Welcome to one of the most active flamenco sites on the Internet. Guests can read most posts but if you want to participate click here to register.
This site is dedicated to the memory of Paco de Lucía, Ron Mitchell, Guy Williams, Linda Elvira, Philip John Lee, Craig Eros, Ben Woods, David Serva and Tom Blackshear who went ahead of us.
We receive 12,200 visitors a month from 200 countries and 1.7 million page impressions a year. To advertise on this site please contact us.
In French it's pretty hazy. Sometimes "Roma" is used as an umbrella term encompassing groups like Sinti and Calo. Sometimes it refers specifically to the Roma in Eastern Europe. In everyday usage, I know from experience that some Sinti take exception to being called Roma. If memory serves, part of the dislike is the association with certain Eastern European groups (really just an expression of the common xenophobia towards Eastern Europeans in Western Europe), and another is a rejection of certain political projects. After all, when you group them all under "Roma", you're never far from calling them "one nation without a country" or something like that. And you give them a flag, and symbols that not all of them recognize and some of them in fact hate.
Since Robf was talking about Granada, I know (or rather, I knew) a few places there where Roma (Eastern European) live. They're a good ways off from any of the Gitano neighborhoods. Based on what I've heard Gitanos say about them, I don't get the sense that they have any feeling of mutual belonging or shared "fate" with the Roma. Really, they just reinforced impression that Roma, as in Eastern European Roma, is the absolute lowest rung in the social ladder in Western Europe. You can get in trouble for being racist towards any other group. All bets are off when it comes to the Roma. For Gitanos, I think the whole story of migrating from India matters as "mythology", but there's no (or very little) sense of real kinship with other groups related to that mythology, other than in some vague imaginary sense. Perhaps not dissimilar to the role Africa plays for some African-Americans, or really the role of any "country of origin" for any group in the US other than First Peoples.
Yes, I live in Granada and I can attest to the truth of this -- there is a very real separation between the Eastern European Roma and the Gitanos. As I suggested earlier, this separation has to do with historical divergences -- the Gitanos of Spain were forcibly sedentarized in 1499, leading to a shift in lifestyle, whereas the Eastern European Gitanos remained itinerant. And more recently, the Eastern European Gitanos were the victims of genocide in the Holocaust, whereas the Andalusian Gitanos faced disproportionate discrimination in Franco's Spain. The strange part about all of this is that I've heard Gitanos in Granada vocally uphold the separation between them and the Eastern European Roma, and then I've heard those same people speak with justifiable resentment about the ways in which the Spanish Crown and Church erased their language and cultural legacy, versions of which, as they attest, still thrive among Roma communities elsewhere. So it's a complicated, conflicted social relation, to be sure, with elements of antipathy alongside elements of affinity.
I think the words are coded differently in English than they are in French or Spanish -- part of this has to do with the legacy of the Holocaust in the English-speaking world. The French and particularly the Spanish don't like thinking about it or talking about it, because it makes them uncomfortable -- or if they do mention it, they're generally interested in making light of it. That has been my experience as a Jew in those countries, in any event. Anglophone culture, meanwhile, has typically been interested in linguistic adjustments as a performative mode of recompense (even if in some cases that recompense might not actually do as much as it claims to do). Moreover, there are clearly plenty of Roma who find "Gypsy" offensive -- a quick google search will unearth plenty of thinkpieces attesting to that.
In any case, it's pretty clear that "Gitano" is the preferred term for Andalusian Roma -- it maintains the historical separation between Roma from other parts of Europe and the sedentarized population that has lived for years in southern Spain, and it avoids the potential pejorative of "Gypsy." Seems easy enough to me.
I don't think that is the case IME. These guys often refer to themselves as gypsies when they call me " Hey it's Johnny, one of the gypsy boys. Can you give me that installer who does the gypsy work's number?" I'm familiar with black folks who refer to their friends as "my Nword". This is not that.
Fair enough! I'm just saying that I've seen enough evidence to the contrary (including thinkpieces written by Roma) that I prefer to err on the side of caution unless told explicitly otherwise by an interlocutor. It seems like it varies from person to person.
I can remember many years ago reading an article in a British guitar magazine about Ian Davies. The author said he went out of compas during a buleria solo. Ian provided a recording to show he did not, saying it was a serious thing in that it questioned his professional competence. The author listened and agreed he was mistaken in his comment and pointed out that Ian was a real gentleman considering the seriousness of the claim, and how Ian handled it. So, yeah, a person who presents themselves as a flamenco who goes out of compas in a way that is obvious, who is not a figura, is going to catch heat at the least, or more likely be completely dismissed.
The American gypsies I know are not flamencos, they are generally scam artists and criminals. And proud of it. I've known many of them for decades. Their culture is perhaps the most unusual I've ever encountered in the USA. Most Americans are completely unaware of them.
quote:
ORIGINAL: chester
I've seen plenty of posts here over the years mocking a musician for not having perfect compas even though they put "flamenco" in the video title, or decrying well-known flamenco artists for being too polished and not what "my idea of flamenco is", or that some "maestro" of another would be rolling in their grave if they knew where flamenco has been going these days.
So this
quote:
ORIGINAL: BarkellWH
culture of "grievance" and "victimization" that seems to be gripping many who have nothing better to do.
is not a new phenomenon and even some of us who are *not* in a "college campus" might also be guilty of getting offended in the name of authenticity.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Mark2 I know plenty of American gypsies and they call themselves gypsies. The word is not offensive to them.
Would these be flamenco gypsies? Where being a gypsy gives you more credibility? Or are we talking about a CPA who goes by "The Gypsy Accountant"?
Personally I don't put too much thought into "cultural appropriation" since many things that some cultures hold sacred were actually forced upon them by a more powerful conquering culture (cough cough religion), but I'd like to posit a question to the readers here -- how do you feel about american white-boys who assume a spanish-y moniker and play "foreign sounding" music (to various degrees of authenticity)?
I think there's something very odd about this thread that I can't quite put my finger on....
first off, it seems like it's making a big lava spewing mountain out of a tiny molehill.
The original video "Why I fell in love with Irish dancing" has a tiny portion in the middle of the video about the twitter responses to the dancer, a tiny portion of which were negative and included accusations of "cultural appropriation".
Here is what she said about it in the video: "My understanding of the term is that it means when you are taking something from another culture [and] claiming it as your own without recognising where it comes from, and that couldn’t be further from what I’m doing. It’s important for people to recognise that there’s a difference between appropriation and appreciation, I think people use the term appropriation without knowing what it means. "
From there we have
quote:
Are all the non-Andalusian members here (including, of course, myself) disgusting cultural appropriators?
WHAT?! In nearly 30 years of listening, learning and playing flamenco guitar I have never been accused of "cultural appropriation" (at least not to my face) and I have never heard of anyone else being accused of it. As far as I am aware no-one on the forum has been accused of it, but this thread seems to have kicked off with the assumption that we are, and people have then swung into defensive/offensive mode to counter these non-existent accusations.
We then have (and just to be clear, the above quote was from Paul and the following is from Bill):
quote:
So-called "cultural appropriation" is just another woolly idea that seems to have originated on the university campus and among academics who have nothing to do with history (usually from such organizations as the Modern Language Association) as a means to create one more "grievance." It is usually voiced by those who have no idea about how cultures have interacted throughout history, borrowing from each other and creating a wonderful mix.
When terms are used by academics they usually have a very specific and clearly defined meaning and usage, so I can only assume that "cultural appropriation" is something that you (Bill) don't understand but know you don't like. Hmmm.....
Before I argue for or against ANYTHING I really want to know what it is, so I looked it up. Here's what I found:
"CULTURAL APPROPRIATION defined: In the broadest sense cultural appropriation is the adoption or taking of specific elements (such as ideas, symbols, artifacts, images, art, rituals, icons, behavior, music, styles) of one culture by another culture."
"CULTURAL APPROPRIATION types: 1. Cultural Exchange - Reciprocal exchange 2. Cultural Dominance - Imposing the dominant culture on a subordinate culture 3. Cultural Exploitation - Taking of subordinate culture for the benefit of dominant culture 4. Transculturation - Development of cultural hybrids"
So just from the few parts I quoted, it seems like pretty standard sort of cultural theory, just a way of looking at things and analysing what's going on. There's no indication that all the types defined are necessarily ethically wrong (I don't see anyone having any kind of problem with types 1 and 4).
RE: Cultural appropriation (in reply to mark indigo)
quote:
When terms are used by academics they usually have a very specific and clearly defined meaning and usage, so I can only assume that "cultural appropriation" is something that you (Bill) don't understand but know you don't like. Hmmm.....
Before I argue for or against ANYTHING I really want to know what it is, so I looked it up. Here's what I found:
"CULTURAL APPROPRIATION defined: In the broadest sense cultural appropriation is the adoption or taking of specific elements (such as ideas, symbols, artifacts, images, art, rituals, icons, behavior, music, styles) of one culture by another culture."
"CULTURAL APPROPRIATION types: 1. Cultural Exchange - Reciprocal exchange 2. Cultural Dominance - Imposing the dominant culture on a subordinate culture 3. Cultural Exploitation - Taking of subordinate culture for the benefit of dominant culture 4. Transculturation - Development of cultural hybrids"
So just from the few parts I quoted, it seems like pretty standard sort of cultural theory, just a way of looking at things and analysing what's going on. There's no indication that all the types defined are necessarily ethically wrong (I don't see anyone having any kind of problem with types 1 and 4).
Very well-said! This should end the conversation, I hope.
Posts: 3467
Joined: Jul. 12 2009
From: Washington, DC
RE: Cultural appropriation (in reply to mark indigo)
quote:
When terms are used by academics they usually have a very specific and clearly defined meaning and usage, so I can only assume that "cultural appropriation" is something that you (Bill) don't understand but know you don't like. Hmmm.....
Wrong, Mark. I understand very well what constitutes "cultural appropriation." When I referred to it thusly:
"So-called "cultural appropriation" is just another woolly idea that seems to have originated on the university campus and among academics who have nothing to do with history (usually from such organizations as the Modern Language Association) as a means to create one more "grievance." It is usually voiced by those who have no idea about how cultures have interacted throughout history, borrowing from each other and creating a wonderful mix."
I was referring to it as it has been presented over the past few years on university campuses by both students and academics who, by their definition, take it to the limits of absurdity. I mention the Modern Language Association because their adherents are famous (infamous?) for assuming the mantle of historians using "post-modernist" theories rather than historiography in their belief that they are better equipped than true historians. Likewise with "cultural appropriation."
One of the absurd ideas is that "cultural appropriation" occurs when assuming, or writing about, certain ethnic characteristics--clothing, manners, modes of speech, writing, etc.--by those not of that ethnicity. A perfect example is the recently published novel entitled "American Dirt," by Jeanine Cummins. It is the story of immigrants coming north. Jeanine Cummins has been castigated roundly by Hispanics because she is an Anglo writing about Hispanics. Apparently they think only Hispanics can write about Hispanics.
It is reflected in the academic battles one reads about over the teaching of various subjects: That only Blacks can teach Black or African history; that only Hispanics can teach Latin American history, etc. In fact, anyone, regardless of ethnic background, can teach any history or cultural course. They must be credentialed, but their ethnic background, whether White, Black, Hispanic, or other, has nothing to do with their ability to impart knowledge.
In short, I understand very well what "cultural appropriation" actually means, but "over-sensitivity" and the zeitgeist have twisted its meaning in order to be used as a bludgeon by those who see it in their interest to do so. Thus my modifier "woolly" in describing it as it is used by the aforementioned.
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white, With the name of the late deceased, And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here, Who tried to hustle the East."
If you have lived in Andalucía for years, learnt some of the very difficult idioma, been to many flamenco performances, taken lessons and practised really, really hard.
That is not appropriation, that is showing love, dedication and respect.
Someone flouncing around in a red and white polka dot-dress, holding castanets and a rose in their teeth, is most likely appropriating or in fancy dress, or both.
Also, we seem to have lost another member over this conversation. Their choice but a shame. I just ignore people I do not agree with, life is way too short.
Posts: 15242
Joined: Dec. 14 2004
From: Washington DC
RE: Cultural appropriation (in reply to mark indigo)
quote:
"CULTURAL APPROPRIATION types: 1. Cultural Exchange - Reciprocal exchange 2. Cultural Dominance - Imposing the dominant culture on a subordinate culture 3. Cultural Exploitation - Taking of subordinate culture for the benefit of dominant culture 4. Transculturation - Development of cultural hybrids"
So just from the few parts I quoted, it seems like pretty standard sort of cultural theory, just a way of looking at things and analysing what's going on. There's no indication that all the types defined are necessarily ethically wrong (I don't see anyone having any kind of problem with types 1 and 4).
5. Pretending you are good at some culture’s art form, regardless if it’s your own or some other group’s creation or associated style, when you are actually mediocre or exhibit poor taste in interpretation of it, yet manage to gain notoriety, fame, and money while misrepresenting both the genre and one’s place in it, (thanks to ignorant interested outsiders) to the extreme annoyance of those that are deeply involved with the genre.
I think 5. is what a lot of folks think it is. It comes down to taste and interpretation. Almost everybody that plays music is guilty of 1,4 and possible 3 if you are white or at least of high economic class bracket. I can’t count how much money I’ve made that some poor gitano deserves...but I’ve also been hired to perform tons of Gypsy weddings and engagements, or been hired and paid by gitanos to perform with them (Spanish, French, Romanian, etc), so, I can live with it, but I’m not gonna pretend I’m not involved in this appropriation thing. Just trying hard to stay out of category 5.
5. Pretending you are good at some culture’s art form, regardless if it’s your own or some other group’s creation or associated style, when you are actually mediocre or exhibit poor taste in interpretation of it, yet manage to gain notoriety, fame, and money while misrepresenting both the genre and one’s place in it, (thanks to ignorant interested outsiders) to the extreme annoyance of those that are deeply involved with the genre.
I think 5. is what a lot of folks think it is. It comes down to taste and interpretation. Almost everybody that plays music is guilty of 1,4 and possible 3 if you are white or at least of high economic class bracket. I can’t count how much money I’ve made that some poor gitano deserves...but I’ve also been hired to perform tons of Gypsy weddings and engagements, or been hired and paid by gitanos to perform with them (Spanish, French, Romanian, etc), so, I can live with it, but I’m not gonna pretend I’m not involved in this appropriation thing. Just trying hard to stay out of category 5.
RE: Cultural appropriation (in reply to BarkellWH)
quote:
"So-called "cultural appropriation" is just another woolly idea that seems to have originated on the university campus and among academics who have nothing to do with history (usually from such organizations as the Modern Language Association) as a means to create one more "grievance." It is usually voiced by those who have no idea about how cultures have interacted throughout history, borrowing from each other and creating a wonderful mix."
I was referring to it as it has been presented over the past few years on university campuses by both students and academics who, by their definition, take it to the limits of absurdity. I mention the Modern Language Association because their adherents are famous (infamous?) for assuming the mantle of historians using "post-modernist" theories rather than historiography in their belief that they are better equipped than true historians. Likewise with "cultural appropriation."
One of the absurd ideas is that "cultural appropriation" occurs when assuming, or writing about, certain ethnic characteristics--clothing, manners, modes of speech, writing, etc.--by those not of that ethnicity. A perfect example is the recently published novel entitled "American Dirt," by Jeanine Cummins. It is the story of immigrants coming north. Jeanine Cummins has been castigated roundly by Hispanics because she is an Anglo writing about Hispanics. Apparently they think only Hispanics can write about Hispanics.
It is reflected in the academic battles one reads about over the teaching of various subjects: That only Blacks can teach Black or African history; that only Hispanics can teach Latin American history, etc. In fact, anyone, regardless of ethnic background, can teach any history or cultural course. They must be credentialed, but their ethnic background, whether White, Black, Hispanic, or other, has nothing to do with their ability to impart knowledge.
In short, I understand very well what "cultural appropriation" actually means, but "over-sensitivity" and the zeitgeist have twisted its meaning in order to be used as a bludgeon by those who see it in their interest to do so. Thus my modifier "woolly" in describing it as it is used by the aforementioned.
One update for you: 'post-modernism' isn't the cool, zeitgeist-y topic anymore in Academia -- it hasn't been for several years. The most salient and viable critiques of what can be called 'cultural appropriation' don't come from a post-modernist standpoint. It sounds like you've been listening to people like Jordan Peterson...
I should add that while you are correct that there are some theorist/literary studies types who play it fast and loose with history, there are others who are meticulous. Moreover, there are plenty of historians who subscribe to master narratives that distort their object of study. The issue is not as cut and dry as you present it to be (I have spent my entire life around both historians and literary scholars, to clarify). What's more, all historiography requires theoretical orientation -- you learn that as a historian as well. Historians need a way to organize and think critically about secondary sources and archival materials, and many of the tools that they use are adaptations of the work of continental theorists (some of them are names that you would likely revile) and anthropologists (many of whom are even more into relativistic 'woolliness' than the post-modernists!). I think you yourself have a very "woolly" idea of what many of these disciplines entail.
Also almost nobody makes the argument that only blacks can teach black or African history (etc.) -- that is a caricature that you have decided upon. People do say that a black historian studying their own culture might have a different perspective than a white historian studying the same topic, and that we need to make sure that the black historian is heard, is not being drowned out, etc.
I'm hesitant to even touch the American Dirt controversy, but you're making a straw man, I'll tell you that much. The problem was less that she was white than that she was white AND that her portrayal of hispanic characters was essentializing. This controversy happened while I was still in a creative writing MFA alongside writers from all sorts of backgrounds, some of whom are getting national attention these days. The critique of American Dirt was fairly consistent across the board, and it wasn't anywhere near as categorical/draconian as you make it seem.
My more salient question is this: why are you so bothered by people being troubled by cultural appropriation? What does it say about you that you are so up in arms about the idea that people might question your right to do whatever you want with their culture?
Posts: 3467
Joined: Jul. 12 2009
From: Washington, DC
RE: Cultural appropriation (in reply to tf10music)
As I mentioned in my post, I am describing a phenomenon as it has developed over several years. Thus, the Modern Language Association and "post-modernist" history, as opposed to the historian's craft. It may not be today's fad in the immediate sense, but it has had a significant and, in my opinion, pernicious effect in academia over the years.
While pursuing a career in the US Foreign Service rather than academia, I, too have been around my share of historians, and my wife has a Doctorate in anthropology. I am well aware of theoretical orientation as a requirement of historiography, and of the "woolliness" that surrounds much of anthropological "discourse," as they like to say. I have had many discussions on various topics with them, and with some we agree while with others we agree to (agreeably) disagree. That, to me, is as it should be.
I don't know where you have been if you have not heard of the "demands" on university campuses for professors of historical and ethnic studies courses to be of the same ethnicity as the courses they teach. I am not suggesting they shouldn't be of the same ethnicity. I am just saying that to think that only those of the same ethnicity of the subjects of the course under consideration is absurd.
As for the "American Dirt"---Jeanine Cummins controversy, the cry from Hispanics that she is both White and "essentializing" Hispanics can hardly be called ground truth. The critiques I have read do not spell out how she "essentializes" Hispanics. They just state that as a White writer she does "essentialize" her characters. Apparently one is supposed to take their word at face value without actually offering evidence. While Cummins may portray certain characters in her novel in a certain way, I am always wary of charges that someone "essentializes" an entire ethnic group. I have not read her novel, though, so cannot comment on it from a personal reading.
Regarding your final question which I quote: "My more salient question is this: why are you so bothered by people being troubled by cultural appropriation? What does it say about you that you are so up in arms about the idea that people might question your right to do whatever you want with their culture?"
You are operating from a false premise. I have never stated that I have a right to do whatever I want with others' culture. As a retired diplomat who has been involved with other peoples and cultures, representing the United States over a lengthy career, I have always had the greatest respect for peoples and cultures. Over a lifetime, I have learned four languages and made use of all of them. What bothers me about the United States these days is a culture of "grievance" and "victimization" among various groups that brands anything they choose to take offense at as "cultural appropriation," no matter how benign. You may not have seen it, but I have.
Finally, I would like to suggest that we agree to (agreeably!) disagree in those areas where we do not see eye-to-eye, as I think that is how it should be in discussion and debate.
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white, With the name of the late deceased, And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here, Who tried to hustle the East."
RE: Cultural appropriation (in reply to BarkellWH)
I'm not post-modernism's biggest fan either, though it's likely for different reasons than you. I think that, in general, the theory that was popular in the 1990s tends to be a mixture of aspirational political theology and centrist equivocation, whether it's couched in semiotics or post-Heideggerian mysticism. There are still loads of problems in the realm of critical theory in 2020, but at least people are interested in doing materialism now, which is something.
I don't think that the causal chain between post-modernism and the idea of cultural appropriation is as clear as you think it is, but it seems worthless to hash out that difference of opinion. Our main difference tends to be about the perceived legitimacy of the grievances that you mention, and on that, as you say, it would be more prudent to agree to disagree.
I think I have a better idea of where you're coming from now, and I suspect that our difference of opinion is at least partially generational. And that's fine! We're approaching these issues from very different contexts. I'm happy to leave it at that, having come to some sort of mutual understanding.
RE: Cultural appropriation (in reply to tf10music)
Here's the Council of Europe's glossary entry on "Gipsy":
"The term “Roma/Gypsies” was used for many years by the Council of Europe, before the decision was taken to no longer use it in official texts in 2005 (a decision reflected in the first version of the Glossary in December 2006), in particular at the request of International Roma associations who find it to be an alien term, linked with negative, paternalistic stereotypes which still pursue them in Europe. Consequently, in the majority of European states, it is recommended that the word “Gypsy” or its equivalent no longer be used, as it is felt to be pejorative and insulting by most of the people concerned (although it is true that it may depend significantly on the context in which it is used).
However, in some countries, the term “Gypsies” or its national equivalent has no negative connotations, is accepted by the people concerned and may occasionally be more appropriate. This is true of France (where the word “Tsiganes” has the advantage of encompassing in one term the Roma, Gypsies/Gitans and Sinti/Manush), the United Kingdom, Portugal (Ciganos), Spain (Gitanos), Hungary (Cigány) and in Russia and the former Soviet republics (Tsyganye). In some countries, NGOs established by Roma, Sinti and Kale use the word Gypsy or its equivalent (Tsigane, Zingari, etc) in the name of their organisation. Nonetheless, in each of these countries, the word “Roma” is accepted when used to designate the Roma community as a whole, especially in the international bodies."
I was curious to see the United Kingdom listed there. It suggests that in the UK they do not consider that there is a negative connotation to the word "Gypsy".
Of course, this is just the position of one international organisation. For "gitanos", they use "Kale", which makes sense to me. Obviously in an everyday context in Spain I'd just go with "gitanos", but I can see the merits of "Kale" in international English.
On a more comical note, they also use the term "anti-gypyism". To explain why they use that and not "romaphobia", they write: "Fearing that careless journalists may start giving us “Romaniaphobia” instead, we prefer to use the term “anti-Gypsyism” at the Council of Europe."
As for cultural appropriation, I deleted my previous post because it seemed a bit too antagonistic. In a nutshell though, I am strongly opposed to that concept, because when it is applied to individuals, all of its merits seem to break down and it becomes in fact quite dangerous. For a multicultural mongrel like myself, it's really a matter of cultural survival to stand against how this concept is often used against individuals. That is why I would go much further than Bill, and I will in fact "do whatever I want with others' culture", whether I have the right to or not. As it stands, the discussion about cultural appropriation leaves no room for the many people like me who don't fit in the nice little boxes society lays out for us. It's a concept for the monocultural, or at least those raised in a monocultural setting. As such, my own choice has been to do like the fictional character Coleman Silk, and "take the future in his own hands rather than leave it to an unenlightened society to determine his fate". As sensitive as modern society is trying to be on certain issues, it has a massive blindspot for people in the interstitial spaces between categories, whether those are cultural, racial, religious, national, etc. and in some ways this cultural appropriation business seems to be a step backwards more than anything. I have plenty of respect for my fellow human beings and their cultures, and it's precisely because I respect them that every now and then I tell them to shove it, which I often end up doing on issues like this one. None of this precludes the possibility that there might a much more enlightened discussion going on in the halls of academia. But the everyday virtue-signalers, purity testers and overall just xenophobic bores that have been having a go at me ever since I was born and who use this concept to try and dictate what my fate should be...yeah, they can shove it.
_____________________________
"Anything you do can be fixed. What you cannot fix is the perfection of a blank page. What you cannot fix is that pristine, unsullied whiteness of a screen or a page with nothing on it—because there’s nothing there to fix."
Deniz I hear ya. I moved around a bit when I was growing up and am now living somewhere very far from the place I was born so I know what if feels like to "not fit in".
Sounds like you're far enough along the journey of self-discovery and gaining the confidence to be "authentic" to yourself.
I'm not sure if you're planning to be a professional musician, but if not you don't need to box yourself in as a rock, flamenco, or turkish musician. If you hear something that you like, learn it, and play with it. It doesn't need to define you. If you want to be a pro that's a different story and yeah you'll need to find something that people would actually pay you to play.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Deniz
Reminds me of Paco de Lucia quoting some composer whose name I can't remember right now, but it goes something like: "All musician influence one another.. and we 'geniuses'.. we simply steal" and Paco goes on saying "and that's what you have to to.. listen to everything and make it yours!"
I've heard it as Picasso saying "good artists copy, great artists steal" but I bet he stole that from someone lol
quote:
ORIGINAL: Piwin
But the everyday virtue-signalers, purity testers and overall just xenophobic bores that have been having a go at me ever since I was born and who use this concept to try and dictate what my fate should be...yeah, they can shove it.
Wow Piwin, who pooped in your porridge? Since you were BORN?? I can't imagine what horrible things you must be doing that people have been telling you to stop for so long.
I liked mark indigo's take where "cultural appropriation" is a thing that just happens and shouldn't be viewed negatively.
On the other hand we're going through some very identity, err...focused times and I think people like me (who are part of the in-group currently) should step back and give minorities some room to express their frustrations and anger.
Wow Piwin, who pooped in your porridge? Since you were BORN?? I can't imagine what horrible things you must be doing that people have been telling you to stop for so long.
Some cultures, especially when fundamentalist religion is involved, take great care in restricting their children's future very early on. It gets very ugly when those aspirations collide with other cultural norms. I should probably leave it at that, but yes, it goes back pretty much to birth.
_____________________________
"Anything you do can be fixed. What you cannot fix is the perfection of a blank page. What you cannot fix is that pristine, unsullied whiteness of a screen or a page with nothing on it—because there’s nothing there to fix."
RE: Cultural appropriation (in reply to tf10music)
A lot of criticism of, or calling out of culture appropriation is taken up by those who don’t really get why and where it’s important. At that point citing something as cultural appropriation becomes part of messaging culture.
Messaging culture is often trenched in bias and agenda and obscures or cheapens the term, abusing the meaning of the term. I see an awful lot of it, but I don’t think it applies to the committed students or a deep aficionado of flamenco. To learn aficion one has to pay some dues and demonstrate discipline and respect. Flamenco at it best has a filter in place to weed out those who don’t respect in their hearts. Because real aficion is a heart thing, not an intellectual thing.
And style points to Bill for using the word ‘knaves’.
I was curious to see the United Kingdom listed there. It suggests that in the UK they do not consider that there is a negative connotation to the word "Gypsy".
Because we have other, more clearly pejorative terms for this population. Also, the prejudice tends to be directed at travelling communities (including, e.g. Irish travellers), regardless of their ethnicity.
I watched the video. The new lingo for what happened to that woman would be ‘misogynoir’ misogyny against black women. Or in 80’s lingo dancing while black.
People accusing her of cultural appropriation are way out of line.
Because we have other, more clearly pejorative terms for this population. Also, the prejudice tends to be directed at travelling communities (including, e.g. Irish travellers), regardless of their ethnicity.
Ah, makes sense. Thanks. I'm afraid to ask what these other terms might be, but I think I might already have a vague idea.
In France the term for travellers is "gens du voyage", though it is apparently not an equivalent to the English term. Officially the State has no right to inquire into the ethnicity of French citizens, so it only has this term to refer to nomadic Roma. If they're sedentary Roma, there would be no official term at all for them, other than the terms used for any other citizen in France. In official speak, "Rom" (Roma) would refer specifically to Eastern European Roma that migrate to France but do not hold citizenship.
There is significant discrimination towards both of these groups.
_____________________________
"Anything you do can be fixed. What you cannot fix is the perfection of a blank page. What you cannot fix is that pristine, unsullied whiteness of a screen or a page with nothing on it—because there’s nothing there to fix."
Rob, that guitar looks really gorgeous. I love the fine detail. When I made my most recent flamenca with the star and crescent sound port, I also thought about the fact that it might come off as a minor cultural appropriation. That’s why I’m careful to describe it with the term “inspired by” the story of the Roma migration from India, through the Middle East into Europe, rather than “telling” the story of that, because I don't feel that it's my story to tell. That said, I’ve been in love with flamenco and Gitano culture for half my life now, and I hope that guitar is seen as a sincere love letter to flamenco and Gitanos, because that’s what it is to me. It’s my “fan art” if you will.
Somehow I missed this, belated thanks for the kind words, Andy.
I don’t know how anyone could possibly think that the beautiful guitar you made was in any way off the mark, and someone making such a suggestion would be revealing more about their own shortcomings than anything about your work, IMO. I even showed photos of your guitar to my customer when we were discussing using the Camarón symbols. He really liked it, and understood why I was reluctant to put myself in the position where someone might, rightly or not, take it upon themselves to accuse me of plagiarizing you. I certainly don’t think you’d ever think that, but there are some real snakes about, and you never know when you might step on one, so I try to exercise caution.
Any rate, I’ve never been shy about tooting the horn for makers whom I respect, and I’ve told quite a few people, both here and in Spain, about how highly I regard your work. I’ve always attributed my use of Padauk to having been inspired by your guitars.
To all others who’ve offered encouragement, thanks, it actually does mean something, and helps.
Really interesting article. Makes a distinction between "cultural appropriation" as:
"the concept of cultural appropriation emerged amongst Canadian, American and Australian indigenous rights scholars and activists in the 1980s. For centuries, indigenous peoples had watched, helpless, as anthropologists, archaeologists, museum curators, artists and entrepreneurs helped themselves to and interpreted their heritage and their ancestors’ bones, even as they were dispossessed and forcibly assimilated.
Denouncing cultural appropriation and claiming ownership over their heritage, arts and stories became a means for indigenous activists to rebuild traditional identities and demand recognition, albeit in the modern (and sometimes intemperate) language of cultural nationalism."
and "cultural appropriation" as:
"in the hothouse conditions of 21st century social media, cultural appropriation morality has bloomed into an intractable, divisive, quasi-religious dogma. In this atmosphere, a compulsive yet shallow politics of recognition reigns supreme, richly inventive in contrived victimhood."
(plus other nuances)
I'd like to think the fallout between Bill and Burdo was because Burdo thought it was the first and Bill the second....
Posts: 3467
Joined: Jul. 12 2009
From: Washington, DC
RE: Cultural appropriation (in reply to mark indigo)
quote:
Really interesting article. Makes a distinction between "cultural appropriation" as:
"the concept of cultural appropriation emerged amongst Canadian, American and Australian indigenous rights scholars and activists in the 1980s. For centuries, indigenous peoples had watched, helpless, as anthropologists, archaeologists, museum curators, artists and entrepreneurs helped themselves to and interpreted their heritage and their ancestors’ bones, even as they were dispossessed and forcibly assimilated.
Denouncing cultural appropriation and claiming ownership over their heritage, arts and stories became a means for indigenous activists to rebuild traditional identities and demand recognition, albeit in the modern (and sometimes intemperate) language of cultural nationalism."
and "cultural appropriation" as:
"in the hothouse conditions of 21st century social media, cultural appropriation morality has bloomed into an intractable, divisive, quasi-religious dogma. In this atmosphere, a compulsive yet shallow politics of recognition reigns supreme, richly inventive in contrived victimhood."
(plus other nuances)
I'd like to think the fallout between Bill and Burdo was because Burdo thought it was the first and Bill the second....
It is a very interesting article, Mark. I cannot speak for El Burdo (who speaks well enough for himself), but speaking for myself, I have always recognized and have the highest respect for the first explanation of cultural appropriation. (I think I demonstrated that in my praise of Rob for his efforts to "get it right" in making the guitar for his Gitano friend.)
On the other hand, you are correct in suggesting that I have a certain contempt for those who interpret cultural appropriation as being the second, right down to use of the phrase "contrived victimhood" (which sounds like something I would have written).
In any case, thanks for succinctly summarizing the two approaches to defining Cultural Appropriation. Very well done.
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white, With the name of the late deceased, And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here, Who tried to hustle the East."
RE: Cultural appropriation (in reply to mark indigo)
Yes, the gulf between these two usages pisses me off to no end. I’m sure it’s caused problems here.
And to the people who shame and call cultural appropriation in things like non Mexicans making tacos, boll@@cks.
That’s how important ideas, like reclaiming native heritage after white domination, get used incorrectly. And that incorrect use becomes in a sense a kind of racism of false privilege. It’s not the privilege of non natives to call out what is being shared as cultural appropriation.
RE: Cultural appropriation (in reply to BarkellWH)
Bill,
I call the unwarranted calling out and virtue messaging or outrage messaging a form of ‘false privilege’ - the author of the essay calls it contrived victimhood, which is good too.
Posts: 3467
Joined: Jul. 12 2009
From: Washington, DC
RE: Cultural appropriation (in reply to estebanana)
Stephen,
Many thanks for posting the link to the article. Between you posting the link and Mark drawing the distinction between the two approaches to defining "Cultural Appropriation," I think the issues under consideration have been clarified in a way that they had not been earlier in this thread. Kudos to both of you.
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white, With the name of the late deceased, And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here, Who tried to hustle the East."
RE: Cultural appropriation (in reply to tf10music)
There was a recent "thing" that made me think about this thread:
A basketball player with Taiwanese parents decided to "dread" his hair. Another player, a Black guy, made some remarks on twitter regarding how "appropriate" it is for an Asian dude to have dreadlocks. The "offender" posted some sort of an apology where he said it's a sign of admiration just like the offended player's CHINESE TATTOOS.
You can google "jeremy lin dreadlocks" or something for the juicy details.
Does that mean that white people are allowed to play the blues? Maybe we can start with Taiwanese blues players and go from there?
Printable Version
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread