...and instead merely moving swiftly forward.
i recently went on an amazon spending spree, and am the proud owner of several new tomes, the subject matter of which is limited to fashion, and food. I have thus revealed myself to the proprietors of that fine website as being someone who is obsessed with eating, and who loves clothes (with one frequently being the reason for self not fitting into the other, especially post-heathrow-injection. But I digress...)
The book I'm currently flicking through is The Complete History of Costume and Fashion: From Ancient Egypt to the Present Day by Bronwyn Cosgrave (this is feeling increasingly reminiscent of a primary school book review: "I read this book and it was nice. I liked the pictures. Sometimes I draw pictures, but not as good as the ones in this book. It was a good book. By Gussy." - an excerpt not entirely dissimilar to some of the work I produced subsequently in university, actually). Anyway, in the introduction, Cosgrove states that
fashion, as a means of self-expression, has been with us since humans began to clothe themselves. The arrangement of cloth on the body... relied on thought and consideration, just as assembling a wardrobe does today. The way a person chooses to wear garments marks them as an individual or as part of a sartorial tribe.
Now, I'm not sure I agree with this (although dix points to Ms Cosgrove for correctly using the word sartorial). I'm not convinced that cave men and women were swathing themselves in animal skins, and pondering how Westwood would drape the former leopard so as to best show off the figure. How can they ponder that when they communicate in grunts?
And even today, I'm sorry, but not everyone thinks of fashion as a means of self-expression. For a lot of people, it is merely a means to avoid being arrested for indecent exposure, nothing more. These are the people who mill around 75% off bins during sale time, and who will buy a top because it's a bargain at only 50p, even though it has no neck-hole and 3 sleeves. This is not self-expression; no right-thinking human being wants to put themselves across to society as a tight-arse who would wear pieces of bread stapled to a bin-liner if the price was right.
The moral of the story is that some people see fashion as function, and that's it. Even for me personally, I don't get dressed every morning thinking to myself "How am I going to express my psyche today?". The other day I went to vote dressed in gumboots and pyjama bottoms, simply because I was already wearing the pyjamas, the gumboots were the closest shoes to hand, and I was too hungover to deal with looking for an alternative outfit. I wasn't trying to demonstrate through the use of fashion something about my personality (that I am a twat, obviously); I was just trying to play my part in the democratic process - while simultaneously not vomitting).
So, there we are. I'm not saying the author is wrong - ok well, obviously I am. Really, I just think she's placing way too much emphasis on the "getting-dressed" process: it's fine to read into things, but don't go nuts. That's what I learnt at uni.
One final thought: Am I the only person in the world who reads the introduction to books? Think I might not bother in the future...
