Inspiration or appropriation?

Originally published on Google+ on October 5, 2018.

A couple months ago I synthesized ideas that stuck in my head after reading articles about cultural appropriation and settled on what has my personal go-to definition.

Cultural appropriation occurs when someone takes something — a symbol, activity, way of speaking, etc. — that needs to be received and uses out without having been granted it (by someone who has the authority to grant it). This can be lightweight. It is cultural appropriation to wear a Christian cross without belief, but the ritual to earn the right to wear it is (for many modern Protestants, at least) private confession of belief before God.

Note what this definition does not include. It does not say that someone has to be a member of a culture too earn the use of the cultural marker. It also includes the possibility of cultural appropriation by those within the culture (although we might call it something different then). And the bit of culture must have earned significance. Wearing everyday clothing from a culture is generally not cultural appropriation. What matters is that a cultural marker must signify that a person earned it. Appropriation occurs when it is used without having been earned.

There are still grey areas. Over time, the meaning and use of a cultural marker can change. When does it lose its significance? Who can make such changes authentically? Different groups may use the cultural marker with different standards such that one group may consider the other to be culturally appropriating the marker. Who owns a cultural marker?

As we go into Halloween, it is worth pointing out another complication of cultural appropriation. Depending on the cultural marker, the culture, and the way it is used, it may be sometimes appropriate to use the cultural marker as long as the usage is clearly signaled as imitation. Such imitation is often encouraged when it takes the form of play by children who are expected to eventually earn the marker. Intentional critical commentary can also be appropriate. A rule of thumb is to ask oneself whether the use of the cultural marker respects the significance of the marker or if it ignores it. The key thing here is that it is the significance of the marker that needs to be respected, not the marker itself. Even mocking criticism can meet this bar if it is intentional rather than incidental.

And even with this definition, there is room for plenty of fuzzy lines and grey area. Group interactions are hard.