[RD] Cultural Appropriation

[thecrazyscot]

So I recently came across this article in my Facebook feed. Some excerpts:

Readers took serious issue with Bon Appétit’s recently published piece originally titled, “PSA: This Is How You Should Be Eating Pho.” The story was accompanied by a video featuring Tyler Akin, chef at Philadelphia’s Stock restaurant, which serves Southeast Asian food. Akin, who is white, demonstrates how he consumes the dish.

The internet took particular exception to the outlet’s use of a white chef as an authority on the subject. Many also criticized the magazine’s touting of pho as a food trend.

Dr. Bich-Ngoc Turner, lecturer of Vietnamese language and literature at the University of Washington, explained that Bon Appétit’s write-up and video, (which you can still watch here), is problematic right from the title.

“So when you present ethnic food this way by a white man, you offend the Vietnamese community and deprive them of their own right to be authentic and maintain their identity.”

“The title sounds very authoritative and over-confident ... Food is very much related to race, identity, and cultural pride,” Turner explained to The Huffington Post. “So when you present ethnic food this way by a white man, you offend the Vietnamese community and deprive them of their own right to be authentic and maintain their identity.”

Another aspect of the piece that’s been stirring the pot is Bon Appétit’s mention of the dish making its “list of the coolest restaurant trends for 2016.” Andrea Nguyen, a Vietnamese chef and cookbook author, noted that by doing so, a crucial aspect of the dish is erased.

“Treating pho as merely a fashionable food negated its rich role in Vietnamese, Vietnamese-American, and now, American culture,” Nguyen wrote in a piece for NPR.

Beyond that, when American chefs make ethnic cuisines, they not only profit off of the food, but they are also not subject to the prejudices immigrants face when creating the same foods, Ruth Tam wrote in the Washington Post last year.

This got me curious on how exactly cultural appropriation is defined, so I found this definition offered by a professor and author at Fordham University (and quoted here):

Taking intellectual property, traditional knowledge, cultural expressions, or artifacts from someone else's culture without permission. This can include unauthorized use of another culture's dance, dress, music, language, folklore, cuisine, traditional medicine, religious symbols, etc. It's most likely to be harmful when the source community is a minority group that has been oppressed or exploited in other ways or when the object of appropriation is particularly sensitive, e.g. sacred objects.

This definition (taking cultural expressions "without permission") seems to be the working definition that most people use from what I've seen.

Some thoughts:

• Who provides "permission" to borrow "cultural expressions"? I reject the idea that culture can be "owned", because culture is not something that can be owned. While connected to intrinsically biological factors such as race or sex, it is not dependent on them. Culture is learned, which means that someone who does not grow up within a particular culture can still be knowledgeable or even an expert on said culture. I'll go farther...a "foreigner" can know more about your culture and respect it more than you do.
• Cultures are constantly changing in relation to each other simply by virtue of the interactions between cultures as well as technological innovation. What is the difference between cultural intermingling and cultural appropriation?
• It seems to me that most of the complaints of cultural appropriation are really complaints about the person doing the appropriating being the wrong race or gender, which seems to me a different thing entirely, but is lumped under the broader heading of "cultural". As I've already argued, culture is not dependent on race or sex because culture is not biological.
• Cultural mockery definitely exists, as does physical cultural theft (for example the wholesale plundering of cultural artifacts by colonial powers). Intellectual cultural theft also occurs, when one culture absorbs something from another culture and then claims it was their idea all along. I'm not disputing any of that. What I am disputing is that members of a particular culture have exclusive "rights" to the usage or expression of that culture, or that it's offensive when someone else expresses an element of that culture.

I hope I was at least somewhat coherent. Thoughts?

EDIT: I didn't mean for this to primarily be a discussion on the "pho incident", I was simply using that as a starting point for discussion and an example of "cultural appropriation". Here are a few more examples that I am shamelessly appropriating from here to give a broader sample. I think one of these examples are far more valid than others.

Musicians such as Madonna, Gwen Stefani and Miley Cyrus have all been accused of cultural appropriation. Madonna, for instance, popularized the form of personal expression known as voguing, which began in black and Latino sectors of the gay community. Madonna has also used Latin America as a backdrop in a music video and appeared in attire with roots in Asia, as has Gwen Stefani who faced criticism for her fixation on Harajuku culture from Japan. In 2013, Miley Cyrus became the pop star most associated with cultural appropriation. During recorded and live performances, the former child star began to twerk, a dance style with roots in the African-American community.

When singer Katy Perry performed as a geisha at the American Music Awards in November 2013, she described it as an homage to Asian culture. Asian Americans disagreed with this assessment, declaring her performance “yellowface.”

A member of a dominant group can assume the traditional dress of a minority group for a Halloween party or a musical performance. Yet, they remain blissfully unaware of the roots of such dress and the challenges those who originated it have faced in Western society.

Although black musicians paved the way for the launch of rock-n-roll, their contributions to the artform were largely ignored in the 1950s and beyond. Instead, white performers who borrowed heavily from black musical traditions received much of the credit for creating rock music.

Thanks to the activism of academics and bloggers, clothing store chains such as Urban Outfitters and hipsters who sport a blend of boho-hippie-Native chic at music festivals are being called out for appropriating fashions from the indigenous community.

 

[BvBPL]

As it relates to food, specifically, cultural appropriation is particularly difficult to differentiate from intermingling. The banh mi, for example, is a traditional Vietnamese dish, but one that obviously owes a great deal to the French.

The whole thing is full up with hyperbole and nonsense. For example, Turner said the article deprives people of their right to be authentic. No it hasn't. No one was blocked, or ever will be blocked, from enjoying authentic pho because of a Bon Appétit article. The very notion is absurd.

 

[civman110]

Cultural appropriation is a joke.

 

[aelf]

There's usually an implicit but likely necessary element of cultural arrogance on the part of the appropriator that everyone kind of ignores - even among many of those who are against cultural appropriation. The pho episode is a very good example of that.

 

[Phrossack]

Eventually the complainers will probably lose. Italians may roll their eyes at how Americans make and eat pasta, but if ever they complain about "cultural appropriation," few would take them seriously.

 

[Hehehe]

So I recently came across this article in my Facebook feed. Some excerpts:


This got me curious on how exactly cultural appropriation is defined, so I found this definition offered by a professor and author at Fordham University (and quoted here):

This definition (taking cultural expressions "without permission") seems to be the working definition that most people use from what I've seen.

Some thoughts:

• Who provides "permission" to borrow "cultural expressions"? I reject the idea that culture can be "owned", because culture is not something that can be owned. While connected to intrinsically biological factors such as race or sex, it is not dependent on them. Culture is learned, which means that someone who does not grow up within a particular culture can still be knowledgeable or even an expert on said culture. I'll go farther...a "foreigner" can know more about your culture and respect it more than you do.
• Cultures are constantly changing in relation to each other simply by virtue of the interactions between cultures as well as technological innovation. What is the difference between cultural intermingling and cultural appropriation?
• It seems to me that most of the complaints of cultural appropriation are really complaints about the person doing the appropriating being the wrong race or gender, which seems to me a different thing entirely, but is lumped under the broader heading of "cultural". As I've already argued, culture is not dependent on race or sex because culture is not biological.
• Cultural mockery definitely exists, as does physical cultural theft (for example the wholesale plundering of cultural artifacts by colonial powers). Intellectual cultural theft also occurs, when one culture absorbs something from another culture and then claims it was their idea all along. I'm not disputing any of that. What I am disputing is that members of a particular culture have exclusive "rights" to the usage or expression of that culture, or that it's offensive when someone else expresses an element of that culture.

I hope I was at least somewhat coherent. Thoughts?

It baffles me as to why this is even an issue. Do people really have nothing better to do? If a white man cooks Asian food, does that diminish said foods? Are Asian people just going to go "damn our favorite dish has been ruined by white man I cannot eat this ever again".

There probably isn't a huge amount of people waiting to appropriate Finnish culture, but those that want to, are IMO completely free to do so. I see no reason why that would be an issue

 

[EgonSpengler]

To me, 'cultural appropriation' becomes a problem when the originators of XYZ don't get the credit and/or remuneration they deserve. There are some African-American blues and rock musicians who never got their due, but I imagine a lot of them are dead now.

The phenomenon of "whitewashing" also makes me really itchy, especially when it evokes uncomfortable chapters of our history. For instance, I think Asian-Americans might have a real bone to pick with the upcoming adaptations of the comic books Doctor Strange and Iron Fist. The former is already under fire for its casting of Tilda Swinton as The Ancient One. I sort of like the gender swap, but why not Maggie Cheung? Both adaptations also continue the "White guy goes to Asia and does the Asian thing better than the Asians themselves" trope, which in 2016 just makes me want to put a paper bag over my head. I'm also kind of holding my breath on next year's The Great Wall, which appears to feature Matt Damon saving Imperial China from monsters... hoo-boy... (this follows Damon's catastrophic conversation with Effie Brown on diversity in Hollywood). That film is directed by Zhang Yimou and costars Andy Lau, so it may just be that the previews are emphasizing Damon's role for American audiences who don't know who Zhang Yimou and Andy Lau are. I remember The Red Hot Chili Peppers getting a lot of attention back in the day for songs that were Stevie Wonder covers. Some people knew that, and some didn't.

 

[thecrazyscot]

There's usually an implicit but likely necessary element of cultural arrogance on the part of the appropriator that everyone kind of ignores - even among many of those who are against cultural appropriation. The pho episode is a very good example of that.

Would you mind clarifying where the cultural arrogance was? I honestly don't see it. Perhaps in the title of the video (“PSA: This Is How You Should Be Eating Pho.”), but that struck me as simply another example of the stupid click-bait titles people use...it doesn't even match the content of the video and seems to be clearly saying that this is just a great way to make pho. The chef is very clear that this is "his" approach to making pho, not that this is how you make pho correctly.

Eventually the complainers will probably lose. Italians may roll their eyes at how Americans make and eat pasta, but if ever they complain about "cultural appropriation," few would take them seriously.

I think pasta is a great example of cultural intermingling. Americans adopted it and do it in a way unique from Italians, but no one disputes where it came from.

 

[BvBPL]

There's usually an implicit but likely necessary element of cultural arrogance on the part of the appropriator that everyone kind of ignores - even among many of those who are against cultural appropriation. The pho episode is a very good example of that.

Bon Appetit was being arrogant? Oh no! I have never heard of a fine cooking and dining magazine being arrogant before, and certainly not one published by Conde Nast!

 

[aelf]

Would you mind clarifying where the cultural arrogance was? I honestly don't see it. Perhaps in the title of the video (“PSA: This Is How You Should Be Eating Pho.&#8221, but that struck me as simply another example of the stupid click-bait titles people use...it doesn't even match the content of the video and seems to be clearly saying that this is just a great way to make pho. The chef is very clear that this is "his" approach to making pho, not that this is how you make pho correctly.

The arrogance stems from the fact that whoever it was (apparently the chef might have been misquoted?) presented their way (i.e. without adding any additional sauces) as the authentic way of enjoying a foreign dish, contrary to how a great number of people whose culture the dish came from actually enjoy it.

Did they even present any evidence to back up this claim? None that I know of. So aren't they, then, being at least awfully presumptuous? And to claim authenticity and implicitly deny the way the dish is actually enjoyed in the culture it came from is certainly arrogant. It's a variation of 'the white man knows best' theme.

Bon Appetit was being arrogant? Oh no! I have never heard of a fine cooking and dining magazine being arrogant before, and certainly not one published by Conde Nast!

I don't understand how this is supposed to take away from the point I was making?


EDIT: I found a link to the video. I remember reading the original text a couple of weeks ago and it seemed kind of blatant, but the video can't be more obvious. Here's this white chef who claims that it "hurts" chefs to see people put sauce in their pho broth. Who are these chefs he's talking about? His fellow white hipster pho chefs? You can be sure that plenty of Vietnamese chefs see people put sauce in their broth and don't bat an eyelid. That's clearly an example of cluelessness and presumptuousness that seems to stem from his self-sure belief that he knows the truth(TM).

 

[thecrazyscot]

The arrogance stems from the fact that whoever it was (apparently the chef might have been misquoted?) presented their way (i.e. without adding any additional sauces) as the authentic way of enjoying a foreign dish, contrary to how a great number of people whose culture the dish came from actually enjoy it.

Did they even present any evidence to back up this claim? None that I know of. So aren't they, then, being at least awfully presumptuous? And to claim authenticity and implicitly deny the way the dish is actually enjoyed in the culture it came from is certainly arrogant. It's a variation of 'the white man knows best' theme.

You can still watch the video here.

So the chef demonstrates his way of making pho, but says that the beauty of pho is that it can be done any way you want. He demonstrates a chopstick trick (he "learned from his wife") to get more noodles in a bite. And he complains about people putting hoisin and sriracha in without tasting the broth first because as a chef he puts great effort into trying to make it flavorful and balancing the spices. But he never argues that it is the "improper" way to eat it. It all seemed super reasonable to me.

EDIT: Apparently you edited while I was typing. I don't see it the same way at all.

 

[aelf]

Yeah, no. As my edit adds, claiming that it "hurts" chefs to put sauce in the broth is just... idiotic (he says it in more than one way, and it gets even worse than how I describe it here). It's obviously not even true in most cases. So who is this guy trying to kid? Who gave him the authority to speak for the Vietnamese chefs who have been serving this dish before he was born? That's arrogance right there.

 

[trader/warrior]

The arrogance stems from the fact that whoever it was (apparently the chef might have been misquoted?) presented their way (i.e. without adding any additional sauces) as the authentic way of enjoying a foreign dish, contrary to how a great number of people whose culture the dish came from actually enjoy it.

Did they even present any evidence to back up this claim? None that I know of. So aren't they, then, being at least awfully presumptuous? And to claim authenticity and implicitly deny the way the dish is actually enjoyed in the culture it came from is certainly arrogant. It's a variation of 'the white man knows best' theme.

EDIT: I found a link to the video. I remember reading the original text a couple of weeks ago and it seemed kind of blatant, but the video can't be more obvious. Here's this white chef who claims that it "hurts" chefs to see people put sauce in their pho broth. Who are these chefs he's talking about? His fellow white hipster pho chefs? You can be sure that plenty of Vietnamese chefs see people put sauce in their broth and don't bat an eyelid. That's clearly an example of cluelessness and presumptuousness that seems to stem from his self-sure belief that he knows the truth(TM).

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/khanh-ho/bon-appetit-and-tyler-aki_b_11914924.html

The HuffPo article claims he "took" the advice from Andrea Nguyen, bestselling vietnamese chef (and of asian race because that matters, apparently), and had the audacity of using and spreading that advice while racially impure.

But the problem with Tyler’s advice is that it’s not theoretically sophisticated. It’s an oversimplification and a distillation...and it loses its nuance. For example, an outsider might explain to you about the broad outlines of kosher but somebody immersed in the traditions might explain more systematically the logic behind the restrictions. Andrea Nguyen, for instance, explains why you don’t add any sauce to the soup before you taste it: it clouds the soup; the purist tradition from which pho descends comes from the North of Vietnam where they are so persnickety, they don’t even add vegetables, let alone sauce; the soup is meant to be tasted at its very essence.

This is something that a connoisseur of pho—someone like Andrea Nguyen—knows and can explain. So Taylor, who mentions none of this, comes off as a frat boy teaching another frat boy moves—plays—that he can use to get some action on a date.

To me this seems like it's mostly a problem with the guys attitude and people basically being angered by his (admittedly quite sickening) hipsterness. Inserting race and cultural appropriation is just silly IMO, if not outright predjudiced and racist in a relatively mild way.

 

[thecrazyscot]

Yeah, no. As my edit adds, claiming that it "hurts" chefs to put sauce in the broth is just... idiotic (he says it in more than one way, and it gets even worse than how I describe it here). It's obviously not even true in most cases. So who is this guy trying to kid? Who gave him the authority to speak for the Vietnamese chefs who have been serving this dish before he was born? That's arrogance right there.

Except that you're wrong.

It was embellished with more of everything -- meat, noodles and broth. The practice of garnishing pho with bean sprouts, ngo gai (thorny cilantro), hung que (Thai/Asian basil) and lime was introduced. Diners also started adding tuong (bean sauce/hoisin sauce) directly to their bowls. This freewheeling, adulterated incarnation reflected the southern Vietnamese penchant for eating wildly complicated food and lots of it.

Then, as now, northern pho purists reacted with horror, decrying the loss of authenticity. Though philosophically liberating, tinkering with the sacred broth was an affront to strict northern cooks, whose pride and reputation rested in crafting a well-balanced bowl.

Seems to me the people complaining about this are probably primarily of southern Vietnamese descent who immigrated here during/after the Vietnam war, and who now think their way of cooking pho is the traditional way, which seems to fit the cultural appropriation bill quite nicely.

Anyhoo, yes, I think this video is a silly example of how "cultural appropriation" can be used to generate outrage without any substance behind the claims, which seem far more based in him being the "wrong" race than anything else.

 

[Manfred Belheim]

It would be interesting to see what the reaction would have been had the chef been black.

 

[aelf]

To me this seems like it's mostly a problem with the guys attitude and people basically being angered by his (admittedly quite sickening) hipsterness. Inserting race and cultural appropriation is just silly IMO, if not outright predjudiced and racist in a relatively mild way.

Yeah, you can excuse this one guy's display as merely an example of hipsterness gone wrong, but what about the magazine that decided to present it in the same way? How about whole industries that thrive on such displays? The whole phenomenon has a life of its own.

And, yes, race does play a part. Just like a white person physically beating a black person might be accused of committing a racist hate crime by virtue of being not black.

Cultural appropriation is harder to pin down than racism and it's, I believe, mostly harmless. Maybe it's a misnomer; maybe it's a shadow, a simulacrum. But much of the feelings that underlie it are legitimate. To a group of people who have spent a lot of their lives essentially being told, for example, that 'the white man' knows best, episodes like this one understandably elicit certain responses that range from eye-rolling to annoyance.

 

[thecrazyscot]

To me, 'cultural appropriation' becomes a problem when the originators of XYZ don't get the credit and/or remuneration they deserve. There are some African-American blues and rock musicians who never got their due, but I imagine a lot of them are dead now.

I think this is an important point, because I feel like the ridiculousness of many of these cultural appropriation claims cloud the horrible examples which really happened.

The phenomenon of "whitewashing" also makes me really itchy, especially when it evokes uncomfortable chapters of our history. For instance, I think Asian-Americans might have a real bone to pick with the upcoming adaptations of the comic books Doctor Strange and Iron Fist. The former is already under fire for its casting of Tilda Swinton as The Ancient One. I sort of like the gender swap, but why not Maggie Cheung? Both adaptations also continue the "White guy goes to Asia and does the Asian thing better than the Asians themselves" trope, which in 2016 just makes me want to put a paper bag over my head. I'm also kind of holding my breath on next year's The Great Wall, which appears to feature Matt Damon saving Imperial China from monsters... hoo-boy... (this follows Damon's catastrophic conversation with Effie Brown on diversity in Hollywood). That film is directed by Zhang Yimou and costars Andy Lau, so it may just be that the previews are emphasizing Damon's role for American audiences who don't know who Zhang Yimou and Andy Lau are. I remember The Red Hot Chili Peppers getting a lot of attention back in the day for songs that were Stevie Wonder covers. Some people knew that, and some didn't.

"Whitewashing" makes me twitch, too, but also for a partly different reason. In my mind it's all about the money, so they cast familiar stars who Americans will pay $20 to see in theaters. What makes me twitch is (a) the historical absurdity of it all...even in a fantasy movie where Matt Damon saves China from monsters, and (b) the cringeworthy trope that the white dude saves all these natives.

 

[thecrazyscot]

Yeah, you can excuse this one guy's display as merely an example of hipsterness gone wrong, but what about the magazine that decided to present it in the same way? How about whole industries that thrive on such displays? The whole phenomenon has a life of its own.

Except that, as it turns out, the magazine was presenting the more traditional way of cooking pho. Just because the chef may be a boor doesn't make it cultural appropriation.

 

[BvBPL]

Who gave him the authority to speak for the Vietnamese chefs who have been serving this dish before he was born? That's arrogance right there.

From whom should he have obtained permission?

Let’s face it, we all know that the Vietnamese-American Food Purity Association does not have the capacity to deal with the massive number of requests that it receives from white people to talk about Vietnamese food. As the sole regulatory authority that governs white people eating Vietnamese food, it is understaffed and nonresponsive to applicants. Its enforcement division is toothless. It is no surprise that some white people have done end runs around the VAFPA and enjoyed pho outside of its authority.

Really this should come a wake-up call that the various associations, guilds, and unions that oversee white people eating ethnic foods are ineffective and cumbersome, at best. I think the time has come for us to discuss dismantling this system in favor of a more permissive, self-regulatory system of white people eating food.

 

[aelf]

Except that you're wrong.

Seems to me the people complaining about this are probably primarily of southern Vietnamese descent who immigrated here during/after the Vietnam war, and who now think their way of cooking pho is the traditional way, which seems to fit the cultural appropriation bill quite nicely.

Anyhoo, yes, I think this video is a silly example of how "cultural appropriation" can be used to generate outrage without any substance behind the claims, which seem far more based in him being the "wrong" race than anything else.

Seems like you're keen on proving the point yourself.

How does it even cross your mind to say that I am "wrong", when the article you cited says that that is how the Southern Vietnamese enjoy the dish (i.e. by adding extra sauces) - the people who then, by your own admission, brought the dish to America and passed on the knowledge to white chefs? Who is the more authentic?

Nobody except that chef (and now you, it seems) is claiming that there is one authentic and traditional way of enjoying the dish. People are simply saying that the claim to authenticity is BS. And I'm saying that the claim that it "hurts" chefs to see the dish being 'adulterated' by sauces is ridiculous and generally untrue.

I don't foresee this discussion going anywhere.

From whom should he have obtained permission?

Let’s face it, we all know that the Vietnamese-American Food Purity Association does not have the capacity to deal with the massive number of requests that it receives from white people to talk about Vietnamese food. As the sole regulatory authority that governs white people eating Vietnamese food, it is understaffed and nonresponsive to applicants. Its enforcement division is toothless. It is no surprise that some white people have done end runs around the VAFPA and enjoyed pho outside of its authority.

Really this should come a wake-up call that the various associations, guilds, and unions that oversee white people eating ethnic foods are ineffective and cumbersome, at best. I think the time has come for us to discuss dismantling this system in favor of a more permissive, self-regulatory system of white people eating food.

It hurts most people to even talk to lawyer types on a rhetorical quest of trying to be ironic to prove an elusive point.