Fashion and Beauty: What Do They Really Cost? By Gerceida Jones The concept of fashion did not exist before the late middle ages. Fashion’s original purpose was strictly to adorn the body. Cultures around the globe developed ways to creatively express their individuality by using their bodies as 3-­‐D canvases, illustrated in head gear, hair styles, clothing, and feet embellishments to be explored in this paper. On the continent of Africa, Black men and women were able to adorn their hair in a variety of ways due to its texture and thickness. Swahili and Maasai women often shaved their heads to highlight the large hooped earrings that they wore. We’ve seen many images on television and museum paintings showing the elaborate jewelry worn by Africans around the neck, arms, and legs. Today we can see evidence of the culture’s influence here in the United States in the unique coiffures worn by African American women. Currently, ethnic women flaunt braids, twists, dreadlocks, and wrapping the hair with thread, styles stemming from an ancient art. In some African cultures, the desired shaping of “an infant’s cranium was achieved through a molding process with tight bands of hide and tree bark. This technique was repeated at regular intervals until the child reached adulthood” (Sagay 25). This form of body art is more clearly seen in ceremonial masks. Not only were Africans obsessed with changing the shape of the head, research shows that skull distortion was a global phenomenon. Globally, Africans, Mayans, Egyptians, Europeans, and even some Native North Americans have practiced the art of sculpting the head for aesthetic appeal. The Mayans considered a person beautiful if the forehead was flat and eyes close together or crossed. They used 2 boards, front and back against the infant’s cranium, to change the shape of the head. The wealthier families wore beautiful headdresses, extravagant clothing with ornaments, embroidery, tattoos, and jewelry that was carved from green jade and shell to distinguish themselves from the common person who did not wear elaborate head gear, but wore loincloth, and loose dresses. If you visit the Luxor and Cairo museums in Egypt, you will see statues and paintings showing pharaohs with sloping foreheads and elaborate headdresses. Close-­‐up of the pharaoh Narmer, from a f ull-­‐sized facsimile of the original Narmer Palette in Cairo, this version resides in the A ncient E gyptian wing of the Royal Ontario Museum. Another common form of body art can be found in China practiced by the lower class from about the 7th-­‐12th century and later by the elite, called foot binding. The reason for this practice was to achieve what the Chinese called the “lotus foot” (Ko 12). The smaller the foot the more aristocratic the woman seemed. However, there was a hindrance to this practice because it limited movement. Girls were not able to perform common household duties, similar to the stigma attached to women of today with long fingernails. Therefore, boys were seen as more of an asset than girls. This fact is why not as much value was placed on the girls because everyone was needed in the family to put food on the table. Some girls also saw this as an opportunity to “marry up” which rarely happened. One article written by wisegeek.com describes foot binding as incomprehensible; this practice existed for fashion sake (solely) as evidenced in the x-­‐rays of the feet of victimized women. Schema of an x-­‐ray comparison between an unbound and bound foot. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foot_binding downloaded 12/2/10. According to a study done by the University of California, some of the effects of foot binding were permanent. William Rossi, author of “The Sex Life of the Foot & Shoes” writes that approximately 40-­‐50% of women in northern China (not widespread in the southern part) participated in the practice and 100% of the upper echelon of women participated. For instance, the girl’s feet or toes were broken to achieve that smallness. Binding the foot involved breaking the foot at the arch before it had a chance to develop. These photographs illustrate the results of breaking the arch of the foot before it has a c hance to develop. http://en.xihalife.com/bbs/photos/old/618.htm downloaded 12/2/10. This left a crevice in the foot approximately two inches in depth. This process took about 2 years with the desired affect for the girl’s foot measuring from heel to toe about 3-­‐3 1/2 inches. This photograph shows the scale of a shoe made for a girl’s foot after the foot-­‐binding process, compared to a human hand. http://www.myseveralworlds.com/2007/07/11/suffering-­‐for-­‐beauty-­‐graphic-­‐photos-­‐of-­‐chinese-­‐
footbinding/ downloaded 12/2/10. Problems with foot binding ranged from infected toes to the worst case scenario being gangrene. Even more so, as these women aged, they could no longer balance themselves and often fell (Cummings 1677). Today such acts are looked upon as another form of ritualistic abuse towards women and punishable by prosecution. The practice of binding the feet was abolished in 1911. Hairstyles, skull shaping, and foot binding are just a couple of ways in which different cultures have creatively expressed their individuality through body art. Although these are some of the consequences women have paid for the price of beauty, we still continue our actions in these modern times by wearing shoes that deform our feet. We subject ourselves to body piercing and elaborate tattoos. Research shows that a full body tattoo does not allow the body to sweat naturally thus causing kidney failure. This is an extreme case of body art which has its own range of problems. However, we are willing to spend long hours in tattoo salons or beauty salons preparing for special occasions to express our individuality. Women’s hair alone is a multi-­‐billion dollar industry. Just watch the TV commercials and you’ll see all kinds of hair products, from shampoos to color enhancers. Globally, the texture of women’s hair ranges from silky to kinky. We straighten, curl, dye, highlight, add-­‐in, braid, and wrap our hair. We seem to love what we don’t have. If your hair is curly, kink, or nappy, you want it straight. If it is straight, you want it curly. The media has defined for today’s woman-­‐-­‐-­‐ what is beautiful. As a child my kinky hair and big lips were disgusting to many. Today my kinky hair and full lips are sexy and highly desired. This influence that deemed nappy hair as ugly has its origins in Europe, resulting from the Transatlantic Slave Trade. The route from Africa to the New World impacted upon techniques of hair sculpting. Nappy, kinky, and woolly hair was not as desirable as silky, straight hair. Africans in the late 19th century, therefore, turned to hot irons and chemical straighteners. As a matter of fact, Madame C J Walker (whose real name was Sarah Breedlove McWilliams) became the first Black millionaire (together with Marjorie Joyner) from her beauty products company. The hair care and cosmetic industry for Negro women was revolutionized by the efforts of these two women. Another bold move towards developing cosmetics for African American women was achieved in the late 60’s by Eunice & John Johnson, owners of Johnson Publishing Company, Inc. in Chicago. They took the risk that most major cosmetic companies would not do by entering into an “untapped market of developing makeup for women with deeper skin tones” (Fashion Fair). As a result, Fashion Fair Cosmetics was born in 1973. With the intermingling of the races, and expanded travel options, women around the world are experimenting with all kinds of hair types. Women can have any kind of hair they choose. If you want hair from India, you can have it. This type of long silky hair is in high demand. If you want braids, kinky hair is available in any African hair braiding shop. By the way, it was Bo Derrick who popularized cornrow braids for white audiences in the 1979 movie “10,” even though Blacks in this the U.S. and Africa had worn braids for centuries. The only hair style that did not survive the transatlantic trip in the African culture is wrapping with thread. Traditionally, hair wrapping (aka hair threading) involves wrapping wool yarn, extra-­‐strong mercerized cotton, metallic, or nylon thread, tightly and evenly around small sections of hair. The hair becomes stiff but pliable and easily coiled or coaxed into bold geometric shapes perched atop the crown. The Nigerians (Igbo method) once used silk thread but now they too use wool or nylon thread. A late-­‐twentieth-­‐
century variation on threading involves wrapping shiny synthetic hair, instead of thread, around the natural hair (also called silky locks) (Segay 31). Go to YouTube and search for hairwrapping to see a demonstration of this lost art. There is a blog about other cultures trying to use thread to wrap their hair and the results. You can read their comments on www.naturallycurly.com/curltalk/showthread in reference to the question: Do non-­‐African American people wrap their hair? During the Colonial Era in Europe, fashion mandated that women wore long hair (either up or hanging on the neck in curls). The hair ‘up’ represented the young girl’s maturity. They wore tall hats with feathers or bonnets outside of the house but usually just covered their hair with mob caps while inside. Their outer garments were all hand-­‐woven. The women wore skirts that came to the ankle or floor with pushed up breast and small waist strapped with whalebone stays or corsets. The shoes were thick and wooden (clogs) worn outside to keep their feet warm and dry. Indoors slippers were made of either cloth or leather. The same was true for the British colonialists that came to America. Women too wore long dresses with close-­‐fitting tops or bodices with shawls to cover up part of the open neckline. In the early 1700’s women began wearing hoops made of whalebone under their skirts to extend the circumference, making bell-­‐
shaped silhouettes a common feature of women clothing for the next two hundred years. Today some women and especially high fashion models will wear a stiff gauze slip referred to as a Can-­‐Can under their skirts or dresses to get a desired effect of a wide profile. The colonial man’s clothing was just as fussy as the women’s clothes. They wore breeches that ended at the knee, knee-­‐high stockings, a waistcoat or more formally called a doublet, fancy buttons and buckles, wigs, embroidery, or ruffles on their shirts or waistcoats. Today, men still wear sleek clothing; fancy suits, sweaters, vests, shoes and even toupees. Just as in other cultures, working women always wore plainer clothing, usually made from fabric of solid colors, while the wealthier women wore fancier, flimsier fabrics that were in vogue, such as silk, satin, and velvet. It’s interesting to note that working women during this era had different sets of clothing; everyday and one outfit for Sunday. This is a very similar tradition found in the African American culture which was standard four decades ago. As a child, my grandmother made sure that I kept several outfits called “My Sunday Best” which usually included hat, gloves, ruffled socks, Patent leather shoes, top coat and dresses of silk, satin, and velvet trimmed either with lace or ruffles. Of course, the dress made a circumference around my small frame because of the Can-­‐Can under it. During the colonial period, from 1600-­‐
1800, my “Sunday Best” style of dress would have possibly landed me in jail as we shall soon see happened in the case of 16 year old Hannah Lyman. The Puritans in New England during that colonial period believed that too much decoration on the clothing was wrong; they created laws prohibiting the wearing of fine gold & silver threads, lace, and silk ribbons. Most of the articles men and women wore were made of wool or cotton but unadorned. In 1634 the Massachusetts General Court passed “sumptuary laws”. They regulated the wearing of fancy clothing. According to Wikipedia, the word sumptuous means lavish, magnificent, or expensive. This meant no one could purchase woolen, silk or linen garments, with silver, gold, silk, or thread lace on them. Actually, these laws date back to 187 BC in Rome. This law was just another global phenomenon practiced by societies as a way to keep control of their members. Sumptuary laws lasted for several decades in colonial times with a multitude of cases brought before the Court. Several noted cases in history are worth mentioning here. One case in particular involved two women brought up on charges in 1653 for wearing silk hoods and scarves in Newbury, CT. The charges were dismissed because they were able to prove that their husbands were worth 200 pounds each. Another case tried 38 women in Connecticut for wearing silk because of insufficient funds. Thirty young men were tried for wearing silk, long hair, and other extravagant clothing. However, it was the case of 16 year old Hannah Lyman who wore silk to court that eventually broke the power of the magistrates. It was pretty obvious to the colonists that it was just a matter of time before this law would be abolished. The magistrates still continued to enforce the sumptuary laws in 1676 because they looked at the wearing of any fine textiles as “wicked apparel.” Research reveals that these laws were abolished in the 1830’s. Where did the colonists get the textiles to make the clothing in the first place? There is no easy answer to this because trade was global by the time the colonists settled in Massachusetts and Virginia. European colonists in North America brought sheep with them and began processing wool in the 1600s. Around 1700 the Scotch-­‐Irish immigrants brought their expertise in growing flax to America and began making linen. Since wool and linen were very common textiles for the colonists, they began spinning their own yarn and making cloth known as “homespun” (Ulrich 4). The growing of cotton came later and by the 1800’s was widely used. When the first ship of Africans arrived in 1619, they had the status of indentured servants but by the late the 1600’s Africans brought to the colonies were enslaved. The first cotton plantation was established in Virginia in 1650. Cotton and tobacco had become valuable cash crops and further helped to establish the slave economy in the southern colonies. Disobedient slaves who once were indentured servants rebelled against the harsh treatment of the plantation owners and were punished with 40 lashes across the back or even worst death by hanging. Willie Lynch, who was sailing up the James River to deliver a speech to the colony of Virginia in 1712, caught a whiff of a dead slave and wanted to know why they were hanging valuable stock. He told the colony, “I have a fool-­‐proof method for controlling your black slaves that will last for at least 300 years” (African American Images, Inc). Lynch taught the slave owners how to pit slave against slave. You can read all about Mr. Lynch’s methods in a well known document called the Willie Lynch Letters, keeping the Negro under control. http://www.africanamericanimages.com/aai/willie%20lynch.html> Cotton growers soon figured out how to process raw materials into clothing. Spinning thread from harvested cotton was the first step, followed by weaving on a loom into fabric. The colonists would cut the fabric into pieces and sew them together to make clothing. This job was done exclusively by women. The first mechanical loom was built in the United States around 1820. From that point on large mechanical looms were used to manufacture cloth in a factory. While the colonists were now manufacturing cotton, linen and silk, England began manufacturing velvet fabric. In other parts of the world, silk was still a lucrative textile. The Chinese established trade routes on land that extended from Southern Europe to Egypt, Arabia, Somalia, Persia, India, Java, Vietnam and back to China. It was the German geographer Ferdinand von Richthofen in 1877 who first coined the expression “Silk Road” for this route. Why was the “Silk Road” so important? It established a connection for cultural, commercial and technological exchange between the “traders, merchants, pilgrims, missionaries, soldiers, nomads and urban dwellers from Ancient-­‐China, -­‐
India, -­‐Tibet, Persia and Mediterranean countries for almost 3,000 years” (Wikipedia). With the expansion of the trade routes by the Han Dynasty around 114 BCE, land routes in the late Middle Ages were replaced with trading by sea. As you can see from previous discussions about apparel, hair, and body modifications, fashions have been a part of cultures for centuries. However, little is mentioned today about the ugly side of fashion. The media does a wonderful job of presenting the glitz and glamour which so many of us fall prey too, but have you ever seriously thought about where your clothing is made? The majority of clothing is made in sweatshops in developing countries such as China, Bangladesh, and Honduras where labor is cheap. The latest fad in the fashion world is something called “waste couture”. Luz Claudio in his article entitled “Waste Couture: Environmental Impact of the Clothing Industry”, says that, “globalization has made it possible to produce clothing at increasingly lower prices, prices so low that many consumers consider this clothing to be disposable. Some call it “fast fashion”, the clothing equivalent of fast foods.” My mother-­‐in-­‐law is an example of this type of consumer. She will wear it one time and discard it. Unfortunately, this type of fast fashion made of mostly man-­‐made fabrics leaves an enormous carbon foot print. Polyester, a synthetic fabric, requires a lot of energy in the manufacturing process which requires substantial amounts of crude oil while releasing volatile organic compounds, particulate matter, and acid gases into the atmosphere. China is the largest exporter of fast fashion in the world. According to the United Nations Commodity Trade statistics database, approximately 30% of world apparel exports come from here. Labor statistics on China show that Chinese workers make as little as 12-­‐18 cents per hour topped with poor working conditions. Bangladesh and Honduras also export apparel to the United States. According to the EPA office of Solid Waste, Americans throw away more than sixty-­‐eight pounds of clothing and textile per person per year, and clothing and other textiles represent approximately 4% of the municipal solid waste (MSW) stream which continues to grow at an astounding rate. Susan Strasser, a professor of history at the University of Delaware, in her book, “Waste and Want: A Social History of Trash,” provides a historical perspective on what happened to clothing and consumer goods before World War I when “clothing was repaired, mended, or recycled to the 1920’s when consumerism was back in vogue (Strasser 111). Our country saw a rise in consumption during World War II in clothing and household goods which ushered in the Industrial Age. This became an integral part of American economy. At that point in time, apparel once passed down to family members…. became disposable at a faster and faster rate” (Strasser 161). Professor Strasser describes this historical period/trend as “progressive obsolescence” (Strasser 229) of clothing and consumer goods. Today with “waste couture” being the norm, clothing gets recycled in 3 ways according to Claudio, “clothing may be resold by the primary consumer to other consumers at a lower price, it may be exported in bulk for sale in developing countries, or it may be chemically or mechanically recycled into raw material for the manufacturer of other apparel and non-­‐
apparel products.” The internet has created a market for the resale of both new & used clothing through auction websites such as, eBay. According to the National Association of Resale & Thrifts Shops, sales in consignment and thrift shops is growing 5% per year. Other outlets such as the Salvation Army and Goodwill take donated clothing and household items providing the citizen with a receipt that can be used as a tax write-­‐off. Another solution to reducing the amount of clothing ending up in the waste stream is a brilliant idea by a avid environmentalist. A recent article found in the Queens Chronicle , November 4, 2010: 29 gives the consumer an alternative to save money and recycle clothes. Lynne Serpe came up with a solution to reduce, reuse, and recycle used clothing by swapping a piece of clothing with another item of clothing; ‘Swap-­‐O-­‐Rama’. Lynne believes that this will reduce the amount of clothing ending up in landfills. She’s quoted as saying, “There is always a greener option. There’s absolutely nothing better than taking something that you like, instead of putting it in the trash, giving it to someone else” (Benjamin 29). This idea could work in reducing the amount of discarded clothing if enough people participate. According to the Council for Textile Recycling approximately 2.5 billion pounds of post-­‐consumer textile waste represents about 10 pounds for every person. You’re probably thinking where does the rest of the clothing go? Used clothing from the United States is sold in more than 100 countries around the world putting a strain on selling high-­‐end clothing. Therefore, “as prices and quality of new clothing continue to decline, so too will the demand for used clothing diminish. This is because in the world of “fast fashion”, new clothing could be bought almost as inexpensively as used clothing” (Oakdene Hollis, Ltd.). What will be the environmental impact of “fast fashion” clothing on the world? Because producing “fast fashion” is energy intensive, new markets are being created such as “eco-­‐fashions”. The whole idea behind developing environmentally friendly clothing is to increase sustainability and extend the life-­‐cycle of the garment. An example of sustainable fibers would be crops that are grown with fewer pesticides, and require less irrigation. The other factor is that an organic cotton T-­‐shirt would require less washing and drying at high temperatures, passing the savings on to the consumer. Manufacturers are also finding other ways to clean up the environment by melting plastic bottles made of polyethylene terephthalate. This reconfigures the structure of the plastic into a fiber that can be woven into material to make clothing. Patagonia is one of the largest clothing retailers in the world to use this material. This takes out of the MSW stream a significant amount of plastic that would have otherwise ended up in a landfill. More companies are following suit, such as Tesco, a British retailer, which labels every product sold with information on how much carbon was used to manufacture it. “In the European Union (EU), the Registration, Evaluation, Authorization and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) regulations enacted June 1, 2007 require clothing manufacturers and importers to identify and quantify the chemicals used in their products.” (Claudio 449) The end products sent to market are regulated by the European Equipment and Product Safety Act which regulates the use of heavy metals, carcinogenic dyes, and other toxins used in textile manufacturing. Other standards provide guidance for the potential harm that a substance like pesticides may cause in a finished product. These are just a few of the standards to regulate the industry to increase consumer awareness by pointing them towards garments that are sustainable. How widespread is this use of toxic chemicals used in the beauty industry? Analysis done by Goldman Sachs estimates that the worldwide beauty industry is worth $95 billion per year consisting of skin care ($24 billion), cosmetics ($18 billion), hair-­‐care products ($38 billion), and perfumes ($15 billion). Cosmetic surgery globally costs consumers $160 billion a year with Brazil leading the pack. What is scary about this industry is the lack of health laws regulating it. According to Stacy Malkin, we are exposed to toxic chemicals in America on a regular basis. One recent example is the permanent lipsticks advertised on TV commercials that never smears . It actually contains lead (Pb). The EU has banned some 1,100 chemicals from cosmetics in Europe that are thought to cause cancer. The EU and Europeans are not taking any chances. On the other hand, the policy of the United States is “We need to be able to prove that an ingredient in this product causes harm before we’re going to do anything about it” (Malkin 6). This is precisely why labeling laws in this country is so important for consumers. We have no idea what these products are doing to our bodies, but some people are willing to pay any price for beauty. However, there are some solutions that are beneficial to the environment and our well being. Some companies are going green. The fashion industry held its second global conference from Thursday September 23 to Sunday September 26, 2010 at Oriel College in Oxford to discuss critical issues affecting the industry. In the call for papers, only one section “The Future of Fashion” was mentioned last in looking at trends and cycles and the materials of fashion such as eco-­‐fashion, intelligent textiles, and branding. There was not a section specifically dedicated to environmental sustainability. According to the conference announcement the focus was supposedly interdisciplinary and trans-­‐disciplinary to explore the historical, social, cultural, psychological, and artistic phenomenon of fashion. However, one section of the conference, Cultures of Fashion, has a category to discuss the ethical issues in fashion such as cruelty free fashion, the PETA anti-­‐fur movement, slave labor, sweatshops, child labor, and the growing counterfeit designer products market. Another part of the conference (which addressed some portion of what this paper focused upon) was “Fashion and Identity”. It looked at fashion, culture, and the human body as it relates to beauty standards, such as body art, weight, plastic surgery, and self-­‐fashioning with body modifications, including make-­‐up, hair design, piercings, tattoos, and body sculpting. There is so much money to be made in the fashion industry, not just in clothing. We have forgotten the ugly side of what’s driving adornment. How different are conditions today for workers in sweatshops around the world in comparison to what young immigrant workers faced in the 1900? It seems that 146 young women losing their lives on March 25, 1911 did not teach us a thing. Do we still not place value on another human being and the environment for the sake of the all mighty dollar? This is why this paper chose to focus on ‘Fashion and Beauty: What Do They Really Cost?’ as a title. Bibliography Sagay, Esi, “African Hairstyles: Styles of Yesterday and Today. Oxford, England: Heinemann International Literature and Textbooks, 1983: 25. Ko, Dorothy, “Every Step a Lotus: Shoes for Bound Feet”, University of California Press, 2001: 12. Rossi, William, “The Sex Life of the Foot & Shoes”, Krieger Publishing Company, Florida, 1993: 3. Cummings, S.R., Ling, X., and Stone, K., “Consequences of Foot Binding Among Older Women in Beijing China”, American Journal of Public Health, 1997, 87:1677-­‐1679. The Legacy of Fashion Fair <http://www.fashionfair.com>. Is African Hair Threading the Same Thing as Silky Dreads? www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJ1j97TcU0Q Do Non-­‐African American People Wrap Their Hair? – Curl Talk www.naturallycurly.com/curltalk/showthread Bellis, Mary, “I got my Start by Giving Myself a Start”. <http://inventors.about.com/od/wstartinventors/a/MadameWalker.html>. Ulrich Laurel Thatcher, “The Age of Homespun: Objects and Stories “, Random House, Inc. New York, 2001: 4-­‐11. Willie Lynch Letter, African American Images, Inc. <http://www.africanamericanimages.com/aai/willie%20lynch.html>. Silk Road <http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silk_Road>. Claudio, Luz, “Waste Couture: Environmental Impact of the Clothing Industry”, Environmental Health Perspective, September 1, 2007, 115:A449-­‐
A454. Strasser, Susan, “Waste and Want: A Social History of Trash”, Metropolitan Books, New York, 1999: 111,161, 229. Benjamin, Andrew, “A Dress for a Dress at Astoria’s Clothing Swap”, Queens Chronicle November 4, 2010: 29. Oakdene Hollins, Ltd., “Recycling of Low Grade Clothing Waste”. <http://www.oakdenehollins.co.uk/pdf/Recycle-­‐Low-­‐Grade-­‐Clothing.pdf Malkin, Stacy, “Not Just a Pretty Face: The Ugly Side of the Beauty Industry”, New Society Publishers, Canada, 2007: 6. Second Global Conference: Fashion-­‐Exploring Critical Issues, Oxford, UK, September 23-­‐26, 2010 http://www.inter-­‐disclipinary.net/critical-­‐issues/ethos/fashion/call-­‐for-­‐
papers/