What is the purpose of fashion Does this help or harm humans - Essay Example

What is the purpose of fashion? Does this help or harm humans? Fashion has been used as a way of differentiating a person from the other, since the purpose of fashion is to attain self-expression, considering that “today, as semiotics becomes fashionable, sociologists tell us that fashion too is a language of signs, a nonverbal system of communication” (Lurie, 185). In this respect, individuals wear what they feel is suitable to portray to the rest of the world about their class and social status, their gender and even their age.

Thus, even when an individual is not known to the other, through his or her fashion, it would be easy to get “important information (or misinformation) as to…occupation, origin, personality, opinions, tastes, sexual desires and current mood” (Lurie, 184). This way, fashion becomes a channel through which the individual communicates to the world, without the use of the language of words. Additionally, the purpose of fashion is to influence the world, through portraying to others, what a person would like the world to know about him/her, or the way the individual would like to be viewed by others.

Consequently, since the language of fashion is understood by the world, “if clothing is a language, it must have a vocabulary and a grammar like other languages” (Lurie, 185). Further, fashion also plays the role of separating an individual from the others, considering that when an individual is dressed in a typical way that the others perceive to be different, the individual is already differentiated from the masses. In this regard, fashion serves as a means of promoting individuality. Unfortunately, in reality, fashion has had some harm on humans, considering that rather than fashion conforming to individuals; it is the individuals who have been forced to conform to fashion.

This is because; “in fashion classrooms and design studios, the human figure is proportioned to emphasize the clothing, not the body” (Herman, 2). Thus, fashion has been established by the designers with an artistic perception of people, such that it conforms to the espoused slim and model-like individuals, while the rest, who may have some extra pound, curves or weight are left out, thus lowering their self-esteem. This is more especially because, “the fashion worlds emphasis on tall, thin and young women is frequently cited as contributing to poor self-esteem, anorexia and bias against the overweight” (Herman, 1).

Moreover, while fashion is a way of individual expression that differentiates an individual from the masses, extreme application of fashion serves to completely separate an individual from the society, to the extent that they are perceived as outcasts. This can be harmful to humans, because the society is then divided by fashion, thus breaking the human cohesion since such individuals feel diminished. While seeking to be unique in the society through fashion, people are made to feel uncomfortable, and even in “those magazine images?

The clothes are pinned and altered, and the models aren’t wearing them to be comfortable” (Herman, 2). All these aspects, serve as the negative implications of fashion on humans.In conclusion therefore, fashion is an important aspect for humans, considering that it gives them a different language of communicating to the world about themselves. Nevertheless, while it creates an avenue for self-expression and individual differentiation from the masses, it may also cause separation in the society, while also making some feel left out by the fashion modes, and thus lower their self esteem.

Simply put, fashion means different things to different people within the society, and its use should conform to the intended purpose, lest the society perceives individuals wearing fashion for what they are not. Works CitedHerman, Valli. “Trends: Kept out of the club; why the fashion world caters to the slim and shuns the full-figured majority.” Los Angeles Times, October 24, 2010. P1-2. Print.Lurie, Alison. “The Language of Clothing”. London: Heinemann, 1981. 184-189. Print.