Economically, there is a duality that is hard to ignore. Parallels between the 20th century teens, 20s, 30s, 40s and 80s are being explored in various levels as fashion, the most outward cultural expression, has exemplified this in the diverse range of designs available. These divides in class distinction are apparent when survival of the fittest becomes more acute during economic uncertainties coupled with social climbing opportunities that a democratic process affords, regardless of the chances of successful economic migration.
That is not to say that this aspiration was less apparent or absent in other decades in the last century, for the availability of mass-produced fashion has increased the possibilities overall of access to levels of quality that can support competition into such aspirational efforts…or preventative presentation so as to prevent ostracization by a population that has long stigmatized any signs of poverty as a contagion to be avoided. But the recognition of this long-ingrained fear and the awareness of its power has driven markets to appeal to these and our dreams in clever marketing made to fuel sales. Thus, luxury always has a place as a vehicle for enhancing status.
Sometimes it’s more sophisticated, involving knowledge of materials, construction and craft. But the post-war mid-century simplification of status via labeling has transcended, rising to an almost gauche level of ostentation in the 80s with labels being worn with pride. It clearly spoke to the simplest of people that the garment was expensive and exclusive, made obvious to all.
As logos and brand emblems rose in popularity, the awareness of this ridiculousness coincided with the emergence of flash pop sensation Sigue Sigue Sputnik, who went as far as to rent space of their albums for commercial ads and sold advertising space on their wardrobes. Everything was for sale, and everything became advertising, playing into the logo craze. The vulgarity was comically absurd and oddly embraced as the logo obsession showed no signs of abating.
When the economy started to waver and the rise of counterfeiting diminished the efficacy of the label, logos became out of fashion. No longer was it acceptable to flaunt wealth, particularly when there were too many suffering economic misfortune. The return of demure appreciation lasted for a while until the turn of this century, where logos have gradually returned.
Within the past couple of weeks, a couple of the heavyweights in media such as the New York Times and Wall Street Journal featured articles on an observation made recently , speaking of the re-emergence of logos in design expression. Some of the spring/summer 2014 collections from designers such as Alexander Wang, Christian Dior, DKNY, Fashion East’s Ashley Williams, Missoni, Viktor & Rolf and VFiles all featured logos in various forms ranging from badges and patches to patterns involving the label itself. Ashish didn’t have its own label but it had many others as some of its garments were coated with corporate logos in the same manner as a Nascar uniform.
While some houses were looking to approach it seriously, some of the others were doing it tongue-in-cheek, barraging the garment with logos to diminish rather than enhance its power and meaning. And depending on who is looking at the logo will depend on that perspective. Business of Fashion recently featured an article discussing the rejection of brad names by the Millennials dues to economics, similar to the 90s. this contrasts with those supporting the return who tend to have more of a nostalgic connection to the go-go 80s, a decade that has been getting a lot of exploration over the past few years.
The diversity of inspiration from both decades simultaneously reflect the divergence of appreciation or disdain for logos. That we have such a supersaturation of brands presented in the collections shows the room for supporting various schools of thought, and the tribalism that trending companies have been exploring over the past few years are showing that the logomania is rooted in a different approach. Rather than merely demonstrating a level of affluence, the wearing of brand loyalty is taking on a new sense of belonging to a perspective, be it the irony or the affinity of philosophies that go beyond what it used to mean.
How this will carry out in the pre-fall 2014 collections is too soon to say. At time of writing this article, very few houses were showing, although the parade of fashion is starting again and DKNY was the only one so far to carry forth its logo embrace while Akris and Tory Burch did not. Or at least did not do so in their presentations, as anything can happen in their boutiques. And anything can happen in the next few weeks, not just in the collections but in the economies of the world. And we’ll see just how many designers have a perspective that supports, diminishes or even rejects the fixation of brandishing a name as an economic badge of honor.