Cultural Appropriation Nonsense, Fashion, Harry, William and Charles
Cultural Appropriation
Othello and Desdemona, William Powell Frith (1819-1909)
Photo Credit: The Fitzwilliam Museum [CC BY-NC-ND]
|
“I feel the days when English-speaking actors put on
accents and told the world they were Russian or German or Swedish or Italian –
those days are gone,” Ralph Fiennes (pictured) said, explaining why he had
largely cast Russian actors in The White
Crow. “One has read quite a lot of critical responses to films that are
still doing that. The landscape has shifted.”
Fiennes defensive position follows fresh demands for
greater authenticity on screen. Whether driven by a wish to create more work
for disabled actors, ethnic minorities and transgender performers, or perhaps
by a more sophisticated awareness among viewers since the international cinema
and box-set boom, there is a powerful new imperative in the acting profession:
keep it real.
Such concerns found voice in Wales late last year when
several well-known actors, including Rhys Ifans called on the National Theatre
of Wales to prioritise native talent instead of bringing in English actors.
…But, elsewhere, performers and directors are pushing
back against calls for authentic casting. “Nobody who has talent should be kept
out of the acting profession. And nobody, even white middle-class males should
be prevented from playing any part,” said Simon Callow.
…Michael Coveney, the veteran theatre critic, bemoans
the escalation of creative limitations. Citing Laurence Olivier’s Othello at
the National Theatre in 1964 – this interpretation was rendered in black makeup
– a practice that would be considered irredeemably offensive nowadays – and yet
was “still the greatest performance in anything” Coveney thinks he has seen.
(The Observer, 2019)
Shouldn’t talent should be the principle – not gender,
race or “cultural appropriation.”?
*The actor Laurence
Fox
gave The Times an
insight the other day into why so many actors become “self-involved little
pricks” when he reflected on how “people walk you from your trailer to the
make-up truck, in case you’re too busy worrying about how famous you are today
to find it yourself” and “send a car to drive you to work in case you get lost
because you were thinking about Hamlet.”
(The Times, 2019) Fashion
Dressing for the Masquerade, Thomas Rowlandson (1757-1827)
Photo Credit: The Henry Barber Trust, The Barber Institute Of Fine Arts, University of Birmingham
[CC BY-NC-ND]
|
In recent years the industry has had to reconcile itself to some uncomfortable truths – such as the fact it’s horribly polluting, or that it preys on young people’s vulnerabilities and low self-esteem, and that it can be elitist, and racist, and mean. Just as its sins have been made ever more apparent so has its value as a social platform become more keen. The global fashion industry is worth some $2.5 trn (£1.6trn).
It has influence. And brands, editors, stylists and creatives are waking up to the fact that compassion can have commercial perks. In a climate in which we wear our hearts (and logos) on our sleeves, the brand that stands for “kindness” or “sustainability” has more power.
… And yes. It could be hokum. Cynics will say that these initiatives are mere lip service in an industry that still venerates 18-year-old body shapes and charges fortunes for clothes.
(The i. 5.8.2019)
Don’t businesses adapt to the prevailing trends. If “doing
good” will increase the profit of the company then it will “do good”. Wasn’t
the same kind of campaign instigated by Gillette not so long ago? Didn’t it
associate with “positive masculinity” and the “MeToo movement”?
The Royals
The Magic Circle, John William Waterhouse (1849-1917)
Photo Credit: Tate [CC BY-NC-ND]
|
…For a long time, a “bicycling monarchy” was mooted as a model for our own royals. Surely, unburdened of their palaces and ceremonial trappings, mixing with the populace in a semblance of normality like their Dutch or Swedish cousins, our royals would not only better reflect our egalitarian age, but be happier. Yet the Duchess of Cambridge will not, unlike Crown Princess Mary of Denmark, need to pick her kids up from kindergarten in a cargo bike anytime soon.
Instead, the House of Windsor is transitioning into the Davos Dynasty. In conversation with Sir David Attenborough in January, Prince William fitted in perfectly with the laid-back, dress-down plutocrats who preach social justice from £3,000-a-night Swiss mountaintop suites, espouse philanthropy while recoiling at any mention of tax.
…At the WE event, Prince Harry said that climate change is “not political but humanitarian”: saving the planet will not require redistribution from rich to poorer nations, it won’t subvert the world order. It’s about people, about caring, or at least saying that you do.
…Now his wife has introduced him to the values of modern celebrity, that you can justify private jet jaunts and £2,000 coats by being “inspirational” with the “clean” food you eat, the blessed hashtag you type on an Instagram post, or the messages you write on bananas for prostitutes. The unimpeachable new royals can retain their ancestral power and all the world’s material blessings along with virtue too.
(Janice Turner, The Times, 2019)
*I get a little exercised when I see the Duchess of Cambridge described as “thrifty” for wearing an outfit worth several hundred pounds more than once. But Prince Charles has just been photographed in a pair of Vilebrequin swimming trunks that he first wore at least twelve years ago. “Probably 16,” says a spokesperson for Vilebrequin, “because this particular style went on sale in 2003 and designs tend not to stick around beyond a season.” The trunks retail at £195 (leaving inflation out of it, this equates to £12 a year of ownership, so you will have to decide if their longevity amounts to thrift.
(Paula Cocozza, The Guardian, 2019)
Good on you Charles.
Did you buy the trunks in bulk?
Comments
Post a Comment