Fashion Fades But Style Is Eternal Essay Typer

On By In 1

Who decides what is considered ‘stylish’? Dina Toki-O believes that everyone’s style is unique and it is yours to define.

‘Fashion fades, but style is eternal’

If you’re a blogger, fashion fiend, lover of all things pretty, and/or a social networking enthusiast, you’ve likely come across that wise little quote at some point.

It makes a whole lot of sense to me, personally – fashion comes and goes; there are always trends being plucked out of nowhere every other week, and you are either a follower or a trendsetter. It doesn’t matter if you have all the money in the world and can afford all the latest designs, thinking that you’re keeping up to trend, because if you don’t know how to put an outfit together, those pricey pieces will mean absolutely nothing.

I’ve come across people who wear designer gear, literally from head to toe, but they have no sense of style whatsoever – well, at least to me. They’ve simply gone to a store, picked up what’s on display and wear it because the industry has effectively told them:

That is style’

That’s in fashion’

‘If you wear it, you’ll be hot

Which leads me to my next point: just because I think a certain individual has no sense of style, it doesn’t mean that it’s true. I may not particularly like a person’s style, but others may find it interesting, pretty, daring and so on.

So who’s to decide who has style and who doesn’t?

Being active on social media like Facebook, Instagram, Tumblr and Blogger, I’m clearly in the firing line for criticism. It comes from overnight ‘style experts’ or fashion gurus with a sudden urge to share their ‘professional’ opinion that my style is ‘no style’.

‘This is what fashion has come to in today’s world,’ they lament.

I find that many people tend to misunderstand my style, and I’ve come to notice that the ones who do understand, appreciate, enjoy or simply respect my style are those who have a similar creative character or background to me.

If I’m comfortable, confident and happy in it, then who’s to say it’s ‘ugly’ or not stylish?

There are a lot of ‘fashion snobs’ out there with very close-minded ideas on fashion. Some follow whoever rules the roost, while others simply stick with the norm. If something is slightly different, then it’s not accepted. People just want to see ‘pretty’ and if it’s not the generally accepted definition of ‘pretty’, then it’s deemed ‘ugly’.

I’ve been contemplating this for a few months, and it has led me to try out new things – things that were judged to be ‘ugly’ or completely out of fashion/style. This frustrates me; I mean, if I’m comfortable, confident and happy in it, then who’s to say it’s ‘ugly’ or not stylish? Even H&M, one of the biggest high-street stores internationally, had a caption on their walls the other week which went something like this:

‘Who cares about the rules; if it makes you happy, wear it.’

And that’s the quote that inspired me to vent a little through writing this week’s column.

All ideas stem from others. So a new idea – a new trend – is always just an interpretation of something seen elsewhere. All of this ‘who copied who’ is therefore invalid, unless, of course, it’s an exact replica.

I wear what I think looks good on me, and I wear what I feel represents my personality

Inventors and creators get inspiration from just about anything. So, if one day I look at a plant and suddenly get an idea, that doesn’t mean I’ve copied the plant. Nor does it mean that my creation will necessarily have an obvious relation to the plant.

To me, style is synonymous to individuality. I wear what I think looks good on me, and I wear what I feel represents my personality. This happens automatically with anyone – you shop using your personality as a guide, whether or not you realise it.

Everyone has their own individual clothing preferences. Let’s say you walk into a shop and you see a short skirt – the first thing you might think is: ‘not for me, it’s not hijabi’. Whereas someone else might look at it, love it, and imagine a whole look with it that’s still suitable for a hijabi.

Ultimately, it is you who decides your style; if you’re confident that you can pull it off, then it will be timeless.

And, as they say at H&M: Who cares about the rules? THEY’RE MADE TO BE BROKEN!


Tags: character, individuality, personality, social network, style, taste, trendsetter

Gabrielle “Coco” Chanel (1883-1971) had a way with words. This iconic twentieth-century designer not only forged the framework of modern fashion in countless innovations—the runway show, the little black dress, styles that celebrated the natural lines of the female figure—she left a legacy of tart, terse dictates that defined a philosophy for women who dare to cultivate their own individual elegance and draw inspiration from their own will. Chanel’s world view celebrated simplicity, whether in the direct expression of a woman’s demands and desires or the severe elegance of the impeccable silhouettes of her garments. She warned against conformity, advising that to be “irreplaceable,” a woman must always be “different.” She urged women to be themselves, declaring that the most beautiful color is the one “that looks best on you.” Her most memorable statement revealed the subtle, but telling distinction between the two words that differentiated her chosen profession from her art: “Fashion fades, only style remains.”

The English word fashion derives from the old French noun façon, and its meaning has an inherent materiality, as in the verb “to fashion” or to make something. By the late middle ages, “fashion” also referred to a manner or a mode of personal presentation—a way of arranging the hair, of tying a belt, of ornamenting a garment. Style also has origins in old French and originally referred a writing instrument with a sharpened end for incising letters on to a wax tablet (the ancestor of the scratch pad!). But its Latin derivation linked the English noun to the character of individual literary expression—of a writer, or a circle or a genre—and by the fifteenth century that meaning broadened to refer to the hallmark features that identified a type of demeanor, art, and, by the nineteenth century, dress.

In The Rhetoric of Style (Southern Illinois University Press, 2008), Barry Brummett positions fashion as an aspect of style, observing that if style is the language, fashion is the “utterance of the moment.” If style is the template, then fashion is a temporary invention on that template, a short-lived reflection of variety or change. Writing in 1863, Charles Baudelaire identified this balance of enduring quality and energizing change as the principle of a “rational” history of beauty in which the beautiful exists in the unity of two elements: the eternal expression of beauty shaped by the characteristics of the age (Charles Baudelaire, The Painter of Modern Life). Chanel adroitly adopted this insight to her theory of design, strong in her conviction that only the steely structure of good style can support the whims of fashion.

Perhaps now more than ever, Chanel’s words offer a critique of the fashion world. While houses such as Chanel and Dior remain fashion royalty, dictating what trends will dominate each season, it seems that for the first time the impulse to mix, reinvent, and resist trends is equally praised. Critics have wondered what is to be made of season after season of undefined extremes in fashion, but this lack of cohesion has gone hand in hand with the advent of personal style blogs, independent fashion publications, and mainstream support of young fashion labels. These have worked to challenge and redefine what we think of as fashion and the fashionable, as well as who makes those determinations. At least on the surface, it appears that fashion has increasingly become an expression of popular taste, with fashion houses looking for inspiration equally in the street and in the archive.

Above all, these channels have made it clear that today style is of equal importance to fashion. But if one thing remains certain, it is that ideas about fashion will continue to shift, morph, and reappear in new form. While this means that the current thinking about the relationship of style and fashion will no doubt change yet again and again, what is to be made of Chanel’s legacy?

Perhaps the answer lies in the evolving perception of Chanel from fashion influence to fashion icon. As in other art forms, fashion has its own history, one that has been formulated, constructed, and revisited. Celebrated masterpieces and their innovative creators have been cited for decades as the origin and inspiration for countless others who follow. But these cannot be thought of as living, breathing forces. Rather, they have become iconic variations of their original forms, endlessly relied upon and cited by whatever and whoever is regarded as the leading innovator at that time. Still, if Mademoiselle Chanel were to take stock of current trends, even she would likely have as much difficulty as ever defining what will fade and what will endure. Regardless, it is fair to say that her iconic sense of style would have something to do with the latter.

Photo credits (from top): Coco Chanel, Evening Standard—Hulton Archive/Getty Images. Gabrielle (“Coco”) Chanel, © Hulton-Deutsch Collection/Corbis.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *