Fashion. A word that can conjure up a thousand images; whether it be couture, style, mass-market, trends etc. Politics is another word with many associations; lying, war, voting, presidential candidates. They make strange bed-fellows, but they are actually two of my greatest passions. I love clothes, always have done. But I also love debates, on topics such as abortion, taxation and federalism. Now, I'm not about to put my views up here (unless asked to). They are mine, and mine alone, and I respect that others may not agree with me. However, the point of this post is not to debate my views, but to identify the link between these spheres that seem to be so seperate.
The link can be seen quite superficially at first. The 2008 American Presidential election has thrown up all sorts of sartorial questions, some of which are predicatably aimed at Hillary Clinton. This has even made column inches; here (Tim Gunn for Newsweek), here (Jezebel quoting a Reuters article), and here (a Jezebel comparison of Michelle Obama and Jackie Kennedy) No doubt there are countless more articles on the subject. We even know who is voting for who in the designer world. The new Mme.Sarkozy is getting a similar treatment this side of the Atlantic, with this London Times article which sees her style as something to be improved upon. I suppose examining politicians and their spouses' fashion choices is nothing new (Jackie O is still a fashion icon) but it does seem to have reached a new level in these media-saturated times.
The link can be seen quite superficially at first. The 2008 American Presidential election has thrown up all sorts of sartorial questions, some of which are predicatably aimed at Hillary Clinton. This has even made column inches; here (Tim Gunn for Newsweek), here (Jezebel quoting a Reuters article), and here (a Jezebel comparison of Michelle Obama and Jackie Kennedy) No doubt there are countless more articles on the subject. We even know who is voting for who in the designer world. The new Mme.Sarkozy is getting a similar treatment this side of the Atlantic, with this London Times article which sees her style as something to be improved upon. I suppose examining politicians and their spouses' fashion choices is nothing new (Jackie O is still a fashion icon) but it does seem to have reached a new level in these media-saturated times.
Anyway, thats all well and good, but I don't think it explores the relationship between fashion and politics, not the one that interests me most anyway. (And I'm all for being well dressed, but I'd rather someone run a country well and wear sweatpants, than wear Armani and attempt to nuke a good proportion of the world.) (Not to say wearing Armani would make you do such a thing.)
What interests me is the political or cultural messages an item of clothing can send out. The most obvious example of this would be the shemagh/keffiyeh craze that seemed to dominate every wannabe hipster~ last year. I really did not have a clue how to take this at all (and neither did some other people.) Was it just as simple as wearing a scarf? Was it culturally or politically insensitive/ignorant? Should it have been treated as another incident of people mindlessly wearing things for 'fashion'? (See also; crufixies when not Catholic.) Well, this hot potato temporily forced Urban Outfitters to stop selling the scarf (however other retailers continued to sell them.) It's not like UO really stopped (The Manchester branch was the first to restart selling them.) I actually recieved one when I was given a free goodie bag for attending a student 15% off event there. I've never worn it, I never intend to.
What interests me is the political or cultural messages an item of clothing can send out. The most obvious example of this would be the shemagh/keffiyeh craze that seemed to dominate every wannabe hipster~ last year. I really did not have a clue how to take this at all (and neither did some other people.) Was it just as simple as wearing a scarf? Was it culturally or politically insensitive/ignorant? Should it have been treated as another incident of people mindlessly wearing things for 'fashion'? (See also; crufixies when not Catholic.) Well, this hot potato temporily forced Urban Outfitters to stop selling the scarf (however other retailers continued to sell them.) It's not like UO really stopped (The Manchester branch was the first to restart selling them.) I actually recieved one when I was given a free goodie bag for attending a student 15% off event there. I've never worn it, I never intend to.
So what is the ideal way to deal with these things? To be blindly ignorant to a garments significance? To know how sensitive others may be to you wearing such an item? Or to eschew the trend? Overall, the best solution is to find out what a garment may mean to someone - and then make up your mind.
-meg,xoxo
No comments:
Post a Comment