RSS
Home
Investigating "investment' vs. "disposable" fashion
Print
Email
RSS
Subscribe
The recent economic climate and the push towards a more eco-conscious way of life has brought some attention to the concept of “disposable” fashion; that is, fashion designed to be worn a limited number of times before quickly going out of style. Inexpensive and readily available, disposable fashion feeds a style-conscious consumer’s desire for instant gratification by providing the trendiest clothing styles at a rapid pace in a shopping-as-entertainment atmosphere.
Of course, purveyors of disposable fashion - such as H&M, Zara, or Old Navy - have their positive attributes. As a shirt from actress Sarah Jessica Parker’s clothing line Bitten - which was sold at the now-defunct Steve & Barry’s chain - stated, “Fashion is not a luxury.” Indeed, it’s refreshing to see creative, stylish designs available to people of modest means. However, to the informed consumer, a pair of adult athletic sneakers retailing for less than $15, for instance, can be a little unsettling. It seems that $15 price tag would barely cover the cost of materials, never mind the manufacturing, shipping, packaging, and marketing of the item in question. This might suggest the item is of substandard quality, which, in the long term, costs the consumer more.
In response, fashion magazines, along with well-known luxury goods brands, have been pushing the idea of “investment” dressing, suggesting that the consumer ignore a high price point in favor of acquiring something they will keep indefinitely, or someday pass on to their children. It’s a novel idea that plays on feelings of nostalgia but fails to acknowledge our current throwaway society in which everything is mass-produced and “it” items appear dated mere months after introduction. Moreover, the “investment” theory was not designed to educate or enrich the consumer, but rather a marketing strategy to keep sales in the luxury market from slipping during the current recession.
Regardless, there are those items that should be chosen with care, and that may be worth the extra cost in the long term:
Shoes. Cheap shoes are usually made with cheap materials, meaning seams can come undone, or man-made materials can crack. Glue may have been applied in a sloppy manner, leaving blobs of it visible or areas where it doesn’t hold up. Good shoes are the keystone of a chic look; be sure to choose something that is well-made and looks polished.
Outerwear. At least ten months of the year in Boston require some type of coat or jacket, so be sure to get something that not only keeps you warm, but also keeps you dry. Avoid a trendy style (like 3/4 sleeves or a loud print) and stick to a classic, flattering shape in a color you love.
Suiting. Since suits are somewhat difficult to construct, many cheaper suits are ill-fitting and are made of cheap-looking fabrics. Considering that a suit will likely be worn to an interview or an important meeting, it’s imperative that you look as put-together as possible. Consider it a small strategic career move.
Formal and evening wear. Similar to suiting, cheap formal wear fabrics look, well, cheap. Look for quality construction and a style that’s flattering and age-appropriate.
This is not to say that spending a month’s rent on a pair of shoes is mandatory; it means that some items should be chosen with more discretion. Follow your instincts and shop wisely!
Related Articles:
Comments
.gif)
