Fashion as Material Cultur - Essay Example

Fashion as Material Culture Essay Number of Degree Word Count:3,050 Introduction It is important to stress that clothing is a specifically important object in the study of cultural norms. Clothing is a medium through which cultural norms and categories are translated and expressed. Since it works in such ways, it is also an important channel of communication. Clothing can also be utilised to signal and even to carry out the shift from one cultural stage to another that takes place in the rite of passage (McCracken, 1990). It is also feasible to embark on the study of history and evolution by means of clothing. Kuper (1973 as cited in Bruzzi & Gibson, 2013) has studied the value of clothing in Southeast Africa during its colonial time. Among other things, she has shown clothing as a tool of both the West’s hegemonic power and the aboriginal efforts to oppose this power. This essay discusses the different kinds of value associated with clothing as it progresses through the various stages of its existence. Clothing fulfils its dualistic value differently. One of its main expressions as an agent and depiction of change is the concept of fashion. Clothing is at times a substantiation of change and at times a beginning of change. It is at times a way of establishing the conditions and nature of political dispute and at times a way of making an agreement. It is at times a tool of attempted dominance and at times an arsenal of opposition and disapproval. In this dualistic value, clothing functions as a communicative tool by which social change is considered, suggested, instigated, implemented, and rejected (Bruzzi & Gibson, 2013). Its analysis enables one to see the communicative part of material culture in its most revolutionary creative form. Basically, earlier research on clothing discloses the aspects of culture that can be explored in the clothing’s material culture. Cultural norms, forms, ideals, mechanisms, history, everyday communication, and social distance are all available to the scholar of material culture by means of research on clothing. Theories of Changes in Clothing and Fashion The theory of the evolution of fashion appears distinct in the 21st century than in previous periods, yet so as to make sense of its current expression it may be useful to have a wide-ranging discussion of the history of the topic. Just like what Appadurai (1986) argued, “The commodity is not one kind of thing rather than another, but one phase in the life of some things” (p. 17). Similarly, Marilyn DeLong explained that “fashion involves, change, novelty, and the context of time, place and wearer” (Lynch & Strauss, 2007, p. 8). Numerous of the early psychological theories that shed light on the evolution of clothing placed emphasis on the capacity of fashion to fulfil two groups of conflicting motivations. First, clothing both hides the body, fulfilling the need for decorum; and exposes the body, fulfilling the need for sexual presentation. Second, dressing to fulfil fashion standards of a group gratifies the desire to belong or become part of a clique, but fashion also gratifies the desire to be unique and exceptional as an individual (Miller, 1998). Fashion evolves, as explained by these theories, in order to keep on generating sexual curiosity and as a way of continuously satisfying the desire for both group membership and personal expression (Melchior & Svensson, 2014). On the other hand, some scholars analysed evolution in fashion using Darwinian principles with the fast transformations in the clothing of American and European women in comparison to non-Western clothing. The plainer clothing of Euro-American men were viewed as more developed or sophisticated, hence suggestive of a higher ranking along the hierarchy of human development (Wilson, 1987). With the introduction of cultural relativism, and emphasis on cultural value in the 20th century, anthropological theories started to interpret changes in fashion as suggestive of cultural clash and cultural change—issues that are popular in the 21st century (Dant, 1999). Meanwhile, sociological theories place emphasis on basic collective behaviour, and the influence of continuously evolving fashion on group belongingness and more significantly power and standing. Vital to the sociological model is the effort to understand the movement of fashion, with focus on the power dynamics and relations motivating the collective behaviour (Dieffenbacher, 2013). Previous theories used social class as the leading type of status differentiation, with fashion flowing down from the rich to the poor motivated by imitation of the less privileged groups, called ‘chase’; and constant desire for division among the upper classes or elites, called ‘flight’ (Lynch & Strauss, 2007, p. 14). Surfacing in the latter part of the 20th century, identity-based models place emphasis on collective reactions to socially uncertain identities. In the 1990s, the interdisciplinary performance studies started to provide explanations of changes in fashion in the 21st century. Academics started to claim that both street and stage performances were creating new changes in fashion and identities (Bruzzi & Gibson, 2013). Everyday performances involve those people are subjected to everyday as a kind of popular culture, and ultimately subcultural performances that have a wider transformational influence. On the other hand, staged performances involve music, film, theatre, and runway shows. This model places emphasis on the transformative ability of clothing to re-express identity, and re-create the limitations of cultural classifications like ethnicity, class, and gender (Melchior & Svensson, 2014). Rene Konig (1973 as cited in Lynch & Strauss, 2007) interweaved the strands of various psychology sub-disciplines in his seminal examination of fashion, but his central thesis hinged on the psychological theory of motivation. He believed that clothing behaviour, which was based on motivations like openness to new things and curiosity, was a central form of individual psychological process. He stated that individuals were always driven by innovation, newness, and novelty. Hence, it is a naturally embedded human tendency to be drawn to the new, to accept it, and also to advance in time to something fresher after only a short duration of constancy. Using research findings on perception, Konig stressed that sight was the main sense used by human beings (McCracken, 1990). Hence it is not surprising that human beings react with such desire to the visual stimulations produced by new clothing styles. He afterwards associated the visual pull of fashion with motivational psychology by arguing that fashion-driven behaviour was rooted in human sexuality (Lynch & Strauss, 2007). As explained by Konig, the motivation to see and be seen was a primitive, natural sexual act needed to attract the opposite sex and proliferate. Hence, Konig claims that “the power that drives man to examine anything new… is rooted in the greatest depths of his existence” (Lynch & Strauss, 2007, p. 15). Basically, Konig argues that the human tendency to look for or desire new clothing styles is a component of basic human psychology. Therefore, from a psychological point of view, it is not surprising that fashion behaviour is quite pervasive among human beings. In another study, conducted by Young (1956 as cited in Bruzzi & Gibson, 2013), it was hypothesised there were three broad primary psychological drives for clothing, with two of them openly associated with fashion. Young explained that the core reason for clothing was to cover and protect the body; yet, since such behaviour merely fulfils a physical necessity it is not associated with fashion theory. Another psychological reason for clothing concerned modesty. Modesty is defined as “a social and moral construction that defines how we appropriately present ourselves, in terms of a combination of body exposure and covering” (Lynch & Strauss, 2007, p. 15). The ultimate clothing motivation theory refers to clothing as a process for vanity-oriented presentation, which is related to sexual expression and sensual nature of clothing. What people regard as modest against sensual are profoundly interweaved and differs over time with the commands of fashion, hence the last two motivations team up to push fashion onward (Esposito, 2011). The continuously evolving forms of presentation emerging over time in fashion indicate that motivation for clothing as a new form of presentation usually motivates fashion behaviour. Meanwhile, Flugel (1930 as cited in Lynch & Strauss, 2007) believed that within the rapid evolution of fashion was the psychological clash between the human drive to cover and protect the body, and the need to present oneself, which formed uncertainty within the self about clothing styles. According to him “dress attempts to balance two contradictory aims: it emphasises our attractions and at the same time supports our modesty” (Lynch & Strauss, 2007, p. 84). In addition, he argued that behind the psychological clashes of beautification against modesty was the ‘common root of the sex urge’ (Bruzzi & Gibson, 2013, p. 92), which is a leading frequent issue in the psychological analysis of fashion and clothing. Steele (1985 as cited in Bruzzi & Gibson, 2013) called this similar topic as the ‘lust-shame theory’ of the beginning and use of clothing. Evolution of fashion arises from this clash as the self continuously re-creates itself, in an unending effort to reunite the two opposing drives. Evolution of the Value of Clothing Once the industrial revolution ended, life became different, or, more specifically, the seasonal demands of agriculture became irrelevant; the machine dominated. The customary festivals and holidays remained in people’s minds, yet even these were slowly supplanted by a stricter division between family life, work, and leisure (Dieffenbacher, 2013). Consumption begun to gain widespread attention; economic growth was the foundation for a drastic transformation in everyday experience, values, and traditions. From this day on, fashion itself was to become a channel for the representation and expression of modern values. There was an evolution from exhibition/display to identity (Esposito, 2011). In the 19th century, clothing became one of the most complex sources of identity that flourished with the success of the industrial culture. Individual took part in a practice of self-labelling and self-proclamation, as clothing became the medium for the presentation of the distinctive individual identity. Simultaneously, women and men were pushed backwards into new kinds of obscurity, trapped in the detached gender division more rigidly than in the past (Melchior & Svensson, 2014). However, even though obscurity was vital to urban life, clothing faintly disrupted and challenged it. Clothing could be a presentation or disguise, or both. The inverse part to the domain of display was the relapse into anonymity. Fashion had never been completely exclusive for the wealthy (Dant, 1999). Fashion eventually belonged to popular consciousness. It also became the object of popular culture due to the mass production of clothing. Fashionable clothing as part of the popular culture and leisure has been shaped by the other leisure choices of the ‘machine’ era—television, film, music, and sport, all of which created new forms of clothing (Wilson, 1987). Photography, advertising, and journalism have served as the mass communication centres linking fashion to popular culture. Since the latter part of the 19th century, image and word have progressively spread fashion. Portraits of desire are always publicised; gradually it has been the image and the object that the person has bought. The teenage girl of the 20th century who purchased an inexpensive Gibson Girl shirt did not only purchase a shirt; she purchased a symbol of success, elegance, and freedom (Bruzzi & Gibson, 2013). Gibson Girl, 20th century *image taken from http://www.pinterest.com/pin/28991991326810482/ Fashion is a supernatural structure, and what people see as they browse fashion magazines is the appearance or ‘the look’. Women’s magazines, similar to advertising, have shifted from the informative to the fanciful. At first their goal was educational, but what people witness nowadays in both advertising and journalism is the illusion of a lifestyle and identity, and what people get involved in is not simply the quite simple practice of actual imitation anymore, but a less aware show of identity (Esposito, 2011). It was primarily photography that produced a new form of seeing and looking and a new form of female beauty in the 20th century. The romance between fashion and black and white photography is the modernist consciousness (Dieffenbacher, 2013). It is likely that the spread of the trouser for women is the most important 20th-century transformation in clothing. For hundreds of years, legs of western women had been covered, pantaloons and trousers worn exclusively by gymnasts, circus performers, actresses, and others of uncertain morals (Miller, 1998). Ironically, in Islamic societies men wear robes and women trousers, but in Western cultures until the 20th century only employed women, and afterwards normally only those employed in the roughest jobs, and performers, exposed their legs or wore trousers, and when they chose to their moral standing was questioned (Dieffenbacher, 2013). *image taken from http://wearinghistoryblog.com/2014/09/a-primer-1930s-1950s-trousers-pants-for-women/ Numerous women who worked on the farms and the mines wore trousers; for instance, those in the roaming field bands were specifically thought to be immoral (Wilson, 1987, p. 162). Nevertheless, trousers were decent clothing for women only for leisure, on the sports arena, or on the beach until at the end of World War II. In the 1920s the fellows of the widely known Paris group of lesbians, which comprised Natalie Clifford Barney, Romaine Brooks, and Radclyffe Hall, including several other authors and artists, wore skirts with their male waistcoats and jackets, neckties and eyeglasses (Wilson, 1987). In the latter part of the 19th century elegant and flowing styles of workout for women—eurythmics, the Dalcroze method, and callisthenics—all became more and more widely known. However, the dances that became widely known soon after World War I were completely self-indulgent, and were less focused on artistry and wellbeing (Wilson, 1987). The new dance movement was related to a transformation in feminine clothing and, although imprecisely, to new standards of extravagance and decadence. In the 1920s, or during the jazz period, dance implied an entirely new modified form of fashion and the drastic transformation of tightening clothes. Its bouncy beats conveyed ‘machine’ awareness (Bruzzi & Gibson, 2013). However, the culture by which the technology of western civilisations progressed, and which embraced a type of dance created by its oppressed group, still inhibited and suppressed the body. Modernity idealised technology and the urban life, idealised also what it thought as ‘aboriginal’. However, this was not a peaceful recognition of the body, because the West’s Judaeo-Christian societies are still smeared with self-denial or austerity and distrust of the body (Wilson, 1987). *image taken from http://www.vam.ac.uk/content/articles/i/introduction-to-19th-century-fashion/ In fashion presentations ever since the 1960s dance and music have increasingly been practised to convert commercial show into entertainment. This though has been known before—in the 19th century the theatre or auditorium was a fashion display. Numerous women and men visited the theatre somewhat to see celebrities wearing high class, fashionable gowns, and the celebrities consequently inspired fashions in beauty and clothing styles (Lynch & Strauss, 2007). The cinema or film industry, with its bigger audience, was particularly powerful in producing new lifestyles for women and men. Conclusions It is important to repeatedly mention that fashion, particularly clothing, is entirely about change. However, without an instrument to initiate and push change, fashion would cease to be present. This essay has been placing emphasis on exploring the different theories that explain the device or motivation that drives clothing styles or fashion unstoppably frontward. This essay explained the different theories that are regarded most important to present-day academics and professionals when studying and predicting changes in fashion. In conclusion, changes in fashion are motivated by newness or novelty, creation of identity, social class division, and imitation. Furthermore, clothing has become an instrument of emancipation for women. The evolution of female clothing reveals how women evolved from being meek, submissive housewives into emancipated, independent career women. Earlier female garments, such as the corset and trousers, were symbols of women’s repression in a male-dominated society. But over time, women increasingly took part in a practice of self-labelling and self-proclamation, as clothing became the medium for the presentation of the distinctive individual identity. Ultimately, fashion eventually belonged to popular consciousness. It also became the object of popular culture due to the mass production of clothing. It was primarily photography that produced a new form of seeing and looking and a new form of female beauty in the 20th century. Moreover, the new dance movement was related to a transformation in feminine clothing and, although imprecisely, to new standards of extravagance and decadence. Fashion change should receive greater attention from scholars because, as been mentioned several times in this essay, clothing serves a number of roles in any culture—it can be physical, psychological, and emotional. Clothing is also an effective communicative tool that reveals individual desires, group membership, social class, and so on. In conclusion, clothing is rich in history and its value transformed in every stage of its existence. References Appadurai, A (1986) The Social Life of Things Commodities in Cultural Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bruzzi, S & Gibson, P (2013) Fashion Cultures: Theories, Explorations and Analysis. UK: Routledge. Dant, T (1999) Material Culture in the Social World. Philadelphia: Open University Press. Dieffenbacher, F (2013) Fashion Thinking: Creative Approaches to the Design Process. UK: A&C Black. Esposito, E (2011) “Originality through Imitation: The Rationality of Fashion,” Organisation Studies, 32(5), 603-613. Lynch, A & Strauss, M (2007) Changing Fashion: A Critical Introduction to Trend Analysis and Meaning. UK: Berg. McCracken, G (1990) Culture and Consumption: New Approaches to the Symbolic Character of Consumer Goods and Activities. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. Melchior, M & Svensson, B (2014) Fashion and Museums: Theory and Practice. UK: A&C Black. Miller, D (1998) Material Cultures: Why Some Things Matter. London: UCL Press. Wilson, E (1987) Adorned in Dreams: Fashion and Modernity. Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press. Bibliography Barnard, M (2013) Fashion as Communication. UK: Routledge. Berger, A (2008) Reading Matter: Multidisciplinary Perspectives on Material Culture. UK: Transaction Publishers. Bloomsbury Publishing (2014) The Handbook of Fashion Studies. UK: A&C Black. Craciun, M (2013) Material Culture and Authenticity: Fake Branded Fashion in Europe. UK: A&C Black. Knappett, C (2011) Thinking through Material Culture: An Interdisciplinary Perspective. Pennsylvania: University of Pennsylvania Press. Kuchler, S & Miller, D (2005) Clothing as material culture. UK: Berg. Parkins, I (2010) “Fashion as Methodology: Rewriting the time of women’s modernity,” Time & Society, 19(1), 98-119. Read More