Cultural Appropriation is real, but it usually refers to entire nations or massive artists or corporations adopting a caricature of smaller cultures, to the extent that people start associating it with that nation or artist rather than the culture. An example here is Picasso using African imagery, or pop stars copying underground music genres and effectively killing them off.

The problem is that people use it to talk about regular people starting a Sushi restaurant or whatever. They do not have the power to do this sort of thing.

[–] Zozano@aussie.zone 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Fair enough. It reminds me of the whole conversation about critical race theory. It isn't what most people think it is, and is reserved for discussions regarding much more nuanced understandings.

I still think it's hard to distinguish whether something is, or isn't cultural appropriation. Where is the line between inspiration and a knock-off?

[–] dillekant@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 year ago

Where is the line between inspiration and a knock-off?

So firstly, just like critical race theory, cultural appropriation is meant to be analysis. Fixing it doesn't just mean "OK guys don't do a cultural appropriation", it's meant to explain why cultures can lose their identity, and how they struggle.

A big part of the analysis is the power differential. One of the problems is that the culture is more associated with the trope than the real culture. It's a very large and powerful community (or individual) taking art from a small community. It's Taylor Swift using a drawing to promote her songs, not paying for it, and asking the artist to be glad she gave her the attention. It's Britney Spears (IIRC) making a pop song using ideas from an online subgenre and not crediting it, causing the subgenre to implode.