The Problem with the Cultural Appropriation Debate

A topic of discussion that I have noticed appearing frequently on social media lately is that of cultural appropriation. Cultural appropriation is concerned with the ethics of appropriating different aspects of different cultures in art, pop culture, and media, particularly in a way that is exploitative.

First, let’s get some clarity, since I didn’t know much about the subject myself and had to do my research; The debate surrounding culture-appropriation typically involves the terms ‘appropriation’ that is, “to take or use (something) especially in a way that is illegal, unfair, etc.” and compares it with ‘appreciation’ (“to understand the worth or importance of (something or someone”).

There are two sides to this debate. One side believes that cultural appropriation can be disrespectful, offensive, and insensitive, while the other believes cultural appropriation is a mythical construct imagined by ‘feminazis’ and PC (politically correct) fanatics wanting something to complain about. There are plenty of shades between these polarised views, but on the internet, the extremes dominate.

On one level, I see the validity of arguments damning cultural appropriation: it’s never ok to make anyone feel bad about themselves, and it’s definitely not okay to exploit the cultures of others in demeaning and disrespectful ways. For example, I understand that an Indian feather head-dress will look rad with your next music fest outfit, but in Native American culture that head-dress was once only allowed to be one by warriors and chiefs who earned each feather by accomplishing one courageous deed at a time. Herein lies the difference between appropriation and appreciation; I cannot speak for all head-dress-wearing music-festival party legends, but I would venture a guess that most would not appreciate this, and therefore i question whether the choice of garment is really respectful.

Being blind to the positions of minorities and less fortunate cultures and religions and furthermore being disrespectful to these cultures, direct or indirect, is also not okay. On another level, I believe that harmonious coexistence between races and cultures will flourish through appreciation and sharing of different cultural ideas, designs, artefacts etc.

Ultimately, however, I struggle to show my support for any of these ideas simply because I do not want to get involved in unnecessarily hyped up, hostile and often greatly misinformed internet fights.

Many people refuse to believe cultural appropriation exists simply because they do not want to be associated with SJWs (social justice warriors) or feminazis. They also discredit and remain indifferent to these ideas because the way that they are presented is often in an hysterical, OTT mindset that is, ironically, socially unnacceptable.

The whole debate, thus, has turned from a well-informed discussion about respecting each other as human beings into a petty argument often confused by individual egos and opinions. The environment that the internet offers for discussing ideas like this can easily become hostile and unpleasant when frustrated people feel they aren’t being heard. It’s like two people covering their ears and screaming across a room at eachother. If we’re to have any chance of taking full advantage of the amazing potential of the internet for communication and connection, we need to find ways to ensure that everyone feels respected, that everyone feels heard, and that the outcome is not to prove a point, but to learn.

Should we Prioritise Psychology in Media Studies?

In 2015, the subject Psychology was the most popular subject among VCE students; at the school I attended, there were two full classes out of our 80 student cohort studying the subject. However, only a handful of these students studied Media as well, or went on to study a Media based subject after high school. I did not study it with an ill-informed prejudice against science subjects, and now I wish I did.

In my New Media New Asia class, our current assessment is to pitch an idea for a mobile app that informs its users of how they can be more sustainable citizens. One group came up with the idea of getting users to donate to charities, however the idea would have some flaws if put into action.

Firstly, human beings, as put by my tutor, tend to be selfish. By understanding this inherent selfishness that is evident in human nature, the designer of an app like this could give incentive for the user to donate, and also feel as though they have been personally fulfilled in some way.

Take the ALS Ice Bucket Challenge for example; the campaign to  raised over $100 million in donations, and was immensely succesfully. My understanding is that the challenge, while allowing all sorts of people globally to raise awareness and donate money, also gratified some subconscious selfish desires to be noticed or admired.

What the Ice Bucket Challenge did was that it had people showing off that they had been nominated, indicating that they had popularity. Secondly, it involved people showing off that they were ‘generous’. In fact, many people who did the challenge did not necessarily donate, but rather they wanted to simply show everyone they knew, and the whole world, that they had done an uncomfortable and amusing challenge.

In summation, the brains behind the challenge knew that they could make a campaign successful by creating a rewarding incentive for anyone who joined. The challenge placed ordinary people on the same level as celebrities and movie stars, becoming one of the most successful social media campaigns in the last few years. Understanding psychology was key to making the Ice Bucket Challenge go viral.

My Take on Casey Neistat

Modern media and communication technologies has given way to a whole plethora of talented people able to present themselves to a mass audience online. The majority of these talents and figures that become known worldwide are YouTube ‘vloggers,’ who blog regularly on a video based platform. And today, I want to discuss the interesting personality that is Casey Neistat.

Neistat is a filmmaker, producer, vlogger, co-founder of his own social media app (Beme), and also a very adventurous man. He has travelled so far that he has essentially gone around the globe several times, and thus has had an incredibly fulfilled life so far and he is only 34. His films, including his vlogs, are visually and technically stunning. While sometimes he prefers a point and shoot Canon Powershot to his marvellous EOS 5D Mark III DSLR, his films and videos maintain an elegantly edited and smooth finish. He is a respected media practitioner and producer, and working as a freelance commercial director has allowed his reputation to skyrocket and he has landed countless projects with companies such as Nike, Mercedes-Benz, Google and J Crew.

I just have one issue: the guy can’t keep a camera intact for more than about 30 seconds. Consistently, he has had mishaps involving dropping, breaking and damaging his cameras and having to buy new ones. If all heroes have a fatal flaw, his is that despite his incredible talent and inspiring productions, his technologies can barely withstand his active lifestyle.

The first time I became really aware of this fact, and also when I questioned my respect for him, was when I watched his 78th vlog, ‘Quitter.’ In it, he ranted for a few moments about the inadequacy of SD cards in his Canon EOS 70D DSLR, and then proceeded to gratuitously axe the camera before immediately buying a brand new 5D Mark III. It was in this moment that I, a broke university first year, saw Neistat in a much less favourable light. To myself I thought, How dare he destroy the camera I can only dream of having and then calling its superior a ‘piece of crap’?

At the same time however, I still respect Neistat. If I saw him in the street, I would lose my cool and make an enormous embarrassment of myself trying to say hi to him. The thing is, this one big part that I dislike about him does something that I don’t see alot from other YouTube personalities; it humanises him and reminds me that even though he is an extraordinary human being, he’s still just a human being. That’s what I think that I admire most in Casey Neistat, being able to get a better sense of his personality. As my own films and photography are greatly inspired by his style of visual media, it is refreshing to get an understanding of how other creative minds think, work and act.

My Take on Filming with Sound

PB3’s deadline is just around the corner, and today I have just about wrapped up shooting the original footage for the final cut.

My only problem is: I am not used to editing or producing films with dialogue or externally recorded audio. I haven’t done so much as stretched my wings beyond little experimental timelapses and music videos.

My first problem that I am encountering is recording audio. To put it bluntly, I simply don’t enjoy recording audio, whether I am using an H2N Zoom or my iPhone 6. Conceptually and technically, I struggle with understanding how to edit or improve sound that has already been recorded; alot of the time, I cringe at the quality of what I’ve recorded, particularly if it’s my own voice.

Jumping that hurdle and getting over the fact that I have an issue with understanding aural media is not something that I am keen on doing. But I’ll need to do something about it if I want to improve and appreciate the quality of my productions more.

Cartoons are Just for Kids

That title probably “triggered” a few people out there so let me defuse the situation first and foremost: You just got clickbaited, without the clicking and redirecting to another page, unless you actually clicked on my blog, in which case: good for you!

Now. Are cartoons JUST for kids? How about we discuss what makes up a “cartoon.” From Merriam-Webster online dictionary:
Cartoon: (noun) A film or television show made by photographing a series of drawings : an animated film or television show

What part of this definition restricts cartoons to children? From this definition, anything made up of a series of drawings could be a cartoon; it could be gory, horrifying, lewd, surreal, anything. So why do we assume that anything that is ‘cartoon’ is something appropriate for children?

Let me elaborate: one of my all time favourite films is Hayao Miyazaki’s anime classic, Princess Mononoke (1997) which I first watched when I was about 9 or 10 years old. At the time, I believed the old “cartoons are for kids” thing, and imagine my astonishment when I saw limbs being lopped off and heads being slashed off at that tender age? It wasn’t until my parents actually checked closely did they realise that this cartoon was rated M15+ – i.e. Big no-no for 10 year old me (sidenote, I knew the whole time what its official rating was. I think the opening scenes with the big wormy boar gave it away; but it was a fantastic film, so sue me right?) Anyway, they decided the damage was done and let me watch it anyway.

Basically, what I am trying to get at here is that parents need to be more aware of a) how to check for and understand media classifications and b) they need to work out what they’re okay with their kids watching and consuming. I’ll also point out that I think I’m fairly liberal with what I believe younger people should and shouldn’t be allowed to consume, within reason. It’s so simple for us to assume at a glance that a cartoon is kid friendly, but the fact is there are so many animated films and television shows out there that parents would never let within 50 feet of their children if they knew what they were getting into; and they’re a click away from us all.

Parents need to be told that classifications aren’t put on movies, cartoons or video games just for decoration; the graphic designers probably hate having to ruin their gorgeous cover art with a little 18+ sticker. I’ve heard too often of kids going into stores like JB Hifi or EB Games etc. with their parents and getting copies of stuff like Princess Mononoke, DeadpoolDead Space 3 or other media texts with ratings of R18+ simply because we are made to believe too easily that video games, superhero films and animated series are ‘just for kids.’ No, they aren’t all for kids. Check your ratings; it’s not the media company’s fault that parent’s don’t take classification ratings seriously.