Monday, March 28, 2016

Vähän vaatteista ja orientalismista / On clothes and orientalism


Törmäsin kirjoituspöytää siivotessani listaan, jonka otsikko on "uudet vaatteet 2016" - en ole muistanut päivittää vuotuista vaateostoslistaani sitten tammikuun lopun. Mitäköhän siihen pitäisi kirjoittaa pari viikkoa sitten UFFista ostamani villakangastakin lisäksi? Ainakin yksi musta paljeteilla ja helmillä koristeltu neule, puhvihihainen pusero, tummansininen viskoosimekko, jossa on kaunis kirjailtu miehusta, mitä näitä nyt on.

Olen vuosien taistelun jälkeen tullut sinuiksi sen kanssa, etten ole minimalisti ja pidän siitä, että vaatekaapissani on runsaasti valinnanvaraa. Pienempi asunto tarkoittaa kuitenkin vähempää säilytystilaa ja kuten usein muuttojen kohdalla käy, olen huomannut, että minulla on vaatteita aina vain liikaa. Vaikka Helsingin second hand-tarjonta houkutteleekin, rajansa kaikella. Olen jo vienyt kirpparille jonkin verran vaatteita, joille minulla ei tunnu olevan enää käyttöä, mutta pitänee luopua vieläkin enemmästä.


Kevät kolkuttelee ovella, tänään elohopea nousi kahdeksaan asteeseen. Olen sen verran vilukissa, etten vielä tarkene kevätkuteissa, mutta lämpimämpiä kelejä ajatellen minua kiinnostavat mm. haori-tyyppiset takit ja leveät, vajaamittaiset lahkeet. Ateneumin Japanomania-näyttelyn nähtyäni olen entistä enemmän innostunut itämaisista vaikutteista muodissa, mutta tässäpä pähkinä purtavaksi: miten itämaista inpiraatiota hakevia (tai no, sanotaan ihan suoraan: orientalistisia) vaatteita käytetään näyttämättä siltä, että lainaa törkeästi vierasta kulttuuria tai että on karannut Kiina-kaupasta? Onko se ylipäätään mahdollista?


As I was tidying up the apartment, I stumbled upon my annual "clothes bought this year"-list that I hadn't updated since late January. In addition to a wool coat I bought two weeks ago, I hadn't yet listed a beaded, sequined sweater, a black puffy-sleeved blouse and a dark blue viscose dress with an embroidered bodice. 

After years of thinking that I needed to become a minimalist, I think I've finally accepted the fact that I like having plenty of clothes. Having moved to a smaller apartment has got me thinking about the amount of clothes I am able to store though. I've taken some clothes to the local flea market, but I think I must donate a bunch more. We simply don't have enough space for my bursting-in-the-seams wardrobe. I must prioritize. 


Spring is around the corner; today the temperature hit eight degrees Celsius (that's about 46 degrees Fahrenheit). I'm not one of those who can strip away winter gear at the first sight of the sun, but I am already thinking about what to wear in warmer weather. Currently I am interested in, among other things, haori-type jackets and cropped, wide-legged trousers. After having seen the Japanomania-exhibition at Ateneum, my interest in Eastern influences, or even orientalism, in fashion has resurfaced. Here's the million dollar question: is it wrong to wear blatantly orientalist pieces, and/or is it possible to wear those types of clothes without (looking like one's) appropriating? 

4 comments:

  1. Ja minua kiinnostaa, mitä olet kantamassa kirpparille :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Aika sekalaista seurakuntaa - lähinnä tällä erää semmoisia vaatteita, jotka olen ostanut uutena joskus vuonna 2008 ja säilönyt niitä sen varjolla että olen joskus maksanut niistä vähän enemmän. Kurkinpa kumminkin kirpparipinoa sillä silmällä, että jos saattaisit tykätä jostain... :)

      Delete
  2. Cultural appropriate is a thorny and pithy subject. Here from the internet are two views of it.
    Cultural appropriation has little to do with one’s exposure to and familiarity with different cultures. Instead, cultural appropriation typically involves members of a dominant group exploiting the culture of less privileged groups — often with little understanding of the latter’s history, experience and traditions.

    Susan Scafidi, a law professor at Fordham University, told Jezebel.com that it’s difficult to give a concise explanation of cultural appropriation. The author of Who Owns Culture? Appropriation and Authenticity in American Law, defined cultural appropriation as follows:

    “Taking intellectual property, traditional knowledge, cultural expressions, or artifacts from someone else's culture without permission. This can include unauthorized use of another culture's dance, dress, music, language, folklore, cuisine, traditional medicine, religious symbols, etc. It's most likely to be harmful when the source community is a minority group that has been oppressed or exploited in other ways or when the object of appropriation is particularly sensitive, e.g. sacred objects.”

    So by cropping your pants are you exploiting an oppressed group of people? Are the Japanese in some way less privileged? Here in Vancouver, there are a number of Japanese shops selling clothes. They are not necessarily "traditional" clothes but certainly bear the influence from where they have come. These shops are run by Japanese people who want to sell their merchandise to a community that is predominantly white at this point. Are they pandering? Are they giving us permission to wear these clothes because they are offered freely in the marketplace? Does commerce transcend everything?
    Personally, I think if we see a good idea and we like it and it makes sense in our lives, why not use it? I am all for cropped pants and haori jackets because of their beauty and practicality and if I wear such items of clothing I do not and will not think I am exploiting anyone.
    Vancouver Barbara

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you for the lengthy comment, Barbara!

      I've read a fair bit on cultural appropriation, so in general the topic is familiar to me. Like you wrote, the issues of exploitation and privilege are important: say, with native Americans, who have been very underprivileged and their culture brutally exploited, the distinction is clear: one should not wear a native American headdress. But "the West" has also exploited and falsely represented Asian cultures for a long, long time. Racist caricatures of Asians have existed (and to some extent, still exist) in Hollywood movies. Even these days, it's quite typical for fashion editorials to feature Caucasian models dressed up as "faux-geishas" with white powdery make-up and black wigs and all, which removes Japanese women them from their current cultural context and infantilizes them. If one googles "Asian appropriation" or "Japanese appropriation", there are numerous images that show the type of usage of Asian cultural references that are just flat-out wrong: Katy Perry in a full-on geisha gear, Selena Gomez and Gwen Stefani appropriating bindis.

      I am not planning on wearing a kimono with slippers, chopsticks in my hair and a fan, but I think there is a fine line between using cultural inspiration in a mindful, respectful manner and ending up looking like a racist caricature. So it becomes a more complicated issue than just looking into current privilege or commercial gain - it's a larger societal, racial, feminist issue.

      And here is why Orientalism as a subject fascinates me: orientalist imagery is never authentic - it is, by definition, Western interpretation of "The Orient". It's gets hairy for me because often, especially in art from the turn of the past century, it happens to be very beautiful to me and inspirational, but is it right? No, not really, the same issues are in the heart of all forms of cultural appropriation: taking something that isn't "ours" and representing it in a way that creates a caricature. And yet, where does one draw the line? Beyoncé wore a rice picker's hat in one of her music videos which clearly wasn't cool... but how does one really know which items are off-limits, or is it more about the total representation? Indeed - a thorny subject!

      Delete