Reading Wikipedia's article for Pith Helmet, it says:
"The pith helmet (also known as the safari helmet, sun helmet, topee, sola topee, salacot or topi[a]) is a lightweight cloth-covered helmet made of pith material. Pith helmets were often worn by European travelers and explorers, in the varying climates found in Africa, Southeast Asia, as well as the tropics, but have also been used in many other contexts. They were routinely issued to European military personnel serving overseas "in hot climates" from the mid-nineteenth to the mid-twentieth century.
The pith helmet became associated strongly with the British Empire. However, the pith helmet was used by all European colonial powers, and for some time even by the United States. It was commonly worn by non-indigenous officers commanding locally recruited troops in the colonial armies of France, Britain, Spain, Portugal, Italy, Imperial Germany and the Netherlands, as well as civilian officials in their territories. As such it became something of a symbol of colonial rule. Helmets of a similar style (but without true pith construction) continued to be used, as late as World War II, by European and American military personnel.
Such was the popularity of the pith helmet, that it became a common civilian headgear for Westerners in the tropics from the end of the 19th century. The civilian pith helmet was typically less decorative and more practical, not as tall as the military counterpart, and with a wide brim all round. It was worn by men and women, old and young, both in formal and casual occasions, until the Second World War. "
hmm, to read the full article click here
Just as I don't agree with the politics associated with a polka dot 50's "housewife" dress, I also think the ideas behind colonialism/imperialism and the horrors which accompanied such campaigns are truly disgusting. So why do I think its okay to wear a pith helmet? Do I actually think it's okay to wear a pith helmet? ...is it rather cringe actually? Why had I never considered the cultural implications of such a storied accessory before just recently?
I love the Indiana Jones films, and Adele Blac Sec, and the adventurer/explorer style I wear often here on the blog. I would like to think of such individuals, civilian adventurers and archaeologists as different from the colonizers and the khaki clad western armies of say the British Raj for example. However, seeing as most 20th century archaeologists "discovered" things only to take them back to the British Museum, and plundered the places they explored for notoriety and profit at home...the differences between civilians and occupiers seems to blur. The only bastion of hope I have for finding an example of safari style worn without implications of terror and occupation would be that of tourists. Still, now when people go on safari they go to see the animals, in the past they went to shoot them, which is yet again another practice I think is horrid and honestly, immoral. So why should I wish to wear the styles from that time? When going on a shooting party and killing gorgeous animals was thought a delightful vacation? Why do I still think safari suits are super endlessly stylish even while these realizations are rolling through my mind? Urhhhg.
I wore a straw version of a pith helmet in the ruins of Tulum in Mexico, a country which my own home nation continues to disrespect on the daily. Why couldn't I see the implications of colonialism in doing so, how on earth could I have been so blind until this moment? This was just a few months ago, dear past me--- think before you wear! In my bubble of white privilege, I had never thought of adventurer styles in this way, and now that I am thinking about it, I wonder; when does saying "oh I just love the aesthetics" start to sound too similar to the absurd "heritage not hate" that racists spout about their horrific confederate flags? In wearing safari fashions, or as they are called in interior design quite blatantly-- colonial styles, it is true I am not appropriating other cultures. No indeed instead I am wearing the styles of my own ancestors, often horrible and very misguided ancestors.
In some ways, I also do that all the time? All of the retro styles I wear, no matter what era they came from, it was no doubt an era when I (being a modern and rather biased liberal leaning creature) didn't agree with the majority of what was going on politically/culturally. We retro style devotees love vintage style, not vintage views on morality, or social justice, or colonialism. That 1950's "housewife" dress represents a lot instantly visually for many people. It represents a time when women were less free, to be outside the home, or even just to be themselves. All vintage style hearkens back to a time less equal. Have modern day vintage wearers, pin-ups, and burlesque stars fully shattered the old implications of vintage style? When I wear a 1950's outfit, I am certainly not trying to imply I want to be treated like women were in the 1950s. Were I to wear a pith helmet, I would certainly not wish to imply that I agreed with the 19th century imperialism in various tropical climates worldwide. Are pith helmets and other "colonial" inspired styles actually just offensive alone?
The men in khaki uniforms and pith helmets who came to conquer, to plunder, and sometimes just to fight someone else's wars on very foreign soil also have something in common that should perhaps be considered alongside all this musing, and that is their overwhelming maleness. I don't think there were many ladies rolling up and colonizing places (they came afterwards, for teas?), so does khaki and a pith helmet mean something different when worn by different genders? Then again, Queen Victoria was "empress" of India??? Yikes. Is it not just a bit off when white people wear such styles? Am I overthinking all of this, or have I been incredibly insensitive promoting adventure/safari style all week long?
Are all so called "colonial" style things, clothing, furniture, architecture, the Disneyland Jungle Cruise ride, so inseparable from their history as to be only offensive? Can one ever truly enjoy the aesthetics of something wholly independent of its historical implications (and in the case of imperialism, continued legacy)? I'd like to hope so, but my opinion isn't really valid because of course these things don't immediately offend me, I am descended from the colonizers, not the colonized. I have existed only within my privilege, and require constant reeducation to dismantle the veils my own twisted culture upholds. My opinion on whether something aesthetic pleasing is offensive or not does not matter.
I would love to hear opinions (especially opinions from people who say aren't, you know, white, but also everyone) on this, because I truly don't know where the line is on this particular style. It seems like something that should at least be considered deeply before delving into such styles, styles I have loved mind, and have been wearing here on the blog just this week. Please consider the comments below to be an open discussion on this topic, and also, please be civil in doing so.
Some links to other discussions of this topic or things relating to it:
British Colonial Co: Outrage in Australia over theme restaurant
Open Thread: Is Taylor Swift’s Video Really A Racist Nod To Colonial Africa?
NPR's article about the same video
UNCOMFORTABLE CONVERSATIONS: SAFARI ICONOGRAPHY AT BALMAIN 2014
Valentino show inspired by ‘wild Africa’ sparks controversy
ARE THESE FASHION ADS RACIST OR HARMLESS?






























