Ethical dilemma re: "Southwestern" patterns

[TheLeadbetterLife]

I've been tying myself in knots over a beautiful pair of 2016 Ralph Lauren evening trousers that I found in a vintage shop - can't decide whether to buy them. I took them to have an Art Deco pattern, but on further research I've discovered they're actually "southwestern" i.e. Native American-inspired. Albeit not very obviously.

I think cultural appropriation is a very complex issue, and I don't always agree with the more angsty-left arguments on the subject. However, I do feel in the case of these type of patterns, which have origins in a very current culture that has only been producing them for a couple of hundred years, that fashion designers ought to be licensing them, not brushing it off as paying tribute to a magical culture blah blah. It's exoticisation, and designers should pay up, just like they do if they want to emblazon Mickey Mouse or Harry Potter on a t-shirt.

All that said, the trousers are so pretty!

I'm interested in people's thoughts more generally on this issue, aside from whether I should buy the trousers.

It’s completely different.

But it suits the OP to muddle it all up together to create a possible route to offence.

LOL at Ralph Lauren clothes being designed by only one man and not a vast army of designers and textile experts.

Copyright normally expires 70 years after the creator's death in the UK and US (I have to work with copyright laws a lot for work). Quite a lot of Native American art will fall within that timeframe. We're not talking about an ancient civilisation here.

They are second hand. Designer rights have gone.

Personally I think taking from other cultures makes people appreciative. If you can see the beauty in others artist expressions it’s not a bad thing. Better we see it Native American than just “ southwestern”.

Without doing a DNA test how can anyone be sure?

And copyright doesn't have to be "legally generated", it automatically applies to any original work.

My approach is to try to purchase items with a specific cultural design directly from creators of that ethnicity or background. For those saying that this is a new thing, I don't think it really is I think people are just more aware now and there are more platforms for indigenous creators to speak out about the effects cultural appropriation has on them and their communities. Therefore younger people have more access to the information as they're more active on social media etc but the issue stems from hundreds of years of white people oppressing the expression of other cultures while simultaneously taking designs, fabrics, artwork and other heritage items from indigenous communities at minimal cost (if not stolen completely) and then sold on to other white people at a significant mark up. The concept of cultural appropriation to me, is about acknowledging this still happens today, and all the people of colour who should have been acknowledged and paid for their work. It's also acknowledging the less favorable difference in attitude, an indigenous person may receive when wearing heritage items, compared to a white person wearing those same items.

It depends on how ethically you want to shop really and everyone will draw a different line in that. For me I'd be less concerned about vintage items that have been pre-owned and I'd rather support a charity shop or similar than a big brand. I think op if you're looking a debate, the aibu thread might be a better place for your question about the trousers than on here. Worrying about this doesn't make you a grade a twat.. at least you're aware of your privilege unlike some.

Is this the sort of thing you're referring to?

Personally I think these are pretty awful and I'm struggling to see much difference between them and completely naff "Indian" Halloween costumes.

Ralph Lauren southwestern joggers
Ralph Lauren fair isle.
Ralph Lauren southwestern jacket

I think in this context it's inspiration, not appropriation. Textile and art designs have always borrowed and developed between and across cultures.

This is the argument fashion designers often make, yes.

If I nicked a design from an unknown artist in Cornwall from the 1950s, used it in an extremely successful and lucrative clothing line, could I pass off any objection from the original artist as me appreciating the beautiful Cornish culture?

If those joggers are offensive then we'd better cancel the 90s.

I would love to see the trousers - and FWIW - I would buy them if they fitted... but as I am a size 16, it's unlikely. Do you live in a place that has particularly fabulous second hand shops?

I do like that you're approaching this from the copyright angle rather than the usual white people can't wear clothes from X or Y cultures claptrap. You are talking about an actual design not something like dreadlocks, and this is an interesting discussion.

If I nicked a design from an unknown artist in Cornwall from the 1950s, used it in an extremely successful and lucrative clothing line, could I pass off any objection from the original artist as me appreciating the beautiful Cornish culture?
If you lift it as a copy and paste then that's problematic. Other companies in hyper fast fashion have been criticised for it too.

If you said "I like that sort of art" and then went away and created something inspired by what you liked about it then nobody is likely to care because nobody can seriously say that only people from Cornwall in the 1950s or have a verifiable link to Cornwall are allowed to do any art in that style.

Who is to say Ralph doesn’t identify as a Native American?

@LolaSmiles yes I would think that's the difference. Stealing an actual design from a specific artist regardless of their heritage or the copyright chief's heritage would definitely be a no no. Something inspired by Cornish or other cultures is not stealing its more sharing IMO. But would be interesting to see the legal perspective on it if there is one.

I thought you did mean Cornish when you said southwestern 😀

I don’t buy into cultural appropriation. But also those trousers are awful, if that was the inspiration for this thread. Interesting discussion.

This is exactly the issue for me - I don't agree with the notion that culture should be siloed, and cultural appropriation arguments often play out ad absurdum for that reason. There has always been an exchange of culture and art wherever human societies have come into contact.

But this is modern art. Ralph Lauren has been using "southwestern" designs for decades. There is absolutely no reason why he couldn't have collaborated with living Native American artists - who are numerous and still creating these kinds of patterns - and pay them handsomely to adapt their designs. It would show the same respect shown to any other modern artist.

I think these days fashion designers are increasingly doing that, actually, but it's interesting that the "appreciating magical native culture" excuse was still being used so recently.

Those are not the trousers by the way!

It's the ones from this suit that I found, sans jacket. On their own they look very Deco.

Yes. Ralph Lauren could have collaborated with designers from that tribe where the design originated. He is someone who does have influence power and privilege unlike an ordinary mumsnetter wearing her hair in box braids or whatever.

"appreciating magical native culture" excuse was still being used so recently

Oh good fortunately you are here to tell us how to appreciate other cultures in a way that we won’t need an ‘excuse’ for.

Of course it is legally generated. Yes, it automatically applies to any original work of artistic craftsmanship, but that automaticity is created by specific pieces of legislation or international copyright agreements. The moral concerns surrounding cultural appropriation are in principal distinct from the legal concerns around copyright theft.
Typically, the cultural forms that get raided by commercial designers etc are common to an entire tradition, and are consciously used and re-used by individual artists within that tradition. That makes them profoundly different from the more individualistic form of intellectual property protected by copyright law, which explicitly rewards innovation/originality.
Not saying your concerns around cultural appropriation ren't valid. Just suggesting that copyright is very much not the right way of validating them.

Do you usually do exhaustive research on google into the fabric patterns of a pair of trousers you like the look of ?
That sounds quite wearing.

I think you have too much time on your hands to give a pair of trousers this much thought. Just go and buy a nice plain pair from some organic cotton shop.

No, I just happened to look these up because they were a specific designer and I was trying to find the year. All the fashion editorials I found are full of praise for the "Navajo-inspired" evening wear.

People are so angry on this thread. That seems quite wearing.

@TheLeadbetterLife Thank you for posting a photo of the trousers, I was dying of curiosity of what they looked like! 😁