I think I’d agree with that, but that’s in reference to a person. A culture by definition must have its own cultural artifacts that aren’t simply taken from another culture. There’s also no requirement for those artifacts to be “high art”. Nearly everything listed in the OP is culture. So to clarify, I ask what you mean when you say “a bunch of the things mentioned aren’t culture”.
Oh for that part of my message what I meant was things like coastlines, cactus, fireflies and foggy days, that’s not culture, what you do with it can be cultural, but otherwise they’re just natural features.
I think the implication is that the things you do with those natural features form a culture. Fireflies aren’t culture, but catching them is. And besides, there are plenty more examples of culture in the post. But you are correct.
I also think they there’s a lot of things that they associate with US culture in the USA that’s just stuff brought from other countries that were appropriated, so in that sense the US culture isn’t as rich as some people think (but that’s normal for such a young country with such a high number of fairly recent migrants from all over the world). Like trick or treating (to use an example from the OP) that comes from Scotland and Ireland and the first North American record of it was in Canada.
What’s funny is that it’s a pretty good demonstration of the lack of culture that (we can assume) American person has!
I reject the idea that something that originated in one society cannot become another society’s culture. It morphs and changes, and is reinforced by the society until it becomes a part of their culture, too. Surely you would not say that tomato-based foods aren’t part of Italian culture just because they came from the new world?
What they make of it in Italy is vastly different from what was done with it in the Americas, so no, but if it’s the same practice that was brought over through migration and most people started doing it, can it really be considered original to the culture of the country? I personally don’t think so…
Light beer as it’s known today is US culture (nothing in common with small beer), but as I mentioned, trick or treating is just a tradition that came as is from elsewhere and was adopted by the locals.
Also, having looked into the trick or treating thing a bit: Canada invented the phrase “trick or treat”, and America has variations such as trunk-or-treating. Modern trick or treating doesn’t involve performing at the door. Some of these innovations (ie. the phrase “trick or treat”) have even propagated back to the originating countries. I think a binary view on this is too restrictive and unrepresentative of the reality of the situation. The tradition is still very similar to what it was, yes, but it changes over time.
This is honestly a pretty ignorant take on america and its culture. A lot of our culture comes directly from the places people immigrated from, mixed with the culture that already existed. After a few generations it amalgamates into the broader culture. Its constantly evolving (whether people want it to or not). Its quite the opposite of only knowing culture fron our own country. In fact, a statement like that makes no sense when you factor in how peoole got here in the first place
Ok but if it’s integrated to your culture and seen as local culture but it actually comes from elsewhere and people don’t realize that US culture is just everyone else’s culture, it just shows that US people aren’t cultured since they just assume that everything is US culture when it’s in fact foreign.
There’s a reason why the “American calling black people African American while traveling abroad” cliche exist.
How would you define “culture”?
A living collection of microorganisms, duh!
:^)
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/cultured
If all you know is cultural items from your own country I don’t think you can be considered to be cultured.
I think I’d agree with that, but that’s in reference to a person. A culture by definition must have its own cultural artifacts that aren’t simply taken from another culture. There’s also no requirement for those artifacts to be “high art”. Nearly everything listed in the OP is culture. So to clarify, I ask what you mean when you say “a bunch of the things mentioned aren’t culture”.
Oh for that part of my message what I meant was things like coastlines, cactus, fireflies and foggy days, that’s not culture, what you do with it can be cultural, but otherwise they’re just natural features.
I thought that was a British trademark. Foggy Albion and all that.
Yep, that was a funny thing to mention in the list considering that fog is mostly associated with the UK, not the USA
I think the implication is that the things you do with those natural features form a culture. Fireflies aren’t culture, but catching them is. And besides, there are plenty more examples of culture in the post. But you are correct.
I also think they there’s a lot of things that they associate with US culture in the USA that’s just stuff brought from other countries that were appropriated, so in that sense the US culture isn’t as rich as some people think (but that’s normal for such a young country with such a high number of fairly recent migrants from all over the world). Like trick or treating (to use an example from the OP) that comes from Scotland and Ireland and the first North American record of it was in Canada.
What’s funny is that it’s a pretty good demonstration of the lack of culture that (we can assume) American person has!
I reject the idea that something that originated in one society cannot become another society’s culture. It morphs and changes, and is reinforced by the society until it becomes a part of their culture, too. Surely you would not say that tomato-based foods aren’t part of Italian culture just because they came from the new world?
What they make of it in Italy is vastly different from what was done with it in the Americas, so no, but if it’s the same practice that was brought over through migration and most people started doing it, can it really be considered original to the culture of the country? I personally don’t think so…
Light beer as it’s known today is US culture (nothing in common with small beer), but as I mentioned, trick or treating is just a tradition that came as is from elsewhere and was adopted by the locals.
Does culture have to be original?
Also, having looked into the trick or treating thing a bit: Canada invented the phrase “trick or treat”, and America has variations such as trunk-or-treating. Modern trick or treating doesn’t involve performing at the door. Some of these innovations (ie. the phrase “trick or treat”) have even propagated back to the originating countries. I think a binary view on this is too restrictive and unrepresentative of the reality of the situation. The tradition is still very similar to what it was, yes, but it changes over time.
This is honestly a pretty ignorant take on america and its culture. A lot of our culture comes directly from the places people immigrated from, mixed with the culture that already existed. After a few generations it amalgamates into the broader culture. Its constantly evolving (whether people want it to or not). Its quite the opposite of only knowing culture fron our own country. In fact, a statement like that makes no sense when you factor in how peoole got here in the first place
Ok but if it’s integrated to your culture and seen as local culture but it actually comes from elsewhere and people don’t realize that US culture is just everyone else’s culture, it just shows that US people aren’t cultured since they just assume that everything is US culture when it’s in fact foreign.
There’s a reason why the “American calling black people African American while traveling abroad” cliche exist.