The Enduring Power of Red: Finding the Nexus of Psychology and Fashion

Across disparate cultural contexts and temporal distributions, the color red has maintained a position of pivotal importance. Red has become emblematic of cultural norms and served as a visual foundation to social movements. Depending on where one is from, interpretations of this color may di er. In Western countries, red’s meaning has become multiple: love and hate, Cupid and Erida. Valor. Power. Sex. One thing remains obvious; red exerts an insurmountably powerful in uence on our collective psyche, and is intimately connected to our emotionality. Furthermore, fashion and visual presentation are crucial to perception. e fashion industry garners billions of dollars in revenue yearly, all to aid in the curation of the “self”. Color remains a critical element of fashion, and plays a major role in setting the tone of a piece of clothing, or collection. us, understanding the psychological mechanisms behind reactions to the color red can help inform our continued obsession with the iconic red looks highlighted in this piece. Although the psychology of reactions to color is still a highly researched topic, a host of studies have demonstrated the unique psychological and physiological e ects of the color red. Red is highlighted to invoke the strongest emotional reaction of any color. Due to its wavelength, it tends to be one of the most easily visible colors on the spectrum, according to Verywell Mind. Perhaps we humans are attuned to the frequency of red because of its unique relevance to us; a er all, blood is red! Other studies have even demonstrated that exposure to the color red can elevate blood pressure, increase heart rate, and increase respiration rate. It comes as no surprise, therefore, that the fashion industry has harnessed this knowledge. Red can help facilitate the creation of a memorable emotion-inducing fashion statement.

Red has dominated women’s fashion, and has served as the foundation for some of the most iconic looks in fashion history. e e ect of each red out t has proven unique to both the individual, and the particular style of their out t. is is demonstrated in the image of actress Marylin Monroe, seen sporting a stunning red dress from her movie ‘Gentlemen Prefer Blondes’, with a cinched waisted and low cut bosom. e adjoining image shows the cover of ‘Ebony’ Magazine, where actress and singer Abbey Lincoln is seen wearing the same dress. Monroe — known for her acting, looks, and style — was highly sexualized by the media. Red was an extension of Monroe’s identity; it served to seal her boldness, femininity, and power. It was no surprise, therefore, that when Lincoln wore her dress, she was suddenly subjected to the same overt sexualization that had characterized Monroe’s career. Lincoln described the waves made in her career as a result of this particular fashion choice as ‘insincere’, and quickly resorted to burning the dress to ensure that she’d never wear it again.

‘Pretty Woman’, a film which made waves with its ‘ragsto-riches’ narrative starring Julia Roberts as Vivian Ward, seems like the perfect film for a ‘red’ moment, with its obvious referenc es to power and beauty. The film covered themes of beauty, sex, power, and class, implicating the male lead played by Richard Gere (Edward Lewis) as the archaic ‘male savior’ to Vivian’s life of prostitution. Indeed, one of the film’s most iconic looks was Vivi an’s red dress, worn the evening of her and Edward’s first date. The stunning dress served as a visual cue to the audience that Vivian’s lifestyle was about to change. Its bold nature is not only memorable, but also flashy, and contrasts with the elegant design of dress and gloves. The dress embodied a pivotal moment in the film, where Vivian begins to solidify her relationship to Edward, and begins to actualize her new life as a woman with newfound privilege.

One more contemporary example of the influential nature of the color red was seen not long ago, on the SuperBowl stage. Unsurprisingly, Rihanna’s iconic red look stood at the forefront of cultural zeitgeist, and attracted commentary from thousands upon thousands of people. Her outfit, which consisted of Loewe jumpsuit, a trailing Alaia coat, and a pair of MM6 Maison Margiela x Solomon sneakers was both comfortable and chic — a testament to her unique ability to redefine maternity wear as comfortable and stylish. Her SuperBowl performance, which marked her first performance in six years, was the quintessential expression of Rihanna’s sartorial expertise. Singlehandedly revealing her new pregnancy while embarking on a musical journey that covered the span of her top hits, Rihanna’s SuperBowl performance was anything but forgettable. To seal the deal, of course, her red outfit left a lasting impression, one reminiscent of Rihanna’s femininity, power, and newfound motherhood.

From Rihanna’s SuperBowl outfit, to Lincoln and Monroe’s red dress, to Robert’s iconic look in ‘Pretty Woman’, the color red has maintained its dominance in women’s fashion. Red’s ability to spark an immediate and noticeable psychological reaction makes red outfits that much more powerful. Red’s demonstrably strong influence can be harnessed to convey a variety of messages. Whether that power is used to convey sex, power, or femininity, red has a timeless quality that will always remain relevant in the world of fashion and media.

F A S H I O N

by Mary Kurbanov

Where ChatGPT threatens to displace writers in their craft, A.I. (artificial intelligence) has been clawing after artists’ works for years now. Many have had enough. In a New Yorker piece released earlier this year, a group of artists — Kelly McKernan, Sarah Andersen, and Karla Oritz — claimed that there is a fight to be had, evidenced by their class-action lawsuit against A.I. imagery generators Midjourney, Stable Diffusion, and Dream Up.

Truly nefarious or just unexpected, A.I. art poses a host of ethical questions about its use. Art thievery is one of them, as stated before. A.I. imagery generation necessitates an algorithm to “learn” a specific aesthetic or artistic genre by analyzing thousands upon thousands of images, according to American Scientist. Creatives fear that their work will be taken from their sites and filtered into these algorithms, their labor becoming a pawn in the crude generation of shallow images.

Often, A.I. “artists” argue that their process of appropriation is not novel. Roman sculptors fashioned their pieces based around the ideas of ancient Greeks. Even now, sampling songs is deemed as an art form, where decades old tunes can be reimagined to fit modern tastes. But A.I. art is decidedly different for reasons of scale and human involvement.

For one, A.I. artwork generation and creation of aesthetics depends on hundreds of thousands of images and the hours of labor which go along with it. Where one artist may take inspiration from the work of another, the infringement of A.I. is almost infinite in comparison. And since users from all over the world can use A.I. image generators with ease, tracking which works have been stolen from who gets more and more arduous.

In a similar vein, A.I. art is merely a regurgitation — a rudimentary blending — of styles that creatives may have spent decades perfecting and defining. The process of A.I. art rejects soul at its essence; it contains no remolding or adaptation, no real new thought, no human depth and originality. Where people will create regardless of each other, A.I. art’s existence relies on humanity to survive. In each rapidly produced reimagining of a realistic Bart Simpson or a pair of futuristic twins, there can never be the heart of an artist. There will only be the curiosity and desires of an experimenter.

<a name=”www”></a>

<table width=”600% border=20”_align= center=”_9></a> ,tr> <td height=”78” width=”300” center=”_9></a> width=”300”

Perhaps the most pernicious aspect of A.I. art is its grotesque extension of female objectification, often to lengths that are disturbing to gaze upon. One scroll through the #aiart hashtag says enough. In between images of magical beasts and renaissance-esque cartoons are depictions of women in the uncanny valley with body proportions aimed to ignite sexual desires.

Just as fanservice in anime favors enormous breasts over female intelligence and character arcs, A.I. art demeans womanhood by reifying the same sexist ideals permeating the digital world in video games, social media, and T.V. Women exist only for pleasure, and A.I. art perpetuates this idea — now, at a much, much wider scale.

It is vital here to emphasize how such technologies are not created in a vacuum. It is people who create the algorithms A.I. art is based on. It is people who choose the thousands of images that refine the algorithm and help it “learn” a particular aesthetic. And it is people who engage in art thievery, who create unrecognizable visions of the “perfect” woman, and who use these digital tools to reify sexism instead of finding avenues for empowerment. Yes, there is an endless list of programmers, designers, and consumers who may continue to degrade the creative space if nothing changes.

This is not to say that misogyny and art have not been in- tertwined for some time, well before the advent of A.I. technologies. Great artists like Georgia O’keeffe and Lauren Greenfield had to fight for their place in the male dominated world of artistry, thus amplifying female voices over sexist ideations. This is also not to say that such individuals will fall out of favor with the public and will lose their ability to influence others with their works. However, with A.I. art — through its blending of works and its perpetuation of sexism — significant, feminist pieces may get lost in the background in the search for the feminine “ideal”. Audiences may turn their eyes to instant gratification, like the overexaggerated female form, rather than human-driven art.

Since it is people who are producing such ethical conundrums in need of analysis, it must be the same people who paint a brighter picture of the future. After all, it doesn’t seem that A.I. art is going anywhere anytime soon. A.I. advocates must listen closely to the struggles of current creatives, so the market may be habitable for both parties. They must introduce some restrictions on the kind of pieces that can be produced, or at least take a firm stance against exploitative, misogynistic art.

The path ahead looks bleak. Artists are still vying to be heard by the general public and the image generators taking advantage of their hard work. Regardless of what the outcome may be, it is imperative that A.I. artists keep real creators in mind when trying to make A.I. art mainstream. After all, art is nothing without the hard work of people expressing themselves and helping others do the same.