Being a part of FBA has truly changed my college experience and career. I found my people and close friends through FBA who I will continue to stay in touch with after the year comes to an end. My journey to FBA had a rocky start as I was denied from joining the club for the first three semesters of my time here at GW. However, I continued to apply and follow what the organization was doing because I knew the FBA was the right fit for me and the only student organization that I wanted to be a part of. Even as a graphic design major, I was still drawn to the creative opportunities that FBA had to offer and the experience that I could gain from being a part of George’s production. I also wanted to find like minded people who I would be able to share my love of fashion with and I was met with exactly that.
Last year I was the head graphic designer for George V and it was an amazing learning experience and opportunity to put my graphic design knowledge to use. George creates a chance for students to have their visual or written work presented in a professional-level magazine and it let me do exactly that. This year I served as the organization’s president and it is an experience that I will be forever grateful for. I learned so much about team-work, delegating, communication, and leadership. I also learned a lot about myself and gained a confidence that I didn’t have before.
I get emotional every time that I think about the breadth and the amount of work that was put into this issue of George. It is so telling how important FBA is to our members and board considering that creating this magazine takes hours and hours of work with no incentive other than the contribute to a 100% student-made magazine. I am incredibly proud of the accomplishments that this year’s executive board and members have been able to complete and I cannot wait to see the future of GWFBA.
Love,
Brooklyn Ramos President
Looking back on my time in FBA, when I joined my freshman year, I had no idea how much FBA would impact my life both professionally and personally. The FBA community is unlike any other. As Vice President, it has been so fulfilling to witness our members champion their love of fashion and make new connections with others as they explore what they can do in this space.
We have accomplished so much this year: organized incredible events, welcomed captivating guest speakers, thrown an incredible launch party… but more than these accomplishments, the creative work contained in this edition of GEORGE marks what truly makes FBA so special: the people. I truly hope that the relationships you make with your fellow members enrich your life as much as they have enriched mine. Though this edition is about looking back on your archive, I know the bonds you create with others in FBA are timeless. Brooklyn and I are so proud of everyone’s hard work, and we are even more excited to see what FBA accomplishes next. Thank you for inspiring me another year as a member of this organization. Thank you FBA.
Love,
Jack Couser Vice President
Hello everyone and welcome to the sixth edition of GEORGE!
Looking back at this year of FBA, I am so amazed by how much work we were able to do, the community we’ve been able to foster and just how much passion I felt from e-board and members whenever we came together. I became a member of FBA in my sophomore year at GW and it instantly became a place where I knew that I could fully dive into my passion for fashion journalism and fashion critique. Over these years of being in FBA, through the highs and lows, the liberating freedom of pursuing one’s passion and the responsibilities that come with it, I have always been so grateful that this kind of space exists at GW. I’m grateful that every week we all come together to forget about exams and internships and the stress of student life to talk about and make fashion.
In this issue you will find all the ways in which our fantastic members explored this year’s theme, “In the Archives’’. There are retrospectives on iconic designers, breakdowns of the inspirations behind today’s favorite trends, interviews with true vanguards of the fashion industry and a critical look at the ever-evolving link between fashion and society. In a world of international conglomerates, hollow praise from glossy magazines and consumer overconsumption, I hope this magazine offers an alternate way to view fashion and encourages others to be critical about the current fashion landscape.
I am beyond proud of every single writer, graphic designer, photographer, model and everyone else that helped make George VI possible. Please enjoy this issue of George magazine!
Happy reading,
Alex Marootian Editor-in-Chief
ENJOY OUR CREATION.
Editor-in-Chief, GEORGE
Alex Marootian
Editor-in-Chief, After Hours
Nneoma Ileoje
Graphic Designers
Ethan Valliath
Ethan Fernandes
President Brooklyn Ramos
Vice President
Jack Couser
Social Media
Shayda Vandyoussefi
Events
Madeline Ng
Keja Ferguson
Business Outreach
Ava Zohn
Reva Dalmia
Treasurer
Justine Phi
Stylist
Isabella Kelly
Members
Sarah Strausberg
Sofia Gianetto
Sonali Sood
Kiki Baumgartner
Kamila Ramos
Briana Diaz
Olin Peterson
Julia Wasik
Cece Nugent
Maya Welch
Karina Reddy
Alex Johnson
Anusha Trivedi
Kelly Rahimi
Hayden Lambek
Katerina Kontoleon
Orli Rose
Sofya Kurilina
Samantha Sandow
Megan Kreuger
Cora Erice
Sebastian Arreola
Juliana Molina
Alexandra Donahue
Nicola DeGregorio
Jennifer Linares
Samantha Penzone
Callie Hoffman
Philippe
Tchokokam
Samantha Travis
Sofia Daniele
Trinity Vo
Christina Zhao
Lisamarie Preci
Rachel Kimmel
Lara Jasaitis
Enith Munroe
Shamira Guel
Matthew Huang
Kimaya One-
Routier
Caroline Heym
Martina Tsimba
Eliza Thorn
Ava Beatriz
Stamatelaky
Monica Carty
Natasha Brewer
Kaitlin Yang
Kailee Whelan
Eliza Auslander
Christine Yoo
Tye DuSoldO’Connor
Soleil Lech
Jordyn Neugarten
Sravani Mannava
Emily Rose
James Pomian
Alexandra Ennabi
Ayla Karimova
Gabrielle Clark
Sloane Bernstein
Declan Kelly
Nitya Jaisinghani
Fayre Li
Lauren McNealy
Vaishnavi Vangani
Shelby Downey
Kathy Grimes
Kate Young
Ashley Ho
Ben Witt
Liv Pressman
Amari Sharma
Grace Riker
Lucas Golluber
Tony Boyd
Lexi Schultz
Cora Erice
Audrey Lorence
Noah Edelman
Megan Taylor
Abby Turner
Paige Nelson
Sarah Gross
Leah Meyerson
Chaewon Lee
Molly St. Clair
Anna Mennuti
Bebe Limanowski
Linwood Tie
Kyla Robinson
Jenna Xavier
Kamora Provine
Juliana Herbst
Alexia Barillas
Leila Shahidi
Nick Patterson
Zoe Luce
Jordan Agay
Alexa Kieltyka
Dre Pedemonte
Charles Malaga
Trinity Vo
Desiree Camargo
Aryana Samadi
Ana Vucetic
Garima Khatiwada
An Ngo
Adeline Monks
Shritha Pillai
Nicholas Anastacio
Senan Pol
Shreya Kodu
Kaity Hendricks
April Chism
OAKLEY
EUGENE RABKIN
When discussing fashion, feelings of stress and restriction can emerge, but what if I told you two sets of designer rivals founded fashion to instead promote feelings of power, femininity, and creativity within oneself? Similarly to the tension between the icons Coco Chanel and Christian Dior, Charles Fredrick Worth and John Redfern, the creators of the fashion industry, were in a constant battle with their contrasting artistic visions and their various methods to make women feel powerful. However, it becomes clear that there are no winners or losers in the fashion industry and correct ways to dress. These designers’ different styles can be loved, debated, or hated, further proving that people, specifically women, should never feel restricted in how they want to express themselves— the fashion industry does not exist to please the male gaze or set a clear boundary.
Charles Frederick Worth, the “first” Paris fashion designer of the 1830s, is popularly known as the “father of modern couture”. He focused on the luxurious designs of arisocratic wardrobes. Worth’s fashion sense came from being publicly surrounded by “women from European royalty” and his early financial support, during the years of the Franco-Prussian War, can be accredited to the daughters and wives of “American nouveau riche tycoons.” Worth’s career was jump-started when Eugenia de Montiel, Emperor Napoleon III’s Spanish wife, noted two “flamboyant” dresses that he had constructed for Princess Metternich, a famous Austrian socialite. Worth took advantage of the opportunity and designed Empress Eugenia’s wardrobe— now considered a masterpiece. Eugenia was the most influential fashion icon of the 19th century, and working with her guaranteed Worth would meet other female celebrities to further his career.
Worth’s newfound popularity helped fund The House of Worth. Not known for subtlety in his dresses, many garments displayed in The House of Worth belonged to the new 1878 “princess line” that enhanced dress couture and added a new spin on his commonly outrageous gowns. Though no credit was given, the “princess line” used a silhouette from a rival fashion designer, John Redfern. Furthermore, even though Worth’s designs derived from his passion for empowering the many influential women around him, they were not yet regarded as art. The start of the fashion industry was not credibly noted and appreciated until he obtained the title of “man milliner” and began
creating men’s designs. In other words, Worth’s involvement in fashion design can be appreciated from a feminist lens. But it was not until he transitioned to a male clientele that he immortalized his stardom, further proving the inherent gender inequality of his time.
A couple of miles from Worth sat John Redfern, another Englishman. Although not well-known in the present day, in the 19th century he was busy transforming drapes into dresses. Several royal customers lined up at Redfern’s door: Princess Alexandra of Wales, Queen Victoria, and Lillie Langtry— a British socialite and stage actress. Redfern’s big break came when WC Hoffmeister, the Queen’s surgeon, asked Redfern to design his daughter’s wedding dress and bridesmaids’ dresses. The final products left many speechless, and The House of Worth officially had competition.
Unlike Worth, Redfern received little to no recognition for his influence on fashion as he rarely designed menswear. He simply wanted to explore his creativity with his female clientele and continue to empower the many women around him. Later in his career, Redfern wanted to encourage women to participate in “male pursuits” like sports. To this end, he began to take advantage of the “Dress Reform movement” and construct athleisure, similarly known as the “walking costume” or “tailor-made” which refers to women’s equestrian clothing.
Originally, athleisure wear was only fitted for men and did not frame the female body, but Redfern changed this narrative by adding more “jersey sport clothes” for women to the market. In addition to jerseys in general, Redfern used his female equestrian designs as inspiration to produce women’s wear for the more “vigorous” sports as well like shooting, golf, hiking, archery, tennis, and yachting. Due to Redfern’s famous designs, women were no longer just seeking entertainment through croquet and watching the men participate in the more appealing sports. These female designs also inspired him during his design for new Austro-Hungarian military wear. This served as a stepping stone to female participation in the military as women began to picture themselves excelling in an occupation that was not in a domestic environment.
Redfern did not only use fashion design to encourage gender equality in sports, he also was able to use his artistry to encourage women to embrace their
own body types. Although the influential Alexandra of Denmark and her mistress Lillie Langtry have different physiques, they both used Redfern’s inclusive designs to define fashion for the next several decades. With an audience not composed solely of hourglass or slim figures, Redfern was able to produce a successful international business. In 1820 it became known as Redfern and Sons and was located in populous cities throughout the world. Despite Redfern’s lack of male clientele, in 1892, his company developed into Redfern LTD and was considered a “dominant force in Western fashion” that caused The House of Worth to eventually go out of business. Even though Redfern died a few years later in 1895, according to fashion scholar Daniel James Cole, Redfern’s aesthetic can still be seen in the work of Clair McCardell, Vera Maxwell, Calvin Klein, and Norma Kamali.
The modern-day fashion rivals, Dior and Chanel, used Worth’s and Redfern’s foundation of fashion to enhance the entire industry. Dior’s designs contain more inspiration from Worth while Chanel’s stem more from Redfern. Specifically, Chanel worked to accentuate a woman’s natural beauty and expand couture within a tailored sports aesthetic while Dior took advantage of the flamboyance of Worth to design elegant gowns. Not surprisingly, she was therefore appalled by Dior’s clothing as she believed a man had no place to decide what looked best on the female body. However, just like Worth and Redfern, Chanel and Dior were working towards the same goal in the end— to promote femininity through their iconic designs.
Gabrielle Chanel, later known as “Coco,” was dedicated to adding a sense of masculinity into her elegant designs similar to Redfern. Before her exploration of technical skills like sewing, Gabrielle acquired her stage name, Coco, when she was a singer in Paris dedicated to the “abolition of restrictions” that were “imposed on women.” Later on, nuns taught Coco how to sew, helping her get her start in the fashion industry. A feminist at heart, it was not until the fight for a women’s right to vote that Chanel truly began to find her passion in fashion and explore her talents in design. Chanel implemented traditional “menswear” like Redfern’s sports clothing into her female designs and avoided corsets as well as traditional dresses. Instead, she began working with jerseys, skirts, cardigans, suits, and accessories. Her 1920s style of the flapper dress and twopiece suit were worn by both Jackie Kennedy and Princess Diana who helped her become globally renowned. Chanel was forced to resign during World War II, but her competitive spirit with Dior’s uprising drew her out of retirement and Chanel again became active in the fashion industry.
Christian Dior obtained his design career after he served in the French Army during World War II. In 1946, Dior became entranced in the arts when he picked up designing in Paris under John Redfern’s mentorship.
His work “sought to restore the feminine look.” Ironically, unlike Redfern and Chanel, but similar to Worth, he achieved this goal through the use of more flamboyant designs that were constructed to enhance the curves of a woman’s body. Although many thought his designs were controversial as he was a male working to empower women, in reality, he received guidance from the three women in his life that he referred to as “his mothers:” Madame Raymond Zehnacker, Marguerite Carre, and Mitzah. In addition to these three iconic influencers, Dior was inspired by the Belle Epoque, “the clothes of the British-born couturier.” He began constructing silhouettes that consisted of cinched waists, padded hips, layers of tulle, and silk. Dior became known for these tiny waist skirts that were each around “23 kg” (50.7 lbs) in weight! In response to Dior’s work, Chanel argued that he was in fact working against the point of tailoring techniques and femininity in general with the impracticality of his women’s wear.
Chanel publicly feuded with Dior, who she saw as her foil. She was appalled by Dior’s clothing, claiming his models were “wearing clothes by a man, who doesn’t know women, never had one, and dreams of being one.” In addition, she mentioned that Dior “upholsters them” and dresses women up like “an old armchair.” Chanel’s public statement was to
make others recognize that Dior was dragging women back to the 19th century when they were commonly viewed as objects. However, contrary to Chanel’s opinions, Dior claimed his art accentuated “the beauty of the female body.” And as previously mentioned, all of Dior’s inspirations for his designs were the important women in his life. Unlike the sexist terms men used to describe women in his era, Dior publicly compared Marguerite Carre to “a technical genius” and stated that Madame Bricard “was his confidante.” Therefore, similarly to Worth, his designs and values assisted him in gaining widespread attention from female royals like Princess Margaret who helped create his legacy for generations to come.
As both Chanel and Dior’s designs still greatly impact women’s fashion today, it is clear that high couture does not have easy expiration boundaries. Dior and Chanel’s current directors are both women who make styling decisions to best represent the female population. So, even though Worth and Dior and Redfern and Chanel had different creative visions, they all worked with the goal of promoting feminism. No matter the body type of their clients or their different approaches to design, they labored to accentuate and empower the women’s natural figure, so they could feel beautiful from the inside out. Fashion is and has always been founded upon feminism, allowing for individual self-expression and celebration.
Noelle Cardi, Abby Turner, Eliza Thorn Photo by Ethan Valliath
Fashion is and has always been founded upon feminism, allowing for individual self-expression and celebration.”
The purpose of fashion is to aid individuality in people’s journeys of self confidence and expression. Ever since the beginning, fashion has been created to act as an accessory to the person. People buy clothes as a means to show their wealth, status, creativity, uniqueness, etc. As fashion became more popular, the roles started reversing and the art became the main focus. Jobs were created, such as modeling and photographers, to showcase these fine works of art on the runway to sellers. Among the industry, a select few individuals were branded as “fashion icons” of each decade. As this year’s George Edition is “In the Archives”, let’s look back at some legendary icons of each decade.
Audrey Hamilton
Photo by Ethan Valliath
The roaring twenties were dominated by fashion designer and icon Coco Chanel. Coco Chanel was the infamous designer of the Chanel brand, which swept the US starting in the 1910s, introducing a revolutionary change in women’s fashion silhouettes. Out came the tight air-constraining corsets and in came loose and fluid silhouettes. Yet what is unique about Coco Chanel compared to the others on this list was that she was able to be both fashion designer and fashion icon. To explain the full extent of her cultural presence, we must examine some of the photos of her in 1920s fashion. A signature of Chanel is her signature pearls, which can be seen throughout photos of her. What also can be seen is her loose fitted silhouettes that she worked to engineer, which was influenced by the Orientalism fashion trend arising in the 1910s. After a ballet featuring loose fluid silhouettes gained traction, fashion designers like Paul Poiret, Lady Duff Gordon, and Jaques Doucet popularized the style even further. Chanel often wore cloche hats due to their simplicity in a time that deemed embellished hats unpatriotic while men were fighting in WWI. Everything she wore helped define the style of the decade, and she was able to represent the duality of fashion designing and modeling. The next fashion icon on the list is Audrey Hepburn, the picture of elegance and grace after a dreary World War II. Her outfits were characterized by defined clean lines through her dresses and shirts. A great example of this was her little black dress from Breakfast at Tiffany’s, accessorized with white pearls, opera gloves, and sunglasses. The little black dress was introduced by our last icon, Coco Chanel, and then was adapted into a long cocktail dress by Givenchy for the movie. Its popularity started a trend for future creative directors of Givenchy to revamp the little black dress dress including Alexander McQueen, Riccardo Tisci, and John Galliano. The little black dress is still associated with Audrey Hepburn, and continues to be a timeless classic even today. Another aspect of Audrey Hepburn’s iconic style was her French inspired casual outfits. A great example of this is her casual outfits consisting of gingham/ pastel trousers with a plain white blouse and ballet flats. Especially since French fashion was popular but didn’t reach the US at the time, her European nationality and American residential status allowed her to be ahead of the times in fashion trends and reflect it.
Unlike the previous decades
mentioned, none of these had a radical or gender fluid approach to fashion like the sixties did. Twiggy, a British model and actress, helped bring the mod movement to the masses. Mod first originated in Britain as a group of people that differentiated themselves from the cultural norm of sleek and sexy silhouettes, eventually making its way to the US with the popularization of British music and their stylistic choices. For example, the Beatles came to America around the 1960s and influenced other American musicians to wear more mod styles. A quintessential mod piece that embodied this radical change was the popularization of the mini skirt, a direct defiance of the sexual norms that women were put under, created by London-based designer Mary Quant who Twiggy would go onto collaborate with. Twiggy was seen in many instances of wearing mini skirts, with accompanying mod items like Mary Jane shoes and crochet sweaters. Another shift from feminine to unisex was Twiggy’s usage of shift dresses. Shift dresses were monumental because of their loose and boxy silhouette, in direct opposition to the previous form fitted dresses that fashion was used to. Fashion brands like Givenchy and Balenciaga transformed the dress style to be its iconic look now.
As the seventies rolled in, Diana Ross was the disco star that made waves when it came to her personal style. Disco fashion originated in gay underground nightclubs and then assimilated into the general club party scene, which was overloaded with neon lights and disco balls. Due to the decoration being so stylish, the outfits were made to stand out in the crowd. This style was what Diana Ross incorporated into her stage outfits and became an icon that represented just one of many 70s style trends. Diana was frequently seen in sequined gowns, spangled body suits, flared pantsuits, and any dress that falls under the category of sparkly. An iconic moment that explains Diana Ross’ impact on the seventies disco era was her photoshoot with Motown Records. Batwing sleeves, plunging neckline, sequin tassels hanging from her sleeves and alternating sequins all around the dress is the perfect example of what made the seventies special.
If Diana Ross was the undisputed queen of disco, Madonna had the same title for pop and punk sexuality. The 80s punk trend derived from influences of punk rock, and became a form of rebellion, especially among the LBGTQ+ community . It was a more underground form of expression, but Madonna chose to be a risk taker when it came to fashion. Even though she catered towards a mainstream pop audience,
Madonna’s style was a mix of new wave, punk, and high fashion. A classic Madonna outfit would consist of fingerless gloves, statement jackets, and a plethora of necklaces and jewelry. Her performance outfits were even more outrageous, with the most iconic being her Jean Paul Gaultier pink cone bra. This bra oozed sex and sensuality, but on Madonna’s body it translated as taking back the authority and power that men used to have on women’s bodies. Madonna’s charm also laid in her ability to ripen with age and continue her fashion ventures on and off the stage.
All of these women have one thing in common: they wore clothes but in an iridescent way that allowed them to shine bright. If you ever see any of the outfits you just read about, you would instantly think of the fashion icon associated. Fashion was able to help bolster each person’s influence, and fashion made. Clothing is all about expressing oneself, and I would have to say that these women were the most elegant yet bold about their choices.
If you’re at all familiar with the fashion scene, chances are that you’re familiar with Vivienne Westwood, a pioneer of punk fashion who has revolutionized the fashion industry since the 70s. The Vivienne Westwood brand has a quality of timelessness thanks to their innovative designs that serve as an intersection of historic aristocracy and the modern punk aesthetic. Both the brand’s forward-thinking styles and its anti-establishment image have allowed Vivienne Westwood to continue to dominate the fashion landscape well into the twenty-first century.
Considering the dramatic impact Westwood has had on fashion, it’s surprising to note that much of her background had very little to do with fashion at all. In fact, Westwood was employed as a teacher when she began her foray into fashion. She and then-partner Malcom McLaren opened a clothing store where Westwood put to use her skills as a self-taught seamstress. The store would go through a number of rebrands, eventually becoming SEX in 1974 where it catered to the punk subculture, a rebellion against authoritarianism and corporatism gaining popularity with British youth in the mid-70s. Westwood’s and McLaren’s store saw massive success with fans of the movement, and continued to gain notoriety when McLaren took over management of punk rock band the Sex Pistols in 1975. Westwood styled the group in custom designs as a way of promoting the fashion label. Thanks to its edgy image and clever branding, SEX has since been considered one of the most successful retail ventures in the U.K. and the popularity of the label would mark a strong start for Westwood’s career.
Pirates was the first ready-to-wear Vivienne Westwood collection and debuted at London Fashion Week in 1981. The collection itself was a “plundering” of history, as Westwood reconstructed historical garments for modern wearers—the first time a designer had done this, as well as the first time punk had been showcased on the catwalk. Westwood would soon split from Malcom McLaren and continue to gain acclaim in the industry as an individual. Westwood showcased her Hypnos
collection in Tokyo in 1984 and would go on to expand globally, producing both men’s and women’s wear, as well as bridalwear, shoes, fragrances, and more. Vivienne Westwood would be awarded Fashion Designer of the Year from the British Fashion Council in 1990, and again in 1991. In 2006 she became a DBE, two years after the Victoria and Albert Museum hosted an exhibition of her creations titled “Vivienne Westwood: 34 Years in Fashion.” It was the first exhibit like this that the museum had ever seen and is a testament to the incredible influence Vivienne Westwood has exerted over the decades.
Of course, the main reason Westwood rose to fame was her designs themselves: unconventional recreations of historical silhouettes and motifs, with a characteristic punk twist. The brand exaggerates and parodies the aesthetics of European aristocracies, something that befits the brand’s anti-establishment statement, but also effectively resurrects historical fashion in a form that appeals to the modern market. For example, look no further than the brand’s orb logo which first appeared in 1987 as a motif of the collaboration between Vivienne Westwood and the Harris Tweed Authority. After the success of the collection, Westwood kept the logo, a combination of the Sovereign’s Orb and the planet Saturn, and it became a new signature of the brand, representing “taking tradition into the future.” Other examples of this futuristic approach to old-world styles include the “mini-crini,” a Victorian crinoline cut to resemble a mini-skirt, and the brand’s iconic corsets, which transformed historic underwear into modern outerwear. One of the most recognizable Westwood corsets is from the Autumn/Winter 1990 collection Portrait and features Francois Boucher’s painting, Daphnis and Chloe—and this is not the only time Westwood would reference Boucher’s artwork. She modeled an evening gown after one featured in Boucher’s portrait of famous French mistress and fashion icon Madame de Pompadour (of course with some asymmetric alterations), and would also reference artists such as Jean-Honore Fragonard and Thomas
BY MEGAN KRUEGERGainsborough in other collections. And the ode to the 19th century didn’t stop there: Time Machine saw a revival of the Norfolk suit, while On Liberty and Vive la Cocotte featured outrageously exaggerated busts and bustles. To drive home the historic illusions, runway models were styled with updos, white face makeup, and beauty marks, an ode to the French rococo look. Westwood never limited herself to a single era of fashion, however, also creating new takes on Savile Row suits and the timeless Scottish tartan. “I take something from the past that has a sort of vitality that has never been exploited—like the crinoline—and get very intense,” Westwood explained. “In the end you do something original because you overlay your own ideas.”
Vivienne Westwood itself has a sort of vitality that has allowed it to experience a renaissance in the last decade. This isn’t to suggest that Vivienne Westwood was ever out of fashion, but that it has continued to appeal to new, younger audiences who have an interest in sustainability and aestheticism. Another major reason the brand continues to resonate with people has to do with the antiestablishment image it has maintained since its inception. Westwood had always made a statement through her fashion, and as of the 2010s, she and her brand were championing social causes such as environmentalism and human rights. “Climate change, not fashion, is now my priority,” Westwood said in 2014, and collections such as Climate Revolution and Save the Arctic reflect this sentiment—Homo Loquax took the issue in a political direction, featuring anti-capitalist and anti-politician slogans. She also participated in many sustainability-themed collaborations, such as the SAVE OUR OCEANS collection with Eastpak and a collaboration with Burberry for Cool Earth. Her slogan “Buy Less, Buy Well” similarly encourages responsible and sustainable consumption. Outside of climate activism, Westwood was a huge proponent of inclusive and gender-neutral clothing—Unisex, from Autumn/Winter 14-15, for example, celebrates androgyny and resists strict gender divisions. Westwood herself was known to protest quite publicly off the runway as well, even suspending herself inside a giant birdcage in London in protest of Julian Assange’s extradition in 2020, proving that she was willing to risk her reputation in the name of activism. Rather than hurting the brand, though, this became something that fans have supported and admired.
Thanks to Vivienne Westwood’s tireless forward-thinking and creativity, her brand has combined historic silhouettes with the punk aesthetic and remained popular for over fifty years. Dame Vivienne Westwood passed away in December of 2022, but her husband and long-time work partner Andreas Kronthaler has
Amari Sharma, Sam Penzone, Megan Krueger
Photo by Ethan Valliath
expressed that her legacy will live on through the brand’s innovation: “[Vivienne and I] have been working until the end and she has given me plenty of things to get on with.” It will be a privilege to see how the brand continues to evolve and shape the fashion industry in the future.
In Tokyo, there is a rich and treasured culture centered around street style and fashion. Young people have flocked to the Harajuku neighborhood, where streets are closed for easy pedestrian traffic, to shop, socialize, and show off their outfits. Home to various subcultures, Harajuku has become a Mecca for those interested in wackier styles. What may be a youth rebellion through fashion, or simply an uninhibited form of self-expression, has made Harajuku the animated fashion center we know it as today. Beginning in the 1980s and exploding in the 1990s, the vibrant Japanese street fashion has been captured throughout the years by various photographers and fashion enthusiasts to gather inspiration and share with others. Of these archives of Harajuku fashion, perhaps the most influential is FRUiTS Magazine. Having a cult following and continuing to inspire fans of Japanese fashion today, FRUiTS has had a large impact worldwide. Lately, its influence has reached larger audiences through social media, creating new followers and sparking inspiration among new generations of fashion lovers.
FRUiTS was created by Shoichi Aoiki, a now renowned photographer. In the magazine, young people who hung out in Harajuku were photographed in the “street snap” style characteristic of FRUiTS. Interestingly, this photographic style could be described as a lack of distinct style. The magazine is filled with images of people on the street taken head on, with no special effects and within no specific setting, just on the street. Individuals, couples and friends are photographed against the
backdrop of professionals walking by, friends congregating on the curb, and shoppers walking through streets with bags. Shot very plainly, the images uniquely focus on the individual in the photo themselves, allowing their personality and self-expression to be at the center of the photo, leaving the personality and expression of the photographer on the back burner. In an interview with the New Yorker, Aoki explained that he is, “not so much photographing as [he is] collecting [his] subjects. It’s not that [he] just [wants] to take photos of people– [he wants] to see people’s inner thoughts, their personalities come to the surface. This, to [him], is fashion, and [his] goal is to document it. When [he shoots, he] is trying not to express [his] own proclivities or show [his] creativity. Seeing someone on the street wearing something killer actually moves [him] emotionally, giving [him] a feeling of pleasure.” This explains more deeply the motivations behind the creation of the magazine, and why its style is so consistent and simple. Additionally, the editing of the magazine is very minimal, with photos taking up entire pages with small captions including details of the subject’s outfit overlaid in the corner, giving full display to the subjects and their interesting and creative outfits.
The fashion throughout the magazine is varied, capturing people of many different styles, from classic to offbeat. However, the most iconic and stereotypically FRUiTS look is something more eccentric, and is sported by many throughout the pages. These more eclectic looks by women have some staple
BY JULIANA MOLlNA
items, including but not limited to: petticoats, statement bags (often in the shape of stuffed animals), carrying stuffed animals as an accessory, short and/or colorful hair, platform shoes, long socks or leg warmers, colorful or patterned tights, bloomers, chunky plastic jewelry, and a statement piece on the neck (large necklaces, scarves, or large collars). Despite a general theme of layering, pattern mixing, and over-accessorizing, there is still a lot of variety to be seen in the outfits of FRUiTS. With differences of color palette, fabric, and accessory choices, the distinct style of individuals shines through. Even the plainest outfits pictured in the magazine usually have an extra flair of style–perhaps an interesting hat or unique silhouette. In a conformist culture like that of Japan, the youth who wore wacky outfits were making a bold statement of individuality and rejection of fitting the norm.
Today, FRUiTS is no longer in circulation, having ended in 2017 after Aoki famously said that “there are no more cool kids left to photograph.” While the magazine is no longer around, it’s kept alive through things like Instagram, with accounts such as @ fruits_magazine_archives uploading old spreads. The spirit of FRUiTS and capturing everyday people’s outfits in street snaps is also seen in current websites like tokyofashion.com, but even more so through social media where users upload their own outfits. Despite not having an editorial reference, social media makes finding and referencing others outlandish outfits more accessible than ever. While the return of Harajuku as a booming fashion epicenter
for weirdos and eccentric dressers will likely never happen again, there are still people taking inspiration from this era of fashion, and its documentation through FRUiTS magazine serves as an important snapshot of fashion history to look back on.
There has been an influence of Japanese fashion on western fashion for decades, with well known designers like Yohji Yamamoto and Rei Kawakubo having global success and influence. However, this influence was largely reflected in high fashion by people like the aforementioned designers, or in subcultures like Ganguro, Dekora, or Lolita. Where the current influence of FRUiTS style differs is in its more casual and mainstream appeal. Seen on people like Bella Hadid, the recent styles that parallel Harajuku street fashion have been deemed as the “weird girl” aesthetic online. Popularized on social media, people like @tinyjewishgirl on TikTok or Sara Camposarcone are poster girls for the aesthetic, sporting bright colors, lots and lots of layers, bright accessories, and patterned printed items. Things like petticoats, a handbag shaped like a binder clip, and a mini skirt printed with the words “MINI SKIRT” are just some of the fun, loud, and unique pieces you may find in a “weird girl’s” closet. Similarly to those pictured in FRUiTS, they’re not afraid to wear things that may seem childish. However, the outfits themselves rarely could be worn by a child, as they often include a risqué edge. These clothes are often thrifted or vintage, but are also often
by small brands, adding to the unique, one-ofa-kind factor– you can’t buy this at the mall.
What does the weird girl say about fashion today? I think it speaks to the phenomenon of “aesthetics” that now dominate fashion on social media. Cottagecore, indie kid, dark academia, coquette, normcore, old money… the list goes on. There is now a plethora of aesthetics that one can pick out and choose as their style of the month. Unlike subcultures, these aesthetics do not require any specific life changes or even a set wardrobe, instead they are only concerned with the aesthetic. This is the natural progression of style in the digital age. It is most important to look a certain way for pictures and social media, but this does not need to permeate your everyday life, nor be aligned with certain beliefs or political movements. In contrast to the youth taking a stand against conformity and challenging the generations before them, the weird girl is not trying to make a statement that is anything but visual. While the teens in Harajuku were outcasts, the main example cited of weird girl fashion is one of the most famous models of the past decade.
The rise of the weird girl also reflects the recent shift towards sustainability that many consumers are interested in. By leaning into the “weirdness” of clothing, people are able to focus on things that are not new, or not in trend. Instead of side eyeing the colorful striped skirt at the thrift store, someone may remember a weird girl they saw on TikTok and take inspiration from the bright colors and patterns. By the sourcing of many pieces being second hand and vintage, and from small, quirky brands, many of which hold sustainability and ethics as core values, consumers can contribute to a circular economy instead of fast fashion trends.
Lately, there has been a conversation about how the number of fashion trends are too high to keep up with, leading people to ultimately embrace their personal style over everything. This begs the question: Is the weird girl a celebration of individuality? While I wish this were true, we still see many overarching and micro-trends that inform consumer habits. The weird girl unfortunately fits into these trends as well. Somewhat aligned with the other recent trend of “dopamine dressing,” we can already see the more vibrant and eccentric styles of the weird girl falling out of favor for more streamlined and muted colors and silhouettes. While those who dress “weird” will always persist, their popularity will inevitably fall off. Furthermore, the deeming of the weird girl as a specific aesthetic ends up pigeonholing her into a specific category, diminishing her
sense of individuality by labeling her. By compartmentalizing such a bright and novel look, the weird girl label has taken away from the uniqueness of her style.
FRUiTS magazine has an undeniable influence in fashion and likely will for years to come. Its demonstration of individuality and personal style is an inspiration to so many people looking for their own sense of selfexpression through clothes. Reflected in the present day, the weird girl encapsulates a similar individuality found in FRUiTS, yet in a world driven by social media, showing how even the weirdest senses of style may ultimately cater to our need to belong to visual aesthetics fit for a Pinterest board or Instagram collage.
Isabella Kelly
Photo by Sarah Strausberg
The Renaissance of Oakley in the Y2K Resurgence
BY DECLAN KELLY
Walking through the Tysons Corner Center just outside of DC, my friend and I decided to walk into the Oakley store and browse through. After 20 minutes in the store, we had just about tried on every model of sunglasses they had in the store. Interestingly, there was one pair of sunglasses I had worn that would change my view on Oakley in the sunglasses market, the Eye Jacket Redux. The model is a revived design from the 1990s of the original Eye Jacket that emulates the same original design principles, but with a modern twist. With the rise of Y2K nostalgia, companies spanning from many industries are looking for ways to bring back designs from the past and appease both old and new consumers. In today’s fashion industry, nostalgia plays a large role in drawing consumers in. We have seen a prime example in the increased popularity of Nike’s Air Jordan 1 and 4 models. With the models having ties to professional athletes of the past, like Michael Jordan, it is evident that consumers feel sentimental towards certain products. Oakley has taken advantage of the nostalgia movement by rereleasing past iconic designs and altering them for today’s audience. With this, they’ve demonstrated the lasting influence of Oakley’s eyewear and the sentimental shift in consumer choices.
College dropout, ex-mormon, and entrepreneur Jim Jannard began Oakley as a motocross handlebar grip company. He manufactured high-quality uniquely lopsided grips that were different from the cheap, cylindrical ones of the 70s. After failing to promote his grips, he moved on to selling motocross and ski goggles believing that the logo on an athletics head would effectively promote his company. Communications manager Renee Law was able to promote Oakley through extreme skier Trevor Bowers. With his endorsement, Oakley was able to release in 1984 the company’s first pair of sunglasses, the eyeshades, which were a mix between goggles and sunglasses. The market for premium sunglasses was a growing one, Oakley took advantage of this by embracing technology and forward-thinking design.
In 1993, Oakley began to pivot its brand for further growth through the redesign of their logo by the new VP of Design, Peter Yee. Through his designs Yee emphasized aerodynamics, biomimicry, and pulling inspiration from unrelated sources. Yee’s first design with Oakley was the cornerstone for the recent trend in “gas-station sunglasses,” the Oakley Eye-Jacket. This design was inspired by the natural shape of our eyes, and utilized unique production methods as it steered away from the conventional straight lines and blocky appearance of previous sunglasses. Yee described the creative process behind the brand’s designs at this time as a balance between “shock-in-awe” and functionality. This balance was demonstrated in the launch of their “Over-The-Top” sunglasses which donned the faces of Michael Jordan and Dennis Rodman. Today they have appeared on the face of famous Migos rapper Offset in Travis Scott’s music video for his Utopia hit, “Modern Jam”. This subtle resurgence of the highly sought after sunglasses demonstrates how Peter Yee’s creative direction gave Oakley a long-lasting impact in the pop culture world.
On a wider scope, Oakley’s influence can be seen in other brand’s models, such as Balenciaga’s Swift Oval Sunglasses. This model was seen on
Kim Kardashian at the Vanity Fair Oscars Afterparty. After this event, sales for the model and accompanying dupes skyrocketed. Outside of this specific model, it is worth mentioning how Oakley’s original Factory Pilot Eyeshades inspired the majority of Pit Viper’s products. Additionally, the similarity in design and the company’s emphasis on athletes is reminiscent of Oakley’s brand image. Browsing through Oakley’s website, I noticed many products were sporting logos from the brand’s different eras. For example, the Hydra and ReDiscover Sutro use the brand’s first logo while the Holbrook, Gascan, and Fuel Cell models sport the brand’s newer logo which was introduced in 2000. Outside of logos, Oakley has reintroduced specific models, such as the aforementioned Eye-Jacket, M- Frame, and Wind Jacket. These models have been slightly redesigned and outfitted with Oakley’s newest technology, to better align with current design trends. The dynamic use of their logos and revitalizing old models demonstrates how Oakley is responding to the sentimental value which consumers place on familiar designs and logos. Through the examples of celebrities and competing companies, it is evident Oakley’s early designs have influenced present day consumers and the overall trend of nostalgia. Sunglasses are just an miniscule accessory when it comes to the fashion industry as a whole. Although there are many different brands and actors, nostalgia seems to play a big part in most brands’ items and marketing. For fashion houses, this means bringing back iconic designs or even specific clothing, like low-rise jeans. Brands are currently aware of the importance of nostalgia because consumers desire a sense of comfort, familiarity, and emotional connection with products and media. In a noisy world, nostalgia provides an escape for consumers to enjoy the products they coincide with familiar, positive experiences.
Oakley’s journey from its humble beginnings as a motocross grip company to its current status as a leading eyewear brand is a testament to the enduring power of innovation, creative direction, and the strategic embrace of nostalgia. The revival of iconic models, along with the dynamic use of logos and the incorporation of modern technology, showcases Oakley’s ability to adapt to changing consumer preferences while staying true to its roots. The influence of Oakley extends beyond its own products, evident in the designs of other brands and the broader trend of nostalgia in the fashion industry. As consumers increasingly seek comfort and emotional connections with products, Oakley’s strategic approach to incorporating nostalgia not only reflects the brand’s resilience but also underscores the timeless appeal of familiar designs in a rapidly evolving market. The Renaissance of Oakley stands as a compelling example of how a brand’s heritage can be a source of inspiration for both past and present consumers, creating a bridge between generations and leaving an indelible mark on the landscape of fashion and eyewear.
Declan Kelly, Noah Edelman
Photo by Ethan Valliath
Eugene Rabkin unapologetically tells us the truth. After immigrating from Belarus to New York City as a teenager, a Wall Street career crisis and an exploration of independent fashion movements at luxury vanguards like Barney’s and experimental SoHo boutiques like If Boutique and Atelier New York, Rabkin established the StyleZeitgeist message board in 2006. He hoped to create a digital space for the kind of people that wanted to talk about the fashion that didn’t just exist on 5th Avenue or Avenue Montaigne. After StyleZeitgeist’s founding and success, Rabkin has gone on to also write for several major publications and interviewed fashion innovators such as Rick Owens, Ann Demeulemeester, Dries Van Noten and Haider Ackermann just to name a few. Between his regular contributions to the Business of Fashion or Highsnobiety, his own articles and magazine publications under the StyleZeitgeist banner and most recently his podcast, Rabkin has always provided a biting critique of the fashion industry at large. Thank you very much to Eugene for sitting down with me and providing your insights.
This interview has been edited down for publication.
BY ALEX MAROOTIAN
AM: Tell me about how you became interested in fashion? Were there specific artists, musicians or personal events that influenced you to become interested in fashion?
ER: Yeah, definitely. My interest started, like for many teenagers, with dressing up. I came to the States from Belarus when I was 16 with my family. A huge part of many immigrant families is aspirational consumption, you come to the States for a better life. And obviously this is an age when you start caring about how you look. A lot of this has to do with sex and romance, trying to be attractive, etc. The person who was most influential for me was Trent Reznor, the singer and founder of Nine Inch Nails. When I saw the first video clip for March of The Pig, I really fell in love with Nine Inch Nails. Seeing something so raw and real was very eye opening to me. So he sort of became my style icon, not just wanting to emulate him mindlessly, but really, really being attuned to his music and lyrics and what he stood for. And at the same time my brother had a friend who was an aspiring designer, and he was really the only person I knew (who was into fashion) because we came from an immigrant Brooklyn neighborhood that will never be gentrified. He’s the one who saw my interest in dressing and he said well you should go to this store called Barney’s and I did. This was the first time where I discovered the Belgians and the Japanese, and I discovered that
Kyla Robinson, Abby Turner, Paige Nelson, Noah Edelman, Lucas Golluber, Samantha Travis, Sam Penzone, Abby Tuthill, Alex Marootian Photo by Ethan Valliath
there is fashion that’s not just about status display and conspicuous consumption. These clothes looked like what I’m wearing already, but just like infinitely better versions, much more elegant, much better made, much better fitting of course. And so that was my rabbit hole. And of course I was thinking “who are these people?” And why do they make clothes like that, and they must make clothes like that because they were into the same music that I was into. It was a very pure connection, a creator created something, and someone discovered it and you opened the dialogue through the clothes, which to me was full of meaning. It just goes to show you how insular the neighborhood I grew up in was, because I discovered Soho around the same time completely by accident. I prowled every single block of that neighborhood. I was like, “oh my god, this place was made for me.” I discovered stores there like the Helmut Lang boutique, which is still my most favorite store in the world. The original Comme Des Garçons boutique was still there before it moved to Chelsea, If Boutique, the Yohji Yamamoto flagship but it was all in between art galleries. Then later I discovered magazines like ID, Dutch, those were very instrumental to my education in the late 90s, early 2000s.
AM: What pushed you specifically into fashion journalism and starting StyleZeitgeist?
ER: Around 2003 or 2004 I was googling stuff on Raf Simons. In my search, this website popped up called The Fashion Spot, which was like the original (fashion) message board. I was really drawn to that because for the first time in my life, I met people virtually who were interested in the same clothes that I was interested in, the kind of people who knew who Helmut Lang or Jil Sander were. There were a lot of people on it, you talked to people like Susan Bubble before she launched her blog. I quickly earned the
reputation on The Fashion Spot for a) really knowing my avant garde and b) cracking jokes and firing off these one liners that were both a bit snide but funny. And so I became quite prominent there. And then eventually I thought, you know, I should start my own thing, why not? I really wanted to concentrate on design because The Fashion Spot was talking a lot about models and celebrity style and I was like I just want to talk about design. And that’s how StyleZeitgeist was born, as a message board and it attracted quite a lot of people. I kind of drove it but not really, because you can’t really drive a message board. It’s the community. At the same time, I had a career crisis. I was working on Wall Street, like a lot of Russian speaking Jewish immigrants do and I really, really hated it. So I went and got a master’s degree at The New School. I thought I was going to teach English literature in high school classes, that’s what I wanted to do. I realized that I wanted to write my master’s thesis about fashion. And at the same time as I was graduating, I got a message on StyleZeitgeist from someone who turned out to be an editor at the weekend magazine Haaretz which is the most prestigious Israeli newspaper. We were talking and I kind of blurted out, you know, I would love to write. So that’s how I started writing and then one thing led to another. Then I decided to start the StyleZeitgeist magazine and at the same time I met Imran Amed from Business of Fashion, I started contributing there and then it just snowballed. So StyleZeitgeist turned from a message board to a magazine, which was very timely, because the message board culture started dying because of Instagram and other social media (platforms). Then I launched the StyleZeitgeist podcast a few years ago, which I think was also very good. I’m glad because I’m never first to the finish line in terms of exploring new media but it seems like the podcast has sort of taken on a life of its own.
AM: You had mentioned the term avant garde before. What does that mean to you and is it a term that’s still
relevant for categorizing these very diverse artists over a 30 year timespan? Is it okay to call both Rei Kawakubo and Peter Do avant garde and is it a term that we should still use today?
ER: What I mean by the avant garde is the classic, modernist definition of the avant garde. It is creators who push the envelope, who introduce something new, who create outside of the norm, and who are basically pushing the conversation forward and pushing the limits of their respective disciplines. Yes, someone like Rei Kawakubo, Yohji Yamamoto, Rick Owens etc. Whether that is still relevant? That’s a fantastic question. I wish I had an answer for it, and I don’t have a definitive answer because I go back and forth on that. (There are) other people who are pushing the envelope. Iris van Herpen, designers like that, there’s a lot of pushing the envelope on the textile development side, materials, etc. In terms of aesthetic, I think that it becomes much harder in our thoroughly post modernist environment where so much has been done. And now it’s more about mixing what has come before rather than creating something genuinely new, which is not impossible, it’s just much harder. At the same time there are designers like Chitose Abe from Sacai, who is actually very avant garde, she created a new aesthetic right? But she’s not really avant garde in her thinking, she’s actually very commercially minded and supremely talented at the same time. And then of course there are fake avant garde brands like, not pushing the envelope at all, but they’re like, you know, “I’m the 50th version of Paul Harnden”. I wouldn’t call that avant garde at all. I would say the term is definitely fraught at this point, and I wish I had a clear answer, but I don’t, which is what makes it interesting. Is fashion art? I don’t know, I go back and forth on that. But that’s what makes it interesting because I haven’t made up my mind.
AM: What are your thoughts on independent creators on Tik Tok or YouTube discussing iconic designer collections or discussing these designers that were making collections before they were born? Do you think they’re actually interested in these designers or are they really just looking for the social media clout of guys in Rick Owens?
ER: Yeah. Look, technology is what you make of it. It’s really how you use this, would there be StyleZeitgeist if there was no internet? No, I would still be probably on the train to Brooklyn with a Barney’s bag so I would never knock it. I’m glad these platforms exist to spread the word. And there are absolutely real enthusiasts who run Instagram accounts. If you look at something like Archive PDF, these guys are genuine with what they do. Are there posers? I imagine there are, like I’ve said I don’t go on TikTok, but I know but I’m too old for this shit. My only reservation with social media and places like TikTok is an incredible amount of misinformation that goes on there. Yeah it’s great that you read one magazine article about Rick Owens, and now you go and tell people about it. But I guarantee you the amount of factual errors I’ve seen in magazine articles, including publications like The New Yorker,
these TikTok videos, Instagram stories whatnot, they’re also leading to a lot of misinformation. And to me, that is the biggest obstacle where I meet kids sometimes and they tell me stuff and I’m like this is absolutely, factually inaccurate. And another problem with this is that stuff creates its own ecosystem. So everyone just keeps spreading this misinformation where, you know, you see my background. I get my information from books where people really have done their research. Even sometimes my fact checkers when I write for publications are like “where did you get this we couldn’t google it.”. And I’m like yeah you couldn’t google it because it’s in a book and guess what that book is out of print. This is why you have me writing for you, because you can’t get this information anywhere else. So my biggest issue there is the amount of misinformation and alleging that is being spread. That’s one of the reasons why I started the Academy and one of the reasons why the first course of that Academy is the history of contemporary fashion. I would like to share my knowledge in a consistent academic environment, it’s a college level course. That’s my biggest problem. Am I glad these platforms exist? Absolutely, yeah, they should exist. And that’s how you learn. Especially, you know, I never forget where I come from. I didn’t live in Manhattan, I am not from an intellectual family. The internet is what allowed me to meet like-minded people, I’m all for it. Will a lot of passion and genuine and accurate information get lost in the vortex, of course, the problem will be about editing out.
AM: What do you think about the influence of reselling platforms like Grailed or Depop on this specific sect of archive fashion? Do you think it is a net negative or do you think there can be some positives to people doing this whole secondhand reselling of these pieces from iconic collections?
ER: Yeah, I think Grailed sucks, I hate it. And I’ve written about it on StyleZeitgeist, I gave an interview about it to the New York Times some years ago as well. I really think Grailed is the epitome of Oscar Wilde’s maxim that today everyone knows the price of things and no one knows the value of things. It has created this culture of low balling and this merchant mentality whereas in the days of forum classifieds; first of all it was a self selected community. Usually people who were passionate about fashion, and that created a community because you traded with people you kind of knew. Maybe you met them in real life, or you met them on the internet. But there was this aspect that went beyond merely transactional, which to me is still super important. This is why I sell my stuff on Instagram. Because it’s as important to me for something I’m selling to go to a good home as it is to get a price. Like I’ll take a discount just knowing that this piece means something with somebody. So I think Grailed engendered this transactional mentality. Oscar Wilde’s maxim was nowadays people know the price of everything and the value of nothing. I think that’s the damage, where the clothes that are so imbued with meaning to me have just become another asset class. That is the thing that I find off putting.
AM: What advice would you give to a young designer or a young journalist or anyone that’s interested in accessing the fashion industry as a profession. This is such a large system, what can people do to help themselves but also stay true to not writing bad puff pieces for Vogue or something like that? What can people that want to work and contribute good work to the fashion industry do?
ER: Yeah, well, I hate to say it, my first inclination is always the same: don’t do it. Because it’s arduous and rewards are low. But of course, I’m not here to prevent anyone from pursuing their dream. I feel like in today’s day and age, probably the most direct thing is to develop your own thing. Journalistic jobs are few and far between, and it is very hard to make a living doing one. I would advise starting your own thing, and growing your own thing. I don’t have much advice for fashion designers, I do think that going to fashion school is important. Going to school in general is important. Because you don’t only learn skills, but you acquire a network, which hopefully you will use down the line. Then my other advice is you have to meet people. Yes, I’ve gotten work because of Instagram, just people DMing me. I’ve got some great connections, but people already know me. So as a starter meeting people is absolutely paramount. And also, let’s not forget the numbers. One big problem with America, we only hear stories about winners. But for every “ideservecouture”, how many kids are there that have their Instagram or YouTube channel and TikTok and nothing happens? So statistically, like any statistic would tell you don’t do it. But I don’t want to discourage anyone. I have a glass ceiling as well. So it’s not easy at all. What’s unprecedented today is that we do live in an age where the means of production has been absolutely democratized. And that can be a huge, huge boon. Yeah, but meeting people is key because emails, messages never work as much as meeting someone in person, which is hard because we usually have to live in one of the cultural capitals which is also expensive.
AM: That’s all the questions I have. Is there anything else you’d like to add or any final thoughts to give?
ER: My final advice is don’t be daunted. I don’t want to say anyone can do this. But I will say that anyone who has the passion and the curiosity and intellectual curiosity can do this. I came from a place of nothing to a place that was also of nothing. But I was very driven and on some level, like autodidacts are my favorite sort of American success stories, because this country is very adamant about not educating its people. But it doesn’t stop you either. I’ve met quite a few autodidacts and they’re actually my favorite people, because they’re driven. I would say don’t let anyone tell you that you can’t. Because knowledge is acquirable, it just takes effort and time.
AM: Thank you very much Eugene for giving me your time.
Lucas Golluber, Kyla Robinson
Photo by Ethan Valliath and Sarah Strausberg
“Grailed is the epitome of Oscar Wilde’s maxim that today everyone knows the price of things but no one knows the value of things.”
When it comes to the artisanal fashion scene, Maurizio Altieri’s Carpe Diem was among the first to establish a voice that touted craft, simplicity in design and truly upending many preconceived notions of “luxury” fashion. A pure celebration of quality materials and small batch production, Carpe Diem helped establish a unique look at daily dress. From totally singular leather offerings to timeless wardrobe staples, this brand of Italian fashion flew right in the face of glossy photoshoots, sleek suiting and stylized embellishments. I had the privilege to speak with Alessia Righi Amante, a central part of Carpe Diem’s creative team. We talked about her start at the brand, what made Carpe Diem successful and its eventual closure in 2006. Thank you very much to Ms. Amante for sharing your experiences with me.
AM: Take me back to when you were at Carpe Diem. How did you start working there, how would you describe the brand, its place in fashion history and its eventual closure?
AA: I met Maurizio Altieri in 1996 or 97 by chance, my ex husband told me “I met someone you have to know” and I met him. I was designing and selling jewels at that time. Meeting Maurizio was a sort of illumination, I never met anyone like him… he was a sort of a shaman, a wizard, a storyteller. I did visit his studio and I fell in love with his work, so raw, primitive, unique simply and perfect. He did only leather clothing and shoes at that time, oh my god the shoes, they were addictive, once you started wearing them you couldn’t wear anything else.
They were not comfortable at all but they looked amazing and totally different, you had the feeling to be different in a pair of Carpe Diem shoes.
At the time I visited his studio in Rome he told me “we’ll change it all”, it was just the second time I met him. He had the rare talent of immediately recognizing people’s potential and pushing them to the maximum so they could express it. This is the way everything started. We were short of money, we worked for the pleasure of it, I kept my job with the jewels company for years before being stable at CDiem. We moved from Rome to Perugia in a very small space nearby the factory who made our clothes, his style at the very beginning was a bit close to Chrome Hearts. He spent some time in LA with Richard and the crew, but then he found his own way with raw hedges, distressed leather, unisex pieces, clothes as uniforms, double layers, reversible jackets, it all seems so obvious now but then it was new and exciting. I used to buy Margiela, Helmut lang, and Ann for myself but this was a step forward.
A couple of years later, business started to work out, we had the best customers in the world back then, we moved in a huge space, new people joined our team, we were like a rock band playing our own music. Everything seemed to be possible; customized, amazing, crazy expensive leathers and fabrics, we started l’Maltieri, the fabric clothing collection, and then Linea, with a much more minimal approach to fashion based on the simple concepts of light, medium, heavy weight and light, medium, dark colors…we also opened an experimental space in Paris called x18, nearby Canal St.Martin. It used to be a garage, it became our home, workspace, a new dimension. We used to communicate with the motherhouse in Perugia through a very complicated video conference system built inside a 12 meters container installed in the center of the space, kind of Facetime or Teams grandfather.
But then everything crashed down, not all in a sudden, I felt it but maybe I did not want to see the evidence, Maurizio was not into it all anymore. CDiem got too big, too “famous”, too much intrusive, he could not stand with it anymore. He needed to find other possibilities, to explore different ways to express himself and we got to the end. I can say now, looking backward, it had been one of the best times in my life. I met incredible people, amazing souls Yoko Ito, Maurizio Amadei, Anna Blessman, Vivetta, Luca Laurini, Simone Cecchetto, Emanuele Colella, Massimo Degli Effetti, Sarah Stewart, Tommy Perse, Kurt, Sofia, Alda, Anna Meris, Peter Sidell, Darius Chegini, to name a few.
AM: Thank you Ms. Amante for giving me your time.
Whether it’s a reflection of financial shifts akin to the George Taylor hemline index, or of a desire to dress like you’ve married a Windsor, Gen Z has found a new infatuation with quiet luxury and quality pieces and deemed it “Old Money”. The lifestyle of inheritance is a virtually unattainable lottery, but it seems that Gen Z also finds it relatively undesirable; all they desire is the look itself. The trend stems from a return to sustainable, reliable basics from quality brands such as Ralph Lauren, Burberry, Brooks Brothers, Loro Piana, and Chanel likely originating from the elegantly casual looks of European elite and royalty. Such brands were worn casually or recreationally, like Polo Ralph Lauren which was initially inspired by Lauren’s interest in sports and sportswear. Thanks to the nature of the sport, Ralph Lauren clothes were manufactured to be timeless and durable, and we can attribute the continuity of its popularity to this notion. Similar labels also focused on durability and style, guaranteeing quality materials and timeless silhouettes, though for a higher cost.
Quality brands have been, and continue to be, resonably expensive for everyday wear, so why is the generation paying college tuitions and job-hunting so immersed in the aesthetic? Many find the look to be the appeal: simple accessories, timeless silhouettes, muted and jewel tones. Recently, the uptick in thrifting and buying secondhand has delivered greatly on the affordability front. It’s simple to go to your local Goodwill or flea market and find a previously worn Ralph Lauren sweater, and as long as it isn’t host to a questionable stain, one wash makes it good as new. Whether they’re name-brand finds or look-alikes, thrifted pieces are a sustainable and affordable way to achieve the “Old Money” look. This may also be a testament to the durability of “Old Money” brands, having survived years of wear by previous owners. But durability is not the aesthetic’s only appeal.
The trend is also wildly popular due to the nature of it being less “flashy”, in which a more subtle display of sophistication is preferred to flaunting name-brand pieces just for the sake of flaunting them. This obsession with name-brands, or “logomania”, began in the early 1980s and reached a final height around 2016 after Louis Vuitton’s Spring show. Though its reign in the ‘80s and ‘90s was iconic and ever-present in certain elements of modern fashion, logomania is slowly being replaced by a desire to boast quiet luxury, rather than obvious opulence. Many people draw this inspiration not only from the style itself, but also from fashion icons of yesterday
and today.
When it comes to icons of quiet luxury and “Old Money”, the People’s Princess is the choice of many thanks to her casual but sophisticated street style, not to mention her legacy in the Royal family. Today, many find inspiration in Princess Diana’s simplistic style, like model Sofia Richie. After her stunning dream-wedding the internet was buzzing, and praised her elegant and timeless style. Her stylist, Liat Baruch, revealed that the trick was not to overdo it with a flashy bag or excessive jewelry. Her go-to look for Richie features the classics: a button down, highwaisted jeans, a plain white tee, and a contemporary but timeless accent piece à la a unique shoulder bag or cutout midi dress. Dani Michelle, stylist for Kendall Jenner and Hailey Bieber, also emphasizes that the importance of “quiet luxury” is all in the details; elevated accessories revive an outfit without detracting from its simplicity. In general, it seems that the motto for “Old Money” fashion is certainly “less is more”. The “Old Money” motto, however, is remarkably in line with the motto of minimalism, and it’s important to recognize where the two differ. The move to minimalism began in the late 1980s and ‘90s, replacing ‘80s maximalism with more sleek, simple designs. Designers like Calvin Klein, Georgio Armani, and Jil Sander found minimalism to be at the heart of their designs. Jil Sander, a European fashion designer hailing from late ‘60s Germany, was particularly transformative during this period of ‘80s and ‘90s minimalism. Her designs enhanced basics and gave them life in the fashion world; a white button-down and a neutral structured coat went from off the rack consumer goods to runway fashion. Her minimalist designs may have lacked “Old Money” prestige and tradition, but the quality and sophistication of her work never fell short. In later years, Phoebe Philo would transform Celine in a similar way. From 20102018, Philo focused on tailored, monochrome looks which varied in texture and pattern, taking women’s daywear to a new level. Brands like The Row would follow, taking inspiration from Philo in an attempt to create cosmopolitan women’s attire that mirrors ‘90s minimalism and quality.
Similarly, minimalist Paris-based brand Lemaire creates pieces that are modern yet classic and ever-changing to suit the trends of the moment. Their minimalist values are held in the timeless designs of their pieces but enhanced by modern, unique twists. What the aforementioned brands and “Old Money” designers have in common is undoubtedly their emphasis on quality and simplicity. Whether you’re buying from Chanel or The Row, you’re guaranteed to be met with durable designs that
exude sophistication. Where they differ, however, is in prestige and intent. “Old Money” conveys not only wealth, but tradition and class. Such brands try to maintain vintage designs, material, and colors, while modern minimalists work to transform such designs. Regardless of their differences, minimalism and “Old Money” continue to fluctuate in and out of fashion, and it’s clear that they’re both making comebacks. In particular, there are several “Old Money” pieces that have risen back into popularity in recent years. The kitten heel has become a staple piece in many wardrobes due to its versatility and comfortability. The style, popularized in the 1950s, is more demure and simplistic than many of the trendier stilettos and chunkier heels present in fashion today. The shoes flowed in and out of popularity during the late ‘80s and early ‘90s, naturally, due to their wearability without having to sacrifice sophistication. Flats are also reemerging into fashion for similar reasons. Perhaps their popularity is due to the “balletcore” trend that’s taken off in recent months, which everyone from designer to retail brands have jumped on in clothing and footwear.
Quiet luxury has also manifested itself in the form of minimalist, timeless bags. Neutral-toned leathers, quality hardware and simple designs all add to an outfit in an understated but luxurious way that trendier, flashier bags are not able to harness. A simple bag will always be in style; from Banana Republic to LOEWE, it’s impossible to avoid finding a unique but timeless clutch or tote for every occasion. In union with minimalist bags, elegant scarves are also making a bit of a comeback, now that Gen Z has recovered from their days of infinity scarf trauma, and not only are they functionable, but they’re extremely fashionable. One can never go wrong with a classic Burberry tartan-check scarf, a subtle yet distinct display of “Old Money” elegance and craftsmanship. However, thrifted or vintage scarves are gaining popularity due to their elegant patterns and versatility when it comes to styling. Whether you’re using scarves to cover your hair in a 1950s Hollywood way, or adorning your classic leather shoulder bags with them in a Birkin-esque manner, vintage scarves give anything that “Old Money”, European flair. On the accessory front, Cass Dimicco, founder of Aureum Collective, explains it best. Accessories should be chosen with care and consideration, as they are meant to be long-term investments that you benefit from by wearing them every day without having them tarnish or break. Pieces should be elegant and timeless, and should complement just about everything in your wardrobe. This is what “Old Money” is all about: pieces that will never go out of style and can be worn and re-worn
Philippe Tchokoam
Eliza Thorn, Phillippe Tchokoam, Andrea Pedemonte
Photo by Ethan Valliath
a hundred times before they show any wear and tear. In particular, luxury brands such as Tiffany and Co, Cartier, Bulgari, and Van Cleef & Arpels have significant historical notoriety among the rich, but still remain relatively popular as once in a lifetime investment pieces. They emphasize the classic design and versatility of “Old Money” fashion when it comes to jewelry, and represent hundreds of years of deeply rooted fashion history.
So, why does Gen Z have such an infatuation with Old Money”? The reality is that the obsession itself is a trend; fashion is constantly fluctuating between out-of-the box style and back-to-basics, and right now many are more appreciative of simplistic style, unlike former fast-fashion trends. However, the reasoning behind wanting a wardrobe that is sustainable and timeless is solid; you want to get the most out of your purchases, so why not make them something that will never go out of style? Quiet luxury will always be at the baseline of fashion, whether it goes by “Old Money” or “minimalism” or whatever TikTok wants to call it, and the emphasis on quality craftsmanship and timeless silhouettes is something that goes much further than a logo.
Eliza Thorn, Phillippe Tchokoam
Photo by Ethan Valliath
BY JORDYN NEUGARTEN
If someone opened up their closet, they would easily own more than three pieces of clothing that were made from denim. Whether someone is wearing jeans to go do everyday tasks or go out on the town with their friends, jeans are a universal wardrobe staple. You could wear the same pair of denim jeans with a t-shirt and call it a casual outfit or wear it with a low cut black shirt and boots to have dinner with your best friends. However, denim wasn’t always considered a casual piece of clothing. It originated in the 1800s and was considered to be a unique and sturdy fabric. It was first used as horse blankets and tents until a gold mining company turned them into working trousers. Denim is not what it was before, and has been turned into over a thousand different styles of clothing made for all genders, shapes, and sizes.
Denim first originated as a strong material that coud withstand hard work. It quickly became popular amongst working men as it was durable and would not be easily torn. Cowboys, miners, and farmers were all seen wearing this fabric. Not only was this fabric cheap but it was a better alternative than the generic jeans which were made out of cotton, linen, and wool. It wasn’t until the 1950s that people started to wear them and weren’t exclusively offered to working men. Levi’s, a 6.2 billion dollar company has had all of America in a chokehold since they produced their first pair of jeans. To this day, they are considered to be the best denim jeans. Celebrities such as Marilyn Monroe were wearing them leisurely which caused the denim sales to skyrocket.
Since the 1960s, there have been three waves of denim which have all come back into style within the last ten years. In the 1960s, jeans were associated with hippies and many started to see jeans as a sign of rebellion. During this time, the infamous bell-bottoms were born. In the 1970s, flared and bell bottom styles were flying off the shelf and denim became the go-to style for a majority of the adolescent generation. It wasn’t until the 1980s when designer brands such as Calvin Klein and Armani launched the first designer denim. Brands like Helmut Lang only increased the popularity of designer denim, proposing jeans not just as mass market but as a covetable part of a designer’s collection. With this, many forms of denim started to shine through.
In 1994, Friends, the TV show, aired and took the fashion industry by storm. The show featured the six main characters Monica, Rachael, Phoebe, Chandler, Joey, and Ross all gathering at their local coffee shop and were pictured wearing many different variations of denim jeans. Especially
the Levi’s 501s. All very different people with different careers, yet they were all seen wearing denim. Rachael and Monica had heavy influence in denim during this time. They were a symbol of working women who didn’t rely on a man for their income. Monica was seen wearing jeans leisurely around her home which normalized wearing jeans during day to day activities. Friends was and still is an extremely popular TV show especially since viewers felt a connection with the characters as they were living through the struggles of being on their own after college. Not only did their character storylines have a heavy influence on people’s lives but it changed fashion as well. Viewers idolized these characters, and in turn wanted to be like them. Many viewers started to adapt to their outfit choices and this had a heavy influence on the rise of denim as it showed that jeans weren’t only worn by blue-colored workers. As denim became more popular, the demand for it also increased. Due to this urgent request, the fashion industry fell victim to fast fashion mass production.
Statistically, production of textiles is responsible for 20% of the world’s pollution. Denim, being an extremely hard fabric to make, uses 1,800 gallons of cotton to make a single pair of jeans. Denim is a tough but also versatile fabric that has shown many sustainable options such as washing your jeans every fifth wear, or stores like Madewell allow you to trade in any pair of jeans in any condition for a new pair. However, fast fashion companies like Shein and ASOS are causing major harm to our environment. The manufacturing of jeans may seem simple, but in reality it is not. They demand extreme water usage, energy consumption, and cause major chemical pollution. It is considered to be one of the main driving forces of environmental damage in the fashion industry. From the vast quantities of water needed to grow the cotton to the chemicals used to dye the denim, it is seriously impacting our planet.
It is said that it takes over 3,780 liters of water to create a single pair of Lev’s 501 jeans. Not only is the manufacturing causing harm, but up to 20% of fabric is wasted and thrown away to landfills
DENIM ON DENIM DENIM
or to be incinerated which continues to cause greenhouse gas emissions to climb. However, there are ways to eliminate the amount of damage, such as plant based dye instead of chemical dye and using fertilized cotton instead of cotton that solely relies on water.
The common saying, “fashion trends always come back” has stood the test of time for this unique fabric. In the last hundred years, denim has continued to come back and even grow into a whole new empire itself. Unlike every other fashion trend that has come back, denim is one that is appreciated by all. Denim is here to stay and is something that is approachable by all generations and all demographics. Along with this, there will always be the baseline of jeans and there continues to be add ons to that style daily. It is also the only fabric that has created words such as “joots” for jean boots or “jag” for a jean bag. Not only have those new words been circulating fashion vocabulary, but denim has stepped out of the box and has been seen in many other forms such as corsets, leggings, and even phone cases. Denim has been around for over a hundred years and will continue to take off and be a trend for the next several generations. I hope that brands will start to implement a more eco-friendly manufacturing process when it comes to jeans as climate change is seriously harming the planet. Nevertheless, Denim will always come back bigger and better each time.
Ever since the dawn of humanity, people have adorned themselves in whatever materials they could find. As societies erupted worldwide, trends began to emerge in the types of mediums and styles people used to make jewelry. The progression from found objects like stones and shells to precious gems and metals evolved alongside people, mirroring human innovations. Societies revolved around the trade of rare materials, so acquiring one would turn one’s outfit into a work of art that made everything someone else wore seem insignificant. Jewelry has long been a marker of a person’s social status, and those signals still exist. By wearing jewelry, you are sending a message to the world about who you are. Whether conscious or not, putting on a necklace, ring, earring, or bracelet in the morning reflects your personality.
No one can deny that the most notable jewelry trend of 2023 was the rise of the charm: charm necklaces, Italian charm bracelets, and eclectic historic pieces strung together on a chain. Celebrating uniqueness through the adornment of charms is no new trend, as it actually goes back to the Neolithic era, where pendants were used as a means to ward off evil spirits. The Ancient Roman Empire also used charms to document the life of the person wearing it, acting as a living monument of the person’s life. Queen Victoria of England has been the most prolific proponent of expressing oneself through jewelry, especially through charms. The Queen had two special charm bracelets—one with enamel hearts for each of her kids and another with gold oval and heart-shaped lockets and medallions; all decked out with black enamel. The second one was made as a kind of mourning jewelry after her husband, Prince Albert, tragically passed away. This new form of statement jewelry is reflective of the beginning of its influence on popular culture. It is a testament to the transformative influence of critical jewelry designers and brands throughout each era.
In the heart of the Art-Deco movement in the 20s and 30s, statement jewelry was geometric and colorful, mimicking a decade of significant social and economic change. Despite the financial hardships of the great depression, glamor in Hollywood was at its peak, being broadcasted to the world when movie stars like Greta Garbo and Marlene Dietrich inspired viewers with their sophisticated style. Designers attempted to make their pieces more affordable by cutting prices and using cheaper materials, with the promise of affordability to a broader audience. Faux materials were used instead of expensive materials to replicate the looks of movie stars but with painted glass instead of pearls and bakelite, which offered consumers a variety of colored gemstones. In Europe during WWII, jewelry manufacturing firms closed down, and many designers left, which allowed American
jewelry companies to enter the European market. The 40s heralded the end of the Art Deco period, where jewelry designs shifted from minimalism to more modern styles with new materials as mainstays were being diverted to the war effort. Funnily enough, gold became the most accessible material for jewelry, and even though it was still expensive, designers would use it sparingly. Cartier defied the odds of the circumstances of the Second World War by creating fabulous, patriotic statement pieces with the letter v for victory. After the war ended, changes in society were mirrored in jewelry production, using skills they used to reduce costs, making it more affordable. Materials and skilled craftspeople became available again to work for design houses in the 1950s while expanding on the emerging trends of the late 40s. This was a creative period for jewelry design, where texture became the defining stylistic element. Pierre Sterlé was an increasingly important designer of the 50s and represented the new interest in naturalism with his interpretation. Sterlé’s jewelry employed dis-symmetry as a clever way of giving movement to the pieces while creating pieces of pure architectural simplicity. As the decade ended, simplicity and modernism shifted towards clean lines and bold forms as the 60s approached. Statement pieces at the time featured large, angular pendants that usually showcased vibrant gemstones or sleek metal accents. This trend was motivated by the forward-thinking era, combining artistic innovation with contemporary flair. Two competing styles captivated fashion enthusiasts: black and white jewelry versus vibrant colors. The black and white jewelry carried over the trend of simplicity and sophistication, while the body colors and patterns embraced the spirit of the psychedelic era. The 70s brought back the trend of statement pieces embedded in gold. Big hoops, thick chains, and pendant necklaces reflected the free spirit of the hippie subculture that started to blend into the mainstream. Coinciding with the social movements, environmentally conscious and recycled materials became increasingly popular. The vibrant nightlife scene at iconic venues like Studio 54 inspired another subculture of the 1970s. Disco jewelry was about pushing boundaries by layering multiple necklaces, stacking rings, and mixing metals. The ultimate 90s accessory was definitely chokers, adding edgy allure to any outfit and challenging traditional jewelry norms. The more minimalist 1990s were tame when it came to jewelry, but as soon as Y2K approached, jewelry became bigger and better. We all know and love the chunky, funky jewelry of the 2000s and now nostalgic for the beaded necklaces that looked like candy, jelly rings, and thick silver chains that halted the world at
Photo by Sarah Strausberg
Isabella Kelly
Photo by Sarah Strausberg
the turn of the century. Y2K style was playful and often synonymous with icons like Paris Hilton and Britney Spears, but as that style started to creep back into our lives and on the runway, it returned with an edge.
Statement jewelry has dominated the early 2020s, starting funky nostalgia in the form of 2000s-inspired beaded pearl necklaces accessible to everyone. Not only were designers like Vivienne Westwood and Martha Calvo creating high-end versions of this trend, but with one trip to the craft store, people made their pearly chains to show off to the world. Across the runways of 2020 fashion week, statement chokers seemed to be everyone’s newest accessory, like at the Moschino show, where Jeremy Scott debuted layers upon layers of necklaces stacked upon each other to The Blonds buckle option chokers, which took belts to our necks. Enamel was everywhere in 2021, from fine to fashion jewelry, most notably in neon colors. The repopularization of this material expanded the potential for jewelry trends as it can transform any piece of jewelry into something entirely different. Drawing from the archives on the runway in 2023, houses such as Saint Laurent, Balmain, and Chanel delivered vintage vibes through bangles and studs. Rosettes reigned in 2023 by appearing everywhere; Paris Hilton debuted at the Met Gala in her biker chic black leather gown with a matching sequin rosette choker to tie it all together. Pushing the boundaries of what role jewelry plays in fashion, outerwear accessories, mixed metals, and body chains changed the game regarding accessibility of expression.
Jewelry can be a badge of affiliation, honor, expression, and individuality. Showcasing your identity through symbolic statement pieces is a method of expression without even saying a word. There are a million different invisible things we carry with us every day, but jewelry as an outlet can be the most essential part of showcasing your identity comfortably. Changes in how we choose to adorn ourselves have reflected the state of our societies and the world’s happenings while serving as a powerful medium for self-expression. We are all incredibly different people in how we walk through the world, and the common theme of jewelry as a means of comfort and expression is how we share our different perspectives in a similar format.
A wedding dress is a garment laced with tradition. Wedding styles have evolved over the centuries, reflecting cultural, social, and religious influences. Understanding the history of weddings sheds light on the significance of styles, colors, and particularly the popularity of the white wedding gown.
The fascination with white wedding gowns began with Queen Victoria’s reign and her marriage to Prince Albert in 1840, reshaping bridal fashion for generations to come with the iconic white wedding dress. White wedding gowns became increasingly fashionable, embodying purity as well as social status. These have continued to influence generations of brides even today. As news of her marriage spread, women sought to emulate her bridal style. The traditional wedding dresses that have been inspired by Queen Victoria are made up of a full floor length white gown with a tight bodice, intricate lace details and a veil. In many cultures today, white is seen as the traditional wedding dress color. However, to many others, white would never be worn at a wedding. In ancient Rome, brides were dressed in vibrant yellows with intricate hairstyles. In China to this day, red is known as the traditional wedding color. In ancient Greece, brides wore light red and violet robes. All of these deeply ingrained cultural expectations can be seen to represent solemnity and grandeur of matrimonial celebration.
For centuries in western culture, white has held a meaning of purity and innocence, whereas in recent trends, wedding dresses have become much more creative and anything but traditional. Brides are wearing suits, short dresses, and more colorful pieces that cater to their own personal style. In the modern age, celebrity weddings set the bar for bridal fashion trends. These high-profile weddings gain audiences worldwide and easily influence the fashion industry such as the weddings of Kim Kardashian, Blake Lively and Priyanka Chopra. Designer collaborations elevate the influence of celebrity weddings on bridal fashion. Designers like Vera Wang, Oscar de la Renta, and Monique Lhuillier are common names that are often associated with celebrity wedding dresses. These collaborations generate lots of buzz in the media and the wedding industry, but also drive demand for designer wedding dresses. Social media has also played a pivotal role in the amplification of the impact of celebrity weddings. Platforms such as Instagram and Tiktok now give us direct insight into the fabrication and styling of celebrity wedding dresses. Additionally, Pinterest is an easy way for brides-to-be to access thousands of designs and inspirations.
Another major piece of media influencing wedding dress trends is the show “Say Yes to the Dress”, which offers a glimpse into the world of bridal shopping. Each episode allows women to find their perfect wedding gown; however the options are limited. “Say Yes to the Dress” is known for the issue of limited availability of non-traditional options. Many of the dresses seen in the show are white, lacking more colorful dresses that women may want. This show is another example of the relevance of the white wedding gown. The wedding dress industry reflects the societal values and ideals of that time, where designs are reflective of society’s ideal body types and overall aesthetics. This brings up issues of inclusivity and lack of space to be creative. According to an article in The List, most “Say Yes to the Dress” dresses are strapless and if for religious purposes you need your body covered, it takes serious convincing and cash for them to be willing to modify and alter the dress. Additionally, many designers do not allow their dresses to be on the show. The wedding dress industry has begun to take meaningful steps towards creating a more inclusive and understanding industry by offering more sizes and incorporating more styles into their inventory. Designers like Justin Alexander and Alexandra Grecco have both made their inclusive debuts at New York Bridal Week in 2018 to show the range of both styles and size.
With the idea that brides should be allowed to create and be confident in their own choice, there are many things that must be considered when choosing a wedding dress style if it is out of society’s normal ideals. For example, cultural appropriation within the
wedding dress industry can be a complex issue and is mostly rooted in different fabrics, patterns, or styles. When cultural motifs are included within western dress styles but without the correct understanding or respect, it leads to ignorance of the specific meaning of the piece and the exploitation of cultural symbols for profit. Another issue for the wedding industry is sustainability. The overall production of wedding dresses uses a lot of resource intensive processes, cultivation of resources like cotton and silk takes a lot of energy consuming manufacturing and transportation. This resource consumption is heightened when synthetic fabrics or harmful chemicals are used by wedding dress companies, but some in the industry are opting for organic fabrics, recycled materials and ethical production methods. The wedding designer Maggie Marilyn based out of New Zealand declared the company “has always been about using that love for Mother Nature to govern and guide our decision making when it comes to the farms, fibers, suppliers and manufacturers we work with.”. Indian designer Anita Dongen is a popular eco-friendly brand in India. With sustainability at the heart of its ethos, Dongan has supported female dress makers across India, as well as having a green headquarters in Mumbai. There has also been a push for larger companies to opt for more wearable styles. When we think of wedding dresses, in most cases it is the most expensive clothing item you own. Once it’s worn, it is sealed away in a box until you decide to give it to your children. Designers are pushing to make styles that customers can be wearing over and over again. A major mid market brand called Reformation is creating 100% silk dresses made ethically along with a white suit that can be worn over and over again. This evolution of wedding dress styles and the industry reflects the dynamic growth and nature of cultural, social, and environmental influences. It is evident that a wedding dress extends far past its fabric and design. The influence of historical figures like Queen Victoria, the glamor of celebrity weddings, and the imperative of sustainability all contribute to the history of wedding garments. Yet amidst the good, challenges in inclusivity and sustainability still persist. Embracing all of the values and traditions seeped in the history of wedding dresses allows for the creation of a better industry. The wedding industry is another reflection of the cultural, economic and social changes that happen all around us, and as it navigates this changing environment every bride can say “yes” to a dress of their choosing.
Lace. Intricate, feminine, detailed, spectacular. A delicate interwoven fabric made from yarn or thread characterized by different designs and patterns. Lace itself is a work of art, there is no base fabric. It is compiled of a thousand little stitches that collectively intertwine to make one breathtaking and elegant piece. It was originally made from silk and linen and was used as decorative fabric to accentuate a design or add different textures. Lace was seen as a way to make a piece of clothing more elegant or to emphasize it. It is seen as dainty and pretty which is why it is commonly seen on wedding dresses. It also adds a sense of class that elevates an outfit. It was considered to be luxurious and only the wealthy could obtain it. As popular as lace is today, this fabric has been around for over four hundred years and continues to have the same effect and wow factor as it did back then. Lace has been and will always be a symbol of elegance and class. Recently, designers have been using lace differently. Instead of adding lace to a piece of
clothing to give depth or texture, it is being used as fabric. There is no denying that lace is still being used to add intricate details to an outfit, but many are seen wearing lace alone. Lace was seen as an accessory, now it is seen as a fabric itself.
Coco Chanel, a highly regarded luxury fashion house that has implemented the highs and lows of all fashion trends has been integrating lace into their outfits for over 100 years. Coco Chanel opened her first store in Paris in 1909, and has continued to shape the fashion world since. Pictured to the right, In 1936, Gabrielle Chanel, crafted a beautiful silk evening gown. It is a champagne gown with a lace and tulle skirt. It has a very high neckline and long sleeves. It covers the wearer from their neck to their toes, but it still allows the wearer to be seen as romantic and even mysterious. It was very common to see women hiding underneath their clothes during this time. But at the same time it also brought a sense of class and elegance to the table. At Chanel’s latest Spring/Summer 2023
fashion show, pictured to the left, a model was seen wearing a very similar gown. Similarly, this dress is a floor length gown, but unlike the 1936 version, this dress is completely see through. With that, it also does not have any intricate detailing when it comes to layering. The 1936 gown had texture and fabric going in every which direction. This dress is simple but elegant yet very exposing. There is no denying that this piece is breathtaking, but it emphasizes that lace is not what it used to be. Now, there is nothing left for the imagination. Lace has never left the main stage, but the way it is worn has.
Today, many highly regarded fashion designers such as Miu Miu are seen using lace as an outfit itself. This raises the question, what caused fashion to become so provocative? Clothing isn’t seen as pieces of fabric that cover up your body, it is seen as expression. The sky’s the limit when it comes to clothing. They come in all shapes and sizes, colors, and textures. Where every person gets to customize their own wardrobe which allows for individuality. With that, why has expression turned into short skirts and see through tops? Is it due to the fact that women have regained some autonomy and now have the right to dress freely? Is it societal standards forcing people to show off their body as if they are a prize to be won? Many questions arise when debunking lace.
Curious, I took the liberty of interviewing George Washington University students, and designers to gauge why they feel our society has taken a more provocative outlook on fashion. I raised the question of “Why do you believe that people have started to wear more provocative clothing, whereas in the 1900s women couldn’t have clothing go above their ankles?” Fashion designer Ramy Brook stated, “Women want to feel feminine, sexy and confident when getting dressed. That may include showing skin, wearing something fitted or dressing in a bold bright color. I wouldn’t necessarily call that provocative, I would call those women comfortable in their own skin”. Similarly, Eliza Auslander class of 2026 wrote, “Back then, women would be shamed for wearing provocative clothing because it was going against their “character”. However, as time went on, women started to embrace more of their personality, appearance, and style in the clothes that they wore. There’s a lot less judgment now for what women wear, compared to in the 1900s”. Two women, two very different ages, still feeling the same way. Women collectively have started to embrace their bodies and not feel pushed down by societal stereotypes. Lace has allowed women to express themselves without the fear of judgment. This trend is celebrating body empowerment and liberation. More and more models and celebrity figures such as, Gigi Hadid and Dua Lipa, have been captured wearing this daring trend. This bold fashion trend empowers women and allows for self-confidence enabling
individuals to feel more comfortable and confident in their own skin.
Like many other fashion trends, they come and go, and usually come back better than before. Lace has circled back in a new revised way. It allows for women to express themselves freely without the criticism and backlash from society. Recently, there has been a shift in societal gender roles. Women have fearlessly fought for many movements such as bodily autonomy and equal pay. The battle was long and hard but women have escaped the barriers they were put in before. Women’s actions and words were limited even when it came down to marriage, what to eat, how to dress, how to speak and who you could speak to. Women were forced to do things that would benefit others. This trend is the reclaiming of what women didn’t have before. Rights to their own opinions and decisions. Reclaiming lace as a fabric and not an accessory emphasizes how far women have come. After being oppressed for so long, lace and sheer allows women to reclaim what they once did not control.
Amari Sharma, Elsa, Jordyn Neugarten
Photo by Joseph Decilos
Amari Sharma, Eliza Auslander,
Photo by Ethan Valliath
The word “trending” has lost all meaning. Everything is trending all at once. The GW campus is packed with students wearing 70s, 80, 90s, 2000s, and even 2010s fashion trends. Ever since the creation of the internet and Google Image Search (thank you JLo’s Versace jungle dress), trends cycle through faster and faster. We especially get to see this constant change right here at GW. Students are constantly hopping on to the latest trends and dropping last month’s trend. As I analyze what is currently trending on GW campus (baggy jeans, slick back hair, and the infamous return of uggs), I wondered what past GW students have worn and what were the trends and popular styles on GW campus. Did they match what was trending in the fashion world at the time? Were there specific looks every student used to wear? I decided to find out by looking into GW’s own archives, the Cherry Tree yearbooks.
The GW yearbooks go all the way back to the 1800s, but I decided to research the yearbooks that stood out the most. I started out with the 1923 Cherry Tree yearbook, where womens fashion was all about simplicity. The extravagant clothing of past years had faded away and 1920s styles rejected formality and was replaced with convenience and comfort. Due to the simplicity of this era, new styles were sold by designers, in department stores, and even recreated homemade by many women. Fashionable looks were no longer a sign of social status because anyone could achieve the simple stylish look, including the women of GW. La Garçonne fashion, roughly translated to “boyish” meaning women dressing against tradition, was very popular in the 1920s and also at GW.
Women at GW wore typically high waisted trousers, ties, and flapper inspired dresses with lower hemlines. Most GW women had their hair cut into bobs and rocked a cloche hat, the “it” accessory at the time. They also wore a lot of pearls and dark lip colors to combat the more masculine clothing. The men at GW wore what was trending in men’s fashion at the time: suits, waistcoats, vests, and bowler and fedora hats. Nowadays the only time you will see a GW guy wearing a suit is if they’re forced to during rushing.
Next, I jumped to the 60s with GW’s 1968 Cherry Tree Yearbook. 1960s Fashion was full of colorful and youthful designs influenced by the cultural phenomenon “Swinging London” which began in 1955, but reached its peak in the early to mid 1960s. Designer Mary Quant and fashion icons Twiggy and Audrey Hepburn led this trend and attracted teenagers and young people. The
late 1960s brought a more Eastern influenced “hippie” aesthetic with long maxi skirts and flowy clothing, but the GW students in 1968 were wearing more of the early 1960s trends with the miniskirts, minidresses, and boxy shapes.
Most GW women either had a bob, much like Audrey Hepburn in the 1966 film How to Steal a Million, or had longer hair and would curl up the ends of it to add to a youthful effect. 1960s menswear was the most prominent development in 1960s dress due to its dramatic change. For the past 150 years, clothing for men had been relatively plain and tailor-made. Now, colorful new elements were introduced such as the collarless jacket, worn with slim-fitting trousers and boots. The men at GW followed this new trend and got a lot of their style inspiration from The Beatles, Jimi Hendrix, and Mick Jagger. GW men’s outfits were less vibrant than what was trending at the time but a big change from the suits and derby hats worn in the 1923 yearbook.
1970s fashion was a turning point for GW’s fashion game. In the 1976 Cherry Tree yearbook, it was the first time I saw both the men and women at GW wearing the same styles. Most students wore collared button down shirts, fitted t-shirts, flared pants, chunky sweaters, and a lot of denim. The GW women at this time either wore what the men were wearing, collared shirts and straight leg jeans with a bit of flare or embraced the more relaxed late 70s womens fashion look of more baggy and revealing clothing. Women at GW wore a lot of strapless or fitted tops with baggy jeans and accessorized with fur coats, sunglasses, and chunky boots and platforms. Many students’ styles were inspired by Farrah Fawcett and Bianca Jagger with the ‘Farrah Flick’ hairstyle and risk-taking clothing. The men at GW wore bolder prints compared to past GW men and wore 70s staples such as corduroy, knitwear, plaid shirts, and turtlenecks and accessorized with big framed sunglasses and aviators. However, the most eye-catching thing in this yearbook had to be the men’s hairstyles, everyone either had the shaggy feathered look or an afro. It was shocking to see how much GW students’ fashion changed in a 10 year span.
The 1990s fashion at GW was everything I expected and more. The yearbooks were finally in color, and the 1997 Cherry Tree yearbook featured so many 90s fashion staples that are still in style today. Trends like denim, mini skirts, and
baggy clothing were similar to GW in the 70s but revamped. Minimalism and casual outfits were back in style and most students wore baggy or straight leg jeans, jean skirts and shorts, or overalls with oversized shirts, baggy sweatshirts, and baby tees. For women, these outfits were accessorized with gold jewelry, small framed sunglasses, and knee high socks and sneakers. GW students’ fashion was heavily influenced by the grunge and hip hop music of the 90s. Most men at GW wore hip-hop style sportswear, including baseball caps and jackets, basketball shorts, tracksuits, and hoodies. They often accessorized with popular shoes at the time like Nike and Adidas sneakers or Timberland boots. This was definitely my favorite Cherry Tree Yearbook by far, with so many timeless outfits that GW students recreate on a daily basis.
I think every GW student has an element of each of these decades in their closet whether it’s the big pants tiny top combo or 90s hip hop inspired sneakers. It is cool to see how GW students from 2023 still dress the same as past students, whether it’s 1997 or 1968. This proves how all fashion trends of every decade are right now trending at the same time. It’ll be exciting to see what the future of GW wfashion holds. Will all decades continue to trend? Or will we be wearing completely different clothes and styles in 20 years? All I know is, GW students will continue to wear whatever they want, how they want, and look good doing it.
Nneoma Ileoje, Philippe Tchokokam, Jack Couser and Ava Zohn
A few years back, a controversial Vogue cover featuring Harry Styles in a Gucci ball gown stirred up discourse online regarding men’s fashion, introducing a slogan intended to combat the alleged feminization of men: “Bring back manly men.” This statement was subsequently used to complain about male celebrities who debuted androgynous looks at the Met Gala, Gen-Z influencers wearing nail polish or crop tops, and just about any other “anti-manly” men in media. This movement is problematic for a number of reasons. Firstly, it approaches fashion as something intended to be strictly gendered rather than an experimental and ever-evolving mode of self-expression. Secondly, it seeks to normalize a mentality that demonizes gender-nonconforming individuals and demeans women by associating femininity with weakness. Lastly, the entire idea of bringing back manly men is laughable, given that “manly” men have been wearing dresses, tights, high heels, and wigs for the better part of human history.
Of course, like all fashion, menswear began as clothing intended to protect wearers from the elements. But it wasn’t long before ancient civilizations began to adopt certain styles of dress as signifiers of status, with colorful, expensive garb being reserved for the wealthy. Most men in Ancient Assyria, Egypt, Greece, and Rome wore what would be considered dresses by modern standards. Perhaps most ironically, Vikings, whom Hollywood has portrayed as the manliest men in human history, were considered feminine by AngloSaxons for wearing pants instead of tunics and also likely as a result of their grooming habits, which involved regular bathing and hair maintenance. In the Middle Ages, fashion was a privilege of the upper class, with noblemen donning fur-lined knee-length houppelandes (the most expensive of which were made of Italian silk velvet) and parti-colored hoes (which, to the modern eye, are essentially just twotoned tights).
If anything, fashion just became more flamboyant in the 1500s, with Henry XIII parading about in puffed shirts, jeweled doublets, and embroidered sleeves and simultaneously being revered as the epitome of masculinity. Caps or bonnets were also worn frequently, often with pearls, gems, and ostrich feather plumes adorning them. In the late seventeenth century and early eighteenth century, the Sun King Louis XIV was the bestdressed, with voluminous wigs, knee-length coats trimmed in lace, and a new type of heeled shoe with red soles reminiscent of the most masculine shoe of modern times: the Louboutin. While high heels had already been invented by Persian nobility in the tenth century to make men appear taller and be secure
in the stirrups while riding horseback, they now became a staple of fashionable men’s wardrobes before working their way into womenswear as well. Menswear became decidedly more “masculine” in the nineteenth century, with the go-to silhouette being one that emphasized manly broad shoulders… but in order to achieve this silhouette, many dandies took to wearing corsets in order to fit into the popular waistcoats which accentuated the shoulders and chest while demanding thin waists
So, given that menswear has been distinctly “feminine” for most of Western history, where did modern masculine dress originate? Well, during the early 1800s, a dandy by the name of Beau Brummell decided it was time to climb the social ladder and become the leader of a new fashion trend. One that, rather than focusing on extravagance, was conspicuous in its attempt to be inconspicuous, disheveled, conservative, and even dull. Men’s clothing should be fitted with no bold colors or patterns, decided Beau Brummell, a choice that immediately took off. Brummell was a certified influencer by modern standards: tailors on Savile Row (a street famous for expensive custom tailoring) outfitted Brummell with clothing adhering to his personal style so that he could advertise for them. How did Brummell of all people have so much impact on the fashion industry? Up until this point fashion trends were set by monarchs, emulated by nobility, and then imitated by the working class. Brummell just happened to be close friends with the Prince of Wales who would soon become King George IV and immediately bought into Brummell’s fashion aesthetic. Before long everyone was wearing it—and continued wearing it, as the linen shirt, fitted coat, and trousers morphed into business suits and tuxedos. The exact cut of the suit is constantly changing as trends come and go. But the stubborn fact is, men still wear fitted suits with minimal patterns and muted color schemes, just as Beau Brummell dreamed up over two centuries ago.
Still, there’s one major problem with the Beau Brummell style philosophy: it relies on the notion that elegance equals discreteness. This mentality shoves men into a narrow style box with precious little room for self-expression of experimentation. Not to mention that going unnoticed is a privilege not available to disabled men, men of color, trans and feminine-presenting men, and any men who don’t meet Eurocentric beauty standards. In fact, if this discussion has primarily centered on Western fashion, that’s unfortunately intentional, as a major consequence of colonization is the suppression of non-Western culture and fashion. Western civilization has gone out of its way to ostracize men whose presentations of masculinity don’t match its own. The idea of skirts as womenswear is itself Eurocentric—something to bear in mind before crediting Western celebrities with breaking boundaries—as it neglects to account for traditional dress in Arab cultures, many indigenous tribes, and parts of Africa, Eastern Asia, and Southern Asia. In fact, even today Western ideals of masculinity continue to be pushed on the rest of the world, seen in China’s attempt to crack down on “feminine” male beauty standards by banning celebrities with androgynous looks from appearing on television. This represents an enormous subversion of the Chinese beauty ideal, which, up until this point, presented the perfect man as a beautiful and youthful
Alex Marootian, Jack Couserscholar, rather than the muscly Western manly man. At the end of the day, fashion is meant to be fun, not something used to enforce traditional gender norms. There is nothing inherent in men’s clothing that makes it for men—something is menswear because it’s worn by a man. For this reason, designers have been pushing back against gender norms in fashion and debuting androgynous, convention-defying collections on catwalks. Rei Kawakubo’s fashion house Comme des Garcons has been known for defying gender conventions since its founding in 1969. The label’s “Homme Plus” line works to subvert stereotypical men’s styles by purposefully integrating elements reminiscent of womenswear and blending both aesthetics to create fluid, gender-inclusive pieces. Japanese designer Yohji Yamamoto was also a part of the movement to deconstruct gendered wardrobes. Yamamoto’s designs for men and women feature wide cuts and loose fits which resist the silhouettes commonly associated with either gender. In 1983 he was already vocal about the need for androgyny in fashion, remarking, “When I started designing, I wanted to make men’s clothes for women. But there were no buyers. Now there are. I always wonder who decided that there should be a difference in the clothes of men and women.” Miles Lambert, Manchester City Galleries curator, notes the huge influence of these Japanese designers, commenting that when labels Comme des Garcons and Yamamoto first showed in Paris, they were “deliberately different. They’ve had an immense effect on what has subsequently been seen on the catwalk.”
While Kawakubo and Yamamoto may have been perceived as ahead of their time, today consumers have begun to embrace unisex and genderfluid clothing, and more brands have also caught on to their thinking. Labels like Palomo Spain have become known for flashy, feminine menswear: their 2018 collection utilized a blend of modern and historical silhouettes full of fur and feather motifs. Jeremy Scott also brought pre-industrial inspiration to Moschino menswear, with models sashaying down the runway in ballet flats and brocade. In his notes on Gucci’s 2020 collection, Alessandro Michele wrote, “It’s time to celebrate a man who is free to practice self-determination, without social
constraints, without authoritarian sanctions, without suffocating stereotypes.” David Yi, founder of men’s beauty publication Very Good Light, also notes that male celebrities are beginning to embrace “a more expansive sense of masculinity. We’re talking about Harry Styles, who wears a dress on the cover of Vogue, we’re talking about Bad Bunny, who loves acrylic nails, we’re talking Frank Ocean, who talks to GQ about retinol, and we’re talking about BTS, who wear makeup and color their hair.” And Yi doesn’t even mention icons of older generations like Freddy Mercury, Elton John, David Bowie, and Prince, who sported cosmetics, heels, and women’s clothing. Rick Owens, another pioneer of gender-binary-challenging fashion known for his stiletto “Kiss boots” comments “I don’t understand why this generation thinks they invented gender fluidity. They did it harder, stronger, and louder in the ‘70s… and in 16th century Japan.” It really shouldn’t be surprising that men are adopting alternative styles of dressing when manly men have been doing this all along. The gender-neutrality of clothing is not a fad—it’s a reality.
The “bring back manly men” movement is problematic because it reinforces Western ideals as the end-all-be-all of masculinity and disregards the cultural fashion of marginalized communities. It also relies on the notion that in order to be masculine, clothing must be discreet and resist experimentation, despite the relative recency of this convention. However, designers and celebrities have not been deterred from innovating and deconstructing masculine norms within fashion, a sentiment that is also becoming popular with Gen-Z on social media. With the continued normalization of gender fluidity and androgyny when it comes to men’s self-expression, fashion will likely be seeing the return of exciting menswear.
We exist to be influenced today. Our friends and families, online personalities, random on- and offline commentary all push and pull us through our decision making process.
BY JACK COUSER
Many of us find comfort in knowing there are others who have done what we want to do before. It lowers the risk that comes from stepping out of our comfort zone. In the age of the internet, we are used to convenience. We are constantly presented with popularity, commonly confused with correctness. But as we grow into more authentic versions of ourselves, we must remember that there is no correct answer. Personal style is a way we can express who we are while feeling comfortable taking on the world. It develops over time, but with everything happening so fast online, it can feel frustrating when we can’t appear as put together as we want to be as we connect with others. Developing our style, we take inspiration from all over, but we can easily lose ourselves amidst our growing spheres of influence. When did it get so difficult to navigate who we are? By looking back at the style decisions we made as kids (at our own archival looks), we can get a better read on what we may naturally gravitate to as we get dressed today. The convenience of being online has made it easier to avoid candidly being ourselves. As we have progressed from childhood to adulthood, we have grown into ideas of who we are and what we represent. But what does this look like? Fashion is a way we express to the world who we are inside, but with the explosion of its products and endless microtrends to participate in, what does it say about us when we blindly accept these as stylish? Maybe that we are choosing the path of least resistance. Growing up in environments that encourage us to blend in and be normal, it is hard to defend authentic versions of ourselves, especially when they might go against the grain.
As kids our earliest influences were our parents. They dressed us before we could, and gave us our first experiences with fashion. Even more, our cultures and where we grew up all informed our childhood style. They were the canvas we used as we painted a picture of who we were growing up to be. As we developed a sense of independence, we learned how to dress ourselves. And we did what anyone does when learning something new: make mistakes. The first outfits we put together ourselves might not have been our very best, but they marked a period of us creating without restriction. We didn’t know what rules existed yet, so we went off of what we liked to make style decisions. Colors might not have worked well together, pants might have been worn under dresses or shirts inside-out, but if it was what we wanted, we tried it.
That was our excitement for fashion at its purest form; we were content with the ability to take something into our own hands. We adopted a beginner’s mind, and had no real comparison for what we wanted to emulate. But as we started to socialize, somewhere in our growing self-awareness came the need to dress more for others, less for ourselves. We began to avoid mistakes. Adaptability became the social survival technique we adopted to signal to others we weren’t a threat and/or weird. In this way, our personal style became malleable.
As we grew into taking more autonomy over how we express ourselves through clothing, we gave up some control in order to fit into our social circles.
As the first truly online generation, those circles are larger than ever. There are more people to appease in order to fit in, which takes away even more of the control we have over our style. It’s overwhelming. Everyone can see what is trending and interact with the same influences. But by casually participating in online culture in our day to day lives, we risk diluting our sense of self.
Our expression through personal style is the most susceptible to the automation of online culture. Overly curating our identities to dress for others ultimately takes the fun out of getting dressed every day, and creates a distance between us and the way we present ourselves. Many of us want to find communities that give us a sense of belonging, so we act like we know who we are even when we might not. We look to influencer communities to guide us through decisions because we want to feel secure. Though, we often forget that they might not know who they are either. Our favorite (and often the best) influencers just get what they like down and go from there.
It’s impossible to jump to an end goal of “stylish” or “complete” overnight. But, we owe it to ourselves to reject the mass of influences that surround us today, in order to affirm and better express who we are. We stifle our identities if we only wear what everybody else is wearing. At one point in our lives, purely through instinct, we found magic in expressing ourselves through fashion. If we start doing the same again today we can break away from the algorithm of homogenous style, and get a clearer image of who we are amidst even the most uncertain of times.
Zoe Luce, Aditi Chandrasekar, Francis Garcia
Photo by Jack Couser
by
Beauty is pain, this is what we have been told our entire lives. It was not until we were a little older did we begin to understand that beauty is also expensive. Fashion is an every revolving door. What is considered in trend today is old news tomorrow. The constant changing of fashion just to be in style with the current season becomes tedious. It is not like you could get away with the knockoff brands. So what are the options left, either sell your left kidney for the luxury brands or start scavenging resale websites and thrift stores.
Over the years the luxury resale market has steadily been increasing. In fact just earlier this year the luxury resale industry represented a $24 billion dollar market, and each year the luxury resale market grows four times faster compared to the primary luxury market. That means the luxury
resale market represents 12% of the market, while the primary luxury market represents 3%. Given the drastic distance between these percentages, it is no surprise many luxury brands are rebelling against the luxury resale market.
Throughout the years luxury brands have struggled with the lack of sales. LVMH stock has fallen about twenty percent over the past six months. This has been a growing problem even with their wealthiest consumers. The luxury brands Tapestry and Ralph Lauren stock fell seventeen percent in 2023. More and more consumers are finding it harder to justify purchasing luxury brands at retail price. Gucci sales declined fourteen percent in the previous year. The newer generations are focused on sustainable purchases. There is also the emergence of past fashion trends in recent years. These factors have created
a desire for thrifting luxury brands. Why spend thousands of dollars for a brand when you could scavenge your local thrift stores for a luxury brand gem?
Many luxury brands have been hesitant to accept the luxury resale market. These luxury brands have argued that the luxury resale market diminishes the brand, as well as leaves the door open for counterfeits to be introduced into the market. One has to wonder if there is merit to this argument. Louis Vuitton, Dior, and Fendi are few luxury name brands that have refused to entertain participating in the luxury resale brand market. There are legal ramifications that these luxury retailers have to consider when endorsing the authenticity of these resales.
The first thing that comes to mind is copyright and trademark laws. When reselling luxury brands there is a possibility of these online luxury resale companies or thrift stores endorsing a counterfeit. What happens if the item is a counterfeit? The luxury brand could possibly have merits to file a lawsuit for copyright. What about if the luxury brand has not given permission to use their brand logo? Now there is a possibility the luxury brand could file a lawsuit for trademark infringement. Every luxury brand item has to be thoroughly evaluated before they are ever presented to the consumer. Due diligence is a must in the luxury resale industry. However, due diligence is not always provided. Even though in an ideal world every luxury resale would be thoroughly vetted, that is just not possible in this world. This is why there has been opposition from luxury brands.
What about the consumers that purchase luxury brands through online luxury resale stores? Sometimes the store is simply a base for sellers to sell their items, like Ebay. There is no guarantee that what is being purchased is authentic, and the misrepresentation will not be discovered until the consumer has it. This is why so many luxury brands have refused to entertain participating in the luxury resale brand market. There are far too many ways this could negatively impact their brands.
Sometimes luxury resale companies try to endorse their authenticity by attaching a stamp of approval from the luxury brand that they are selling. In recent years the luxury brand Chanel has had to deal with this problem. Chanel filed a lawsuit against the luxury resale company What Goes Around Comes Around (“WGACA”). This case
has been in the headlines since early 2018. Chanel’s lawsuit against WGACA has listed trademark infringement, false advertising, unfair competition and false endorsement and association.
Many times the judge for these cases, Judge Staton, has sided with Chanel. However, there have been times that Staton has found validity in WGACA arguments, arguing that WGACA’s whole company is based on being authentic. They would gain nothing from misrepresenting their merchandise. In fact, it would diminish their consumer numbers. Recently, Judge Staton had found some of Chanel’s witnesses to be lacking credibility. This could present a problem for Chanel and their case. As of right now the outcome of this case is up in the air, and only time will tell who the verdict will favor. This is not the only time the luxury brand Chanel has gone after companies that have resold their merchandise.
Chanel filed a lawsuit against the online company The RealReal. Chanel alleged in the lawsuit that the luxury resale company had committed false advertising and sold counterfeit Chanel handbags. Similar to WGACA, The RealReal refutes these allegations. The RealReal alleged that Chanel was attempting to eradicate any attempt of their merchandise entering the luxury resale market.
Farfetch is a luxury resale company, and has done some of the very things that Chanel lists in its lawsuit. Why has Chanel not gone after Farfetch? Chanel has made an major investment into the company Farfetch. In Chanel’s lawsuits against these two luxury resale
companies, there was never any mention of the online company Farfetch. The RealReal also noted the company was missing from Chanel’s lawsuits. The RealReal took note of this discrepancy in how Chanel dealt with them versus Farfetch. The RealReal filed an antitrust claim against Chanel once they learned of Chanel’s investment in Farfetch.
After evaluating how some luxury brands have chosen to reject the luxury resale market, it makes sense because consumers are choosing the luxury resale market. This is leading to a decrease in the primary luxury market. However, there is a growing chance of counterfeit within the luxury resale market, and it is understandable to have a fear that their brand will be misrepresented. It is reasonable for them to want to take every available source to prevent any type of misrepresentation of their brand. The luxury brands are not alone in wanting to ensure the consumers receive authentic luxury merchandise. The consumers also want to purchase authentic luxury merchandise.
In fact, there is a bigger distrust between the consumers and the luxury resale market. Many consumers struggle to afford these luxury brands at retail prices. So even the notion that they may be scammed out of money, no matter the amount, is enough to petrify any consumer. Even with this knowledge many consumers still attempt to score luxury brands through the luxury resale market. At the end of the day the consumers are the ones taken on the biggest risks. If the luxury brands are looking out for the consumers that is understandable. However, is this all that these luxury brands are attempting to accomplish by blocking the luxury resale market? The luxury resale industry is a booming market. More and more companies are joining this ongoing competition to dominate the luxury resale market. It is not surprising considering the desire to own these timeless pieces of art. Honestly, that is exactly what luxury brands are, timeless pieces of art. These luxury resale companies desire for every consumer to be afforded the opportunity to experience these timeless pieces of art.
There seems to be a desire on the luxury brands side to be the sole proprietor of the luxury market. Unfortunately, this desire to be the sole proprietor of the luxury market might be more detrimental to these luxury brands than any luxury resale company could ever be. Beauty truly is painful.
The relationship between economic standing and the fashion industry is undisputedly intertwined. Just as industry growth contributes to greater economic prosperity, the underlying fluctuations in the economy dictate the creative direction undertaken by fashion houses. Design becomes a responsive art to the financial climate we live in. The way fashion reacts to economic shifts becomes especially evident during transitions from periods of growth to recession. This begs the question,
what does fashion look like in times of recession? Beauty often takes a back seat, leading to a rise in simplified makeup routines and an emphasis on embracing a natural, understated look. The hemline index reflects a transition towards longer hemlines, while tailoring becomes more subdued, embracing conservative styles. Muted tones become prevalent, replacing the flamboyance of embellishments and vibrant colors. Functionality also becomes a key aspect in garments, as consumers prioritize clothing that
offers long-term value. Pivotal economic changes manifest in fashion, marking fluctuations between maximalism and minimalism. This discernible pattern has been observed in past economic downturns, including the 1929 economic crash and the financial crisis of 2008.
The Great Depression was the first noticeable shift in the fashion landscape in response to economic turmoil. The 20s had epitomized opulence, sparkle, and glamor, mirroring the
economic prosperity of the time. The abrupt 1929 crash brought about a stark departure from the extravagance, leading to the adoption of simple silhouettes and conservatism. Designs underwent a transformation, streamlining their elements by drawing inspiration from the preceding Art Deco period, while simultaneously simplifying to align with the challenging financial climate. Elements were taken from the simple Garçonne look of the twenties, but structure was added with the departure from the drop waist and return of the natural waistline. Hemlines were brought down to mid-calf, as the focus shifted towards frugal fashion. As the economy changed, so did consumer values. Individuals were forced to reassess the lavishness of prior styles, and pivot toward a more restrained and practical approach. Fashion became distinctly utilitarian, embracing functionality and embodying the prevailing pragmatism of the era.
A more recent illustration of societal shifts occurred during the transition from 2007 to the 2008 financial crisis. In 2007, fashion trends embraced maximalism, featuring velour sweatsuits, excessive accessorizing, bold colors and prints, metallics, and logomania. The era epitomized the “more is more” philosophy, as exemplified by the layering of tunics, skirts, and leggings, coupled with an abundance of accessories and oversized bags. The era was shaped by designers including Roberto Cavalli and Anna Sui, who displayed 2007 collections featuring striking, animal-like prints and heavy layering. However, this exuberance took a swift turn as the stock market crashed, leading to widespread job losses. In response, designers pivoted towards a more subdued aesthetic, marking the resurgence of muted colors and simplicity. This shift was not only confined to the United States but had a global impact, influencing international designers and fashion movements.
Amid economic uncertainty, consumers altered their spending habits, seeking value and longevity in their purchases. As the fashion landscape adapted to these changes, minimalism took center stage in designer collections by 2010. Vera Wang’s 2010 collection showcased a palette dominated by black, navy, and gray solids, complemented by models sporting messy, undone hairstyles and minimal makeup, featuring a subtle smear of grungy black eyeliner. Reed Krakoff continued this theme with an earth-toned collection paired with utilitarian combat boots and simple knit sweaters. Recession era fashion hit a peak during Hedi Slimane’s time as creative director for Yves Saint Laurent. His Fall/Winter 2013 menswear collection marked the culmination of minimalist, grunge fashion that had been on the rise since the economic crash. Models with unbrushed hair and prominent eye bags showcased 90s rock inspired leather peacoats and blazers combined with subdued plaids and knit scarves slung over
the shoulder. The minimalist era, catalyzed by the events of 2008,
came to define the fashion landscape of the early 2010s. Historically, maximalism persists in fashion collections until the final moments before undergoing a transformative shift. Designers consistently showcase maximalist aesthetics right up to the onset of a recession. Currently, we find ourselves amidst economic uncertainty and ambiguity. We have observed the revival of trends reminiscent of the 2000s era, featuring oversized belts, vibrant neons, extra-large bags, and metallic tones, exemplified by the popularity of chrome. Balmain’s latest Spring/Summer collection unveiled a series of bold prints, intricate embellishments, distinctive shapes, and vibrant hues. In contrast, Marni’s Spring/ Summer collection approached maximalism differently, presenting an array of almost surrealist pieces. The collection featured meticulously crafted, paper-like flowers intricately assembled, offering a fresh interpretation of floral patterns. In spite of this resurgence, 2023 introduced the Quiet Luxury movement which persists into 2024. Esteemed minimalist brands such as The Row, Brunello Cucinelli, Totême, and Khaite have surged to prominence in the high-fashion realm, showcasing more conservative collections characterized by understated elegance that increasingly resonates with consumers. Additionally, the launch of Phoebe Philo’s eponymous label last September marked a significant milestone in this shift. Although we are not currently in recession, labels are producing both maximalist and minimalist collections, demonstrating the uncertainty of the current period. The juxtaposition of these two movements in fashion reflects the contrast between opinions surrounding current economic standing. Some economists and financiers believe we have successfully avoided the threat of recession. An executive at Bank of America claims interest rates are high enough to deter inflation but low enough to steer clear of recession patterns. Conversely, it is the opinion of the federal reserve and former employees of the fed that the threat remains due to the fragility of the current economy.
The intricate relationship between economic cycles and the fashion industry reveals that fashion doesn’t solely function to embody the creativity produced by individual designers, but operates as a response to economic climate. The historical evidence provided by the Great Depression and the 2008 financial crisis serve as compelling
examples of fashion evolution in response to economic turbulence. Reflecting on the contemporary fashion landscape, the resurgence of both maximalism and minimalism in recent collections raises questions about both the direction of the fashion industry and the direction of the greater economy to come.
Red is the symbol of passion, love, desire, and power. Women for centuries have used fashion to convey their grace, beauty, passion, and power. An outfit can be great, but to truly captivate your audience it all comes down to the shoes. When you think of a pair of shoes that conveys grace, beauty and power, Christian Louboutin is one of the names that come to mind. This luxurious brand has graced fashion runways, danced across the pages of renowned fashion magazines and created an air of confidence in meetings. The crimson hues at the bottom of any pair of shoes immediately brings to mind Christian Louboutin. This was always the objective. The designer wanted to create a timeless brand that would stand out from other luxury brands. Instead of being known for the timeless pieces created and their legacy in the fashion industry, they also have the legacy of being a litigious brand.
Christian Louboutin is a French shoe designer who started his career in Paris. He worked with women’s shoe designer Charles Jourdan for a while, before he decided to become a freelance designer. Similar to Louboutin, Jourdain was known for his women’s shoe designs, working with Chanel, Yves Saint Laurent, and Roger Vivier. Ironically, one of Christian Louboutin’s highly publicized trademark infringement lawsuits would be against Yves Saint Laurent. The iconic crimson soles were introduced to the world in 1992 and were trademarked by Louboutin in 2008. This opened the door for Christian Louboutin to bring lawsuits against companies that had crimson soles. In 1995, the Supreme Court ruled in Qualitex Co. v. Jacobson Products Co. that a color could fall under the trademark protection. They stated that if the color is so distinct that it invokes a particular company’s name to mind, it would be trademark protected. In the legal field, this distinction is acknowledged as a secondary meaning. An example of a secondary meaning would be Tiffany Blue. The first image that is created in your mind is Tiffany’s. Even UPS “Pullman” brown color is protected under this ruling.
Photo by Ethan ValliathOne of the most iconic lawsuits brought by Christian Louboutin was against Yves Saint Laurent (YSL). YSL, for their Spring 2011 collection, created a completely crimson (including the bottom) pair of heels. In April 2011, Louboutin filed a lawsuit against YSL for their monochrome heels. They argued that YSL was committing trademark infringement with the release of the crimson heels within their collection line. The argument presented was that Louboutin crimson soles are widely recognized and had acquired a secondary meaning.
YSL presented a counterclaim that Christian Louboutin’s red sole trademark registration should be revoked, arguing that single colors within the fashion industry are inevitable. YSL’s argument was not strong enough to withstand Louboutin’s original trademark infringement claim, as the courts found validity in both arguments presented. The result of the lawsuit was that Louboutin had a valid trademark, and any company that had a crimson sole violated the trademark. The court also ruled that YSL could keep their heels within the collection because the entire shoe was crimson, and that as long as the shoe was completely crimson it was not a trademark infringement.
YSL was not the only company that Louboutin brought a trademark infringement claim against, bringing a similar trademark infringement claim against Zara in 2008. This case did not end well for Louboutin. Initially, the court ruled in Louboutin’s favor. However, when Zara appealed the initial judgment in 2011, they argued that the trademark was too vague. Zara also argued that there was no chance that their shoes would be mistaken for Louboutin’s for a multitude of credible aesthetic reasons.
The French court hearing the appeal agreed with Zara. The court overturned the original judgment, and ordered Louboutin to pay Zara $3,600 in compensation. It could be argued that the Court made a mistake in overturning the original judgment. There was no field study done to determine if everyday people could tell the difference between Zara’s shoes and Louboutin’s. Instead of attempting to understand the detriment of allowing Zara to keep producing these shoes, they chose to punish Louboutin
for attempting to protect their brand. Louboutin eventually filed an appeal after the judgment was rendered in Zara’s favor, yet the court upheld the judgment rendered in Zara’s appeal. It seemed that Christian Louboutin was on a mission to monopolize this particular niche within the fashion industry, and if that meant filing lawsuits to achieve this goal so be it. Louboutin filed a trademark infringement claim against Vinci Leather in 2023. In the claim Louboutin claimed that Vinci Leather were engaging in deceptive trade practices, design patent infringement, and trademark infringement. Once again Louboutin was claiming that another company was violating their red sole trademark, mimicking Louboutin’s in an attempt to deceive the general public. This is another lawsuit and battle for Louboutin. These numerous lawsuits present the question if it truly is possible to trademark a specific color in the fashion industry?
Louboutin is not alone in the fashion industry attempting to trademark a specific color. However, it seems based on the outcomes the courts seem to more often favor the defendants in these lawsuits. In fact, a Japanese Court in 2022 denied Christian Louboutin’s trademark infringement claims against Eizo Company. The court stated that the color had been a constant presence in the fashion industry long before Louboutin ever set claim to the iconic color. The Court’s were right in their decision. Louboutin had no right to argue that the Eizo Company should change their designs when they came before them. The court argued that the significant discrepancy between the prices of both brands would not cause confusion for the gen-
eral public. Also, there was no evidence that Louboutin had enough time to have made a significant impact within Japan to claim original ownership of the color. It could be argued Louboutin is exhibiting entitlement in assuming no other company could use the crimson color on their footwear.
No matter what argument is presented by the various fashion companies, Christian Louboutin’s are known for the iconic crimson bottoms of their shoes. Even though other shoes have had crimson soles, the majority of the world thinks of Christian Louboutin when they see crimson on the bottom of any pair of shoes. It is understandable that they would want to protect their company’s image. The true question is, when has the desire to protect the brand image gone too far? There comes a point where it is simply an attempt to monopolize the industry. If no one else can use that specific color, more and more companies will file trademark protection on other colors. In the end, no company would be able to use any color that they had not trademark. This would place a restriction on the fashion industry. There is some evidence that Louboutin is attempting to do this very thing. Either way, it is clear that Louboutin will continue to file trademark lawsuits no matter the judgment of the previous lawsuits. These lawsuits will only succeed in transforming the fashion industry into a litigious industry and fashion designers’ creativity will ultimately be stifled by trademark lawsuits and overly litigious brands. Fashion companies will be afraid to take a chance on new ideas in fear of a lawsuit, then where will the fashion industry be?
What will define the 2020s in style?
By Jack CouserA lot of what’s trending today seems to have been seen before, almost exactly. Today, fashion is accessible to everyone at every moment. On social media, users turn into journalists, critics, people with influence, pushing the possibilities of the role everyday people play in the fashion space. Yet despite these possibilities, today’s fashion seems to mirror (almost exactly) styles we’ve seen before. A copy + paste of highlights we love from certain eras that we somehow decided would be fun to bring back.
Beyond a simple nod to the past, today’s fashion is making as strong a statement as it did the first time around. 2000s low-rise has made a comeback at Miu Miu, Diesel, Bluemarine, Levi’s and others. Slick (yet familiar) 90s minimalism returned to Gucci, and has been seen elsewhere at The Row and Bottega Veneta. Exaggerated proportions of the 70s can be found across the internet, in wide-leg pants and longon-long styled outfits. Though these ideas might feel a little fresh today, they’re just not what we wore in the 2010s: when brands started to take their younger consumers more seriously.
Social media grew in power throughout the 2010s, giving younger consumers a stronger voice that brands really listened too. It also afforded higher-end brands the space to experiment with how they could communicate with these consumers in their own territory. Today, social media is one of the easiest places for a brand to turn and reach younger consumers: those with less resources to spend. Though this new generation is still growing into their disposable income, brands have started to understand how they eventually will move into their target markets. Since everything on the internet exists forever, users have access to an infinite archive, shareable on these platforms where they coexist with brands of today. With younger consumers, as they explore fashion history they also explore how they can express themselves. And though they have limited resources, they turn to where they can both explore an archive and find their own style: second hand.
This being considered, the conversation around secondhand shopping has changed. It’s cool to thrift now, and it offers the physical experience of exploring the (discarded) personal archives of hundreds of people at once. Not only can the younger market take inspiration from that ever existing archive online, but they have a space where they can actually find and afford pieces from it. It’s no secret that thrifting elongates the lifecycle of a piece of clothing. But in a larger context today, becoming so
popular, thrifting elongates the lifestyle of trends too. The trend cycle has sped up so fast that it can be hard to keep up. However, more under the radar, thrifting has shown the trend cycle doesn’t end in obsolescence, rather with reintroduction. Sharing thrift finds online, forging together outfits spanning multiple decades, even telling your friends about the joys of the hunt all indicate how much power thrifting gives the thrifter, beyond affordability.
An interest both in archival fashion and the act of seeking archival pieces (by thrifting/vintage shopping) has pointed brands naturally in the direction of reintroducing styles from the past. In an increasingly corporatized fashion system, it is harder to stay successful as a newer brand if your customers can’t turn to you and expect something consistent. It takes time to develop a brand archive, but this has led to brands crutching on certain eras to get the attention of potential customers. Interestingly, this has made some of the most fashion forward brands the ones that offer the realest version of the histories they try and replicate.
Bode, for example, is relatively young, but uses antique textiles and tailoring as a source of strength in differentiating itself from luxury conglomerate powerhouses. People can expect the same quality from new Bode pieces as they would authentic 1950s pieces, tha same goes for Diesel. Customers already have an idea of what to expect from 2000s era fashion, so they can turn to Glenn Marten’s Diesel and expect something similar, while also getting the same satisfaction as they would searching for a true period piece from the thrift store. Beyond giving users access to the eternal fashion archive, social media has also accustomed us to the convenience of an echo chamber of inspiration. One where we can seamlessly blend together pieces of the past to make something new but not. So what defines 2020s style? Reference and randomness. It’s an organized chaos that looks almost the same as today feels. Though consumers don’t know what to expect, they’ve grown comfortable with pretending like they do. They look towards brands with clear and authentic perspectives to guide them forward as they figure out their own identities, and are more open to looking at the past because there is no question about what’s going on there: it already happened.
We’re matching our style to the experience of collaging together our identities against a bleak outlook for the future. Like designers pouring over mood boards for their own collections, we’re doing the same for ourselves. And though it seems like we’re on the way to hit a brick wall, the Renaissance came from a new appreciation of the old. Today we do the same putting together pieces that used to only exist decades apart. When we look back at this decade of style at first glance it might look painfully unoriginal. In reality, it’s more (optimistically) an era of experimentation. And it’s with that optimism that we will be able to move forward.
“We’re matching our style to the experience of collaging together our identities against a bleak outlook for the future.”
Photo by Sarah Strausberg
ORLI ROSE
DECLAN KELLY
CHRISTINE YOO
MEGAN KRUEGER
Not Pictured: Alex Marootian, Alexandra Ennabi, Jack Couser, Lara Jasaitis
JULIANA MOLINA
SOFIA GIANNETTO
GABRIELLE CLARK
ISABELLA KELLY
LAUREN MCNEALEY
Alex Marootian
Photo by Ethan Valliath
