03 December 2015
Cultural Larceny
By Chin Chin
I have a horrible, horrible suspicion that I have indulged in colonial racism. No, not “cultural appropriation”, nothing as bad as that, thank God, but the slightly more venal sin of under-appreciating the Canadians. You see, apart from knowing that there is tundra there, and forest and bears and things like that, I hadn’t really spent much time thinking about Canada and its people. Of course I was aware of the obvious things. Canadians are good at trapping and keen on health and safety. Yes, we all know that. Also that they wear furry hats with the tails of the animal hanging down their backs and carry axes, and are generally the chaps you would like on your side in a dispute over a forest path with a grizzly. I even knew that lots of them are lumberjacks and are okay about it. What I hadn’t appreciated, however, was the potential for Canada’s intellectuals to improve the lot of the human race.
Over, then, to the University of Ottawa where the Students Federation has closed down a free yoga class (designed to help students with disabilities) on the grounds that yoga has been stolen from the colonised and oppressed people who invented it. The Students Federation has been much mocked for its ruling and, to be fair, when you read that the ruling was made by the “higher-ups”, you do wonder what the “lower-downs” can possibly be like. Still, the reactionary press has been on its high horse making comparisons with the transfer of algebra from the Middle East and the spread of all sorts of other ideas and philosophies around the world.
It is a shame that imaginations are so limited. Rather than trashing the idea of “cultural appropriation” we should be looking at its potential. If philosophers have managed to make something useful out of the concept of a “just war,” couldn’t we do something with the idea that it is a form of theft to adopt the traditional practices of other races?
I have never done any yoga. No, that isn’t because I’m too sofa-bound and lazy to do all that stretching. It’s not even that when I was young I confused it with yoghurt, the apparent similarity of the linguistic root being reinforced by the fact that both of them appeal to the same sort of Guardian-reading beardo (or lady bearda, so as not to be sexist about it). No, as I now realise, I was subconsciously uneasy about the cultural issues and the more I think about them the less easy I become. You won’t catch me sitting cross-legged on a towel in front of some university building – at least when there are good warm pubs selling beer where I could be sitting instead. Yes, it’s sad, I’d like to be out there stretching and getting fit, but my principles forbid it.
It would be a mistake to think, however, that the cultural heritage issues stop there. What about food? I have never cared for coconut and I now realise that it’s because the idea of eating coconut was brought back from colonised and oppressed tropical islands. Send back the bounty bar! That’s what I say. Replace it with something untainted by colonialism.
Then there’s the brussels sprout. Many a schoolboy has had these inflicted on him over the years and the news that, due to the damp autumn, this year’s sprouts will be 50% larger than usual must have cast a gloom over many a youngster looking forward to Christmas. It’s all right now, though. Like the man with the raccoon on his head, the University of Ottawa has come galloping to the rescue. Brussels sprouts come from Belgium, a country variously oppressed by the Spanish, the Dutch and the French. It would be going too far to suggest that the object of the oppression was to get hold of the sprout. That piece of cultural looting was probably incidental; still, it is no defence to a charge of racism to say that it was not deliberate. The sprouts need to be restricted to Belgium every bit as surely as the Stone of Scone (note to University of Ottawa: this is a real stone and not a bun) needed to go back to Holyrood.
It’s when you get to the American imports that you realise the full potential of this doctrine. McDonald’s and Amazon should clearly be banned from Europe and replaced by local restaurants and booksellers. We could kick out American TV programmes while we were at it. Actually, why not make it illegal to say “how are you today,” with that irritating accident on the “you,” unless the speaker has an American passport. “Have a nice day” would have to be restricted too, save in cases of genuine concern. Every European country should be restricted to its traditional way of life. Germans would not be allowed to tell jokes. The French would not be allowed to wash.
What an enormous improvement it would all make. It’s true, though, that there would be one or two disadvantages. Any restaurants serving good food in London would have to be run by a Frenchman. Well, we could probably live with that, even if it meant an inspectorate of foods checking that British run restaurants did not exceed a particular standard. Then the wine. Ah yes, the wine. You will be expecting me to say that we should be restricted to British vintages. That however would be to overlook the cultural background. Since Henry II married Eleanor of Aquitaine, our royal family has always had a good claim to the south of France. So it’s our wine, not theirs. We should be able to drink it, not them!
But, just a minute. Where does that leave the University of Ottawa’s claim to academic prowess? Not so good, eh? Never mind, philosophy isn’t everything. There are still plenty of bears left to wrestle with in the forests.
ERRATUM: Since writing the above, I have had a call from the editor. He tells me that George III gave up his claim to the throne of France in 1801, although the Jacobite pretenders have never done so. Hmmm, I’m certainly no Jacobite so that is a problem. Theory dictates that I should not be able to drink French wines? Well, to the Devil with the theory then!
Click here if you would like an email reminder when The Shaw Sheet comes out each Thursday
