Boy do I have a lot to say in response to Kari’s post. This might come out as somewhat of a rant, but I hope you guys get something good out of it too.
First of all, when Kari mentioned sashimi, I immediately thought about haole people and how they like to call it “sushi” (Haole means foreigner, usually used in reference to a culturally ignorant white person). It always irks me when people call sashimi, sushi. It’s not the same thing! ARGH!
Anyway, the point of that was to say that there’s a difference between genuine interest in a culture, and just using it to appear “cultured”. The difference is whether you actually take the time to learn about the culture (kind of like Meghan and Virginia) or just impose your own perspective on it and use it as convenient to you (like what Rachel N. mentioned in class about Mrs. Ramsey adopting Mangos, but using her own way to eat them).
I’m not sure if either type of cultural adoption is “ok”. Actually, I’m not really sure whether one is acceptable over the other either.
I’d like to say that I’d rather people actually care enough to learn about a culture than just use it ignorantly, but even that bothers me. I didn’t like Meghan and Virginia. Maybe because they were trying to educate the narrator (does she have a name?) on “her” culture and like she said, what right do they have to tell her what her culture is?
Another thing that bothers me (and we talked a little in class about this) is that they almost seem too excited about the Indian culture. They exoticize it and treat it as a novelty, where an Indian person would just live it and not make a big deal about it—and that doesn’t mean they don’t care about it, but they can appreciate it without the outward showiness. I think of Meghan and Virginia as “culture-droppers” (like a name-dropper, if that makes any sense).
Alex discussed in class how adopting a culture meant you could “pick and choose” the aspects that you like. This prevents you from really becoming a part of the culture, because you’re not invested in the culture in its entirety. You’re not willing to fully immerse yourself in it…you just kind of want to wade around in it. And this isn’t necessarily intentional. In fact, intention may be the only difference between the Meghan/Virginia style culture adopters and the Mrs. Ramsey style ones. Mrs. Ramsey knows she isn’t Indian, and she’s not trying to be. Meghan and Virginia are trying to be and don’t realize they are missing essential components. Sure they are outwardly Indian, but they are lacking Indian instincts. Their saris are faultless, but they are completely oblivious to the racism going on right in front of them (during the religious services no less) and that they themselves participate in (page 121). The narrator, Indian herself, has no trouble recognizing racism against her own race, so if Meghan and Virginia are so “Indian”, why can’t they see it?
Now that I’ve thought about it, I don’t think there is a right way to adopt a culture. With any culture, when you start as an outsider, you can never really become an insider…unless you are invited in. You can’t adopt a culture; you are adopted into the culture. The culture adopts you.
So back to my rant…let’s talk pineapple (this has to do with imposing a definition on another culture). “Hawaiian” pizza is my eternal torment. Don’t get me wrong, I like the taste, but it’s not Hawaiian. Just putting pineapple (which, by the way, is native to South America) on something does not make it “Hawaiian”. A few weeks ago I went to a church potluck where they served “Hawaiian haystacks”. I assume they were called this because they had pineapple on them. Interesting fact: the only two people from Hawaii there (my sister and I) had never heard of them before. “Hawaiian” haystacks, huh? Then why don’t they have them in Hawaii???
My friends also like to tease me that spam is a Hawaiian food. I have trouble restraining myself from punching them in the face. That’s a horrid stereotype. Just because we know how to eat it doesn’t mean it’s like our national (pardon me…state) dish. You’re from Hawaii…do you eat spam? What??? That’s worse than “do you surf” or “do you hula dance?” Or here’s another one my friend gets a lot: “Oh you’re from Utah…are you Mormon?”…or worse “You’re Mormon…so you believe in polygamy.” Umm…no…no we don’t.
A couple more comments on Kari’s post:
First, on being called “Hawaiian”, I usually get around this discussion because I do have a little Hawaiian blood; so when people ask if I’m Hawaiian, I just say yes and don’t make a big deal about it. What bothers me sometimes though, is when people refer to me as a Hawaiian (as a noun, not an adjective). I don’t really think I deserve that title. I don’t speak the language, I’m not incredibly knowledgeable about the culture, and I don’t feel I share the same plight common to native Hawaiians. In Hawaii, I consider myself a local, yes, but I’m haole too. Just living in Hawaii does not make you Hawaiian any more than living in a tree makes you a monkey…or eating bananas and saying ooh-ooh-eee-eh-ooo.
Secondly, about the kukui nut leis: not only are they cheap plastic, but they make them in gaudy colors too. So yes, kukui nuts are from Hawaii, but no, these cheapy plastic, bright blue things are not “Hawaiian”. And why are they advertised as kukui nuts? To exoticize them, because exotic is cool. They can’t just make big round plastic beads (too eighties maybe), they have to make them in the shape of kukui nuts (because that’s classy), and that sells.
~Kelly Cloward
posted by Seung Hye @ 9:00 PM
1 Comments:
Comments seem to have been disabled on Kari's post, but I wanted to note that I have most definitely made the mistake of guessing that someone from Hawaii was Hawaiian, even when she was half Japanese, half Caucasian. The person actually asked me what I thought her ethnic background was (now that I think of it, that's kind of an unfair question--whether you get it wrong or right, you are forced to use what you know about different cultures, almost inevitably stereotypes, to answer). To relate this to the invisibility of whiteness, I feel like it is more likely for someone to ask about your ethnic origins if you're Asian than if you're Caucasian--a lot of people (almost always Asian or Caucasian) have asked me "what I am" but I rarely hear someone asking a white person "what they are." Like the narrator in the story, I think sometimes it's nice to be recognized for something other than your race; then again, noticing something you have in common with someone else (i.e. the sense of community) is something that also prompts this "what are you" kind of question. There's both otherness and commonality in this question of origins, which seems like a double-standard to me.
On another note, when we talk about Mrs. Ramsey "adopting mangoes" and how she's appropriating mangoes, I agree that mangoes are symbolic in the story as cultural appropriation, but in a literal (not literary) sense, I feel like it's a bit of a stretch to apply this same symbolism to real life. I think few people have ever sat down to eat a mango and thought really hard about the possible ways to eat a mango and the cultural implications of those methods. To an extent, I don't think it's necessary to analyze food like that--better to think about the environmental implications of tropical food imports, perhaps (speaking of imports, pineapple may be native to South America, but the economic history of the pineapple industry in Hawaii was very significant in shaping some of Hawaii's history, just take Lanai for instance; of course, this isn't to say that Hawaiian pizza is a product of Hawaii because it has pineapple in it, just as how Canadian bacon isn't a product of Canada because of the name). To get to the point, I think it's important to keep in mind that authors writing fiction or even semi-autobiographical works use methods to develop the story, but it may or may not be an entirely accurate portrayal of real life.
Post a Comment
<< Home