[Note: "Fashion philosophy" and "fashion politics" are overlooked genres in journalism. Robin Givhan, however, won a Pulitzer for her WaPo column. It is always interesting to see things a few layers deeper. We will astonish ourselves.]
by Jennie S. Bev
We all think consciously and subconsciously. For this, we all are philosophers of some sort, at certain level, regardless of our acknowledgement or denial. Some people think more and deeper than others in finding meanings of things surrounding them. Thomas Nagel in What Does It All Mean? said it well, “The main concern of philosophy is to question and understand very common ideas that all of us use every day without thinking about them.”
Cyclical and seasonal trends in clothing and accessories might have come and gone without triggering any deep thoughts on what they truly mean to us other than they are meant to make us feeling good, beautiful, and comfortable. And images of those bestowed with fame and fortune might have been illustrating glossy magazines and tabloids for us to savor without much thinking. They create fashion trends and, for most of us, those trends are what matter, not the ideas behind them, not the philosophy behind them.
Fashion is, indeed, one of the most overlooked ideas. The late John Updike, one of America’s great thinkers and essayist, and Robin Givhan, a 2006 Pulitzer Prize winner in category of criticism did not, fortunately, take fashion for granted. For them, it is more than an idea of being and becoming neat and glamorous. It is a reflection of society as a structure and its occupants. It is a mirror of ourselves.
Updike might not have written about fashion as much as Givhan, as the latter writes a regular column for The Washington Post, yet he has been fascinated by Coco Chanel, a paragon of female fashion trend-setter whose artistic ideas captured the world’s inner passion for simple-chic and elegant fashion. He wrote a biographical essay on her titled “Chanel No.1” which was included in Janet Wallach’s book Chanel: Her Style and Her Life.
He wrote how Coco was a self-made woman synonymous with France itself and her lifestyle as a mistress of military and aristocrat playboys with whom she encountered thrilling pilgrimage from man to man Etienne Balsan, Arthur Capel, Grand Duke Dmitri, Paul Iribe, and Baron Hans Gunther von Dincklage. These encounters had shaped her perception on what constituted grandiose, chic, wearable, and classic. And they made her a strong woman beyond belief.
She was a femme fatale personification for she had attempted to use the Nazi anti-Semitic laws to save her Chanel No.5 perfume from her partner Pierre Wertheimer. Her attempted exploitation of such law resulted in an arrest but spared the public trial humiliation. She sent herself to an exile in Switzerland only to return to Paris in 1954 when she was seventy. French and the world of fashion had forgiven her. And her story is no fairy tale. It is a story of the politics of fashion and the philosophy of a fashion genius.
Givhan is a fashion columnist for The Washington Post and she is a fashionista of the highest order. She writes thoughtfully on what a piece of clothing or accessory would mean to the wearer, how it projects certain image and what it signifies to the person and to the external world, to the culture. No details are too small to discuss, to analyze, and to synthesize.
Updike might have seen Coco Chanel as a cultural icon from a behind-the-stage vantage point, but Givhan is a great thinker of fashion as an interesting overlooked phenomenon of mankind. Both believe that fashion is significant in fostering deeper understanding of the human psyche.
One of Givhan’s latest commentaries was on Michelle Obama’s inauguration ball gown and swearing-in attire. She wrote eloquently, “For that moment when she officially became first lady, Michelle Obama chose a metallic gold coat and matching slim-fitting dress by the Cuban-born designer Isabel Toledo. The dress made a glamorous statement with its regal color, and it separated the new first lady from those wearing the more traditional red and blue. From a purely aesthetic point of view, the selection was a wise one. The rich shade was flattering to her skin, and it proudly announced her embrace of a role that is symbolic, grand and historic.”
In Indonesia, traditional fabrics, like batik and ikat bring forth their own ancient philosophies. One’s social class can be easily reflected and each type of fabric has its own functions. From the cradle to the grave, Indonesians wear their batiks in many different ways, for instance babies are carried with batik lullaby, brides and grooms wear their wedding ceremony batik of jarit for happy marriage while avoiding parang design as it connotes battle.
Batik is also a symbol of friendship and diplomacy that is oftentimes given away as presidential gifts to leaders of other countries. For its cultural and intrinsic values, batik has been declared as world intangible heritage by UNESCO, which emphasizes its utmost worthiness not merely as a piece of wearable art. Batik is, undoubtedly, an important part of Indonesian culture and the world’s.
Through fashion, we learn a lot about ourselves, society, and how both are interrelated with each other. The key is reading beyond the surface of a piece of fabric or metal. Edmund Burke said it well, “To read without reflecting is like eating without digesting.” To wear a piece of fashion without understanding the meanings it signifies is like not wearing anything at all.
So, whenever you are wearing something, make sure you are not naked, philosophically speaking.[]
