Vol. 6: The Industry Trinity 2014

University of Oxford. Fashion Magazine

INDUSTRY I N D U S T RY

TT14

www.industryfashion.org

THE INDUSTRY PHOTOBOOTH 3 Photography Henry Sherman

IDENTITY

CO N T E N T S

8 Sapeurs of the Congo Beth Timmins 10 Put on a Show Creative Director Morgan Harries Photography Jacob Sacks-Jones 14 Wear Yourself Laetitia Nappert-Rosales 15 Conceal or Reveal Evie Ley

OXFORD STYLE PROFILES 17 Student Style

ENVIRONMENT & ETHICS 21 New Threads Creative Director Ellie Grange Photography Henry Sherman 24 Eco Manifesto Ellie Grange 26 Interview Sloane Hamilton Ellie Grange

GENDER 30 Neutral Creative Director Amy O’Brien Photography Henry Sherman 34 Blue and Pink Camilla Rees 36 Skirting the Issue Alys Key 38 Fashion and the Female Form Amy O’Brien 41 Why We Need Blurred Lines Fred Shan 42 Boy Culture Creative Director Olivia Griffiths Photography Romain Regelade

THE INDUSTRY PHOTOBOOTH 1

45 Photography Henry Sherman

O

xford is brimming with interesting people.

So much so that we wanted to showcase how these individuals and their ideas relate to self-expression in fashion.

Fashion is often alienated from ubiquitous issues in today’s world. If these issues are everywhere, why should they not be addressed by the fashion industry?

We think that that self-identification, environment & ethics, and gender-identification are particularly relevant to the industry right now.

We asked you to come along to our Industry Photobooth and show us how you express yourself. This, and the Oxford Style Profiles, take a look at how students use fashion to display their personality. By contrast, Sapeurs of the Congo explores how expression through clothing is intrinsic to self-identification elsewhere in the world.

Looking at fashion on a global scale means considering our place in the supply chain. Not only does this extend to the declining planet, but in her interview, Oxfam’s Sloane Hamilton reminds us of our obligation towards ethical trading practices.

2

One of the most important issues we wanted to explore in this term’s Industry was the function of gender in fashion. Usually a focus on the blurring of the gender binary translates into emasculation in female fashion.

Our writers confront how gender neutralism is finally working both ways.

Fashion doesn’t have to be prescriptive. It shouldn’t impede upon our self-identification, our artistic expression, or our gender affiliation.

Let’s evant

see to

fashion every

as relindividual.

Ellie and Amy

Photography: Henry Sherman

INDUSTRY PHOTOBOOTH

3

Heritage & Noelle

INDUSTRY PHOTOBOOTH

Otamere

4

INDUSTRY PHOTOBOOTH

5

Lucinda & Rosa

INDUSTRY PHOTOBOOTH

Tom & Barbara

6

‘I am not made like any of those I have seen. I venture to believe that I am not made like any of those who are in existence.’ Rousseau

7

SAPEURS THE

OF

CONGO

Illustration: Rebecca Thornton

BETH TIMMINS

T

he members of the Congolese Société des Ambianceurs et des Personnes Élégantes (Society of Tastemakers and Elegant People, SAPE) or Sapeurs are renowned for their stylishly sumptuous suits with matching colourful shoes.

Yet, the ornamented Sapeurs dictate this opulence with a rigidly defined set of rules. For example, Sapeurs never wear more than three colours at once (four if white is included), the bottom cuff of the jacket must always be undone and they must also be fluent in French.

Yet, there must also be a evidence of clear individual style

within this remit. Ferolle wear knee high socks and full Scottish evening dress including a kilt and sporran. ‘I love the style of the Scotsman.…to me it is of the utmost elegance and has to be worn with pride and good manners. As a Sapeur you have to find your very own style, something that is you. The Scottish man’s style is me and many people love it.’

Since featuring in the latest Guiness advertisements, the Sapeurs have gained a greater notoriety leading to more modern transferals of the movement’s founding concepts.

During the filming of the ad, 8

the Sapeurs held a funeral for one of the group’s pioneers.

The red carpet which led to the funeral reception reputedley echoed a Hollywood catwalk: an archetypal representation of their lavish style.

These emblems of refinement are considered an art form and see members highly respected within other communities.

It’s common practice for Sapeurs to be paid to appear at weddings and anniversaries.

This subculture of high fashion, in the midst of extreme poverty, was arguably a means of resistance, where such expen-

sive tastes could be adopted and therefore effectively owned by lower-class Congolese.

The movement originated with the idea of replicating the elegance in style and manners of dandy styled colonial predecessors. In the 1920s-30s when Congolese who had spent time living in France returned, this influence was then illustrated in their wardrobes. The Congo-

so that he’ll never have to wear the same suit twice in a month.

In Belgian Congo, the Sapeurs in Kinshasa reportedly adopted the European attire when power of the former Belgian Congo fell into the dictatorial hands of President Mobutu who argued that everyone should wear traditional African dress only. Yet

and bow ties. They are the true definition of the word sape - the French denoting ‘to dress with elegance and style.’

This identification through fashion comprises an attitude and way of life. Their refined, gentlemanly behaviour is something to hold to in such a complex political climate. The Sapeurs lessened their involve-

‘Sape: the French denoting “to dress with elegance and style.”’ lese intellectual and freedom fighter Andre Grenard Matsoua returned to Congo in 1922 after working for the French army and living in Paris. He continued to wear French attire in Africa, and is consequentially considered to be the Grand Sapeur Matsoua.

Didier Gondola argues in his essay entitled La Sape Exposed! that ‘captivated by the snobbery and refined elegance of the Coast Men’s attire, Congolese houseboys spurned their masters’ secondhand clothes and became unremitting consumers and fervent connoisseurs, spending their meagre wages extravagantly to acquire the latest fashions from Paris.’

Hassan Salvador for example, who appears wearing dark John Lennon glasses in the Guiness advert, claimed he spent 20% of his warehouse manager wage on purchasing his latest set of clothes.

Mosengo similarly worked eight months at his part-time job at a money- exchange shop to earn enough for a single outfit, one of the thirty he owns,

to uphold their individual autonomy, Sapeurs remain reluctant to align themselves with any particular political party.

ment in the 1997-2002 civil war with the adoption of the motto ‘let’s drop the weapons, let us work and dress elegantly.’

Rhumba Rock musician Papa Wemba otherwise known as ‘le Pape de la Sape,’ developed a distinctive French-influenced style in the 1960s and 70s. He named his dress sense ‘Ungaru.’ He would wear brogues, 1930s trousers and slanted tweed hats. To earn more money to fuel this expensive taste, Papa Wemba would charge other Sapeurs up to $4,000 in exchange for smuggling them into Europe under the guise of being members of his band.

The ostentatiousness in their overtly colourful tailored suits and the constant competition of acquiring designer labels embodies something of far greater consequence. In their so called ‘cult of the cloth,’ the Sapeurs are forging a unique defiance in the midst of their surrounding circumstances. Indeed, as Sapeur Hassan Salvador argues, ‘fashion is frenetic, it changes all the time. The Sape does not present such frenzy, but a constant gentleness, refinement.’

Le Pape de la Sape became an icon for the young revolutionaries during President Mobutu’s dictatorship.

In the Baba Boum bar in Brazzaville, the capital of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, stylish accessories adorn the regular customers. Every emblem of elegance is flaunted, from white gloves, Cohiba cigars and canes to bowler hats 9

PUT ON A SHOW Creative Director: Morgan Harries / Photography: Jacob Sacks-Jones / Models: Barbara Ling Bell & Grainne O’Mahony With thanks to Jaesun Chung

10

12

LAETITIA NAPPERT-ROSALES

W

WEAR YOURSELF

estern culture constantly reminds us that fashion is a means of expression. We are encouraged, some might say, to use style as a tool for projecting our own personality, to parade around in the right shoes and embellish ourselves with a particular accessory that reveals exactly who we are to the world. To this end, what we wear is ours to decide. So, if you really are the ‘cool and confident’ character you claim to be, what’s stopping you from wearing a ball gown to lectures? Practicality aside, of course, it is societal pressure, conditioning even, that’s stopping you from picking up that sparkly number, provoking that familiar dilemma: ‘is it too much?’ which forces you to dress alike to your peers.

Pressure to be à la mode, and to purchase items according to trend dictums in fashion magazines such as Style, Vogue and Elle, is difficult to avoid. The‘what’shot’and‘what’snot’ page encourages you to steer clear from a perceived fashion faux pas - God forbid you own something on the‘what’snot’list.Surelyit’scommon knowledge that we do not, under any circumstance, go anywhere near

crocs or head-to-toe denim in the same shade? But what if circumstance changed? If Cara Delevingne wore crocs on the catwalk, would we all change our minds? It doesn’t seem so long ago that socks and sandals or the infamous jelly shoe were deemed unwbearable, but now they occupy the shelvesofeveryhighstreetstoreshop..

When exactly did thick eye brows become cool? Once magazines forecast certain trends and retailers respond, everybodywantstogettheirhandson the new key items. With this in mind, it becomes difficult to claim that your clothes define your personality;: all the girls on the high street are thinking the same thing, and much to your dismay, wearing the same thing too.

These mainstream fashion publications tell us what we should be wearing as if it were a moral obligation. By glorifying certain products and brandishing them ‘must haves,’ a pang of shame and inadequacy strikes if said item isn’t sitting in our wardrobe. It appears that some God, some sartorial superpower, is deciding what clothes we wear, whilst confusing things with that contradictory, if a little condescending message: ‘Wear what you want, as long as you feel comfortable in it.’

The dreaded dress-code is another tool of restriction. Dressing professionally for work becomes a uniform when we’re told to wear a shirt, skirt or trousers. Can what we wear really affect our capacity to work? Why are we still concerned with defining ourselves through clothing in a

14

work environment? If everyone has the same outfit then fashion is making us blend in rather than stand out. Perhaps the theory behind a uniform is that lack of variety or expression will make us more efficient. The same goes for black tie, which forces us to dress up for an occasion even if we would feel more at home in a tracksuit. Not only do fashion trends restrict our sartorial choices, but the societal stigma attached to clothing ‘category’ impedes our freedom to choose what we wear in a range of situations.

However, there is great flexibility in dress-codes and it is true that not everyone has the same style.

‘Dressing up’ means different things to different people. Whether you wear a long or short dress, plain or print, or even a trouser suit, there are many acceptable styles for black tie. Moreover, fashion isn’t simply a matter of the clothes you wear but your makeup, hair, attitude, and accessories. While a girl may have a similar dress to yours, it will be worn differently. We must also acknowledge that there is a time and place for certain sartorial choices. It is common knowledge that first appearances do matter and that people can draw conclusions from your wardrobe. At work, you can still try to maintain a level of comfort by choosing to wear trousers and a shirt instead of a blouse and pencil skirt, for example. Indeed, while magazines do endorse certain items, most also provide inspiration to customise and create a versatile look that suits you.

You can still find ways to express yourself, even if that means wearing crocs. What seems to be at the heart of the issue is the appropriateness of particular clothing for particular situations. It’s getting hot outside,: who knows, maybe you’ll start a footwear trend for next summer.

EVIE LEY

CONCEAL OR REVEAL

I

t may be self-evident, but it’s always worth keeping in mind that what we choose to wear reveals something about us as individuals. The image we present of ourselves to others through what we wear may be generated without us realising; alternatively we might spend considerable money, time and effort in curating our ideal self through our clothes. The view that it is through appearance that we express a personal identity is so widely accepted that it seems unnecessary to spell it out so plainly, but it is an idea that stands to be deconstructed. We assume - consciously or not - that we identify ourselves through what we wear, so it is worth considering how far the concept of a ‘personal identity’ is in fact compatible with our idea of fashion, and if the two should ever go hand in hand.

According to the writer Tanya Gold in the Guardian online, ‘if fashion is your primary means of expression, you are…only to be pitied.’ Harshly put, but there might be something in this statement. The very definition of‘fashion’as‘aprevailingstyleorcustom’ suggests it is a concept that does not cater to individuality. The fashion industry operates in such a way that all of the items available from virtually all retailers take inspiration from a select numberofdesigners. Itseemsdifficult to separate the idea of fashion as it is mostcommonlyrecognised,fromthe idea that it is dictated completely to its followers. To follow fashion blindly is to deprive yourself of the opportunity toexpressanythingpersonalthrough the way you present yourself on a daily basis; what could be expressed from hiding behind the art of others?

Similarly, the twenty first century phenomenon of ‘brand culture’ can be considered a natural opponent of what is generally considered ‘fashionable.’ Brands such as Superdry and Hollister have found

enormous success in marketing items memorable only for the sheer size of the company name stamped upon them which can be seen to stunt the expression of identity.

However much a shirt emblazoned with ‘JACK WILLS’ may differ from an item of haute couture, the wearer of either is likely to reveal little about themselves other than the fact that they place high value on the power of a name or brand. To own items from such brands or designers expresses that the wearer is of a particular social and economic status. But, if all a person hopes to express is that they possess the means to wear a name - for someone else’s name is all it really is then perhaps there is reason to pity.

All this seems to throw what exactly we mean by ‘identity’ into an ambiguous light. It’s easy to fall for the supercilious argument that to favour, for instance, heavily branded clothing, or to slavishly follow seasonal trends is a ‘lesser’ form of style. It’s important to consider, though, that subscribing to this view assumes rather a narrow window of ‘identity’ - one that insists it make some specific, original statement about an individual. Not only does this attitude suggest at its core that the very notion of fashion is antithetical to self-expression, it’s also rather limiting. Realistically, few of us have the time to be so concerned with the pursuit of self-expression through fashion that they can eschew all forms of dictated trends or outside influence; it’s not practically possible. Instead, the conscious choice most of us make is to adopt elements of popular fashion to fit the image of ourselves. Even 15

if fashion, and particularly its subcultures, are becoming ever more homogenous, subscribing to a particular style - even if it is not one we have invented personally - can reveal every bit as much about us as deviating completely from prescribed fashion can. In the end, it is the vast choice we have, thanks to the work of a relatively small number of designers, that allows us to interpret the art of high fashion in such a way that we may leave a stylistic imprint upon those we interact with daily. The status of ‘fashion victim’ is hardly one to which anyone would rightly aspire, but it’s certainly possible that a comfortable middle ground can be established.

Ultimately, it does seem difficult to reconcile an interest in following fashion closely with expressing an identity that is strictly personal.

Perhaps the identity we want to express isn’t one that must be ‘individual’ at all. Although it’s true that to follow popular trends devotedly may display little individuality, there is undoubtedly an advantage to the influence of the ‘dictations’ of the designers of popular fashion, and that is the provision of a convenient means of selecting elements from this art to create a personal image.

Jaesun Chung dress with silver codelelush coat

Photography & interview: Katherine Pangonis

STYLE PROFILES

OXFORD

LOVE HEDMAN. CHRIST CHURCH

Why do you think fashion is important?

If fashion is defined as a particular category of clothing: I don’t really think it is important. I would be annoyed if I couldn’t wear what I find coherent. It’s more of an OCD thing.

However, no one escapes the fact that people are lazy. Everyone makes inferences of personality depending on looks.

17

Do you think your sense of style says something about you?

Yes, it defines how other people perceive you. That’s true for everybody. When I came to England, there was a period when I was confused about this because people in Sweden generally tended to dress more like me. I was probably perceived very differently in Sweden.

LIVVI YALLOP. REGENT’S PARK

Photography & interview: Karolina Kalinowska

What item of clothing says the most about you?

Glasses! My most vital accessory.

Do you have a style icon?

Pheobe Philo, Alexander Wang, Wednesday Addams.

What makes you feel like yourself?

Top to toe black.

KHUSHNA SULAMANBUTT. ST EDMUND HALL

Photography & interview: Katty Cowles

You’re an artist, so would you say that fashion is art?

Fashion for me is definitely an art form. It requires a creative mind to design, and skilled craftsmanship to execute. Fashion trends have often followed artistic trends!

What’s a fashion rule you always follow or break?

18

I always match my lip colour to my nail colour!

Photography & interview: Katty Cowles

MARIETTE MOOR. ST EDMUND HALL

My only style icon is my mum. She’s honestly the coolest person I know.

What makes you feel like you?

My CAT boots. I wear them so much I can’t remember how tall I am in flats.

What do you look for in another person’s style?

Precisely what I’m not looking for but notice anyway.

Do you have a style icon?

19

Is there a fashion rule you always follow or break?

I hate to do it to Coco, but I don’t think you can ever accessorise too much. The more jewellery, the better.

What comes to mind when you think about ‘fashion’?

Nothing. ASOS at a push.

‘Fashion’ isn’t exactly my forte.

‘Earth provides enough to satisfy every man’s needs, but not every man’s greed.’

Gandhi

20

NEW THREADS Creative Director: Ellie Grange / Photography: Henry Sherman / Models: Rosa Cheesman, Sam Gebreselassie, Fattori McKenna With thanks to Komodo, People Tree & Rapanui

21

Jacket & T-Shirt: Komodo

22

T-Shirt: Rapanui

23

Dress: People Tree

A

spectre is haunting Europe – the spectre of ecofashion. The global supply chain is being reconsidered and re-evaluated at every level to ensure environmentally and ethically sustainable production and consumption. Eco-fashion is already acknowledged by the power houses of the global fashion industry to be a power in itself, but is it yet to fully take up its own mantle? What are we to make of this revolution in textile production which seeks to challenge the established order of dominant synthetic fabrics in the fashion industry?

The new craze for eco-fashion is not only making an impact on the catwalks but also hitting the high street. Environmentally friendly textiles such as wool get a mention in Vogue, and well-known labels such as Topshop are flashing their ‘green’ credentials. ASOS, too, is eager to promote the ‘green’ section of its website, which only displays items made with ‘upcycled materials’ and ‘labels in sustainable fashion.’

It would seem that, increasingly, eco-fashion is no longer categorized as a worthy but dull alternative to popular fashion. The nag we all know exists but is so much less fun: the apple or bag of leaves to the high street’s pizza and crisps. But is this still the case?

Eco-fashion is becoming trendy. It doesn’t have to be awkward, unattractive or straitlaced as the stereotypes and negative connota-

ECO MANIFESTO

tions of yesteryear would suggest.

New brands are making a splash by challenging the previously entrenched reliance on synthetic fabrics and unsustainable production.

Fairtrade fashion designers such as People Tree aim to ensure that consumers are able to wear stylish and affordable items ‘at the same time as respecting people and planet.’

Rapanui, an eco-fashion brand set up in 2008, is now releasing a range of t-shirts, tops and hoodies derived from bamboo, eucalyptus and organic cotton, produced in factories powered by wind turbines.

However, is this budding revolution the newly-dreamed fantasy it would appear to be or merely a revival of simpler times? Perhaps, in fact, history is simply repeating itself. Natural fibres currently in vogue, such as cotton and wool, were household names less than a century ago. Due to mass production and the changing nature of the global fashion industry and its supply chains, these textiles fell behind in popularity and style. Now, they once again dominate the fashion scene, recognised for their comfort, beauty and, most importantly, their relationship with sustainability and protection of the environment. Hemp, silk, and linen, for example, are all being revived as a part of a new trend in which we evaluate and understand manufacturing differently.

So, what is this revolution really challenging? Rather than defying the old means of production, ecofashion is actually contesting the relatively new synthetic and unsustainable trends which have emerged in the last couple of decades. A re24

ELLIE GRANGE

vival of previously modest and plain materials comes as part of a return to simpler times: this revolution is bringing back the old rather than instituting something radically new.

Contrary to popular belief, this rejuvenated quest for sustainability is clearly evolving to suit current trends in popular culture. Ecofashion brands are rivaling their competitors with equally original and innovative products. Komodo, for example, promotes itself as a ‘fashion life-style brand’ which was originally ‘born out of a sense of fun and travel.’ In this case, ecofashion can be introduced into popular culture as a relevant alternative rather than a solicitous choice, as Komodo choses to incorporate a consideration of the environmental impact of its fabric within its broader, popular ethos.

With a manifesto which is very retro yet relevant to current ideals and trends, eco-fashion is commanding a leading role on today’s fashion stage. Breathing new life into traditional textiles, this movement is something to spark the public imagination whilst simultaneously chiming with popular culture and environmental reality.

Eco-fashion will continue to grow; these brands have the world to win!

Dress: Komodo

25

T-Shirt: Rapanui

ELLIE GRANGE

SLOANE HAMILTON

INTERVIEW:

O

ver-looked and under-recognised, workers at the bottom of global fashion supply chains are often the undefended victims of corrupt business practice and exploitation.

As a member of Oxfam GB’s Ethical Trade Team, Sloane Hamilton confronts the hidden truths swept under the fashion industry’s carpet of false glamour on a daily basis. She seeks to improve working conditions across the globe by offering advice on best practice labour standards to British and multi-national businesses. Her work explores the relationships between the conditions for workers and poverty while she also plays a key part in overseeing 26

Fair Trade policy within Oxfam GB. I interviewed Sloane to find out more about her opinion on what ethical trade means and its role in an increasingly conscientious fashion industry.

What drew you to working at Oxfam?

I always wanted to work for a non-governmental organisation, and Oxfam was on my radar from a young age because of its focus on rights and its promotion of people’s power to be their own change-makers. I decided to study Anthropology with Development at Edinburgh University and, whilst there, I made every effort to travel as much as possible to learn about different countries and cultures. After completing

Illustration: Olivia Rowland

a student-development project which had me living in rural Zambia for three months, I decided to spend my spare time outside of University volunteering in the Climate Change wing of a charity that had an office in Edinburgh.

I’ve been at Oxfam for six years now, but I arrived in the Ethical Trade Team in a rather roundabout way. I never intended to work on private sector issues and, for a while, I was highly sceptical that the private sector could play a positive role in development.

However, I continued to find employment in running events on private sector and development issues at Oxfam and this challenged a lot of my previous assumptions, whilst also providing me with the opportunity to

develop my knowledge. Suddenly, I found myself meeting the requirements for a job advertised in the Ethical Trade Team.

I have learned that, no matter how much you try to plan your career, it is often the unexpected opportunities that really help you to pave your way.

Can you describe the daily work of the Oxfam Ethical Trade Team of which you are a member?

Oxfam’s Ethical Trade Team works to influence companies to respect the rights of workers in global supply chains.

Our team does this through a mixture of advice and advocacy to companies sourcing materials from developing 27

countries. What is unique is that we often deploy a collaborative approach to help companies understand the impact that their operations can have, both positive and negative, on workers. This enables us to access up-to-date information about issues workers experience in specific supply chains and countries. For example, a last-minute change in product design by the buyers can mean longer hours in production for the workers. Buying companies can have a lot of impact on workers at the bottom of the chain, so the aim of my team is to heighten their understanding. We see a lot of risk being passed down the supply chain to workers: often those with the least power and voice. An ad-

vantage of doing collaborative work with companies is that we can often use the findings to influence the wider sector beyond the individual company with whom we are working.

The main focus and challenge for us this year is the Living Wage because low wages were identified in several reports that we have published. In the context of rising food prices and inflation, far too many workers around the world are not able to earn enough to meet their basic needs. It’s shocking to think that workers are living in situations of extreme poverty despite working full-time in supply chains that are ultimately very profitable.

What would be your advice to consumers?

It’s great to see so much interest in Ethical Trade by consumers but, at the same time, navigating these issues can be a bit of a minefield. Personally, I always look to buy goods from brands who talk about workers’ rights in their sustainability material. Too many companies are still focused on building wells, schools and orphanages, which are often appreciated by communities, but are also highly irrelevant to the their operations and responsibilities to people producing goods for their company. Instead, we prefer businesses to look within their own organisation, where they are not only able to have the greatest impact on poor people but, also, where they hold the most responsibility, usually to those manufacturing their products. If companies are able to ensure that these workers’ rights are respected, and that they earn a living wage, then that’s something to shout from the rooftops about!

‘IF WORKERS’ RIGHTS ARE RESPECTED ... THEN THAT’S SOMETHING TO

SHOUT

FROM THE ROOFTOPS ABOUT!’

28

What is the most frequently recurring problem you see in the context of ethical trading?

In the 1990s, when there were lots of sweatshop exposes, NGOs (including Oxfam) pushed companies to audit their supply chains to show that workers had decent working conditions. Twenty years on, most brands are auditing their factories regularly, yet tragedies still happen, such as the Rana Plaza disaster (the Bangladeshi factory fire where over 1000 people died [ed.]) We are concerned that unless the root causes of issues are tackled, conditions will not improve for workers.

Often, this is about the business practices here in the UK, for example. Audits offer a certain degree of protection to brands but, far too frequently, the very real and serious issues go unnoticed. If auditors talk to workers, it’s usually in a factory setting, with management present, and workers do not feel comfortable enough to raise any issues. We’d like to see the emphasis shifted to worker empowerment so that employees can highlight problems they experience in a way that is taken seriously.

It’s really troubling to me that there is a whole sub-industry that helps factory owners to pass audits fraudulently, by keeping double books, for example, and by coaching workers on what to say when the auditor questions them on working conditions. Imagine if all of the money spent on auditing (and passing audits through audit-fraud!) was spent instead on empowering workers and raising their wages?

‘The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman’s garment; for all that do so are abomination unto the Lord thy God.’ Deuteronomy 22:5 29

NEUTR AL

Creative Director: Amy O’Brien / Photography: Henry Sherman / Models: Ariel Gregory, Ben May

32

33

PINK BLUE

& W

CAMILLA REES

hen I was about fifteen I remember picking up a women’smagazine and finding a picture of Michael Jackson dressed in black jeans, a white top, and a navy blue suit-jacket. Before reading the caption, I was confused about why this picture was included in the ‘celebrity fashion disasters’ section – but then I saw that the caption criticised MJ purely because the jacket happened to come from the women’s department in Topshop. After going into more depth, I was shocked to see the amount of abuse the star received on because he liked how he looked in women’s clothing. In October 2009, following his death in June, a question was posted on Topix about why he wore female clothing. Options for the multiple choice answers included, ‘He had a vagina,’ and ‘He was the No.1 closet-tranny’. What is strange about these answers is that they assume a man wearing women’s clothes to be a question

of gender or sexuality. Perhaps no one would have noticed that his clothes were purchased from the women’s section, if it weren’t for the hyper-critical eye of the press.

On the one hand, we can rely upon the fashion world’s seasonal upheavals to make it a progressive industry. On the other, retailers seem to be a little backwards in their rigid maintenance of the gender binary.

When you walk into a clothes shop, you automatically browse either the men’s or the women’s department.

There is a very clear divide between them, often with the men’s clothing on a different floor: after all, it’s women who are more likely to be drawn in by shop-windows, and you can’t take a buggy upstairs, right? Even shops that are supposed to have a strong unisex vibe, such as Uniqlo, have separate sections for men and women.

While unisex children’s toys are increasingly breaking into the market, mixed sport becomes ever more popular and unisex toilets

34

are installed in numerous public places, why do we still have such a rigid division in the fashion world?

Not only is this particularly strange because fashion is an industry that tests and stretches social boundaries, but the strict sartorial gender binary unusually sees men marginalised. Women can wear men’s clothes much more easily than men can wear women’s. The reception that David Beckham received a few years ago when he wore a sarong was the polar opposite to the feminist celebration that emerged when Angelina Jolie wore a suit to match her husband’s. A man must follow a restrictive dress code to avoid his masculinity being put to question.

The confusion in the press was palpable when Beckham, a prevalent male icon in Britain, wore a woman’s skirt in public; could he still be a man if he wasn’t wearing trousers?

This accepted rule that men can’t wear women’s clothes grows ever more shocking when we consider it within historical context. Primarily, until the 1940s, pink was considered a boy’s, rather than a girl’s, colour. Boys were dressed in pink when they were born: a colour close in tone to red, it was considered strong and masculine. Girls were considered dainty, calm and passive were dressed in blue, much like the Virgin Mary. Going back even further to the time of Elizabeth I, pink was considered an even more masculine colour, not only for children, but for fully grown men.

For example, a portrait of Sir Francis Drake, the hero of the Spanish Armada, shows him clad in bright pink: the archetype of masculinity.

What is also noticeable about this portrait is how much of Drake’s legs are on display. This points to another trend subversion: until relatively recently, it was men who would

Illustration: Martha Thomson

show their legs off, whilst women covered themselves with large dresses. In Louis XIV’s court in Versailles, men sported high heels, and all over Europe men would wear corsets if they wanted to improve their shape. Moreover, accessories such as ruffs were a unisex fashion, and men wore incredibly large cod-pieces to show off their fertility in a particularly phallic fashion.

All of these examples highlight the fact that our society has not always been constrained by the rules we follow today. In some ways, the sixteenth century was much kinder to men in terms of fashion.Women had prescriptive codes governing their outfits; men were in a position to wear what they wanted.

Fashion needs to take the issue of gender restriction more seriously.

Although we are witnessing something of a rise in androgynous models such as Andrej Pejic, who walked both the men’s and women’s shows in the 2011 Paris Fashion Week, there is still serious need for more flexible representations of the everyday man’s wardrobe. If men want to wear more traditionally ‘feminine’ clothes, we should embrace the change rather than fear it. Gender equality should not solely mean that women have the same opportunities as men, but also that men have the same as women in their political, personal and sartorial life.

Illustration: Martha Thomson

I

n Virginia Woolf’s Orlando, the eponymous character undergoes an unexplained transformation from man to woman.

While most of us might be surprised to be confronted by this turn of events, Orlando barely notices at first. The moment when she realises what it means to be a woman is on her return to England: ‘it was not until she felt the coil of skirts about her legs and the Captain offered, with the greatest politeness, to have an awning spread for her on deck, that she realised with a start the penalties and privileges of her position.’

Throughout the book, there is a close association between Orlando’s identification with gender and clothing. When dressed as a Restoration-era lady, she is constricted by her clothing. She becomes dependent on men to lay out awning for her, hand her into carriages, and make enough space for her oversized skirts. Women historically have been confined by their clothes in many ways and though today we might consider ourselves fairly liberated in terms of clothing, there are many issues still to overcome.

To research this article, I posted on NoHeterOx and Cuntry Living Facebook groups to find out how people interact with clothing based on their gender identity. The response showed clearly that there are still restrictions on what women can wear.

For example, Abigail Buccaneer talks about the factor of fear : ‘I like wearing sexy outfits that don’t consist of much - but whenever I’m out on the streets dressed like that, I risk harassment and violence from men. So I usually just wear things like jeans and a t-shirt - attracts less attention and is more androgynous. In this way my entire gender presentation is filtered through what straight men find ac-

ALYS KEY

SKIRTING THE ISSUE: 36

ceptable and becomes redshifted towards gender-neutrality.’

The role of ‘the gender binary’ in fashion is undeniable. Men and women are expected to conform to rigid definitions of ‘masculinity’ and ‘femininity’ but, for many, such labels are too constricting. What we wear can be a way of expressing ourselves, so conventional ideas of what a girl or boy is ‘supposed’ to wear are repressive and limiting.

For someone who is transgender or non-binary, the gender identity forced upon them has to be enacted in many different ways, including wearing clothes which don’t represent who they feel themselves to be. Conversely, clothes can also have a comforting effect. In a recent debate at the Oxford Union, S. Bear Bergman spoke about his pleasure in dressing in a typically masculine way, paying attention to details like cufflinks and a watch. As a trans man, Bergman expressed satisfaction in dressing in a way which matched his own sense of self. Clothes have the power to make us comfortable in our own skin, just as they can make us feel that we’re pretending to be someone else.

Of course, one can still identify as cisgender (when the self-identifying gender conforms to the biological one) and want to wear clothes associated with a different gender. ‘Cross-dressing’ reinforces the gender binary, with specific male and female categories, yet for many, transvestism provides a form of escape or a chance to have fun. Artist and cross-dresser Grayson Perry describes the sub-

versive role of transvestism in our society: ‘I welcome the mischief it creates, and the way it undermines the increasingly rigid gender roles that are pushed on our children.’ When we look at the most prominent image of the transvestite in popular culture, it is the ‘drag queen’ represented by the likes of RuPaul and Lily Savage which stands out. With playful entertainment at its core, it shows how subverting traditional roles can promote a new and different mode of expression. Efi Gauthier says on Cuntry Living ‘my gender is not something I feel particularly strongly about and my fashion is anything but consistent... on special occasions wearing a ball gown feels no different than wearing a pirate costume - for me both are exciting opportunities to play parts and explore aesthetics that differ from the everyday.’

A concept which comes up frequently when we question gender norms of clothing is that of androgyny. For most, this conjures up an image of David Bowie in a skintight jumpsuit, or Tilda Swinton in wide-shouldered suits. But many commentators on Cuntry Living express their frustration at a rigid definition of ‘androgyny.’

Amber Beardow says ‘One thing that has always irked me is that in fashion, androgynous seems to mean women in ‘masculine’ clothes…I find it really upsetting that there is such a massive stigma towards men who want to wear feminine clothing. In my mind, if you like a piece of clothing, you should be free to wear it...but some of my male friends get ridiculed and made to feel unsafe simply for wearing a nice skirt. It’s horrible.’ It’s very true :

do a quick Google image search for ‘androgynous fashion’ and all of it is women in suits. Thea Bradbury says that this is down to the fact that ‘masculinity …is seen as the default, whereas femininity is a weird aberration.’ It’s reminiscent of Madonna’s What It Feels Like For A Girl: ‘but for a boy to look like a girl is degrading ‘cause you think that being a girl is degrading.’

So why are we still adhering to inflexible classifications of ‘men’s’ and ‘women’s’? Well not all of us are. Several people who responded to my post advocated shopping in the men’s section, like Emily Dring who buys ‘clothes from the ‘men’ sections of shops… chiefly because I find they’re much better value in terms of the quality of the fabric but also because I often prefer the cut (and even the colour palettes) of ‘men’s’ shirts, jumpers, even coats.’ None of this means giving up a love of fashion, and in fact opens up many more avenues to explore. As Isabella De Vere Rogers says ‘I wear a lot of men’s clothes, mainly massive old shirts and jumpers with leggings or skinny jeans. I think it’s interesting how someone’s old stuff can be styled and worn completely differently by someone of a different generation and gender.’ There may be issues with the way clothes are made, marketed and sold in terms of gender, but with the rising influence of street style, we can take matters into our own hands. Let’s stop thinking about clothes in terms of gender and start thinking about whether they’re comfortable, make us feel good, and express who we feel ourselves to be.

GENDER IN FASHION 37

S

FASHION AND THE FEMALE FORM:

ince humans first began observing and recreating the world around them, numerous works have seen artists inspired by the female form in one way or another. Paleolithic art represented the woman’s body and Venus as the paradigm of fertility, modelled in ivory and terracotta statues. In occidental art, the female form as a source of great artistic inspiration came to the fore during the Renaissance, with eminent works such as the Venus de Milo, Da Vinci’s La Gioconda, Goya’s two Majas, Las Meninas by Velasquez and Bottichelli’s The Birth of Venus establishing the honour of the female nude’s representation in art. At this point, women were portrayed as a higher form than the natural human, rather more as a goddess, fused with the concept of beauty.

Since then, the artistic tradition has often placed the female form on a symbolic field, worthy of admiration. All too often, her form has taken on a supernatural quality.

It is clear that the artistic obsession with the female form is no new thing, yet efforts to achieve equality of the sexes in western society are still relatively recent. Although the male body has historically been glorified with similar symbolic effect (think Michelangelo’s David or classical depictions of the gods, symbolic of virile fertility), the female form in art is seen by many to have taken on a new aesthetic value beyond supernatural symbolism. The nude form of both sexes is still represented in contemporary artwork, but we’ve seen the female body acquire a new sexualised aesthetic in advertising, music videos, fashion photography and other media.

A plethora of studies have focused on the analysis of gender relations portrayed through the nude in contemporary art and the media, many criticising it as reflecting male predominance or misogyny in western society. What’s more, generation Y is being hailed as the ‘over-sexualised’ generation. Just 5 minutes of television commercials show that for us, the media rely upon the dictum ‘sex sells,’ and the airbrushed female form realises target figures.

Jean Kilbourne is an American writer acclaimed for her critical studies of the image of women in advertising. In her documentary Killing Us Softly, she informs us that the average American is exposed to 3000 adverts of some form (whether it be TV commercials, sidebars on websites, on billboards, taxis or buses) per day. The UK advertising industry spend was said to have reached a record £14bn in 2013, with digital advertising accounting for 44% of this figure.

Considering how gender representation on the smallest scale has always been so important for us to comprehend what it is to be male or female, this large-scale takeover is inevitably influential. If our society’s gender identification were to directly reflect the images we’re exposed to in the patriarchal mass media, every woman would maintain an ideal state of beauty, sexuality, passivity and submissiveness whilst every man would be ultra-macho, authoritative, competitive and avaricious.

Kilbourne’s research also observes how an overwhelming proportion of these adverts seem to reduce women to body parts, quite literally dismembering the body from 38

the human in what could be seen as a de-humanising process. These models are presented as objects or vehicles with which to sell the objects being advertised. Forbes et al. created the BIO hypothesis claiming that modern day beauty ideals are oppressive: why has a transformation from celebration in art to objectification in the media taken place? Perhaps western society has always had a similar attitude but nowadays simply possesses more platforms on which to present this image of the female form.

Relating these ads back to art and fashion photography, the question really surrounds at what point we started to use women as “bodies,” not “somebodies”. Or can we still claim that modern day media is inspired by this subject matter?

Nude fashion editorials have long been featured in European publications, but have rarely graced the pages of English and American magazines. In the world of fashion photography, Helmut Newton is recognised as a pioneer of the nude fashion photograph after being amongst the first of Vogue Paris’ commissioned photographers to shoot semi-nudes and nudes for the publication. Newton is quoted as saying “What I find interesting is working in a society with certain taboos - and fashion photography is about that kind of society. To have taboos, then to get around them - that’s interesting.” If by taboo Newton was referring to the nudity in these particular images, is he providing evidence for a change in attitude that has forced the artist’s intention to go from celebration to provocation? Have society’s views impeded upon artistic expression?

And considering Newton was liv-

EXPLOITATION OR ART?AMY O’BRIEN ing in a relatively sexually liberated world compared with that of Da Vinci’s, why has the female nude form been distinguished from any other artistic subject and become ‘taboo’?

Illustration: Olivia Rowland

Then there’s Guy Bourdin, Newton’s contemporary, whose work is unashamedly provocative, some

would say explicit. Bourdin’s advertising campaigns and editorial work is boldly colourful and sexual, and the fashion is often secondary to the female form in the composition. Sometimes models’ bodies are completely dismembered from the human. Leading brands such as Aldo, Marc Jacobs, Tom Ford and NARS choose Bourdin for their campaigns: these pictures sell goods. Most of these products are bought by female consumers. How far can we claim that these images are demeaning and offend women, and how far can we claim that his intriguing work impresses the consumer market?

Most recently, it is fashion photographer Terry Richardson who sparked the most controversy when the attention moved away from his signature suggestive polaroid shots of notable models and celebrities, to the actual process of achieving these shots. After numerous models claimed he’d sexually harassed them, US Vogue announced they had “no plans” to work with the pho39

tographer in the future. This editorial decision is completely valid, but if nude photography is intrinsic to a fashion photographer such as Newton’s work, why should it be barred from a publication in the same way as the work of a photographer guilty of sexual harassment?

All these photographers have become renowned in the fashion industry. Although the American or British reader would perhaps be shocked to encounter spreads featuring female nudes in mainstream publications, European readers have been exposed to the work for years without it damaging sales. Furthermore, there has been an influx of more avant-garde fashion publications made available to the British and American reader in the past few years such as i-D, Another Magazine, LOVE, W magazine, Hunger and Schön!, whose shoots frequently feature nudes. The reason the issue has become more taboo in England and America could conceivably be due to the predominance of advertising here, as a reaction against the sexualised aesthetic that has been projected onto the female body.

If Anna Wintour were to include Bourdin’s nude photography in the middle of a US Vogue shoot, and not just in the advertisement campaigns that occupy the initial pages, would this validate his female nude shots as art? Why should we perceive the two differently? Perhaps the distinction in this sensitive topic lies between whether the female nude is photographed in order to sell, or whether she is photographed to be observed as any other artistic subject.

WHY WE NEED BLURRED LINES FRED SHAN

T

he fashion world has traditionally been a reserve for women. While male designers headed major fashion houses, they focused on women. Even in the modern era, many men are still reluctant to embrace fashion.

Take a Iook at the history of the concept of masculinity, and you might begin to understand why.

‘Masculinity,’ as fashion historian Christopher Breward remarked, ‘is not a given. It is too created and manipulated through film, magazines, advertising, and of course, clothing.’ Indeed, in an attempt to draw male consumers into the fashion retail market, nineteenth century department stores set forth male consumerism as the polar opposite of that of females. Stereotypically, retailers perceived men as withdrawn, almost unwilling consumers, whilst women were relied upon to snap up the latest bargains.

tury? Fear and insecurity are, perhaps, the answer. Sociologist Michel Foucault suggested that young men resisted the idea of male fashion and feigned disinterest in fashion as a weapon of patriarchal empowerment – women were assigned the role of the fashionable gender.

Thus, the persistence of fashion as a feminine interest reflects men’s attempts to maintain the status quo in gender boundaries. If men were to accept fashion, it would mean a recognition of female pre-eminence. In fact, as a reactionary attempt to keep things as they were, a certain hyper-masculinity developed in male psyche. According to Labour politician Dianne Abbott, hypermasculinity is the over-exaggeration of values perceived to be masculine: ‘at its worst it’s a celebration of heartlessness; a lack of respect for women’s autonomy; and the normalization of homophobia… [ed. influenced by] Viagra and Jack Daniels.’ Essentially the Lad Culture.

In the early twentieth century, the distinction between gender boundaries seemed clear cut: women were confined to the domestic sphere, while men laboured for the family income; each gender was allocated qualities that were deemed ‘masculine’ or ‘feminine;’ and a successful man was one who possessed all the ‘masculine’ qualities and lacked the ‘feminine’ ones.

Men view the demonstration of feminine qualities, such as an interest in fashion, as a weakness. They see women assuming traditionally masculine roles as an infringement of their own right of existence, and hesitate to incorporate them. At the same time, the rise of gay culture presented ‘effeminate’ gay men as another opposing faction against the heterosexual man.

In this sense, he feels the need to suppress change by identifying and undermining feminine qualities, as well as socially excluding men who possess such qualities.

Why was fashion considered effeminate even into the twenty-first cen-

The issue with such unprogressive reactions, however, is that men who 41

only uphold traditionally masculine virtues face serious disadvantage in today’s society. As fashion designer Tom Ford rightly claimed: ‘In our culture, men are judged by our looks.’

Those who pay little attention to the way in which they present themselves are significantly disadvantaged when competing with equally skilled, fashion conscious men.

Yet, in modern society, simply being fashion-conscious is no longer enough for men. As more and more men cease to perceive an interest in fashion as a sign of weakness and femininity, one must go one step further to stand out from the crowd.

A willingness to go beyond traditional gender boundaries gives men new opportunities for self-improvement. Men’s makeup brands like Mënaji present ‘cleaning-up products’ in a masculine manner, and attempt to do away with men’s belief that makeup is reserved for women.

On the other hand, androgynous fashion allows us to blur the sartorial gender binary, ensuring that the traditional confines of one’s sex do not impede upon one’s individual expression. In this way, androgynous fashion shifts selfexpression away from gender and instead focuses upon individuality.

Masculinity is a relational concept that is subject to constant adaptation. As feminism gradually liberates women from their traditional roles in society, the definition of masculinity also changes as a result. The modern man must go beyond the traditional virtues and boundaries of masculinity to become a more rounded individual. In the world of fashion, the blurring of gender boundaries, for men, means a greater interest in self-presentation and aesthetics, as well as the nerve to try out things previously deemed ‘unmanly.’ It is in our pursuit of adaptation and progress that we become more complete men.

BOY CULTURE Creative Director: Olivia Griffiths / Photography: Romain Reglade / Model: Johan Trovik With thanks to Clements & Church 42

43

44

INDUSTRY PHOTOBOOTH

45

Adelaide & Beth

INDUSTRY PHOTOBOOTH

Leah & Noelle

46

INDUSTRY PHOTOBOOTH 47

Callum

INDUSTRY PHOTOBOOTH

Matteo & Alice

48

University of Oxford. Fashion Magazine

INDUSTRY I N D U S T RY

TT14

www.industryfashion.org