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.

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.

Well yes, again, that's what the fashion designers would say, but is this true, or a justification? If they're not collaborating with artists in that tradition, how can they know for sure?

Damien Hirst uses a lot of repetitive coloured dots in his art. I could argue it's just polka-dots and rip it off. I might well win a copyright case with that argument too, these things are never cut-and-dried.

I don’t wholly believe in appropriation as a concept, not going to go into why here, but I do believe that if you’re into an aesthetic or (if it’s the written word or cinema) interested in a particular culture or view-point it’s a good idea to educate yourself and put your money where your taste is. I suppose what I mean is support the originators, not those who’ve capitalised on the desirable part. So, if you like Native American patterns, get yourself online and support indigenous creators. Second hand breeks won’t damage anyone (well, you could make the argument it feeds the supply) but supporting an actual person might make a big difference.

The "Indian" Halloween costumes are people playing dress-up in a very stereotypical image of Native Americans, a sort of cartoon image. Meanwhile, here we're just talking about using a pattern on a piece of everyday clothing. Not the same thing.

The links say they're 'inspired by American southwest'. I don't see anything wrong with these type of prints or so-called 'Aztec prints', which look similar despite the Aztecs being quite a bit south of the American southwest. I also don't see why the middle one (which doesn't open for me because it's a tracking link) is here - the fair isle pattern is a Scottish one; are you also saying only Shetlanders should be wearing it?

I think you have a point that at least is worth considering OP. The issue for me is that the American First Nations suffered brutally at the hands of European settlers and for that reason appropriating aspects of their designs into fashion seems almost adding insult to injury.

RL and his team collaborating with First Nations craftspeople and designers and acknowledging their input seems very different to just going " hey , those cute Navajo blankets would look cool as trousers"

We're not what????????

The Fair Isle doesn't actually look like Fair Isle, but taking this further traditional producers of Fair Isle do get hacked off at cheap, mass produced crap being passed off as Fair Isle.

The joggers I linked don't to my eyes look any better than Halloween costumes.

https://www.vogue.com/fashion-shows/fall-2016-ready-to-wear/ralph-lauren/slideshow/details#2

They're not these ones are they?

We're not. This is a modern society co-existing in a nation of multiple modern societies, with varying ancestries. Treating them like they're living in the Mysterious Cities of Gold is part of the problem.

Retailers can sell any old shite they want, provided it doesn’t break the law, and customers can wear whatever derivative old shite they want - and so contribute to the overall dilution and devaluation of the aesthetic - provided they have sufficient money and desire to do do. The slight risk they run is that by so doing they accidentally display a total lack of knowledge and wear a garment which sucks balls in terms of respect, authenticity and artistic merit. Bemused by the fact you’re having (arguably) legitimate qualms about some second hand jeans but when someone is flat out telling you the Ralph Lauren joggers have precisely fuck all to do with Fair Isle you go straight for the ‘can only Shetlanders wear it?’ chestnut😂

@TheLeadbetterLife I think you need to spend sometime googling.

I was speaking to a local First Nation elder recently about ribbon skirts. I said I had seen some for sale at a recent cultural festival and wondered if I could buy one. She told me (and I am a white, British expat) that I should not hesitate to buy one and wear it. The only problem would arise if I learned to make them and sell them (see also beadwork, dream catchers etc).

Having seen the trouser example, I now know why I don't share the OPs breast beating opinions any more than I would wear those monstrous crimes against style

Presumably in that case you're paying the FN artist though. Not Ralph Lauren.

Lauren was born on October 14, 1939, in the Bronx, New York City,[3][4] to Ashkenazi Jewish immigrants[5][6][7][8] Frieda (Cutler) and Frank Lifshitz, an artist and house painter,[9][10] from Pinsk, Second Polish Republic

How will you not buying them change anything? I believe you are overthinking this, and getting it out of all proportion.

Buy the trousers

I think if the trousers are giving you this much angst then you probably shouldn’t buy them as I doubt you would enjoy wearing them, and imo fashion is to be enjoyed!

My personal opinion is that ‘southwestern’ inspired prints are no more cultural appropriation than tartan style fabrics, or large hoop earrings, i.e. they aren’t.

If you love wearing something, then wear it. If you don’t love it because, for example, it brings back bad memories of a difficult time in your life / was made in a sweatshop by Chinese primary school children / is made of animal products / makes you feel uncomfortable about what it represents then feel free to not wear it.

My dermatologist told.me I looked like an old Romanian peasant woman earlier when I went for Botox. I had to giggle at the thought of her having an OP type patient. Hello? Is that the police? I want to report a crime. Yes. This woman has culturely appropriated the old peasants wrinkles 😀😀😀. I think my Dr is actually Romanian. Unless it's some kind of EE joke I don't understand.