FASHION

Fashion

Fashion

Introduction

Fashion is not just about clothing but also concerns the maintenance of beauty, the production of glamour, and the various ways in which people fashion their bodies. Women are especially vulnerable to the constant pressures of fashion's seasonal changes. Because of the way women are socialized to present their bodies, the fashion and beauty industry has become a source of controversy, blamed for encouraging women to engage in extreme dieting and even surgery to improve their appearance (Davis, 1995, 39). However, as fashion design has gained cultural and economic force, key women have also responded to these issues by pioneering new directions in the industry. (Church, 2010, 349)

Consumer culture creates a regime of choice, feeding the popular perception that women should regularly alter and improve their bodies. So while fashion might be creative, it has also become associated with activities that prepare women for their traditional role within patriarchal society. Fashion makes demands on women to change their appearance. This demand implies that real women are not good enough and suggests their bodies are so unruly that they must be controlled by beauty regimes. (Simmel, 1971, 323)

Discussion

Sidelining fashion as unworthy of serious analysis runs the risk of denying the breadth of women's influence historically. The rational dress movement reappeared in the early 20th century when reformers applied principles of art to women's dress to encourage the adoption of more comfortable, hygienic, and beautiful clothing. Whereas art was largely the preserve of men, dress was where women had some creative influence. (Cunningham, 2003, 44)

Fashion is not just about the formal systems established by the clothing industry but also involves the various informal cultural practices created by women. Fashion is where women's leadership often takes the form of a countercultural rather than transformational style. This became clear from the role fashion played in the 1960s. British fashion designer Mary Quant's radical new look, the liberated “Chelsea Girl,” reflected the social and sexual liberation of the 1960s. Exemplified by the British model Twiggy, this new look involved short hair, simple clothes, and an androgynous slim body. While Quant's hot pants and miniskirt might have become synonymous with the 1960s sexual revolution, it was her pioneering concept of the boutique that established her as a distinctive force in fashion design. (Dworkin, 1981, 45)

Through the popular practice of fashion, women reclaimed their right to challenge norms of beauty and assert ownership over their own bodies. Here, fashion was both a visible and powerful signifier of resistance. Subversive sartorial gestures, permitted precisely due to their “soft” rather than “hard” politics, are where subtle interventions have huge symbolic import. Even though girls were sidelined from early British subcultures, they managed to use unusual and innovative style to express their dissent from mainstream culture (McRobbie & Garber, 2004, 220). More recent work by women on subcultures reveals the range of forms that fashion takes at street level, not only to express marginalized identities, but also to fight sexism and racism (Walker, 2001, ...