Jump to content

The world has become too fragile


Scythe

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 74
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I'm assuming that Holtby's intention was to honour the First Nations people that live in and around Vancouver. With that in mind, not consulting with an indigenous artist for the design process was a fairly significant oversight.

Indigenous Americans have suffered genocide at the hands of the Canadian and American governments, and lost a great deal of their culture as a result. The least that non-indigenous people can do, when they want to utilize parts of that culture in their professional work, is consult with the community to ensure it is accurate and not a caricature or misrepresentative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And to those people who are pissy about non-indigenous artists being asked to consult with indigenous artists when they use culturally significant indigenous styles/symbols/iconography... well, I'd suggest they reconsider who's actually being "fragile".

Nobody creates in a vacuum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Scythe it really has ...
It’s a pretty safe bet Holtby wasn’t trying to offend or piss off anyone.  Nor was the artist.  But we are in a hyper PC world.   Take that how you will.  Thoughts on the Cleveland “baseball team” Dropping their nickname? It’s not a slur.....

How about Braves, Chiefs and Blackhawks? 

I am from “indigenous people” Bloodlines on both my father and my mothers side.  Cherokee and Lenape. Before it gets called into question. My grandmothers great great great (might be missing a great or 2 ) grandmother was 100% Lenape. I might be in the minority here be I’ve always looked at teams using the names as a great since of pride.  The football team in Washington  ok I never knew it was a slur.  I learned.  Point being I don’t need or want the woke white telling me how to think or feel. When they have no “skin” In the game.  They just run at the mouth. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/13/2020 at 9:46 PM, Mike24 said:

@Scythe it really has ...
It’s a pretty safe bet Holtby wasn’t trying to offend or piss off anyone.  Nor was the artist.  But we are in a hyper PC world.   Take that how you will.  Thoughts on the Cleveland “baseball team” Dropping their nickname? It’s not a slur.....

How about Braves, Chiefs and Blackhawks? 

I am from “indigenous people” Bloodlines on both my father and my mothers side.  Cherokee and Lenape. Before it gets called into question. My grandmothers great great great (might be missing a great or 2 ) grandmother was 100% Lenape. I might be in the minority here be I’ve always looked at teams using the names as a great since of pride.  The football team in Washington  ok I never knew it was a slur.  I learned.  Point being I don’t need or want the woke white telling me how to think or feel. When they have no “skin” In the game.  They just run at the mouth. 

The only people I've seen getting legitimately upset over Holtby's helmet are the people claiming that he's "being cancelled", or about "PC culture run amok". Essentially all the critical responses I've seen have been "yes, this is a cool mask, but there were better ways he could have gone about making it". For example, if Holtby's intention was to honour the First Nations who lived on Vancouver Island, then his mask is using the wrong art design

https://www.vancouverisawesome.com/canucks-hockey/canucks-braden-holtby-apologizes-for-goalie-mask-accused-of-cultural-appropriation-intends-to-work-with-indigenous-artist-3179933

"The design is not Coast Salish. It's a Kwakiutl or Kwagiulth totem pole design," said Xwalacktun, an artist and carver with Squamish and Kwakwaka'wakw ancestry. "It should be designed by a First Nation. It's pretty simple: if there's First Nation art, it should be done by a First Nation artist."

At the same time, Xwalacktun wanted to be clear he laid no blame at anyone's feet.

"We're trying to be kind, we don't want to throw a negative towards the artist that wants to put artwork on the helmet," he said. "But at the same time, we just want to make it authentic."

There is value in ensuring that cultural artwork you commission or create is authentic to that culture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh look, twitter is once again being awful. Who would have guessed.

This "woke culture" and everyone and everything it creates is just awful. I'm not even a crazy right wing puritan, I'm just someone that wants to happily live without the unnecessary outrage that comes with being "woke".

Shit, can't even come up with a cool mask design that leans on some cultural heritage without having to jump through hoops and grovel for permission.

Just fucking obnoxious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, CJ Boiss said:

I'm assuming that Holtby's intention was to honour the First Nations people that live in and around Vancouver. With that in mind, not consulting with an indigenous artist for the design process was a fairly significant oversight.

Indigenous Americans have suffered genocide at the hands of the Canadian and American governments, and lost a great deal of their culture as a result. The least that non-indigenous people can do, when they want to utilize parts of that culture in their professional work, is consult with the community to ensure it is accurate and not a caricature or misrepresentative.

9 hours ago, CJ Boiss said:

There is value in ensuring that cultural artwork you commission or create is authentic to that culture.

This is perfectly stated. All insinuation aside: No one is the proprietor of any human's emotions, and we must therefore be abundantly clear in our intention, and our execution thereof, to honor, homage, repair, or stand in solidarity of another human's culture, heritage, art, etc. To do anything less leaves the door open for further interpretation by both the appropriate interpreters and the inappropriate ones. Which leads me to...

35 minutes ago, coopaloop1234 said:

Oh look, twitter is once again being awful. Who would have guessed.

This "woke culture" and everyone and everything it creates is just awful. I'm not even a crazy right wing puritan, I'm just someone that wants to happily live without the unnecessary outrage that comes with being "woke".

Shit, can't even come up with a cool mask design that leans on some cultural heritage without having to jump through hoops and grovel for permission.

Just fucking obnoxious.

 

It is. As Ricky Gervais has said (my paraphrase) "It's not so much what the Nazis said, really. It's what they did." 

If every target is a moving target, we are on a very slippery slope. That so many folks are so shamelessly sliding their principles along the spectrum in order to best suit their own feelings is a serious demerit to the 'woke' conversation. There are CLEAR transgressions that we have to rectify socially and politically, but it seems to me that far too many people all along the political and social spectrums are far more comfortable attempting to demonstrate how 'woke' or 'unwoke' they are, rather than commit to doing the work that needs to be done. I am a proponent of the fundamental principle of 'wokeness' - empathy - but I'm not sure that a whole bunch of woke folk understand what empathy is, nor do they practice such naturally. Of course the result is a bunch of pseudo-fascists and pseudo-racists coming out of the woodwork: It's easy to dump on a 'woke' group of sanctimonious assholes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess I don’t get this. I am not getting into a discussion on First Nations’ people, but, help me out here. I hear about what a crime it is for one pad manufacturer to “copy” the graphics from another – what a blasphemous infringement it is - but copying another person’s art w/o permission is OK?

As far as I know, art is “copyrightable” (OK, probably not a word) and in Canada, copyright is automatic

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/14/2020 at 11:59 AM, Colander said:

I guess I don’t get this. I am not getting into a discussion on First Nations’ people, but, help me out here. I hear about what a crime it is for one pad manufacturer to “copy” the graphics from another – what a blasphemous infringement it is - but copying another person’s art w/o permission is OK?

As far as I know, art is “copyrightable” (OK, probably not a word) and in Canada, copyright is automatic

Utilizing an art style isn't copyright infringement.

Asking permission to use an art style, especially when it's well meaning, isn't necessary either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Canadian copyright is automatic - if you write something, anyone who wants to reproduce it in part or whole needs to ask your permission. As far as I can see that extends to other creative sources such as art..

Back to my original point, though  ,it seems hypocritical to me for people to get their backs up over manufactures making graphics similar to others, but this is OK...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Colander said:

Canadian copyright is automatic - if you write something, anyone who wants to reproduce it in part or whole needs to ask your permission. As far as I can see that extends to other creative sources such as art..

Copyright in this scenario would only pertain to me trying to copy the design on the mask and sell it as my own.

"Style" isn't protected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/14/2020 at 6:00 AM, Scythe said:

 

One First Nations person who doesn't mind the former name of Washington's football team doesn't mean: a) that it wasn't a slur, and b) that it was an appropriate team name.

On 12/14/2020 at 10:04 AM, coopaloop1234 said:

Oh look, twitter is once again being awful. Who would have guessed.

This "woke culture" and everyone and everything it creates is just awful. I'm not even a crazy right wing puritan, I'm just someone that wants to happily live without the unnecessary outrage that comes with being "woke".

Shit, can't even come up with a cool mask design that leans on some cultural heritage without having to jump through hoops and grovel for permission.

Just fucking obnoxious.

It's not about asking permission, it's about talking to an expert to ensure that the designs and symbols you use are authentic. It's about making sure that, if you do utilize the cultural designs of a people that our government nearly wiped out in a genocide, you're not doing so in a way that disrespects or cheapens their heritage.

That's not being "woke", that's being respectful.

On 12/14/2020 at 11:59 AM, Colander said:

I guess I don’t get this. I am not getting into a discussion on First Nations’ people, but, help me out here. I hear about what a crime it is for one pad manufacturer to “copy” the graphics from another – what a blasphemous infringement it is - but copying another person’s art w/o permission is OK?

When a pad manufacturer copies a design, they are doing so with the intention of monetarily profiting from it.

When a goaltender puts someone else's art on their helmet, they're telling everyone "hey, this thing is really cool and/or it means a lot to me".

Copyright doesn't factor into the ethical equation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/14/2020 at 2:00 PM, CJ Boiss said:

It's not about asking permission, it's about talking to an expert to ensure that the designs and symbols you use are authentic. It's about making sure that, if you do utilize the cultural designs of a people that our government nearly wiped out in a genocide, you're not doing so in a way that disrespects or cheapens their heritage.

That's not being "woke", that's being respectful.

This is entirely being "woke". You're utilizing a disingenuous argument to prop up the notion that people that aren't part of that heritage can't use their art style. The past transgressions that happened to the first nations community has ZERO impact on whether it's ethical for others to mimic the style.

I assume you don't have any problems with anyone who isn't African American creating and mimicking Jazz, Blues, Rock, and Rap. So why is this scenario any different?

Paying homage to other's cultures brings people together. Putting these artificial barriers in place only further creates a divide that is incredibly unnecessary and only creates more strife.

As long as the creation is coming from a place of homage/love, who the fuck cares?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, coopaloop1234 said:

This is entirely being "woke". You're utilizing a disingenuous argument to prop up the notion that people that aren't part of that heritage can't use their art style. The past transgressions that happened to the first nations community has ZERO impact on whether it's ethical for others to mimic the style.

I assume you don't have any problems with anyone who isn't African American creating and mimicking Jazz, Blues, Rock, and Rap. So why is this scenario any different?

Paying homage to other's cultures brings people together. Putting these artificial barriers in place only further creates a divide that is incredibly unnecessary and only creates more strife.

As long as the creation is coming from a place of homage/love, who the fuck cares?

 

Music is a very good example of what has become an acceptable form of cultural appropriation. No one would feel anything less than ridiculous if they spent their days dumping on every single white gal or guy that appropriated Blues and Jazz from every black gal or guy that came up with it originally.  We know these to be facts, humans have nearly universally acknowledged this was and is an homage of sorts, and we move forward.

My theory is that, since the intention art is to fundamentally elicit a response from the individual listener, there is a certain aspect to the art form that can be viewed as a commodity; everyone will value art differently, regardless of the full intention of the art. There are fits and spurts of arguments concerning "who stole what from whom and when", but that's really just a tiny amount of noise in the signal. That muzzling or cancelling has become so prevalent and acceptable is really fascinating in it's contradiction and hypocrisy. An individual simply wouldn't seek to listen to music that they dislike. If you do not like something, you have every right to not subject yourself to that thing. What you do not have a privilege to do (and perhaps no right to do depending on how you go about doing so and the particular law of the land) is to create a narrative about another person's intention and posit this narrative as fact. This is cancelling for cancelling's sake.

I do not believe that Holtby must apologize, although doing so speaks highly of his character. For a man that owns pet turtles, publicly and adamantly supports the LGBTQ+ community, and appears to be a stand-up and 'woke' human, he sure got cancelled quick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/14/2020 at 2:00 PM, CJ Boiss said:

When a pad manufacturer copies a design, they are doing so with the intention of monetarily profiting from it.

When a goaltender puts someone else's art on their helmet, they're telling everyone "hey, this thing is really cool and/or it means a lot to me".

Copyright doesn't factor into the ethical equation.

So when McDonald's starts selling their mini- masks and when posters of Holtby playing for the Canucks are being sold - are they paying the original artist a royalty?

As far as "style"  is concerned, I heard the Chiffons made a few buck off Mr. Harrison's "style"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, coopaloop1234 said:

This is entirely being "woke". You're utilizing a disingenuous argument to prop up the notion that people that aren't part of that heritage can't use their art style. The past transgressions that happened to the first nations community has ZERO impact on whether it's ethical for others to mimic the style.

I assume you don't have any problems with anyone who isn't African American creating and mimicking Jazz, Blues, Rock, and Rap. So why is this scenario any different?

Paying homage to other's cultures brings people together. Putting these artificial barriers in place only further creates a divide that is incredibly unnecessary and only creates more strife.

As long as the creation is coming from a place of homage/love, who the fuck cares?

 

I literally said it's fine if artists want to use designs and styles from cultures they don't belong to. They just need to talk to an expert in those designs/styles, ideally on from the culture, to make sure the use is authentic. Think of it as a collaboration, or consultation.

There is a great deal of thought that has been given to Eminem/Elvis type situations in the creation of art. The general consensus is that the music they made is what they grew up with, and they interacted with the community in an authentic way. There's a great video all about it that i'll link to later, but basically, they were experts in the culture because they were raised in and alongside it, so the art they created was authentic.

That's not the situation we have here, of a white man commissioning a Swedish artist to create art in a First Nations style. There was no input from relevant experts, which is why they ended up unintentionally using the wrong designs to honour the Coast Salish people.

Paying homage is great, nobody has any problem with that, but it isnt an homage when you get important details wrong. Say I did a Patrick Roy pastiche on my mask, as an homage. Well, it wouldnt be an homage if he was depicted playing for the wrong team, with the wrong gear, in a mask he never wore, doing things he never did. I'd just be using his face because i like the idea of having Roy on my mask, without actually honouring anything about his career.

To come from a place of love, to actually be an homage, you have to do things right. You have to do things accurately. That means talking to First Nations artists when creating First Nations designs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dualshowman said:

... For a man that owns pet turtles, publicly and adamantly supports the LGBTQ+ community, and appears to be a stand-up and 'woke' human, he sure got cancelled quick.

Nobody is "cancelling" Holtby. He heard critical feedback on how he got things wrong during the design process, agreed with that criticism, and decided to redo his mask to correct the mistakes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, CJ Boiss said:

Nobody is "cancelling" Holtby. He heard critical feedback on how he got things wrong during the design process, agreed with that criticism, and decided to redo his mask to correct the mistakes.

I have and will continue to enjoy your posts on this topic, but I respectfully disagree that nobody is cancelling Holtby. If he is accused of cultural appropriation for paying homage through honest, although ignorant and inaccurate, artwork and the climate is such that he feels moved to apologize for his honest ignorance, I believe there is at least a toe over the line of cancellation. I have yet to read or hear of any other professional athlete going as far as this to correct a wrong regarding logos, artwork or similar. Have any of the member of the NFL Washington Football Club or MLB Cleveland Baseball Club apologized for perpetuating known derogatory logos and word marks? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/14/2020 at 4:43 PM, CJ Boiss said:

Nobody is "cancelling" Holtby. He heard critical feedback on how he got things wrong during the design process, agreed with that criticism, and decided to redo his mask to correct the mistakes.

Eh, there's enough twitter responses that are upset at Holtby. It's not as massive as some things that have popped up, but to say it's clear of any cancel culture isn't true.

Quote

I literally said it's fine if artists want to use designs and styles from cultures they don't belong to. They just need to talk to an expert in those designs/styles, ideally on from the culture, to make sure the use is authentic. Think of it as a collaboration, or consultation.

I still think it's unnecessary. If you want to hit a super authentic look I think collaboration is recommended. But stating it's a necessity I don't agree with.

Quote

There is a great deal of thought that has been given to Eminem/Elvis type situations in the creation of art. The general consensus is that the music they made is what they grew up with, and they interacted with the community in an authentic way. There's a great video all about it that i'll link to later, but basically, they were experts in the culture because they were raised in and alongside it, so the art they created was authentic.

See now the goalposts have shifted. It's now OK if you grew up surrounded by it. Alright, that's fine.

What's the take on Europeans or Asian countries appropriating that music culture as well? Shouldn't this fall into the wheelhouse of unacceptable usage to you?

Quote

hat's not the situation we have here, of a white man commissioning a Swedish artist to create art in a First Nations style. There was no input from relevant experts, which is why they ended up unintentionally using the wrong designs to honour the Coast Salish people.

Paying homage is great, nobody has any problem with that, but it isnt an homage when you get important details wrong. Say I did a Patrick Roy pastiche on my mask, as an homage. Well, it wouldnt be an homage if he was depicted playing for the wrong team, with the wrong gear, in a mask he never wore, doing things he never did. I'd just be using his face because i like the idea of having Roy on my mask, without actually honouring anything about his career.

To come from a place of love, to actually be an homage, you have to do things right. You have to do things accurately. That means talking to First Nations artists when creating First Nations designs.

So what was your take on Miller's Vancouver mask? There was zero outcry and controversy in 2014 when Miller commissioned a white American to do this mask without any input from the local first nations community.

Design was mostly created by Miller and the expanded upon from Bishop Designs.

https://ingoalmag.com/masks/first-nations-art-adorns-millers-first-canucks-mask/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjcjnAJ79DM

I still don't agree on this gatekeeping of art. These imposed, and always shifting, barriers to whom can use what is so counter productive of being inclusive that it's leaning towards a type of segregation.

You see the same thing with gatekeeping hairstyles, or venues, or dances, clothes, or whatever. It feels like what a good amount of people took from trying to do the right thing and it's manifested itself into this unnecessary decisive stance of who's allowed to do what solely based off of the colour of their skin. Shit, you see people get blasted online for using a "black hairstyle" in a video game.

https://www.polygon.com/2020/11/30/21734131/animal-crossing-space-buns-puffs-black-hairstyles-nintendo-switch

https://boundingintocomics.com/2020/11/21/animal-crossing-new-horizons-player-faces-wave-of-harassment-and-accusations-of-racism-over-in-game-bun-hairstyle/

It's such a nonsense type of mentality that it boggles my mind that people gobble this up so readily.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ITT: People upset at "cancel culture". 

Personally I don't think respect for one another is something to be upset about, and as with anything due diligence is always required. Art or not, and especially when said art is supposed to be an homage. 

This is not a bubble wrapped planet.

This is not woke culture. 

This is not left wing, right wing. 

It's just respect. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Who's Online   1 Member, 0 Anonymous, 25 Guests (See full list)

  • Member Statistics

    2,008
    Total Members
    2,646
    Most Online
    b709
    Newest Member
    b709
    Joined

×
×
  • Create New...