Consumerism Plague

Consumerism Scary Role in Fashion? Ruining the Craft Consumerism has become a plague in America and fashion is just another industry to fall victim to it. Terms like ironic consumption and conspicuous consumption have been created in an attempt to describe the increasing number of shoppers. That being said, creating a fashion brand is still a legitimate opportunity to show your creativity and make a living; doing it the right way is very challenging however. Due to creating a brand being a valid route, lots of people have found ways to include themselves in the industry, either for the perceived image and connections that come with owning a brand or the immense profits that can be made. These instances typically occur due to wrong values and standards being the face of the industry. Fast fashion companies have demonstrated to investors how lucrative a brand can be. Luxury brands, another key influencer in the industry, has fallen to the wave of consumerism as well. What once took great pride in craftsmanship, heritage, brand integrity, attention to detail, is now a key player in the support of the virus of conspicuous consumption. Throughout recent history, luxurious fashion brands have been the luminary of the industry. Their prestigious image has been carefully worked on for many years earning them credibility as a brand. However, as of recent, it seems like core values have been changed to fit a more profit-based approach, rather than an artistry approach. Perceived quality, social status, celebrity endorsement are all routes brands like to take in order to take their gross income to new levels. An article done by Whizy Kam on Vog suggests that, “the psychology of why we buy designer products also eschews typical economic sense, because the motivation to buy is about status. The higher the price, the more status you’re theoretically buying.” Social status is something that has been intertwined with fashion for many years in history; it’s no surprise that conspicuous consumption is present in the industry. According to an article from Investopedia, conspicuous consumption refers to the purchase of goods or services for the specific purpose of displaying one's wealth (Will Kenton). Examples of this could include eating out at a fancy restaurant, expensive jewelry, designer brands, etc. What has been shown to be true is that the evidence of wealth can largely impact your social status. Buying products that have logos stamped across are likely purchased by the consumer that isn’t looking to self-express themselves in any way, but rather be noticed by a specific group of people they would want to be a part of. Due to the overwhelming influence this phenomenon has on humans, companies like LVMHandKering are able to greatly benefit from this. Creating handbags and wallets that proudly display the logos of luxury, often tied with an elite status, is one approach. Oftentimes their customers are buying these products in hopes of receiving social attention, rather than purchasing for quality and craftsmanship; this is something executives proudly recognize and hone in on. In return brands can sell products according to their perceived value rather than their actual value. Research suggests that consumers purchase luxury goods not just to meet basic life needs but for the fact that the symbolic value of luxury brands increases consumers’ self-esteem, the extent of recognition by others, and meets the emotional requirements of individuals (Xi Xi). The quality of the craftsmanship has taken a massive hit in recent years as a result of this perceived value. The urge to expand and globalize can cause a company to run thin. Due to mass production, a lot of luxury brands choose to out-source their production to a region with lower costs, causing craftsmanship standards to diminish. In 2016, a group of luxury houses introduced the Utthan pact, an ambitious and secretive compliance project aimed at ensuring factory safety in Mumbai and elevating Indian embroiderers. Among the signatories were Kering (owner of labels including Gucci and Saint Laurent); LVMH Louis Vuitton Moët Hennessy (owner of Fendi and Christian Dior); and two British fashion houses, Burberry and Mulberry (Kai Shultz). Out-sourcing isn’t necessarily a bad thing, but these luxury brands are meant to be flagships and production like this does not live up to the name. The artistry once admired by the public no longer exists, luxury is starting to evaporate their elite reputation with the quality of their products. The public has to do a better job of not giving into these selling techniques and begin to expect more from these giant corporations; people have to appreciate and support the genuine companies, even if it is not as convenient. Another sector to benefit from consumerism in the industry is fast fashion. This phenomenon undoubtedly has to be the worst thing to come out of the craft of creating clothes. Fast-fashion companies, like Shien, have been able to take advantage of cheap labor and an incredible demand, and create a company that is able to bring in $2 billion in profits in 2023 (Lloyd Lee) Many factors come into play to allow something like fast fashion to be possible; consumer demand, trend turnarounds, convenience, social media culture. Social media especially is a powerful tool in this situation, the marketing team can use it to find buyers for the constant cycle of cheap clothes being produced. Of course, companies like these only succeed because the demand is present. People, specifically in America, are starting to use new garments only once or twice and tossing them because of the low price and cheap quality. “Fast fashion is defined as inexpensive clothing produced rapidly by mass-market retailers in response to the latest trends. Through fast fashion, consumers are encouraged to purchase the newest styles on the market while they are “still hot,” and then discard them after a few wears when they are no longer in style.” (Rosie Kaur) The question of who is at fault, the consumer or producer, is still a debate. However, one thing to be shown time and time again is that producers will primarily have profits in mind, something that has quickly become a poison to the crafting of clothing. When talking about who’s at fault, much of the blame could go to the producer. Fast fashion companies operate in a way that maximizes profits, rather than producing a product that will actually be beneficial to the consumer. This approach became popular among brands at every level, from established luxurious brands to start-ups. The hefty margins are too juicy to pass up. When trying to cut costs, corners are cut in every sector, but production is usually the sector to suffer most, leading to a decline in quality. However, margins like these are incredibly attractive to investors causing some to dip their hands in the industry, invoking a war between creative and corporation. It makes hardly any sense to have an industry inspired by the craft of making clothes be run by corporate giants who have no care for the detail and effort put into constructing these products. When a craft has an industry that is being propagated by an exaggeration of wrong influences, the integrity of the discipline withers. New brands entering the market are trying to adhere to these new, mostly incorrect, influences in order to maximize profits, rather than taking a more honest, creative approach. Investors understandably want to see financial viability or potential for scalability and growth; they want to know if the brand can create an identity for themselves and receive customer engagement. All these things are fair to ask for from a brand when deciding to invest in them, however it creates an unauthentic blueprint on creating a brand, making so that someone who specializes in marketing and selling product, rather than the artist interested in spreading a message and creating a movement, be the ones to receive attention from the investors. Trying to make it in the fashion industry as a brand is a very difficult task and a lot of times short cuts are being taken instead of putting in the actual work required to build a successful brand. Clothes are being used as a tool to create a business rather than being the main focus of the brand. With these kinds of brand values, the art of making clothes becomes a commoditization. New brands want to follow the same steps that other brands used to find success but the problem presents itself when the public starts to see numerous brands starting out and coming out with the same printed t-shirt or pair of pants or jacket. Clothes are used as a tool to create revenue for people that don’t really care about the creation of the garment, but rather the money it can bring in. You can’t be too critical of the little guy though, values believed to be worth following when it comes to running a brand are being presented by greedy goblins. They’ve shown that through their predatory marketing techniques, profits are a sure thing to come by. Conversations like these seem redundant to a point because the problem of consumerism is so wicked. Many psychological factors are tied into both the consumer and producer side of the transaction. Solutions seem to be limited to abolishing capitalism all together. With the way things are set up, something like that will not happen. Capitalism isn’t all the bad of a system, sort of like communism or socialism; the problem with these theories are the people that learn it better than the public and find ways to take advantage of it. Dealing with those nasty leaders is possible only with the masses, but these days the masses couldn’t be bothered. Everyone is just living here on earth momentarily and couldn’t care less what happens to this planet when they’re gone.

Bibliography

Kenton, Will. “Conspicuous Consumption: Definition and Examples.” Investopedia, Investopedia, www.investopedia.com/terms/c/conspicuous-consumption.asp#:~:text=Conspicuous. Accessed 4 Apr. 2024. Xi, Xi, et al. “‘we Buy What We Wanna Be’: Understanding the Effect of Brand Identity Driven by Consumer Perceived Value in the Luxury Sector.” Frontiers, Frontiers, 24 Aug. 2022, www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1002275/full. 27, Sofi Thanhauser January. “A Brief History of Mass-Manufactured Clothing.” Literary Hub, 26 Jan. 2022, lithub.com/a-brief-history-of-mass-manufactured-clothing/. Lee, Lloyd. “Shein Made $2 Billion in Profits Last Year. That’s a Lot of Fast Fashion.” Business Insider, Business Insider, www.businessinsider.com/shein-2-billion-profit-2023-ipo-fast-fashion-environmentally-co nscious-2024-3. Accessed 4 Apr. 2024. Ink, Social. “Project Rapid Runway: Unraveling the Insidious Threads of Fast Fashion.” The Flaw, 6 Dec. 2023, theflaw.org/articles/project-rapid-runway-unraveling-the-insidious-threads-of-fast-fashion/. Schultz, Kai, et al. “Luxury’s Hidden Indian Supply Chain.” The New York Times, The NewYork Times, 11 Mar. 2020, www.nytimes.com/2020/03/11/style/dior-saint-laurent-indian-labor-exploitation.html. “The Luxury Empire: LVMH’s Most Notable Acquisitions since Inception.” Quartr, quartr.com/insights/company-research/the-luxury-empire-lvmh-s-most-notable-acquisition s-since-inception. Accessed 4 Apr. 2024.