In ancient times, travel was an arduous endeavor that often led to death, and civilizations were self-contained entities. The Romans existed at the same time as the Han dynasty in China, but neither the former nor the latter were aware of the other’s existence. The Romans created Roman art – influenced by Greek culture, or appropriating it, depending on your point of view – and the Han Chinese invented noodles. Noodles eventually made their way to the Romans and now we have spaghetti, which, served with garlic and clams, is a delicious example of cultural appropriation.
Today, the descendants of the Han know the descendants of the Romans. They exist side by side in a mixture of cultures, a perpetual dialogue. Art is one of the languages of this dialogue. The purpose of art itself is the conversation that occurs between the creator and the observer. But in the swirling mists of the recent cultural revolution, a chilling edict has emerged: no borrowing.
How are artists, especially novelists, supposed to function in these circumstances? The new rules are vague; the sanctions are severe. On the Internet, mobs attack authors who deviate from the exclusive description of their own community. Books are “cancelled” by publishers. Authors give up publishing their own books for fear of the chaos that would ensue.
In the United States, writers who identify as “white” are strongly discouraged from creating characters who are not. In a society as multi-ethnic as America, this poses an obvious problem. An American novelist tells American stories, and telling American stories that only involve white people is an incredible strain on the process.
Just a few years ago, if a white novelist wrote a book without black characters, he risked seeing his work condemned for being “too white” and, consequently, a little racist. Today, this same novelist is told that the creation of black characters is cultural appropriation and is therefore verbotenand I don’t use a German word by chance.
Could Marc Twain publish “Huckleberry Finn” today?
It is difficult to determine what is acceptable to the current gatekeepers of American culture, because boundaries are conveyed through a look and a nod. The only unwavering demand seems to be that writers must reinforce the current progressive political agenda, and that cultural appropriation would get you excommunicated. Dare to point out the parallel between this philosophy and that of the medieval Catholic Church, and you will be called a reactionary.
Let me name some specific acts of cultural appropriation. The Ladies of Avignon : Picasso saw African masks, which illuminated part of his brain, and the result was a cornerstone of modernism. Inspired by an exhibition of Japanese art in 19th-century London, Gilbert and Sullivan created the operetta The Mikado – their very British vision of Japanese culture. In his novel Huckleberry FinnMark Twain introduces us to the character of the black slave, Jim, Huck’s friend, who plays a major role in the book.
If Mark Twain wrote Huckleberry Finn today, it’s a safe bet that his agent would refuse to submit the manuscript to traditional publishers. Produce The Mikado in 2023 could end the careers of those who have the audacity to do so. As for Picasso, his problems today go beyond his borrowings from African art – some are calling for him to be “cancelled” because of his personal behavior. The achievements of these artists are now compromised by a shift in fashionable societal ethics. Everyone has the right to have their own opinion on all this and debate on the subject is even desirable. But in America, the current conversation lacks nuance.
Of course, the history of cultural appropriation has a dark side. When Elvis Presley appeared, rock ‘n’ roll music had already been invented by black artists. These black artists produced records that sold to primarily black buyers and no one got rich. In 1954, Sam Phillips, the white man who founded Presley’s label, Sun Records, realized that if he could take that black sound and put it in a gyrating white package, it would make a big deal. silver. Elvis’ success paved the way for the Beatles, etc.
Cultural appropriation is therefore a complex subject. Yet, without it, we would only have folk culture, traditional creative work specific to a homogeneous group and associated with historical continuity. Irish dancing, Colombian pottery, Indian sitar. There is nothing wrong with these cultures; some of them are magnificent and everyone is free to appreciate them more than any other cultures. But a country where only folklore was allowed would be like Disney World – it’s fine for a day, but if I had to live there I’d lose my mind.
Taco Tuesday
In America, there are minor cases of cultural appropriation that some people still find offensive, because in America there is always someone willing to be offended. “Taco Tuesday” is a promotional slogan used by non-Mexican restaurateurs to sell tacos, a Mexican dish. Since this is America, there are well-meaning white people who think this expression lacks respect for Mexican culture. Let’s ask: Given the threat of Donald Trump’s possible re-election, is it worth getting upset over “Taco Tuesday”? If cultural appropriation is the way to achieveUlysses by James Joyce – an Irish-Greek mash-up with a Jewish protagonist – frankly, “Taco Tuesday” is a small price to pay.
More seriously, there is the case of the painter Dana Schutz and the Whitney Biennial, a major New York museum that exhibits the works of some of the most important American artists every two years. In 2018, Schutz exhibited a painting at the Biennale depicting the corpse of Emmet Till in an open coffin. Emmet Till was a 14-year-old Black boy murdered by racists in Mississippi in 1955 for whistling at a white woman, and he is an icon of the civil rights movement. I saw this painting at the Whitney Biennial. It is a powerful work. But the fact that the painting was in the exhibition created a scandal, because Dana Schutz is a white woman. It doesn’t matter that his intentions were respectful, that the painting was designed to attack racism and highlight the terrible suffering of Emmet Till. Those upset said that Dana Schutz had no right to represent this image, that she had transgressed by creating this work and that it should never have been exhibited. Dana Schutz is an American artist who created a historical painting. Does she only have the right to paint the history of white America? The painting has not been exhibited since. Artists and writers now self-censor. No one wants to risk being excluded from the collective of right-thinking people.
Magpie thief
Personally, I’m a magpie. I borrow, I steal, I mix and match to create something that I hope is vibrant and new. America is a complex, turbulent and multicultural country. We are loud and there are a lot of people. Blackface is terrible. It’s the equivalent of someone putting on a prosthetic nose and declaring themselves Jewish. On the other hand, if someone put on an artificial nose to make fun of anti-Semitism, I don’t see the problem. Context and intention are key. The most compelling art doesn’t recognize boundaries, it pushes them.
Writing about characters from backgrounds other than our own provides an opportunity to explore different worlds with sincere curiosity, and to examine how those worlds affect the psyches of the characters who inhabit them. This is intended to arouse empathy in the reader. The creation of any work of art is a social act. What is a great novel if not a person trying to connect with another in a new way? It is fundamentally unartistic to expect a writer to stay on your side of the fence, especially today, because while the left wastes its time complaining about cultural appropriation, the right, she bans books. If we want to have a healthy society, this is a much bigger problem.
* Seth Greenland is a novelist and screenwriter. He has just published American plantranslated by Liana Levi.