Dissertation
CARDIFF METROPOLITAN UNIVERISTY CARDIFF SCHOOL OF ART AND DESIGN BA (HONS) FINE ART
Culture Appropriation through identity: A Foucauldian Perspective
Briana Gough
16th March 20201
Culture Appropriation through identity: A Foucauldian Perspective
Briana Gough
Submitted for: BA (Hons) Fashion Design Cardiff Metropolitan University
I declare that this dissertation has not already been accepted in substance, or in part, for any degree and is not currently submitted in candidature for any degree. I further affirm that the substance of this work is entirely the result of my own independent research, except where otherwise stated.
Signed :
Name in Full: Briana Amber Chantelle Gough
Date: 16th March 2021
Word count (circa): 9,897
https://brianagoughfashion.wordpress.com
ABSTRACT
This dissertation looks into the interactions between culture, identity and semiotics through the perspective of Foucault’s theories within Society. It progresses the importance of the consumer as well as fashion businesses through the narratives of structure, power and discourse. Using the specific study of Gucci autumn/winter 2018 collection diagnoses the current responsibilities within culture appropriation and how globalisation is impacting the values within symbolic garments. This context expresses the developments and fashion cycles created through Foucault’s concept of panopticism and cultural flows. Looking within business strategies highlights the responses from power dynamics between societies acceptance and rejection within fashion as it explores the responsibilities within formatting new identities. This conclude whether the philosophy of Foucault can clarify the history of fashion culture and predict the future of fashion globalisation. Using contractions such as Chomsky to finalise these results.
CONTENTS
1. Title Page
1. Declaration and Acknowledgment
3. Abstract
4. Contents
5. Introduction and
6. Key Words and Chapter One
15. Chapter 2
23. Gucci Case Study
28. Conclusion
32. Bibliography
INTRODUCTION
This study seeks to disclose the attachments of identity and interpretations through the narratives of fashion. In today’s society we often ignore the source of knowledge that is obtained within traditional dress making that transcends aesthetics, disregarding their symbolism to influence non-sustainable trends. Within this practise of art, fashion has become a prodigious imitator using inspiration from any source, becoming a copycat industry. Within my practise I forget the values of cultural wear that innovates my designs, conforming to western civilisation. There are small details that differentiate inspiration and reinterpreting. Semiotics in culture can be lost from not specifying the origins and meanings behind it, causing an illusion of culture. Disputing this disregard towards the fashion industry I will question the effects of semiotics through the consumers perspective as well as the industries interpretation. This displays the accountabilities between both parties and how they interact to alternate controversies, understanding discourse in society. Exploring the case study of Gucci ready to wear autumn/winter 2018 will give me enlightenment to the responses within this matter and the overview of traditions, understanding social media as a platform to express the responses of cultural placement. Confining to philosophies that illuminate fashion psychology, marketing behaviourism and cultural ties will guide me the answers to question why modern communities’ expressions change throughout different time phases, proposing we are becoming self-aware to the responsibilities of ethical fashion. From the study of previous literatures, it is hard to distinguish reasons for every directional change in fashion which can cause generalisation. My thesis proposes that the knowledge of panopticism from the philosopher Michel Foucault used within fashion will give an understanding to societies response to cultural identities. This will indicate their implications through influential change and why the response of different parties within society has different causes of episodic events. As the diversity of society is constantly changing the importance of fashion appropriation is significant, the freedom of communication within clothing allows consumers to have a range of garments but queries morals and imitation. This questions whether fashion is still regarded as self-identification when the elements of culture and community has become commercialised. Is this caused by the power of western industries from its placement within social structure and how the fashion industry has reached this prospect through placement of society. This concludes if my thesis can use Foucault’s theory to explain the developments of culture appropriation and the prospect of future fashion. This will allow me to understand who is responsible for the changing identity within cultural fashion and how communities are scrutinizing this behaviour.
KEY WORDS
Battle of truth - the change of normality through development of power
Power - capturing leadership as others follow
Discourse-a change of events through fashion statements
Hierarchy - order of society through dominance
Society- modern society that relates to western communities unless specified
Structure - normal construction of western society unless specified
Identity - expressing a person’s state of who they are through fashion unless stating the identity of an object that shows narrative
CHAPTER 1
FOUCAULT THEORY
Although it may appear to be a conscious decision with what we wear. Fashion is heavily influenced through power and socialisation, which can indicate one’s place in civilisation. Despite fashion statements being seen as a personal preference, it embodies power that can cause a “battle of truth” (Gaventa, J. , 2003). One’s perception of expression through clothing can oppose a different judgement to another. What once resembled a certain tradition within an individual society becomes exposed globally, questioning exploitation in fashion. Can we categories one’s place in civilisation if western fashion has undermined culture ties to produce fashion outcomes for a generalised society. Consumers can conform to societal expectations or produce non-conformity connotations, causing a manifesto to embody a new discourse, as stated by Gaventa, J. (2003). Furthermore, Gonzalez and Bovone (2012) states that fashion produces order in the world, controlling social environments while performing corporate growth. Companies can use social media to produce a popular notion through the platform, creating normality in order to produce discourse. People have become a custom to the acceptance of westernisation from its position of power within society. What once was a range of culture diversity in the fashion industry has now become generalised from the act of marketing on a global scale. The constant exposure to one power influences effects what we wear and therefore our identity. Elaborating on this theme, Michel Foucault proposes a perspective on hierarchy and social differentiation, questioning theories of dominion through episodic events. There is a pronounced opposition between the faculties of influencers within fashion, whether being the consumer or the designer, what we choose to wear is dependent on both parties. “Battle of truth” (Gaventa, J. , 2003) can be provoked from any class, recognising its level of influence and how it can impact on others. Foucault investigates the “power structure” (Ewen,1990, p252) and how we imitate or eliminate the hierarchy from other affiliations. Further exploration of these sections underpins the developments of power diffusion between fashion psychology.
Foucault used panopticon to explore perspectives on social behaviours and hierarchy. He indicated the relationship between systems of social control and people in disciplinary situations, referring to Moya K. Mason (2018) concept of power-knowledge. This describes panopticism as the feeling of constantly being observed by the subject in power. We often find ourselves acting accordingly depending upon the situation, making our social interactions adapt to our surroundings. Our wardrobe can be categorised into different statuses used in different social interactions. This is caused by society formulating to the rules of dressing. We feel the need to follow others in terms of a dress code and its function. For instance, we often have occasion wear that is different to casual wear but panopticism questions why we feel the need to do this. Smith (2012) concludes that there is a constant confrontation between the people in power and the people who monitor their behaviour, creating a sense of leadership while others imitate. We are expected to “self-regulate” (Smith, 2012), causing social awareness and to follow commands. Emphasising this into my own subject, exposure to fashion movements causes a sense of panopticism in designers to stay on trend. This suggests that the subject in power would be the trend initiator, whether being a consumer, blogger or a company. Having said that Foucault (1991) use of bio power would proliferate the system of control which could interchange to the designer, making this theory dependent upon placement in hierarchy. Individual fashion can be placed into different influencers; street fashion is dependent upon the inspiration of consumers while couture is often influenced from other sources. However, the use of culture can be seen in every aspect of fashion. This could help explain why culture misappropriation has become the norm in today’s fashion network, as the consumer has followed the trends in society. We follow the conformities of dressing from its popularity between one another without questioning the reasons why, reflecting the dominant trend.
“Parts of society can be regulated in the form of dress (e.g. uniforms)” (Smith, 2012). This classifies leadership roles and the hierarchy of society, using fashion discourse to affect individuals. This can be seen as a direct relation to the philosophy of panopticism but there are many indirect associations that can be applied to the arts of fashion. It has become accepted to wear western fashion inspired by cultural wear rather than the origins of the garment itself. This has been accepted by fashion branding at the top of the hierarchy, disregarding smaller businesses in the industry. Monica Bota-Moisin (2018) explains this through several case studies such as Tom Ford spring/summer collection 2011.The traditional Romanian blouse was copied to be labelled under a new designer. Without any consequences of exploitation towards culture there is a loss of identity from the Romanian blouse. The consumer has now represented a culture without knowing the meanings behind it, causing society to have no individual identity within fashion. Another example expressed by Monica Bota-Moisin (2018) is Tory Burt resort collection 2018 using a 20th century Romanian coat. Not only was there no credit given to its ethical meaning, but it was a direct copy of the design, not just being inspired by the garment. Being placed at the top of the hierarchy causes power over those who follow, even if it is inappropriate the imitator adopts the current movement of trends. Original design concepts that are placed into well-known brands causes higher popularity with consumers rather than its’ found origins, showing how influential other competitors are towards the consumer. The consumer wants to gain approval rather than decide for themselves what they want to wear, following what is seen as the norm in society, thus becoming amenable. Customers of current brands become loyal to the point of not seeking out other forms of fashion, allowing western fashion to adopt other fashion.
To understand the theories of panopticism it is necessary to understand the origins it was placed in, that being the disciplinary concept from the control of a prison. Smith (2012) describes this through the placement of a tower within in the centre of the prison. This allows all cells to be viewed, suggesting the prisoners could be seen at any time. Whoever is placed within the tower cannot be seen by the prisoners, causing the fear of constantly being watched. Developing an unseen discourse in society, this hypothesis would suggest social change in behaviours leading to jurisdiction. Associating to the rules of fashion, designers or consumers would be judged into an unsocial division. If they were to go against the norm it would cause a “battle of truth” (Gaventa, J. ,2003). Referring back to Monica Bota-Moisin (2018) reflection on the Romanian inspired blouse from Tom Ford summer collection, she explains that the response from consumers varied in opinion. Some Romanian consumers believed that it was an honour the culture inspired a well-known designer, while others could not understand why there was no credit given and how this fashion that originated to express a culture has become branded. We are led to believe that what is at the top of the hierarchy should be followed like the order within a prison. The rules within a prison cell are not normally questioned until society expresses their difference of opinion.
While Foucault’s philosophy on Panopticism helps demonstrates the patterns of fashion seasons, it is appropriate to voice the conclusions of abandoning social hierarchy. At the beginning of this philosophy research, I contended society being monitored by a higher power but if the community “rejected the power structure” (Ewen,1990, p252) this would suggest an oppositional stance to fashion. Proposing the discourse in society questions theories of hierarchy and social differentiation. Using a Foucauldian perspective, I will challenge the idea that “power is everywhere” (Gaventa, J. ,2003) displaying acts of dominion through episodic events. Foucault did not only explain one scenario of social structure but also the apposed situations. Society can go against leadership and confront these accustomed expectations, fighting capitulation. The prediction of a discourse within the fashion system could be anticipated through the understanding of panopticism and the analysis of disputes between the social hierarchy of fashion. This questions whether the consumers are going against the power of fashion businesses that are placed at the top of the hierarchy, to ask their responsibilities within culture identity of fashion.
Power is affected by external influences that create social scale, being “neither an agency nor a structure” (Foucault,1998) as it can move in any direction based on individual situations. What society believes to be true forms acts of power, develops a “metapower” (Gaventa, J. ,2003) Power can be escalated rather than produced by one entity, dispersed not restricted by confinement. “Embodied and enacted rather than possessed” (Gaventa, 2003(2)), this causes power to shift from one entity to another, questioning if there is more than one structure responsible for culture appropriation. Shifting away from the rules can be seen as going against power causing a “battle of truth “(Gaventa, J. ,2003) creating a “source of social discipline and conformity” (Gaventa, J. ,2003). What once was a battle can now become the ordinary as the original hierarchy has developed. The impact of panopticism has shifted from the subject in power, to monitor their behaviour. This develops a relationship between the consumer and the designer, alternating influences from one another. This hypothesis defines how globalisation has led to the dominance of Westernised fashion throughout other cultures, overpowering other cultural wear. This can be seen as normal development within a capitalist society from a competitive business point of view, however is this success unjust? Westerm cultures have produced an environment where other cultures can’t compete on a global scale, due to lack of exposure. Western fashion is not just popular to the consumer due to its original design, but it imitates other cultures as a source of inspiration without giving any recognition, creating a platform of all fashion under one market.
FASHION IDENTITY
To use Foucault’s theory, it is important to recognise identity within fashion, connecting to the semiotics of culture. As distinguished by Gonzalez and Bovone (2012), connecting the body with our dressed body creates bodily decoration, a basic element of our identity. Fashion has influenced how we categorize different bodies and social classes, using clothing as an “identity kit” (Ana Marta Gonzalez, Laura Bovone, 2012,p.72). Modifying the naked body formulates statuses between embodiments, whether being fashionable or anti fashionable our “Style refers to behaviours” (Ana Marta Gonzalez, Laura Bovone, 2012,p.intro).This can identify the pressures on consumers, feeling the need to work with societal expectations or rejecting fashion marketing, with no concerns of being ostracized. Fashionable or anti fashionable indicates whether identification of a person through clothing can gain an inclination of an individual without manipulation of exposed pressures. Being described as fashionable can cause a misbalance of identity, disrupting one’s freedom to dress if they are willing to mask themselves to follow the popular notions of trends. A more direct response for a clear indication of identity is the dialogue of uniform, due to its “unambiguous form of communication” (Marta and Bovone, 2012, P.56). Further demonstrations of this could be the type of work wear to present our identity in society. This can play the role of recognition of wealth from a suit enforcing higher income to being a labourer wearing building attire. Other examples can express certain gender, age and religion but expressing identity to create certain characteristics within individuals can become more complicated. Elaborating this hypothesis to our desired fashion, Gonzalez and Bovone investigates the capabilities of identity recognition. This question “we are what we wear” (Ana Marta Gonzalez, Laura Bovone, 2012, p.15), through representations of ourselves as communication is displayed to society. Clothing can be stated as the first exchange of contact without vocal communication but as a visual statement, using our dress to substitute our identity. The debate between fashion and academic researchers suggest that clothing can be measured as a language through sartorial meanings, causing complex context while clothing rules produce “pocket of homogeneity” (Ana Marta Gonzalez, Laura Bovone, 2012, p.5). Lipovetsky (1987) suggests that fashion identity can only be produced if the individual applies self-expression within the “empire of fashion” (Ana Marta Gonzalez, Laura Bovone, 2012, p.intro), having no continuous patterns to measure identity, due to its “idiosyncratic” (Ana Marta Gonzalez, Laura Bovone, 2012,p.5) mannerisms. This has become challenging to distinguish further profiling within fashion as consumers feel the need to stay on trend from the process of panopticism, Foucault’s theory of power through leadership as others follow. Influencers within the decision of clothing can affect the judgment of visual communication, it is dependent upon individuals wanting to display a proposal or produce a new identity. The value of identity is greater when there is a development of a discourse within a consumer, neglecting the pressures of formality, abandoning trends and therefore rejecting panopticism. Gonzalez and Bovone (2012) journeys through the identities of fashion through a multidisciplinary approach, contemplating the connections between the consumer and fashion marketing. Identities can produce a reflection of oneself or mask certain commodities using clothing, re-enacting or reinforcing.
Gonzalez and Bovone (2012) concept of fashion identity connects to the theory of Foucault’s perspective of social hierarchy; consumers choice of communication can categorize their place within society. This links to contemporary fashion as associations with acceptance or rejection can be presented through placing ourselves within different fashion formations. This causes a “battle of truth “ (Gaventa, J. ,2003) whether to conform to our “ascribed status” (Lennon, Johnson, Rudd, 2017, p.263) or our “achieved status” (Lennon, Johnson, Rudd, 2017, p.263). Progression over time affects our identities, whether to remain the same such as one’s position within a community or to pursue adaptations within ourselves, fluctuating on the social hierarchy. Often developed from internal and external factors one’s identity cannot be categorized into one motion but is interchangeable, affecting the clothes we wear. This makes it difficult to produce a conclusion of identity through fashion, as an individual’s style changes from the constant counteraction between our “ascribed status” (Lennon, Johnson, Rudd,2017, p.263) or our “achieved status” (Lennon, Johnson, Rudd,2017, p.263). Reforming to each status inconsistently over time effects an individual’s fashion choice, often having a variety within our wardrobe. The history of a consumer’s fashion choice is an indication of their reaction to different society periods. The relationship between social environment and class can impact how we view our own identities and connect with one another, while placement category gives identity through others referring your placement of the social hierarchy. Everyone is affected by these determinants differently, depending on the demands of society’s structure.
Gonzalez and Bovone (2012) state that pressure within social identity can resolve in fashion overstatements from anxieties of appearance and body image, Panoptism has induced the analysis of clothing. Exaggeration is a form of perceiving others of who we are, becoming important to the consumer so that others recognise their position within the hierarchy. The constant feeling of being watched by the subject in power has caused dependencies on how others regard us. We become self-verified through establishing fashion that express our own perspective of personal identity. The need for acceptance constructs criticism from others to cause validation, no longer having the desired “opposition” (Lennon, Johnson, Rudd,2017, p.241) which produces uncertainty for true expression of identity. Lennon, Johnsons, Rudd,2017 corresponds to Gonzalez and Bovone, vocalising that we no longer want to stand out or become too similar, assessing one another’s appearance. This connects to the theory of need for uniqueness by Synder and Fromkin (1980). Examples of this are found in the impact of westernized fashion, heavily influencing the fashion industry resulting in the identity of other cultures being lost.
Fashion is an “aesthetic standard of judgment” (Ana Marta Gonzalez, Laura Bovone, 2012, p.12) making us conscious of fashion rules and what is classed as on trend and off trend. Trends are becoming more popular in society than that of our true identity within culture, the fast fashion industry has emphasized the cycle of panopticism. This doubts whether society can make a clear statement through clothing, analysed by Gonzalez, Bovone (2012) we should not feel obliged to confined to other opinions of what is classified as attractive but choose to decide for ourselves. In reality, today’s society are influenced through marketing trends, not having an open expression of oneself. The media portrays regular experimentation with fashion, resulting to no self-discovery and no code formation within fashion identity of consumers. The subject in power has caused our identities to become monitored. It may appear we have more options through the use of media as we are more exposed to fashion companies, but this is limited through the competition of brands, affecting the exposures of society. Due to the power of westernized fashion other cultures traditional wear is ostracised.
Lennon, Johnson, Rudd, (2017) also supports identity through Foucault’s perspective, suggesting how identity within fashion adapts through statement in power. We ask ourselves whether to conflict with social conformity or to become the unaccepted. From wanting to satisfy our needs (id), our ego decides how we can overcome this while our superego imposes our limitations. This creates “apposition” (Lennon, Johnson, Rudd,2017,p.241) and “opposition” (Lennon, Johnson, Rudd, 2017, p.241) identity; whether to create new identities or to imitate others. If society believes to have produced an individual fashion style, we are still practising the imitation of the superior. Fashion marketing leads us to make decisions within seasons and communities we can access. Consumers might believe they have made their own choice of clothing but are often subconsciously choosing clothing that has been exposed to the individual through trend forecasting and advertisement. The clothes that we buy are often mass produced, making it difficult to produce a new form of identity when it has been exposed on a global scale. This is due to the popularity of western fashion and the power of its industry. Arguing against this concept is the use of active stylisation, creating a new interpretation from the same merchandise. Going against the formality of imitation causes “Ultra-socialisation” (Ana Marta Gonzalez, Laura Bovone 2012,p.72) and “ego screaming” (Lennon, Johnson, Rudd,2017,187) which creates key influencers for others to follow. Lennon, Johnson and Rudd (2017) explain that identification is created through inspiration of others and modelling which produces coercion within society. It is only our superiors, ego screaming and societies that go against the social hierarchy that truly relate to fashion and identity, not being influenced through panopticism. Having said this the cycle of trends in fashion is often created from those that are ego screaming and going against fashion conformities, becoming the influencer. Davies (2014) uses the example of Doc Martins to understand the cycle of fashion trends. Initially Doc Martins were used for workwear shoes from its comfort and durability but attracted an anti-fashionable attire within the youth subculture. What was once was a sensible workwear shoe has now become a fashionable trend to date due to the influence of “Punks, Grunge and Indie kids” (Davies,2014,p.4) Referring to Barnard (2002) it is fashion that makes us individual and not clothing that is worn within simple societies, that not being the subculture youth within the history of Doc Martins. Foucault theory on power can be adapted depending upon different societies groups and enactments of hierarchy from past to present. “Power is everywhere” (Gaventa, J. ,2003) therefore it depends which individuals influence change in power which is dependent on how identities change. This questions whether consumers that do follow the popularities of fashion are still able to produce their own identity within each trend or whether to have a true representation of identification consumers must go against mainstream apparel.
Concluding identity through the literature reviews of Gonzalez, Bovone (2012) and Lennon, Johnson, Rudd, (2017) the impact of communication through fashion is affect through a certain number of factors. Ones indication of identity cannot be applied to another as fashion followers adopt different shapes of identity depending on occasion. Associating with only one statement, “the identity of a person cannot be reduced to a single aspect” (Ana Marta Gonzalez, Laura Bovone 2012). Fashion can be expressed through several occasion wear, creating a diverse wardrobe within an individual. If we were to observe one’s identity through there fashion “Patterns of dress over time would need to be observed” (Ana Marta Gonzalez, Laura Bovone 2012, p.56). Analysing an outfit rather than a garment alone for an individual’s preference is an inclination of their personality, focusing on style and accessorizing rather than fashion alone. Ginzalez, Bovone (2012) emphasizes the true indication of identity is when we can produce a voice of communication while trends are constantly changing. Previously stating that it is only our superiors and ego screaming that pushes the boundaries to create identity, fashion trend followers that are still able to create an outfit that is unique from others are still indicating a form of identity. If we can reflect our personalities within ourselves and to others in a constant manner while adapting to fashion developments, identity is formed, expressing the same narratives over time. This may be less of an extreme expression not going against mainstream apparel but can still be an indication. This statement of reflecting fads leaves us to question whether our identity within culture to be. Time is a key assessment to evaluate a person’s consistency within status or modification of themselves. The difficulty of this is knowing whether they have developed their identity or produced “Social masking” (Ana Marta Gonzalez, Laura Bovone 2012). Identity itself cannot be categorized into one aspect, our personalities change, develop and adapt depending on circumstances. This needs redefining before using fashion as an indication of identity. Whether being a developing process, consumers experiment to work out “who they are “(Ana Marta Gonzalez, Laura Bovone, 2012, p.4). Gonzalez, Bovone (2012) introduces the work of Campbell to deliberate fashion identity in the modern world, discovering the response of seasonal wear that is brought to other people’s attention. One outfit is not a true expression of characteristics but monitoring what consumers buy can measure their true identity. We could argue that a person’s identity is more complex than what previously stated as a person can have multiple aspects within one identity. For example, this could cause an individual to feel feminine one day or masculine another, affecting what they wear throughout their lives. Not all individuals represent culture everyday but only on occasion or certain life events. We need to know a person’s characteristics to compare their fashion sense to evaluate similarities between the two. Results of this cannot be evaluated until there is a comparison to decide on a successful understanding.
When taken out of context, our active stylisation can transform an objects identity to refer to our preferences through different social standings. Calefato (2004) analyses that the aesthetic overrules the objects purpose, making the body distorts the entity. The previous proposition of fashion communicating one’s identity can be considered from a different perspective as clothing itself can produce its own connotations. Not only does our identity develop over time but the identity narrative of a fashion piece can adapt through time connecting to Foucault’s perspective of “power is everywhere” (Gaventa, J. ,2003). The relationship between the wearer and the garment can counteract its meaning, as a person’s identity changes so can an item of clothing. Garments have their own embodiment of identity and not just the person expressing through the material item. when fashion re designs the identity of a garments origins it causes a miscommunication of its original statement. Fashionable wear can produce symbolic meanings that relates to the distinct components of one’s self being the material self, the social self and the spiritual self, associating to Lennon, Johnson, Rudd (2017). As fashion reshapes to individual tastes the industry can disembark on cultural and religious semiotics relating to the spiritual self, leading to such cases as the Gucci’s ready to wear autumn/winter 2018. Lennon, Johnson and Rudd (2017) previous statement of identity being inspired through admiration of others can cause misappropriation from miseducation of interpretations. This guides us to the research of critics within semiotic fashion
CHAPTER TWO
SEMIOTICS
To begin the concept of semiotics it is important to indicate the definition of structuralism. Hawkes (1997) defines this theory through the formality of perception and description. Components can only be identified once claimed within an opinion formed from elements and circumstance, causing perception to sometimes be greater than the description itself. Perception indicates the identities of individual objects that are self-standing and categorized dependant on the perceiver. As each observer is individual they perceive objects in a diverse approach, this is the cause of “inherent bias” (Hawkes, 1997,p17).An objects entity cannot be classified within one perception as any observer demonstrates a different examined outcome . This creates “reality itself” (Hawkes, 1997,p17) from the dominance of the observed to the observer but questions if these forms of new realities are a true representation of each symbol. For an individual to truly understand an objects identity there needs to be a conversation to assemble how the reality materialises between two positions. The “principle involved must invest the whole of reality” (Hawkes, 1997,p17) which may lead to the opinion of a false perception of the object from the construction of different realisms . This is due to conflict between ones’ sense of truth to another; whether being an ontological relativist or an epistemological emic. Ontological relativists believes that reality only exists within their beliefs while emic epistemology is acknowledging different perceptions between individuals. This is significant to understand the developments of meanings towards an object over time.
An individual’s perception of an object reflects the definition of semiotics; from exchanging opinions between a symbol communicates the fundamentals of a component. We determine semiotics through the environment we are surrounded by, from societal demands and what they represent to others. As we become the observer and not the observed from, the pressure of panopticism demonstrates the “quasi-necessary “(Hawkes, 1997,p124) nature of signs. This validates that semiotics are learned from what an individual has been exposed by their social environment, recognising the “statement “(Hawkes, 1997,p124 )it produces within that community. This demonstrates structuralism, as the reality of individual semiotics, are determined by our own practises or as stated by Hawkes (1997,p124) “intelligence capable of learning by experience” (Hawkes, 1997,p124). Semiology is the “life of signs” (Hawkes, 1997,p124) which can be manipulated through the study of fashion, communicating ones perception through the decoration of the body. Stretching the idea of language as an unwritten communication is an accomplished form of semiotics, indicating meaning and identity.
“Triadic relations of performance“(Hawkes, 1997,p127) is often used within the fashion industry to help create a recognisable brand within competitors of marketing. It is an example of how semiotics use the format of an “icon” (Hawkes, 1997,p127), an image that helps to represent a sign without having to apply itself. The use of branding helps to identify a fashion company, advertising their identity to the world through representation of a logo. Often the “icon” (Hawkes, 1997,p127) itself becomes more dominant than the aesthetics of the garment , becoming the selling point for luxury brands. This produces a fashion statement that can be referred to Foucault’s theory of panopticism and idolisation. We instantly feel that we have to follow fashion directions through the power of branding and designer labels, the more recognition of a fashion name creates more power. “Triadic relations” (Hawkes, 1997,p127) entails “a sign whose object is ultimately not a single thing but a law” (Hawkes, 1997,p127).This is the understanding of an objects purpose of interpretation and what it can be related to. For instance, Luxury branding often symbolises wealth from the cost of these products, causing a stigma of a better quality of life to others. This represents more than a brand but suggests a life style choice. Idolisation has caused fake duplicates of these brands that are cheaper for other consumers to buy. Red point (2021) survey taken in 2020 states that 43.6 % have purchased a fake product and 20% of young respondents would consider buying a fake brand if it was quarter of the original cost. We have become invested in what the brand portrays, wanting to proclaim what it signifies, even if we cannot afford it. It has become more important for the consumer to become the observer rather than the observed. On the contrary, well-known brands also copy designs from smaller brands and fashion cultures. From my previous statement referring to Monica Bota-Moisin (2018), designers such as Tom Ford and their imitation of culture wear gives further exposure to consumers. For example, the Romanian blouse became more popular when an admired brand was applied to the same merchandise. The importance of semiotics within branding identity can determine a designs success within the market, selling the statement of a product rather than the garment itself. Structuralism within societies hierarchy has determined the change of statement from the Romanian blouse, changing its connotation and therefore its semiotics.
Hodge and Kress (1998) analysis of the semiotic system explains that the subject cannot be studied in solitude, but needs to be applied through social dimensions. This associates the theories of Foucault’s bio power and discourse in society. Without the knowledge of “meaning to power “ ( Hodge and Kress ,1998,p.2) this undermines opinions towards social and political movements. Applying this to fashion when it is positioned in globalisation and intentions of profiting causes biased access to fashion trends. Creating a disconnection between the “rulers and ruled, exploiters and the exploited” (Hodge and kress , 1998, p3). Foucault justifies this position through the “power structure” (Ewen,1990, p252) and the role of subject in power. Dominant parties within fashion globalisation use their power to create structuralism that reflects a reality that benefits the company, creating “ideology” (Hodge and Kress ,1998, p.3). For instance, fashion has become a copycat industry that can consciously misinterpret semiotic fashion to devalue and reproduce. Hodge and Kress (1998) suggests that structures within society have not always been portrayed correctly if the subject in power adopts new realities within semiology. The “battle of truths” (Gaventa, J. , 2003) causes the power dynamic to change if the resistance of fashion globalisation dominance is prospered, causing realities to conflict. We must identify the inequalities that capitalisation brings in order to understand our own perceptions and realisms. Using the symbolism of the cross in fashion demonstrates the developments of semiotics within power dynamics. As stated by Christian today (2017) this cross with its original connotation representing a religious view is often seen in popular brands such as Versace and Tom Ford to high street fashion like Primark and Abercrombie. The reality of the cross has discoursed into not only a religious commodity but also a fashion statement. Kolodziejska (2013) describes this development as decontextualization as popular cultures have generalized the crossed, becoming commercialised though the deconstruction of it reality. The dominance of the cross originals description has transformed to fit the communications of a different dominant culture. This is due to the perceiver becoming more important that the description, as stated within the introduction of structuralism. This questions the appropriation towards the perceivers of Christianity and debates the offense it can cause.
Using “Ideological complex” ( Hodge and Kress ,1998,p.3) identifies both power and solidarity, solving conflictions within semiotic constructions through exploiting the dominant and inferior. Ideological complex” ( Hodge and Kress ,1998,p.3) underlines the perception of epistemological emic beliefs, from recognition different social groups versions of authenticities. Alongside the practise of this theory, “lognomic systems” ( Hodge and Kress ,1998,p.3) neutralizes cultural interactions amongst individual values and others knowledge of traditions which can generate dispute. What may be offensive to an individual may differentiate towards another. The “Lognomic system” ( Hodge and Kress , 1998, p.3) evaluates “rules constraining production” ( Hodge and Kress, 1998, p.3) and “rules constraining reception” ( Hodge and Kress, 1998, p.3) from establishing who can announce the subject and whether one can comprehend both points of views. The system also deliberates conditions of its placement, stating why conversation are instigated and how it occurred. This validates the case study of Gucci ready to wear autumn/winter 2018 and its criticism within social media. With society having access within fashion media, we are able to become the “lognomic system“ ( Hodge and Kress ,1998,p.3), causing feedback that influences the development of social structure .
Combining semiotics with cultural wear is appropriate within today’s society as there is a rapid social change which can reshape our academic disciplines within society as stated by Hodge and Kress (1998). Today globalisation and the access of media has spread different cultures, allowing multiple influences within fashion but debates the values of semiotics. Kaiser, S. (2012) describes fashion as a custom of time while culture is a custom over time, causing a complex correlation between design and society. This presents a debate of what is accepted and what should change within cultural appropriation. “Fashion has long been conceptualized as the product and domain of western capitalism” (Welters and Lillethun , 2018, p4 ), becoming the most successful in the industry. This has caused “euromodernity” (Kaiser, S. ,2012,p32) within undominant fashion cultures. “Euromodern” (Kaiser, S. ,2012,p32) history that is based within European countries has caused other multicultural societies to be categorized from a static world and unaccepted within the modern world. Having said this Knox, K. (2011) positions fashion as intertwined between the clash of east and west to produce variations in styles from textiles and embroidery to pattern cutting and shaping. This creates a positive outlook from a designer’s point of view but questions who is responsible for mislead identities, semiotics and cultural values. From fashion media advertisement, consumers and designers, the function of all three play different roles for influences and change. They can cause a positive or negative relationship between fashion and debate between one another.
FASHION STRATEGIES
what society believes to be “true” (Gaventa, J. , 2003) creates a state of discourse ,truths can be formed by institutions and reinforced through groups of people. They are resultant from forms of rules, “battle of truths” (Gaventa, J. , 2003). Influenced by societal cultures, Foucault suggests that power can be affected by periods of time. “reinforced (and redefined) constantly through the education system, the media, and the flux of political and economic ideologies” (Gaventa, J. , 2003). Today consumers are able to express their opinions from different global formats and have a better understanding through the use of media, becoming more self-aware. Foucault’s suggestion that power can be changed over time , explains how today’s society is creating a new discourse from having further access to education within the fashion industry. This Causes a “battle of truth” (Gaventa, J. , 2003) as our opinions adapt through the exposure of accessing new information. This has caused a reaction in the fashion industry to become more ethical within the products that they buy , causing a new trend created from the buyer rather than the designer, redeveloping the social hierarchy . Examples of this is more sustainable wear such as the high street clothing brand H&M, creating aims for “renewable fashion, while being a fair and equal company” (H&M group sustainability report 2017 ). Even though there has been a change in some aspects of ethically conscious marketing , the responsibilities of culture exploitation has been undermined with new developments. Foucault theory on power can be adapted depending upon different societies groups and enactments of hierarchy from past to present. “Power is everywhere” (Gaventa, J. , 2003) therefore it depends which individuals influence change in power which is dependent on how identities change. For instance the practise of fashion branding at the first stages of a business might not have a high impact on influencing society, however as it expands and becomes successful it can compete against popular designers. This creates a higher competitor that produces approval within consumers, having a raised division on the social hierarchy. Reformation is constructed through the different stages of the life span within a company. For instance, competing against well-known brands that aren’t just based on luxury such as high street clothing creates loyalty. Customers no longer buy clothing for its aesthetics but buys its statement through its name. Fashion companies are adapting their identities to become more attractive for the conscious consumer , creating a domino effect to make sustainability a new trend. The more advertisement and success of a fashion line makes society feel watched by them causing panopticism, causing further consumers to become more ethical .What once was at the lower end of the social hierarchy has dominated to the top. The spread of power is constantly changing. Referring to Chopra and Gajjala book of global media, culture, and identity , the culture imperialism theory reflects the dominance of culture through the instrument of media. This questions whether the discourse (Gaventa, J. , 2003) in fashion media is a natural happening from a multipolar world as some influencers are more popular than others , creating a higher power. Culture imperialism argues that this isn’t the case due to unequal access from the construction of global media. The nature of competition not just from a business point of view but from a consumers ,affects culture and identity. Using Foucault’s theories could suggest that the developments of certain aspects of ethical clothing can cause a knock on effect to give awareness within culture ties and branding, meaning the fashion system today could change for the future of other cultures.
To this point I have considered reformation within a company and how it develops on the social hierarchy through Foucault’s theories and social structure. Previous to this theme Gonzalez,Bovone (2012) states that it is also important to consider the consumers point of view within fashion media . Addressing this matter is crucial for the case study of Gucci ready to wear autumn/winter 2018 to advance knowledge between the subject in power and self-monitoring. This examines counterintuitively as the “bio power” (Foucault 1991) becomes a watershed due to customers rejecting their fashion. Today’s twenty first centaury fashion has allowed “schizophrenic shifts amongst fashion personas” (Maria Mackinney-valentin, 2017,p.14) given the consumer opportunities to alternate between styles without “committing to a specific identity”, (Ana Marta Gonzalez, Laura Bovone 2012). This generates greater multiplicity as the fashion system has given us further prospects for self-expression but questions if our social standing within fashion replicates our true individuality. Lennon,Johnson,Rudd (2017) debate whether retailers and manufactures are a socialization mediator. Customarily we are only familiarised to certain brands due to their dominance within the fashion industry. This confines the consumer from branching into diverse fashion, causing undermining for the “individuals capacity to develop a personal style” (Ana Marta Gonzalez,Laura Bovone, 2012). A commercial mentality objective is the increase of profit , limiting the innovation of independent fashion. Having said this Gonzalez, Bovone (2012) emphasises the measurement of one’s identity can be distinguished from the position of the fashion cycle, this is calculated through the consumers perception of their placement. Media shapes the outcome for future fashion identity through its controlling and successful communication between the buyer and the business, from a personal and social aspect. Different classifications of society can become more affected compared to others as the development of one’s style fluctuate over time leading to experimentation.
“Deterritorialization” (Chopra and Gajjala,2011,p52) has impacted on how individuals express themselves. It theorises the notion of geographic status within social, economic and political focus becoming inadequate for connection identity with placement. This has caused the sense of identity within spatial cultures to become uninfluential as media becomes omnipresent. Space is an important indication of context which is becoming an unclear distinguisher to classify in today’s modern technology. This creates a condition for material realities and semiotics to be experienced without its original configuration, prevailing our concepts of vision. It has become difficult to sustain traditions in a global world, needing a substantiality that both accepts globalisation and the keeping of identity and culture. As stated by Chopra and Gajjala (2011) millennials sense of location was an important indicator for categorising identity but the youth cultures of today are often manipulated through mass media , overpowering consumers identity as projected by Gonzalez,Bovone (2012)This is due to contemporary societies based on “appearing rather than being “ (Ana Marta Gonzalez, Laura Bovone 2012,p.5) not using fashion for self-expression but to pursue current trends that imitate media.
Fads have become a popular notion within today’s society from consumers having a “taste for novelty”, (Ana Marta Gonzalez, Laura Bovone 2012, p.11) engaging into new trends. This justifies the high turnover for fashion companies but leaves the consumer to constantly modify their visual appearance. Being able to express in a vast amount of styles, questions how we measure identity through clothing. Gonzalez,Bovine (2012) Indicates there are continuous accessibilities for new trends reaching communities within a short amount of time. This results in panopticism pressures of “fashionable attitudes, fashionable ideas and fashionable behaviours “ (Ana Marta Gonzalez,Laura Bovone 2012,p.165) , producing a deterioration in fashion values and meanings. Gonzalez,Bovone (2012) expression of fashion patterns is highly influenced through western society, causing globalisation of contemporary western associations . This supremacy causes other cultures to become limited in the access to buyers, causing a gradual “spread from elites to other social classes” (Ana Marta Gonzalez,Laura Bovone 2012,p.3).The Gucci ready to wear autumn/winter 2018 case study validates its reliance on fashion commercialisation and media as the constant developments of what is in and out of season from this brand creates fads. There is a loss of integrity as the brand changes styles for the sake of change, thus producing increased profit. The operations of fads has allowed high profile names like Gucci to understand consumers will follow their latest styles but what makes the study of this brand interesting is the evaluation of rejection. As detailed by Lennon, Johnson,Rudd (2017) consumers can reject merchandise and the influences of retail, discarding the construct of panopticism and the statement of Gucci on the social hierarchy.
Previously discussing the theories of cultural imperialism, other models of globalisation can help identify the changes of culture. For instance, the cultural flow network as stated by Crane, Kawashima and Kawasaki (2002) justifies globalisation created to not one embodiment but is influenced through all aspects of directions. This can be related to Foucault’s theory of bio power as dominance can be formed from any range of the social hierarchy, causing obscurity within the boundaries of centralising inspiration. This theory would cause “cultural hybridization” (Crane, Kawashima and Kawasaki ,2002,p1) rather than “homogenization” (Crane, Kawashima and Kawasaki ,2002,p1) , mixing cultures together through altering elements instead of popularization of one culture throughout. This illustrates different time frames within the developments of Foucault’s power dynamic. “cultural hybridization” (Crane, Kawashima and Kawasaki ,2002, p1) is a significant theory to narrate Foucault’s philosophy as there is no clear indication of ownership towards culture misappropriation. It could be argued that the mixing of cultures is instigated from power dominance of globalisation as without it, cultures wouldn’t have access to be inspired from each other. This cultural flow is often created with westernisation being the forefront of design aspects before any other, signifying a constant advanced power in the fashion system rather than a two-way flow. On the other hand, this concept could also be the foundations of development of new popularities of stronger dominance, rejecting the status of westernized fashion. This is a problematic debate to discuss as the history of fashion within globalisation has constantly been narrated within one cognitive but the recapitulation of society demonstrates discourse and structure is persistently evolving. While “homogenization” (Crane, Kawashima and Kawasaki ,2002,p1) is an example of how one power at the top of the hierarchy has caused panopticism, creating a new form of reality which can be interpreted to the introduction of how western fashion became globalised .
A third theory that is also portrayed by Crane, Kawashima and Kawasaki (2002) is the reception theory, causing negotiation and resistance. This is an indication of culture globalisation through the perspective of the consumer, debating new realities that is linked towards semiotics and discussing the “battle of truth “ (Gaventa, J. , 2003), indicated by Foucault. A debate is indicated only if perceivers are communicating the different authenticities each component holds and there is a shift within the social hierarchy, causing the consumer to become the influencer. This concept is not always successful in formatting a new direction, as the “audience response has little effect on global media conglomerates or culture policy” (Crane,Kawashima,Kawasaki, 2002, p2). Debating this statement, the development of social media and its impact on a global scale has caused the voices of consumers to have a greater impression on cultural appropriation. Panopticism has developed into modern technology, having a constant accessibility within everyday life. This system leads us to the introduction of the Gucci ready to wear autumn/winter 2018 due to its negative reaction from the media through a consumer’s responses.
GUCCI CASE STUDY
Fashion designer, Alessandro Michele’s inspiration for the Gucci fall 2018 collection came from the boundaries of humans, animals and machines. It focused on the 1984 literature of “A Cybog Manifesto” (Begum, 2018) by Donna Haaway, referring to his work as a “dystopian tale” (Begum, 2018). The collection had a vast array of different culture wears, from Chinese architectural head peace’s to representations of tribal jewellery. The response from the Gucci show based in Milan became negative and was expressed over different forms of media. For example, Diet Prada an Instagram account used for exposing copycat designs stated that “while we’re not against looking to other cultures for inspiration, please remember the threat, assault and persecution that these people face worldwide and the right they have to practice their beliefs in public” (Jackson, 2019). This case study exemplifies the developments of cultural appropriation through design, communication and naming as traditions in today’s fashion has led to “an umbrella term” (Sadaba, LaFata and Torres, 2020). This theory is used due to the industries history of imitation, causing generalised conditioning as culture is used for stimulating design. Such creations produce a mere example rather than representing its origins. Gucci’s 2018 collection summarises different degrees of influences to plagiarisms not only from a design point of view but how a fashion company advertises, brands and communicates culture to the consumer.
Appropriation through design was infringed due to Gucci’s numerous accessories that were displayed in the collection without any context, combining different cultures together to produce one season. Illustrating this, Gucci produced a number of head scarfs that can be related to religious semiotics of hijabs. By producing this scarf without its original context, it caused a new form of reality, affecting its statement within the community it was initially formed. Photographer and editor Faiyaz Kolia expands upon this through the struggles of deprived cultures, “Someone who buys and wears the Gucci scarf that’s designed to be worn on the head, wears it without stigma” (Begum, 2018). This is due to wearing a garment not for its religious connotations but as a fashion trend statement. If worn in this matter, the consumer has the option to take off the headscarf when they want. While from a religious aspect the wearer does not have a choice. This undermines the struggle of the Muslim culture within the westernised world. The history of the Hijab has caused many racial accusations, leading to dominant cultures misinterpreting and stereotyping the beliefs used to express their identity. Lamisa Khan (Begum, 2018), a reporter for a website representing Muslim women expresses the abuse from wearing a hijab to then seeing it considered within fashion. Normalisation could have been produced for other cultures, by expressing them within luxury brands. However, Gucci has only utilized the hijab for the “purpose of aesthetic for that season” (Begum, 2018) creating a negative perception within Islam. This not only undermines the religious symbolism of the hijab but also diminishes the history of social acceptance and its struggles.
Culture appropriation can also be discussed from a communicating point of view. Gucci’s representation of this collection had a vast majority of white models, “78 out of 90 models” (Finney, 2018) which caused criticism, as cultural wear was not being represented though its original patrons. This distinguishes between “rules constraining production” (Hodge and Kress, 1998, p.3) and “rules constraining reception” (Hodge and Kress, 1998, p.3) as society confronts the importance of how a religious symbolism can be perceived if worn by a consumer that does not address its meaning. Gucci could have been accepted if models that were used truly represented the ethnicities of each cultural accessory. For example, as stated by Fashion Magazine (2018), Marc Jacobs’ use of turbans to accessories his collection was accepted in society that was placed a season before Gucci. The representation of this cultural wear was communicated through the use of ethnically varied models, abandoning “apposition” (Lennon, Johnson, Rudd,2017, p.241) and “opposition” (Lennon, Johnson, Rudd,2017, p.241) identity. Therefore, the demonstration of a racial diversity acknowledges the negative effects of imitation within culture appropriation and the creations of new identities which produces a dishonest reality.
Gucci also caused controversy through the appropriation within naming. There have been discussions on the concept of design within culture, but it is important for the recognition of branding a product under a new name. An example of such is the turban called “Indy Full Turban” (Turra,and Lockwood, 2020, p1) which can be referred back to the “Triadic relations of performance” (Hawkes, 1997, p127). As Gucci’s renaming of a Sikh’s headdress, demonstrates a company strategy of reclaiming its original identity. This manipulation of structuralism is often used in successful labels such as Gucci with the explanation of panopticism and social hierarchy. However, the reactions of consumers caused a biopower formation within society as social media has created a platform for debates, “battle of truth” (Gaventa, J., 2003) For instance a social media response that has been quoted through Jackson (2019), comments “Did someone at @gucci even bother to figure out what a dastaar (turban) means to Sikhs? Did it cross your minds to consider the history behind our identity? My people are discriminated against, even killed, for wearing a turban”. This draws attention to the documentations of discriminations towards this garment when applied to wearers of its originators. Being reproduced for mass marketing has indicated that from Gucci’s perspective, the acceptance of society applied within consumers used the garment without its religious aspect. This challenges the concept of formulating to societal expectations. From one aspect Gucci’s previous success within the fashion system has caused consumers to follow trends that the brand produces, believing its powerful status in society. The history of globalisation has led companies to also believe that westernisation and its inspirations from other cultures have been accepted due to its dominance.
In contrast, the reception theory explained by Crane, Kawashima and Kawasaki (2002) has created an episodic event through the abandonment of “power structures” (Ewen,1990, p252) as consumers question Gucci’s representations of cultures. This exemplifies Foucault’s perspective on societies developments between different scenarios; how Gucci had expectations of approval to consumers rejections and overruling the collections performance. Observing this concept raises further questions as to why Gucci wasn’t accepted when previous identities in fashion have discoursed into new realities from the pressures of panopticism. For instance, the example of Doc Martins as previously stated, is an example of how its identity developed over time, suggesting that acceptance within manipulations of religious connotations rather than subcultures is abandoned within society. As aforementioned, this complicates the explanation of the Christian cross as its controversial statement within fashion trends has still remained successful in fashion companies, as consumers are still purchasing these products. This challenges whether there are developments within the conforming of a new society, understanding their acceptance and what is classed as responsible within culture wear. It has become difficult to premeditate how the social structure will develop in time as rules are often changed and developed from the theories of Foucault.
Furthermore, leading into the responsibilities between the consumer and the brand of Gucci. Marco Bizzarri, the CEO of Gucci stated that the company needs to re-educate themselves in terms of culture awareness as “being a global company, is a mirror of society” (Sadaba, LaFata and Torres, 2020). This not only confirms Gucci’s recognition of the mistakes made but also states its power within society. Gucci’s influence on consumers is caused through panopticism, fashion trends and hierarchy which indicates a higher accountability than that of the consumer. Consumers also have an important role to recognise brands responsibilities and are often powerful in producing a discourse in society. An explanation of this is expressed through Foucault’s use of bio power as without consumers response, Gucci would not see the effects of culture appropriation. This could indicate that the consumers have a higher role in leading rules within society, having a higher power and influence towards hierarchy. For instance (Sadaba, LaFata and Torres, 2020) states culture racism within the collection of Gucci in 2018 from a Balaclava knit jumper. This resembled blackface imagery that remained on online stores for one year without any controversy, only being raised once it became viral over twitter through social networking between users. Validating the importance of consumers is key within social progression as without, Gucci could create a trend that reproduces the history of blackface. Tendencies of fashion cycles could replicate this matter as it creates new popular notions that previously were classed as unfashionable. To demonstrate, Yves Saint Laurent produced a trend of turbans to “convey oriental glamour” (Young, 2018) that became impunitive due to consumers not responding to its culture appropriation. Without the pressures of consumers, fashion brands can produce identities to benefit their business. Panopticism has been formed through the relationship between the fashion industry and the observer rather than embodied within one entity. Findings of these affiliation could cause the theory of cultural policies, strategizing nations and cultural organisations to promote globalisation within other cultures that aren’t just based within western society. Cultural strategies protect inherited and traditional cultures, giving freedom to project to others, preserve and options for repositioning. An example of this is the Mexican government creating a law for protecting its culture heritage from being plagiarized, specified within Sadaba, LaFata and Torres, (2020). This arose from Carolina Herrera’s brand producing a resort 2020 collection with the inspiration of her Venezuelan origins and translating this into a New York life style. Even though this designer has a history within this culture it was perceived inappropriate to combine within an American culture. The cultural policy theory can become complicated with negotiations between different rules within different countries, understanding responsibilities within fashion culture should be seen as a global matter rather than individually.
The present Gucci case study has caused a controversial position within the perspective of Foucault’s theory as Alessandro Michele collection was inspired through Foucault’s disciplinary powers and fixed identities. The show was opened with quotations of Foucault philosophies, “the challenge of disciplinary power is to impose a precise identity on the subject. This operation is carried out placing the subject inside binary fixed categories, as the normal/abnormal one, with the specific intent of classifying, controlling and regulating the subject” (Segran, 2018). Here, centrals Foucault’s concept of identity being used as a control within bio politics and how others are perceived if we go against panopticism. Gucci’s garments are then expressed with the collection reconstructions of materials and collaboration of different identities within an operation room, created for the staging of the cat walk. Using the idea of a surgical hospital expressed the cutting renovation of garments within semiotics. This concept questions whether fashion is truly a freedom of expression within identity or there are boundaries for social acceptance. Previous statements within fashion identity have been analysed through un-fashionable trends and the meanings of going against society, causing a reaction that isn’t politically offensive compared to societies view of culture appropriation. Gucci’s launch of the 2018 collection articulates how communities responds to this subject within today's civilisation but questions these commodities for the future as globalisation and media expands. Expressions of philosophies within fashion has caused much debate as Gucci demonstrates its brand to produce a new discourse, indicating the limits within Foucault’s theory. Understanding Gucci’s place within hierarchy can predict its influence to consumes but under estimated the power of the consumer. Even with Gucci’s knowledge of how society is formed, its predictions were miscalculated. This suggested that Foucault’s perspective cannot always be utilised for prognosticating fashions futures within globalized culture as Foucault not only states social patterns within his philosophy but also states is unpredictable nature.
CONCLUSION
Throughout the case study of Gucci and the exploration within culture appropriation , it is clear that social media plays an important role within today’s society. Without this platform, education towards brands wouldn’t have been identified. Lauren Indvik, fashion editor from Financial times claims “There wasn’t the same visibility and awareness and dialogue around cultural appropriation years ago, but the internet has made it so much more visible” (Rackham, 2020). She explains that the focus of diversity has significantly changed within the last five years , which could be a substantial factor within the prospects of future fashion. This has transformed panopticism, creating a power flow between the observed and the observer. Globalisation and social media have converted fashion identities through the constant monitoring of what is deemed as socially acceptable, causing the social hierarchy to constantly adapt. It could be argued that societies discourse has accelerated from the past as access to knowledge has expanded, creating further power. Communities responses are a key indication for predicting discourse as brands begin to adapt within ethical polices. This challenges the change of power as it transforms the brand hierarchy, becoming obliged by the approval of consumers . Aforementioned, this summarises the use of Foucault’s theories, defining explanation through a philosophy observation. However there are limitations and further calculations that need to be applied.
To examine, history of globalisation within fashion has been constantly dominated through westernized society, arguing the statement of change within cultures. It is unclear to draw a conclusion that culture appropriation awareness will affect the outcome of designs as historically fashion has constantly been the adaptations of recycled styles. This queries how the industry will adopt new ideas of expressions without influence from other societies. Documentations of fashion history has allowed us to conclude that traditional wear is deteriorating as society adopts to modern thinking. It is hard to distinguish this occurrence , whether it is the nature of society or the loss of values. From one aspect , designers could begin to work with other cultures rather than copy, giving a voice to other ethnicities from the pressures of new policies. Adopting this concept could result in dominant brands remaining a higher power as designs will be exposed under one name, even if it is appreciated rather than appropriated. If cultures were to work without collaborations from stricter guidelines ,the media could create access to consumers without a competitive brand to be identifiable. These two scenarios suggest different outcomes within globalisation, causing further confusion within responsibilities and the opportunities for other cultures to grow.
While Foucault is used to understand society structures , there is no defiant theory to produce an accurate prediction. This philosophy creates a condition for counter reactions within different social scenarios but does not produce an answer within specific equations. Within this perspective it is important to accept counterintuitive philosophies, as stated by Wilkin (1999) , Noam Chomsky and Foucault share similar knowledge within social developments but dispute the abilities of human nature. Chomsky concludes that within Foucault’s statements of society the concept of social justice needs to be applied. Both philosophers distinguish “different conceptions of human nature, epistemology, and ontology” (Wilkin,1999, p 1). This can be related to culture appropriation within fashion as Chomsky believes societal developments will cause an ideal civilisation while Foucault argues there is no ideal concept within social integrity. The difference between these two opinions can conclude two different outcomes for future fashion, either developing culture diversity through historicism, as we connect passed problematic dynamics or though globalisation to cause the power of dominance without values. This is due to no ideal notion of social justice, created from the “battle of truth” (Gaventa, J. , 2003) as power can be dispersed within any structure while Chomsky indicates there is always a higher power within values and righteousness. Therefore, Justifying this concept, as communities need to harmonize the same outcomes within society, to share the same idealisation.
To conclude, it is undeniable that society has lost its values within culture identities from fashion appropriation. To adapt this problematic industry consumers and brands need to work together to create new found policies. Success of this outcome will only be produced through communities working throughout a global perspective, as design should be legalised within plagiarism. Throughout other industries rules are placed to prevent plagiarism, however from this investigation it is clear that society has forgotten its cultural responsibilities within the fashion industry. Identity within fashion has become a complicated subject from societies outlook of others and the attitudes within the fashion industry. Culture has become indecisive between inspiration and imitation.
BIBIOGRAPHY
Barnard,M.(2002) fashion as communication. Great Britain:Routledge
Begum, T.. (2018) Gucci Citicised For Culture Appropriation on A Global Scale. [Online] Available from: Gucci Criticised For Cultural Appropriation On A Global Scale | HuffPost UK (huffingtonpost.co.uk) [Accessed: 15th March 2021]
Calefato,P(2004)The clothed body.New York:Berg
Chopra, R. and Gajjala, R.(2011)Global Culture, and Identity. New York:Routledge
Christian Today. (2017) The cross in fashion :Appropriation or opportunity ?. [Online] Available from :https://www.christiantoday.com/article/the.cross.in.fashion.appropriation.or.opportunity/114711.htm. [Accessed : 8th March 2021)
Crane, D. Kawashima, N. and Kawasaki, K (2002) Global Culture : Media, Arts, Policy, and Globalization Taylor and Francis Group : ProQuest Ebook Central
Cultural Fashion: Transform the Fashion Industry From Villain to Hero. (2018) online video.Monica Bota-Moisin (URL) TEDXTUM
DAVIES, C.(2014) Smells like teen spirit: channelling subcultural traditions in contemporary Dr Martens branding.
Ewen S (1990) All Consuming Images: The Politics of Style in Contemporary Culture.New York: Basic Books.
Finney, A. (2018) Gucci appropriates minority cultures again: when is fashion’s ignorance finally going to stop ? [Online] Available from : THE PROBLEM WITH THE GUCCI CULTURAL APPROPRIATION - INDIE (indie-mag.com) [Accessed 15th March 2021]
Foucault, M. (1991). Discipline and Punish: the birth of a prison. London, Penguin
Foucault, M. (1998) The History of Sexuality: The Will to Knowledge, London, Penguin.
Gaventa, J. (2003) (2) Power after Lukes: a review of the literature, Brighton: Institute of Development Studies.
Gaventa, J. (2003) Foucault:power is everywhere (online) available from : http://www.Gaventa, J. .net/other-forms-of-power/foucault-power-is-everywhere/(accessed : 10thJanuary 2018)
Gonzalez, A. and Bovone,L. (2012) Identies through fashion a multidisciplinary approach. London, new York:Berg.
H and M (2017) H and M group sustainability report available from : https://about.hm.com/content/dam/hmgroup/groupsite/documents/masterlanguage/CSR/reports/2017%20Sustainability%20report/HM_group_SustainabilityReport_2017_Highlights.pdf (accessed : 25th October 2020 )
Hawkes, T.(1997)structuralism and semiotics.London:Methuen and co.Ltd
Hodge, R. and Kress G.(1998)social semiotics Oxford:Basil Blackwell.
Jackson, J.(2019) Gucci is Being Criticized For Cultural Appropriation Yet Again, And I am Just Tired. [Online] Available from: Gucci Is Once Again Being Criticized For Cultural Appropriation (buzzfeed.com) [Accessed 15th March 2021]
Kaiser, S. (2012)Fashion and cultural studies.London: Bloomsbury Publishing Plc.
Knox, K. (2011) Culture to Catwalk. How world cultures influence fashion. London: A and C black.
Kolodziejska, M.(2013) Symbol of the Cross in Popular Culture: an Analysis of the Use and Transformation of the Symbol in Machina Magazine . [Online] Proquest central (182). P 209-222. Available from : https://www-proquest-com.ezproxy.cardiffmet.ac.uk/docview/1446932922/abstract/BC372B970C8A4B9FPQ/1?accountid=15588 [Accessed: 1th March 2021]
Lennon,S and Johnson,K and Rudd,N (2017) social psychology of dress.New York London :Bloomsbury
Mackinney-Valentin, M.(2017) fashioning identity status ambivalence in contempory fashionLondon New York :Bloomsbury
Mason,Moya. (2018) Foucault and His Panopticon(online) Available from: http://www.moyak.com/papers/michel-foucault-power.html(Assessed : 10th January 2018)
Rackham, A. (2020) What high fashion is doing about cultural appropriation [online] Available from : https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-51177738?fbclid=IwAR3yats2-lhtrREu7Re9MBeG3AHLtwpf-epCNb7TFmF-Tywwor_ti6OMAO0 [Accessed: 15th March 2021]
Redpoint.(2021)Why young consumers turn to fake fashion online to fill their wardrobe [Online] Available from : https://www.redpoints.com/blog/young-consumers-fake-fashion-online/ [accessed: 10th March 2021]
SADABA, T. LAFATA, V. and TORRES, A. (2020) ‘Cultural Approrpiation in the Digital Context:A Comparative Study Between Two Fashion Cases, international conference on Human-Computer Interactions. Navarra University, 10th July 2020. Spain : ISEM Fashion Business school
Segran, E. (2018) Gucci put turbans on white models and explained it with cyborgs and Foucault. [Online] Available from: Gucci put turbans on white models and explained it with cyborgs and Fo (fastcompany.com) [accessed: 15th March 2021]
Smith,L.(2012) Fashion Theory: Foucault and discourse (online) Available from : http://www.rarelywearslipstick.com/2012/11/fashion-theory-foucault-and-discourse/ (assessed :10 January 2018)
TURRA, A. and LOCKWOOD, L. (2020) Renee Tirado, Global Head of Diversity at Gucci,Resigns Post. Womens Wear Daily. [Online] p.1-3.Available from : http://ezproxy.cardiffmet.ac.uk/login?url=https://www-proquest-com.ezproxy.cardiffmet.ac.uk/trade-journals/renée-tirado-global-head-diversity-at-gucci/docview/2495502127/se-2?accountid=15588 [Accessed: 15th March 2021]
Welters, L., and Lillethun, A. (2018) Fashion History : A Global View. Bloomsbury Publishing Plc : ProQuest Ebook Central
Wilkin, P. (1999) Chomsky and Fucault on human nature and policies: An essential difference ? [Online] 25. P 1-34. Available from: https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy.cardiffmet.ac.uk/docview/199307259/abstract/69594FC753114D24PQ/1?accountid=15588 [accessed 14th March 2021].
Young, C. (2018) What Can We Learn From Gucci’s Cultural Appropriation of the Turban?[online] Available from: What Can We Learn From Gucci's Cultural Appropriation of the Turban? - FASHION Magazine [Accessed: 15th March 2021]