More on the use of "tribal"

... and this time it's from Fire Mountain Gems, and it's cringeworthy!

The text of a specials email I received from the company at the end of February, combined into prose paragraphs, but otherwise left intact and uncut:

"Wild Animal Prints in Drops, Links and Focals Plus a Selection of Hot-Selling Beads.  Tribal Tribulations: 'High-contrast ethnic prints offer graphic appeal.'  --Accessories magazine, November 2010 Issue in reference to Spring 2011.  Dear Jewelry Designer, Take a walk on the wild side with animal print beads, drops, links and focal components!  Exotic NEW prints and customer favorites add bold patterns to jewelry and home decor pieces.  Shop the variety of colors and patterns and embark on your own expedition of safari-influenced designs."

The problems with this copy are twofold.

First of all, it has that regrettable and exceedingly colonial emphasis on "discovery," "embarkation," "expedition," "exploration."  This is a relic of the imperial drive -- our cultural mythos in the West, particularly the English-speaking West, is that those who travel, who discover, who conquer are the world's heroes.  Africans don't generally go on safari.  Rich middle-aged white men who dress like every other country is a camping trip do.

Shockingly enough, Disney's Pocahontas actually constitutes a lovely little meditation on the motivations for the colonial spirit: the musical number which is a duet between John Smith and the commander dude whose name escapes me at the moment is a little more subversive than it seems, because while it initially looks like there's a contrast of "good" and "bad" motivations, there's more going on than that, as the idea of "discovering" and "taming" a wilderness is illustrated to be just as faulty as raping the land for raw materials.  Props, Disney; didn't expect it of you.

The second problem is both more subtle and, in my not-so-humble opinion, more hideous.

Check out that header of "Tribal Tribulations."  Why are animal prints "tribal"?

Given that "tribulations" is, definition-wise, a quite ludicrous choice in this context, I'll happily grant that this is just hasty work, and by no means deliberately attempting to draw the parallels I'm about to highlight.  However. 

The deeper problem with this text is that it conflates tribal people with animals.  No, really, bear with me.

At the Living Desert Zoo in Palm Desert, CA, private event sponsors can rent the residence of the British district commissioner of the Kenyan village replicated in the zoo's African exhibit.  Though constructed in the same manner, the commissioner's residence is referred to in all copy as a "house," the other buildings as "huts."  And in the British-style dining room, a plate-glass wall looks into the leopard enclosure.  Unlike any other animal in the zoo, permanent signage advertises how dangerous the exotic leopard is and explains the usages of the local people for leopard claws and skins, with images where the leopard parts hide the faces and bodies of the wearers.  The leopards in this case take the place of the native people: Kept excluded from the refined area within the British-style house, lovely to look at but not to be gotten close to, the dangers of the African night subdued and brought under the British gaze in a way that is all about the pleasures of power.

This was the topic of my paper "Conservation and the Narrative of Stewardship," and I find the mentality even more painfully obvious in this copy.

Animal prints labeled "exotic" is one thing, though the problem with "exotic" is similar to that of "Oriental" in that it assumes that everyone who matters is in the same place.  But animal prints labeled "tribal"? 

Animals don't form tribes.  People do.  And this copy encourages its readers to consider that "tribal" is a synonym for "wild" and "animal."  Tribal people become wild animals in this construction of the world beyond the audience of the copy.

Whether it's the fault of the magazine quoted or the copy editor who pulled this together, and even though it was certainly done without intent of harm -- there's no excuse for that "tribal tribulations" header.  This is exactly what's wrong with using the word "tribal" insensitively.