Resistance

by Nora Daly

Unlike subcultures who use the fashion system to express difference, fashion resistance is people or groups who resist taking part in the fashion system for various reasons

Barnard: 7. Fred Davis, “Anti Fashion: The Vicissitudes of Negation”

Fred Davis was emeritus professor of sociology at the University of San Diego. This article is an excerpt from his book Fashion, Culture and Identity, published in 1992.¹ The article comes from a contemporary, academic context; nevertheless it is structured in a fashion that makes it easy to digest. In the introductory paragraph, Davis identifies six anti fashion movements, which he proceeds to discuss individually in the remainder of the body of the essay.

The first anti fashion movement Davis calls “utilitarian outrage.” This perspective criticizes fashion on a moral basis for its “wastefulness, frivolity, impracticality, and vanity.” Davis contends that the viewpoint can be traced far back in history, citing the bible as an early source of the anti fashion sentiment. In the nineteenth and twentieth centuries economic and social theorists are continued proponents of “utilitarian outrage.” However, Davis mentions that people outside of the intellectual elite also experience “utilitarian outrage,” and criticize fashion for its instability and excess. Davis also points out that established designers sometimes champion “utilitarian outrage.” He cites as examples the early work of Chanel, and Liz Claiborne.

Exponents of “utilitarian outrage” advocate a simple mode of dress based on function rather than aesthetic. In extreme cases they may subscribe to “modular dressing,” an aesthetic of “loose-fitting, single colored garments,” usually unisex.

Davis refers to the second anti fashion movement as “health and fitness naturalism.” He emphasizes this movement’s roots in the nineteenth century dress reform movement, which was a reaction against restrictive Victorian styles, in particular the corset. Davis cites as the modern day equivalent the health and fitness craze that began in the late seventies and continues to this day. There are two options of dress in for “health and fitness naturalists,” the first “loose, baggy, and under-designed” (sweatpants for example), the second skintight, Lycra stylings such as bike shorts or leotards. He points out the quick acceptance of these rebellious forms into the fashion mainstream, in particular the absorption of Spandex by fashion in the eighties.

Leisure, leisure everywhere. While it began apart from fashion it has become common to see people wear athletic clothing in public, negating all the fashion codes for appropriateness.

The next movement is “feminist protest.” The objections of this group to the fashion system are fairly well known- they feel that the majority of styles (created by men) are restrictive to women and attempt to maintain the status quo by relegating them to traditional, subservient roles (such as “domestic/housewife” and “sex object”). Davis notes that within the fairly large category of “feminist protest” there are several sub-divides. There are those who believe women should dress in a masculine fashion, thus closing the gender gap. There are others who feel that society must produce a new form of dress, free from gender bias, in order to move forward.

The fourth movement Davis called “conservative skepticism.” This category was particularly interesting in that it did not stem from any particular intellectual or social movement, but instead from “millions upon millions of women” who object to new fashions on the ground that they are unflattering, or do not reflect the individual consumer’s personality. Interestingly this group seems to wield the most power, “killing off the new fashion altogether or causing it to be so modified as to greatly neutralize its symbolic intent and visual impact.” Also interesting is the fact that the members of this anti fashion group are not inherently anti fashion, the normally do follow fashion, which is why undesirable new styles are a threat to them.

Conservative skeptics are also those in general who doubt or do not take part in fashion. While women with occasional skepticism about an aspect of fashion can influence the market, conservative skeptics such as critics negate fashion in society and themselves dress in consistent plain clothing.

The last two anti fashion movements Davis discusses are closely linked. “Minority group disidentification” and “counterculture insult.” The former phenomena stems from cultural subgroups attempting to distinguish themselves through fashion. As examples Davis cites religious sects (i.e. Hassidic Jews or the Amish) and racial minorities (i.e. African Americans). The primary difference between the two forms of “minority group disidentification” is that when employed by religious sects different dress serves to keep mainstream society out, while the styles of racial minorities often “float upwards” helping to bridge the gap between societies.

Clothing is not only away to indicate group association but it is also an extension of values which is why faith based clothing stands apart from the fashion system

In 1943 in a series of riots between sailors and Latinos, the Latino dress of the Zoot Suit made them an easy target and more notable to media

The last movement, “counterculture insult,” Davis argues is the most easily integrated with mainstream fashion despite being the most directly anti fashion of all the movements discussed. Integration occurs for a variety of reasons. Firstly, the proponents of “counterculture insult” are usually middle-class teenagers, thus they are members of the very group they rebel against (Davis cites the hippies and the punks). Younger designers seeking to find their niche in fashion often latch on to these counter culture fashions as a way to set themselves apart and give themselves an edge. Also, fashion has a historical link to counterculture, since the earliest designers collaborated with avant-garde artists at the dawn of the twentieth century.

Davis article applies in particular to our course because it discusses a classic power struggle, that between fashion and anti fashion. In a close reading of Davis’ text it is interesting to note that each of the anti fashion movements he discusses attempt to seize power away from fashion, except for the “conservative skeptics.” These women adhere willingly to the power of the fashion system, and yet they are the only group truly successful in wresting power from it. While the other groups become integrated into the fashion mainstream in one way or another, this group alone is able to defy and change edicts of fashion by subverting trends.

The afro once a minority expression has not only been accepted into the fashion landscape but has been recently elevated to a high position of beauty and style, above in Vogue Paris Nov 2009 by Mario Testino

Article: Brian Hilton, Chong Ju Choi, Stephen Chen, “The Ethics of Counterfeiting in the Fashion Industry.” Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 55, No. 4 (Dec. 2004), pp. 345-354

All three of the authors of this article are on staff at the Australian National University. Brian Hilton works for the National Graduate School of Business. Chong Ju Choi is the dean of the University’s National Graduate School of Management, and Stephen Chen is the senior lecturer at that same school. In the article, the authors discuss the ethics of counterfeiting in the context of high fashion and luxury goods. The first distinguish between three types of goods, then between four ethical perspectives, and finally between four types of counterfeit products. Afterwards they analyze the four types of counterfeits based on the four ethical perspectives raised earlier in the article.

To begin with, the three types of goods are: “credence goods,” “experience goods” and “search goods.” The value of a “search good” is apparent before purchase. That of the “experience good” becomes apparent after purchase and sometimes even after a period of use. It is extremely difficult ever to determine the value of “credence goods.” The authors specify that while counterfeits may fall under any one of these three categories, authentic high fashion holds the mystical value of a “credence good.”

Next, the four ethical perspective by which the authors analyze counterfeit products: The first is “utilitarianism,” which dictates that if intellectual property goes unprotected there will be no grounds for innovation on behalf of the producer and society as a whole will suffer. The second, “distributive justice,” argues that the benefits you reap from a product should be equal to the amount of effort you put into it. By this argument, designers deserve the full profits of their designs on the grounds that they are responsible for the creation of the intellectual property on which counterfeits are based. Third is the “moral rights of man perspective,” which states that “there are certain basic human rights that need to be respected at all costs.” If you view intellectual property as one of these rights, this perspective also becomes an argument against counterfeiting. Finally, “ethical relativism,” which “bases decisions on what others are doing under similar circumstances.” This perspective offers the least grounds for defending counterfeiting, for (as is discussed in the article’s introduction) while most countries have copyright and intellectual property right laws, they are for the most part rarely and loosely enforced.

The authors then introduce the four types of counterfeits: “vanity fakes,” “overruns,” “condoned copies,” and those fakes produced by the same house whose high fashion product they imitate. The authors proceed to examine the four types of fakes based on the four ethical perspectives, and largely find within each perspective grounds for the defense of the counterfeiter.

“Vanity fakes,” have both a low use value and a low mystic value. However, as this low value is apparent to the consumer before they purchase the product. On the grounds of “moral rights” producers of these “vanity fakes,” usually working out of low-income countries, have the right to make their living. Also, the consumer targeted by the product, most likely in a similar low-income situation, has a right to purchase the product that brings them some joy. On “utilitarian” grounds, the cheap copies can encourage designer innovation, as the designer must produce new designs more rapidly to distinguish their name and brand from the cheap, counterfeit styles as they become readily available. Also, the authors make the argument that the prospective consumer of the “vanity fake” would never have the buying power to purchase the genuine luxury product; therefore no one is harmed in this equation.

“Overruns” are counterfeits created by the owners of factories that produce genuine designer products. The counterfeits are forged from the left over material, they are of good quality, and often are identical to the designer’s product save a name or logo. The authors defend this kind of counterfeiting on the grounds that many designers produce their luxury products in sweatshops, through producing “overrun” counterfeits, workers are able to supplement meager wages, which would otherwise constitute only one percent of the cost of the designer’s product. Clearly, this defense works from the perspective of “moral rights.” It also applies to a “utilitarian perspective,” without the additional income of counterfeiting workers would not receive a benefit from the product that equaled their share of the labor. Finally, from the “relativistic” perspective, the majority of societies condemn sweatshops as unethical, so this small revenge could be seen as fair.

UNESCO's campaign to expose counterfeiting in connection to the other crimes and abuse of the black market

Third, “condoned copies,” in which legitimized fashion houses produce less expensive copies of haute couture designs (the authors cite as examples Victor Costa and Jack Mulqueen) is defended on “relativistic” grounds. Designers themselves often agree to the use of their designs, and one could argue the entire industry of fashion is based on copying, therefore this form of counterfeiting could be deemed acceptable.

“Self-Copies,” are designers’ reproductions of their own work. It is difficult to turn a profit in the luxury good industry; therefore many designers rely on supplementary ready-to-wear lines to keep their businesses afloat. However, if not handled carefully, increased production can flood the market with your product, thus diminishing its mystic value (the authors use as an example Gucci in the 1980s).

The main ethical dilemma around “self-copies” and other counterfeits of a high quality, equal to that of the luxury good they imitate is that it confuses the value attributed to the original product. Designers must rely solely on mystic value, brands and logos, to justify the higher cost of their product when counterfeiters begin producing products of equally quality at a lower cost.

At the conclusion of the article counterfeiting remains an ethical “gray area,” where equal arguments can be made for and against the practice.

Subcultural Power

by Emily Kearns

Dick Hebdige “Style”

Dick Hebdige is a British media theorist and sociologist who is most well known for his studies of subcultures. He wrote a book on the subject called Subculture: The Meaning of Style, which was published in 1979. He is currently a professor of film, media studies, and art at the University of California, Santa Barbara. These excerpts of Hebdige’s writings were written in 1979.

In this selection, Hebdige looks at style and subcultures, specifically the style of punks. He begins broadly, by defining the meaning of style in relation to subcultures. Subcultural style is very intentional and thought out. Additionally, members of subcultures dress themselves in a way that sends a message. Their ensembles are “obviously fabricated,” “display their own codes,” and “go against the grain of mainstream culture.” The goal of the style of subcultures is to communicate a difference and a group identity.

Next, Hebdige looks at “Style as bricolage” and begins the section by noting that, aside from the fact that many members of subculture are working class, they are also “cultures of conspicuous consumption.” To further explain this idea he illustrates the concept of bricolage and offers the following definition of the term: “the means by which the non-literate, non-technical mind of so-called primitive man responds to the world around him” (258). Bricoleurs change and subvert the meanings of signs that normally have a certain meaning.

Sex Pistols

In the next excerpt, Hebdige closely focuses on the punk subculture. The punks chose ordinary objects and made them a part of their style, giving these objects new meaning in the process. For example, they removed safety pins from their context as useful and utility and chose to wear them instead as facial ornaments through the cheeks or lips. The main goal of the punks was to go against convention and to make a statement. Both men and women wore makeup, contrary to standard practice, and parts of school uniforms were “symbolically defiled” (260).

Vivienne Westwood

Hebdige also explains how the punk subculture went beyond just clothing and wardrobe. It went against every “relevant discourse” at the time (260). The dancing style of the punks was deliberately different from every other relevant style. Dances like the robot were popular among the subculture because they were very far from mainstream dance moves. They were a reaction to what was mainstream and popular at the time. Similarly, punk music was very different from typical pop and rock music at the time.

In the last section, the author examines how although the punk culture signified chaos, it was actually extremely orderly. He explains this paradox with the concept of homology and uses the skinhead subculture as an example. Finally, he talks about the significance of the swastika as a symbol in the punk subculture. Punks did not wear the symbol because they necessarily agreed with the beliefs behind the symbol. They wore it because as one punk said, “punks just like to be hated.”

Appropriation is the gesture of taking an object and reusing it, as in the swastika or safety pin. Homology is when a group appropriates and makes sense of those aspects as one group, such skinheads who repeat the style among one another and in then end look conforming. We have also seen that almost all previously rebellious signs have lost potency and are used freely among youth and alternative subcultures in mass.

Sophie Woodward “The Myth of Street Style”

Sophie Woodward is currently a research fellow and lecturer at Nottingham Trent University in the School of Art and Design. She is also a faculty member in the sociology department at the University of Manchester. Woodward’s research interests include feminist theory, material culture, fashion and consumption. Her article “The Myth of Street Style” was published in Fashion Theory in March 2009.

In her article “The Myth of Street Style,” Woodward examines the mythologization of street style and the relationship between street style and many parts of fashion industry, including fashion magazines and high street retailers. Through her research, she explains the myth of street style, its emergence, and examines the relationship between the myth of street style and actual street style. She begins her article by talking about Andrew Hill, who wanders around the streets of London and observes what people are wearing. He expects to find people in quirky outfits that express their individualism. However, he finds that's people dress “boringly” (84). This anecdote sets the framework for Woodward’s further investigation into street style. The “quirkiness and sartorial expressiveness” that Hill expected to find are major elements of the myth of street style (84).

The article is based on Fashionmap, which is a research project at Nottingham Trent University. The study is based on two key components: the documentation of fashions and styles at high street stores and photographs of people taken on the streets or in bars. These photographs were collected over a four year period in Nottingham, England and tend to feature young people between the ages of 18-26. By comparing these photographs, researchers can determine any “common trends” and “potential areas of innovation” (86).

Next, the author explains the origins of the myth of street style. It began in the 1940s with Polhemus’ observation of defined style groupings, starting with the “Zooties” in Harlem. Groups like this, as well as other subcultures like punks, dressed as “a reaction against established mainstream fashion design” (87). Although these distinct style groupings are less present today, they are still an important part of the history of street style in that being “alternative” is a major element of street style. In Woodward’s research project, nearly 78% of the people interviewed pointed out that part of their outfit was from an “alternative source” such as a second-hand store.

Terry Jones created street photos for i-D magazine and later Fruits magazine developed in Japan

Woodward also explains how the idea of street style trickles down into the mainstream, thus becoming “sanitized” (88). She gives the example of the magazines The Face and i-D, which claimed to offer authenticity, but photograph ordinary people. The styling of these shoots soon appeared in mainstream fashion magazines like Vogue and Elle. However, in these magazines the styles appeared on models wearing a “fantasized imitation of The Real Thing” (88). The depiction of street style in magazines has continued to evolve and today the street style pages feature images of people on the street. She then introduces the idea that current street style is paradoxical, as it claims to show something other than the mainstream, but it features people wearing lots of garments from high street stores.

The high street stores play an important role in street style according to Woodward. These stores, like Zara, Topshop, and H&M, are particularly present in the UK. They are able to provide their customers with constantly changing goods as opposed to “predetermined seasonal collections” (90). This has led to the term “fast fashion.” Although there is a rapid turnover in stock at these stores, Woodward’s research shows that the styles change subtly over time and some styles keep reappearing. In high street store windows and in fashion magazines, fashion is presented to consumers as looks and every season there are distinct new trends. However, if trends in fashion are considered through what people actually wear, then it is evident that these shifts occur much more gradually. This is a result of people buying new pieces but then appropriating them into their current wardrobe. In summary, Woodward argues that although fashion is supposedly faster than ever, fashions actually evolve very gradually, so perhaps “fast fashion” is not an appropriate term.

The fashion industry absorbs styles and street style has been used as a basis for editorials and campaigns above model Agnes Dyne and below Juergen Teller

Woodward then focuses on observations made at a bar in Nottingham. All of the people at this bar have a very clear “look.” These looks are identifiable at this particular bar, which is less mainstream than many others. Although the people at this bar are more alternative, Woodward notices that many of the women are wearing items that were from high street stores, carefully mixed with clothing from vintage or alternative sources. She reaches the conclusion that many people dislike high street stores in theory because the clothes are mass-produced, not because they dislike the styles of the clothing.

Therefore, an important element of street style is where specific elements of an outfit are sourced from and how they are combined with other articles of clothing. Many of the people interviewed for the research project expressed a desire to appear “different.” As a result of the street style pages in magazines, the current idea of street style is “now characterized by the ordinary person that manages to set themselves slightly apart” (92). Young people then internalize this idea and, even if their outfit is from the high street, talk about their love of vintage clothing and the importance of wearing secondhand items with high street items.

In her conclusion, Woodward summarizes the article by arguing that street style should not be looked at as those possessing “quirky individuality,” but as “the intersection of different arenas” of fashion (99). She ends by noting that, despite the omnipresence of the term fast fashion, the rate of change in fashion today is really no faster than it was in past centuries.

The images above and below are from Scott Schuman’s street style blog The Sartorialist. While Schuman is known for shooting people on the streets, these images were styled and shot specifically to appear in a magazine editorial (British Elle 2007). According to Woodward, editorials like this further propagate the “myth of street style.”

Purchase Power

by Rahkua Verderosa-Ishakarah

Swiss artist Sylvie Fleury, installation of shopping bags, 1990

"Magic Flute" - Theodor Adorno
Theodor Ludwig Wiesengrun (later adopting maternal surname Adorno) (September 11, 1903-August 6, 1969) was one of the most important philosophical and social critics in Post-World-War II Germany. He examined Western philosophical tradition and radically critiqued modern Western society. Adorno belongs to the Frankfort School (a term delineated for several different institutions based in or around Frankfurt, Germany) of thinkers who re-engaged Marxist philosophy as it applied to the critique of modern capitalism. He focused on the application of these critiques to an "exchange society" in which fetishized commodity production is central to Western society's cultural aesthetic and value system. His theories are largely based on those of philosophers like Georg Hegel, Karl Marx, Immanuel Kant, and Sigmund Freud.

"Life does not live."

Theodor Adorno approaches the subject of disenchanting and enchanting illusions of beauty, power, and art through a sociological, psychological, cultural, and theoretical lens that focuses on the fetishistic/magical endowment of power and its captivity of certain objects and consequently (as a product of the general predisposition) luxury. He intends to dispel the notion that enlightenment, through its invocation of reason, dissolves the beauty of art and objects, instead positing that it simultaneously dissolves and assembles the qualities of the beauty aesthetic.

Adorno also strives to question the failure to disenfranchise commodity and its spellbinding mysticism through realization of its existence. "Contemplation, as a residue of fetishist worship, is at the same time a stage in overcoming it." Adorno briefly recalls the origins of gold and precious stones as once magical entities with the power to subjugate nature through its illusory omnipotence. "The radiance they reflect was thought their own essence" rather than a mere encapsulation and emittance of an outer light source. Thus the stones were feared and revered as inherently powerful. Even when enlightenment expelled these illusions of the stones' self-generated light, the magic of the object was no less potent. Giving the objects such careful thought and reverie imbued them with residual interest. In other words, in order to become fixated with an object, one must give it credence; this contemplation can breed suspicion and spur discovery, allowing for the mystical, uncanny elements to be uncovered and overcome; and the residual effects of such deep consideration transforms the motivation behind the reverie but makes it no less powerful.

Versace gearshift adornment

Through his assumption of capitalist society's gullibility and easy enchantment with the culture industry, Adorno critically debases the validity of actualized enlightenment. He implies that humanity is trapped within the bounds of spectacled illusion and enchantment and only entangle oneself differently through the freeing from one ideology into another of the same object. Thus, synthesis of a new thought as a product of consideration of a thesis an its antithesis. To an extent, accepting this sort of defeatist reasoning further entangles and perpetuates the delusion of a non-existent autonomy, further infatuating society with the culture it is being accused of over-valuing; yet at the same time we can be pulled into a deeper condition of human ontological consideration and possibly break free of the fetishizing society that Adorno describes.

The fashion victim is held captive by brand and trend.

The fact that this contemplation/enlightnment/fetishistic commodicizing is applicabe to our current (as Adorno calls it) "exchange society" (where the exchange, mythic, and quantitative value of products/people/ideology have exceeded their qualitative "use" value in both importance and consideration) is apparent in every aspect of the socio-cultural construct. While Adorno provides example through the once feared now coveted jewel, the same concept can be found in the enlightenment of the superficiality of the celebrity image - which is still highly pedestaled; or of commodified brand power - which is still an object of desire despite realization that its inherent value and its cultural value (which has more credence in capitalist society) are separate entities. Adorno calls attention to this recycling phenomenon of interest and bestowed the responsibility of deciding whether and how to escape on the society in question.

"Magic Flute" was originally published in Adorno's Minima Moralia: Reflections from Damaged Life in 1951 by Suhrkamp Verlag, Frankfurt am Main and translated in 1974 by New Left Books. It was written while the author was exiled in America during World War II as a gift to friend/collaborator Max Horkheimer. The book draws its name from one of Aristotle's works on ethics, Magna Moralia and centers around Adorno's idea that a "good", "honest" life if no longer possible because of the inhuman/inhumane industrial society in which we live.

Key Terms: Enlightenment; Kantian Theory; contemplation; magic/power/illusion/myth; domination; commodity

"Great Aspirations: Hip Hop and Fashion Dress for Excess and Success" - Emil Wilbekin

Emil Wilbekin, born in Cincinnati, Ohio in 1968 is the former Editor-in-Chief for Vibe Magazine (Quincy Jones' creation for urban culture and fashion with an emphasis on uban music). He was educated at Hampton University and Columbia University's Graduate School of Journalism in New York City. Wilbekin is now the vice president of brand development for designer label Marc Ecko as well as a member of the editorial board for the brand's magazine, Complex. He was also named as one of the top 100 influential homosexual people of 2002 by Out magazine.

Tupac in two styles, Karl Kani left and Versace suit right

"Soon, hip hop would start to change the sartorial landscape of Seventh Avenue, Paris, and Milan."

Emil Wilbekin takes a journalistic approach to an examination of urban culture's permeation into the high fashion lexicon (and vice-versa). He demonstrates, through a brief yet expansive overview of hip-hop history, how the culture has been integrated into haute couture brands and fashion in general and how many of the "hip-hop heads" have embraced the practice to the extent of creating their own clothing lines. "Beyond the blatant courting by both sides, fashion now takes aesthetic direction from hip hop cuture more than ever." Wilbekin takes the position that at the center of it all is capitalistic desire. The hip hop moguls represent the image of popular culture and thus prove to be profitable marketing venues. At the same time, the designer brands like Versace, Chanel, Armani, Louis Vuitton, Gucci, etc. represent an image of success and hold mystical/glamourous value for hip hop culture who want to emulate these same values and do so through the promotion of these brands in music, clothing, advertisement. The mutualistic symbiosis is guided by the ultimate desire of capitalist societies: money. As Wilbekin states in the last line of the article, "It's the American Way".

Jay Z in street wear and power suit

While Wilbekin takes for granted the reader's knowledge of many of the hip hop names references, he does very clearly elucidate this symbiotic relationship between urban culture and high fashion and challenges the perception of the merger (or hip-hop influence solely) as a short-lived phenomenon. "Cultural critics (the same ones who said that hop hop was a trend that would never live more than five years) and fashion editors (the same ones who once said, "A Vogue girl would never wear a ski cap") declared that the baggy pants look would be a passing phase. Fast forward to the present, and see how much bigger skate kids' pants have gotten, how all rappers and R&B artists wear size 36 waist jeans, and how wide legs have once again become the cool silhouette in high fashion. Like hip hop itself, wide-leg pants are now simply part of the style lexicon." It seems obvious that the longevity of the collaboration will continue because of the high profitability of the trend.

WuWear, ALife

Urban brands connected to Hip Hop

"As rap diversified, it was clear that for hip hop heads, clothes did define the man." Though the massive impression that urban culture has made on the aesthetic of the fashion industry is proof that the man also defines the clothes. The desire for the fashionable image (which is a desire to be associated with richness, privelege, and high society) is advertised in many rap lyrics (Tupac/"Him 'Em Up" - Now it's all about Versace/You copied my style/Five shots couldn't drop me/I took it and smiled; Young Jeezy/"Hard" (Rihanna)- "See my Louis tux, Louis flag, Louis frames, Louis belt What that make me Louis mane?) making the brands more popular and the associations with success and glamour (of both the artist and the brand) stronger.

Lil Kim by David LaChapelle

Not only are the hip hop moguls finding collaborations with established high fashion brands a profitable market, but also the creation of their own labels and aesthetic images. "Naughty by Nature launched Naughty Gear...Def Jam's Russell Simmons started PhatFarm...Puffy...debuted his Sean John line in 1998". This continues to occur (with artists like Beyonce Knowles launching Dereon and House of Dereon) today and just the people behind the established brands of Gucci Calvin, Klein, Chanel, etc. these artists are extending the brand's name to cover more than just the clothese and shoes, but also perfumes and jewelry, bags, sports gear, key chains, and a range of other products (including even liquor - P Diddy and Ciroc).

Above Baby Phat backed by Russel Simmons and Hip Hop influenced Chanel in 1991 below.

"As we approach the millennium, what we're experiencing is a global remix of individual urban ideas combined with the marketing of big business."

"Great Aspirations: Hip Hop, and Fashion Dress for Excess and Succes" was first published in 1999 by Three Rivers Press, a division of Random House, Inc in a chronological examination of hip-hop - The Vibe History of Hip Hop by the editors of Vibe Magazine.

Key Terms: hip-hop (fashion/brand); urban market; ghetto fabulous

"Ethical Fashion: Myth or Future Trend?" - Catrin Joergens
Catrin Joergens is the Global Product Manager of Men's Apparel at Addidas Originals in Nürnberg Area, Germany where she is responsible for creating globally relevant products and concepts and men's apparel. She was educated at The University of Manchester and Hochshule Niederrhein.

What makes something ethical or sustainable? Many factors from production to consumption as well as their lasting influence and consequences.

It is first important to understand what "ethical fashion" really means and what societal implications it may have. Ethical fashion, which Joergen refers to as "a contemporary phenomenon in Western societies", basically describes the practice of designing, producing, selling, and purchasing in an ethics conscious manner - taking into consideration the working conditions under which the clothes were made, animal welfare, the sustainability, or ability to recycle the material and its affect on the environment, etc.

Catrin Joergens approached the concern for ethical fashion's existence, success probability, and consumer purchase influence from a purely research/emperical standpoint. She is trying to determine whether or not ethics have a significant, if any, effect on consumers' decision to purchase clothing. This article basically demonstrates these findings - consumer's attitudes and beliefs about ethical issues as they relate to the fashion industry and subsequent purchase behavior - in an attempt to give insight and understanding of ethical fashion and its consumption and possibly spread interest/action in the topic.

The key question that Joergens is attacking is whether consumers are willing to "sacrifice their personal needs to support ethically produced clothing" and what marketing potential does ethical clothing have. Through a series of focus groups and questionnaires administered to UK and German 18-26 year-olds, Joergens provided first-hand accounts of how ethical fashion is viewed to the relevant consumer. This ag e group is employed because of the relevance of the "ethical fashion phenomenon" to this particular consumer base.

Recycled dresses

Joergens predicts that "young consumers will be the next generation of ethical consumers...who could really make a difference by forcing retailers and brands to take action", yet the results of her study show that many of the consumers are not very concerned with ethical values insofar as it affects their purchasing. Although some are interested in animal welfare, environmental preservation, and safe/fair working conditions, the price and style/comfort of the clothes seem to take precedence over the decision on whether or not to buy. The "culture industry's" preoccupation with glamour and image in Western capitalistic society rings true in this battle for ethical consideration as many consumers choose brand over conscience. "The image and brand name influence me to buy the product more than the ethical awareness or social responsibility of the company": this seems to be the sentiment of the majority of the participants in the focus groups who admit that it is just cheaper, m
ore stylish, and easier to shop for looks rather than ethics. "GM: 'I want to look good and make an impression on people'".

Joergens points to the fact that the delineations are not clear enough between the companies producing ethical fashion and the ones that are not. Many of the participants showed concern over the role the media played, targeting certain companies for being unethical, while ignoring the overarching problem as a whole. "CD: I don't think it makes a difference if I boycott Nike or Gap. Doing so I would just be following what the media says." "DR: At the end it is just a shifting of buying to another unethically acting company". Thus the industry and issue as a whole needs be examined in order to shift the dynamic not from one store to another, but from one major form of producing and purchasing to the other.

Furthermore, the concern for ethical issues is also undermined by the low accessibility and awareness of the products. "One of the main difficulties they perceive is the limited offer of ethical products as well as the price of these." Many of the participants imply (some even explicitly state) that they might be more inclined to consider the ethical issues if there were a wider range of products to choose from, things that would personally fit their own styles. Also, if there was some clear demarcation of which products are being generated ethically rather than continuing to follow the flawed system that exists today where many company stake claim to ethicism for the public image but don't actually practice. Thus, it seems clear that more information is needed not only about the products but about the phenomenon in general in order for people to be able to make informed decisions. The ethical fashion companies need to communicate this more effectively and the consumers need to put more pressure on the other companies and the media in order for us to move toward a more ethic-conscious society of buyers.

Noir, Danish Eco-Fashion label, London Fashion Week, 2009

"Ethical Fashion: Myth or Future Trend" was published in 2006 by Emerald Group Publishing Limited in the Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management. Vol. 10, Issue 3 in Manchester, England. The research/focus groups were conducted in the UK and Germany.

Key Terms: purchase power/behavior; trend; ethical fashion; customer satisfaction; ethical issues

"We adress... ethical or ecological... questions in every other part of our lives except fashion. Mind-sets are changing, though, which is encouraging." -Stella McCartney ("What is Ethical Fashion" www.vam.ac.uk. Victoria and Albert Museum.)