The Social Life of Vintage Fashion - Essay Example

The Social Life of Vintage Fashion History of fashion The term fashion was first coined and coined during the 14th century, the manner this term was used in that period is the same manner in which in which it is used today to mean the connection of people’s appearance according to established norms and customs. The production of clothing was increased during industrialization era and fashion became a consumer culture. Status would now be conferred according to the type and choices that one had. In this modern times fashion has become easily assessable and consumers demand for clothing is fragmented and shrewd (Craik 2009). There different and numerous fabrics and style, there is a very fierce competition in the industry that has prompted many retailers to increase the tendency in which they are introducing new style and trend (Easey 2009). Fashion industry was based on mass production of homogeneous styles that did not change regularly due to the constraint of the factories. During this time consumers were less concerned about fashion and taste, rather they preferred normal apparel. It was also during the 1980s that so the import of fashion oriented apparel for women develop to great levels. This made the demand for the simple and classic apparel to decrease and consumer were now fashion conscious oriented. Focusing on the last decade, the fashion industry has transformed structurally, which saw the retailers to incorporate design, sales and marketing in their products. In a perspective of long-distance trade and rotation, Appadurai (1986) interprets for the meanings developed or misplaced by a circulating object. The various stages of its ‘social life’, an object’s exchangeability is characterized by meaning and power associations in compliance with the ‘politics of value’. Sequentially entering and leaving the market, objects undergo commodification and de-commodi­fication developments, and hence “a commodity is not one kind of thing rather than another, but one phase in the life of some things” (1986: 17). Kopytoff (1986) concurs with Appadurai’s perspective on circulating objects and suggests the necessity to appreciate their ‘cultural biographies’. Commodities can be found anywhere, as they are described by its exchangeability and only depend on the existence of the essential ‘exchange technology’. But de-commodification is also likely whenever an object becomes invaluable and obtains another form of worth. This is the outcome of natural cultural developments such as sacralization and singu­larization. The thought of this author will enhance and develop vintage clothes as a commodity in respect to value. It is presumed that goods and services do not have a fixed identity but they are the products of a continuous re-signification, and that more or less prominent vintage clothing- and commodity-like components – such as moral responsibility or alienability – necessitate the examination at a particular time and within their setting (Carrier 1995: 192). Commodities can be said to possess some aspect of value, since there is politics of associated with a commodity. Whenever there is an exchange of a commodity there is economic value created. Value is embodied in a commodity that are exchanged. “Focusing on the things that are exchanged, rather than simply on the forms or functions of exchange, makes it possible to argue that what create the link between exchange and value is politics, construed broadly” (Appadurai 1986:3). It can therefore be said that commodities just like persons have social lives. Due to this perspective, commodities can be said have various kind of value associate with it as it progresses through the different stages of its existence. If an object is not valuable it will be difficult to acquire, a valuable objects will resist our desire to possess it them (Simmel 1978: 67). According to Simmel economic objects are those that exist in the space between pure desire and immediate enjoyment. This paper will analyze vintage fashion and the manner in which it has attained value in different times. The association between fashion and identity are very close, “fashion provides one of the most ready means through which individual can make expressive visual statement about their identities” (Bennett, 2005: 96). Economic value of a commodity is created as a result of exchange of sacrifices. There are various argument that were given by Simmel in regard to economic value of a commodity. The first analysis is that economic value is not just value in general, but a certain sum of value. Although diverse consumer research on the identity and symbolic powers of vintage fashion has been explored considerably, less consideration has been appropriated to actual processes and practices that the vintage fashion objects have undertaken in the course of their existence in order to become valued. The market has differentiated aspects of value and price as distinct constructs that play different roles in the vintage market place. While price in viewed as an economic factor, value of a vintage product is considered a social factor. This is the notion behind value attachment on individual possessions as explained through the social process (Belk et al. 1988). The vintage market place has evolved through value enhancement at different levels of its existence. Its market is seen as a cycle full of re-enchantment and endless empowering of the fashion industry. The consumption of these products can be seen to be entirely different from consumption of products from the conventional marketplace. Furthermore, the concept of value construction in this marketplace is different from the convectional market place. When selecting vintage products, use value as well as exchange value are two aspects that are considered to be of utmost importance. Traditionally, the vintage products were re-valued by taking into prospective the use value attached to the consumer of the vintage pieces as opposed to exchange value. Re-evaluation practices involved includes evaluation of the knowledge of the period, the skills utilized during the alteration process, the price, quality and condition of the piece (De Long, 2005). As such, consumption of vintage fashion can be considered as cultural commoditization since the culture is overtly involved in shaping the process and practices through which one phase of vintage products is withdrawn and how the next phase is introduced in the new setting. The introduction of new skills and innovation is required in order to successfully introduce the next phase of vintage products in anew setting. According to McCracken’s (1988), there is a world of possibilities in the creation of new fashion trends in the vintage industry. With regards to value addition through the different phases of the existence of such pieces, he argues that, “combination and recombination take place until a concept and an aesthetic emerge that help give substance to a group’s wish to differentiate itself from the mainstream” (1988, 136). For instance, the recreation of new fashion trends in the vintage fashion industry can be exemplified by looking at the gowns below. The gowns are inspirational and most of the gowns been produced in the mainstream fashion industry are a replica of these vintage designs. This shows that the possibilities of creation of new deigns with vintage fashion is endless. Value addition through different lives of vintage fashion is dependent on the mobilization of knowledge and exploration of how the knowledge amassed in integrated into the practical employment of value creation. According to propositions of Callon (1998), vintage marketplaces are composed of diverse operations resulting from a combination of different forms such as material objects and expertise. The combination provides materialized insights which can be drawn from the market place as they are directly associated with the behavior of the consumers. As such, the act of consumption of these products cannot be explained by the specification of personal tastes and preferences of the consumers or by personal penchants, but by the requirements of the practice. According to Shove & Araujo (2010), the method of conceptualization involves ““the social field of interwoven practices anchored in habit, routine, shared understandings and embodied skills” (18). Value addition in vintage fashion is also influenced by the perception of the consumers towards the pieces. The change in the attitude of consumers or how the market views the vintage products affect the potential of the products to attract value as they transition from one phase of existence to another. Furthermore, the products must be handled by competent personnel in order to attract value. Value can be said to be attached to a commodity when it is created by people with requisite level of competence (Shove & Araujo 2010, 20). This aspect has shaped the vintage fashion market as it aids the practitioners in comprehension of the forces that play a role in determining how products are seen by the consumers and how they are re-evaluated. In this regard, the notion of being “hooked on vintage” is considered to be part of a rather complex process that is characterized by consumer possession of the relevant revaluing skills, ability to discriminate between counterfeit and authentic products, clever dressing, tastes and aesthetic. As such, the vintage product departs from the conventional market by failing to recognize this process as a haphazard process. The concept of materiality in value addition in the life of vintage products takes the perspective of second hand commodities that move in and out of the market following a linear trajectory of consumption. Vintage products, just like any other second hand object, is considered to have been discarded out of existence in the conventional marketplace. As such, such expulsion and exit from the market is a driving force for re- evaluation and re-examination of the vintage fashion pieces. The process of market expulsion followed by reexamination by practitioners builds on the central argument of Appadurai, (1986) that “objects have lives”. This is because at some particular time the fashion industry trends with designer clothes and new styles of fashion that oust the vintage fashion out of the market. However, that period does not last long as vintage fashion practitioners re-evaluate the fashion pieces and re-examine them to identify features that will blend well into the current market.as such, the vintage fashion is able to survive different phases throughout its existence by moving in and out of the market and fashion trajectory. Value creation throughout the lives of vintage fashion is favored by consumer and seller perception (Parsons, 2008 and 2009). For a second hand fashion to re-enter into the market after having been disposed, there needs to be an attracting feature that appeals to the consumers thereby preventing them from perceiving the products negatively, and instead, they overlook the negative attributes associated with second hand products. This concept can be explained further by visiting Using Thompsons’ Rubbish Theory. The theory argues that value creation occurs as a result of consumers changing their perception about a particular products with time. When consumers miss the vintage fashion in the market for some time, there is craving as most of the consumers change their attitude towards the fashion as opposed to the mainstream designer’s fashion. Changing the way consumers see and place such items may not require reinforcement in production and marketing as consumers are appealed by staging of the products in the market. Araujo et al. (2008) argues that the process of hypothesizing the market is an ““ever-changing performances, rather than as stabilised entities, shaped by multiple and distributed calculative agencies” (8). Association of value and consumption on vintage fashion requires a competent seller and consumer who have the acquisition of relevant knowledge, competencies and ability to understand the market place of vintage fashion. Differences in understanding of the value of vintage fashion among consumers is responsible for creation of different consumer behavior. The consumer is therefore, the biggest carrier of behavior patterns, participating, understanding and desiring patterns. Value creation in vintage market place is abstract and requires that the practitioner and the consumers of such products understand the value of the items under consideration, understand the process through which such items acquire value and the boundaries related to value acquisition and consequently, the purchase of such an item. With this regard, Reckwitz (2002, 250) asserts that “the social world is first and foremost populated by diverse social practices which are carried by agents”. Furthermore, the practice of sourcing for vintage fashion items is developed through continued involvement in the market. This is because even value allocation for vintage products is different from that of the traditional markets where fashion items sold are allocated a price tag carrying the value of the item. In the case of vintage fashion, a buyer and a seller are assumed to have adequate background knowledge of how to place value to items whose price is negotiable and prone to manipulation depending on the item or the buyer’s and seller’s comprehension of value allocation. Price negotiation shows that value in vintage markets is not a fixed construct and is largely dependent on the skills of both the seller and the buyer to negotiate ad place value. Vintage fashion has also acquired value throughout its existence as a result of global influences. There are a lot of uncertainties in the fashion marketplace as noted by Appadurai (1986). One of such situations is the influence of the value of vintage fashion globally due to global forces that influence the lives of consumers by directing them towards the routines, possessions, daily lives and imagination constructed on a specific value. As such, the vintage market place undergoes a state of structural globalization as cultural concepts are re-integrated into local contexts. Appadurai (1986), maintains that this trend is due to the fact that “spatial, cognitive or institutional distances between productions, distribution consumption are great” as a result, fashion items acquire intense qualities and striking value. Increase in value becomes more plausible as the distance gap between the consumption destination and the production origin widens. However, the value designated by the market as result of global forces may further be exaggerated by issues of different currency between nations and most especially, by inflation which leads to constant fluctuation in prices. Most of the globalized vintage fashion pieces are presented in the pictures below. Vintage fashion has also acquired value due to the consumer’s discovery of its performance characteristics. According to La Motta and Schiffer (2001), objects acquire value based on the value the consumers perceive will be derived from the performance of such as product. Vintage fashion has some of the most unique and elegant outfits. Pieces that are totally different from the traditional fashion market where most of the outfits are standardized and only differentiated in color or size. The value of vintage fashion is highly rated as a unique piece can be obtained at a relatively lower rate that the trending fashion and last longer. The shows above and the pieces below are very unique when used in the contemporary would especially when they are the original pieces from the ancient designers as opposed to the reproduced version. References Attfield, J. (2000) Wild Things: The Material Culture of Everyday Life. Oxford: Berg Miller, D. (2010) Stuff. Cambridge: Polity Press. Miller, D. (2012) Consumption and its Consequences. Cambridge: Polity Press. Appadurai, A. (1986) Introduction: Commodities and The Politics of Value in Appadurai, A. (ed) (1986) The Social Life of Things: Commodities in Cultural Perspectives Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Appadurai, A. (ed) (1988) The Social Life of Things: Commodities in Cultural Perspective, Pennsylvania: University of Pennsylvania. Appadurai, A. (2006) The Thing Itself in Public Culture, volume 18, issue 1, pp.15-31. Barker, C. (2012) Cultural Studies: Theory and Practice. London, Sage Biddle-Perry, G. and Cheang, S. (2008) Hair, Oxford: Berg. Connor, S. (2011) Paraphernalia: The Curious Lives of Magical Things. London: Profile Books. Campbell, C. (1996) The Meaning of Objects and the Meaning of Actions: A Critical Note On the Sociology of Consumption and Theories of Clothing. Journal of Material Culture, volume 1, issue 1. Gell, A. (1998) Art and Agency: An Anthropological Theory. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Barker, C. (2012) Cultural Studies: Theory and Practice. London, Sage. Hall, S. (1997) Representation: Cultural Representation and Signifying Practices. Milton Keynes, Open University Press. Lury, C. (1996) Consumer Culture, Cambridge: Polity Press. MacGregor, N. A History of the World in 100 Objects. London: Penguin. Pearce, S. M. (ed) Interpreting Objects and Collections. London: Routledge. Read More