Comments | bellatrys: The Longer Version: "Inappropriation"

bellatrys

The Longer Version: "Inappropriation"

Jan 18, 2009 01:03

Prologue: "I Didn't Mean To Do Any Harm"

...But that moment the little lady leaned forward into the moonlight, and Curdie caught a glimpse of her eyes, and all the laugh went out of him ( Read more... )

stupidity, appropriation, racism, cultural imperialism, dialectic, conservativism, privilege

Comments 18

badgerbag January 18 2009, 06:34:54 UTC

I may need a "honky fangirl to the rescue" icon...

If I knew where my copy of "The Blue Sword" was bellatrys January 18 2009, 10:14:42 UTC

that might work, since there seems to be a pretty unanimous verdict that it embodies the trope, and iirc the art was suitable for iconage...

Re: If I knew where my copy of "The Blue Sword" was brown_betty January 18 2009, 20:06:41 UTC

In my book-cover, I think her face was covered up enough by swirling scarves that her honkeyness was less apparent than it might have been.

You're right bellatrys January 19 2009, 11:35:24 UTC

I checked google image and I was mixing it up with the old cover of "The Hero and the Crown" in my head.

The new cover is more obvious that she's blonde - I'll keep looking for a less fuzzy scan of that one.

Here is the scan I did find.

mac_stone January 18 2009, 06:55:32 UTC

Hmm.

My own personal reaction was more along the lines of "I've spent most of my adult life recovering from the effects of being told by abusive people that they knew the inside of my own head better than I know it - I don't plan to voluntarily put myself back in that position. But good luck with convincing more vulnerable, gentle, and gullible women of good-intent that they're total shits who don't know their own brains."

I understand pain. I understand grief, and inarticulate rage.

NO one has any right to try to tell me they know my intent, my soul, better than I know it.

I've re-read this several times, and I'm afraid it's so elliptical bellatrys January 19 2009, 11:47:32 UTC

that I still don't know what you're trying to communicate here.

I've spent most of my adult life recovering from the effects of being told by abusive people that they knew the inside of my own head better than I know it

Yes, this is the common state of abuse victims, and describes for one) my daily life between the ages of 4 and 27. And the abusers' intent is irrelevant; mine didn't "mean" - or so they often said - to wreck us with violence, insults, neglect, playing favorites, threats to kill our pets, unremitting criticism, madonna/whore complexes, morbid religiosity and so forth. They *intended* - so they always said - to "raise us right", because they "loved" us unconditionally, and we were supposed to intuit this intention through, or despite of, all their actions.

In the end, their intentions weren't worth spit. Is that what you were trying to say? Because yes, of course.

Re: I've re-read this several times, and I'm afraid it's so elliptical sajia January 19 2009, 14:50:02 UTC

I think I could clarify. One of the ways abusers control their victims is by telling them that the victims' perspectives on their own experiences do not count, only the abusers' perspectives count. Victims are just making it up.

rozasharn January 18 2009, 08:35:19 UTC

Your work is always impressive.

vito_excalibur January 18 2009, 18:05:33 UTC

I've been trying to come up with a good way to explain the "But I WAAAAAANT it!" fallacy for a long time. This is great. Thanks for writing.

I'm glad it was helpful -- bellatrys January 18 2009, 22:18:22 UTC

It took a bit to articulate, but it seemed to me that while it seems at first that the "homage" appropriations/forgers are vastly different from the "disgust" appropriations like Simmons' Song of Kali, frex - and on one level they *are* - the two phenomenon *had* to have something in common, and what it is deep down is the conviction that certain people just don't *count.* They might use, and hate/fear, and scorn vocally, or use, and praise/"love", and pedestal (see also "chivalrism"), but it comes down to *using* and not regarding someone else as persons with same rights as themselves ( ... )

shininghalf January 18 2009, 19:59:14 UTC

I feel like some of the things you're saying can seem overbroad if generalised---like "appropriation" is also a term used in transformative use of copyrighted/trademarked properties, and people who see that appropriation as inherently inappropriate could use the same analogy ( ... )

I don't think we're in disagreement there bellatrys January 19 2009, 12:00:11 UTC

This is rushed, but the fannish debate over fanfic and appropriation is indeed an argument over who's the rightful owner of stuff, particularly when it was an interactive/collaborative/shared-world *product* to begin with, and also depending strongly on the question of cui bono? with the nonprofit aspect figuring hugely into the ethical defense.

A huge problem with the inappropriately-appropriated profic (apart from things like power differential and "the Mysteries were never intended for pop entertainment") is that, well, it IS for profit, and one thing I've seen come up a *lot* is the pertinent question of just what, if anything, these appropriators who are so generously "introducing", say, First Nations concerns into the mainstream, are giving back to the communities they are so "inspired" by - or are they just leeching off, for their own fame/fortune? So it isn't totally separate.

Similarly I think water carried for Great Men of the Past smells fishy past a certain point. Mm-hm. There's an inability to disunite aspects, a "Sin- ( ... )

Re: I don't think we're in disagreement there shininghalf January 20 2009, 00:31:13 UTC

::nod:: The fanfic thing is OT and I probably never would have come up with it if I'd been seeing all the context for your post, but I've experienced people telling me as a fanfic author "how dare you use things that aren't yours" and I believe pretty strongly, though I realise self-servingly, in my fanfic-ly artistic vision and my right to those things, so I did feel it a little you know. I personally don't see monetary gain as weighing so heavily, but it makes a big difference that you're taking from within your own culture---like, to extend your analogy, maybe it's more like if your sister made something and said "this is for you", and then when you acted like you owned it she wasn't even content to tell you how she wished you would or wouldn't treat it but got your parents to chew you out and take it away. I mean, the work the creator puts in should count for something, but not *everything* (and not as much as someone's human and cultural integrity), and it's creating a power relationship between people within a single culture ( ... )