Monday 26 October 2009

Is Fashion Fascism?



Fashion: formerly a luxury that only the very wealthy could afford, this high culture indulgence has become accessible to all budgets over the last half a century with the development of low-cost stores such Primark, making it an affordable pastime and way of life for anyone. Evidently there is quite some difference between the Couture gracing last month’s London Fashion Week runway and Asda’s new Autumn/Winter line, however the bridging of the high and low culture gap in society is resulting in ever-growing opportunities for the fashion industry to influence women across the market with dictatorial vigour.

Today’s society is undeniably driven by neoliberal capitalism; we are seduced into buying clothes that we have little or no need for through advertising, countless magazines decreeing this week’s ‘must have items,’ paper features and celebrity endorsements and become a slave to consumerism where, as Tyler Durden from Fight Club claims, ‘the things you own end up owning you.’ Whilst, as previously stated, anyone can follow fashion in today’s consumerist culture, this materialistic society in which we live is dictated by the fashion designers, steered by the wealthy, and emulated by the remaining population.

Fashion can be seen as an aspiration; an escape through which consumers hope to present a grander and more hopeful version of themselves by imitating celebrities and people who have a higher social status and a more desirable life. How you dress and present yourself affects how people to think of you, and is important both in terms of employment and in attracting a future partner. However, this consumerist culture has put such an emphasis upon one’s presentation that dressing well can be considered almost as a career (think Victoria Beckham), and judging fashion has become almost a sport, with best and worst dressed lists gracing the first few pages of most weekly magazines, often with public slating for bad dress sense.

Anyone who remembers Bjork’s public execution for her crimes against fashion when she wore a swan dress to the Oscars a few years back must be able to understand just how fashion is like fascism. Rather than be open minded and perceive her creative and quirky fashion sense as a personal expression, she was ostracized; the media calling the ‘fashion police’ on her from publications aplenty.




While it appears that fashion is predominantly led by and intended for women who stereotypically worship it and follow it religiously, it could be suggested that perhaps fashion is actually our enemy. Indeed, the term ‘fashion victim’ is more correct than we first thought in regards to how influential and powerful it is at brainwashing much of the general public and especially the target demographic. We seem to willingly purchase magazines in which we are mostly greeted with a series of images of stick thin women wearing unaffordable clothes, with recycled yet inviting diets and tips to lose weight in order to replicate these very women.

Stepping back and regarding this objectively, it seems near impossible that the fashion industry are able to manipulate us in such a manner. This main controversy surrounding fashion is, of course, regarding size. With the infamous size zero debate still rife, it has been nice to see the increasing media awareness of their influence over the rise in anorexia in today’s western society. However for every magazine, advert (such as for Dove) and catwalk show that is all for celebrating women’s natural sizes, there are hundreds of media pressures persuading women to starve themselves to fit into an agreed conformity.

But what is the reason for this development in fashion that has only been around for the past few decades? Long gone seem the days when curves were seen as sexy in the industry, and yet ask around any group of males and the general consensus seems to suggest that they still much prefer curves than a woman whose form is pre-pubescent and undernourished. So why is it that the industry seems to be dominated by boy-like figures with no breasts or hips to speak of? The only solution that readily pops into my head is an idea I examined in some detail whilst writing my undergraduate dissertation: that of the importance of androgyny in today’s pop culture.

There are many theories and ideas that serve to pinpoint the factors that differentiate men and women. Some theorists believe it is related to the phallus or lack of, whilst others suggest that gender is actually just a performance. Either way, one wonders whether perhaps designers are forcing women to be androgynous in order to fit into the stereotypical of ‘human;’ the first form we recognize from a young age in this male dominated, patriarchal society. By stripping female models of their sexuality, it presents them as a blank canvas; a sexless object which nevertheless has more male than female characteristics. This allows the art that is fashion to be presented and appreciated purely for its form, with less distraction of sexuality. This blank canvas is ideal for the projecting of fashion propaganda; a new trouser line, a different waist than was in last season or this year’s new skirt length that is enforced by these fascist designers and publicized by the media and PRs.




This brings me to start questioning my future career move. I have read many comparisons between propaganda and public relations – so are we faciliting and further compounding this fascism of forced skinniness and ‘agreed’ conformity? Will my integrity be somewhat tried and tested if future campaigns or jobs could be the promoting of something that is ultimately damaging society and the image of my own sex? Or am I over analyzing an industry that, much though I would like to blame the strangling constraints of aforementioned male-dominated society, is mainly driven by women who dress for other women, as opposed to for men. If this were not the case, then the fewer clothes the better, but we are all aware of how baffled men seem to be by shoulder pads, Ugg boots and wet-look leggings!

Ultimately, designers dictate the uniforms that we adopt, and it is fashion victims who blindly follow in the hope to become more desirable/accepted/higher up in the social hierarchy. It is rare to find someone who possesses true style, be it rebelling from the decreed ‘this season’s look’ or merely just knowing what suits their body shape and sticking to it. Whilst it takes a confident woman to try to pull off the more daring looks of each new season of fashion, it takes a much braver one to defy the often repressive nature of the industry and have to withstand the barrage of attacks from all angles from the formidable and unforgiving media and society – their sheep - of today. 


4 comments:

  1. You talk of the shift away from curvy models to the stick thin ones of today but is there any specific watershed moment in the past that caused this change? For example was twiggy the first stick thin supermodel, did she act as a catalyst for this 'movement'?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Fashion can bring up so many interesting debates. Over the summer I planned on writing some articles looking at the differences in magazines such as 'Elle', 'Vogue' 'Harper's Bazaar'etc and comparing them with magazines with a mostly non-white readership in mind like 'Asaian'and 'Black Hair and Beauty'. There are always loads of adverts for fake tanning sprays in the mainstream magazines, and in magazines targetting non-whites there are always ads for skin lighteners. Funny that.

    And it's interesting to looks at the models themselves. In the non-white magazines the models always conform to the western ideal of beauty: even western features rather than the prominent nose and lips, long wavy hair, and caramel coloured skin, despite the variation of looks in black and Asian women.

    Just thought I'd add my tuppence worth...

    ReplyDelete
  3. @or106 - Indeed Twiggy was one of the first models who championed the skinny look; called 'Twigs' after her gangly, skinny legs, she was certainly different to the other, curvier models of her time. Her boyish, mod look contrasted the likes of ultra-feminine Bridget Bardot and Marylin Monroe. But can she be blamed for the size zero culture of today? I can't help feeling that it more more of a gradual evolution that may have subconsciously be related to her, but generally focused on competition in the industry. Many clothes DO look better on skinner frames, and it is possible that one designer favoured the skinny look, and other models were forced to slim down further to fit to designers' ideas of beauty. However it is nice to see that size zero models are being banished from many catwalks, and with the help of campaigns such as Dove's, healthy-looking women may soon be back in fashion.

    @Lady Almaz - It would certainly be interesting to read any articles you write about this topic. Why is it that the media is always pushing for people to modify themselves to look different? It's completely normal for us to open western magazines such as 'Heat' and see whose been tangoed and who has overdone it with the mahogany shades. And who can forget the L'oreal adverts where Beyonce is whitened up dramatically to match the blonde shade of her hair?

    ReplyDelete