Here’s an experience when I ran into the cultural property issue for
the first time. Maybe writing it down will illuminate something about
this issue for me or anyone else. In 1962 I had a neighbour who had
an interesting candelabrum in his house. It looked a bit like a
Jewish menorah but had sockets for 7 candles. It was covered with
crudely carved symbols. Some of them were recognizeable versions of
zodiac signs. Some were vaguely representative of recognizeable
entities like snakes. Some were abstract geometric patterns. My
neighbour told me the object came from Haiti and was some kind of
"voodoo" object. It looked like it was made of some kind of ceramic
but it was made of mahogany wood, painted and generally dirty and
beat up with a lovely patina. I didn’t know much about voodoo
(voudoun) but the object had a certain charm and, just for fun, I
made a copy of it. I made no bones about copying as I wasn’t about to
sell it or profit from it in any way nor was I claiming to have
"designed" the thing. I just wanted to learn to achieve that
"artless" charm and I figured straight imitation was as good a way to
learn as any, at least for a start. I did a good job and was pleased
with the result.
About three years later I was about to depart on a grand adventure -
sailing around the world on a 3-masted schooner. In preparation I was
finding places to leave the possessions I could not take with me. I
decided to leave the “voodoo” candlestick for safekeeping with a
loved one in NY and so there I was one day, carrying the thing,
unwrapped, walking along W. 83rd St. An old black woman was walking
towards me and as she approached her eyes opened wide. She stopped
me, grabbed my arm, and asked quite emphatically “Where you get that
thing?” I was a little surprised but not frightened. She was not
hostile but clearly she was somewhat surprised herself. My answer
only surprised her all the more, “I made it,” I said. (Talk about
"artless!") She dropped my arm and stared at me as if I’d told her
pigs can fly. Neither of us could think of much else to say or do on
either side of this encounter and we parted. I was full of youthful
self-regard, happy for something of mine to have provoked a reaction,
I was no more thoughtful than that - and she kept throwing fearful or
accusatory glances back over her shoulder as she continued down the
street. Only later, in retrospect, did I realize that I’d missed a
great opportunity to learn something, to find out exactly what this
object was, what it was used for, what its power was. It was clear in
the woman’s expression that it meant a great deal to her, that it had
a meaning and power which was clear to her while only “charming” to
me. It was also clear that in her eyes I looked entirely like the
wrong person to have that object in my possession, much less to have
made it myself. She felt as I might feel if I saw a 5 year-old kid
walking down the street carrying a loaded kalashnikov assault rifle.
So I regret my youthful obtuseness but that’s all in the past. I
have much more sophisticated ways of being obtuse these days. I
suppose, depending on factors unknown, that the situation might have
turned out hurtful or dangerous, that I might have given offence or
might have been offended against in response. In any case, after my
slow thought processes and ruminations on this experience, I have
decided to be cautious in playing with symbols. It is not that they
are the “property” of any group or individual but that they can
carry emotional weight.
Ten years ago I was still chewing over the dilemma of creating
something with that same “artless” or"primitive" feeling which had
captured my attention when I first saw that voodoo candlestick. I
decided to make some more of that type of candleholder but this time
I would not copy the “alien” symbols. I would make up my own - but
hoping for the same general effect. Was that ever hard to do! I am
not artless, nor primitive, and I come from a huge mix of cultures
with a giant vocabulary of symbols from everywhere. It was damned
near impossible to stay in the groove, so to speak. Even more
interesting was my discovery that every mark I made felt utterly
silly or phony unless I could find a story from which it derived.
The story need not come from any known religious or tribal
tradition. I could even make up a story myself replete with exotic
characters and events and, if it was a good story,and if I sort of
believed it, only then would my symbolic “illustrations” feel
coherent. In other words, I had to know the “back story” to which my
symbols referred. I made a half dozen or so of the things and gave
it up as a bad job. I am not in the same league as Tolkien, not
about to create whole coherent worlds, myths, religions,histories. I
could see from the reactions of other people that the things just
didn’t hold together.
And this is what I see when an object embodying a cultural or
religious icon is manufactured by “non-believers”. Technically a bead
is a bead, a cross is a cross, a star of David is a star of David
etc. They’re just objects and any machine or any craftsperson can pop
them out by the thousands. As simple geometric objects it probably
doesn’t matter what the maker believes - but when these symbols are
treated simply as “design motifs” or as decoration rather than as the
carriers of deep power and meaning - it shows. It just looks like
crap. Never mind getting huffy about disrespecting this or that
religion - it just ends up looking like cheesy, phony schlock. I
guess what I’m saying is that you can’t “borrow” significance. If you
are using a signifier in your designs, you need to believe the back
story or else your design looks about as impressive as the old Lone
Ranger Secret De-Coder ring that I got for 25 cents and a Cheerios
boxtop when I was 9 years old.
My 2 cents worth tonight, friends.
Marty in Victoria
