CHARGING “CULTURAL APPROPRIATION”: A STRANGE ASSAULT ON DIVERSITY AND CREATIVITY BY ALLAN C. BROWNFELD———————————————————————————————————————————-A new charge is rapidly spreading as a means to challenge diversity and creativity: that of “cultural appropriation.” In
New York, “Emmett Till: A New American Opera,” recently premiered at
John Jay College. It has stirred controversy because composer Mary D.
Watkins, is black, and librettist and playwright Clare Coss is white,
while the subject, Emmett Till, is black. The controversy has arisen
because of Coss’s race and her prominent inclusion of a white character
whose gradual change in perspective is key narrative portion of the
performance.The Black Opera Alliance, a
coalition of black opera artists, issued a statement declaring, in
part, “…we denounce the telling of this historic story by a white woman
and from a white vantage point. It is time for black creators to be
given opportunities to expand the operatic canon with authentic
storytelling from our own perspectives.”
Watkins, a
Howard University trained composer, defended Coss’s libretto as well as
her right to write it. She said that, “Even though there are many
artists of color involved in this project, , the critics are assuming
that we had no impact on the final shape of the piece and that the
playwright has somehow forced all of us to tell her story. It is an
insult to me as a black woman and to the cast members who are African
American.”Emmett Till was 14 in 1955,
when he was accused of flirting with a white woman, Carolyn Bryant,
while at her family’s Mississippi grocery store. Days later, Till was
abducted, beaten and lynched by two white men—-her husband Roy Bryant
and Roy’s half-brother J.W. Milan—-who were tried and acquitted. Later,
under protection from double jeopardy, they confessed to the killing.In
another recent instance, British Academy Award-winning actress Helen
Mirren was criticized for being chosen to play former Israeli Prime
Minister Golda Meir in a movie. Another British actress, Dame Maureen
Lipman, argued that Meir should not be played by someone who is not
Jewish. Helen Mirren responded: “If someone who is not Jewish can’t
play Jewish (characters), can someone who’s Jewish play someone who’s
not Jewish?” She compared the debate to that around theatrically
casting gay characters. “I know actors like Ian McClellan would, I
think, take big issue with that because what happens then if you’re a
gay actor? Shouldn’t you be able to play straight parts. Is this
really a path we want to go down?”Acting,
after all, is a form of make believe. Mirren notes that, “I’m from
Essex. Can an Essex girl play a woman from Newcastle? I’m sure there’s
a lot of fabulous lasses from there who would object to my portrayal.”John
McWhorter, a professor at Columbia University, who is black, argues
that cultural borrowing and cross-fertilization is generally a positive
thing and is something which is usually done out of admiration and not
with intent to harm the cultures being imitated. In his view, the
specific term “appropriation,” which can mean theft, is misleading when
applied to something like culture that is not seen by all as a limited
resource.Conservative columnist Jonah
Goldberg described cultural appropriation as a positive thing and
dismissed opposition to it as a product of some people’s desire to be
offended. Kwame Anthony Appiah , ethics columnist for the New York
Times said that the term “cultural appropriation” incorrectly labels
contemptuous behavior as a property crime. He notes that, “The key
question in the age of symbols or regalia associated with another
identity group is not, what are my rights of ownership? Rather, it’s:
Are my actions disrespectful?”Author
Lionel Shriver says that authors from a cultural majority have a right
to write in the voice of someone from a cultural minority, attacking the
idea that this constitutes cultural appropriation. Referring to a case
in which U.S. college students are facing disciplinary action for
wearing sombreros at a tequila party, Shriver said, “The moral of the
sombrero scandals is clear: you’re not supposed to try on other people’s
hats. Yet that’s what we’re paid to do, isn’t it? Step into other
people’s shoes and try on their hats.”In
winning the 2019 Booker Prize, Bernardine Evanisto dismissed the
concept of cultural appropriation, stating that it is ridiculous to
demand of writers that they “not write beyond their own culture.”
Writing in The Atlantic, Jenni Arens declares that, “Borrowing from
other cultures isn’t just inevitable, it’s potentially positive….Let’s
banish the idea that appropriating elements of another’s culture is
itself problematic. Such borrowing is how we got treasures such as New
York pizza and Japanese denim—-not to mention how the West got
democratic discourse and the calendar….In the 21st century, cultural
appropriation, like globalization, isn’t just inevitable, it’s
potentially positive. We have to stop guarding cultures and subcultures
in efforts to preserve them. It’s naive, paternalistic and
counterproductive, plus it’s just not how culture and creativity work.
The exchange of ideas, styles, and traditions is one of the joys of a
modern multicultural society.”Susan
Scafodi, a lawyer and the author of, “Who Owns Culture?: Appropriation
and Authenticity in American Culture,” says, “It’s not fair to ask any
culture to freeze itself in time and live as though they were a museum
diorama. Cultural appropriation can sometimes be the savior of a
cultural product that has faded away.”Anne
Tyler, an author who has sold ten million books and won the Pulitzer
Prize in 1989, says she is horrified by the implications of today’s
cancel culture on literature: “I should be allowed to write a novel
from the point of view of a black man without being accused of
appropriation. I’m astonished by the appropriation issue. It would be
very foolish for me to write a novel from the point of view of a black
man, but I think I should be allowed to do it.”The
concept of cultural appropriation is deeply flawed and is being used as
another way to silence the voices of some with whom the advocates of
our growing cancel culture disagree. It is clearly time to categorize
it as the assault upon free speech and genuine diversity which it is. ##