110
A. Ospina and A. López
trend, we require a redefinition of rules for the commercialization of these pieces,
considering the respect, protection, and promotion of ancestral knowledge. Regrettably, these trends come along with corporations and people taking advantage of
certain people’s crafts, from people buying at ridiculous prices (taking advantage
of the need of some communities) to people just copying designs and techniques
and calling it “inspiration” without giving the proper credit to the artist and communities. The appropriate term for these practices is what we know today as cultural
appropriation [49].
Cultural appropriation is a term being born recently. The Oxford dictionary
included it just in 2017 and defined it as “a term used to describe the taking over of
creative or artistic forms, themes, or practices by one cultural group from another.”
Brigitte Vézina, in her 2019 CIGI Paper “Curbing Cultural Appropriation in the
Fashion Industry” defines Cultural Appropriation as “The act by a member of a
dominant culture of taking a TCE whose holders belong to a minority culture and
repurposing it in a different context, without the authorization, acknowledgement
and/or compensation of the TCE holder(s)” [56, p. 6].
4 Sombrero Vueltiao, an Example of Cultural
Appropriation
The “Vueltiao” hat has been a flagship piece of the Zenú community and the Colombian people, for more than three thousand years. It is a cultural symbol of the nation
and economic base of this community, including the artisans of Tuchin, who learn
the technique from an early age.
The use of cañaflecha as the raw material and natural pigments to achieve the
dark hue and the process of sowing, harvesting, drying, design, and braiding make
of this piece multiple sources of heritage wealth and recognition both locally and
nationally.
In 2013, the streets of Cartagena, Colombia, were filled with “Vueltiao” hats made
in china. The low price, the use of synthetic materials and artificial dyes, as well
as their production origin, alarmed the entire country. China had been responsible
for reproducing a cultural object serially stripping it of all its history, its ancestral
knowledge, and exclusivity.
The locals mentioned a visit by Chinese businessmen, who have come to know the
creation process of the hats. People quickly started selling Chinese hats that looked
like real ones but with substandard quality and lower prices. You could buy one of
these hats for 5 dollars, while the original price of the Vueltiao hat is above 18 dollars.
That same year, the government signed commitments with the community to help
them protect the intellectual property of the hat, which by then had the designation
of origin, but had no customs protection or awareness-raising programs in place.
A. Ospina and A. López
trend, we require a redefinition of rules for the commercialization of these pieces,
considering the respect, protection, and promotion of ancestral knowledge. Regrettably, these trends come along with corporations and people taking advantage of
certain people’s crafts, from people buying at ridiculous prices (taking advantage
of the need of some communities) to people just copying designs and techniques
and calling it “inspiration” without giving the proper credit to the artist and communities. The appropriate term for these practices is what we know today as cultural
appropriation [49].
Cultural appropriation is a term being born recently. The Oxford dictionary
included it just in 2017 and defined it as “a term used to describe the taking over of
creative or artistic forms, themes, or practices by one cultural group from another.”
Brigitte Vézina, in her 2019 CIGI Paper “Curbing Cultural Appropriation in the
Fashion Industry” defines Cultural Appropriation as “The act by a member of a
dominant culture of taking a TCE whose holders belong to a minority culture and
repurposing it in a different context, without the authorization, acknowledgement
and/or compensation of the TCE holder(s)” [56, p. 6].
4 Sombrero Vueltiao, an Example of Cultural
Appropriation
The “Vueltiao” hat has been a flagship piece of the Zenú community and the Colombian people, for more than three thousand years. It is a cultural symbol of the nation
and economic base of this community, including the artisans of Tuchin, who learn
the technique from an early age.
The use of cañaflecha as the raw material and natural pigments to achieve the
dark hue and the process of sowing, harvesting, drying, design, and braiding make
of this piece multiple sources of heritage wealth and recognition both locally and
nationally.
In 2013, the streets of Cartagena, Colombia, were filled with “Vueltiao” hats made
in china. The low price, the use of synthetic materials and artificial dyes, as well
as their production origin, alarmed the entire country. China had been responsible
for reproducing a cultural object serially stripping it of all its history, its ancestral
knowledge, and exclusivity.
The locals mentioned a visit by Chinese businessmen, who have come to know the
creation process of the hats. People quickly started selling Chinese hats that looked
like real ones but with substandard quality and lower prices. You could buy one of
these hats for 5 dollars, while the original price of the Vueltiao hat is above 18 dollars.
That same year, the government signed commitments with the community to help
them protect the intellectual property of the hat, which by then had the designation
of origin, but had no customs protection or awareness-raising programs in place.