I. Introduction – my world of fashion

What makes fashion interesting and at the same time tricky, is that fashion as an elaborate system follows certain protocols and traditions on beauty and gender. In a traditional fashion definition of elegance, women need to be thin, on high heels, flexible in their body language and seductive. This fashion language becomes visible during all fashion representation, almost as a basic rule. Women and fashion are constantly changing in connection to this language – that is what we call trends.

Even more in the interpretation about femininity, masculinity and newly about androgynies, the fashion system is strict. Fashion is constantly redefining standards of the woman and the perfect image about it.

But if I’m not fitting – who am I?
Well, I’m a woman, but I don’t want to be sexy and feminine in a traditional definition. But I’m not a man. So what am I?

I’m observing how fashion relates to certain codes and their effects. For me, the frame of fashion is my starting point of inspiration and observation within the issue of women, who don’t fit into a classical fashion definition of femininity and get pushed and push themselves into the masculine fashion definition.

This new interpretation of femininity, which in my opinion has become a new stereotype, has difficulties to be recognized as such, because the public doesn’t want to accept these new women as ‘real women’.

II. Fashion as visual code – and conflict

Catwalk and fashion presentations mirror our zeitgeist definition of stereotypes. Of course it changes over the years, but what do all have in common? We, women, want to be like the models/beauty icons on the catwalk.

Some designers and shows are trying to change that – think Rick Owens, Paris Fashion Week, September 2013. And yet, the stereotype remains: Chanel’s Ready-to-Wear show (2014) placed models in a hyper supermarket, wearing traditional stereotypes on sneakers.

The situation is fictional – no woman looks like this while grocery shopping. But everyone wants to imagine themselves wearing Chanel to buy milk. Hilarious!

For me, fashion is the most important visual communication: it indicates how to organize, standardize, who belongs to whom, which gender we are and which codes we need to follow. Gender always exists in relation to society and power, just like fashion. Women are reduced to serve and maintain the balance of power in society, men continue to play the role of power.

The way we dress expresses our position in society and the power role that is reserved for us. To challenge this, I deconstructed the traditional way of femininity in relation to elegance, social status, gender positioning and ideal beauty – to understand why fashion relates so much to being human.

In the end, we should be dressed not only to attract and seduce someone else.
We should be dressed for ourselves.

III. The question of invisibility

Fashion, regarding the question what don’t we want to be seen as, forces us to deconstruct clichés on multiple levels – especially how women want to be seen through fashion.

“…there is no gender identity behind the expression of gender… identity is performatively constituted by the very ‘expressions’ that are said to be its results.”
Judith Butler, Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity, 1991

My research infiltrates every visual layer: imagery, colors, material, techniques, second-hand pieces, dress codes, magazines, music, conversations. During my research, I’m always driven by WHY: Does it make sense? Is my question coherent?

My collections always observe the “craziness of humanity” (Jo-Ann Furniss, Comme des Garçons, FW14), societal clichés and visual codes. I deconstruct to understand.

My BA graduation collection (2011) broached the body and the common definition of beauty. Uniformity Hybrid (2013) explored gender neutrality. My MA collection (2014) addressed the issue of being a woman in fashion and society, and the stereotypes surrounding femininity and elegance.

At the same time, it became necessary to focus on my role as a designer and a woman: Is there a difference between me as a designer and me as a woman – or is it the same personality?

IV. Style as resistance – and responsibility

I'm searching my debate not only outside but also inside fashion. I analyze other designers – how they represent themselves and convey their message without getting lost.

My icons: Maison Martin Margiela and Comme des Garçons. I’m interested in how they tell their story and deal with their audience. In Margiela’s case, the shift to a commercial brand influenced dissemination and image. In Rei Kawakubo’s case, it’s about resisting the mainstream by inventing ultra-expensive and outré single pieces.

Both designers found their niche inside the strict fashion world and still try to do what they believe in. And I think that’s the most admirable way of dealing with fashion.

References & Sources

• DOC25: It's in the sky (Dutch TV documentary on female stereotypes)
• Warm Bodies, Lorella Zanardo
• Judith Butler – Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity, 1990
• Pierre Bourdieu – Masculine Domination, 2001
• Jo-Ann Furniss – Comme des Garçons FW14, in: over-the-rainy-addiction