There is a difference between cultural appropriation and appreciating a culture. Many fashion designers have yet to realize this.
Cultural appropriation is a growing problem in the fashion industry. In their hunt for “new” designs, fashionistas steal the cultural heritage of indigenous people, including sacred traditional patterns and symbols.
Appropriation happens when designers rip off another culture’s imagery without proper credit.
This is insensitive and it is theft. Fashion designers know it can be difficult to prove and have ways to divorce the original source with the purloined imagery.
This problem has been normalized and is now confused with the term “cultural appreciation.” If designers become genuinely interested and understand the traditions of a specific culture while working with the community, that qualifies as “appreciation.” Otherwise, it is appropriation and stealing.
Indigenous-rights activist and attorney Brigitte Vézina described at the 7th International Copycamp Conference three causes of appropriation: the appeal of the aesthetics, lack of protections of cultural elements and misinformation in regards to the term “cultural appropriation.”
“Culturally, it is an attack on the cultural integrity of the owners,” she said. “On a socio-political level it is also an attack on their loss of identity. It is experienced often as another form of domination or exploitation or even colonization.”
Indigenous people gain nothing from the expensive apparel sold by famous designers. This perpetuates to the poverty many indigenous communities experience.
“They might be deprived of the sales of their genuine, authentic products,” Vézina said.
It is insulting to indigenous communities that their culture is celebrated by others not for historical value but for aesthetics. Adopting ethnic elements with no intention to treasure or understand them is disrespectful.
It is understandable that influential designers seek inspiration. What is unacceptable is taking elements without acknowledging and sharing the benefits with members of the culture.
Chidi Oguamanam, an expert in intellectual property and author of the article “Rethinking Copyright for Indigenous People Creatives Works,” wrote it can be difficult for marginalized groups to protect their sacred traditions.
“The real problem lies is in the fact that colonial copyright laws simply do not meet or fit the understandings and expectations of Indigenous creators and knowledge holders,” he wrote. “When Indigenous peoples resort to copyright laws for protection of their literary and artistic creations, they find that these protections fall short, because more often than not they fail to account for the intangible essences, spirituality or symbolism – not to mention the collective communal and transgenerational interests – that are attached to those works.”
Native American designer Bethany Yellowtail was offended when she saw Kokon to Zai, a London label, present a dress that held significant resemblance to one of her designs and traditional patterns of Native American culture at New York’s 2015 Fashion Week.
“To be honest, [it] took the wind out of me, this felt really personal,” Yellowtail said, “like an attack on me as a Native person.”
Powerful designers must create a respectful environment with cultural transactions done with responsibility and awareness. Indigenous artists should be able to draw on their heritage without being poached by the industry. Desecrating traditions sacred to others should always be out of bounds.
If cultural elements are used in a design, they should be included with the appropriate involvement of the original creators and with respect.
