The famous quote from French auteur Godard, which punctuated American film maker Jim Jarmush’s fearless perspective on creative inspiration – “Authenticity is invaluable; originality is non-existent.  Don’t bother concealing your thievery, celebrate it like you feel it” – reads like a mantra for cultural appropriation in fashion and beyond, hitting the zeitgeist on the head.

Cultural appropriation, fashion’s hot topic jamming up feeds with vicious rantings of designers accused of pillaging from minority, non-Western cultures – using tropes, symbols, motifs, prints, music for the sake of benefitting their commercial success – has been rife with controversy. But is this really something that should be condemned or applauded?  Is borrowing from different cultures and subverting them, only to weave them into a more widespread, multi-cultural collective where boundaries dissolve to form a new narrative a bad thing?

It’s a heavy loaded question, with divisive points of view.  Academics and activists accusing brands and designers of being ignorant and capricious, exploiting marginalized cultures at their whim and to their advantage, reducing culture to trendy fanfare.   Case in point the latest assault on Gucci’s A/W 2018 show for featuring Sikh turbans atop the heads of prepubescent white boys.  A cultural injunction so it seems, appropriating the mishaps and strife of Sikhs so carelessly for the parody of fashion – or at least that’s what the critics suggest.  On the other side of the argument is the creative license to cull inspiration from disparate cultural sources repurposed into diverse tapestry representative of our current times, pushing the creative and cultural envelope forward.

YES, Alessandro Michele could have exhibited more sensitivity, integrating Sikhs (read: Waris Ahluwalia)in the show vs. Caucasian models, making them part of the narrative through inclusive cultural representation.Sure, that may have lessened the blow, but frankly, there was so much more happening in that show - a cacophony of references from present, past and future featuring Medieval Arabs, Russian babushkas, collegiate yuppies, gender fluidity and other mythical creatures yet to be defined – all stitched together through Michele’s vision of the modern Cyborgs (the show’s title theme).To reduce the collection to a narrow-lensed criticism of cultural appropriation, seems short-sighted if not a bit trite.If anything, it felt like the celebration of individuality bolted together by the canvas of culture to form a new globalized perspective, albeit one that may not always be politically correct – but messy, blurred and an honest reflection of the strangeness that surrounds us. A new obfuscating vernacular for a strange new time.

Gucci A/W ‘18: A cacophony of cultures from present, past and future woven together AS A vision of modern Cyborgs.

The culprit is not cultural appropriation as much as misappropriation which can be harmful and derogatory.  Valid appropriation taps into culture to inspire, bridge and broaden horizons, underpinned by respect and citation of the sources it’s pulling from.  Imagine the evolution of food without it.  How bland to limit ourselves with nationalistic cuisine forgoing culinary advances bred from cultural cross-pollination.  As an American citizen with Lebanese origins educated in the West now residing in Dubai, I have amassed enough of a “continental” lens, that rejoices in seeing Levantine cuisine diversified beyond its Arab borders - even if it comes in the guise of a dubious by-product (quinoa tabbouleh, beetroot hummus anyone?).  What could be considered sacrilege by orthodox food purists - mother in laws, grandparents – is ultimately celebrated by a global audience, ironically coming back full circle and dished out in Beirut’s modern eateries as “fusion”. 

Clearly, food is an acquired taste and fashion is fickle, with the label of cultural appropriation fudging the discussion depending how one relates to the subject matter – not only as critic, but importantly as viewer.   Starting this article, I was leaning towards the sentiment that the backlash was an over-reaction; the naysayers a veritable lynch mob ready to police and cast venom on the creative set - whose freedom to express a vision borrowed from a greater collective - remain intact. 

But to be dismissive of the potent issues that underpin the creative product would have been a fallacy, which became apparent to me through the work of Marine Serre, winner of the 2017 LVMH Prize whose take on interpreting the hijab and crescent motif, both symbols of Islam, through the eyes of a young French woman, I found to be original, disruptive, brave and a style coop de force. 

Upon closer inspection of the collection “A Radical Call For Love” the uncomfortable itch started to grate.  Was showcasing headgear traditionally worn on devout Muslim women modeled on Western ones bridging a cultural divide, or appropriating the hijab as a new fashion fetish?  Despite the designer’s intent to redefine the cultural taboos and negative associations of the hijab in the West via a hybrid creation that interlaces religion and utilitarian chic for the modern woman, fashioning them on European models defeats the purpose with scathing irony.  Crudely stated, a white girl trying to make a case for Muslim women reads as borrowed interest when not featuring them in such a singular dialogue.  Was this cultural appropriation? Definitely, even if not ill-intended. 

But to dismiss cultural appropriation as unjust I think misses the point.  For it is because of cultural appropriation that new perspectives come to the forefront – uncomfortable ones that make us squirm in our seats, creating tension points that muster up our indignation as we take notice of something new that may not always be expressed in the way we are accustomed to, ultimately requiring engagement and a change of perspective. 

If cultural appropriation is the unpopular scapegoat to get the conversation going, pushing us out of our comfort zones and asking us to re-question and confront, then I can only see that as a progressive way forward. Ultimately, cultural appropriation is here to stay, it’s how we see it and use it that needs to change.