We need to talk about your kitsch problem...

I fear that Sven's taking Tiki to a museum and his magnum opus "Tiki Pop" has furthered the serious investigation into Tiki that is upon us. And it is more and more popular. "Authentic" is something we have struggled with for a decade now. Sven and some of us "elitists" feel that "authentic" is one thing, and many others want to embrace it all and "don't worry have a Mai Tai."

Then we get Party City and Walmart pushing the most horrid abominations and you have to pick a side. Is that all cool and do what you like, or do we raise the flag of "inauthentic" and put it down?

If we allow that Party City Tiki is okay, then anything is okay and pretty soon there WILL be a clamoring call for Tiki to be viewed in the same way as the Washington Redskins or even Civil War memorial defenders. As the Tiki becomes more aesthetically offensive to both us "elitists" as well as every day people with taste, it also WILL be seen as offensive to Polynesian islanders and their culture.

The call for "authentic" as put forward by the "elitists" is what can save Tiki.

Every article that uses the work "kitsch" about Tiki is ringing the bell that will call forth the cultural wars.

Abolish All Tiki Bars
She has a point and her voice will get louder and the comments full of "lighten up and have a Mai Tai" sound as awful as the guy at the Redskins football gave saying "have a beer and relax dude!"

A READER IN THEMED AND IMMERSIVE SPACES

A long read, but skip to page 61 and the Tiki section. He spells it out pretty well and I bet he is 100% right. This aloofness of Tiki people and acceptance of everything will be it's demise.

I am saying it right here and right now in no uncertain terms. If we don't ALL get more "elite" about Tiki and start disdaining the awful crap, we will ALL soon be painted with the brush of Walmart Tiki and we'll be hiding our collections like old southerners who "take pride in the heroics of Robert E Lee." Or we'll revel in the low brow and how normal society doesn't get us so here's our middle finger. That will not play well to the Polynesian people on the other side who are calling us racists.

"Mai-Kai: History & Mystery of the Iconic Tiki Restaurant" the book

[ Edited by: Swanky 2017-05-25 10:32 ]

Well now my life and my past life is totally screwed. I love original-elite tiki...that's what got me to this site. I grew up between Maine and Northern VA and went to many Redskins games and my High School (JEB Stuart) is embroiled in a name change. Honest truth, I never considered the origins, etc. I was a fan and a proud Raider and I love Polynesian Pop Restaurants from the past. Thanks Swanky.

[ Edited by: Or Got Rum? 2017-05-25 11:29 ]

Well said, Swanky.

Eloquently put, Tim.

Love the thought here, but authentic Polynesian and Polynesia through the old GI filter would both be considered "Cultural Appropriation" and not a good thing. We are already on the proverbial slippery slope. Authentic is not tiki, it is Hawaianna or Polynesiana.. tiki was born not through cultural accuracy, but through amalgamation and fantasy. While I do not like the Party City Tiki, it seems that all what we call Tiki is currently suspect already. I fear we WILL have to hide our collections none too soon!

~Insantiki

I seriously get headaches reading serious articles about the topic of "authenticity" in tiki cultures. I read both articles. I love "tiki", yet I fail to understand how anyone can make any sort of argument for "authenticity" in "tiki communities." I suppose the only call for purity would be for items, music, art in STYLE of the original "Polynesian Pop" phase of the 1940s-60s. I have seen a few passable things mass produced here & there that would fit into that style period, and I've seen plenty of stuff that wouldn't. But unless it's an actual artifact from Polynesia, it's all appropriation & kitsch. I'm ok with that. What is "authentic"?

Tiki is a culture of its own, that's why. It's not Hawaiiana or anything else. It has a history an a culture. If you would read the book of tiki you would understand this.

Thanks for posting Swanky!

As I posted elsewhere, "This is why we can't have nice things."

That's not me trying to be glib. It's a persistent issue. Pretty much any themed aesthetic I can come up with would be offensive to someone. And I'm not dismissing that--many people come by their distaste honestly, and have legitimate reasons for feeling the way they do. The fact that some/many/most people with Polynesian/Hawaiian ancestry have no problem with tiki doesn't diminish the feelings of the author of the first article linked above. The fact that she finds tiki bars problematic siphons some of the joy out of it for me, but you know what's worse? The spiteful comments directed at her in the comments section (never read the comments).

I've worked over the years with a Mexican national who's a great guy. Funny, smart as a whip, and one of the most talented graphic artists I've ever known. Nothing ruffles his feathers, but he absolutely bristles at the terms Hispanic and Latino. In his view, he's not from Hispania or Rome--both of those terms classify a broad swath of North American people in Eurocentric terms. He's Mexican, and U.S. citizens of Hispanic heritage are American, period. He also has problems with what Cinco de Mayo has become in the U.S. (can't say I disagree with him there) and the questionable, stereotypical decor that adorns some Mexican food restaurants. He's got a point, but he knows he's not going to change the course of an entire cultural representation. He states his case then moves on.

My point is (if I have one--I have to wonder sometimes) that all the "education" in the world isn't going to change his mind, or the author above. To think otherwise assumes ignorance on their part. My friend understands the necessity of such terms, and knows there are certain expectations of restaurants, etc. That doesn't mean he likes them. Likewise, it's going to be damned hard to convince the author who wants to abolish tiki bars that she's got it wrong. She's already familiar with the claim that modern tiki is a celebration of the original tiki era, itself never a serious attempt to represent cultures of the South Pacific. And she rejects it.

"Agree to disagree" is trite, but some form of detente may be the best anyone can hope for. If I stripped what few tikis I had from my bar and recast it as a "Caribbean bar" I know good and well everyone who visited would still view it as a tiki bar, no matter how much Jimmy Buffett I played on the stereo. That's not going to change even if overpriced resin moais disappear from every garden center in the country. Most people just want to be listened to, to be heard, to be acknowledged. That's why civil discussion is so important, but seems progressively more difficult to attain. When both parties start out from a defensive posture, it's damn hard to accomplish any real communication. Personally, I don't wish to give offense to anyone and will go out of my way to not make someone feel uncomfortable. But I've also put a lot of effort into my still-developing tiki bar. It give me pleasure, both working on it and relaxing in it. I don't intend to give that up. How does one reconcile those two positions? I'm not smart enough to answer that question, but without civility, there's no chance at achieving a mutually-acceptable level of tolerance. Or something like that.

So I just came back from a visit to the American Museum of Natural History in New York. They have a section on Pacific Islander peoples and their art, and it was curated by Margaret Meade, so it's pretty good. No surprise that I found nothing which was even close to Polynesian pop-style tiki stuff except for a tiny and relatively new display case with two small kid-size aloha shirts on display. One of those shirts had President Obama's image on it. They were making some sort of point about modernized clothing and cultural sensitivity or insensitivity, or something like that. But clearly what is "tiki" is not anywhere close to the authentic stuff you find in places like the Bishop Museum in Honolulu, or what I just recently saw in New York.

"Tiki" is a recent development which is very loosely and very casually tied to reality.

But can we control "tiki" now that it's so pervasive in Walmart, Party City, and in today's pop culture? I think that's unlikely we may just need to suck it up and enjoy what we have, and stick to our standards. I think the de-evolution will continue regardless of what we do. Not sure how much more crappy it can get, but Party City is pretty much the bottom of the barrel. I think of their stuff as "clown tiki" because it's so colorful and ridiculously stylized.

Modern tiki culture: imagery, food, drinks, and to a lesser extent music, is pretty much entirely derivative. We all (on this forum, at least) know this.

What we need to be doing is having discussions like this. What is appropriate for us to continue to use for decor, and style? Should we only use authentic south seas carvings - and if so, do the artists need to be limited to folks of island heritage? Or, should we never use authentic decor and only go with lowbrow pop art? Is there a middle ground?

How can we have our tropical fantasy that riffs off many cultures and honor the cultures they're riffed from?

How can we encourage representation from the cultures we're riffing from? None of the island folks I've talked to have problems with the tiki thing, but it's a (very) small sample.

In the big scholarly paper Swanky linked, there's a quote from Sven saying (I'm paraphrasing) "Keep the imagery from the Polynesian triangle - nothing Mexican, nothing Asian" - but the food in traditional tiki palaces is Chinese(ish) - so much so that Chinese restaurants co-opted tiki to the extent that in the 80s, the only place to find anything remotely like a real tiki drink was either the few old palaces that remained, or your local late-night Chinese restaurant. Do we keep things as a pure homage to mid-century colonialist attitudes, with men in suits and women in coconut bras, or do we stretch out allowing our tiki lady friends to own their sexuality with burlesque, and hold classic burlesque shows at midnight at our tiki conventions with almost no references to tiki culture ('cause those burlesque performers have their own style and schwerve, which is, indeed, mid-century inspired, but not tiki)?

I have no answer to these questions. But we should be asking them. The one thing that really, fully, absolutely has to stop in our community is the kneejerk "Shut up! Shut up! The cultural appropriation phrase was mentioned and now I'm going to attack you!" reaction that's overwhelming in response to any article criticizing our community's co-opting of imagery from an era where this kind of sensitivity was unimaginable. We live in a time where we, as a wider culture, are concerned with such things, and need to address them.

And please don't take this as me saying your Tiki stuff is crap or whatever. I'm simply talking about a concern. I'm not here to bash as much as sound an alarm for this community to get our story straight before some other forces start to tell it for us and we end up in trouble.

For the record, there is a lot of old "authentic" Tiki stuff I think is tacky and ugly. And Tiki was born out of bastardization and "inauthentic" roots, so we have a tough time getting on solid ground.

I just think we are going to see more of these stories. We gotta talk about how we approach the subject and how to separate what we define as the core of Tiki from what Party City does.

Maybe it's me, but I've always found insistence on keeping tiki true to its South Pacific origins amusing when rum, which underpins and lubricates the tiki culture dating back to Don the Beachcomber, is pretty much the essence of the Caribbean. Not throwing stones, it just give me a chuckle.

It has been my experience that one cannot prevent the crap to rise to the surface with the cool stuff. One can point out what oneself, personally thinks about it, but the differentiation between GOOD bad taste and BAD bad taste is lost on many.

I will continue to do so in my books and other publications, but it's just like with the foodie internet writers who cannot see beyond the rim of their Zombie glass and hail every bland bar with a mere Tiki cocktail menu as a "Tiki bar" nowadays. You can rail against it, you can explain why they are wrong...but that won't make them read my books, or understand where they are missing the point.

They, just like those politically correct "colonial guilt" carriers, live in THEIR reality, and we will hardly make a dent in it. It's just like in politics. Parallel universes.

Any cultural wave will eventually create a counter reaction. Let the smug bastards come, so we can skewer each other's self-righteousness :)

This said, I must say that the Lukas article is an amazing attempt by an outsider to understand our complex esthetic! And he "gets" that it is mostly playful. Kudos for thinking much more about it than 99% of journalists out there!

[ Edited by: bigbrotiki 2017-05-25 13:51 ]

On 2017-05-25 13:30, Swanky wrote:
And please don't take this as me saying your Tiki stuff is crap or whatever. I'm simply talking about a concern.

I'm glad you started this conversation, Swanky. It's a good one to have, and continue to have.

I don't think anyone's going to win against Party City. One can only weather the storm. The Wife good-naturedly bought me some tiki string lights from some place a couple of months ago. I thanked her, but she could tell I wasn't thrilled. It was mainly because they were cheap, and looked cheap. So we returned them and used the money to buy some solar illuminated glass pineapples for the landscape. Sounds kitschy, I know, but they look amazing at night. There were no recriminations, no hurt feelings, but The Wife doesn't buy the cheap plastic tiki stuff anymore. We've defined the parameters and she's bought into it, 100 percent.

Patience and communication. We all have to start somewhere.

I just typed out a whole buncha crap on Facebook... I am re-editing and elaborating here, because I am really enjoying this thread (and... TC...)

I guess what bothers me when the "cultural appropriation" word gets brought up is, what is your INTENT in your decor, and in what oceanic artifacts (or other Tiki stuff, new or old) you bring into your home?

What about the spread of actual, honest-to-god KNOWLEDGE and RESPECT for a culture, its art, and its people, that has been kickstarted in some of us through an overarching love of Tiki and might not otherwise ever happen?

I can say, I know a helluva lot more about Papua New Guinea, Hawaiian folklore, and the art/cultural heritage of Fiji, the Marquesas islands, et al, than I ever would have probably dug into if I wasn't interested in Tiki first. If you can appreciate a piece of Oceanic art as ART, I feel you are more likely to want to LEARN (I am anyway) about where it came from, the people who made it, and why it exists. I don't personally see a difference between having a cocktail and admiring a beautiful Marquesan carving and somebody having a cocktail and admiring a landscape painting or something... You're appreciating the art and the craft of it. If you know where it came from and why it exists and can appreciate it for what it is in the larger context of it being something that someone MADE and brought into the world to be looked at and appreciated. With that, the art piece you're looking at and appreciating, you are undoubtedly appreciating because it conjures certain feelings inside of you that you enjoy. I think that's where the importance lies, personally.

And with that, how many (hundreds?) of artists have been INSPIRED by Oceanic art and culture to make their own ART? From Gaugin, to Witco, to Bumatay, to Hedley up to Bosko and Crazy Al (and Lake Surfer... Hi Dave!) Is THAT cultural appropriation? I don't see how it possibly could be... there's nothing disrespectful about it. To the contrary, these art pieces are made with the UTMOST respect and reverence for the source material and the people who first created their carvings before the marching Christian soldiers came along and all but obliterated native culture. This is ART inspired by an Polynesian person's CULTURE... isn't that the pinnacle of respect and maybe even flattery? I'm a white dude in Wisconsin in my mid-30's, so I maybe can't speak to how actual Polynesian and Oceanic peoples would feel about some of these things, but personally I would think you would be HAPPY to know there are these folks out there appreciating your culture in a way they might not have otherwise known about it. Is the gateway that got them there (whether walking around the Field Museum or in a Tiki bar) really that important?

I know I'm coming at this one sided, because when you have clown Tikis or Tikis wearing sunglasses and flip flops with a sign that says "TIKI SAYS RELAX!" or steam punk Tiki mugs or fezzes or pink gorillas or Star Wars Tiki mugs or... whatever... there is undoubtedly a much stronger argument to be made about respect to the source material. Or what constitutes "art" or a "tribute" or "reverence." With all this stuff... my personal feeling is it's fun and goofy or stupid or whatever. To each their own... how a Polynesian person might view that, I don't know. They likely have every right to be a little agog about it. But again, what's the intent? Is it borne from a love of Tiki and just having some fun with it (a gentle ribbing, maybe), or is it meant to be mocking or cheap or "cashing in?"

I am also very much into Sideshow and Circus history, and more oddball ethnographic stuff like what Robert Ripley was doing in the 1930's and 40's. Was writing a cartoon about Tsantsa shrunken heads or making a newsreel about the "giraffe necked women" of Burma explotative? Sure... that could be argued. But going back to my original point it's the INTENT... Ripley wasn't making these things (and Barnum didn't start his sideshows) to LAUGH AT or MOCK people or other cultures... they had a genuine interest in other cultures and far-flung parts of the world, and in people different than them... the mysteries of the world and of nature itself, and had they not documented certain aspects of it during the time they were alive, in the ways they knew how, think of all of the things we may never have actually known about, or had any real documentation of. It's the intent... Were there braying morons who went to point and mock and look down upon, of course, but that's because there are awful people everywhere.

Two more quick points and I'll turn over the lecturn (ha...)

One, Swanky had mentioned (either here or on Facebook) the point about the Redskins, and how saying "just relax and have a Mai Tai" is no different than a Redskins fan saying "just have a beer and relax." I absolutely agree with that, though if we're looking at something like the Redskins (a universally accepted derogatory term for indigenous peoples applied to a football team) and Tiki (in the modern context, a blanket term for a lot of different parts of a subculture, in the traditional context, the name for the "First Man" in Maori mythology or a god throughout Polynesian cultures... not derogatory in the least, just perhaps being mis-applied) I see this as an altogether different thing. If someone is LEARNING about Oceanic and Polynesian cultures in WHATEVER way that is, via Tiki, or creating art based on those cultures and a reverence for them, that is very different than a football fan... I seriously doubt there are Redskins fans who so love the team they are motivated to learn about Native American tribes of the Pacific Northwest. That's me being a nerd, sure, 'cuz are there a lot of people into Tiki who don't give three wet shits about the history or Oceanic culture or the more curatorial, museological aspect? Damn straight... a lot of 'em, no doubt... but that is hardly representative of the entire subculture of people into "Tiki."

...Second thing...

All this stuff stems from museums. The history of natural history museums (I can recommend a fantastic book about this topic for anyone interested) is the story of "Say, look at this interesting thing I found" and showing it to people. The Sideshow was born there. Journalism was born there. And, arguably, Tiki decor was born there... The set designers and decorators who inadvertently created the pillars of what we might call original "authentic tiki" (the "jumbo shrimp" of our conversation) saw artifacts on travels or in museums and they wanted that curatorial feel to have a level of "authentic" escapism... to try and conjure that sense of other lands, other cultures. Maybe that's two points in there... I'm rambly today.

To repeat the point after typing out a huge post most people will probably not read, it's the INTENT of the thing, and what you do with it.

--Pete

Those Tiki Ti Make Tiki Great Again hats are becoming more of a necessity now, i reckon. either way, that article was poorly written by a two bit journalist who didn't do an ounce of homework and was going off this idea that Hawai'i and Tiki are seen as one in the same for some odd reason.

This debate is exactly why I wrote my rather lengthy article on whether Tiki is "cultural appropriation". To excerpt the meat of it:

Though Tiki culture and Polynesian Pop has pulled substantial influence from traditional Polynesian culture, it was never intended in any sense to represent it. Rather, Tiki style was a reflection of the American experience of the South Pacific, which included the American encounter with Polynesian cultures and landscapes alongside the Pacific War and Cold War experiences, nautical romance, and elements of pure fantasy. Statues of Moai and Ku were ubiquitous, and regularly supplemented with mermaids and shipwrecks. Tiki culture ostensibly began when Ernest Raymond Beaumont Gantt opened the first Don the Beachcomber bar in Hollywood in 1933, decorated with the souvenirs of his own voyages around the South Pacific. Far from appropriating Polynesian culture, Tiki culture was the manifestation of how the romance of the South Pacific colonized the American psyche.

This may be why many Hawaiians can be cavalier about it. It does not and never did represent them, having lacked any pretense to do so. Tiki culture's focus has always been through - and to a large extent on - the lens of American perception. It is telling that Disneyland Paris' Adventureland lacks the Tiki aesthetic ubiquitous in the company's American parks, opting instead for references to European colonial exploits and adventure stories. It's also telling that the Enchanted Tiki Room has a bunch of birds singing Big Band hits while doing impressions of Bing Crosby and Louis Armstrong. Tiki is a reflection of America's cultural experience, not an appropriation of Polynesian culture. It is an example of Americana, not Polynesia.

...

Aspects of Polynesian aesthetics diffused their way into mid-century Americana, satisfying a longing within American culture. In contrast to the gleaming, hi-tech, fast-paced future promised by the Space Age, Tiki and other so-called "primitive" aesthetics offered a more Earthy emotional release valve. It was sensual in the full sense of the word, as that which arouses the physical senses, reflecting a connection to nature and recollecting ideals of Paradise (Tiki ran alongside a renewed interest in America's National Parks for a comparable reason). And to those living the new suburban dream, it did offer a controlled experience of the extraordinary and exotic, which are feelings mingled with wonder and curiousity. These images appealed to people because, above all else, they were beautiful and interesting...

The overlap - not appropriation - of Tiki culture with genuine Polynesian cultures unavoidably led to some situations of inadvertent insensitivity, misrepresentation, plagiarism, and disrespect. Tom Swiss, in his controversial article There is No Such Thing as "Cultural Appropriation" argues that these established concepts offer a more useful way of understanding these issues. "[W]e recognize laziness, dishonesty, and plagiarism as sins all on their own," he says. "We don't need to create a new category to condemn them."

Recognizing that, and the debt I owe to Disney for first introducing me to Tiki, may be part of why my most preferred expression of Tiki is not "purist" or "elitist" as defined in this thread, but outright fantasy... A nightmare of King Kong, Creature from the Black Lagoon, 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea, mermaids, krakens, sunken ships, the Jungle Cruise, and the Enchanted Tiki Room. I just did a quick count and if we eliminate Disney, I only have a half-dozen mugs that are classically "Tiki" subjects. Not counting Disney, my favourite Tiki bar so far is the Sip n' Dip, because it has mermaids, which is awesome. My wife and I hosted our first "Skull Island Luau" just under two months ago. For me personally, I embrace the tropical fantasy idea of Tiki, which diffuses accusations of cultural appropriation by highlighting how Tiki is a phenomenon generated in Western culture.

Not Party City through... Whether you're more of a "purist" or more into "fantasy" or more into authentic Polynesian cultures or what have you, I think we can all agree that there can be standards of quality that Party City doesn't quite measure up to.

I'd be very happy if the next writer found this thread before they penned an article. Humu Humu put out a thoughtful response. I hear there is a plan to have a public talk along these lines. I think my book's portrayal of women is a nice point in the context of Tiki and our communities appreciation of what we are doing and why. I think I'll do a blog post myself just to add to the conversation and link to this thread of course.

Good stuff!

We should not worry too much about authenticity. Here is the text from the paper:

Tiki’s failure lies not in its soft misogyny, cultural appropriation and essentialism, or its willingness to align itself with the all-too-popular, kitschy, or campy forms of culture, but in its inability to act on the nascent counter-insurgency that is evident within its cultures. Concerns with Victorian sexuality and unrealistic expectations of masculinity could be addressed with new expressions of gender and sexuality, perhaps paralleling the metrosexuality and pansexuality trends outside of tiki cultures, as well as with more critical reflections on gender, sexuality, race, and other intersectional and postcolonial issues.

Topics:
Misogyny: We inherited a genre where women are native wahines of the free love type. We are recognizing women in Tiki now and their contributions beyond sexual object.

Cultural appropriation: A lot said here and elsewhere.

Kitsch: Plenty here.

Unrealistic expectations of masculinity:

Race:

Post Colonial issues:

"Mai-Kai: History & Mystery of the Iconic Tiki Restaurant" the book

[ Edited by: Swanky 2017-05-26 06:57 ]

[ Edited by: Swanky 2017-05-26 06:58 ]

On 2017-05-26 06:57, Swanky wrote:
We should not worry too much about authenticity. Here is the text from the paper:

Tiki’s failure lies not in its soft misogyny, cultural appropriation and essentialism, or its willingness to align itself with the all-too-popular, kitschy, or campy forms of culture, but in its inability to act on the nascent counter-insurgency that is evident within its cultures. Concerns with Victorian sexuality and unrealistic expectations of masculinity could be addressed with new expressions of gender and sexuality, perhaps paralleling the metrosexuality and pansexuality trends outside of tiki cultures, as well as with more critical reflections on gender, sexuality, race, and other intersectional and postcolonial issues.

So if I understand this word salad correctly, their core complaint about Tiki is basically that its prevailing social attitudes have not fallen in lockstep with the prevailing social attitudes in college social science faculties. Y'know, they tried this on gamers not too long ago and failed spectacularly. Do they really want to bring on "Tikigate"?

I don't believe potential criticism of inherited tiki culture is remotely comparable to Gamergate. It's not even an apples and oranges comparison, more like apples and hockey pucks.

[ Edited by: Prikli Pear 2017-05-26 07:46 ]

On 2017-05-26 07:46, Prikli Pear wrote:
I don't believe potential criticism of inherited tiki culture is remotely comparable to Gamergate. It's not even an apples and oranges comparison, more like apples and hockey pucks.

Granted, there has yet to be a touchstone issue like the media suppressing discussion of a controversial issue and then mass vilifying those who want to discuss it, but that was sort of the Franz Ferdinand of the problem. That word salad about gender, sexuality, masculinity, etc. was exactly the thing gamers were being criticized about by characters from outside gaming communities. I'm trying to read the actual paper the excerpt came from, and it has all the hallmarks of an external prescriptivist wagging their finger about what they think other people ought to be doing. I've seen that over and over again as a Goth, then in Steampunk, then to gamers (I don't even consider myself a gamer and it was pretty self-evident), and now this.

You had to know it was only a matter of time until this happened. The Political Correctness Tsunami grows daily and way too many support it because if you don’t you are painted as a bigot, racist, etc. Personally, I just think it’s ridiculous.
Cultural appropriation is the latest trend along these lines. I mean what the fuck a couple white girls in Portland were forced to close their burrito business because a local writer or someone accused them of stealing the ancient art of making tortillas while on a south of the border road trip. What’s worse though, the writer or the people that supported that argument in droves.

Trying to explain or show how Tiki is not cultural appropriation is a losing battle. These people don’t want to hear your argument, their minds were made up that this is wrong before they even knew it was a problem. Your words and time will be wasted on them.

To go one step further Tiki is without a doubt cultural appropriation by definition. White guys carving Tiki idols, drinking cocktails out of Tiki gods. Stereo typed women and men in art, the list goes on and on. Sure, there might be some real stuff in there like a PNG mask, but if it’s on a wall next to a Shag painting with a beautiful curvy dark skinned wahine next to your bar where you sip your mai tais listening to exotica, that’s still cultural appropriation.

If Cultural appropriation is a real concern to you and you are against Chief Wahoo and The Redskins, Confederate Flags, etc then you need to really take a deep look in the mirror. And before you say well Flags and Indians are racist and tiki isn’t, I’ll call you on your bullshit. Do you think the hundreds of thousands of Polynesians that were killed, placed into slavery, or displaced would see any difference? I highly doubt it.

So either tell these self-righteous assholes who know what’s right and wrong and think that they should be making these decisions for everyone to fuck off, or put your shit up on ebay.

I'm really starting to feel like the tiki community is going to have to adopt some sort of official Venn diagram of the various aspects that make up tiki culture. For its own edification and to better communicate "tikiness" with non-community folk looking to point fingers. (Especially since looking for victimization in culture groups seems to be a popular sport these days.) Because it was measured parts of many different and overlapping influences and has grown to include even more.

I know that I'm a relative newb and so any thoughts I have on the matter should be taken with a healthy grain of salt, but it seems to me that tiki started and is still being driven by the selling of a fantasy. That was the whole appeal and is still the gateway for people who get into it nowadays. The fantasy that is being sold might have changed over the decades, but the initial appeal is still one of reverie. Now once a person has entered that world there is a plethora of tangible interests that they can pursue and that is, what I think, "keeps" people involved in the tiki world. Everything from the academic (study of both Polynesian history and culture and/or the history of the tiki movement itself,) to the artistic, to the libatious (I may have just totally made that word up but it seems to fit for "having to do with cocktails,") to the purely social, to the merely stylish. The point is, there are deeper nuances beyond that initial draw and even that initial draw is a fiction. It's an escapist notion of a far-away adventure.

My second point might be a little more political, but at least in respect to the accusations of internalized oppressive behavior (misogyny, unrealistic gender expectations, etc.,) besides the fact that I have not personally been witness to these things, nobody is ever forced into a niche cultural movement. You join because it appeals to you for whatever reasons and you make that conscious choice to be a part of it. That being said, you may have bad experiences and encounter bad people within that social group, but that has much more to do with the individual interpersonal interactions you would find in any social group and has very little to do with the cultural tenets of the movement. (And I would have to say that the tiki folk do a much better job of self-policing negative behavior than many other sub-cultural societies I have seen.)

Sorry, looking back this seems a little "rambly" but hopefully my intent can be mined from all of that.

Granted, there has yet to be a touchstone issue like the media suppressing discussion of a controversial issue and then mass vilifying those who want to discuss it...

Right. My background's in journalism. I knew some of those evil, nasty people who oppressed all those poor gamers. Death threats, stalking and relentless, coordinated harassment's all part of a natural and understandable reaction to being called out as an asshole. I didn't think the tiki situation was anywhere analogous, but I could be convinced otherwise.

Don't assume that the "politically correct "colonial guilt" carriers" can't hurt us. Below is a story (assuming it's true, I don't trust anything any more) about shaming and bad reviews used to close down a white owned Portland burrito shop because they were stealing (appropriating) recipes from the people of Mexico. It's gonna get worse, not better.

http://www.theblaze.com/news/2017/05/24/tiny-white-owned-burrito-shop-in-portland-suddenly-shuts-down-you-already-know-why/

On 2017-05-26 11:46, MadDogMike wrote:
Don't assume that the "politically correct "colonial guilt" carriers" can't hurt us. Below is a story (assuming it's true, I don't trust anything any more) about shaming and bad reviews used to close down a white owned Portland burrito shop because they were stealing (appropriating) recipes from the people of Mexico. It's gonna get worse, not better.

http://www.theblaze.com/news/2017/05/24/tiny-white-owned-burrito-shop-in-portland-suddenly-shuts-down-you-already-know-why/

Should I burn all my Rick Bayless and Julia Child cookbooks now? BS!

On 2017-05-26 11:23, Prikli Pear wrote:
Right. My background's in journalism. I knew some of those evil, nasty people who oppressed all those poor gamers.

"Oppressed"? No. Used their platform to publicly malign an entire demographic to obfuscate their own malfeasance and abuse of their platform to push a political ideology? Absolutely. Got their butts royally handed to them for doing so? Hilariously.

Man TC needs to make up its mind.
ATP and I gave one guy Crap on TC for posting not only not tiki art
but crappy art if you could even call it art and all heck broke lose defending
Crappy computer art guy.
That guy had page after page of “yer awesome”
Day after day some goofy tiki art, smoking fountain ect…is posted on TC and folks LINE up to go on about how great it is.

I mean cool is cool and you can ignore some stuff on TC but why egg em on?

Cultural appropriation?
F that, ol Polynesians did not even have electricity so my appropriation is from Trader Vic’s and Donn Beach, ect…

The drink the Polynesians had was Kava and that is one drink NOBODY here is going to want to
Make that the way the Polynesians did as they chewed the root and all spit it out into one big bowl and drank each other’s spit, Yum!

Bill Sapp said much of the Kahiki décor came from Mexico and some of it looks like
that’s where it came from.
But again cool is cool and it worked.

But for real I don’t get it, just yesterday ALL forms of tiki were “awesome” on TC.
The up side is if you praise one of these non-real tiki newbies they will follow you, post on your thread, you get a friend for life.

For the record I like ol skool tiki, like American bars of the 50s and that’s what I try to make my lights look like.

Star wars is not tiki, nor are Legos.

On 2017-05-26 14:26, tikiskip wrote:
Star wars is not tiki, nor are Legos.

100%

On the one hand it seems worth noting that the discussion of cultural appropriation isn't unique to Tiki culture. At it's root it seems to be a discussion about to what extent, if at all, things that are sacred to some people can be borrowed by others for use in non-sacred ways. To state the matter in the reverse, when should free people have their freedom to make and enjoy imitative art, fashion, food, drink, music, architecture, etc., circumscribed by others on the basis that certain elements of such free expression are off limits to some people? When is it appropriate to appropriate (pronounce them differently or this sentence makes no sense)? This seems to me a question many might find serious and interesting, and one that people have had very serious debates about for a very long time (see, e.g., the debate over images of the Prophet Mohammed).

On the other hand, I wonder how anyone can seriously argue that a "culture" built around a fantasy, an imagined tropical wonderland that never was, somehow inappropriately appropriates from other real cultures? How can the flotsam and jetsam of an imaginary landscape of the mind be a misappropriation of anything? Isn't Tiki too nebulous (another argument about what is and isn't "Tiki", anyone?) or imaginary to actually misappropriate anything? Maybe it's just not that serious.

Or maybe it's the reverse - maybe Tiki culture created this imaginary tropical wonderland precisely by intentionally appropriating elements of various non-Western cultures? Maybe it only exists because it purposefully mashes together a variety of Polynesian elements (not to mention Micronesian, Caribbean, Melanesian, Cantonese, Indonesian, African, South Asian, wherever the hell fezzes come from, etc.) - elements sacred, profane and neither - into some new thing that wasn't there before. And if the entire foundation of Tiki is built on appropriation, but the appropriation is in the name of fun, relaxation, escape, and a sprinkling of ... dare I say reverence? ... for "good" Tiki art and for the past, then maybe the appropriate (there's that word again) response is simply, "Of course Tiki is appropriative - that's the whole point. Sorry if that bothers you - let me buy you a Mai Tai."

Just some observations from a filthy casual.

[ Edited by: HotelCharlieEcho 2017-05-26 21:35 ]

Seinfeld Clip - The Cigar Store Indian
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cpGfyp6MxkM

Not tiki but on topic.

I made sushi tonight. I used a Japanese sushi knife and learned the technique by watching a Japanese man on YouTube. I guess you could say I appropriated the shit out of that culture and it was delish. Next time I make it I need to wear the Mr Miagi sushi headband.

I want to weigh in on this because it's a topic that's been on my mind for quite a while. I'd like to offer some perspective lest we reduce the term "cultural appropriation" into a straw man.

Imagine when yourself as a child. You have a t-shirt that you love. It used to be your dad's. It has a logo of a restaurant that's long gone out of business. With age, it become a little threadbare, there's a grease spot that won't come out. But you love the shirt. You wear that t-shirt to school, where EVERYONE wears brand name clothes. The kids start to notice that you've been wearing that shirt everyday. The comments from Fred, the popular kid, start : "Don't you have anything else?" "Why is it so dirty?" Then across the schoolyard assumptions about you are made : "You must be poor" "Your family must be poor".

You become ashamed of the shirt. You probably only wear it at home. Maybe you put it in storage. You do what it takes to get whatever brand name clothes everyone else is.

Years later, you hear that Fred, the popular kid in your school, had started a line of t-shirts with the logo of a restaurant that's long gone out of business. It's got sewn in holes in in and even a fake grease stain. But it's now made with organic cotton. Everyone comments how cool these shirt are. It's all the rage on the hipster circles. Fashion magazine heap praises upon Fred. Fred makes a lot of money selling these t-shirts.

You dig up your original t-shirt, and try to wear it out again. Somehow, no one notices. You can't rock that t-shirt. After all these years, you've never been able to shake off that reputation that you're just a poor kid from a poor family wearing a ratty t-shirt.

Obviously my allegory isn't about t-shirts. It's about what we eat. It's what we believe in. It's what we practice. It's how we look. We were shamed and ridiculed for it. But someone else takes it, marginally changes it, and is lauded for it. That is cultural appropriation.

If you still can't identify with this, my friend, you are in a privileged place, and I truly hope you never feel marginalized this way.

[ Edited by: paranoid123 2017-05-28 06:51 ]

BUT what Swanky is saying is the new hipster shirts suck as we LIKE the old real shirts.
AND in TC land there is a guy who makes lots of money and he collects these shirts and wants to own every one ever made so he will pay lots, for the old stained ones.

Some in TC land don’t want to waste time with Fred’s new hipster shirts and want to focus more on the old cool shirt.

Funny thing is the old cool shirt is a copy of another shirt.
That shirt was ok but the old cool shirt had some differences that in some peoples mind made them better than the first shirt.

In reality old Polynesia must have sucked, bugs, disease, viral infections, sitting a storm out in a dam grass shack.

Hollywood made it look good and we bought into THAT fantasy, well no Don Beach bought into it and sold it to us plus made mugs we really like.

So is The Simpsons, Archie Bunker, Al Bundy and on and on, are they Cultural appropriations of the white American father?
If they are then the white American father has been openly and very negatively portrayed for years.
And that is only getting worse.

On 2017-05-26 15:53, tikiskip wrote:
Seinfeld Clip - The Cigar Store Indian
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cpGfyp6MxkM

Not tiki but on topic.

Saw that last night :D

On 2017-05-27 14:23, tikiskip wrote:
...If they are then the white American father has been openly and very negatively portrayed for years.
And that is only getting worse.

White males and smokers are the only 2 groups you are allowed to ridicule :wink:

I was looking up kill white fly's on the net.
We have a garden and the white fly's are going nuts.
Well I typed kill white and the hits that popped before I got to fly was Kill whitey and kill Haole day.

You may find yourself amazed at where Kill Haole day is an event each year at the end of the school year.

Aloha.

On 2017-05-27 11:59, paranoid123 wrote:

Obviously my allegory isn't about t-shirts. It's about what we eat. It's what we believe in. It's what we practice. It's how we look. We were shamed and ridiculed for it. But someone else takes it, marginally changes it, and is lauded for it. That is cultural appropriation.

If you still can't identify with this, my friend, you are in a privileged place, and I truly hope you never feel marginalized this way.

Over the span of my life, I have been/still am a farm boy, sci-fi/comic book geek, a Goth, and a "Steampunk." So yes, I am well-acquainted with this phenomenon. Heck, THIS YEAR a local event is running with a Goth/Steampunk theme after kicking out me and my friends for dressing Goth/Steampunk at it about 10 years ago (to make it even better, this is a Western/cowboy heritage festival, so they kicked out a FARM BOY in the process). In Jr. High I would get made fun of for wearing superhero t-shirts and being into video games. I've noticed the irony, but never felt a particular angst over "cultural appropriation."

One of the problems with cultural appropriation theory is that what counts AS cultural appropriation is poorly defined. I did quite a bit of research about this when I wrote my article about whether Tiki is cultural appropriation, and I couldn't get a clear picture of what it is even supposed to be. My suspicion is that it's poorly defined because it's not contingent on an actual activity, but on the class of the people doing it. Cultural appropriation theory is rooted in Marxist dialecticism, which treats society as an arena of conflict between competing dialectic groups defined as either the oppressor or oppressed (as opposed to, say, an arena of negotiation between individuals or social contracts in mass society or any of the other theories of society that exist). Cultural appropriation theory can only really be understood in a framework of WHO is doing something, not WHAT they're doing. Specifically, what a oppressor class of people labelled "white" are doing with the things "belonging" to an oppressed class labelled "people of colour." As noted above, it's even okay to express GENOCIDAL speech so long as you're in an "oppressed" group who are merely "punching up."

After the controversy over the burrito stand in Portland that was shut down, an organization put together a list of "White-Owned Appropriative Restaurants in Portland" and alternatives to them. Yes, Hale Pele and Alibi are on it. What's interesting about the list is that their alternatives to Hale Pele and Alibi are "Hawaiian fusion" restaurants that don't appear to be owned by Native Hawaiians. They begrudgingly admit that their list of "Nearest POC-owned Alternatives" doesn't mean that the person of colour who owns that business is actually of the appropriate ethnicity. I thought about writing them a letter to let them know that by endorsing non-Native Hawaiian owned Hawaiian restaurants, they're probably doing more to tacitly endorse Hawaiian colonization than some silly Tiki bar. Not too long ago, the Boston Museum of Fine Arts was showing Claude Monet's painting La Japonaise as part of an exhibit partly funded by the Japanese broadcast network NHK. The painting depicts Monet's wife Camille wearing a formal uchikake kimono and the exhibit (which first toured Japan) included a Japanese-made replica of the kimono which visitors were welcome to wear. This sparked a controversy among a small group of protesters who descended on the MFA with cries of cultural appropriation. They issued a statement saying "The act of non-Japanese museum staff throwing these kimonos on as a 'costume' event is an insult not only to our identities, experiences, and histories as Asian-Americans in America, but affects how society as a whole continues to deny our voices today." Having taken the initiative to speak as "Asian-Americans in America," the protesters quickly found themselves fending off counter-protests from JAPANESE people who didn't have a problem with the kimono but DID have a problem with American protesters acting as cultural gatekeepers. In my research I came across an amusing and telling article in which a young Indian lady, 20-something college student, was complaining about her parents' enthusiasm over "white" people appropriating Indian culture.

So I think it is important when discussing cultural appropriation theory to remember that "cultural appropriation" IS a theory, not a fact, and as a theory it rests on a highly, HIGHLY debatable sociological framework. It's grounded in a certain view of the world that may not actually be true or, in a globalized, multicultural society, even reasonable. The examples I gave above were to show that this kind of Marxist dialecticism doesn't actually work on the ground, when sociological theories in college classrooms brush up against the complexities of lived reality.

Back to my own experience, since you asked me to empathize and accused me of being privileged if I don't (keeping in mind that "privilege theory" is also one of these debatable sociological theories rooted in Marxist dialecticism)... As I said, I noticed the irony of people loving the things that I used to get beaten up, made fun of, and kicked out for in the past. Do I resent it? Not at all. I take roughly the same view as that 20-something Indian lady's parents, nor is it lost on me that her parents and I are probably of the same generation: to me, those are hallmarks of social acceptance that have had the direct proximate BENEFIT of me NOT GETTING BEAT UP as much as I used to, as well as making things I like more readily available and accessible. Sure, it has also increased the amount of shite masquerading as the things I like... most "Steampunk" stuff is hot garbage that totally misses what is cool about Victorian science fiction... but nobody is forcing me to buy the shite either. Yeah, I used to make fun of Hot Topic as being "Mall Goth", but they do have some nice stuff (that I can't wear now that I'm pushing 40). Yes there are lines to draw, like the mocking treatment of someone's deeply held spiritual beliefs or plagiarism or using something to denigrate a culture or using objects that denote a formal rank that someone has to earn (like a headdress or a uniform), but you don't have to adopt cultural appropriation theory to be sensitive to those things either. That's part of why I preference "Fantasy Tiki" (and interest in actual Polynesian cultures) over so-called Tiki purism, and do feel a little bit bad over the Enchanted Tiki Room pre-show. Activist anger under a pretense of cultural appropriation theory is not the only possible response.

[ Edited by: EnchantedTikiGoth 2017-05-28 09:39 ]

My biggest gripe with "kitsch" is that the word tends to mean "anything goes if it's in the name of fun" Party City, Wal-Mart, and Oriental Trading Company thrive in 1980's idea of "island culture." So when I see so called tiki bars pop up, I'm very skeptical. Case in point, that all-white "modern tiki bar" or even Navy Grog in Santa Barbara. Yes it has the name of a drink rooted in history, but the interior is all navy and no tiki. In this case, why not just approach this by opening up a regular bar but calling out a respectable exotic drink portion of the menu? In the past, craft cocktail and tiki didn't mix, but now that the drinks are getting nailed down it's time to respect the setting, the stage if you will, to be an real tiki bar. That last point is often what's missing - either replaced with actual kitsch like surf,skirts and umbrellas, or completely devoid of correct elements altogether. "Clown tiki" isn't a suitable replacement and whether we're aware of it or not, these places are educating the uneducated...be it the wrong teachings or right ones.

On 2017-05-26 14:26, tikiskip wrote:
Star wars is not tiki, nor are Legos.

This is exactly my point, too. Lately the ThinkGeek mugs are on the top of my shit list. There's tiki-fying pop culture, and then there's slapping the word "tiki" on something to follow a trend and get trendy sales. Star Wars, Star Trek, Guardians of the Galaxy, Aliens...these things are just a quick money grab from those who often don't know the difference or know better. I understand a lot of people on this site probably buy those mugs too, but I'm also not much of a mug collector so I don't fully feel the desire to buy buy buy. If the mentioned mugs at least made an attempt thru their sculpts to look indigenous and totem-like, then that would be passable. But the end result is something that just looks angular and brightly colored and so far from what a tiki actually resembles. They've made mugs, but not tiki.

On 2017-05-30 15:33, kkocka wrote:
...If the mentioned mugs at least made an attempt thru their sculpts to look indigenous and totem-like, then that would be passable. But the end result is something that just looks angular and brightly colored and so far from what a tiki actually resembles. They've made mugs, but not tiki.

Just for my own edification, would we generally agree that this would be the foundation of why a ThinkGeek 'Yoda' tiki mug is generally rejected as "tiki," but something like the 'Hitch-hiking Ghosts' mug is accepted? Or is the "authenticity" of the manufacturer or source also a factor?

(Or is the 'Ghosts' mug not generally accepted either, and so is a bad example.)

On 2017-05-30 16:28, CosmoReverb wrote:
Just for my own edification, would we generally agree that this would be the foundation of why a ThinkGeek 'Yoda' tiki mug is generally rejected as "tiki," but something like the 'Hitch-hiking Ghosts' mug is accepted? Or is the "authenticity" of the manufacturer or source also a factor?

(Or is the 'Ghosts' mug not generally accepted either, and so is a bad example.)

Interesting point. Looking at the Trader Sam's Hitchhiking Ghost mug, I think it kinda works because it's stylized enough to keep the character elements but things like the grinning mouths could maybe have taken a more poly-totem look. It's certainly better than the straight up Jack Skellington pumpkin mug. Although now the more I look at it, the less tiki the ghosts look. I guess whether or not it's "accepted" depends on the leniency of the individual. I hold the belief that you can't just add faux wood cracks and BOOM it's tiki. I do like the mug for what it is though now I'm sorta admitting it's not very tiki.

As far as the manufacturer thing goes, I'm thinking it isn't a simple yes or no question to answer. An authentic manufacturer can make stuff that is spot on but also then produce something that strays. Where it's coming from certainly plays a factor to a degree - if Oriental Trading Co. offers a mug, you sorta already know what you're getting. :wink:

My wife saw that "Abolish" article and sent it to me. She said that the author made some good points. I said, "no she didn't, I can't even see one point she made." I sent her a link to EnchantedTikiGoth's blog post about appropriation (which I thought was very well written) and we started to discuss. First and foremost the author thinks tiki bars are about listening to Jimmy Buffett?!? She obviously has absolutely no clue about the tiki culture of today, so to write an article very ill informed, how can it be taken seriously?

So lets see, what from a tiki bar is taken from Hawaiian culture??? Drinks? Anyone who has ever been to Hawaii knows that this is not the case. Just try to find a decent cocktail in Hawaii, I dare you. Dimly lit bars? Music? Escapism? No. Tikis? Tikis are the one and only similarity I can find. Is tiki a practiced religion? Not that I know of. The most common religion in Hawaii is the one that was appropriated from that John guy from the west. Wasn't tiki appropriated to Hawaii to begin with?

Like many others have touched on is that we embrace the art and the aloha spirit it seems few are keeping alive today. We are not using tiki as a way to negatively impact anything. Redskins is obviously a derogatory term (as is Haole and Gringo) and is negative so the argument with tiki is clearly not the same. If we are playing the CA card, nearly everything can be considered and nothing can be excluded. EnchantedTikiGoth has it right when he says that there is no clear meaning of the term Cultural Appropriation.

I have noticed that the wahines in Hawaii wear shirts... This is an obvious appropriation of western culture and SHOULD NOT BE TOLERATED!

On 2017-05-30 19:08, lunavideogames wrote:
My wife saw that "Abolish" article and sent it to me. She said that the author made some good points. ...

This is my point here. She read it and agreed. That's all that has to happen, but on a bigger scale, and then we are all stuck trying to defend this thing called Tiki. What if 50 people with signs show up at the next marketplace? The news will cover them and anyone in an aloha shirt saying "they should have a Mai Tai and cool out" will doom us all... And once on the news, the next protest will double, and double... and then spread across the country.

It can happen.

And the media loves a shit show. They won't seek out the smartest response to the protest, but the worst.

It certainly is a valid concern. The media loves a scandal and you are absolutely right, they won't seek out a more educated response. It also doesn't help that there most definitely is at least an element of cultural appropriation to tiki, and so any attempts, even from learned sources, to try to educate "outsiders" can always be twisted into the "apologist zone" and, to be honest, it is a fine line.

At issue is that tiki is a pop cultural movement born in America which is a cultural melting pot, and like 85% of all pop cultural movements born in America there is going to be an inspiration from some other society's more traditional cultural elements. Plain and simple. America is a hodge-podge culture with a WASPy elitism at our core and we have always been intrigued by the aesthetic trappings of other cultures without making the effort to educate our masses on the deeper meanings and traditions. Tiki goes much farther than other pop cultures to edify itself and cultivate a respect for its inspirations but that effort is largely lost outside of the ohana.

That being said, and I don't mean this in a fatalistic way, tiki culture has endured for a long time, through ebbs and flows of popularity, by its ability to be inwardly stable. It is on a rising tide at the moment which makes it a target for the current trend of "Social Justice" finger pointers who are always on the prowl to find new "oppressors,' but it has been able to survive for a long time, I hesitate to say "underground" so let's say "privately," and I am confident that at least the core movement will weather any such backlash.

(If it even comes at all. It's hot right now after a couple of articles came out, but with the current climate, there is a bit of a time limit for people to build momentum on that before the news-cycle brings a new distraction. If we don't see an immediate and massive response to this current shot, I'm confident our tiki bars won't go the way of a Pacific Northwestern burrito shop.)

On 2017-05-31 09:44, CosmoReverb wrote:
It certainly is a valid concern. The media loves a scandal and you are absolutely right, they won't seek out a more educated response. It also doesn't help that there most definitely is at least an element of cultural appropriation to tiki, and so any attempts, even from learned sources, to try to educate "outsiders" can always be twisted into the "apologist zone" and, to be honest, it is a fine line....

And books like BoT are really gigantic fuel for that fire of cultural appropriation. A lot of our literature is "hey, here is the complete history of white people taking Polynesian themes and making money off it. Here are mugs and bowling alleys to prove it!"

This community spent the last 2 decades being proud to spread the news of how whitey appropriated brown people's things for profit. Why we even turned their religious items into funny drinking vessels! These very things we have done to revive Tiki are now the greatest ammo against us.

There are some bits here and there that highlight the roles of other brown people in Tiki, and other non-white people. But our literature is largely damning. Everything we have been doing is largely damning.

If that magnifying glass ever really points our way, I'm not sure what the proper response can be. I have some good talking points, but we've also handed our enemies a lot of great things to hang us with.

And who wants to be out there talking to the cameras? Who wants to become the target for that criticism? Even a good argument will attract a lot of hate.

On 2017-05-31 10:36, Swanky wrote:

If that magnifying glass ever really points our way, I'm not sure what the proper response can be. I have some good talking points, but we've also handed our enemies a lot of great things to hang us with.

And who wants to be out there talking to the cameras? Who wants to become the target for that criticism? Even a good argument will attract a lot of hate.

Well, the article I wrote is my response (and thanks for the compliments, lunavideogames) and I put it out there in the hopes of "arming" fellow Tikiphiles with a way to articulate a cogent counter-argument. I don't know who would be brave or foolhardy enough to go out on camera, but if we're talking tactics, then let's talk turkey...

The two most important things we have on our side are the fact that SJWs are not invincible and nobody likes them. You see the odd success, like the Portland burrito stand or video of them shouting down a lecturer, and think that SJWs win every engagement the moment they shout "racist." That is not true. These are the same people who lost the presidency of the United States to the least qualified and most offensive candidate in American history. If you actually watch the goings on, SJWs lose nearly every fight they pick, including actual real riots where they're literally getting their asses kicked. For some reason, most people are getting fed up with sanctimonious scolds who try to suck the fun out of everything and accuse everyone of being racists and white supremacists and misogynists and so on. The extreme left-wing position adopted by SJWs has successfully managed to alienate liberals, libertarians, conservatives, socialists, religious people, gay and bisexual people, actual transgender people, video game players, an endless list of everyone politically to the right of Mao Tse-tung. And more importantly, it is increasingly uniting them against SJWs. These two facts are your biggest asset.

So, strategy:

1. SJWs are not your customers. They're going to picket your bar? They're going to boycott? So what? They never darkened your doors to begin with. Stay loyal to your customers, the people who like and support what you're doing, who are loyal to you. Don't try to appease people who never supported you to begin with and aren't going to support you if you give them what they want.

2. Therefore, don't give SJWs what they want. In fact, don't engage with them, period. Let them picket. So what? If they come on your property, rough up your customers, smash your windows, call the cops. You don't have to talk to them, because they don't want to talk to you. They are picking on you because it makes them feel powerful, not because they want to have a reasoned discussion with you and come to a generous consensus. What they want most is to be right and for you to be wrong. Don't attempt to reason with unreasonable people.

3. So don't admit any wrongdoing. Don't apologize... NEVER apologize... NEVER capitulate... NEVER try and meet them halfway... You can't appease a shark by giving it only a taste of blood. Admitting that they "might have a point" about "some things" is a confession. In the hands of an inquisitor, a confession is a weapon. No accused witch was spared the pyre because she was made to confess. If they accuse you of cultural appropriation, DO NOT SAY "I guess maybe a little." You say "Cultural appropriation theory is just a theory."

4. Which means, don't capitulate to their framework; challenge it. If it comes to that, don't just accept their social theories about cultural appropriation and patriarchy and privilege and white supremacist systems of oppression. Don't try to exonerate yourself on their terms. Their terms are iron-clad rhetorical constructs designed to find you guilty. Challenge the validity of their social theories. Don't try to prove that America isn't a white supremacist system: challenge the idea that there is such a thing as a "white" race. Argue that cultural appropriation is not a thing and there are better ways to understand cultural exchange and diffusion. The defining characteristic of their politics is to lump everyone into dialectical opposing groups, obfuscating your individuality and reducing you to a representative of a system of oppression, so respond by asserting your individuality and the dignity of your personhood*. Learn to recognize kafkatraps and call them out when you see them.

5. If it does come to that, remember that your audience is the public, not the SJW. You're not trying to win them over, not really. That would be nice, but that's not the goal. Their goal is to win, to make you look bad and make themselves feel powerful in the process. So bypass them and appeal to the public with virtues that everyone normal can agree on: personal liberty, personal dignity, the right of a businessperson to make an honest living, the right of America to have its own culture and experiences (tying back to what I said about how Tiki is not a representation of Polynesia but a representation of America's collective experience and romance of the Pacific), and the right of people to harmlessly chill out and enjoy a drink with friends. Be humble, be kind, be personable, be a good guy or gal. Get the public on your side. Don't worry about the SJWs. They don't like the SJWs.

6. Words will never hurt you. SJWs are emotional abusers. Seriously, their behaviour patterns are the same as emotional abusers. Like all emotional abusers, their tactics rely on you being a better, more generous, more introspective, more self-critical person than them. Do you think they're the one's wracked with existential questions over calling you a racist, white supremacist, patriarchal, cis-het normative, misogynistic cultural appropriator? They're not, but they sure hope YOU are being wracked with existential questions over being called that. They are throwing anything against the wall to see what makes you doubt yourself. It's EXACTLY like the bully who just said any mean thing to get a rise out of you.

7. No matter how it goes, it's not the end of the world. So they picketed you, called you names, slandered you in the media, maybe even got a couple companies/advertisers to stop supporting you. That's a tough deal, but it isn't the end of the world. At the end of the day, the people who always supported you will keep doing so. We'll still be here.

• To add to this point, one of the best, quickest arguments I've made to shut down an SJW was like this. Here's how it went down (I'm the wordy one, go figure):

I shared all this in the hopes that you could see how this works in practice. What I did was two-fold. First I identified, called out, and denied the validity of "Marxist dialecticism," "race essentialism," privilege theory," and the entire concept of a "white" race and pan-racial identities. Second, I stood firm on a set of unarguably high-minded moral virtues, particularly ethnic diversity and personal dignity, and the unflinching assertion that what she was saying were simply debatable propositions and not The Truth. As you saw, it's kind of hard to accuse someone of being racist when they're adopting a stronger multicultural stance than you are. Make sure you know what you DO believe so you can stand firm on it.

On 2017-05-30 16:28, CosmoReverb wrote:
Just for my own edification, would we generally agree that this would be the foundation of why a ThinkGeek 'Yoda' tiki mug is generally rejected as "tiki," but something like the 'Hitch-hiking Ghosts' mug is accepted? Or is the "authenticity" of the manufacturer or source also a factor?

That is a good point and this would make it hard to “define” what is tiki really.
If you look back you will find the “Steve” mug more clown than tiki, and even the “tiki Bob” mug.
Looks more like a tree with a face, but both tiki to us.
One of the most sought after mugs is the severed Head mug and is the head of James Dean upside down.
How is that tiki?
I want one.

If you go to Sven’s house that is a museum of sorts for tiki over the years you may see Barbie and Ken
In a diorama this could make a newbie think are Barbie and Ken tiki?

Plus the MANY other things that have been deemed as tiki here that are not really tiki but riding In on the back of tiki for one reason or another.

I once told a girl who was Hawaiian and doing the hula at an event that tiki to me was about the Restaurants and bars in America in the 40s and 50s not Hawaii.
This kinda made her mad.

We could not even find a tiki in Hawaii when we went years ago but when we did find some they were made by Bosko.
I can find more of what I call tiki here in Ohio than we did in Hawaii.

If it were not for what some would call cultural appropriation and decorating our spots with Tapa would they even make it as much Tapa they do today?
What would the people who make Tapa do for the money they would lose from no more Tapa sales?

Wonder how much in dollars cultural appropriation makes for the cultures that are selling the things of their cultures to the people who are doing the appropriating of said culture?
Sometimes known as tourists.