The term cultural appropriation is believed to have first appeared in Arthur E. Christy's essay about orientalism in 1945 and was widely used as a criticism of Western expansionism. However, with the age of globalisation, the exchange of different cultures around the world started to increase, and cultural appropriation was given a new explanation. Young (2005) explained that cultural appropriation is the use of elements of another culture by members of one culture. This explanation was considered too neutral and vague by Matthes (2016), who argues that cultural appropriation is still offensive in many cases. However, there are some evidence that cultural appropriation has changed positively in the context of globalisation. In this essay it will be argued that the evolution of cultural appropriation would be positive in terms of the concept of cultural appropriation, the survival of culture, and the preservation of culture.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Firstly, with the advent of the age of globalisation, the discourse of cultural appropriation has been stripped of its cumbersome political and historical context and has become more neutral and positive. When scholars first discussed cultural appropriation in the 20th century, its been deeply linked to the larger discussion of Orientalism. Arthur E. Christy (1968) referred to cultural appropriation as a form of expression under Orientalism and believed it to be unrestricted behaviour. Because Orientalism is a biased narrative of the West towards Eastern countries and cultures in academic and art, cultural appropriation was also seen as an \u2018accomplice\u2019 to this negative behaviour at that time. A related discussion followed by Kenneth Coutts-Smith. Although he used the Marxist term \u2018class appropriation\u2019 rather than \u2018cultural appropriation\u2019, he argued that the behaviour of appropriating culture was a form of cultural colonialism (Hiller, 1991). But this discussion was changed with the advent of globalisation. Tuncer (2023) expressed that globalisation has facilitated the interaction of different cultures, resulting in new forms of cultural expression. Most acts of cultural appropriation are no longer aimed at exploitation and oppression, but come from the exchange of different cultures. Its definition has changed as a result. Richard A. Rogers (2006) recognised that cultural appropriation is an active process, and that the act of \"taking\" can be regarded as cultural appropriation, regardless of its purpose or result. While there are still some who link cultural appropriation to a history of oppression, Matthes, for example, believed that a Native American appropriation of mainstream Western culture should not be called cultural appropriation because it is a forced cultural assimilation from Western culture, an extension of the coloniser's history of oppression of the indigenous (Matthes, 2016). But they obviously ignore the implications of increased global cultural connectivity. Their neglect of another aspect, the subjective will of cultural groups, will be discussed later. Overall, such changes are visible and positive. Cultural appropriation has been removed from its specific negative context and has become a neutral and objective narrative under the influence of globalisation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
And from the perspective of cultural development, cultural appropriation has existed from the past to the present and has contributed to the survival of cultures and the birth of interculturalism. If we study those civilisations with a long history, we can find traces of cultural appropriation in the cultures of most of them. The act of cultural appropriation is much older than the appearance of the concept of cultural appropriation. Benal Dikmen (2014) explains that the phenomenon of cultural hybridisation and interactivity can be traced back to antiquity. For example, ancient Greek art was influenced by Egyptian, Scythian, Syrian and Phoenician cultures. And Zen Buddhism, believed to come from Japan, is centred on Buddhism, which originated in India (ibid.). It can be said that it is a symbol of dynamism for a civilization or culture to enrich itself by constantly extracting excellence from the cultures around it. And dynamism is a key element in the continuity of civilisations and cultures. As Richard A. Rogers suggests that culture should be communicative and in a dynamic state of dialogue and transformation. This is not a recognition of cultural hegemony, but of the mobility of culture (Rogers, 2006). Similarly, there are many examples in modern world that can be found and support these ideas. Paul Simon appropriated the music of South Africa to energise popular music. And the famous composer Steve Reich has also appropriated the music from the Ewe people of Ghana (Young, 2005). The appropriation of these two musicians, along with many others like them, has resulted in the diversity of styles and longevity of popular music. Of course, Paul Simon's appropriation of South African music also included a revolt against apartheid, but this is not the focus of this essay, so it will not be discussed too much. Recalling these occurrences, and according to UNESCO's definition of interculturalism: \u201cthe existence and equitable interaction of diverse cultures and the possibility of generating shared cultural expressions through dialogue and mutual respect (UNESCO, 2023).\u201d We can find that interculturalism was proposed precisely on the basis of these manifestations of cultural appropriation. And there is a growing recognition that cultural appropriation has had a positive impact on cultural survival and development from time immemorial. But when talking about interculturalism, the preservation of culture is also an inescapable issue.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
On the last point, many are worried about the harm that cultural appropriation causes to marginalised cultures. But there are some evidences showing that cultural appropriation is no longer as harmful as it used to be, but can be a powerful weapon for cultural preservation and promotion. Returning to the era in which the concept of cultural appropriation was proposed as previously discussed, the era prior to globalisation. As a result of cultural colonialism, which means that powerful cultures use economic, media, and military factors to seize the voice of marginalised cultures, marginalised cultural groups have become victims of cultural appropriation. It fits Matthes' description of the harm of cultural appropriation. Matthes argues that cultural appropriation is detrimental to marginalised cultures and silences those cultures by controlling them with dominant discourses (Matthes, 2016). But the development of communication technology has clearly changed this situation. Tuncer (2023) believes that people now have more opportunities to learn about different cultures in detail and to visualise the differences between them. Nguyen and Strohl (2019) also agree that cultural groups now have more autonomy to decide whether to allow cultural appropriation or not, rather than being forced by others. This is in fact proof that the voice of marginalised cultures is increasing in today's world, and this is why it was said earlier that Matthes ignores the subjective willingness of cultural groups when discussing cultural appropriation. As Nguyen and Strohl argue that some of the offensive cultural appropriations are instead welcomed by cultural groups. For example, the influence on soul music by David Bowie is seen as a mutually beneficial cultural exchange. Similarly, Indian society considers that the appropriation of sari marks Indian culture as mainstream (Nguyen and Strohl, 2019). In addition, we can find examples where marginalised cultures are no longer only passive recipients of cultural appropriation, but actively use it to strengthen their voice. Qian Li and Xiaotian Li's study suggests that popular scepticism about Genshin Impact's preservation of Chinese culture arises from its appropriation of Japanese anime culture. However, others argue that appropriating elements from other countries and making them \" Chinese\" is also a form of preservation and promotion. Just like Japanese anime culture itself, it also promotes Japanese culture by appropriating strong Western culture (Li, Q. and Li, X., 2023). It is obvious that marginalised cultural groups are no longer silenced by cultural imperialism as in the past, but are actively raising their voices in response to cultural appropriation, and are even actively using cultural appropriation to protect their culture.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Although there is still a lot of debate about cultural appropriation, it is undeniable that it is developing towards a positive direction. With increasing of global connectivity, the voices of third world countries and marginalised cultural groups are being strengthened, which fundamentally changes the discourse of cultural appropriation. Cultural appropriation also breaks down the boundaries between different cultural groups and enhances cross-cultural exchange. More importantly, marginalised cultural groups can use this to confront the cultural hegemony of the West, which is not \"assimilation\" as some scholars believe. Furthermore, it should be recognised that cultural appropriation is not a priori, but rather complex. This means that cultural appropriation remains an area for long-term discussion. Therefore, while it is argued that cultural appropriation has positive developments, it is still necessary to retain the research on its negative impacts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Christy, A. (1968) The Asian legacy and American Life<\/em>. New York: Greenwood Press.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Dikmen, B. (2014) \u2018G\u00f6rsel Sanatlarda K\u00fclt\u00fcrleraras\u0131 Etkile\u015fim ve Melezlik\u2019, MSGS\u00dc Sosyal Bilimler, <\/em>(9), pp. 27-37.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Hiller, S. (1991). The myth of primitivism : perspectives on art.<\/em> London ; New York: Routledge.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Li, Q. and Li, X. (2023) \u2018Debating the \u201cChineseness\u201d of a mobile game in online communities\u2019, Global Media and China<\/em>, 8(4), pp. 442-461. Accessed on: https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1177\/20594364231190313<\/p>\n\n\n\n Matthes, E.H. (2016) \u2018Cultural Appropriation Without Cultural Essentialism?\u2019, Social theory and practice<\/em>, 42(2), pp. 343\u2013366. Accessed on: https:\/\/doi.org\/10.5840\/soctheorpract201642219.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Nguyen, C.T. and Strohl, M. (2019) \u2018Cultural appropriation and the intimacy of groups\u2019, Philosophical studies<\/em>, 176(4), pp. 981\u20131002. Accessed on: https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s11098-018-1223-3.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Rogers, R.A. (2006) \u2018From Cultural Exchange to Transculturation: A Review and Reconceptualization of Cultural Appropriation\u2019, Communication theory<\/em>, 16(4), pp. 474\u2013503. Accessed on: https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1111\/j.1468-2885.2006.00277.x.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Tuncer, F.F. (2023) \u2018Discussing Globalization and Cultural Hybridization\u2019, Universal Journal of History and Culture<\/em>, 5(2), pp. 85\u2013103. Accessed on: https:\/\/doi.org\/10.52613\/ujhc.1279438.<\/p>\n\n\n\n UNESCO (2023). Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions.<\/em> [online] Unesco.org. Accessed on: https:\/\/www.unesco.org\/en\/legal-affairs\/convention-protection-and-promotion-diversity-cultural-expressions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Young, J.O. (2005) \u2018Profound offense and cultural appropriation\u2019, The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism<\/em>, 63(2), pp. 135\u2013146. doi:10.1111\/j.0021-8529.2005.00190.x.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Assignment score\uff1a<\/strong>77\/100<\/p>\n\n\n\n Instructor feedback\uff1a<\/strong> \u6587\u5316\u632a\u7528\u4e00\u8bcd\u88ab\u8ba4\u4e3a\u6700\u65e9\u51fa\u73b0\u57281945\u5e74 Arthur E. Christy \u7684\u5173\u4e8e\u4e1c\u65b9\u4e3b\u4e49\u7684\u6587\u7ae0\u4e2d\uff0c\u5e76\u88ab\u5e7f\u6cdb\u7528 […]<\/p>","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":111,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[17],"tags":[19,21,20,18],"class_list":["post-860","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-academic-traces","tag-globalisation","tag-development","tag-culture","tag-cultural-appropriation"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.admiralspee.site\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/860","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.admiralspee.site\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.admiralspee.site\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.admiralspee.site\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.admiralspee.site\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=860"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.admiralspee.site\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/860\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":937,"href":"https:\/\/www.admiralspee.site\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/860\/revisions\/937"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.admiralspee.site\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/111"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.admiralspee.site\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=860"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.admiralspee.site\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=860"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.admiralspee.site\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=860"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
\n\n\n\n
Well done for responding in detail to the feedback. You have a clear position and made some interesting points on a difficult subject. You have clearly researched the topic and have included appropriate supporting details. Your structure is much clearer although more counterarguments could have deepened your analysis.<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"