Fashion Becoming Too Mainstream?

[plasticine20]

Originally posted by Diesel21@Jan 16th, 2004 - 5:37 pm
Paris prances around the farm in "the simple life" with her dior pants and manolo blahniks like it is totally normal. Give me a break...she thought Wal-Mart was a store that sold "stuff for walls". SHe either is extremally stupid or shes trying to portray the image that a girl needs to be ignorant of the world around her and wear couture everyday. Sorry i got off topic

The producers of the show picked the outfits for the girls. They had no say in what they wore. Just trying to clarify that part

 

[Diesel21]

thanks for clarifying...Well then I blame it on the producers...it is true that fashion is becoming too mainstream because the media lures people into a lifestyle many cannot afford to live resulting in people living beyond their own means

 

[labeladdict]

If one has the funds to purchase then .... Shop Shop Shop! Who are we to decide who has a right to buy Chanel because they weren't born with a silver spoon 'up' their nose...? Let's be honest...it's all about making the cash and the bling blingers like J. Lo & Co are buying the goods

Some of the comments here are smack of descimination and Elitism I am a fashion snob at times but hey....GOT $$$$ ? , then welcome to the club....

 

[labeladdict]

A birkin could be easily made for under $500...(I know where the leather can be sourced and also a friend who could have one made)...would you still buy it if it was under $500?

honestly....it wouldn't be as coveted. We always want what's most difficult to grasp. Goes back to the old boys "it's the chase, not the girl" that guys love. Same with high priced handbags. I wouldn't daydream about a $30 handbag the way I have Chanel bags.

I'm being honest.

 

[brian]

Originally posted by labeladdict@Jan 20th, 2004 - 4:26 pm
honestly....it wouldn't be as coveted. We always want what's most difficult to grasp. Goes back to the old boys "it's the chase, not the girl" that guys love. Same with high priced handbags. I wouldn't daydream about a $30 handbag the way I have Chanel bags.

That is actually very, very true.

 

[Eliza Neptune]

Hi, sorry to intrude into this forum and discussion. I came to the fashion spot a week or so ago to ask a question about a handbag. But since I have always been fascinated with fashion, and I have always been just curious in general - I decided to snoop around the other threads. I can live out my fashion dreams vicariously through this board : )

I'm not in the fashion industry in any way (which is probably obvious) though I wish I had gone into it. I adored fashion as a child and young adult, but I felt pressured to go a more "mainstream" route and go to law school - ha! All that money and I never practiced - now I'm in fitness. Anyway, beside the point...

There is a really good book out right now that discusses the underlying premise of this topic. It's called "Trading Up: The New American Luxury" by Michael J. Silverstein and Neil Fiske. I started reading it not too long ago and think it's great, especially for people who are in marketing.

Anyway, that's all I wanted to add

 

[tealady]

Welcome, Eliza Neptune.

 

[dl20]

i agree that certain things have gone ridicoulously mainstream, but as someone said early on in this thread, "if someone has no style, there is no label that they can hide behind.." Example, the masses of girls carrying around 20$ LV fakes, with a baby tee and lowrise jeans, makes u wonder if they can even think for themselves.......

i also think this issue is somewhat irrelevant for guys, not to sound like a snob, but i rarely see anyone my age who looks like they put any thought into what they were wearing that particular day.
Most guys i know wear abercrombie for casual or wretched A/X to go out

dl

 

[Lena]

Originally posted by Eliza Neptune@Jan 26th, 2004 - 3:14 am

There is a really good book out right now that discusses the underlying premise of this topic. It's called "Trading Up: The New American Luxury" by Michael J. Silverstein and Neil Fiske. I started reading it not too long ago and think it's great, especially for people who are in marketing.

thank you for bringing the title in

welcome to tFS eliza n.

 

[mrrene]

I think that one must not be too quick to establish a contradiction between money and style.

I mean that in the sense that fashion becoming "mainstream", as the topic title points out, has to do with designers and fashion houses may be more risk-averse when the economy is not doing so well and budgets become tight for those whose income is sensitive to that.

Perhaps when times are good, the fashion industry (meaning the totality of designers, firms and the distribution sector like department stores, chain stores, mail order houses, of course there will be more exceptions with designers), everybody is more willing to experiment, in fact, that's when they try to be sensational and outcompete each other.

The issue of "Me-too"-ism on the part of consumers is another sociological issue.
Lack of independence may force a great number of people into fitting in by way of designer labels.

Then again, many people - perhaps also here on this forum - may have a very genuine affection for some labels and items, based on their beauty. I don't condemn making a sacrifice for that then, and I wouldn't call that neurotic or hypocritical, but I must advise caution - many fashion articles are wasting assets; maxing out one's credit card for that is not a good idea. That's just a cold, hard fact of life.

I think it would be great if durability played a greater role in high-end fashion design. In that sense, the Gucci and Louis Vuitton bag may even be an example of one of the very coveted fashion items that do last.

 

[Assembler]

people should be comfortable with their 'low incomes' and stop pretending their are big shots. Its pathetic to try looking rich when one is not, luxury copies make 'lower incomes' seem pathetic.

Is that sort of a "Know Your Place" comment? Because not only does it refer to people paying for things above their means, but trying to get stylish, though less expensively made items, from stores that look to luxury houses for inspiration.

I think there is certainly a desire to keep seperate the seperate income classes. If someone of a middle income can look like a high income person, though for less money (and just because you're high income, doesn't mean you're more stylish), some people who want that distinction kept are going to complain about it.

Anyway, I don't believe fashion has become more mainstream. I think that fashion has always BEEN mainstream, but certain types of fashion has just never been available to those who could not afford it. It's not like the mainstream was ignoring luxury houses, or the styles represented there, they were still coveted, they were still admired, but they were out of reach. Now cheaper, mass produced clothing lines are becoming more fashionable and are atleast making an attempt to satisfy those who always were fashion concious but just could not afford it.

So, in music when a musician has become mainstream, what it means is that they have CHANGED their music to accomodate the prevailing current of thought (what most of the people like), or the prevailing current of thought has changed to that musicians type of music. So, I think many people LIKED luxury items, but couldn't afford them, and just because people are adjusting their finances differently now, so that some can afford them, or buying clothing inspired by luxury trends, does not mean that fashion has gone mainstream, but that it has become more accessible. People weren't buying luxury items (for the most part) becaue they didn't LIKE it, but because they couldn't afford it.

I can understand why people may not like that. Because now this is something that isn't exclusive to them. Something that is special because of its rarity may have an inherent value far less than what society attributes to it. I think people should consider the inherent value of items, and not consider its rarity.

If you are wearing the same thing everyone else wants (whether it is rare, or too expensive for most people to buy), it means that YOU are mainstream. And there's nothing wrong with that. If people don't want to be mainstream they should persue things that despite cost, and accesibility the majority of people wounldn't want. Thinking that you're avoiding the mainstream by purchasing something that is limited, rare or expensive, is incorrect. The real draw to buying something rare, limite or expensive (beyond the ability to buy for most people) is a case of wanting to feel like one own's something exclusive. Nothing to do with wanting to avoid mainstream.

Nothing wrong with wanting to feel exclusive though. I don't mean to suggest that there is. JUst that there is a difference in something becoming more accessible and something becoming more mainstream.

Anyway, the "you" in this post is a general you.

 

[Judea]

you don't need money to make a statement.

the question that you should ask yourself when complaining about fashion being main streem is what you want your individuality to be....

If you base being "different" on being able to afford a status bag while your friends are buying knock offs, then yeah I would say you need to watch out, because wealth only sets you apart for so long....But if you are into fashion to express how you are, and you want to have things no one else has then find an indie designer, order things custom made, make things your self....the thing that make fashion mainstreem is not the amount of people wearing designer clothes...its the WAY they wear designer clothes. Take a hint from Karl, Isaac, and even celebs like Gwen stafani...it's the person who makes the clothes....not the clothes that make the person. It doesn't take a lot of money to stand out or be elite, it just take knowing how to work with what you have.

 

[snowqueen]

Its like in the early twentith century fashion was a luxury and something only the rich could have. There was no cheaper option for the poor. there were rich man styles and poor man styles. Then gradually The richer styles became cheaper reporductions, slightly cheaper so the poor could afford it. It was a cheaper outfit but still had the same look as the rich mans. And now this has gone on and on unitl its mad, i mean how quick does it take clothes to be on catwalks to their being copys of simular styles in topshop etc. and then it goes to cheaper stores and then to the very cheap stores with in a matter of weeks, were as it used o take longer. I think due to technilogical changes people have become more aware of fashion, as its more in the public eye due to tv, and magazines and internet etc. People also see pictures of what the rich and the celebs were so they can recreate the luck, which before modern times people couldnt do ... hope that makes some kind of sense lol

 

[snowqueen]

I also think the definition of fashion ahs been changed over the years it used to be used to describe something fresh, cutting edge and unique. Now fashion is used to describe something everyone and their kids are wearing, eg. to describe a poncho as fashionable would be tecnically incorect as its not fashionable as everyone is wearing one... popular would be a better choice of words

 

[haydn]

fashion is unfortunatly a status symbol. most people will wear that hot new logo item just so people know they can afford that hot new logo item. nobody cares about the work that went into it, the design aspect, etc... its really unfortunate that a lot of people will wear something to convey what they want people to think of them rather than as an expression of themselves.

you realize how scary "fashion" is when you've got a mans name on the waistband of your underwear and it's not your own.

 

[Alura]

thank you for bringing the title in

welcome to tFS eliza n.

I'm currenty doing a study on this subject, especially focused on sub branding and such. I could go on for hours on demo-lux, democratization, massification, trading up and so on. I hope to finish it in 1 month or 3 with quantitative research. The trading up book is okay, especially from an American perspective. There are some interesting articles on the phenomenon from the instute de la mode in Paris as well. You may want to search on the author Roux about this, though her articles are often only in French.

When is fashion art? When is the art of fashion a tool for marketing?

Anyway, I'm actually becoming tired of this movement, and I think many are. I'm actually longing for bringing the snob, elitist part back into fashion without seeing 15 year old girls on MTV pretending they know and showing off. A lot has changed in the past 8 years or so. I remember I was an outsider on school because I did wear the designer stuff but then again, I wasn't showy about it. I appreciated it, it was part of my upbringing and never flashy or tacky. I'm very curious where the fashion industry will be standing in 5 years from now...

 

[Alura]

the question that you should ask yourself when complaining about fashion being main streem is what you want your individuality to be....

If you base being "different" on being able to afford a status bag while your friends are buying knock offs, then yeah I would say you need to watch out, because wealth only sets you apart for so long....But if you are into fashion to express how you are, and you want to have things no one else has then find an indie designer, order things custom made, make things your self....the thing that make fashion mainstreem is not the amount of people wearing designer clothes...its the WAY they wear designer clothes. Take a hint from Karl, Isaac, and even celebs like Gwen stafani...it's the person who makes the clothes....not the clothes that make the person. It doesn't take a lot of money to stand out or be elite, it just take knowing how to work with what you have.

You are absolutely right on this too. Those who are 'in the know' know how to wow others. It's all in the styling and mixing. LV became hot because those people knew how to mix it with other styles, making it cool. We currently see people wearing LV bags with everything, I still like them when I see it on the right person wearing a good combination but they can be appalling on some tacky girl wearing Uggs .

 

[travolta]

you realize how scary "fashion" is when you've got a mans name on the waistband of your underwear and it's not your own.

haha. you might as well brand your buttchecks??

 

[Mutterlein]

An interesting twist on the topic of buying brands due to status...

I bought a Comme Des Garcons wallet because of it's name. Now keep in mind that I live in a city where people have no idea what CDG is and scoff my wallet off because it doesn't say Coach on it. Also keep in mind that I knew this when I bought it. Why would I do this if I didn't care about status, copying a celebrity trend, or show off my latest "luxury" leather accessory? I bought the wallet because I value the integrity of the CDG label . For me owning and using the wallet allows me too associate myself with it's aesthetic/sensibilities/values. It's about me and CDG and not anyone else. I think this another reason why people buy certain labels...brand loyalty.

 

[meme527]

soon, the very wealthy will have certain plastic surgeries done that mke them all reacognizable as part of the elite crowd. these surgeries will be don soon after birth, perhaps, or upon entering adolescence, like a bat mitzvah. the poor with not look like the rich. their bodies and fashed will be the ultimate elite fashion statement.

the poor and working class will eat collagen.