Cultural appropriation in pottery: a question

[C.Banks]

14 hours ago, CactusPots said:

Of course the Japanese make world class whiskey and no one complains.  Can't call it Scotch though. 

Who decides what is offensive?  The most easily offended?  Read Fahrenheit 451 and get back to me. 

I've always thought it odd when a racial pedigree is necessary to advertise/sell your art.  If that's your thing and your clients buy into it,  swell.  In art, nothing is pure.

For me it's a matter of authenticity.

It's unfortunate that the idea of race has persisted as a means of identifying what should, for my liking, be more accurately described as ethnicities.

I'm only very lightly familiar with how the term 'race' has come into use and how the term, for a lot of people, is troublesome.

It's also unfortunate and most likely an unpopular opinion that, in echo chambers, ideas that challenge the comfortable positions are likely to be ... misunderstood.

I find it absolutely true that a pedigree is necessary to promote work as authentic. I also agree to a certain extent that nothing in art is pure but a work that lacks pretense will present as more honest. I know I can be a bit naive but I like to think an honest work will speak for itself. I also know honesty does not always translate into social or financial success.