Fashion and Identity - Historical Perspective - Essay Example

Fashion and Identity s History Department 6th March Introduction Fashion as a concept incorporating a wide range of aspects has been significant in the global society since the dawn of humanity. Throughout the history, fashion, including not only clothes, but also accessories, makeup, hairstyles etc., has been a hallmark of various time periods and a reflection of the society’s condition, values, psychological state and differentiation (similar to art). It is difficult to overestimate its importance in the modern world, as apparel and textile industry is a recognized leader in employment worldwide (Maynard, 2004, p.16). According to Pamela Church Gibson (2006, p.20), fashion of a certain society is capable of providing a comprehensive image of beliefs, behaviors, attitudes and ideas typical for it. There have never been a society that did not cover their bodies and didn’t adorn themselves. In the course of evolution, “fashion has been analyzed from various perspectives: as a symbolic system, an aesthetic form, a global industry, a media phenomenon, an individual indulgence or sign of group membership, and a technique of creating and re-creating a sense of self and persona” (Craik, 2009, p.284). Even in the primitive societies one can trace use of fashion: from animal skins to cover and protect the body from cold to the so called war paint, which used to be applied by men and eventually evolved into makeup. Church Gibson addresses fashion as a bearer of three main functions: protection of the body, fulfilling the demands for modesty (e.g. covering genitals) and, of course, adorning and embellishing. Each epoch gives birth to certain forms of clothing, which are intended for practical application and, at the same time, imply certain image bearing and conceptual functions. Dressing ourselves in a certain way and adorning ourselves with certain accessories, makeup or hairstyle, we virtually place ourselves into a certain cultural or social context. This means that fashion in its infinite many forms is far from being simple and autonomous. Instead, this phenomenon goes hand in hand with the global community along the path of its development, offering prompt responses to social conditions emerging in the society. Thereby, Charlotta Kratz and Bo Reiner (1998, p. 195) describe fashion as a the result of people’s desire to belong to a certain group and a “form of collective behavior”; according to their definition, fashion is a phenomenon involving meanings and communication of a certain message rather than just the way people dress themselves. Being the means of differentiation between social groups and demonstration of social status, fashion might emphasize social inequality, as people typically participate in fashion behavior to the extent of their opportunities and stimuli. However, this inequality can also be reduced, as nowadays, fashion is perceived as the hallmark of democratization of the society smoothing differences away. At the same time, the conditions imposed by the current stage of society’s development determine the role of fashion as of one of the core aspects in construction and realization. Choosing and combining certain colors, clothes, accessories etc., people make conscious or unconscious choice, identifying themselves with the certain segment of society and thus constructive their identity via the range of visual means. At the dawn of humanity, clothing was predetermined by the climate conditions the human lived in and thus could help other tribes identify his/her belonging to a certain group. Later, in the Middle Ages, the attire of a person clearly bespoke a person’s social status or title. Moreover, throughout the history, fashion manifested itself as a cultural phenomenon in different peculiar elements of national costumes; traditional dresses still can help one distinguish people belonging to the certain cultural segment, for instance, Japanese are known by their kimonos, some ingenious tribes living along the Amazon river are characterized by half-naked looks and disks in their lower lips (Church Gibson, 2006, p.20), Scottish men are recognized by their kilts and Hindu women traditionally wear saris. On the other hand, clothes and other elements constituting fashion can be a sign of one’s belonging to a certain religious group: women wearing hijabs and burquas are inevitably associated with Muslim culture and Islam as a religion. However, at the contemporary stage of development of the society, fashion isn’t a privilege of the rich or a merely practical method of protecting and covering the body; instead, it is the phenomenon accompanying social, political and cultural processes taking place in the world on everyday basis. Nowadays, many scholars agree upon the idea that “fashion provides individuals with a key means through which to manage their identities in the context of everyday life” (Bennett, 2005, p.98). This means that fashion is considered a universal means of identification, self-actualization and communication (inside groups and between them). To clarify this idea and evaluate its plausibility, the brief look at the history of fashion taken first. Historical perspective In the primitive societies and even in the ancient times, people used to vest themselves mainly for practical purposes, yet multiple evidences confirm their interest in embellishment and expression of their social status and wealth via “fashion” means. However, this concept wasn’t developed at that time, whereas in the 12th and 13th centuries, growth of cities in the Western Europe sparked development of urban culture and need for new means of communication (more superficial and short-term). Growing urban areas were the place, where manufacture developed and new cultural tendencies emerged. While city guild handicraft with separate sale-oriented workshops evolved into large manufactures, royal courts were the major source of fashion tendencies. However, fashion acquired real social significance only in the 19th century, especially after the range of bourgeois revolutions (e.g. in France) and industrial revolution. These events signified development of the ‘equal opportunity society’, for all old-time boundaries and prohibitions ceased to exist in it. Mass production enabled supplies of diverse and cheap consumer commodities, new ways of communication were invented: post, telegraph, railroads, newspapers, magazines, radio, television and – eventually – internet. With the rise of consumer society, or, to put it more precisely, rising volumes of consumption and production, fashion has acquired even more significance in our world, shifting the original purposes and functions of clothes and other elements of image. Nowadays, fashions is what makes us “discard a garment before it has outlived its usefulness” (Braham, 1997, p.121). However, it would be reasonable to mention that it is the 20th century, when fashion manifested itself in the full splendor all over the world and, particularly, in the Western society. Growing significance of mass media is commonly considered to be among the major triggers of consumption and the factor enhancing consuming potential of the society. Milestone and Meyer (2012, p. 152) cultivate the idea that mass media imply the messages and representations passively and uncritically perceived by the audience. Therefore, it is reasonable to state that mass media have been playing a great role in development of fashion as the method of identity formation and management. Identity and fashion Effect of fashion on identity development is difficult to overestimate in our society. The way a person looks is an immediate and most comprehensive signal to the surrounding people in conditions of globalization. Moreover, modern life involves a great number of tension and complex relationships between the members of society, and participating in fashion behavior enhances understanding of this complex system (Miles, 1998, p.91). At the current stage of development both of society and of fashion industry, clothes and other aspects of appearance help untangle the complex ties existing between various social groups. One of the most visible domains, where fashion acts as an identity-forming force, is gender relations. Initially, fashion was generally considered women’s prerogative, while men were considered fashionless. However, according to Craik, genders gradually have been growing more equal in this aspect of social life since the 19th century due to changes in perceptions of sexuality and gender roles (Craik, 1994, p.176). The real breakthrough occurred in distribution of gender roles and thus clothing elements occurred as one of suffragettes, Elizabeth Smith Miller, put trousers on and then one of the 20th century’s most formidable designers Yves Saint Laurent made trousers women’s favorite. Nowadays, everyday fashion plays a significant role in demonstration of an individual’s gender identity, moreover, it is even characterized as a “messenger from a sexist, celebrity-mad mass culture” (Wilson, 2010, p.40). Modern society is characterized by much tolerance and liberalism in terms of gender self-determination: instead of “classical” feminine females and masculine males, there’s a great variety of identities including those based on nontraditional sexual orientation. In this aspect, fashion is an everyday means of expression for, for example, transgender society members. Once such person wants to communicate his/her identity to the community or to other transgenders, it is enough just to select the proper outfit. On the other hand, fashion can be used to conceal these peculiarities from the society in case a person does not want others to see his/her real identity. Furthermore, genders can communicate their characteristics through their style and regulate the extent, to which their identity is revealed to others. Particularly, women can use clothes, makeup and hairstyle to demonstrate their identity to men: feminists, for instance, are likely to wear more functional models of clothes (Negrin, 2008, p.33). Fashion can be applied by people to identify themselves with various subcultural movements in their everyday life: punks, Goths, teddy boys, skinheads, emokids, the Beatniks, hipsters and many others. Via “either adorning or modifying the body” (Barnard, 2014, p.117), people can emphasize their belonging to a certain cultural group based on ideology, historical attachment or music affiliation. We could recollect one of the recent subcultural movements, emokids, whose hallmarks were black and pink colors in clothing, predominantly black messy hair with a long fringe, strident dark eye makeup and lots of body modification. The fashion of dressing in this case wasn’t a part of couture fashion, instead, this style was applied in everyday life – this was street style – to show the person’s identity to other people. Moreover, subcultural movements tend to resort to body modification as the way of identity formation: various types of piercing, tattoo, microdermal implants, unusual hair-dyes and so on. Carrying a certain social message from the individual to the outer world, fashion can help express ideology, perception of life or protests, as it is mostly typical in young people: a good example is the way longing for freedom in totalitarian Soviet society gave rise to the movement of the stilyagi (a term close to Teds). Thus, for subcultural movements are especially typical for young people, it is reasonable to talk about fashion as the means of identity development in youth. Message carried by image of young people in their everyday life – especially of those belonging to certain subcultures – is often viewed as a sign of resistance and protest (Barker, 2000). Willing for self-actualization tends to drive young people to rebellious styles, unusual or loud clothes or extreme hairstyles: at that age, people typically try to communicate their message to the world, “I am different, I want you all to see it”. On the other hand, in the modern consumer society, the tendency for mass popularization and hence consumption of various commodities has been developing. Global apparel, accessories and even gadget manufacturers artificially spark interest in certain segments of their assortment via intense promo campaigns; and it is often use who turn out to be targeted by them. Regarding this aspect, fashion in young people’s perspective seems to be the expression of identity and a mark of belonging to a prestigious and fashionable segment of society. As an instance, one could recall the hysteria that sparked around iPhones – these devices have become an integral part of a thriving and stylish person. Going around the city with iPhone, a person communicates his/her identity (or, at least, the one he/she dons) to the surrounding people: “I am successful”. Despite the fact that our society has entered the epoch of equal opportunities long ago, there’s still much inequality and social differentiation, first of all, in social status. Therefore, it is fair to speak about fashion as a daily market of people’s social status, financial state and level of income. Great number of fashion houses, designers and apparel brands enables people belonging to different social classes to find clothing and accessories they can afford. However, these delusively equal opportunities imply the idea of profound differentiation between those who purchase elements of their outfits in mass-market stores like Bershka, H&M, New Look and others and those who can afford expensive couture clothes, shoes and accessories. The same tendency can be observed in terms of hairstyles, makeup etc.: women of higher income class can afford buying cosmetics of premium quality. Finally, probably, the most trivial domain of expressing one’s identity through clothes and image is professional sphere. Being engaged in a certain sphere or doing some king of job presupposes complying with the requirements the position imposes. Professional qualification as an important building brick of identity can be communicated through image or way of dressing. Office workers and people occupying positions in administration or management are often recognized by certain uniform: this might be a formal-style suite or at least an elegant combination of a shirt and trousers. Meanwhile, doctors are known by their white uniform and working-class people are typically characterized by casual style in clothes. Conclusion History provides us a multifaceted picture of transformations that experienced by representations of fashion and particularly clothes in the course of development. Starting with the primitive societies, fashion has been performing three main functions including an entirely practical one. However, social, economic and cultural progress has changed the face of fashion. In the modern consumer society with the enormously wide choice of opportunities, an individual is free to choose any suitable way of self-expression and identity formation. Diverse constituents of the image and fashion are combined and modified in various ways in order to create and communicate the message to the surrounding people and signalize about the individual’s belonging to a certain social group. As it is seen from the examples, fashion indeed contributes much to identity management and expression, being not the mere way of dressing, but a visible and easily decoded way of communication. Although predetermined by different backgrounds, expression of an identity through fashion and image is an immense phenomenon of our daily life: regardless of the concrete purpose of choosing a certain style, fashion serves to signalize about a character of a personality, being similar to a book cover. In the society where connections between people are rather transient, image, clothes, hairstyle and makeup are able to provide the primary information about a person necessary for superficial short-term interaction. References BARKER, C. (2000) Cultural Studies: Theory and Practice. London: Sage. BARNARD, M. (2014) Fashion Theory: An Introduction. London: Routledge. BENNETT, A. (2005) Culture and Everyday Life. London: Sage. BRAHAM, P. (1997) ‘Fashion: unpacking cultural production’. In DU GAY, P. (Ed.) Production of Culture/Cultures of Production. London: Sage. CRAIK, J. (1994) The Face of Fashion. London: Routledge. CRAIK, J. (2009) Fashion: the Key Concepts. Oxford: Berg. JACKSON, T. & SHAW, J. (eds.) (2006) The Fashion Handbook. London: Routledge. KRATZ, C. & REIMER, B. (1998) ‘Fashion in the Face of Postmodernity’. In BERGER, A.A. (Ed.) The Postmodern presence: Readings on postmodernism in American Culture and Society. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press. MAYNARD, M. (2004) Dress and Globalization. Manchester: Manchester University Press. MILES, S. (1998) Consumerism as a Way of Life. London: Sage. MILESTONE, K. & MEYER, A. (2012) Gender and Popular Culture. Cambridge: Polity. NEGRIN, L. (2008) Appearance and Identity: Fashioning the Body in Postmodernity. Cowden: Palgrave McMillan. WILSON, E. (2010) ‘The Ethics of Fashion’. In RIELLO, G. & McNEILL, P. (eds.) The Fashion History Reader: Global Perspectives. London: Routledge. Read More