Cultural Appropriation Of The Black Female Body

Appropriation has been a key contributor to the development of the modern world, to which the role of appropriating land and resources is inescapable from our present. The role of appropriation has transgressed centuries amongst underdeveloped countries, but specifically black female bodies. Thus in this essay, I will be reviewing the extent of this process as well as the influence of neoliberalism and choice. Actions are conditioned by political, economic and historical shifts in societies; that determine citizen’s roles in perpetuating such a cycle. As a consequence of the nature of past discourses, societies are living in and benefitting from a colonial legacy of cultural and economic appropriation which came from a place of ridicule, cultural ridicule. Hence, to derive these narratives in this essay will I need to look at pinacol examples of the cultural appropriation of the black female body.

Background of appropriation

Cultural appropriation is one way the epistemology of colonial legacy still remains in the modern world as the act of taking and embodying a culture that is not your own has become very much centralised in modern society. Historical imperatives of modernity were created and remain incomplete till this day, as colonial exploitation diminished purpose and self-reliance of now underdeveloped countries, resulting in the lasting dependency nations have upon the global west since, ‘The other constructed an absolute opposite, negating everything the West stood for’. (Hall and Gieben, 1992: 314) These endeavours denied the rights and privileges to the resources and opportunities colonised lands had to offer within modern civilisation. Through this, their bodies, cultures and resources became commodified for the continuation of capital relations seen prominently is western civilisations. Hence, this concession reveals a regime advocated for free labour and private enterprise which ran parallel with a colonial personality, one being the tragic case of Sarah Baartman. ‘The brutal treatment of enslaved black women by white men exposed the depths of male hatred towards women’s bodies’  but in this essay, I will put emphasis specifically towards the treatment of black women’s bodies. Due to the imperative of racial imperialism, the appropriation and exploitation of women’s bodies were deemed as acceptable for the development of modern civilisation and is still very much prominent in our postmodern era.

Sarah Baartman

Thus, before delving into the contemporary narratives of appropriation, the nature of the appropriation of the body historically needs to be taken into account. For instance, the case of Sarah Baartman known as ‘Hottentot Venus’ in the 19th century is depictive of a system which sought to benefit off the financial capital derived from taking one’s body and appropriating it for money. The French displayed her as an exotic freak show in a cage; a carnival attraction chained to ridicule. Yes, the chains which carried her from South Africa do not physically exist currently, however, the remainder of her deprivation as a symbol of black sexuality still endures as something bound and commodified. ‘Having suffered a double colonization – the mass expropriation of its people by the Atlantic, Indian Ocean, and trans-Saharan slave trades and of its lands by European, Ottoman, and earlier empires’, (Tageldin, 2014: 303) this image of the transatlantic slave trade is in relation to the dispossession and forced migration of African people to white nations to be exported for profit. She was disposed from her land during an era where expropriation dwarfed or was equal to exploitation for commercial capitalism thus, appropriation and enslavement are intertwined and rooted in racially aestheticized binaries within the black diaspora in today’s society. 

By being ascribed such a horrible narrative upon the black body, the history of cultural appropriation raises important and complex issues surrounding the nature of culturalism and the unequal development of capitalism. The neglect placed upon this woman, to the extent whereby her extended labia was removed from her body by scientists who radicalised her body with such violence, amplifies such a derogatory perspective. (Clark, 2013) Parisian citizens exploited her bodily features to reference that of a colonial fantasy of a primitive, exotic animal, therefore enabling many racial apparatuses to be placed on her, chaining Baartman to a disgusting and fallacious narrative. The development of this form of appropriation holds such power that women surgically reduce the size of their labia for the fear of resembling such a narrative. Thus, the power attached to such a narrative depicts how trapped the western mind is in ignorance of the very detriment Sarah Baartman had to go through and many women like her. Much of her story has been lost to be defined by her exploitative utilisation to which the western world is chained by their own sanctioned ignorance especially female black bodies, coined by Spivak. 

Josephine Baker

This sanctioned ignorance has a role in perpetuating the cycle of appropriation within the 20th century through Josephine Baker, transgressing into the modern world. This does not refer to an ignorance of black women’s subjugation but her ignorance to the neoliberal commodification she adopted. The crossover between slavery and appropriation was embodied through Josephine Baker whom allowed white people to laugh at the human frailty of black people without having to compromise their whiteness, thus making a living from the ridicule placed upon colonised black women. (Archer-Straw, 2000) During the 1920s there was still an obsession with the concept of negrophilic savagery, especially among the entertainment scenery, thus the chains of Sarah Baartman trails through to Josephine Baker’s narrative. Her appropriation of seductive femininity with a cage and phallic banana skirt informed by a nature of minstrel shows encouraged a problematic binary opposite of civilisation and savagery, playing on the many tropes used to define African women. Hence, it seems that the black diaspora identities clung to a negrophilia that continued to demonise blackness globally by Josephine choosing to cooperate in the demonization for black bodies for the need to escape the prejudice she faced in America; although her appropriation played into element of a patronising racist Eurocentric view. However, her choice of cultural appropriation can be considered as transgressing racial barriers by not accepting the status quo surrounding black individuals, by acting on certain contradictions. Correspondingly, the influence of neoliberalism did not guarantee her the absolute freedom she sought as she was still controlled by the white narrative and commodified for capital. Therefore, the objectification of her exoticized body bears roots within French colonialism where black females were economically exploited seen with Baartman’s discourse; translating into a masculinist colonial discourse as well as an adopted neoliberal thought.

Nonetheless, all forms of cultural appropriation for capital interest are indefensible. Those who defend it either lack the understanding of it or ignore its complexities, making it simple to dismiss the appropriation of female bodies in the modern world. Interestingly, Braudel (1982) believes apologists for colonial appropriation fail to realise it was only necessary to feed their greed and capital interests of their nations to build their infrastructure or appropriated culture. Deriving from this, the economic interest for appropriation believed to be a legitimate commerce, developed from a rivalry between six European powers whom divided and ruled Africa, known as the scramble for Africa. (Pakenham, 1990) The colonial relationship was mostly extractive and for the purpose of cultural imperialism. Hence, to answer the question a visual representation of the imperialist legacies can be found in the universal exclusions and appropriation of women of colour to create polar standards of female beauty evident in the modern world.

Beyoncé

Nonetheless, to bring this all down to our current climate, in the 21st century influential figures such as Beyoncé, though it may be from a place of ignorance, sustains this cycle of savagery appropriation through their image portrayal; inadvertently having an effect on the standard western narrative of female sexuality. For instance, Beyoncé participates in the role of appropriation in the modern world as she enables the continuation of European power to inscribe a primitive narrative upon colonised bodies, by adopting the infamous banana skirt by Josephine Baker. This choice is evidence of how the racial history is inescapable and perpetuated through our present. (Archer-Straw, 2000) To acquire an income, these three women I have looked at have been and are fixed within this dominant discourse as through the increasing freedom and hyper-capitalist society, the narrative of autonomy is transcribed despite being a very much blurred concept. However, since they choose these increasing increments, they continue to ingrain themselves deeper into this dominant discourse. This is the only way they can make money and achieve some self dependence but succeeds in economically enslaving them. Thus, ‘the anatomical economy of black beauty attaches these women’s bodies to the world’ whether this means maintaining a narrative of cultural and economic appropriation, to the detriment of other black women’s societal narrative. 

Presently, mainstream society appreciates white women’s bodies whilst neglecting and degrading that of a black woman, whom colonisers dispossessed from African countries for their sexually depraved and financial antics. For instance, ‘The white woman is always depicted as the goddess and not the sinner’ wherein, the same things non-women of colour are praised for currently, black women were exploited for, which is why it is important to understand the history surrounding cultural appropriation. While ignoring black women, the media still make an effort to disparage women or appropriate them for an exogenous gain making the black woman’s body a symbol of pain, trauma, ridicule and oppression. Thus, studying the role of appropriation should not exclude the accountability that needs to be placed on such mainstream individuals as ‘cultural archives’ exist, as culture is not monolithic. Academics cannot discuss the role of appropriation in the modern world accurately when it stems from the disbelief and shock factor of African bodies because they would be going against the European status quo of keeping black bodies in a perpetual economic cycle.

Besides residing upon the cycle perpetuated by women of colour, it would be wrong to not acknowledge the role of appropriation by non-women of colour. As this is a look into the history of sociology, historiographically the Kardashian family on numerous occasions have appropriated black culture with little to no acknowledgement of its origin, but as they are a new phenomenon there is not enough academic reference to support this claim. However, as this essay acknowledges contemporary appropriation, they fit well into this narrative. From the appropriation of African hairstyles to the black female body, the problem arises when minority groups do not get to dictate their culture but instead, their culture is deployed by individuals with a greater privilege than them. Many seem to confuse this narrative with assimilation which cannot be substantiated if ethical issues still remain due to a country’s past discourse at the hands of colonialism. There is a clear distinction between when borrowing becomes appropriation. When the premise of borrowing fails to compensate its sources through acknowledgement, then that pattern becomes appropriation. Thus, assimilation cannot be achieved if there is a power imbalance founded on racial hierarchies and a deep-rooted superiority complex. 

Consequently, the feminisation of Africa over the centuries has left the continent to be seen as an infantilised place. From Sarah Baartman, Josephine Baker to Beyoncé there seems to be no in-between, either sexual impotence or hyper-sexualisation. Powerfully, Sojourner Truth’s (1995) speech critiqued the moral inaccuracy of gender and race prejudice by western powers, thus rendered is the unfortunate circumstance in embodying two discriminations; a reality still prominent today. What one should take from the review of the role of appropriation within the modern world is that whether we notice or not, appropriation is embedded within our subconscious, to which the black diaspora identities cling to a narrative that misrepresents contemporary blackness and African history, ‘The specter of diaspora haunts its borders, and its histories – refusing closure’.

Conclusion

To conclude, I have attempted to establish that cultural appropriation trivialises historical oppression. The role of appropriation in the modern world entails power and dominance of lands and black female bodies. This essay was not to highlight the individual black women experience of appropriation but how the discourse surrounding black women’s bodies are constructed as these are how ideologies function. By not acknowledging or giving credit to the origin of your appropriation serves as an uncomfortable reminder of the chains from Sarah Baartman prevalent today. I could have lengthened my analysis on the dispossession of African men and women, but I wanted to focus primarily on the transgression of female appropriation from the 19th century onwards for the sake of informing others, whilst explaining the extremity of violence done to her body. Thus, to explain these problems we cannot just look at the legacy of appropriation, however, our problems cannot be explained if we ignore the legacy which has bound African land to the West for centuries.