The pattern used by Dior, the so-called garden, comes from an embroidered tapestry in the eponymous smoking room designed by the decorator Victor Grandpierre for the Dior founder's home in Paris. The patterns are certainly related to Guangdong's export of wallpaper and embroidery in the 18th and 19th centuries, but more research is needed to determine whether the tapestry itself is Guangzhou embroidery or was redesigned and made by French craftsmen at that time. Because such large-format Guangzhou embroidery for export is indeed rare.
Patent rights and copyrights protect civil rights. The beneficiary is a specific civil subject - a person or enterprise. Rather than a "nation" as a non-civil subject. Whether it is a horse-faced skirt or a flower-and-bird painting, when initiating a lawsuit and demanding an apology, you must always find a specific civil subject. So, who? For example, Newton's three laws, geometric axioms and theorems, and the Arabic numerals from 0 to 9 can be used by anyone without stating their source or paying remuneration. Most of the creators of the fonts, pictures on your computer, and the emoticons you use when chatting are still living in the present. So, do you mark the author every time you use them? It is a good thing to have awareness of cultural property rights and intellectual property rights, but it must be truly implemented.
Of course, another less likely scenario is that this tapestry was customized in China in the 20th century, but even so, plagiarism and infringement cannot be directly determined. The reason is that most of these works are professional works, and their copyright is valid for 50 years after the creation, not 50 years after the author's death. In other words, in most cases, this pattern has been protected by copyright for a longer period of time, unless Grandpierre ordered it directly from a Chinese embroidery master and did not place an order through any unit in the mid-20th century.
However, it should be noted that it is generally a post-colonial concept, and the objects it protects are mainly the cultures and traditions of minority businessmen and indigenous peoples. In the context of our country's historical development, this concept is increasingly inappropriate for us. Moreover, although the concept of cultural appropriation can be applied to assert one's rights when it comes to horse-faced skirts, this concept does not apply to the issue of Cantonese embroidered flower and bird pictures. The reason is that these Guangzhou embroidery works were spread to Europe through legitimate channels, and at the same time they were integrated into European culture, forming a Chinese-style artistic style and taste. However, when describing the product, they concealed this layer of history.
At the same time, for those works that cannot be restricted by the museum ticket purchase instructions to ordinary audiences to produce images of public works, such as the Eiffel Tower and various old buildings, France can support the local display of new art. In order to avoid the loss of image copyright of related works, the most notorious case is the light show of the Eiffel Tower. They claimed that although the tower has expired the copyright protection period, the lighting arrangements on it are all the latest works.
We can find that developed European countries use very modern and rational methods to protect their own culture and traditions. They neither claim that they have a weak culture nor persuade others not to appropriate it, nor do they Simply wield the stick and stop others from misappropriating it. This is something we need to think about in the future. After John Galliano, Dior has launched several works with a touch of Chinese style, but in fact the inspiration came from European Chinese style art rather than Chinese art, until these two recent incidents. So why don’t big brands claim that they are inspired by China anymore? Do we need to reflect on this?
I understand that everyone may be very angry after reading this, and it seems that no matter how hard you argue, it is useless. Don't worry, you'll get even more angry later. What we need to pay attention to are actually the various measures promulgated by France to protect its local culture and traditions, as well as the various practices of its cultural institutions and private cultural organizations. France practices the principle of blood and sweat in terms of intellectual property protection. For example, for a public-edition painting, the image copyright of the work can be substantially extended by regularly asking photographers to retake it. The above effect can even be achieved simply by establishing a database.
On the contrary, I think there is no need for reflection at all.
Under the current international situation, big brands legally choose to hide the Chinese origin of their works, which is an approach that takes into account both the Chinese market and the European and American markets, because China is no longer what it used to be. It is not a fascinating exotic land, but close to the European and American mainstream. Culture, a behemoth that even tries to surpass it in one fell swoop. In fact, claiming that a certain work is inspired by China is not necessarily a good thing. On the contrary, it is often a kind of cultural bullying and cultural colonization. In other words, China's development has brought about these phenomena and is inevitable. From sleeping on the side of emptiness, we are gradually moving towards the center. In this process, there must be some objections. But, just let it go? Not really. As a Chinese, I want to propose a new attitude.
In this type of incident, all the inequalities we encounter today come from the imbalance in the intensity of copyright protection. China does not guard public domain works like Europe, which allows our ancient culture to be used by European brands at will. On the contrary, when our entrepreneurs want to use European culture and art, they are afraid of infringing copyright. They are even proud of the authorization from European institutions and rely on European and American culture to build their own brand image. This approach is passive.
So on the one hand, we seem to need to establish a national database to regulate the random use of Chinese art and culture by European brands. On the other hand, we can also take the initiative and directly Appropriation of European Art. Moreover, this kind of appropriation is not intended to exaggerate a foreign land, but to reveal its culture and examine Western history and culture from the perspective of human nature.
Compared with people boycotting which brands to buy, it is more fun to play with imaginary European history in the cultural field and use bad but cool cultural products to rewrite the history of Europeans; another example is in the design field, We can learn from the redesign ideas of the Italian group Alchimia. Through material replacement, function transfer, etc., we can create new ideas based on the direct appropriation of European and American designs in the Foshan factory, and play with and transform their cultural heritage.
These are all worth thinking about. For domestic brands, it no longer makes sense to rely on European and American culture and art to build brand power. It might be more interesting for us to join the poker table, appropriate each other, and play each other out. So don't take it personally. True cultural self-confidence does not care about the appropriation of one or two works, but actively plays cards with the other side and prevents cultural compradors from defending the rights of European public edition works. Only then can we have a fruitful fight with the other side.