Wessie Ling, Mariella Lorusso and Simona Segre Reinach on their perceived realities of Global Fashion in 2019

(A multi - disciplinary perspective from anthropology, sociology, cultural and fashion theory)

'All the articles included in this issue show that fashion is a social force, constitutive of cultural meanings—although in different ways, not least because of the many ambivalences surrounding the display of fashion practices around the globe.

An issue on Global Fashion is very much needed given the crucial transition facing the disciplines of fashion in recent times, in the attempt to give an account of the increasing complexity of the material and symbolic flows of fashion. What is more, the interchanges of fashion imply an understanding of the circulation of technologies, objects, and ideas around fashion.

The debate about the global dimension of fashion is not at all new. It began with the dismantling of Western-centered theories about the Western origin of fashion and the (non) existence of fashion outside the Western world. In conjunction with the so-called “global turn” which has been unfolding since about 2000 in the wake of the rapid spread of connections across the world, a revision of the

“favourite child of capitalism,” as fashion was defined by economist and sociologist Werner Sombart in mid-nineteenth century, is already underway within the many disciplines concerned with fashion, including history, sociology, anthropology, and linguistics.

On cultural Appropriation...

The invention of haute couture in mid-19th-century Paris established the template of the modern woman, la Parisienne, and her male counterpart on the other side of the Channel, the bespoke British gentleman “dyed-in-the-wool.” These two sartorial icons, the British gentleman and the Parisian woman, despite the ethnic ambivalence inherent in the status of fashion, reinforced Eurocentric

ideologies, the patriarchal code, and narratives suggesting that the two main capitals, London and Paris (New York would soon join them), as the height of civilisation. 

By the end of the 20th century, when designers from outside the Western world became visible and legible as a result of a broader circulation of ideas—through the network of fashion schools—and in the areas of production, distribution, and exhibition—through the increasing outsourcing of the production of garments—the narratives of modernity vs. tradition and fashion vs. costume started to blur. The non-Western world ceased to resemble a catalogue of inspirations available to Western authors, instead becoming a cultural, political, and geographical site where designers could express new flows of creativity and new practices of production and consumption. 

The present-day debate on cultural appropriation in fashion, fraught with difficulties concerning the regulation of sources or inspirations, and the formulation of a list of who is granted protection and who is not (yet) when it comes to ownership and attribution, only proves that fashion discourse is still based

on a system of differences, an interplay between inclusion and exclusion, and that it is not possible to have absolute rules. It is, however, possible to be aware of the issues at stake.

Fashion lawyer and scholar Susan Scafidi, for her part, argues that cultural appropriation is not necessarily a negative thing; in her view, it can be positive, a borrowing that leads to interesting and inoffensive fusions. Cultural

appropriation comes from a place of too much love as opposed to racism, which comes from a place of hate and fear, and that infects fashion with terrible mistakes.

Having said this, the problem is only stated, not resolved. Dealing with global fashion means both dismantling the Eurocentric prejudice on fashion and, in parallel, giving up a too-radical approach based on the binary opposition West/Rest, by recognising multiple voices and multiple aims within a global landscape. It is relevant to underline that the “rest” in fashion is highly hierarchical and not an undifferentiated place, as theorised by Edward Said.

As Adam Geczy puts it, “The dichotomy of East-West is simplistic and to many objectionable, as changes, exchanges, re-namings and re-acculturations in this field are so diverse and paradoxical that they can scarcely fit within a Saidian framework.” (more from Geczy later!)

Anthropologists and fashion scholars working in different areas of the world have found that each nation, culture, and ethnic group is a case in itself, and every designer has a different sensibility toward the center-periphery relation, in terms of costumes, habits, and technologies of production.

On the ever present media filter..

Fashion, like consumer patterns and advertising, goes global through multi-local processes and situated practices. As anthropologist William Mazzarella has argued, the globalisation of markets occurs “in a piecemeal, contested and multifocal manner.” Global fashion refers to a multiplicity of situated practices and values connected by often asymmetrical networks and exchanges around the globe.

This is particularly pertinent to today’s fashion industry for it is marked by ambiguity and ambivalence. For instance, the attempt to embrace concepts such as inclusivity and sustainability complicates more the matter of fashion. Can the search for artisanal sustainable fashion in the non-Western world in some

cases be considered a new form of Orientalism when the individuality and creativity of the artisan are often kept out of visibility?

....so much to unpack there and bringing to light more complexities than I can handle! There should be a theory on that... there probably is.... 'complexity theory?'

I tried to summarise it but so much good stuff I couldn't leave it out!

The situation becomes incredibly complex when global contexts are considered; cultural appropriation is complex, gender is complex, hierarchy is complex, and fashion is complex....and I love it!

The combined perspectives of three different authors have been enlightening; the flow of ideas between them has added new ways of seeing familiar issues. Where does this leave me, and how does it relate to my own writing?

Thought spirals...

...firstly, reading this highlights concerns that are frequently raised in relation to media and marketing. (more on that later)

One example is the invisibility of the artist; something I have personally experienced when designing for brands rather than under my own name, which is, of course, how much of the fashion industry operates. This suggests that perhaps such invisibility is a shared experience for creatives across the world.

In relation to sustainability, its no secret that most designers say that when they entered the industry from higher education, they believed innovation was the key to success. Yet, the principles they were taught and practised in education often fail to be replicated in industry.

On ambiguity and ambivalence—while it is a generalisation, I have experienced both within the commercial fashion sphere and observed them creeping “up” the fashion hierarchy into luxury over a period of time. Perhaps this is due to creatives stepping off the treadmill and seeking new ways of applying their creativity.

These reflections point to a recurring tension between perceptions and industry realities. Whether in issues of authorship, sustainability, or creative autonomy, perhaps the same patterns are emerging across different levels of fashion and across the world (although more research needed here).

References:

Critical Studies in Global Fashion

Wessie Ling Mariella Lorusso Simona Segre Reinach

Published: December 23, 2019