‘Shared or Stolen?’ - The Rebranding of Cultural Fashion

Fashion constantly evolves. Things go in and out of style like clockwork, and as a result

trends are continuously created.

However, the ‘creation’ of these so called new trends, aren’t always as original as they are

presented to be.

Within western fashion, elements of colonisation can be seen. In particular, the rebranding of

pieces with cultural significance, relabeled, with the intention of becoming palatable.

Edges become ‘sticky bangs’, Dupattas become ‘Scandinavian Scarfs’ and the list goes on.

After all, a trend isn’t so marketable when its unoriginality is revealed.

The argument that ‘culture should be shared’ is used when the topic regarding those outside

of a culture adopting its elements is discussed.

Of course, I do agree with that argument, but only to a degree. It is generally okay to want to

participate in other cultures. A natural curiosity and the willingness to explore is integral to

forming unity, however, in many cases, boundaries are crossed, and the line between

appreciation and appropriation is ripped away, like a loose thread. Because, what holds that

line, what clearly defines something not as appropriation but rather appreciation, is

understanding and a willingness to learn about the culture and its significance, not to co-opt it.

When practices and pieces are appropriated, their origins are, in most cases, completely

disregarded. Credit is ‘forgotten’ and context is diminished so that a distance between

creator, co-opter and consumer can be maintained.

What makes this process that much more harmful is the change in attitude according to who

is adorning the creations of a culture.

Often, when a person, usually a person of colour, decides to practice their own culture, it is

regarded poorly. They are seen as unprofessional, and are alienated, or possibly even

stereotyped. This can be seen with hairstyles that are common amongst the black

community in particular.

However, despite the criticism one group faces, when the culture is westernised, it is seen

as cool, and different in a way that is desirable.

The process of westernisation and commercialisation causes these elements to become so

far removed, that we no longer associate them with their origin.

We see this with dream catchers for example. What is now seen as a cute piece of room

decor gaining its major popularity in the 2010s, was actually created by the Ojibwe tribe,

indigenous to North America.We also see this with Yoga. Though a well respected physical wellness technique, it is often forgotten that Yoga originated as an ancient Indian practice that is rooted largely in spirituality.

Despite westernisation making these examples appear socially cultureless, it is not the case.

They have meaning beyond their means to make a profit.

And without these cultures that we keep so hidden, they would not exist in the first place.

Instead of celebrating our access to them by honouring those who have created it, the

creators are demonised.

But it is not fair to strip the meaning behind something so significant and dear to a whole

group of people.

Part of what makes something so culturally significant is its meaning.

The only way to combat the rise of appropriation is to consume more responsibility.

Until corporations decide to give credit where credit is due, it is up to us as consumers to do

our research, and to care about what we decide to wear.

Because like all else, fashion is political. Every clothing item, decor item, fashion sub-culture

and even every practice has its context, and that context deserves to be known.

Written by, La’Keesha Stewart