The Ongoing Debate Over Dreadlocks
- Caleb Busch
- Apr 10, 2015
- 3 min read
A look at Rastafarian culture in the U.S.

The thing is, Bob Marley's really important to me. That is what I refuse to change and I will never ever stop caring about him no matter what people say.
Here's what I mean: when I was eight years old my favorite song was No Woman, No Cry. My mother had said once she listened to it in labor and that it possessed an ability to make all pain vanish, clear away from the bed frame and bed sheets. At my naive age, I believed her. My 14 year old sister Monica introduced me to all the "big" artists when I was eight: The Who, Green Day, Vampire Weekend, The Beatles. The Wailers were at the top. Down in our basement in Whitinsville she made my first mixed tape to listen to on the bus and I carried it with me wherever I went. I played "Three Little Birds" when I used the bathroom and "Get Up, Stand Up" while I ate my Rice Chex. For birthdays, I asked for Rasta hats and bongo drums to wear and play in my room, beating rhythms on my bed and oscillating my shoulders. Honestly, I aspired to dreads, but figured they would probably block my headphones. Back then, Walkman was how you rolled.

(Marley really feeling it)
So, to repeat myself, I find Bob Marley important. This is because of my mother and my sister and the bongo drums and the Walkman. But I, in an all fairness, shouldn't haven't to justify this. Because in a fair world, my tastes aren't debatable statements. They're just tastes. They're irresolute and quirky and always changing facts.
But this doesn't matter a whole lot when people are concerned about offending others. Specifically, cultural appropriation (a VERY real and ongoing problem) is often steeped in things like repeating stereotypes. “Rip-offs” of other cultures have been around for quite a while (think Indian tobacco) and are probably not going to leave.
So, here’s the issue: what happens if you really like the rip-offs?

(Stewart, Sting, Andy)
The Police have been criticized for appropriating reggae. The 70’s and 80’s were big decades for genres like mento, ska, and “Caribbean” music, which included hit bands like The Police. The lifestyle and way of life reggae supported was popular at the time and often considered “the heartbeat” of many civil rights protests. Artists like Peter Tosh, Bob Marley, and Jimmy Cliff became role models to thousands of teens and tried to lead them to a world of non-violence and “natural love for mankind.”
This said, some people still really hate “Walking on the Moon.” Arguably The Police’s most popular reggae song, it has been bashed by several cultural critics as being unrepresentative of “the true” reggae sound. Reggae, from this point of view, is music developed in Jamaica and performed by native Jamaicans. Nothing beyond this can be considered authentic or even respected as a legitimate art form, as essentially it was "stolen" from others.
What should we think about this? The Police, what I also consider a pretty good band, have a serious accusation against them. Are they, simply because of skin color, appropriators of art?

(Rasta baby, or cultural threat?)
Here’s my take. Cultural appropriation should be entirely based on protecting minority’s rights and disallowing white snobbery. The issue behind taking someone’s culture and placing it out of context is that it will inevitably become degraded or misunderstood in some way. In fact, I think in almost every instance of borrowing an apology should be extended “just in case” someone’s offended. This is called humility and being a decent human. But, to throw my curveball, I think we should appropriate anyways. Appropriate, and do it as often as possible.
I have two reasons for this. 1)- art is essentially stealing. And 2)- racism begins with trying to preserve.
To address the first, I think all art is repackaging. We look at “the world,” manipulate it on paper or otherwise, and then redistribute. Considering some things valid to be stolen and others not is far too difficult and subjective. Instead, we should embrace everything at our disposal and attempt to remain polite, as in every aspect of life.
The second is a little more edgy. But I think that whenever we become protective (“of anything”) there is a slippery slope that leads to violence and hatred. Obviously, we are always going to have things we care about, but nothing we should ever being willing to fight over. Justifying offense could create unnecessary violence in the world (not by giving minorities power) but by finding problems in things that could be, in reality, insignificant. Considering things obscene or unhumorous is your right, although it’s not your job to dictate it to others.

(Interesting)
Note: my views have and will change.
Komentarze