Oscar Wildes Fashion Ugliness Argument - Essay Example

Oscar Wilde’s Fashion Ugliness Argument By Foundation Department: Oscar Wilde’s Fashion Ugliness Argument Oscar Wilde’s assertion that fashion has some ugliness and intolerable aspects, is arguably factual, because humans are normally expected to retain attractive items for many years or even decades. However, advocates for fashion argue that it is attractive and that its being in flux is basically driven by newer and more attractive designs and or other secondary influences. Such influences arguably include human rights, globalisation, physical environment, culture, identity construction and physical image. As such, it is possible that clothes that people put on have deeper meanings, most of which are anchored on history. This paper critically examines whether fashion has some ugliness. Ugliness of fashion Oscar Wilde was arguably right in his observation that the mass market that produces and distributes fashion products is saturated with poor quality products, which are meant to appeal to the end-users within a short period of time as the manufacturers make millions of pounds in profits. Producing fashion items for global consumption generally takes precedent over creativity or individual vision (Jing, 2014). The skill and creativity in the design of tight undergarments, for example, takes a lesser role as far as creating the commodity is concerned. Serving hundreds of millions of consumers with such unhealthy clothes for “six months” requires quick production of simple fashion materials through cheap processes for selling multiple times over without paying attention at the health risks and or discomfort that it would pose to the wearers. The end-result is an “ugly” fashion item that prevents the wearer from freely engaging in his or her everyday duties. In addition, owing to the priority of contemporary corporate bodies that design and produce fashion items to make profits, it is apparent that short-term gains cannot coexist with quality and the “inner” attraction of fashion items. Profit demands continuous generation of unique designs that are easy to manufacture such as backless blouses for women (Salamensky, 2002). Once a fashion design has been accepted, usually by individuals who are under the pressure to generate more revenue, it is then mass produced under low quality standards for sectional gains as vital social values go to drain. China is an example of a country where “ugly” fashion items are produced. In spite of the fact that China lacks any popular fashion brand it can call its own, other countries have been trailing her in garment production for almost two decades. The development implies that some producers in the country may be basing their production on “ugly” standards to produce fashion items that are equally of low quality and with limited lifespans. Rational Dress Movement Oscar Wilde’s support for the Rational Dress Movement’s castigation of the ugliness of fashions is arguably right as far as the late 19th century fashion items were concerned. The Movement condemned the introduction of new fashions of garments that would either distort the physical appearance of the body or hinder free body movement or those that posed health risks to the wearer. Oscar believed that fashionable tightly-fitting corsets, high-heeled footwear and heavy skirts were “ugly”, because they could hinder free body movement and exercise (Jing, 2014). By wearing weighted skirts over underskirts and or over crinolines, the wearer could not control dragging hems, which irrespective of fashion, make the wearer both unclean and vulnerable to the risk of fire. Compactly laced corsets were also dismissed by the Movement as “ugly”, because they exerted more pressure on the internal organs, which was bad for those who were handling physical duties. Although, the late 19th century society was moving from traditionalism to a culture of greater freedom for women, feminine fashions that allowed the freedom were equally dismissed by Oscar Wilde as “ugly” (Salamensky, 2002). Freer and more transparent women dresses were considered by the Rational Dress Movement as ugly because most of such dresses were arguably immoral and not worth wearing by women. The Bloomer Suit, for example, was one of the dressing reform options on offer by the fashion designers boasting of a more beautiful fashionable dress (Jing, 2014). The garment was a pair of baggy trousers covered by a light skirt. Nevertheless, the “ugliness” of the fashion arguably manifested in some trendy women wearing just the inner bloomers only. Although, these fashion items was not completely fitting in any way, the Movement still considered them as ugly, mainly because the revealed the wearers’ legs. The revealing nature of the dress prompted religious leaders to complain about feelings of immoral behaviour that such dressing would give rise to. The political class were also not left behind; many of the leaders read disintegrating families as women abandoned their households to enjoy the perceived freedom that was traditionally a reserve for men. The Beauty of fashion Although Wilde would argue that if fashion was attractive it would remain unchanged for longer durations of time, advocates for fashion are of the opinion that production of fashion items is not accidental. Each item passes through a long design and production process as well as numerous trials before it can be sent to the market. Salamensky (2002) added that fashion designers are not aloof from the needs of the consumers: if a majority of fashion designers build “ugly” brands that are indifferent to the needs of the market, then the brands they make would not be popular for two or three months, let alone the six months suggested by Wilde. In fact, Jing (2014) noted that owing to the need for overwhelming power and resources to influence the market, fashion designs launched as brand are normally seen as “ugly”, hence their failure. As such, it is plausible that a majority of fashion designers operate without any form of partiality in creating new fashion items. Conclusion Generally, Oscar Wilde’s fears of fashion are arguably well-founded because since the late 19th century, ugly fashions such as transparent dresses, tight under-garments, high-heeled shoes, extremely long dresses, and trousers that sweep the surface and heavy clothes threaten individual health and decency in societies. As such, Wilde and his Movement decided that the only solution to the problem was to mount consistent campaigns against the arguably unbecoming trends. Since the ‘ugliness of fashion’ remark was made, industrialization and globalization have conspired to impact the world in different ways to support ‘ugly’ fashions. Despite its ‘ugliness’, fashion is arguably attractive and plays a unifying role in society by giving all wearers a sense of fulfilment and belonging in various communities. References Jing, H. (2014) ‘The Aesthetic Experiment of Oscar Wilde in A House of Pomegranates.’ Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 4(10), p.2168. Salamensky, S.I. (2002) ‘Re-Presenting Oscar Wilde: Wildes Trials, "Gross Indecency," and Documentary Spectacle.’ Theatre Journal, 54(4), pp.575-588. Read More