Fashion is a "Waste of Money"

Illustration by Ella Gibson

On the way to school a few weeks ago they were discussing the reasons as to why fashion is a waste of money on the radio and obviously being me, I was offended by this statement. I don't believe fashion is a waste of money and here's why - 

The obvious is that fashion is ultimately an industry which provides jobs for people and is a million if not billion dollar industry which is part of the economy of many countries. But, the fashion industry as a whole is much more than simply clothing or accessories, it extends far beyond that.

I don't think people understand that fashion is so much more than simply a piece of clothing, it’s a medium in which a creative force can be expressed, it's a platform with endless boundaries which are meant to be broken, it serves to shock, surprise and evoke so many different emotions.

 People often put down the idea of fashion or those who have any interest in the fashion industry and label them as being "superficial" simply because fashion is represented by pieces of material which are worn on the exterior of someone and it is true that fashion serves as a world in which judgement is so highly valued. The sense of superficiality is one which is more than often used to ridicule or tarnish the namesake of the industry. Yes, high fashion is extremely highly priced and may even sometimes be unfairly priced but the justification for these prices is one which is far from the notion of superficiality. Some may argue that the justification behind these lavish prices is because of the design or production process, or perhaps even to entertain the affluent. So yes, fashion is an extremely materialistic world but is society not just as materialistic or even worse?

The whole notion of valuing the interior and not exterior after all is used to combat the idea that judgment of the exterior can often lead to misconceptions. While this is all well and good, is there not a link between the exterior and interior, so much so that they may be mirrors of one another? Humans market themselves in a way to the public just as companies market products to the consumers. I use the term 'market' because the principles applied to the jargon used on television for an advertisement are the same as the principles applied when representing our external selves; it is the way in which we objectify ourselves through our clothing and accessories which defines not only our exterior but our interior as well. In the end it's about creating a sense of 'identity' for ourselves and this identity is meant to guide our exterior and interior selves and the way in which we portray ourselves. I'm not saying here that we surrender ourselves completely to objectify ourselves for the gratification of society and our peers, as realistically it is much of a libertarian approach, however, the way in which we portray ourselves is often to market ourselves to our target demographic.

In regards to this, fashion has helped to shape identities and create self expression. By buying pieces of clothing from design houses we are effectively using fashion to create our exterior identity and also identity as a whole, in this way fashion is not a waste of money and especially not superficial.

Another notion which is hugely popularised outside of the fashion industry and in the mainstream public is this idea of fashion creating “trends” or that fashion is defined by “trends”. While the Peplum may be popular in commercial fashion these days, it is not an accurate representation of the trickle-down system, Peplum is not a trend as it has been marketed to the general public, rather, it's a part of an aesthetic and it’s important to understand that fashion does not dictate these “trends” of the season but rather the aesthetics. It’s more accurate to represent these as aesthetics rather than trends because trends often disappear after a year or so, however aesthetics generally live on and while may be changed slightly, they are still true to its origin. I mean remember last year or was it the year before that “colour blocking” was the “new” trend? Colour-blocking has always been around as an aesthetic and it was only that year that the fashion media decided to pull this particular aesthetic out as a “trend”. To take a quote from Miranda Priestly in The Devil Wears Prada, “Florals? For Spring? Groundbreaking.” I think this quote accurately sums up my attitude towards the so called “trends” in fashion.

Illustration by Ella Gibson, Screencap taken from The Devil Wears Prada

You don’t have to follow these “trends” and spend lavishly on the latest design phenomenon. Trends were created to be used as a marketing tool, to be able to commercially market fashion to the masses and following these trends is a waste of money. Don’t follow trends, trends are authoritarian and contradicts the ideology that fashion is liberal.

Aesthetics on the other hand, are vastly more liberal in the same way which fashion is.

Aesthetics work better for one reason, aesthetics are defined by yourself, and you are able to pick and choose them depending on your personal preferences. One’s aesthetics are compounded by a vast number of social influences - it’s extremely true that you are a product of the environment in which you live. In the words of Rei Kawakubo, "fashion design is not about revealing or accentuating the shape of a woman's body; its purpose is to allow a person to be who they are. Fashion is interesting because it's always moving. It relates to social movement, politics and the current financial situation."*

Unfortunately aesthetics and the action of using aesthetics to compile an identity of the exterior aren’t pushed to the masses as much as trends are and this is one of the reasons why people may push against fashion or claim that is a waste of money.


*  Rei Kawakubo, i-D Magazine 1992