Professional Documents
Culture Documents
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms
Taylor & Francis, Ltd. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
The Sociological Quarterly
Similar to scholars in general who have shown some concern with the
topic, sociologists are disposed to identify fashion exclusively or primarily
with the area of costume and adornment. While occasional references
may be made to its play in other areas, such casual references do not
give a proper picture of the extent of its operation. Yet, to a discerning
eye fashion is readily seen to operate in many diverse areas of human
group life, especially so in modern times. It is easily observable in the
realm of the pure and applied arts, such as painting, sculpture, music,
drama, architecture, dancing, and household decoration. Its presence is
very obvious in the area of entertainment and amusement. There is plenty
of evidence to show its play in the field of medicine. Many of us are
familiar with its operation in fields of industry, especially that of business
management. It even touches such a relative sacred area as that of
mortuary practice. Many scholars have noted its operation in the field
of literature. Its presence can be seen in the history of modern philos-
ophy. It can be observed at work in the realm of political doctrine. And
-perhaps to the surprise of many-it is unquestionably at work in the
275
field of science. That this is true of the social and psychological sciences
is perhaps more readily apparent. But we have also to note, as several
reputable and qualified scholars have done, that fashion appears in such
redoubtable areas as physical and biological science and mathematics.
The domain in which fashion operates is very extensive, indeed. To limit
it to, or to center it in, the field of costume and adornment is to have a
very inadequate idea of the scope of its occurrence.
Let me use as the starting point of the discussion the analysis of fashion
made some sixty years ago by Georg Simmel. His analysis, without ques-
tion, has set the character of what little solid sociological thought is to
be found on the topic. His thesis was essentially simple. For him, fashion
arose as a form of class differentiation in a relatively open class society.
In such a society the elite class seeks to set itself apart by observable
marks or insignia, such as distinctive forms of dress. However, members
of immediately subjacent classes adopt these insignia as a means of
satisfying their striving to identify with a superior status. They, in turn,
are copied by members of classes beneath them. In this way, the distin-
guishing insignia of the elite class filter down through the class pyramid.
In this process, however, the elite class loses these marks of separate
identity. It is led, accordingly, to devise new distinguishing insignia
which, again, are copied by the classes below, thus repeating the cycle.
This, for Simmel, was the nature of fashion and the mechanism of its
operation. Fashion was thought to arise in the form of styles which
demarcate an elite group. These styles automatically acquire prestige in
the eyes of those who wish to emulate the elite group and are copied by
them, thus forcing the elite group to devise new distinctive marks of
their superior status. Fashion is thus caught up in an incessant and re-
current process of innovation and emulation. A fashion, once started,
marches relentlessly to its doom; on its heels treads a new fashion des-
tined to the same fate; and so on ad infinitum. This sets the fundamental
character of the fashion process.
There are several features of Simmel's analysis which are admittedly
of high merit. One of them was to point out that fashion requires a cer-
tain type of society in which to take place. Another was to highlight the
importance of prestige in the operation of fashion. And another, of par-
ticular significance, was to stress that the essence of fashion lies in a
process of change--a process that is natural and indigenous and not
unusual and aberrant. Yet, despite the fact that his analysis still remains
the best in the published literature, it failed to catch the character of
fashion as a social happening. It is largely a parochial treatment, quite
well suited to fashion in dress in the seventeenth, eighteenth, and nine-
teenth century Europe with its particular class structure. But it does not
fit the operation of fashion in our contemporary epoch with its many
diverse fields and its emphasis on modernity. Its shortcomings will be
apparent, I think, in the light of the following analysis.
ments. I think that this explains why the dress designers-again a com-
petitive and secretive group, working apart from each other in a large
number of different fashion houses-create independently of each other
such remarkably similar designs. They pick up ideas of the past, but
always through the filter of the present; they are guided and constrained
by the immediate styles in dress, particularly the direction of such styles
over the recent span of a few years; but above all, they are seeking to
catch the proximate future as it is revealed in modem developments.
Taken together, these three observations which I have sketched in
a most minimal form outline what is significant in the case of fashion in
the women's dress industry. They indicate that the fashion is set through
a process of free selection from among a large number of competing
models; that the creators of the models are seeking to catch and give
expression to what we may call the direction of modernity; and that the
buyers, who through their choices set the fashion, are acting as the un-
witting agents of a fashion consuming public whose incipient tastes the
buyers are seeking to anticipate. In this paper I shall not deal with what
is probably the most interesting and certainly the most obscure aspect
of the entire relationship, namely, the relation between, on one hand, the
expressions of modernity to which the dress designers are so responsive
and, on the other hand, the incipient and inarticulate tastes which are
taking shape in the fashion consuming public. Certainly, the two come
together in the styles which are chosen and, in so doing, lay down the
lines along which modem life in this area moves. I regard this line of
relationship as constituting one of the most significant mechanisms in
the shaping of our modern world, but I shall not undertake analysis of
it in this paper.
ing and portraying the movement. The people in other classes who
consciously follow the fashion do so because it is the fashion and not
because of the separate prestige of the elite group. The fashion dies not
because it has been discarded by the elite group but because it gives
way to a new model more consonant with developing taste. The fashion
mechanism appears not in response to a need of class differentiation and
class emulation but in response to a wish to be in fashion, to be abreast
of what has good standing, to express new tastes which are emerging
in a changing world. These are the changes that seem to be called for
in Simmel's formulation. They are fundamental changes. They shift
fashion from the fields of class differentiation to the area of collective
selection and center its mechanism in the process of such selection. This
process of collective selection represents an effort to choose from among
competing styles or models those which match developing tastes, those
which "click," or those which-to revert to my friends, the buyers-"are
stunning." The fact that this process of collective selection is mysterious
-it is mysterious because we do not understand it-does not contradict
in any way that it takes place.
Historical Continuity
The history of fashion shows clearly that new fashions are related to, and
grow out of, their immediate predecessors. This is one of the fundamental
ways in which fashion differs from fads. Fads have no line of historical
continuity; each springs up independently of a forerunner and gives rise
to no successor. In the case of fashion, fashion innovators always have
to consider the prevailing fashion, if for no other reason than to depart
from it or to elaborate on it. The result is a line of continuity. Typically,
although not universally, the line of continuity has the character of a
cultural drift, expressing itself in what we customarily term a "fashion
trend." Fashion trends are a highly important yet a much neglected
object of study. They signify a convergence and marshalling of collective
taste in a given direction and thus pertain to one of the most significant
yet obscure features in group life. The terminal points of fashion trends
are of special interest. Sometimes they are set by the nature of the
medium (there is a point beyond which the skirt cannot be lengthened
or shortened [see Richardson and Kroeber, 1947; Young, 1937]); some-
times they seem to represent an exhaustion of the logical possibilities of
the medium; but frequently they signify a relatively abrupt shift in
interests and taste. The terminal points are marked particularly by a
much wider latitude of experimentation in the new fashion models that
are advanced for adoption; at such points the fashion mechanism par-
ticularly reveals the groping character of collective choice to set itself
on a new course. If it be true, as I propose to explain later, that the
fashion mechanism is woven deeply into the texture of modern life, the
study of fashion in its aspects of continuity, trends, and cycles would be
highly important and rewarding.
Modernity
The feature of "modernity" in fashion is especially significant. Fashion
is always modern; it always seeks to keep abreast of the times. It is
sensitive to the movement of current developments as they take place
in its own field, in adjacent fields, and in the larger social world. Thus,
in women's dress, fashion is responsive to its own trend, to develop-
ments in fabrics and ornamentation, to developments in the fine arts, to
exciting events that catch public attention such as the discovery of the
tomb of Tutankhamen, to political happenings, and to major social shifts
such as the emancipation of women or the rise of the cult of youth.
Fashion seems to sift out of these diverse sources of happenings a set of
obscure guides which bring it into line with the general or over-all
direction of modernity itself. This responsiveness in its more extended
form seems to be the chief factor in formation of what we speak of as a
"spirit of the times" or a zeitgeist.
Collective Taste
Psychological Motives
Now, a word with regard to psychological interpretations of fash
Scholars, by and large, have sought to account for fashion in terms
psychological motives. A perusal of the literature will show an assort
ment of different feelings and impulses which have been picked out
explain the occurrence of fashion. Some students ascribe fashion to eff
to escape from boredom or ennui, especially among members of
leisure class. Some treat fashion as arising from playful and whimsic
impulses to enliven the routines of life with zest. Some regard it as
to a spirit of adventure which impels individuals to rebel against
confinement of prevailing social forms. Some see fashion as a symbo
expression of hidden sexual interests. Most striking is the view expres
no place for fashion. It is for this reason that fashion does not take root
in those areas of utility, technology, or science where asserted claims
can be brought before the bar of demonstrable proof. In contrast, the
absence of means for testing effectively the relative merit of competing
models opens the door to other considerations in making choices between
them. This kind of situation is essential to the play of fashion.
A fifth condition for fashion is the presence of prestige figures who
espouse one or another of the competing models. The prestige of such
persons must be such that they are acknowledged as qualified to pass
judgment on the value or suitability of the rival models. If they are so
regarded their choice carries weight as an assurance or endorsement of
the superiority or propriety of a given model. A combination of such
prestigeful figures, espousing the same model, enhances the likelihood
of adoption of the model.
A sixth and final condition is that the area must be open to the emer-
gence of new interests and dispositions in response to (a) the impact of
outside events, (b) the introduction of new participants into the area,
and (c) changes in inner social interaction. This condition is chiefly
responsible for the shifting of taste and the redirection of collective
choice which together constitute the lifeline of fashion.
If the above six conditions are met, I believe that one will always
find fashion to be in play. People in the area will be found to be con-
verging their choices on models and shifting this convergence over time.
The convergence of choice occurs not because of the intrinsic merit or
demonstrated validity of the selected models but because of the appear-
ance of high standing which the chosen models carry. Unquestionably,
such high standing is given in major measure by the endorsement and
espousal of models of prestigeful persons. But it must be stressed again
that it is not prestige, per se, which imparts this sanction; a prestigeful
person, despite his eminence, may be easily felt to be "out-of-date." To
carry weight, the person of prestige must be believed or sensed to be
voicing the proper perspective that is called for by developments in the
area. To recognize this is to take note of the importance of the disposition
to keep abreast of what is collectively judged to be up-to-date practice.
The formation of this collective judgment takes place through an inter-
esting but ill-understood interaction between prestige and incipient taste,
between eminent endorsement and congenial interest. Collective choice
of models is forged in this process of interaction, leading to a focusing
of selection at a given time on one model and at a different time on
another model.
we have discussed-a turning away from old forms that are thought to
be out-of-date; the introduction of new models which compete for adop-
tion; a selection between them that is made not on the basis of demon-
strated merit or utility but in response to an interplay of prestige-
endorsement and incipient taste; and a course of development in which
a given type of model becomes solidified, socially elevated, and impera-
tive in its demands for acceptance for a period of time. While this
process is revealed most vividly in the area of women's fashion it can
be noted in play here and there across the board in modern life and
may, indeed, be confidently expected to increase in scope under the
conditions of modern life. These conditions-the pressure to change, the
open doors to innovation, the inadequacy or the unavailability of decisive
tests of the merit of proposed models, the effort of prestigeful figures to
gain or maintain standing in the face of developments to which they
must respond, and the groping of people for a satisfactory expression of
new and vague tastes-entrench fashion as a basic and widespread
process in modern life.
CONCLUSION
Blumer, Herbert
1968 "Fashion." Pp. 341-345 in International Encyclopedia of the
ences V. New York: Macmillan.
Lang, Kurt and Gladys Lang
1961 Collective Dynamics. New York: Crowell.
Richardson, J. and A. L. Kroeber
1947 "Three centuries of women's dress fashions: a quantitative analysis
Anthropological Records 5:111-153.
Sapir, Edward
1931 "Fashion." Pp. 139-141 in Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences VI. New
York: Macmillan.
Simmel, G.
1904 "Fashion." International Quarterly 10.
1957 "Fashion." American Journal of Sociology 62:541-558. (reprint).
Young, A. B.
1937 Recurring Cycles of Fashion: 1760-1937. New York: Harper & Brothers.