A Critique of Simmel fashion theory

(Buhari Maryam T.)

Abstract
This article gives a brief description and critique of Simmels theory of fashion. His discussion on fashion is
largely directed toward fashion as a form of social dialectics; for unification and separation. Simmel’s
analysis encapsulates the determinants of fashion including its actors in a society. He saw the elite as the
major creator of fashion, hence, the influence of class system on fashion. He also tries to explain why the
female gender has high sense of fashion adoption than their counterpart. However, this work tries to show the
dynamic nature of the society which explains various changes that has permeated our new modern world and
subsequent change in human behaviour. This thus calls for new form of explanation to certain issues that has
been affected by the change in the society hitherto analysed in a particular way with the realm of fashion
inclusive.

ABOUT SIMMEL
Simmel was born in Berlin, Germany. He was Jewish and this became one of the reasons for his
marginalization within the German academia. Although many didn’t recognise him as part of the major
intellectual and philosophical influence in sociology, his intellectual and theoretical works continue to be a
force to reckon with. This can be seen in his philosophical influence on symbolic interactionism and even in
Marxism as he influence many Marxist scholars like lukacs. Simmel’s contributions to sociology are thought
provoking, unparallel and unprecedented. His contribution to the discipline was different from the likes of
Durkheim and Karl Max in the sense that while these authors saw helpless individuals in the society who are
alienated, isolated and forgotten, Simmel saw individuals who re assert self through unique manners in
fashion and styles. As such, he was able to solve the problem of individualism to an extent through his theory
on fashion. For him, fashion is a way through which individualism is conquered.

1
INTRODUCTION

Simmel theory of fashion is a very rich intellectual contribution to the field of sociology which
indicates his vastness as an intelligent sociologist. This can be seen in some of his assumptions and
explanations about fashion that still stood the test of time in the face of various changes that
characterised this social world. His work explained different form of social behaviour in fashion and
its essence using different societies as his basis of rich comparative analysis. For instance, He tried to
depict the case of the Kaffirs who developed strong class system that tend to influence their fashion
and compared it with the Bushmen with no class system which did not interest their change in
apparels. However, some of Simmel’s propositions happen to be in tandem with classical modernity
as the society has move to what we can call late/high/radical modernity as noted by Giddens. The
need for a new way of understanding this phenomenon serves as a driving force towards this review.
It is impossible to do justice to all the various themes Simmel pointed in his work; however some
aspects of his writing will be reviewed as follows.

 Simmel’s Trickle down notion and Actors in fashion

 Determinants and rational behind change in Fashion
 Fashion standing test of time
 Simmel’s Dialectic principle of Fashion (Dividing and Unionism)
 The concept of gender in fashion

In making a critical review of this work, Feminist and Modernization theory of Giddens, and its
emphasis on rationality will be use as point of reference. From Giddens perspective, modernity is
seen as a juggernaut that can’t be escape from, as such modern fashion is so encapsulating that one
can’t escape from it. It is highly competitive and driven by desire to always be in vogue irrespective
of one’s gender or social status. the principle of rationality is now seen in fashion as we now have
rationalization of the market system of fashion, internet technology as a fashion informant for new
trend to be identified; online retailers like Jumia, konga etc. Feminist theory on the other hand seeks
to describe the social world from the distinctive vantage points of women. The theory saw the image
of patriarchy in women’s subordination, exploitation, control and in setting standards of fashion
irrespective of their class or social status. As such, the new modern world has tried to personified
women body and constructed an ideal body type for women which have constantly influence their
high sense of fashion adoption.

DESCRIBING FASHION

Fashion is a popular trend, especially in styles of dress and ornaments. Fashion in modern times has
been defined as a distinctive and often habitual trend in the style in which a person dresses. In

2
fashion, just as Simmel noted, we have fashion leaders and fashion followers. The fashion leaders
often transmit a particular look by first adopting it and then communicate it to others. The fashion
followers include large numbers of consumers who accept and wear the merchandise that has been
visually communicated to them. For Simmel the fashion leaders are the upper class while the fashion
followers are the lower class.

TRICKLE DOWN THEORY AND ACTORS IN FASHION CREATION

Simmel tries to understand how fashion came to being in the society as noted in his work;

Fashion differs for different classes –the fashions of the upper stratum of the society are never
identical with those of the lower; in fact they are abandoned by the former as soon as the latter
prepares to appropriate them. (pg133). The more frantic becomes the desire for imitation from below
and seeking for the new from above.

Social forms, apparels, aesthetic judgement, the whole style of human expression are constantly
transformed by fashion in such a way, however, that fashion i.e., the latest fashion affect only the
upper class. Just as soon as the lower class begins to copy their style, thereby crossing the line of
demarcation the upper classes have drawn and destroying the uniformity of their coherence, the
upper classes turn away from this style and adopt a new one, which in turn differentiates them from
the masses; and thus the game goes merrily on. (pg 135)

Simmel believe that fashion of the upper class is usually different from that of the lower ; this
assertion is known as the trickledown theory, whereby the fashion always come from up to down. As
the upper class see that it is being embrace by lower, they tend to drop this fashion. This means that
for simmel, fashion is always about class distinction, for oppression and separation. However fashion
in neo modern sense has gone beyond that, Simmel failed to see element of individual modern
creativity in fashion. Fashion these days does not necessarily start from the upper class as most
fashions now start from the lower class. For instance many of the designers get their inspiration on
the street and even in unbelievable situation; fashion inspiration now comes from music, movies, art
paintings etc. Another instance is the trend in ray-ban sunglasses as a form of fashion which has
come to stay, this form of fashion started after a movie men in black. Many people adopted this sense
of fashion irrespective of their class and there is no indication that the upper classes will abandon this
fashion because it’s being adopted by all and sundry. Another instance is the trouser sagging fashion
which was adopted from a prisoner. The rationale behind it popularity is still beyond sociological
comprehension. Using a more specific instance is the Ankara print fashion in Nigeria, Ankara used to
be seen as a lower class sense of fashion, but because of more creativity that many designers bring
out of this print, the elite which to Simmel can’t even continue with fashion they create once it’s

3
being imitated now find the Ankara fashion appealing. In fact the Ankara fashion remains one of the
enduring forms of fashion in Nigeria sense. This also negates Simmels sense of fashion as a form of
imitation by the lower class as its now shows that the upper class can also imitate the fashion of the
lower class.

Furthermore, for Simmel the major actors in fashion creation is the elite/upper class, however the
new fashion actors have gone beyond the elite. In fact critically looking at the actors in it creation are
hustlers, who in order to reach fame, express their selves to gain more income, these people take
fashion as a source of livelihood. Fashion trend is now complex and complicated than what one
group out of the whole society can create. We now have designers, artists, celebrities, fashion
bloggers, fashion journalist, fashion police who serve as protector and custodians of fashion
upholding its tenets and principles. Mass marketing of apparel is now a serious lucrative business,
mass production, mass distribution has made fashion /clothing an aspect that is available for all, there
is what we can call fashion revolution which moved from home made to readymade. In fact fordism
has made fashion products cheaper for all which thus allows for fashion overlap among classes.

DETERMINANTS AND RATIONAL BEHIND FASHION ADOPTION

The increase of wealth is bound to hasten the process of new seeking and render it visible, because
the objects of fashion, embracing as they do the eternals of life are more accessible to the mere call
of money. (pg135)

His assumption of wealth as a major precursor in quickness to attune to new fashion is no more
relevant, the major determinant to ones quickness in fashion is ones level of information. The new
modern world is characterized with reflexivity due to advancement in information, people
irrespective of their social class or status are now forced to reflect and locate themselves in the new
fashion world, a microcosm of the new modern world. Also because the new modern world is
characterized with disembeddiment, it gives way for expert system, thus the professionalization of
fashion itself. This makes it difficult for fashion to be located in a local context of the elite class as
Simmel postulated because we now have professionals and masters in interpreting this new form of
fashion. The expertise which we can now call the creators of fashion is not determined by their class
but by access to information technology and knowledge. At a micro level, it has been observed that
the new Information technology (Internet Technology like instagram face book, twitter makes it
quick for people to learn new trend and change their fashion sense. For instance, if upper class
person fail to listen to fashion news or use the social media for a long time to see what is in vogue,
such person might be tending toward being outdated despite his elite status. This new IT is bridging

4
the gap between the upper and the lower class. We can now make our postulate that the more access
to IT, the more quickness in fashion. It is also safe to make postulation that fashion creates its own
elite and not the other way round as Simmel assumes. Thus it’s now a social necessity for all because
of it power to determines ones social class/ status as fashion lovers now judge social status by the
way an individual combine outfits. Even if such individual has lots of money but appears or dress
shabby, such individual is not seen as elite in the new fashion world. Even if such individual use
expensive apparels and combine it wrongly, the person will be seen as unfashionable.

As alluded earlier on fashion creating its own elite, the new modern world fashion can be seen in
what Antonio gramsci called Hegemony. Fashion can be seen as a strong force to be reckoned with
and has its power over almost everyone whether consciously or unconsciously, this is now used to
overturn the social class differentiation. It’s so powerful that its follower can spend their last penny
on it, again we can still see element of conspicuous consumption of Thorstein Veblen in fashion. The
George lukacs reification concept can still be attributed to fashion. Individuals, elite or no elite are
now being placed at the mercy of fashion dictate, everyone wants to be regarded as fashionista (a
symbolic language created in the realm of fashion to show acceptance) and do not want to be
regarded as unfashionable. Fashion now becomes a respecter of no one, we now have laws in
fashion, just as we have professional jargons in various disciplines, fashion has gravitated to the
aspect that it has its own language that its followers constantly seek knowledge for. Again fashion is
now seen in the sense of conformity and deviance as fashion has its own custodians who give
appropriate sanction to individuals who break its rules, thus sanction could be through labelling,
shaming, gossips, rejection and reduction of such person’s self esteem and confidence. Fashion also
reward its conformist through good labelling as fashionista, acceptance and increase in self esteem.
Its custodian, who interprets and carries out both its reward and punishment are called Fashion
Police. Fashion also can be seen in form of theatrical performance as used by Ervin goffman, the
front stage is the fashion world where people put in a lot of costume in order to engender acceptance,
outside the fashion world is the back stage where people prepare themselves.

FASHION STANDING TEST OF TIME

In his writing; The very character of fashion demands that it should be exercised at one time only by
a portion of the given group, the great majority being merely on the road to adopting it. As soon as
an example has been universally adopted, that is as soon as anything that was originally done only
by a few has really come to be practised by all- as is the case in certain portions of our apparel and
in various forms of social conduct- we no longer speak of fashion. As fashion spreads, it gradually
goes to its doom. The distinctiveness which in the early stages of a set fashion assures for it a certain

5
distribution is destroyed as the fashion spreads, and as the element wanes, the fashion is also bound
to die. (Page 138)
For simmel, as fashion spread and is being imitated by all, it gets waned, destroyed and dies. This
might be true for the fashion in his time, but fashion in this modern world doesn’t die. In fact we can
say that as fashion spreads, it becomes comprehensive. It doesn’t die but becomes recycled. An
example will suffice, the pencil trouser fashion was first adopted by many in the 80s just as Simmel
noted non expediency in the method to which fashion dictate whether wide or narrow trousers,
coloured or black scarf’s shall be worn. This narrow trouser was a fashion in vogue for so many
years. In Simmels view the narrow trouser is bound to die once it is accepted by all. However, just
like simmel predicted, the narrow trouser became outdated and out of creativity, the boot cot trouser
became the fashion of the day. Many people adopted this fashion in the late 90s and early 21st
century in most part of the world, but all of a sudden, the narrow which is now labelled pencil came
back again to be the fashion in vogue, some even transform the pencil to carrot trousers. From this
indication, we can say fashion don’t die, but gets “hibernated” for a while and becomes recycled.
Another example is the Nigeria Afro-hair and Oleku fashion attributed to the 1980s, this fashion
became hibernated and labelled outdated, but these two fashions has been recycled and brought back.

SOCIAL DIALECTISM IN FASHION AND A TOOL FOR CLASS DIFFERENTIATION

Simmel postulated fashion in a dialectical form of unity and division as explained in his work;

Fashion is a product of class distinction, the double function of which consists in revolving within a
given circle and at the same time emphasizing it as separate from others. Thus fashion on the other
hand signifies union with those in the same class, the uniformity of a circle characterized by it, and,
‘uno actu’, the exclusion of all other groups. (pg 134)

His dialectic principle of unity and Divide can be seen as unattainable in the new fashion world; this
is because fashion can separate between the fashion conscious and the non fashionable, but uniting as
Simmel explain might not be in its real form because of what we can call sociological drama that
exist among this group. We now have rapacious and competitive fashion as a result of competitive
and rapacious capitalism, and even people of the same class that fashion unite in his perspective
become unrealistic in modern times because people of this class are always in constant tug of war on
superiority of who is more fashionable; as such there is no way it bring them together. For Simmel,
the upper class create fashion; this assertion becomes not totally true with new fashion trend. For
instance, there was a time when it was fashionable for one to be slim, now the body structure
fashion; the figure eight and six packs syndrome; this is also used in determining ones sense of
fashion. Looking at this aspect of fashion, it affirms the fact that fashion dictate does not only come

6
from the upper class because the dictate of this fashion does not go in favour of the rich who are
likely to be more obese in body structure than the poor due to what they consume, a case of
macdonalization thesis. Many of this rich are now force to reflect and relocate themselves to the new
accepted norms of fashion. Many of them buy all sorts like weight shedding supplements to achieve
the “ideal fashionista body structure” some even go to the extent of having body and cosmetic
surgery to achieve this end. This also explains the fact that the self is more reflexive, altered and
molded leading to body obsession through modern fashion.

A TOOL FOR CLASS DIFFERENTIATION

Another postulate of Simmel was the use of fashion as an instrument of class differentiation;

Two social tendencies are essential to the establishment of fashion, namely the need of union and the
one hand the need of isolation on the other. Should one of these be absent, fashion will not be
formed-its sway will be abruptly referencing. (pg137)

For Simmel, the dichotomy and power relationship in fashion is monolithic as it between the upper
and lower, However its dichotomy varies from ones level of access to information and technology,
there is also variation from culture to culture, variation between the west and non-west, and
dichotomy in respect of gender. For instance we can say there is issue of superiority in western
fashion to that of the non west which goes beyond ones class location in the society, skin colour also
determines the dichotomy these days, some often belief that the whites always have advanced form
of fashion than blacks. Even among the celebrities, western celebrities are usually view more
fashionable than non western celebrities. This means that one’s sense of fashion and the imitation
dichotomy goes beyond the lower class /upper class but also in respect of race and location in the
world and not a function of the person’s level of wealth.

Fashion is a product of social demand and there is no slight reason for it creation from the
standpoint of an objective, aesthetic or other expediency. (pg134)

From this quote, Simmel could not picture the true essence of creation of fashion. Technologies
permeate every aspect of our life today. In fact instead of his postulate that fashion is a product of
social demand or a product of imitation, fashion in modern era can be seen as a product of creative
technology. This is because the new modern world has shown that the more advance the technology
is, the more accessible it becomes and the more complex and advances it is. As such, it becomes
difficult to escape from the whims and caprice of fashion. With this new technology and more
individual creativity, people need not demand for fashion before it becomes created for them. To this

7
end, fashion is now seen as an expressive tool for designers to deliver their own message and be seen
and recognised in the society.

THE CONCEPT OF GENDER AND FASHION

Simmel tried to look at the influence of gender on fashion adoption by trying to make a comparative
analysis of the gender that adopt fashion most and the rationale behind such adoption;

There exists for each class of human beings, a definite quantitative relation between the tendency
towards individualisation and the desire to be merged in a group, so that when the satisfying of one
tendency is denied in a certain field of life, he seeks another in which he then fulfils the measure
which he requires. Thus it seems as though fashion were the valve through which woman’s craving
for some measure of conspicuousness and individual prominence finds vent, when its satisfaction is
denied her in other fields. (pg 144)

Simmel was also aware of the inequality that exist in the society among men and women but his
reason and analysis of why women usually adopt fashion is more of value judgement and more of
arm chair philosophising and his reason for such analysis remain unscientific because there was no
scientific research of how he reach this conclusion, not like he conducted a research to ask for
women’s opinion about why they seek fashion. When one takes a sample of reason why women seek
fashion, one hears comment like, they need to be in vogue and be recognise so as not to be outdated,
this recognition is not to compensate her for her lack of position in a class based calling as Simmel
posited or to seek her individuality in another form of life as the men have relegated her in other
form of life. This argument will however be justified from feminist perspective, that male gender
make certain personification, expectation and social construction of beauty for women for their own
gratification which make women to constantly find fashion. This expectation started even before
modernity, but became more aggressive in late modernity, In pre-modern times, women role have
been predefined by the men as to what is expected of her, how she is suppose to look in terms of
taking care of self and looking presentable. Likewise, despite various women emancipation even in
modern time, those pre modern expectations shifted to even more personified definition of their
body. Thus, in modern times, re definition of ideal face, look and body type for women by their
counterpart has increased their love for fashion. The definition of figure and sexy curves for ideal
women has allowed fashion to permeate their life more aggressively than before. We now have many
of this women going through body surgery in order to achieve this ideal type set by men, in fact the
foundational reason for majority of transgender is to look ideally feminine. Also because there is still
gender bias in the aspect of technology, men produce this cosmetic and technology to influence and

8
achieve their demand of ideal body structure. A good example is the fact that majority of the doctors
who perform this body surgery are mostly male.

Furthermore, Simmel tried to emphasise how fashion serves as valve of recognition and
individualization for women in the process of their marginalization in the society;

In certain sense, fashion gives woman a compensation for her lack of position in a class based on a
calling or profession. The man who has become absorbed in a calling has entered a relatively
uniform class, within which he resemble many others and is thus often an illustration of the
conception of this class or calling. (pg145)

For simmel, one of the male quality is the indifference towards fashion especially in outward
appearance women adopt fashion more than men because of the institutional inequality especially in
relation to work place, as such women adopt fashion to compensate themselves. Simmel was gender
bias in his analysis from feminist perspective and saw the quick adoption of fashion by women as a
result of their weaker vessel nature. The fashion world is now rapacious to the extent that even in the
modelling unit of fashion, men and women are both found on the fashion runway (a flat platform
used by models to demonstrate clothing and accessories during a fashion show). As such, men are
also constantly finding fashion this day whether consciously or unconsciously. For instance,
tattooing a form of fashion is mostly common among the male to show their sense of fashion. Also
there was a time in Nigeria where the male gender was seeking pink lips as a form of fashion
especially in Lagos. Lastly men also use jewellery just like the women to show their fashion
adoption. These thus debunk Simmel assertion of male indifference toward fashion.

SUMMARY

This paper has not included a major survey, but the benchmark towards this review has been based
on the author as a participant - observer in the new fashion world, furthermore the social media
response was also use as a source of reference alongside with modernization and feminism as a
theoretical insight. Simmel, in 1904 presented an analysis of fashion where he introduced different
notion on fashion. While some of his assertions still stand the test of time in this new modern world,
others have proven inapplicable. However, it is the author’s belief that this review provides an
important contribution towards a neo modern perspective to fashion with some reference to Nigeria
situation. As such this review provides, possible avenue for revisiting old theoretical notion on
fashion and introducing new ones.

9
Simmel noted the difference in fashion with respect to class, hence, fashion always come from up to
down. However this paper has been able to establish that fashion does not necessarily have to come
from the upper class and can come from other class of the society.

For him the major determinant in adopting fashion is wealth, hence, the increase of wealth hasten the
process of new seeking, this work was able to establish the fact that with new modernity, access to
information and technology hasten new seeking. In Simmel’s view, as fashion spread and get
imitated by all, it get waned, destroyed and dies. However, this work affirms that the increase in
rationality lead to increase creativity which allows fashion to be recycled instead of dying.

This work saw competition in fashion as oppose unity that Simmel postulated in his dialectic
assertion of fashion. Likewise, fashion has gravitated toward body cosmetic whereby the issue of
figure and ideal body structure is encapsulated as an aspect of fashion.

On the aspect of gender and fashion, Simmel view that women adopt fashion as a compensation for
her lack of position in a class based calling/ profession in the male dominated world. from feminist
perspective, this work saw Simmel postulate as a disadvantage for women and affirmation of women
inferiority in the society, therefore, this paper tries to show how women adopt fashion in order to
meet the ‘ideal woman’ criteria (a social expectation set by men). Also men are now responding
increasingly towards fashion contrary to their indifference in Simmel’s view.

CONCLUSION

This paper serve as a theoretical attack on Simmels fashion base on various changes that have
permeated this social world in which the fashion world, a microcosm have heard a fare share in it.
The main point of reference for the critique has been on the conception that fashion has move beyond
Simmel’s analysis with the concept of rationality and modernity taking a new turn. Furthermore the
various changes that have been witness in the discipline of sociology also necessitate the need for
new theorizing in the realm of fashion. Thus, this work have contributed to existing knowledge on
fashion theorizing.

10
REFERENCES

Benvenuto, S. (2000): Fashion; George Simmel: Journal of Artificial Societies and Social
Simmulation Vol. 3. No 2

Breward, C. (1995): The Culture of Fashion: Manchester University Press, UK

Blummer, H. (1969): Fashion from Class Differentiation to Collective Selection: The Sociological
Quarterly 10, N0 3(275-291)

Davis, F. (1992): Fashion, Culture and Identity: University of Chicago press

Delong, M.R. (2005): Theories of Fashion

Ritzer G. (2011): Contemporary Theories of Modernity in (Ritzer Sociological Theory); McGrawHill

Publisher, Eight Editions
Simmel, G. (1904): Fashion: International quarterly 10(1), October 1904, pp. 130-155

Steel, V.P. (1998): Fashion; A cultural History

Veblen, T. (1889): Theory of Leisure Class

11