More handpicked essays just for you.
Case analysis of cultural appropriation
The effects of cultural appropriation
Positives and negatives of cultural appropriation
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Despite the fact that it has been over two decades since the passage of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), the issues of ethical conduct revolving around repatriation are still highly relevant today. The political implications of repatriation show just how delicate the issue can be for both archaeologists and tribal members. The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (Public Law 101-601; 25 U.S.C. 3001-3013) describes the rights of Native American lineal descendants, Indian tribes, and Native Hawaiian organizations with regard to the treatment, repatriation, and nature of Native American human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects, and objects of cultural patrimony, referred to communally in the statute as cultural items, with which they can show a relationship of lineal descent or cultural affiliation. Repatriation legislation …show more content…
serves two important functions. The first is to provide greater protection for American Indian burial sites and more careful control of the removal of Native American ancestral remains and cultural materials. The second is to require Federal agencies and museums receiving Federal funds to inventory their collections of American Indian human remains and cultural materials. The agencies are then required to consult with tribal groups and organizations in an attempt to reach agreements on the repatriation or other disposition of these remains and objects. Disposition may be occur through many means from reburial to long term curation, according to the wishes of the lineal descendants or culturally affiliated tribes. Historically the conflict is best put into words by Walter R.
Echo-Hawk: “If you desecrate a white grave, you wind up sitting in prison. But desecrate an Indian grave, you get a PhD” (Thomas 2000). Fascination with Native American culture has been conjoined with the violation of indigenous graves since the advent of colonization in North America by Europeans. In a sense the land and the deceased became an imperial asset to the Europeans during colonization. The Pawnee historian James Riding In calls this practice “imperial archaeology,” (Riding In 1992) which is the European belief that their discovery of the Americas granted the right not only to the soil but also the bodies of the people that were buried in that soil. This attitude toward indigenous graves manifested itself early on in Euroamerican history in North America, and has continued into the present day practice of archaeology. Early examples of entitlement can be found in the grave-robbing excursion from the Mayflower or the supposedly scientific excavation of a Native American burial mound by Thomas Jefferson (Russell
2007).
On July 26, 1996 two individuals were walking along the bank of the Columbia River near Kennewick, Washington, did not expect to find one of the oldest complete skeletal remains in the world. While, Kennewick man has gained considerable notoriety, debates have grown over the application of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) and whether the Native Americans or Archaeologists have the rights to the body. As soon as the body was found it was studied by anthropologist James Chatters and he discovered “that the skull had characteristics unlike those of modern Native Americans” (Native Americans and Archeologists). As a result, it did not qualify under the NAGPRA rules. However, conflict arose because the Department of Interior and many Native American tribes are contesting that evidence found by the archaeologists. But, while it goes against Native American beliefs to inspect the bodies of their ancestors, any evidence that was gathered during the trial, in regards to the origin of Kennewick man, was necessary in order to find out to whom he belongs. Now, the skeleton is currently being kept at the Burke Museum in Washington State, where it is not on display. I believe that is where he should stay until more information about him is found. Finally, in regards to the presentations, I will be taking about who cares about the Kennewick Man, Lise Anderson and Jen Gray will be tackling the topic of opinions, Matt Ruffcorn will do the basic information about the Kennewick Man, Austin Eibel will talk about the conflict affected and finally, Matt Hellinghouse will talk about the research from an archaeological perspective.
Kennewick Man has started and added to an immense saga about the ethics involved in excavating and studying the remains of other that passed away long and not so long ago. Kennewick man being one of the hottest topics of the media during the mid-nineties has proved to be one of the most trying ethical dilemmas of our time. An ethical dilemma as described by Kelley Ross Ph. D is a “conflict between the rightness or wrongness of the actions and the goodness or badness of the consequences of those actions” (www.friesien.com). In the case of the Kennewick man the coalition of the tribes are trying to do what is best for their culture and belief by having the Kennewick man buried and the scientists who want to study this strange humanoid that has shown up on the banks of the Columbia River and are acting how they believe this should be handled, with careful study and the need to find the knowledge that this skeleton can provide about America nine millennia ago; and here is the problem that has been floating around this case for little over a decade.
Throughout ancient history, many indigenous tribes and cultures have shown a common trait of being hunter/gatherer societies, relying solely on what nature had to offer. The geographical location influenced all aspects of tribal life including, spirituality, healing philosophy and healing practices. Despite vast differences in the geographical location, reports show various similarities relating to the spirituality, healing philosophy and healing practices of indigenous tribal cultures.
As a scholar invested in the progression of the field of Native American material cultural studies, I consistently recondition my understanding of both epistemology and the appropriate ways to approach cultural circumstances of the so-called “Other” through personal encounters and the shared experiences of my contemporaries. My own ethical position is forever fluid, negotiated by both Native and non-Native sources as I attempt to find ground in what exactly I intend to do (outside of an occupation) with the knowledge I accumulate. Perhaps the most vulnerable facet of existence in the world of academia is the ease that comes in the failure to compromise one’s own advancement for the well-being of those being studied. Barre Toelken is an encouraging exception to this conundrum, considering his explicit analysis of both Navajo and Western ethics in the case of the Hugh Yellowman tapes. His essay argues for an approach that surrenders the fieldworker’s hypothetical gain to the socio-emotional needs of subjects’ epistemological structure and, most intriguingly, he treats ethnographic materials as praxis rather than data. After years of apprehension with the objectifying habits of cultural anthropology, a discipline internally dithered by the bickering of Science vs. Humanities, I am finally moved to disengage from such authoritatively based methods altogether as a result of Toelken’s example.
Canada is a diverse country, home to many different peoples and cultures. It can easily be said that Biological Anthropology is one of the main reasons that we have learned so much about the many people who have lived in Canada. This can certainly be said when one thinks of all we have learned of the First Nations peoples’ through this method. However, in Canada there exists such an Act known as the Cemetery Act. This act protects many things, one of which being the protection of aboriginal burial grounds and ossuaries. Through Anthropological research in Canada, however, Ossuaries have allowed us to see and learn more about the First Nations peoples and their lives; revealing the information denied to us previously. This report will take a look at the anthropological studies of these ossuaries and burial sites while also discussing the restrictions and limitations met in accordance to said Act. For the purpose of this report, there will be particular stress placed on the Iroquois Nation, to whom this act may pertain to more than perhaps another, smaller, tribe. Through Anthropological research in Canada, Ossuaries have allowed us to see and learn more about the First Nations peoples and their lives revealing the information denied to us previously.
Considering historical evidence, the notion: Native –Americans was not the first inhabitant of America is a complete false. For centuries, history kept accurate and vivid accounts of the first set of people who domiciled the western hemisphere. Judging by those records, below are the first set of Native-American people who inhabited America before the arrival of another human race; the Iroquois: The Iroquois of Native Americans was one of the tribes that lived in America before other people came. Based on historical evidence, it is believed that the Native Americans came from Asia way back during the Ice Age through a land bridge of the Bering Strait. When the Europeans first set foot in America, there were about 10 million Native Americans
Black lives in America have been devalued from the moment the first shipment of black slaves arrived in Jamestown in 1619. They were seen as nothing more than an lucrative animal to help aid in the production of various crops, such as tobacco, rice, and cotton. The Europeans were careful in the breaking of the black slaves, as they did not want a repeat of the Native American enslavement. European settlers found it difficult to enslave natives as they had a better understanding of the land and would often escape from the plantation. The African slaves however were stripped of everything they had ever known and were hauled to a new distant world.
Bigger Thomas wasn’t just one man but every man Richard Wright, the writer of Native Son, had encounter in his childhood and adulthood. Wright had encountered a nice Bigger, violent Bigger, and a Bigger Thomas who hated the white society. He combined all of these Thomases and created Bigger Thomas in Native Son. Bigger filled with enrage and fear of the whites accidentally kills a white woman and tries to run away, but only to end in a prison cell waiting for his punishment. Bigger’s definition of himself and the white society had limited his possibilities of having a greater future but Bigger could have went to the right path if he had controlled himself and his choicies.
There has been a lot of controversy regarding human remains and the field of archaeology for some time. The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) protect the Native American’s rights over their human remains and cultural items. Proposed by the Morris Udall, former Congress Member for Arizona second District, NAGPRA was passed by the Congress in November 1990. The congress’ intention was to facilitate the repatriation of the Native Americans skeleton and cultural remains that were held in museums and federal agencies. In compliance with the Act, anthropologists returned several skeletal remains that were conserved in their study laboratories and museums to the respective Native tribes. In 1998, for example, the University of Nebraska repatriated over 1702 cultural artifacts to the affiliated Native Americans (Niesel 1). This was a significant blow to the scientific and anthropology studies as it marked the loss of necessary resources in unraveling the development of the human being.
Native Americans lived on the land that is now called America, but when white settlers started to take over the land, many lives of Native Americans were lost. Today, many people believe that the things that have been done and are being done right now, is an honor or an insult to the Natives. The choices that were made and being made were an insult to the Native Americans that live and used to live on this land, by being insulted by land policies, boardings schools and modern issues, all in which contain mistreatment of the Natives. The power that the settlers and the people who governed them had, overcame the power of the Natives so the settlers took advantage and changed the Natives way of life to the
1. Trace the history of relocation and Indian reservations. In what ways did reservations destroy Native American cultures, and in what ways did reservations foster tribal identities? Be sure to account for patterns of change and consistency over time.
recreational factors in which draws people from around the world to the area of Fort Walton Beach, Florida. The museum houses interpretive exhibits depicting 10,000 years of Native American occupation. Over 6,000 artifacts of bone, stone, clay, and shell are found within this museum, as well as the largest collection of Fort Walton Period ceramics in the Southeastern United States. Although every artifact present in The Indian Temple Mound Museum offers clear evidence of cultural sophistication and artistic skill, the more interesting artifacts I encountered were the Ware Human Effigy Urn, the Buck Burial Mound Urn...
In recent years, ancient burial grounds have been frequently disturbed due to increasing surveillance by anthropologists and constructed on by state-of-the-art technology and are more critically protected than ever before. Understanding the importance of burial grounds gives an insight on the rich history of ancient Hawaii. They have influenced the burials performed, ancestors and their modern inhabitants, and how they have impacted modern Hawaii. Burial methods will range from the tallest peaks on land to burying those in the ocean. Ancestors influence these methods depending on their rank and actions, having their modern descendants have a choice to inherit these arrangements and protect their ancestors. By educating people about past burials, procedures performed by ancestors, and the impact today, it should provide a clear background of its importance in Hawaiian society.
In the past few decades, the world has experienced heightened globalisation. During this period, organisations have prioritised setting up leaders capable of dealing with the ever-increasing involvedness of running their global operations. Overseeing global talent along with career paths is consequently a decisive challenge in lots of multinational organisations. Individuals as well as organisations perceive International assignments as a constructive way of developing global occupational competencies (Brewster & Suutari, 2005).
To future enrich the understanding of the problem, laws that are established in the U.S and Canada should be looked at to see the legal limits both Archaeologist and Native tribes are bound to. Expanding upon that,