancers at the time, the Harajuku Girls. Image: James Devaney for WireImage.

To which extent is it valid to use the aesthetics of cultures other than one’s own as a creative inspiration? What is the difference between appropriation, admiration and appreciation? Moreso, can it be said, as some do, that cultural appropriation does not exist?

The subject of cultural appropriation has been a part of the fashion conversation for a long time. In the last few days, this topic has been relevant once again in the Latin American industry due to an incident that took place in Peru, during a talk show about sustainability and environmental impact. In said event, statements that eventually went viral on social media were made about the exchange of fashion and textile knowledge between people from big cities and indigenous communities. Beyond the personal qualities, circumstances and aptitudes of those who participated in this polemic conversation, it is important to critically analyze the arguments used, as well as their social, economic and cultural implications.

“CULTURAL HERITAGE IS FREE AND SHOULD NOT BE MERCANTILIZED” – FALSE

One of the reasons why the talk show mentioned above has created a big controversy is because in this event it was said that it is not fair that indigenous tribes charge for sharing their cultural knowledge and expressions. As a premise, it was stated that all world cultural heritage is free to use and access for everyone.

Such statement is categorically incorrect as, following the agreement of the 2003 UNESCO Convention, all community or people that owns these cultural artifacts has the right to receive economic benefits for them on the grounds of sustainable development, to recognition and visibility, to an active participation in projects related to their cultural riches, and to protect said riches from inadequate usage, exploitation or appropriation.

“THEIR PRICES ARE UNREASONABLE” – FALSE

It was also said that the prices those communities ask to grant access to their knowledge and techniques were excessive. Qualified professionals can charge whatever sums they deem appropriate for their time and skills, and groups with ancestral knowledges can do the same. In the current free market economy, we all have the right to put the price we think is fair for our products and services. A commercial deal that does not go through because the parties involved could not reach an agreement is not an “act of injustice” and neither “playing hard to get”: that is just a normal, daily situation in the business world.

Chanel received significant backlash after the runway show for their Summer 1994 collection that showcased dresses with prints of some of the Quran verses. Karl Lagerfeld apologized saying that he thought they were Hindi love poems, asked for forgiveness for his mistake and the maison took the dresses out of the collection.

“IF WE ARE FROM THE SAME COUNTRY, WE HAVE THE SAME CULTURE” – FALSE

Another argument used in this event was that people who are citizens of the same country necessarily share the same culture, therefore all knowledge that forms said culture should be shared freely. In this statement, there is a confusion between the terms “culture” and “nationality”, which are neither synonyms nor interchangeable. Different groups of people can have the same nationality and, at the same time, be a part of different cultures. This is particularly true in Latin America, one of the most culturally and ethnically diverse regions of the world.

“WITHOUT FAMOUS FASHION DESIGNERS, THOSE COMMUNITIES WOULD HAVE NO EXPOSURE AND NO COMMERCIAL LIFE” – PARTLY FALSE

Additionally, it was said that communities that did not want to share their textile knowledge for free would be wasting the opportunity to become more well known along with creators who are more famous than them. While this is partially true, it is not always the case that the designs and techniques of cultural minorities receive their due recognition when they are used as an inspiration, or when they are directly copied. In fact, the instances where, even with all corresponding credits are given, the economic retribution they receive is significantly smaller than needed, are not rare at all. Is it worth it to work for free in exchange for “exposure” when that does not translate into real opportunities, recognition and remuneration?

Spanish designer Stella Rittwagen found herself amidst controversy in 2014 when she released traditional bags made by the Wayúu tribe from Northern Colombia as her own designs, without properly crediting the culture that originated such items.

“CULTURAL APPROPRIATION DOES NOT EXIST” – PARTIALLY TRUE

To conclude, in this event was stated that, if all human beings share the same ancestors, then we all have to share our knowledge without restrictions, as we all belong to the same “family”. Following this train of thought, all cultures are universal, thus cultural appropriation does not really exist.

In a legal context, cultural appropriation has not been defined as illegal per se, as in fact are related acts such as plagiarism, counterfeit and theft of intellectual property. Cultural appropriation does not exist as a crime, but as an ethics and morals issue. The use of cultural elements without the right approach might be disrespectful, unfair and reprimandable, and the decision to if that is the case highly depends on contexts and parties involved. But, at least until today, it is not an illegal act.

It is accurate to say that this sort of situation will continue to occur in the fashion industry and the conversation around this topic will continue. And, just as in any other industry, it is up to customers to decide who deserves their support, attention and money.