Week 1: Response to Fletcher & Edelkoort – Samanta Shi

Response to “Slow Fashion: An Invitation for Systems Change” by Kate Fletcher

Fletcher brings up a fundamental issue with the economics of mass production that I unequivocally agree with: the greed for business growth impacts our treatment of the environment, workers, and quality.  In order to affect change, both consumers and producers have a responsibility to question the current status quo and adjust their behavior, goals, and mindsets. To embrace sustainability, fashion businesses should look to the farmers’ markets and artisanal ice cream shops of the world for how to embrace slowness, localness, quality, and even diversity.  Farmers markets sell different goods depending on the season, and almost always run out of the “good stuff” in the first hour — the type of goods may very well also vary from week to week. And, we know that consumers do not mind paying the premium for the organic, local quality. By reconsidering mass production and choosing slow fashion, fashion businesses can change the wasteful cycle that they are currently stuck in.

Additionally, fashion companies should utilize technology to more accurately predict demand to avoid unnecessary excess in production. Perhaps they could even re-think the entire shopping experience. What if – instead of instantly buying a garment that almost fits – a consumer walks into the store, browses the garments, then gets their measurements taken, and finally requests a custom-made piece that is produced locally and delivered within the month. This, of course, requires consumers to truly embrace slow fashion and change their expectation of taking the piece home right away, but if we can collectively change the nature of demand, then businesses will have to follow suit.

Response to  â€śAnti-Fashion: A Manifesto for the Next Decade” by Li Edelkoort

Edelkoort discusses various areas of the fashion industry that we need to re-think, from advertising, retailing, branding, to the interactivity of the shopping experience and claims that “we need to be more interactive in the way we display things” [Edelkoort], which I fully agree with.  The biggest challenge with changing the display boils down to how humans interact with brands offline. Where do they go? How do they expect to interact with a piece of clothing before and after they buy it? If we are to change the display and shopping experience, then we will have to change the mentality of instant gratification and the cost expectations that the consumer has.  Perhaps the piece is not cheaper than a sandwich, or perhaps you buy the piece today and receive it in 3-4 weeks.  Brands like Zara and H&M will eventually be challenged by smaller, local boutiques who can offer more unique and sustainable options. However, in order to compete with the larger brands, industry leaders will have to agree on a regulated price point, as Edelkoort points out.

Edelkoort really struck me when she said “sometimes when you buy a t-shirt you kill somebody … it’s better to buy fur”, which emphasizes the problematic state of current manufacturing. This also reminded me of a story my mother (who used to trade textiles based out of Hong Kong) once told me about factories and coloring: “one time, a factory got a turquoise blue wrong by the slightest shade, and they had to reproduce 1000s of t-shirts”. On top of that, the color of the shirts that were wasted, was particularly harmful to the environment.  So, by moving away from mass production, into smaller, local businesses, perhaps we can avoid these logistical nightmares and make better quality pieces that not only look good but also feel good physically and mentally.

I also particularly enjoyed Edelkoort’s comment on the new man and how fashion needs to give more attention to creating pieces that embrace the more sensitive, elegant, and less macho man.  In many ways, the fashion industry has lagged behind, with fin-tech, health-tech, and even ed-tech gaining traction to improve and innovate, where is the fashion-tech?

Leave a Reply