Cultural appropriation vs appreciation

Cultural appropriation vs appreciation

by | Opinion

basics you need to know

Cultural appropriation vs cultural appreciation

Updated Jan 11, 2024

Cultural appropriation: you have probably heard a lot about it in the context of ethnic jewellery, but what is it, exactly? And what is the difference with cultural appreciation? This quick overview gives you the basics.

What is cultural appropriation?

Cultural appropriation refers to the adoption or use of elements of one culture by members of another culture, without proper understanding, respect, or permission.

It often involves an unequal power dynamic in which the appropriating culture has more power and privilege than the culture being appropriated. It may result in the trivialization, exoticizing or misrepresentation of the appropriated culture and its elements.

What is cultural appreciation?

Cultural appreciation refers to the respectful and informed understanding and engagement with elements of another culture. It involves learning about and gaining an understanding of the cultural context, history and significance of the elements in question, and being vocal about these.

Appreciation involves a deeper understanding and respect for other cultures, putting these cultures centrally, and amplifying their voices.

What is the main difference between appropriation and appreciation?

Basically, the difference between cultural appropriation and cultural appreciation is the context in which the elements of the culture are used, and the intent behind it.

Cultural appropriation is often done with little regard for the culture being taken from, and is exploitative or disrespectful. Think fashion houses adopting styles or motifs without acknowledging, crediting and supporting the cultures they are traditionally used in.

On the other hand, cultural appreciation is based in respect and understanding, and aimed at actively supporting the culture borrowed from.

Of course, the field of cultural appropriation is endlessly more complex than these three points. So this blog continues with the question ‘Can I wear ethnic jewellery?‘ in which I explore the difference between appropriation and appreciation further, and also discuss the role of history!

—

Want to learn more about the background of jewellery? The courses might be just the thing for you: have a look at them here!

Browse more blog articles on the world of jewellery here!

Never miss out on a new article and other jewellery news? Join the Jewellery List and have them delivered in your inbox!

—

References

An excellent start to read more is this blog, or this one.

The Atlantic discussed the difference in this article

Would you like to quote this article? Please do! Here’s how:

S. van Roode, [write the title as you see it above this post], published on the Bedouin Silver website [paste the exact link to this article], accessed on [the date you are reading this article and decided it was useful for you].

Sigrid van Roode

Sigrid van Roode is an archeologist, ethnographer and jewellery historian. Her main field of expertise is jewellery from North Africa and Southwest Asia, as well as archaeological and archaeological revival jewellery. She has authored several books on jewellery. Sigrid has lectured for the National Museum of Antiquities in Leiden, Turquoise Mountain Jordan, and many others. She provides consultancy and research on jewellery collections for both museums and private collections, teaches courses and curates exhibitions. She is not involved in the business of buying and selling jewellery, and focuses on research, knowledge production, and education only.

What’s in a name?

What’s in a name?

by | Opinion

jewellery and identity

What’s in a name?

Updated Jan 24, 2024

One of the most complex issues when working with jewellery is how to put the origin of a piece into words. Looking at a hallmark is only the beginning. The hallmark systems, which operate on a national level, can inadvertently be counterproductive in attributing jewellery: when a piece is hallmarked in one particular country, this does not mean that the type is exclusive to that country.

There is much more to the identity of a jewellery piece: who made it, who wore it, where, and when. Here are some thoughts on how we identify jewellery and from which point of view we do that.

A Ouled Nail Bedouin woman and silver bracelets.
A foulet khamsa from Morocco, with a bright green glass cabochon.

Which name to use: the issues with countries

In most jewellery books, you will find pieces of jewellery assigned to a particular country. That seems rather straightforward, but is in reality quite complicated. Most of the borders delineating countries we know today have come into existence after World War II and the various wars for independence. These borders are disputed in several cases, too.

So especially when a jewellery piece is a little older, the country as we know it today may have had a different geographical range, may not have existed at all when the piece was made or may have been colonized after the piece was made.

Modern state boundaries also cut through age-old systems of exchange and cultural space: they have been conceived on the drawing board during colonial times. That is reflected in their straight and angular lines, disregarding natural boundaries such as rivers or mountain ranges that defined cultural spheres of contact.

Identities: cities, towns and tribes

Arbitrary though they may be, modern borders have a compartmentalizing effect: national identity does not always take transnational identities into account. Sometimes, this even leads to disputes about whether a piece of jewellery is, for example, Moroccan or Algerian, Algerian or Tunisian.. But that distinction is not always relevant, because a piece of jewellery can be both: the particular Amazigh tribe that makes use of it, may very well live in more than one country.

So, when referring to countries, it is always important to remain aware that these are countries as they are now – and that countries are not equal to cultures.

That is different for cities and towns. These may be older than the country they are currently located in. Cities and towns also cater to a larger clientele.

An example are the bracelets shown above: these were made in Cairo, and worn in Sinai, southern Palestine and southern Jordan. The Bedouin that purchased these bracelets inhabited this large area, which now consists of three different countries.

So do we call it an Egyptian bracelet, because it was made there?

A Palestinian bracelet, because it was worn there?

Do we call it Israeli or Jordanian, even though the bracelet was made before these countries themselves existed?

Or is it a Bedouin bracelet, because these are the people of whose culture this was part?

Identities: religion and movement

Another aspect of identification is often religion. This is where it gets even more complicated, especially in the sphere of creation. Many master craftsmen of jewellery were Jewish, but does that make a piece they created Jewish, too? Craftsmen catered to clientele from all religions, throughout history.

An example are the two Coptic silversmiths living in Bahariyya Oasis, Egypt, who created jewellery for an almost exclusively Muslim clientele. Are their pieces Christian?

And what to think of itinerant craftsmen, who traveled through a, sometimes vast, region to create jewellery for a variety of patrons? Is their nationality, tribal affiliation or religion even relevant to the identity of the pieces they made, just because they made them?

It is – when the jewellery they make serves to explicitly identify its wearers as belonging to a certain group. And that brings me to the topic of identity.

Jewellery and cultural identity

I believe the key is to understand how jewellery is very closely linked to identity. Now ‘identity’ is of course a notoriously fluid concept, interpreted differently depending on context.

But the picture that emerges is that the backbone of identity often is the locality or tribe a person belongs to, with religion coming in second and expressed in significant, but relatively small differences in dress and adornment, and modern nations following only after that.

Jewellery worn by Jewish, Christian and Muslim women can be completely identical, because they both live in a region with a certain notion of what ‘their’ jewellery looked like. The foulet khamsa shown above for example was worn by women of all three religions in a certain region of Morocco – read more about this ornament here.

So, when determining where a piece is from, I feel that all these factors should be taken into account instead of just pinpointing an origin in a country as we know it today.

There is the question of where it was created and by whom, who would have been wearing it and in which geographical range, and where it eventually was sold.

A piece can be simultaneously Yemeni and Saudi when it’s part of a community living on either side of a modern border. It can be Jewish and Islamic when created by a Jewish craftsman for a Muslim patron.

All of these aspects form part of the identity of the piece, and together they paint a much more vivid picture of the people who wore these multi-dimensional pieces. Trying to classify a piece as exclusively this-or-that ultimately says more about us, than about the wearers themselves.

—

Find out more about the changes over time in jewellery and identity in the e-course on History of Jewellery!

More articles on jewellery? Browse them all here!

Never miss out on new articles, exhibitions, tips and how-to’s? Join the Jewellery List and receive regular updates straight into your inbox!

—

Would you like to quote this article? Please do! Here’s how:

S. van Roode, [write the title as you see it above this post], published on the Bedouin Silver website [paste the exact link to this article], accessed on [the date you are reading this article and decided it was useful for you].

Sigrid van Roode

Sigrid van Roode is an archeologist, ethnographer and jewellery historian. Her main field of expertise is jewellery from North Africa and Southwest Asia, as well as archaeological and archaeological revival jewellery. She has authored several books on jewellery. Sigrid has lectured for the National Museum of Antiquities in Leiden, Turquoise Mountain Jordan, and many others. She provides consultancy and research on jewellery collections for both museums and private collections, teaches courses and curates exhibitions. She is not involved in the business of buying and selling jewellery, and focuses on research, knowledge production, and education only.

Losing sight

Losing sight

by | Opinion

the decline in knowledge

Losing sight

Traditional jewellery is disappearing at a fast rate. It is no longer made in the quantities past generations would need, and it is being sold both in the countries of origin as well as in the regions of the world where collectors live. These days, that is not just ‘the West’, but also for example China: amber and coral are bought in bulk by Chinese collectors. But besides the jewellery itself, another valuable asset is disappearing at an even more alarming speed. That is knowledge about what this jewellery actually is – and what it represents.

That loss of insight is for example visible in the flawed identification of pieces of adornment. Sometimes these can be way off the mark, such as the Bedouin face veil shown in the gallery below. It was offered up for auction as a body ornament/necklace from Turkmenistan (1). The dorsal ornament from Turkmenistan, pictured below as well, was offered as a Saudi jewel. We might have a good laugh about such a mismatch (and I usually do), but the rate in which these appear is indicative of a much more serious matter.

Now you might think ‘Of course these are misidentified, they are being handled by cultural outsiders’ and that would certainly hold true in a number of cases. But incorrect attributions also, and increasingly, occur within the countries of origin themselves. The photograph in the gallery below shows several splendid Yemeni necklaces – I photographed these in the exhibition Splendour and Shine in the Flow of Time. When I posted this photograph on my Instagram-account, I received dozens of messages from Algerian followers insisting this was Algerian. The Turkmen jewellery, which I photographed on the Amsterdam Tribal Jewelry and Textiles Fair, received a lot of attention as well, with many people writing me these pieces were from Kabylia. These are just a few examples: I receive messages every single day of people who genuinely believe a piece of adornment stems from their culture, even if it hails from another continent, another culture, another language family entirely.

The loss of accurate knowledge also manifests in constructed images presenting as reality. Lebanese singer Myriam Fares launched a new music video early in 2022, in which she claimed to dress and perform in Amazigh tradition: the jewels and dress she used in an online dress-up challenge however were random and had very little to do with actual Amazigh adornment. (2)  The comments on this particular post range from appreciation to anger: misrepresenting Amazigh culture on a global stage by an Arab performer is adding insult to injury in an already strained dynamic. Being respectful about adornment has much wider implications than just ‘looking the part’: it includes understanding what jewellery actually means. The photograph of the young woman included in the image gallery (click ‘next’ on the right side of the gallery) is another example of a non-existent, exotic-looking ensemble. Constructed reality in older photographs is a well-known phenomenon, as I addressed in another blog post. It is however still very much alive today, where photos are made specifically to share one narrative or to convey one particular message. There is no such thing as neutral photographs, yet we often accept them as reliable sources of information. When we no longer recognize that a dress is worn the wrong way, or mismatched with ornaments that would not belong with it, the power of misinformation that is shaping our world view will only grow stronger.

Bedouin face veil

Turkmen dorsal ornament

Yemeni necklaces

Turkmen jewellery

Modern mashup

You might also think ‘So what? A wrongly attributed piece, what’s the big deal?’. Incorrectly identifying pieces of adornment is not my point here. That happens all the time, and many of those glitches can be avoided with a little more research. My point is that ascribing pieces of heritage to another culture has consequences. In the continuous struggle for identity and acknowledgement that many cultures face, it is imperative to be aware that spreading misinformation is not helping, to say the least. It can even be outright damaging, if the misattribution occurs willfully and intentionally – rebranding heritage to fit a new narrative is one of the most vicious ways of erasing the past.

Piece by piece, accurate insights in dress and adornment are diluted further with chunks of misinformation that are repeated over and over again – the Internet is as fast as it is patient. Images are easily copied and shared, with the accompanying background information disappearing and being replaced by brief, and often wrong, captions. With the watering down of conducting proper research to simply ‘Googling’, these nuggets of misinformation continue to be repeated and shared. The meticulous work of Wafa Ghnaim of Tatreez and Tea is just one example of the time and effort it takes to bring back the detailed meaning of Palestinian tatreez from the brink of oblivion, and there are many more researchers that work tirelessly to ensure not only material culture survives, but its cultural, social, economic and historic meaning as well. One of the most important factors in this ongoing effort is that the results are shared widely, so they are accessible to people worldwide: the databases of both the Textile Research Centre and the Zay Initiative are just two examples of accessible information.

And we need those efforts more than ever. Because we have now arrived at that point where the transfer of knowledge to the next generation is crucial. If we lose sight of both the details of and the wider world behind adornment, if we let the stories of both wearers and collectors slip through the cracks of time, the remaining jewellery pieces will have lost their voice as a historic source forever.

—-

Do you own a collection? Please do try and document it as much as possible. Every little note helps! A free guide on how to get started with that is here.

Are you wondering what to do with your collection? Please consider the work of the Qilada Foundation – my non-profit initiative aimed at repatriating collections and everything they represent to their countries of origin.

References

1) Catawiki lot 59513855, auctioned on June 17th 2022

2) The choreography did, however: this was copied straight from a choreography by Kif-Kif Bledi, a group of performers who are known for their deep study of dance and identity. The contemporary twists they add to traditional dance made the choreography easily identifiable as a creation of Kif-Kif Bledi as shown in this video– the intellectual property dispute is still ongoing.

Sigrid van Roode

Sigrid van Roode is an archeologist, ethnographer and jewellery historian. She considers jewellery heritage and a historic source. She has authored several books on jewellery from North Africa and Southwest Asia, and on archaeological jewellery. Sigrid has lectured for the Society of Jewellery Historians, the National Museum of Antiquities in Leiden and the Sultan Qaboos Cultural Center, among many others. She curates exhibitions and teaches online courses on jewellery from North Africa & Southwest Asia.

Early Photography Portraits

Early Photography Portraits

by | Opinion

an unreliable source

Early photography portraits of the Middle East

Updated Jan 11, 2024

Don’t you just love those old photos of women wearing jewellery? Many collectors search for these and use them to get an idea of how jewellery was worn. But there are some serious considerations to take into account with these photos: you can’t take them at face value.

Staged studio photographs

The thing with old portraits is that in almost all cases they have been staged. Early photographic equipment was heavy and cumbersome: you couldn’t snap a candid picture like we are used to nowadays, the subject had to stay really still.

Buildings and landscapes are better at that than people, so these form a large part of early photos.⁠ For people, photographers would have their own studio and their own props, and they could create photographs of people dressed in just about anything that they believed would sell.

And that is an important aspect of early photography: the point of view from which these photos were taken.

Early photography: creating the ‘Orient’

Early photography very often served to create an image of ‘the Orient’ to send back home. Of course, this new art was also used in documentation like for example of archaeological sites and monuments, but documenting more often than not switched to creating when contemporary life was photographed.

What was photographed had to fit into a specific framework: idyllic scenes in the countryside ‘like it had been in Biblical times’, and studio photography of men and women at their most ‘Oriental’. This included strangely misplaced clothing and sometimes complete nudity, as well as unnatural poses.⁠ Life as it actually happened was rarely photographed.⁠

Old photographs therefore are not neutral sources of information: we always need to be aware of the intent with and purpose for which they were taken. The photograph shown above was taken by Jean Besancenot in Morocco, and is more reliable than for example images from photo studios operating in the main cities.

Constructing the Orient: modern media

But is that misrepresentation a thing of the past? Sadly, no. In this digital age, photographs circulate faster and wider than ever before.

Social media platforms like Instagram and Pinterest are picture-based entirely and a quick search will get you dozens of image results. The context that goes with these however often does not come along, and as a consequence misinformation and misrepresentations are repeated again and again. It’s why I started this blog, as I wrote about here.

With the availability of photography for virtually everyone, paired with the slow disappearance of traditional dress and adornment, we enter a new era of constructed images.

Again, mashups of dress and adornment are created, photographed and circulated widely with just one click of a mouse. The photo shown above is an example for such a mashup: the headdress and face veil are not worn together like this, as they belong to two different social groups.

How to observe early portrait photos from the Middle East

Here are three points to consider when looking at old photographs of women wearing jewellery.

First of all, don’t take them at face value immediately but have a close look at what you actually see. Is it a studio photograph? Is the photographed person (semi-) nude? Is the photo part of a series, recognizable by captions like ‘scènes & types’? These are all indicators for posed and constructed photography. Postcards in particular are notoriously posed and in some cases a far cry from reality.

A second point is to look for other work by the same photographer: there is a difference between the well-known photo studios in large towns, and photographers associated with for example archaeological or military expeditions.Who was the photographer? What else did he (it was almost always a he, see for a remarkable exception this blog) photograph?

Thirdly, see what information, if any, you can dig up about the photograph itself. Especially with photographs found online, see what information comes with it: not every ‘Bedouin bride’ or ‘Woman in traditional clothing’ is identified accurately. As mislabeled info is often copied many times over (see more about that here), this may take some searching, but using the search feature for comparable images it may in some cases be possible to find a source with more information.

Taking the time to form an opinion about the trustworthiness of a photograph as visual source will help you gain a better understanding of the jewellery and dress you’re researching.

Early portrait photos and jewellery: what we can learn

Is there anything we can learn with certainty from early portrait photographs, regarding jewellery? Well, yes: we can observe which jewellery items were in existence at the time of photographing.

Even if they are props and used randomly (you’d be surprised to see how many necklaces ended up as headdresses, just because it looks so exotic), logic dictates they were available when the picture was taken.

This provides us with a timeframe: ‘this type of jewel existed as early as…’, and to some extent an idea of clothing. These pieces of information can then be used again to contribute to the actual story of the photographed people as they really were, instead of how the photographer invented them to be.⁠

And that’s the story jewellery research aims to bring back to life!

—

Never miss a thing on jewellery studies? Join the Jewellery List and find new articles in your inbox each month!

—

References

I have written this blog post from a perspective of photography as resource for jewellery studies and not as a discussion of early photography itself. This field is widely explored by scholars from a variety of angles. Here are a few starting points:

The essays in the Postcard Women’s Imaginarium are a very important contribution by contemporary artists and scholars to the interpretation of Orientalist postcards.

Tied in to the inventing and constructing of photographs is the power balance between the (foreign) photographer and the photographed. The Civil Contract of Photography by Ariella Azoulay explores these ethical aspects in depth. The video A Snapshot of Empire: the racist legacy of colonial postcards shows how these pre-staged photographs continue to influence our view today: watching these 8 minutes is highly recommended!

Local photography is discussed in Ritter and Scheiwiller (eds), The Indigenous Lens? Early Photography in the Near and Middle East (Berlin 2018), of which the introductory chapter can be read here.

A selection of sources for historical photographs of the Middle East can be found here and here.

Would you like to quote this article? Please do! Here’s how:

S. van Roode, [write the title as you see it above this post], published on the Bedouin Silver website [paste the exact link to this article], accessed on [the date you are reading this article and decided it was useful for you].

Sigrid van Roode

Sigrid van Roode is an archeologist, ethnographer and jewellery historian. Her main field of expertise is jewellery from North Africa and Southwest Asia, as well as archaeological and archaeological revival jewellery. She has authored several books on jewellery. Sigrid has lectured for the National Museum of Antiquities in Leiden, Turquoise Mountain Jordan, and many others. She provides consultancy and research on jewellery collections for both museums and private collections, teaches courses and curates exhibitions. She is not involved in the business of buying and selling jewellery, and focuses on research, knowledge production, and education only.