The clone theory...

Economists at a loose end have, in the past, come up with theories that link fashion with economy. The hemline theory is well-known though whether it is credible or not is another matter altogether. Then there is the lipstick theory where economists have argued that in a downturn lipstick sales go up as women spend morre on lipsticks, a less expensive cosmetic and yet one that can make a difference to a person’s appearance significantly.

Another set of people who follow and study economic matters have been trying to find solace in the teachings of Karl Marx and there is evidence that copies of Das Kapital are flying off the shelves. And these very same people are also wondering if this current economic crisis is the end of the road for capitalism. In my humble opinion, both these sets of humans are barking up the wrong tree (or trees) because, as the fashion and luxury business shows, capitalism, socialism and communism all get us to do the same things — only by different names.

Take for instance the Hermes Birkin bag which in the heydays of capitalism was available only if you queued up for a longish period of time. For all those old enough to recall those good old days of socialism in India — remember when everyone queued up for their daily necessities. Queue, same to same, just the product is different. Yet the Birking queue is a badge of honour and the ration queue something to be reviled.

Turn your eye away from the queue theory for a moment and turn it towards the whole trend shebang that fashion in modern capitalist times has espoused. Breathless fashionistas tell the hoi polloi from the pulpit that this season the colour purple is so in. Every fashionable brand on high streets across the globe is awash in that colour. This kind of uniform trend has been good for fashion companies and retailers who then don’t have to invest in keeping different inventories of sizes and styles.

But the negative impact of this has been that people have started looking like clones irrespective of geographies. Cultural nuances are getting blunted thanks to this capitalist marketing gimmick, and now, often, it’s difficult to tell which city in the world one is in as urban men (walk into a corporate office anywhere and its hard to tell people apart such is the overriding sameness of the suit in black and blue) and women are looking like each other everywhere.

How different is this from the Mao suit that the Chinese were all expected to don through his reign? Much has been made about how this was an unfortunate part of communism which made the Chinese lose their individuality and its horrible impact on the country’s culture. Capitalism’s impact on preserving cultural diversity in fashion terms hasn’t been stellar either. As far as fashion and luxury are concerned, all the three isms are as blunting. Time, then, for fashion and luxury to invent its own ism that respects and promotes diversity and keeps cultural nuances intact and doesn’t turn all of us into clones. Fashionism anyone?