Date: 02-12-2019
Response to Li Edelkoort’s “Anti-Fashion” Manifesto
After watching Edelkoort’s brief yet passionate speech, I did a little research on her and found on Wikipedia that “The British design magazine i-D listed her among the world’s 40 most important designers and Time magazine named her one of the 25 most influential fashion experts of our day”. If someone this big in the fashion industry is calling it “unfashionable”, it gets me thinking that maybe rather than just bluffing, she has a point.
As a college student who seldom spends time thinking about what to wear, I don’t know much about fashion, which, however, makes me strongly agree with Edelkoort that fashion design schools should shed more light on designing everyday clothes, and try to change their students’ mindset that only if they design catwalk clothes can they make it in the industry. If students are all obsessed with fashion shows and focus solely on runway model clothes, who is going to design the type of clothes people actually wear every day? The more unbalanced it is, the wider the gap will be – a gap that already exists between fashion and the style of everyday clothing. This could also connect to the first point that Edelkoort makes in her speech, that in the fashion industry, top designers are worshiped as individuals, but not as representatives who should be grateful to the huge amount of people behind them that make their design possible.
This has got me thinking: is fashion a business, or is it a form of art? Should it be available for everyone, or is it never supposed to be affordable and easily reachable? I believe that fashion must be somewhere in between a business and an art form, just like how Edelkoort herself uses the film to illustrate that credits should be given to all participants in fashion industry – the film is exactly something that combines both art and business. If fashion is an art form, then designers are artists, which makes it more than reasonable for them to be recognized as individuals: we all know the one famous Steven Spielberg, who film school students look to as a role model, but nobody ever complains about the way he is worshiped. Then why is it “unfashionable” for top designers to be appreciated individually? On the other hand, if students are supposed to view fashion more as a business, then they may be able to see the significance of designing everyday clothing, but what are the consequences? Is it a good thing if it makes fashion less exclusive? Will it blur the line between what we see on TV and what we wear every day? This could be some food for thought.
Response to Kate Fletcher’s “Slow Fashion: An Invitation for Systems Change”
Just like Fletcher states in the abstract: “In some circles, ‘fast’ has become a proxy for a type of fashion that epitomizes ideas of unsustainability”. Fast food for instance, is frequently heard to be criticized by the media for its mass-production and unhealthy amount of fat. Similarly, the concept of “fast fashion” is used to describe the way that brands put out new products in a huge amount at a ridiculous pace. Moreover, Fletcher blames “fast fashion” for doing damage to the environment and causing workers to be treated badly. Consequently, she is trying to advocate this kind of “slow fashion” where the entire process of clothes making is slowed down, and thus resources will be saved; sustainability is maintained.
On all of the above, I would say I agree with her. Her opinion reminds me of a traditional Chinese saying: “新三年，旧三年，缝缝补补又三年”. Literally it means that a piece of clothing is new for the first three years, after which it gets old but is still wearable for another three years; if you fix its holes and give it patches, it can even last three more years. So in total, you can keep a piece of clothing for at least nine years! Well, the saying is basically just promoting a sense of frugality, but it reflects what fashion used to be like. Clothes lasted longer in the past than they do now – and by “last”, I don’t mean clothes remaining wearable, but clothes remaining liked by their owner. People want to look new every day with fresh clothes on, and brands want to sell more, resulting in resources going to waste – all the energy that was spent in the process of one piece of clothing being manufactured.
However, people may not need such a full wardrobe, but it is highly impossible to stop them from having one. Now that society has evolved, changes in the industry and business models are inevitable. How is it practical to promote “slow fashion”? I would say, we can’t really slow it down. Nonetheless, it is possible to revolutionize the fashion industry with more environmentally friendly approaches. Technology involved could be one feasible way, as Fletcher suggests, if brands utilize it to decrease production to the level actually demanded. Clothes could be made more flexible: if there is more than just one way to wear a T-shirt, would its owner be more willing to wear it? Besides, customers should be encouraged to try on different matches within a limited amount of clothing, because there are lots of possibilities if clothes are matched differently. Rather than purchasing new clothes, try to make the old ones new. This is something that designers and manufacturers should work on: how to make clothes more recyclable, and maybe even more flexible (provide novelty), so that consumers will voluntarily pursue a new kind of “slow fashion”.