Blog Post 1 – Lecture Reflection

After two weeks of very informative and inspiring lectures from fashion practitioners from around the world, I feel I have absorbed a multitude of concepts that are part of the ethos of the London College of Fashion. However, one lecture that I keep coming back to and thinking about was given by Dr. Jekaterina Rogaten. This lecture covered the concept of well-being. As we currently live in a highly materialistic culture, it is very important to consider well being, as this can have links to depression and anxiety. Rogaten referenced to Positive Psychology, which is the use of “psychological theory, research and intervention techniques which are used to understand the positive, creative and emotionally fulfilling elements of human behavior”. (Monetta, G.B. (2013). She looked at what makes us happy, and the ratio between genetics of being happy and optimistic. It is important to remember that we are the decision makers with choices and preferences, and we are the only ones that can make ourselves happy. Her points brought me to understand the materiality of fashion – I completely agree with this idea. It is ultimately our choice to see things positively – the hedonic quality of our current experience depends on our presence and acceptance of the now. If we are unhappy with the present moment, we are either anxious (worried about the future) or depressed (sad about the past). 

Rogaten also mentioned the effects of the paradox of choice. By maximizing choice, our freedom and decision making are also maximized. People fifty years ago had to make substantially less decisions than we do today. In an age of excess consumption, all these things to make choices on later influences us to have unrealistic expectations, as our high expectations are much harder to satisfy. Thereby, our responsibility for making decisions is negatively affected. With too much choice, it is hard to make decisions as we have to compare and contrast many things, making it a heavy cognitive load. I find this very interesting, as I always thought of having multiple options as a good thing. In our fashion system today, we have created an extremely unsustainable system, pumping out loads of garments. We have given consumers the opportunity to choose between the same shirt in eight different colors, widening our pool of choice. While this might seem like a good thing, this is actually quite negative to our mental health as well as the planet. The industry needs to reshape the system and as consumers, we need to do our part in understanding and being aware of how having a multitude of options is worse for us than we think. The system can create better lives by materializing a minimalist lifestyle.

My favorite part of the lecture was Rogaten’s evaluation on what a happy life consists of was very eye opening. From a psychological perspective, a happy life is an engaging life. Not so much experiencing high levels of positive emotions, but there is meaning and good things happening when you take a step back to reflect. Perhaps this idea relates somewhat to social responsibility, how the notion of taking time to reflect and evaluate how you are feeling and being aware of your emotions. By putting things into perspective and becoming aware of how you feel rather than judging how you feel, the world could slowly become a better place.

References 

Rogaten, J 2020, Wellbeing, lecture notes, Better Lives Unit FU001708, London College of Fashion, delivered 17 February 2020.

In our modern times, sustainability, diversity and social responsibility has become somewhat of a trend amongst curators and consumers alike. Thus, it has been interesting to see the ways in which one of the leading fashion universities (UAL) has come to address such a global discussion. The Better Lives unit has enabled all members of LCF to consider the ways in which we can each contribute towards bettering the controversial fashion industry, regardless of our differing courses.

In particular, Julia Crew’s analysis on power struggles were educational in helping to understand the complexities of trying to control economic imbalances within fashion. As one of the wealthiest consumer industries there is, it seems obscene for there to be such great inequality; a pressing universal issue, with 8 men owning the same wealth of 3.6 billion people who make up the poorest half of humanity. (Oxfam, 2017) Especially within garment production, Crew explained how politicians argue rising wages will drive companies to produce clothes wherever it’s cheaper, how economists call it a “race to the bottom” whereby companies rush to countries with the lowest prices regardless of the impact, and how manufacturers predict higher wages will damage the domestic industry’s ability to compete in the global market and workers could lose their jobs as a result. Unfortunately, it appears “business people often become so enmeshed in the practice of business that they lose the ability to discern and react to possible ethical dilemmas.” (Boylan, 2014)

Moreover, I found Teleica Kirkland’s perspectives on representation to be enlightening by making her audience question the cause and effect of diversity and inclusion within the fashion industry. Using Marc Jacobs’ controversial dreadlocks used for his SS16 runway show as an example, Kirkland refers to subject appropriation; “the Canada Council… recognises as a form of appropriation ‘the depiction of… cultures other than one’s own.’” (Young, 2008) The Marc Jacobs show clearly exemplified the effect and difference types of representation: cultural appropriation and cultural appreciation, alongside which, in our strive to develop a more diverse industry, is preferred.

In doing so, the Better Lives unit has ultimately show how we, as the next generation of fashion creatives, can and should intend on changing the industry for the better, whilst ensuring we are well versed on the complexities of doing so. I found the series of lectures to be enlightening and inspiring by encouraging students to think about the power and impact they have regarding sustainability, diversity and social responsibility.

Bibliography:

Boylan, M. (2014) Business Ethics (pg. 46) Wiley-Blackwell, West Sussex. Available at: EBSCO Host (Accessed on: February 17 2020)

Oxfam (2017) Just 8 men own same wealth as half the world. Available at: https://www.oxfam.org/en/press-releases/just-8-men-own-same-wealth-half-world (Accessed on: February 17 2020)

Young, J.O. (2008) Cultural Appropriation and the Arts (pg. 7) John Wiley & Sons, Incorporated, Hoboken. Available at: ProQuest Ebook Central (Accessed on: February 17 2020)

BLOG 1: POWER

Following the initial two weeks of our Better Lives project, I attended a variety of lectures that focused on diversity, sustainability and social responsibility within the fashion industry, whilst covering a range of different topics within these themes.

Reflecting on the lectures I attended, the one that influenced me majorly was entitled, ‘Power’, led by Julia Crew. Within this lecture, Crew covered a selection of thematic sub-topics, discussing the relationship between power and fashion, money, media, the consumer, protest and ‘you’. By covering such a broad subject with such intricate discussion, I found that this lecture really enlightened my way of thinking when it comes to the question of, ‘who holds the power?’ within the fashion industry.

In regard to the Better Lives themes, I found that this lecture reflected ideals of diversity within the fashion industry, as it addressed the concept of the fashion chain and who holds the top spots. Crew displayed a slide showing the top eight European stakeholders, which showed that Bernard Arnault, the CEO of LVMH, based in France, owning the high-fashion brand, Louis Vuitton, had a net worth of $66.7 billion (Warren, 2019).Alongside Arnault were the co-owners of the fellow high-fashion brand, Chanel, whose net worth sits at $26.1 billion, and the CEO of Deichmann, whose net worth sits at $9.2 million. Overall, amongst the eight companies, the CEOs obtain a combined net worth from $9.2 billion to $66.7 billion (Warren, 2019). In addition to this, it is interesting to note that the eight topmost successful European stakeholders are all of white ethnicity and are all male. This data shows that within the fashion chain, in which consists of arguably the most powerful people in the industry with regard to finance, there is a huge lack of diversity. 

In addition, it was shown in an Oxfam report published in 2018, “it takes just four days for a CEO from one of the top five global fashion brands to earn what a fast-fashion garment worker in Bangladesh will earn in their lifetime.” (Oxfam, ‘Reward Work, Not Wealth’, 2018). Whilst this statistic shows the level of power that these CEOs hold over the fashion industry, it also raises the issue of inequality amongst roles in the industry too, linking to the Better Lives theme of social responsibility. 

Within this lecture, Crew also discussed how power intertwines with us as the consumer. It was argued in an interview for ‘Vestoj’, by Laura Gardner, that “The consumer also has substantial power: the power of where and how we spend our money. This power can be positive, if handled correctly.” (Gardner et al., 2015). In regard to the Better Lives theme of social responsibility, and tackling the inequality seen within the fashion hierarchy, I believe that the power lies within the consumer. As consumers, where we shop, makes a difference as to what brands become successful. Therefore, if we choose to shop at companies which source sustainably and treat employees fairly, such as labour workers, supplying them with the fundamental human right of a living wage, then through the use of support, we are the ones striving for this change to be made, 

CITATIONS:

Warren, K. (2019). The 15 richest people in the fashion industry, ranked. [online] Business Insider. Available at: https://www.businessinsider.com/the-richest-fashion-designers-and-brand-moguls-in-the-world-2017-9?r=UK&IR=T#7-heinrich-deichmann-106-billion-19 [Accessed 3 Mar. 2020].

‘Reward Work, Not Wealth’. (2018). [online] Oxfam. Available at: https://www.oxfam.org/en/press-releases/richest-1-percent-bagged-82-percent-wealth-created-last-year-poorest-half-humanity [Accessed 3 Mar. 2020].

Gardner, L., Gardner, L., Akbari, A., Cronberg, A. and Richardson, D., 2015. The Best For The Most For The Least | Vestoj. [online] Vestoj.com. Available at: <http://vestoj.com/the-best-for-the-most-for-the-least/> [Accessed 10 March 2020].

After reading the assignment brief for the Better Lives unit I wondered how this topic related to my chosen path of learning which is costume for performance.  All of the first-year students at London College of Fashion, no matter what their discipline, are asked to complete the Better Lives unit to give them a greater understanding of environmental, diversity, social responsibility and sustainability issues.

Previous to the lectures on this course, I attended some lectures on sustainability in the fashion industry so I thought I had an insight already on this issue. After watching and attending some of the Better Lives lectures, this has deepened my awareness. In particular the lecture on ‘Society’ by Katelyn Toth-Fejal. Katelyn mentions how each of us are a social being and how dressing is a social act. ‘Social change happens through individual choices’ is one quote that got me thinking about ways in which the costume industry and myself as a costume practitioner can contribute to resolving this issue. I have learnt that costume makers by trade are familiar with being sustainable. Partly because they are trained to stick to strict budgets, partly due to convenience. They have to make costumes that have to be used frequently for performances so they use hard wearing fabrics. They are trained to preserve garments so that they can be recycled by different performers. When making garments they use larger seam allowances so that they can be adjusted for the next performer who needs to wear the garment. Elastics, drawstrings, buttons and poppers are used as fastenings, again so that a different performer can adjust a garment to their specific size. Costume makers have been using the, ‘Make do and mend’ motto that was used during the war years when people were on clothes rationing. So how can the fast moving, massive money-making fashion industry adapt to these ideas? Is it even possible? 

If we are to believe the facts that are given to us in these lectures then it is essential to change our way of thinking, otherwise we will have no planet left. It is that drastic and vital that things change and this change happens as soon as possible. I believe that if the fashion industry reviewed traditional methods of, ‘Make do and mend’ we will have a safer environment for our children to grow up in.  Using better quality fabrics will make garments last longer.  Mending a garment, putting a patch or a stitch on it will give the garment a longer life. Making the small changes will add up to a big change.  It is also fundamental that the fashion industry and governments modify the consumers thought process. It is too easy to buy a cheap garment that lasts for just five or six wears and then throw it away.  Purchasing a higher quality garment costs more but lasts longer. Consumers, governments and the fashion industry need to formulate a plan of action that is workable.

No-one wants to take away the creative freedom that fashion gives us but a revolution of practice desperately needs to happen. I remain optimistic that education for everyone involved will bring a positive outcome for all of us.

References

IMPERIAL WAR MUSEUM. (1943) Cover of Make Do And Mend Book. Imperial War Museum.[online image] Available from https://www.iwmshop.org.uk/p/17940/Make-Do-and-Mend [Accessed: 20.02.20]

In Fashion, every single person involved in the process of making clothes to wearing them has an essential role. It goes from the Designer, to the people who are making the clothes, to those who are selling them, to the consumer,… Unfortunately, important inequalities regarding the salaries are often (indeed all the time) observed, obviously depending on which position the person occupies. Designers get the higher salaries and their work is as important as everyone else’s but the conditions in which the clothes makers work and the salaries they get need to be changed. This is what it is about : raising awareness and so starting to provoke change partially by giving my opinion. 

Are you happy with what you have or do you always need more? 

In today’s society everything is made for people to consume more and more. In order to feel happy, people feel this need to buy new things as often as possible. The problem with that way of consuming? We are never truly satisfied. We are happy with our new acquirement for a few weeks or even days only and we always end up feeling like we are missing something and feel this urgent need to buy new things. But are all those things necessary to our well-being? 

When we think about the process of making clothes, we think of the people who are making them. But unfortunately, these people are most of the time underpaid and can’t buy the quarter of what most of us possess and sometimes can’t even pay for their basic needs like food and warm clothes. It is time for them to feel as happy as we are when we buy new clothes, but by allowing them to survive and work in better conditions. It is time to ask ourselves if we really need everything we buy and what we could do to help ameliorate the clothes makers’ situation. Fashion is, in my opinion, the solution to this problem. But this is in our hands as well. We could start thinking more about what we’re buying, why and where we are buying it from. Fashion journalists and interviewers could start asking Designers and brands how much are their employees paid to make them realise that people are starting to be aware of this problem and that they need to change things. On the other hand, those who are giving their employees good work conditions and salaries could also talk about it and how they did it through Instagram, blogs,… I think that the best way of making change happen is awareness. It is people working in Fashion that mostly have the opportunity to ameliorate the situation and help these people for example by organising a fashion show with clothes realised by the models themselves or even recycled clothes to show that without clothes makers, Fashion is nothing and they deserve and need better salaries and work conditions.

To conclude, think twice before buying something. Do you really need it? Do you know about the company’s employees’ work conditions and salaries? That is now what I’ll start to think about before buying clothes. Every small step counts. 

References : 

Rogaten, J. (2020) ‘Well – being’ (Lecture). Better lives, London College of Fashion, 17th February. 

Kuronuma, Y. (2016) Available at : https://asia.nikkei.com/Economy/India-hopes-to-overtake-Bangladesh-Vietnam-in-garment-exports (Accessed : 02.21.20).

After seeing John Lau’s lecture on culture. I became very intrigued by the way fashion interact with larger cultures. Culture exists as a collection of ‘ideas, customs and social behaviours’, and thus it influences our ‘values, actions, and expectations of ourselves’, John said. So thus throughout history and different cultures, we see people donning dresses that reflects their respective statuses, needs, and era. I see that fashion grows accordingly to the things happening around different cultures — society, politics, and beliefs. Thus, certain appearances have been made to be associated with certain occupations or beliefs, like how John exemplified the politician look epitomised by Margaret Thatcher. It seems then, to me, that fashion is born to be the embodiment of culture — we assign certain semantics to certain aesthetics. However, this practice brings repercussions that have always baffled me. In our age of globalisation with bursting grow in diversity, we often see talks of cultural appropriation versus appreciation in fashion. And people tend to quickly get angry when bits get borrowed from a culture appear in a garment, or when put onto a person of a different culture. Certain subjects in many culture become isolated, and I feel like they become reserved exclusively for current members of each particular culture. John made a point talking about fashion items that might have infringed on the cultural significance of other cultures, such as the blackface inspired sweater, saying that it is bad designing, in which the design fails no acknowledge the meaning of the aesthetics. I understand this point, but I also think that when we restrict the use of aesthetics that are associated with worse things in history, such as slavery, religions…etc, we turn them into taboos. And I feel it is an extreme way of assessing fashion during our strive for globalisation and diversity. We should not have to get angry when we see Justin Bieber with dreadlocks, or when John Galliano run a Japanese inspired runway. Just because certain looks are bonded with ugly things from the past, doesn’t mean we should bury it away, especially when we very much make the better out of it.

Reference:

Lau, J. (2020) ‘ Cultural Sustainability’ [Lecture]. Better Lives, London College of Fashion, 18 February.

In these last two weeks, I have attended some really interesting lectures. Julia Crew’s lecture on the 10th of February has shaped my thinking on how much influence people in power have over the fashion industry. Fashion is powerful… The fact that Love Island can increase sales by 40% on BooHoo by just including some of their garments on the show illustrates how much power the media and influencers have over the youth and their fashion choices. Similarly, the pressure social media puts young users to keep presenting a new, updated, fashion forward feed, not only leads to increased anxiety and depression but 100 billion garments a year, with 75% of that clothing going to landfill. Personally, I think this is mad. The constant bombardment of fashion brands is becoming very invasive, brainwashing the youth into a fast fashion style craze. Fast fashion won’t decrease until the media understands the power they have is having a detrimental effect not only on the environment but on our youth.

The distribution of money in the fashion industry due to power isn’t creating better lives either, infact, quite the opposite. The industry is competing in the ‘race to the bottom’ to produce clothing at the cheapest price point possible to insure the cost of goods is cheaper for the supplier, to produce even more cheap clothing. A vicious cycle. The businesses that work in this way suggest it ‘creates better lives’ by ensuring the workers keep their jobs. However, in reality the workers are exploited to the max; forced to work overtime and unpaid in terrible conditions, all for our consumer culture and love for fast fashion.

However, as consumers we also have the power to set trends and choose where we spend our money. The power isn’t just in the hands of influencers and rich businessmen, but us. We are the ones buying their stock and generating their money; boycotting gives us the power and the ability to reshape the industry. As a consumer collective, we could bring down the reign of fast damaging fashion. A new dawn. The potential to allow the fashion industry to create better lives by dismantling the current toxic regiment brands are stuck in. 

Being young creatives branching into the fashion industry, we are able to influence each other in positive ways. In her lecture, Crew said ‘power is control, but power is also freedom’, the utilization of this can push our generation of designers to inspire a new approach in terms of technology, material, to make sure exploitation is eradicated from the industry. This power shift could also make the media and the way we portray and inform fashion more equal and less harmful to the planet and consumers. Power is positive, if it’s in the right hands. We can change lives through fashion with this power. To quote Extinction Rebellion who has protested against the many negative attributes in fashion and the many environmental issues the industry has caused, “there is no fashion on a dead planet”.