Rethinking Luxury Fashion: The Role of Cultural Intelligence in Creative Strategy

By Thomaï Serdari

Using the field of material culture as its methodological departure point, this Palgrave Pivot explains the strategic advantages that brands can set in place when their executives are fully in command of how to move from strategy to tactics. Specifically, it studies the brands, their products and signature experiences as well as their relationship with the consumer in an attempt to define the greater powers that have pushed fashion labels in and out of fashion. It focuses on case analysis of specific luxury fashion brands and attempts to link those to the greater context of material culture while also elaborating on theoretical discussions. Bridging theory and practice, this book explores the relationship between creative strategy and cultural intelligence.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Palgrave Macmillan
• Release date: Sep 1, 2020
• ISBN: 9783030453015

Book preview

Part IBackground of Luxury Fashion as a Field of Material Culture

© The Author(s) 2020

T. SerdariRethinking Luxury FashionPalgrave Advances in Luxuryhttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-45301-5_1

1. Defining Fashion, Luxury, and Luxury Fashion

Thomaï Serdari¹  

(1)

New York University, New York, NY, USA

Thomaï Serdari

Email: [e-mail]

Abstract

While traditionally difficult to define, the concepts of fashion and luxury are examined anew to highlight key moments in scholarly thought that advanced our understanding of how these two terms can relate to each other and to culture. Identifying their role in the fields of creativity elucidates how they can impact the individual physically, emotionally, and intellectually. This launches our inquiry into understanding how weak signals that are perceived within a specific culture can become the instigators of new creative thought which in turn can transform society and culture.

Keywords

FashionLuxuryCultureDesignSociology

Fashion

Fashion is the armor to survive the reality of everyday life,¹ insisted the late Bill Cunningham, fashion photographer for The New York Times, whose candid street photography documented New Yorkers’ mood, week after week. Cunningham’s work was entertaining, informative, and above all prophetic. No one else has managed to capture the future of fashion in the present with such ingenuity. The ultimate expression of urban folklore, fashion evolves as a result of individual freedom. In wishing to predict what might come next, one needs to identify these individual expressions, one by one. When a handful of them have appeared, the future has folded into the now.

The Merriam Webster Dictionary offers several definitions for fashion, which reveals the complexity of the term. Fashion refers to the prevailing style during a particular time, but it also refers to the garment itself. It is a widespread custom or usage, but it is also the make or form of something. As a verb, fashion means to give shape or form to, to design or devise for a particular use or purpose.

The definition of fashion therefore implies change and transformation. This constant flux that characterizes fashion as a creative domain happens on three different dimensions: time, space, and the individual. Additionally, the inherent association of a style with a physical product (dress, garment) links fashion to art historian Jules Prown’s theory and model of material culture [which] is the study through artifacts of the beliefs—values, ideas, attitudes, and assumptions—of a particular community or society at a given time.² In classifying the range of objects that make up our world, Prown listed fashion as third in a sequence of six categories that progressed from the more decorative or aesthetic to the more utilitarian,³ reinforcing the idea that fashion is as much a statement as it is a necessity.

Almost 40 years after Prown articulated the theory and method of material culture, a discipline whose sole goal is the investigation of culture through its use of objects as primary data, the most prominent change related to fashion is the fact that today fashion straddles the established categories as it both respects and defies the taxonomy of material classification. A little over ten years earlier, sociologist Herbert Blummer had already discussed this aspect of fashion in a groundbreaking article in which he prophetically maintained that fashion is to be found in manners, the arts, literature, and philosophy, and may even reach into certain areas of science.⁴ Maintaining this train of thought, one can easily appreciate that today, digital devices can be fashion and fashion can be art.

Nonetheless, fashion appeared as soon as the first civilizations were established.⁵ Apart from the creation of clothing for protection, ancient societies created and participated in their own fashion systems through which class status was assigned and imitated. Therefore, if culture is the ability of homo sapiens to enact creative (i.e., visual arts, music, performance, theater, dance, poetry, literature, etc.) and analytical thought (language, religion, politics, commerce, etc.), fashion is a domain of human activity that is informed both by creative and analytical thought.

This hybrid nature of fashion as a concept that has additionally been shaped by craft and industry contributed to its dismissal from serious academic inquiries until the 1990s with only a few exceptions rooted in classical sociology.⁶ Several of these writings are worth summarizing, even if briefly. This is offered to showcase the multitude of interpretations and their fragmented approach to the field of fashion. No thesis among them offers a comprehensive definition of fashion.

Classical sociologists, such as Herbert Spencer (1820–1903),⁷ Ferdinard Tönnies (1855–1936),⁸ Thorstein Veblen (1857–1929),⁹ and Georg Simmel (1858–1918),¹⁰ who were primarily concerned with the systematic study of human society and social life in its earliest period, were mainly focused on the concept of fashion as an idea rather than any of its material forms. This led them to variations of a singular discussion centered around the idea of imitative relationships in society, enabled through fashion. Intrinsically imitative in nature, fashion, according to classical sociology, aims at the erasure of class distinction either because imitation constitutes a reverential event that denotes respect toward the imitated or because imitation is competitive and is driven by an individual’s desire to assert at least equality with another person (if not even superiority).

Veblen advanced the discussion of imitation by declaring expensive fashion as conspicuous consumption, namely immediate evidence of economic wealth. He also noted that the less functional the dress the higher the class of the wearer who, through fashion, expresses s/he is not concerned with practical labor. Finally, Veblen observed the temporal character of fashion in the sense that the most up to date the dress the higher the class of the wearer.

Simmel added to Veblen’s theory by pointing out that in addition to being conspicuous and imitative, fashion allows for demarcation of social groups that develop a mentality of belonging. Demarcation also explains the fascination with the novel, the exotic, or foreign in fashion because it precisely did not originate in any of the familiar social contexts.

Tönnies augmented the idea of demarcation by discussing how fashion is defined by unwritten customs that rule gender, race, and religion and that become less relevant when a small community (Gemeinschaft) transitions to a larger society (Gesellschaft). This implies that creativity in fashion is linked to modernization and perhaps to establishing a greater distance from traditional craft and know-how.

Contemporary sociologists who wrote on fashion after the WWII maintain that fashion may very well be about imitation and class distinction, but it is, undeniably, about fluidity of behavior and mobility of the individual or classes, in general. This completely dissociates the idea of fashion from a rigid, hierarchical society further abstracting fashion as a concept and definitively dissociating it from its older material manifestations.¹¹

In rejecting their discipline’s classical view on fashion, contemporary sociologists such as Herbert Blumer (1900–1987), Diana Crane (1933–) and Fred Davis (1925–1993) advocated that rather than a means to differentiating the social classes, fashion refers to a collective selection, which, according to Crane, is often consumer-driven. In other words, fashion’s identity is shaped by the masses. Therefore, there is more than one point from which ideas can originate in fashion. As a phenomenon, fashion is post-modern (rather than a product of modernity) and allows for a trickle-up and trickle-across type of imitation that contradict Veblen’s singular trickle-down theory.¹²

Finally, Yuniya Kawamura (1963–) and René König (1906–1992) introduced the idea of fashion as a system in their respective works, consisting mainly of empirical studies on the fashion industry and all its participants.¹³ According to Kawamura, the fashion system is an institution in which individuals associated with fashion are part of a collective that further perpetuates the ideology of fashion as well as its culture.¹⁴

Based on the aforementioned theorists, the only way to understand fashion is to interpret it within a greater social and cultural context. Giorgio Riello, scholar of history and culture with a focus on fashion, product innovation, and textiles, has outlined the subtle differences between looking at fashion as a mere object and theorizing about fashion as an abstraction. Riello concluded that material culture is not the object itself (which […] is at the [center] of dress history), but neither is it a theoretical form (which dominates the approach of fashion studies). Material culture is instead about the modalities and dynamics through which objects take on meaning (and one of these is that of fashion) in human lives¹⁵ which reinforces the present work’s approach to fashion interpretation. Moreover, in fashion and all its unpredictable material expressions one may discover aspects of thought that may differ from, complement, supplement, or contradict what can be learned from more traditional literary and behavioral sources.¹⁶ In conclusion, we can define fashion as a field of design, itself a solution to a problem¹⁷ (with its own history, theory, and practice) that has produced material expressions of creative and analytical thought (dress across space, time, and communities/societies) and that has served as a catalyst of change in culture.

Luxury

The term luxury has traditionally presented a different set of challenges for scholars mainly because the field of luxury research is interdisciplinary, which prevents the research community from establishing a comprehensive overview of its key publications. This leads both to omission of important works that originate in different academic disciplines and to repetition by many academics who feel obligated to begin their discussion with Veblen’s Theory of the Leisure Class (1899).¹⁸ Most have worked around its definition by mainly articulating its major traits.¹⁹ Even in what seems to be an elusive term, many agree that luxury is the extraordinary.²⁰ It is also generally agreed that the construction of luxury depends on its historical and cultural context.²¹ Therefore, the question of luxury revolves around decoding the extraordinary, establishing that there is no culture without consumption (since antiquity and certainly in the modern world), and finally, recognizing that emotions and cognition are part of the experience of luxury consumption.²² My definition of luxury, published elsewhere, maintains that "luxury is a universal certainty that implies scarcity, beauty, and culture. It is a multi-sensory experience that impacts the individual on an emotional, intellectual and physical level."²³ This definition allows for the concept of luxury to evolve through time as it provides a high level understanding of why luxury is so personal and subjective as many authors have suggested in their scholarship. Rather than contradicting their work, it organizes the meaning that had previously been uttered in adjectives into a coherent summary from which additional definitions can be formulated. For example, luxury object and luxury experience are now easier to define. A luxury object must be made of materials that are rare or beautiful (or both) and through a process that is culture-specific (based on a special type of craftsmanship or know-how). It is perceived as more luxurious when it activates more than one of the five human senses and becomes attractive by evoking a physical, emotional, and at times intellectual response from the user. Similarly, a luxury experience, even if transitory in nature, is based on the orchestration of rare or beautiful (or both) ingredients that address at least one or more of the human senses in a way that enables the enactment of a specific creative train of thought. The individual who perceives the luxury experience may be physically, emotionally, or intellectually impacted. When interacting with luxury objects or experiences the user may not be able to express in precise words how exactly she was impacted because she may be lacking the sophistication or the vocabulary to do so.²⁴ Regardless, she will most probably be able to at least refer to the aura of the object or experience, to its magic or dreamy nature, to the extraordinary. In fact, these are adjectives that populate academic and professional publications that deal with the subject of luxury brand management.²⁵ They are great words that relate to the transcendent nature of luxury objects and experiences. They are also in agreement with Eunju Ko’s definition of luxury brands based on a thorough review of the existing literature.²⁶ According to Ko et al., a luxury brand is a branded product or services that consumers perceive to:

1.

Be of high quality

2.

Offer authentic value via desired benefits, whether functional or emotional

3.

Have a prestigious image within the market built on qualities such as artisanship or craftsmanship or service quality

4.

Be worthy of commanding a premium price; and

5.

Be capable of inspiring a deep connection, or resonance, with the consumer.

While this definition perfectly summarizes the field of consumer research, it does not explain the timeless quality of luxury. All five elements of the aforementioned definition may be activated within a brand without it being capable of holding the consumer’s attention through time. It is worth relating the definition of luxury brands to the author’s definition of luxury. A luxury brand is a well-delivered promise of value in the future—not just today, which is what Ko’s definition implies. The future value of products or experiences delivered within the universe of a luxury brand is dependent on the element of the extraordinary, itself a component of intangible concepts and ideas, which also explains why it is so difficult to construct luxury brands with lasting value in the market. It is precisely the lack of a discussion on the creative process that defines the intangible ingredients of luxury products/experiences/brands of lasting value that inspired this book. To accomplish this, the medium of fashion will provide the basis for an analysis of material culture and the forces that shape it.

Luxury Fashion

For most people the term fashion connotes luxury. In the popular imagination, these two concepts are related as the expression of self-indulgence and over-indulgence, both traits associated with human behaviors of narcissistic proclivities that give into beautiful clothes and opulent accessories. In that sense, those who see anything beyond usefulness as a superfluous result of fancy with no applicable utility would define fashion as a category of luxury, itself a paragon of decadence and excess.

On the other extreme, for anyone who has experienced the ubiquity of fast fashion and has suffered the pain of one-time wear fashion items, there is nothing luxurious about fashion. Its quality can range from horrific to extraordinary based on whether the creator’s intention is to sell a high volume of fashion items very fast for high profits or to express a nuanced point of view about an idea through a carefully produced piece that has been marketed fairly.

In light of these two opposing perspectives, the most uncomplicated way to define luxury fashion would be as designer fashion²⁷ at high prices. This already recognizes the importance of a creative perspective during the production process and agrees with the view that high pricing denotes luxury. According to fashion scholar Jonathan Faiers when the two words luxury and fashion are uttered in one breath, the combination implies cost, exclusivity, indulgence, and excess, and is typically understood as being constructed from the finest materials, involving a high level of craftsmanship, laborious production, and often originating from a specific manufacturing location.²⁸ The scholar maintains that today luxury fashion is being consumed and produced on an unprecedented scale, but this very proliferation of luxury begs us to ask some important questions about fashion’s relationship to luxury, for in an age where super brands dominate the luxury fashion landscape, it might seem that as long as there are enough prominently displayed logos and the most expensive materials are used the term ‘luxury’ can be attached to any piece of clothing.²⁹

To this accurate assessment, one would add that luxury fashion should also be delivered through some type of remarkable experience, whether this takes place in real life, online, or on any of the channels that are designed to provide the customer with a 360-degree access to her preferred products. Luxury fashion brands can be easily spotted in the marketplace based on the symbols they are using to communicate to their consumers, the type and quality of merchandise they market, and the level of experiences they stage in order to capture the customer’s imagination and deliver their specific dream as holistically as possible. High-end apparel brand Burberry³⁰ is a great illustration of Faiers’s definition—it is also the first luxury fashion brand that embraced technology in an effort to further advance the customer experience while also exploring new ways of delivering products and messages through new platforms that bridged the physical and the digital seamlessly.

While these connotations are part of our understanding of luxury fashion and some relate directly to the experiences most of us have had when shopping, the term luxury fashion is key in the discussions that ensue in this book. As French sociologist Lucien Karpik noted, luxury fashion products cannot be valorized by conventional methods because they are multidimensional, incommensurable and of uncertain or indefinable quality.³¹ It would therefore be premature to fully define luxury fashion here since we need to rely on the discussions in the chapters that follow. The goal is to add to the aforementioned definitions by providing an opportunity to rethink luxury fashion.

Conclusion

The critical differentiation of a new definition of luxury fashion lies in the fact that we have brought together two conceptually challenging terms, luxury and fashion. As has already been established, both relate to a greater cultural context at a given time, define ideas and objects all at once, and belong to creative fields that have the potential to impact individuals physically and emotionally but also intellectually.

This is exactly where our inquiry begins. To engage the user’s cognition, the creators of luxury fashion work from a vantage point that allows them to turn weak signals of change into behavioral updates that quickly gain critical mass and transform society and culture.

Notes

1.

Harper’s Bazaar. "The 70