I was pondering on the concept of pre-ripped clothing, and stylings that (generally) would lead an outsider to believe that the wearer was homeless. My mind fell upon an old book that I had mused upon: Thorstein Veblen's- The Theory of the Leisure Class.
In it he speaks on the "leisure class" (here synonymous with upper class) and its tendency to go over the top, culturally, in proving that it is, in fact, very well-off. My favorite example is when Veblen speaks on the economics of the corset. Loosely, he says that the corset is designed to physically destroy the person who wears it, therefore proving for all to see that the wearer is in fact, SO rich that they can afford to denigrate their body making it a less useful tool (in the sociological sense).
I wondered then, if ripped jeans and the high fashion of making oneself look homeless might be along the same vein. In this instance, the person is not physically destroying themself, but socially. The thought process might go: I am so well-off/popular I can overpay for these clothes, and look like a hobo without suffering negative consequences in my high-class social circle.
Granted neither in Veblen's time, nor now, are these thoughts/actions conscious. Isn't wonderful to know that our fashion sense has evolved from physically harming ourselves to only attempting to harm ourselves on a social level?
Everyone interprets fashion differently, but I don't think ripped jeans come close to saying 'homeless.' I think the statement is more along the lines of: 'I'm so active/artistic, and I live so dangerously, that my jeans are ripped! Check out my hot bod beneath.' Or something along those lines. I want a tshirt that says that, actually.
ReplyDeleteZoolander's 'Derilicht' or trashbags, smelly old clothing, rotting smell perfume... these would be more akin to the social suicide and homelessness style.
But then, I did go off on the pre-faded ass jeans I saw so much of in Europe. I now believe it is not so much the statement of, 'look how much I sit on my ass,' but avoiding the inevitable fades from doing so, which are actually quite unsightly.
I have to find fault with your suggestion that wearing ripped jeans destroys oneself socially. If anything, participating in cultural trends( whether its ripped jeans, tattoos, piercings, tiny-tees, baggy jeans or any other fad you can think of) is commonly an attempt to fit in socially.
ReplyDeleteI suppose you could argue that many people do discriminate against others based on the clothes they wear, and as such, dressing down can have a negative impact. It's unfortunate that this is the case, since most people have much more interesting qualities than the clothers they wear. Since this discrimination does occur however, I think its only fair to point out that it goes both ways - some conservative people pre-judge those who dress trendy/flashy, just as some trendy people pre-judge those who dress conservatively.
To a certain extent, the clothes one chooses to wear may express a desire to fit in with a particular social group, at the expense of being an outcast from other social groups. One may even wish to invoke ire from particular social groups by wearing something that breaks societal norms - I suppose in that case your argument might be true - the person would indeed be trying to harm themselves socially, but that damage occurs wihtin a social group that they have no desire to be a part of, and elevates them within a social group that they do want to be a part of.
Thanks for posting, uberfreki (check out his new, excellently named blog!), you and p have pretty much summed up my thoughts here.
ReplyDeleteI really dig Veblen, but not all fashion is as easy a metaphor for helplessness as corsets.
But fashion is still often a good example of conspicuous consumption, no matter what social circle you are in.
Contemporary fashion always seems to emphasize expendability. Ever more garish designs suggest a conscious effort to make them go out of style as quickly as possible. It's like planned obsolesence, only the consumer is the one demanding the short life span of the product. When you buy the trendiest clothes, you're announcing to the world that you have so much excess income, you consider your clothes disposable.
But I think uberfreki's point about how clothes simultaneously trade social capital from one group for social capital in another is spot on. Me, I like to buy clothes that allow me to cross social groups. But unfortunately, no one can ever tell I'm wearing this business suit ironically.
I really dig Veblen, but not all fashion is as easy a metaphor for helplessness as corsets.
ReplyDeleteThere is no greater motivator than being told you can't do something (justice system excluded). So...
I found no arguments against Veblen's satirical corset comments, but some were pointed at mine. So in my defense:
1. Ripped jeans give no physical or practical benefits (For example some jeans have a loop or extra pockets for workers to store/carry things very practical .
2. If an item of clothing has no physical or practical benefits, then its only benefit is social (thank you uberfreki).
3. Much of upper-class or high fashion consists of only meeting this criteria of social benefit.
4. What does it mean to have ripped clothing (try and take jeans out of the equation for a minute)? It has typically meant that the person cannot afford unripped clothing. (That may change from now until the end of time, but it would be impossible to argue about this being the previous line of thought) If a person cannot afford new clothes, then they are from a low socio-economic class.
5. What does it mean if a person from a high-social class adopts clothing from a typically low social class? They want to be poor? (Surely not, becoming poor is relatively easy)
6. My final assertion is that these people are subconsciously/unconsciously proving a point: I am so stable within my social class that I can wear jeans from any social class without being excluded/chastised by my peers.
OR
I have no taste.
Apologies to all who thought I was denigrating ripped jeans.
First off, thanks Thomas for the link to my blog...hopefully I'll get some content up in the next week or so.
ReplyDeleteAs far as the planned obsolecense of clothes, I certainly agree with that. At one time it seemed that the speed at which fashion recycled past trends was constantly accelerating and would eventually reach a point we would reach some bizarre fashion utopia where all historical fashions coexisted with the new trends. Bits of the 80's have been popping up occasiionally since the late 90's, but they've not really taken too much of a hold, so it seems to be screwing up that theory.
ep, allow me to suggest an alternative to your final assertion. Regardless of social class there are a variety of social cliques, each with charistmatic leaders setting the fashion trends. From early on we learn to either reject these cliques altogether and form our own fashion sense( ideally as Thomas suggests, one that allows us access to multiple social groupings), or pick a clique and try to fit in by dressing alike. I have to think that the desire to fit in is as potent a force to the social elite as it is to the rest of us, perhaps even more so. As such, I would suggest that the majority of trend chasers, despite social standing are compelled to wear trendy fashions( even ripped jeans ), not because they subconsciously feel so stable in their social class, but because they consciously feel so *unstable* in their social standing. Anecdotally, it seems that as time has passed, I've been involved in conversations with people I would have considered social leaders and found out that often they did not view themselves as social leaders and had insecurities about fitting in.
Furthermore, I'm a bit sceptical about theories involving subconscious beliefs of a social grouping. Such theories seem to be impossible to prove or disprove since one cannot accurately answer questions about their subconscious feelings.