In ‘Fashion as Communication’, Bernard explores the ambivalent status of fashion, drawing on a range of ideas. Chapter one explains how social and cultural groups in western capitalist societies are affirmed by fashionable clothing which connotates power and status; and furthermore the contrast of this with primitive societies where fashion is used so differently as a means of identifying with eachother and one’s culture. The important debate on the triviality of fashion, is supported by interesting concepts, for example how fashion gives the ‘neutral’ and pure human body, meaning; and contrastingly, how this can make people respond how they should not by presenting the body as something that it is not. The writer explains how fashion is therefore a meeting point within the realms of psychology, sociology, economics, anthropology and history, forming the ties on a culture as a base for stabilising economy.

Regarding this debate, reading from ‘Fashion Media’ about the role of fashion magazines, Miller explains ‘the magazines’ distinguished readership were told how to dress, how to furnish their elegant interiors and how to entertain’. This realises how fashion is not limited to the way we dress, but forms the basis of our social society. Ideas of class and power communicated by fashion through taste, decoration and luxury. Furthermore, when speaking with friends, it was suggested that because of the visual age we now live in, fashion is a way for people ‘to express themselves instantly’, and this I agree with especially as there are so many accessible blogs which combine fashion with lifestyle and interior decoration.

Although Bernard presents us with a plethora of theories to ponder, I feel that some of these are notably less relevant; particularly the statement that fashion is for women and is ‘sublime and childlike’. I think Bernard failed to explain how this came about by noting how the expectations of women in the past was to be seen and not heard, therefore leaving them with only one way of expressing themselves which was through dress. Bernard also says ‘genius is found more often in the realms of art than design’, which i believe is untrue. It is fair to say, that fashion is an art form which is limited to, yet equally inspired by the forms of the pure and natural human form. It would be unfair to say that a painting holds a stronger and more ‘gutsy’ concept than a garment design because I feel that it is the designer and artist who should be contemplated along with their ideas and expression, not the products of their creativity.

Fashion as Communication’ to me, is an interesting collection of ideas and theories of the role of fashion. However I feel that the writer has perhaps unfairly filtered his collection of concepts, failing to address the debate with appropriate and more modern fundamental ideas even with the book being published not long ago. Of course, much like fashion itself, the ideas within this book are down to interpretation and each reader will gather from the text differently.

References:

Bartlett, Djurdja and Cole, Shaun and Rocamora, Agnes (21st November 2013) Fashion Media: Past and Present, Bloomsbury Academic, London/New York, ISBN 978-0-8578-5307-3.30

Barnard, Malcolm (2002) Fashion as Communication,
London: Routledge