Week 10
Re-Orienting Fashion
Magnolia Garcia
“. . . Fashion has been defined a priori as a Western phenomenon, and that, in this way,
fashion has been a function of the ‘enormously systematic discipline by which European
culture was able to manage -- and even produce . . .’” By assigning a definition to fashion,
a limitation is being imposed to its wonder and ambiguity. The term ‘fashion,’ in this case
holds a negative connotation which is almost repulsive. Fashion is entirely subjective, and
those who try to make it an objective topic are, frankly, the ones who feel entitled enough to
claim that their opinions about it are factual. To say that it is exclusively found in the Western
nations is even more absurd.
fashion has been a function of the ‘enormously systematic discipline by which European
culture was able to manage -- and even produce . . .’” By assigning a definition to fashion,
a limitation is being imposed to its wonder and ambiguity. The term ‘fashion,’ in this case
holds a negative connotation which is almost repulsive. Fashion is entirely subjective, and
those who try to make it an objective topic are, frankly, the ones who feel entitled enough to
claim that their opinions about it are factual. To say that it is exclusively found in the Western
nations is even more absurd.
“Who has, and who does not have fashion is politically determined, a function of power
relations,” followed by, “The definition of fashion was designed and assigned within the
crucible of social Darwinism by those who could,” are very ambitious statements. To say that
fashion doesn’t exist in less developed societies and tribes is ignorant; the clothing and textiles
they wear are all they’ve ever known and been exposed to. As a matter of fact, tribes that
make their own clothing spend hours to weeks working to make intricate pieces of art; is that
not considered fashion? That is their fashion (not that the term or concept necessarily exists
in their culture). If fashion is a matter of “is” or “isn’t,” who exactly is responsible for making
these executive calls? Even after earning a Design degree myself, I surely won’t have the
mentality that I can make factual claims about what is or isn’t considered fashion.
relations,” followed by, “The definition of fashion was designed and assigned within the
crucible of social Darwinism by those who could,” are very ambitious statements. To say that
fashion doesn’t exist in less developed societies and tribes is ignorant; the clothing and textiles
they wear are all they’ve ever known and been exposed to. As a matter of fact, tribes that
make their own clothing spend hours to weeks working to make intricate pieces of art; is that
not considered fashion? That is their fashion (not that the term or concept necessarily exists
in their culture). If fashion is a matter of “is” or “isn’t,” who exactly is responsible for making
these executive calls? Even after earning a Design degree myself, I surely won’t have the
mentality that I can make factual claims about what is or isn’t considered fashion.
No comments:
Post a Comment