FASHION Lara Machado BA Design 2 year
How is the idea of fashion implicated in design in general, and in the design of what we wear in particular? Do designers of clothing want to reflect culture, create culture, or do they seek to do both?
Figure 1: Seventies women’s wear.
Fashion, culture and objects are concepts intrinsically related. Objects can act as translators of a community’s culture. In that sense, material culture is the manifestation of a society’s ideas, beliefs, and behaviours in the form of objects at a given time. Professor Tim Dant states, “Material culture is not only objects designed to fulfil basic animal needs, but also an expression of who and what we are that shapes how society can proceed”. (Dant, 1999, p.12) Design finds itself intimately related to that, since it is deals with creation of new objects, which can shape ideas and be shaped by them. Designers creates objects and these reflect a specific culture at a given time. In that sense, fashion is a good representative of this relation, since it echoes not only one person’s inner self, but also the identity of entire groups. According to art historian Quentin Bell, “our clothes are too much a part of us for most of us ever to be entirely indifferent to their condition: it is though the fabric were indeed a natural extension of the body, or even of the soul”. (Bell, 1992, p.19) Fashion works in a constant flux, breaking tradition and always changing by creating new or recycling old ideas. According to researcher and author Angela Finn (2014), fashion can be defined between two factors: immaterial and material, which are present in our everyday life. The first admits fashion as a set of ideas that guide a specific community at a given time and defies conformity, always aiming for innovation. The second considers fashion as a materialized concept, such as clothing. It is how fashion manifests itself in the material world. Those two concepts are intrinsically connected, being hard to tell them apart.
Clothes are made to protect ourselves but also work almost as a window, displaying important information of the person wearing them. Professors Susanne Küchler and Daniel Miller state that as material culture, clothing is not seen as simply reflecting given aspects of self but, through its particular material propensities, is co-constitutive of facets such as identity, sexuality and social role. (Küchler and Miller, 2005, p.21) Outfits show our identity, or what we want people to perceive from us. They become more personal objects, since it is acts as our personal ‘packaging’. In addition, the majority of people in the world wear clothes, which makes it much more relatable than other objects. For example, if someone criticizes the way we are dressed, it is almost a critic to our own persona, whereas a critic to our interior design decoration does not feel as much as a personal critic. According to Professor Lars Svendsen (2006), “fashion affects the attitude of most people towards both themselves and others, though many would deny it”. Fashion, as stated
Figure 2: Punk style.
by Svendsen (2006), is not only related to clothing, but it can be interpreted as an ideology that navigates in many aspects of modernity. Fashion can be constituted by the relationships between clothes, the people who wear them and ideas and values. When we get dressed, we represent not only our identity but also conform to cultural models. Fashion is a statement, and even when escaping from it, we are still making a statement, an anti-fashion type of fashion. Because it is related to appearance and the ‘surface’ of people, fashion has been usually considered vain and superficial, but it reveals much deeper meaning. Another aspect of fashion is that there are certain clothes or accessories that began to be used by certain groups and they now act as part of their culture, but not necessarily carry the same meaning for people outside that community. As exemplified by Küchler and Miller (2005), the use of headscarf in Islam cultures is a common behaviour, because beauty is related to moral and guarding the body from the sight of others. In Western cultures, for example, a headscarf does not carry the same meaning, acting more as a fashion statement.
Fashion design goes through changes quite quickly, possibly quicker than other design industries. According to Svendsen (2006), all of us feel the need to express who we are through visual appearance, which means that this necessity will be linked to fashion and the increasingly rapid cycles of fashion indicate a more complex conception of the self, which becomes more transient day by day. As quicker as people change, fashion changes as well. Many factors are involved in the evolution of fashion design, such as the discovery of new techniques to deal with fabric, evolution of technology, rising of middle class, appearance of ‘tribes’ and subcultures, among others. Fashion shapes culture, by creating new ways to express ourselves and the time we live in. Fashion designers create culture, but they cannot predict all the meanings and implications their designs will carry. Svendsen (2006) states “there is a broad agreement that an artist does not stand in a privileged position when it comes to understanding the works he or she creates. The artist is quite simply an interpreter on an equal footing with all other interpreters”. (Svendsen, 2006, p.69) In addition, fashion also is shaped by culture through the emergence of new movements, change in politics, music and other areas. Fashion designers both create and reflect culture, as time goes by, following or generating new trends and sometimes both. Entire eras can be recognized just by its existing fashion, like the seventies for example. (see figure 1) Another example is the punk movement (see figure 2), initially a reaction to disco seventies style and the mainstream Figure 3: Vivienne Westwood. (1978) music. Some prominent designers contributed to create the visual culture of the movement, such as Vivienne Westwood (see figure 3), but also the punks would draw inspiration from music, fetishism and everyday life objects, using fashion to make a statement. They were reflecting the disco culture they were against, the cultures they draw inspiration from and bringing new things to the table in order to build this new subculture. Later on, other fashion trends would draw inspiration from punk, create more different cultures. Nowadays, the rapid changes in fashion and the mass spreading of trends makes their initial meaning get lost. (Svendsen, 2006) Many people wear punk culture inspired fashion without wanting to make the statements they initially intended, for example. This shows that meaning can depend on the context we are in, designers that create culture, the people wearing it and the people viewing it.
Part Two: Show how we can apply specific theories of the “Material Culture” can be used to analyse either two similar or contrasting objects in fashion design.
There are a few theories that help understand and interpret material culture, focusing on sociological aspects, meaning, etc. In this essay, the analysis of two objects is going to be based on semiotic theories. According to Danesi (1999), “the basic goal of semiotics is to identify what constitutes a sign and to infer, document or ascertain what its meanings are.” (Danesi, 1999, p.9) It constitutes a study of signs, an investigation into the meaning and nature of things. A sign is a system, which has a physical structure, which refers to something (object), and the sign evokes ideas and interpretations (meaning). Danesi (1999) states that there are three principles of semiotic analysis: all meaning-baring behaviours and forms of expression have past origins; sign systems influence people’s notion of what is ‘normal’ in human behaviour and the particular system of signs in which one has been created influences worldview. This means
Figure 5: Puritans garment on seventeenth century.
Figure 4: King Louis XIV of France.
that a material culture analysis based on semiotic looks into history in order to interpret signs, exposes certain perceptions of normalcy and why they exist and also the context in which those signs are analysed, because its meaning varies with the circumstances. One semiotic approach focuses on the process of myth creation, assuming as something depending on context and as an artificial human creation, which alters the interpretation of things. Semiologist Rolland Barthes proposed that myths give the idea that things have an inherent meaning, making concepts feel ‘natural’ and easier to understand. Usually the creation of those myths pass by unnoticed, which facilitates people’s persuasion. Therefore, his fashion studies were against the idea that a
Figure 6: Scene from the animated movie Cinderella.
certain sign would have only one particular interpretation. (Barthes, 1973) He also had a structuralist approach, considering that signs would not have a meaning outside a system. Barthes also believed that is not possible to act without conveying any meaning. For example, even people that do not care about fashion convey meaning through their outfit, generally a meaning of anti-fashion, anti-consumption, etc. Based on those concepts, this essay proposes to analyse two objects in fashion that are usually worn on similar occasions by Western society: heels and suits. Both objects carry general notions of elegance, sophistication and sexuality. When wanting to make a good impression, they are viewed almost as essential. They are related to gender, because it is commonly believed women should wear heels and men should wear suits when they are getting dressed for an important occasion, such as job interviews, weddings, graduations, etc. Firstly, we need to understand their history, all the factors that led to the current meaning those objects carry. According to Danesi (1999), the perception of heels as stylish footwear dates back to fourteenth century Venice, when aristocratic women started wearing them to set themselves apart socially from ‘common’ women. Then, in the sixteenth century, the fashion spread to the French aristocracy and both men and women started using heels as a symbol of nobility, showing that they were not always gender exclusive. (see figure 4) Later on, men would stop wearing them because heels are not working shoes, being uncomfortable to walk long distances. In the mid-nineteenth century, women of all classes started wearing heels, in order to prevent their dresses from touching the ground. The heels became related to female fragility and beauty, due to lack of practiFigure 7: Fetish footwear.
cality and effects on the body, accentuating its ‘best features’ and making women unsuitable for ‘hard work’. High heels are still a symbol of women’s elegance and sensuality, among other meanings. There is a notion that women have to wear heels, almost as a fashion standard. Although heels are not related to comfort, they became famous for what they do to the body, giving a slimmer figure, making the person taller, making their breasts jut out, etc. In addition, myths have been created around it, such as shoes as centrepiece of many of children’s tales, revolving around some magical power they possess, such
Figure 8: Photo of Marilyn Monroe while filming The Seven Year Itch. (1954)
Figure 9: Vintage pin-up girl. (1940)
as Cinderela (1697). (see figure 6) Pop culture representations of sexy and confident women in heels also contribute to create this image, such as Marylin Monroe (see figure 8) and pin-up women (see figure 9). Also according to Danesi (1999), heels are often perceived as a fetish, which is related to objects or body parts being related to sexual fantasies. (see figure 7) Shoes, feet and stockings are common fetishes in Western society. Therefore, when women are wearing heels, they act as a sign which sends powerful information on sexuality, stylishness and status. Regarding suits, they are considered the ultimate garment for male elegance. However, according to Svendsen (2006), there was no gender distinction regarding ornamentation before the nineteenth century, being a matter of class. According to Danesi (1999),
the origin of the suit comes from the conflict between Cavaliers and Puritans on the seventeenth century in England. While the Cavaliers dressed with colourful clothes and ornaments, the Puritans were the opposite, wearing dark colours, suits and collars, hoping to convey sobriety. (see figure 5) By the Industrial Revolution, Puritans became richer day by day and their traits became popular and a need for simpler clothing for men arose. The suit was a perfect fit for that and it symbolized the rising of a new age. It was a middle class garment that upper class started to use. This was the birth of modern corporate capitalism and the Puritans principles of hard work and simple living became connected to economic success. The contemporary suit has its roots on the Puritans dress code and it has changed very little; and some of the Puritans
Figure 10: Humphrey Bogart.
principles are still ruling the business world. Suits gained meaning related to masculinity throughout the years. Just like heels, suits had representations in mainstream culture associated with powerful and sophisticated men, such as actor Humphrey Bogart (see figure 10) and fictional spy James Bond (see figure 11). It does not matter the situation, Bond is never poorly dressed, always wearing a sharp suit. Most Hollywood representations of men in powerful position are wearing suits. A more contemporary example, in the series How I met your mother (2005-2014), the charactor Barney Stin-
Figure 11: Daniel Craig as James Bond - 007.
Figure 12: Neil Patrick Harris as Barney Stinson.
son is a powerful, rich man, that attracts women and he is always wearing suits. (see figure 12) The character has punch lines about it, stating that a suit is the thing that better suits a man and they should always wear it.
Figure 13: Yves Saint-Laurent’s ‘Le smoking’. (1965)
In the sixteenth century, there was no gender distinction between who wore heels, for example. Throughout history, many myths were created around heels and suits, and for many years, their meaning related to sophistication has remained. According to Svendsen (2006), the distinction between male and female fashion began to become blurry after Yves Saint-Laurent’s woman’s dinner jacket of 1965. (see figure 13) On the last few decades, with the appearance of several ideologies towards equality between the sexes and the fluidity of gender, fashion is becoming more and more gender fluid, and some designers have attempted to make gender-neutral clothes and the androgynous look arose, crossing gender. For example, women started gaining more space in society, especially at the workplace, which was accompanied by the incorporation “men’s clothes” into their style, using male symbols of sophistication. In addition, feminism has gained more strength and society is questioning the ‘normal’ assumption of female roles, what include following fashion standards. For some women, heels represent part of a ‘fashion dictatorship’, almost a symbol of women’s frailty and submission to beauty standards and to men. However, the myth of ‘normality’ for heels to be for women and suits for men has been being constructed for many years and for many people, it is the ‘normal’ assumption.
Conclusion It is possible to conclude that material culture reflects much about a certain community at a given time, because we express ourselves as part of society through our material production. The way we create and use of objects, especially clothes, create and/or reflect different cultures, weather consciously done or not. Clothes, acting as display of our idenity, plays an important part in analysing the world we live in. Fashion is around us, setting trends, rejecting conformity and focusing on innovation, by creating completely new ideas or recycling old ones. It is possible to analyse the objects around us using a semiotic approach, treating every object as sign, conveying many different meanings. Especially when it comes to fashion, it is almost impossible not to transmit any information through our clothes, because they act as a platform to showcase ourselves and every clothing item present in an outfit reveals a message, and also the combination of them. Getting dressed is an act filled with semiotic intention. Signs and their meaning depend on context, their construction throughout history, ‘normality’ patterns created around it and different worldviews, which means objects may be perceived differently by different cultures. The creation of myths makes us believe that certain things have a ‘natural’ interpretation attached to them, when actually they present their meaning because of historical convention. By analysing high heels and suits, symbols of elegance and sexuality for each specific gender, we can perceive that the relation between clothing and its meaning is arbitrary. There is no natural reason for clothes to be considered fancier than others or to be specific to a certain gender, as history show us that this was not always how they were used and it is all result of a social construction. Western society has made some progress in breaking those pre-established meanings, especially related to gender, but the myth of dressing up with high heels and suits still has a huge strength in fashion design. By understanding signs and analysing the objects surrounding us, we are not passive to the situation, we engage with reality more, interpreting what is around us and acknowledging more who we are by the things we use.
References Barthes, R. (1973) Mythologies, London: Paladin Barthes, R. (1983) The Fashion System, trans. Matthew Ward and Richard Howard, p.x. Benjamin, W. (2003) Selected Writings, vol. IV: 1938-1940, trans. Edmund Jephcott et. al., ed. Howard Eiland and Michael W. Jennings. Cambridge, MA. Bell, Q. (1992) On the Human Finery: The Classic Study of Fashion through the Ages. London: Allison and Busby. Bogost, I. (2012) Alien Phenomenology or what it’s like to be a thing, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press Küchler, S; Miller, D. (2005) Clothing as Material Culture. Berg. Danesi, M. (1999) Of Cigarettes, High Heels and other Interesting Things, Macmillan, Chapter 8 Dant, T. (1999) Material Culture in the Social World, Open University Press, Chapter, 5 Finn, A. L. (2014) Designing Fashion. Queensland University of Technology. Available at: http:// eprints.qut.edu.au/77850/1/Angela_Finn_Thesis.pdf [Accessed 30 April 2016] Freeman, H. (2015) Why do tall women wear high heels? The Guardian. Available at: http://www. theguardian.com/fashion/2015/jun/15/tall-women-high-heels-dilemmas-ask-hadley [Accessed 30 April 2016] Frykhamn, G. Fashion Grammar. Vestoj. Available at: http://vestoj.com/making-a-case-for-rereading-barthes/ [Accessed 30 April 2016] Kremer, William. (2013) Why did men stop wearing high heels? BBC. Available at: http://www. bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21151350 [Accessed 30 April 2016] Maki. (2009) Tees: The Art of the T-Shirt, London: Laurence King Publications Miller, L . (2015) Why I Refuse to Feel Guilty About Wearing (Only) High Heels. Popsugar. Available at: http://www.popsugar.co.uk/fashion/Why-I-Refuse-Feel-Guilty-About-Wearing-OnlyHigh-Heels-35459825 [Accessed 30 April 2016] Morgado, M. A. (2007) The Semiotics of Extraordinary Dress, A Structural Analysis and Interpretation of Hip-Hop Style. University of Hawai’i–Manoa. Available at: http://ctr.sagepub.com/content/25/2/131.full.pdf+html [Accessed 30 April 2016] Robinson, A. (2011) An A to Z of Theory Roland Barthes and Semiotics. Ceasefire. Available at: https://ceasefiremagazine.co.uk/in-theory-barthes-1/ [Accessed 30 April 2016] Svendsen, L. (2006) Fashion: A Philosophy, London: Reaktion
Images Figure 1: Seventies women’s wear. [photograph] Available at: https://www.reiss. com/explore/blog/throwback-thursday-the-seventies/ [Accessed 30 April 2016] Figure 2: Punk style. [photograph] Available at: https://www.thinglink.com/ scene/745704007418249216 [Accessed 30 April 2016] Figure 3: Vivienne Westwood. (1978) [photograph] Available at: http://limegreenbow.co.uk/not-just-a-label-vivienne-westwood/ [Accessed 30 April 2016] Figure 4: King Louis XIV of France. [eletronic image] Available at: http://www. todayifoundout.com/index.php/2013/06/high-heels-were-popular-among-menbefore-women/ [Accessed 30 April 2016] Figure 5: Puritans garment on seventeenth century. [eletronic image] Available at: https://br.pinterest.com/pin/488359153313817905/ [Accessed 30 April 2016] Figure 6: Scene from the animated movie Cinderela. (1950) [eletronic image] Available at: http://www.refinery29.com/louboutin-glass-slipper [Accessed 30 April 2016] Figure 7: Fetish footwear. [photograph] Available at: http://loveme-shoes-boots. co.uk/Fetish-Shoes-Boots/Fetish-Footwear/ [Accessed 30 April 2016] Figure 8: Photo of Marilyn Monroe while filming The Seven Year Itch. (1954) [photograph] Available at: https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marilyn_Monroe#/media/ File:Marilyn_Monroe_photo_pose_Seven_Year_Itch.jpg [Accessed 30 April 2016] Figure 9: Vintage pin-up. girl. (1940) [eletronic image] Available at: https://br.pinterest.com/pin/350154939753305005/ [Accessed 30 April 2016] Figure 10: Humphrey Bogart. [photograph] Available at: https://rebeccamcwattie. wordpress.com/tag/humphrey-bogart/ [Accessed 30 April 2016] Figure 11: Daniel Craig as James Bond - 007. [photograph] Available at: http:// www.thefashionisto.com/daniel-craig-suits-up-as-james-bond-in-spectre/ [Accessed 30 April 2016] Figure 12: Neil Patrick Harris as Barney Stinson. [eletronic image] Available at: http://wonderfulengineering.com/how-to-suit-up-like-barney-stinson-an-engineers-guide/ [Accessed 30 April 2016] Figure 13: Yves Saint-Laurent’s ‘Le smoking’. (1965) [photograph] Available at: http://www.hungertv.com/feature/top-ten-yves-saint-laurent-fashion-moments/ [Accessed 30 April 2016]