Haute Couture Pretends to Glow Green
Is High Fashion is a Waste of more than money?

A show of hands here: Who plans on buying a Louis Vuitton bag because it supports Al Gore's climate change project? How about slapping down an extra 300 bucks for a gold-painted recycling logo on your $2,300 Murakami bag?

The fashion biz, like every other industry, is feeling the push to "go green," which is less about climate change than it is about including warm fuzzies about Mother Nature in your marketing campaign. This means a look book stuffed with descriptions like "organic" and "environmentally sustainable."

It's comparable (but not quite as bad) as Exxon saying they are green because they've met with some environmental lobbyists. Or McDonalds saying their food is healthier in reaction to Supersize Me. Except in fashion, it's overconsumers like Marc Jacobs who pretend to send the message.

 

A PR stunt with Catherine Deneuve and Andre Agassi espousing your eco-senesibilities is just that, unless you actually put your money where your mouth is.

For an industry that thrives on competition and consumers discarding last season's attire, the concept of sustainable clothing just doesn't work. Why? Because "sustainable clothing" means clothing that you keep wearing, that you don't buy more of, because you still own the stuff from last year. As in, the direct opposite of what designer labels want you to do.

Think Fashion Week is about innovative new designs? No. It's about manufacturing trends to make consumers think they must have the new. it. thing. Even though everything's been done already, and you probably own it.

This scenario is even more ridiculous than the McDonald's health food campaign. McDonalds doesn't make its money off you getting fat — that just happens to be an unfortunate side effect — while the fashion giants need you to throw out your old clothes so you can buy more at a later date. Or at least put them in Manhattan Mini Storage.

And if anything, the industry is getting worse, not better, by trying to put forward a green image:

Dressing luxury in an eco-friendly gown demands eco-unfriendly practices. The typical Western-designed handbag is assembled in China, trucked to Hong Kong, and shipped to Italy—where the attachment of a buckle or handle is enough to earn the vaunted made in italy label—before it is flown back to China to be sold. No public image is green enough to offset that kind of carbon footprint.

So the solution? Don't "go green," maybe? Learn how to stitch, don't throw away your clothes (yeah right) and shop entirely at Beacon's Closet. But: Watching Project Runway is still environmentally sound.

Aug 14, 2008 · posted by drew · Link · 2 Responses
Related Posts

• 11.21.08: Mickey Rouke is the Comeback Kid (Comments: 2)
• 11.21.08: Neil Feldman's Battle with AOL's Tech Service Team (Comments: 1)
• 11.21.08: Newspapers Receive Temporary Monetary Reprieve (Comments: 0)
• 11.21.08: Blind Item: Cheating Editor-in-Chief (Comments: 2)
• 11.21.08: Larry Hackett, Defender of People's Celebrity Shilling Integrity (Comments: 7)

Comments (2)

No. 1 emily says:

thanks for this. the easiest way to be green is consume less, which seems like 'duh', but somehow is hard for people to grasp…

Posted: Aug 15, 2008 at 11:49 am
No. 2 Tod Brilliant says:

Great points and well said. Yet, there is such thing as sustainable luxury fashion and there are people out there doing everything they can to create blueprints for others to follow. I can think of Entermodal for example. Hermes-quality bags, unparalleled dedication to environmental stewardship. Also most every line carried at Arboretum Apparel (pretty much the most ethically-demanding boutique).

A gold plated recycling logo? That kind of shite just makes everyone's work harder….ugh. Thanks for the solid post.

Posted: Aug 19, 2008 at 1:32 pm
Leave a Comment

It's easier to leave comments when you register for an account. It's quick.

Already have an account? Then log in!

Scroll Posts