“It's a social process of negotiation and navigation through the murky and yet hopeful waters of what is to come.”

 

To me, these two definitions about fashion from the lecture are interesting, they explain what fashion may be while widen what fashion is. What fashion means to me was used to be strongly linked with clothing, accessories, or makeup, which are trending and dominating the garment industry, but these seems more like “dress” after the lecture. 

By looking at these definitions and having the idea that fashion is different from dress and not only dress, I immediately think about something that shares the same characteristics, which is people’s behavior or activities. Beside dressing, these are what people change a lot and can be marked out form the society from. 

Especially on the Internet, these can be trending among different groups of people, for example visiting a specific series of shops, eating a specific food, taking selfie in certain poses and filters, and a lot more. You can also simply tell that what type of people are doing the matching things. All these are happening and changing rapidly just like fashion in dressing.

I wonder if this could be define as a kind of fashion.

Fashion is often seen as a shallow subject or interest as one is to focus on the exterior and decorating it, but through the lecture I have learned that so much more thought goes into the creations. The lecture has stated that people creating fashion also answer personal and political questions surrounding the body(Iris van Harpen). As well as that “fashion practice and media depends on theory, history, culture“(Coralina Herrera) and that “it draws inspirations from, reflects, responds to and influences and shapes the complex world around it“.

After seeing this lecture I started looking at fashion at as not only a way to decorate the body but to incoorporate people into an artpiece, kind of like a semi-form of installation for the everyday and or certain occasions.

 

In my eyes, fashion is actually a way of life. "A person's taste is related to his social status." In one word, "Everybody's a snob." People will make judgments about a person's dress based on stereotypes of class. Under such a social reality, people tend to follow fashion in order to gain a higher sense of social identity from others, and regard fashion as a way of life whose purpose is to show, which is more obvious in today's prevalent social media. Under this transformation, cultural trends are constantly changing, new things emerge endlessly. Under this logic, being a hipster, constantly embracing new things, becomes the most direct route to social fame. As a result, people often want to demonstrate the ability to spot or create trends, thus showing independent style and "really good taste".

But when we go back to the source of fashion: is it fashionable to follow others? So I think it's important to keep your authenticity in exploring fashion: not to show it to others, but to really put it into your own life.

I’m from Brazil and I’m part of a religion called Candomblé Many parts of the body are considered sacred but the most important part is the top of the head where there’s you’re ‘Ori’ which means head, the place that houses the Orixás, the sacred entities worshipped by the members. There are many different ways to do that, with special vests or just with a hat. The Ori is usually covered when going to a place with heavy energy or surrounded by death, such as hospitals, cemeteries, and even parties, depending on the medium's intuition. 

Rebecca Arnold practically reinforces my impression when she talks about these two distinct worlds within the fashion world. The luxurious, accessible to the few, and the banal side of this art form have become so commercial that it has lost its essence. Finally, Susan B . Kaiser made me more hopeful about this market. Although we still have to negotiate things like gender equality, class, racism, and ancestry, fashion is a mechanism for crossing barriers and making people reflect and be marvelous at the same time.

To me aesthetically pleasing means something that satisfies the aesthetic needs when it comes to an object, a room etc. 

I find it interesting that this term, aesthetically pleasing, is used to describe an outcome of somebodies body. I feel like now (21st century) we don’t really use the term to describe a person but rather what they’re wearing or what surrounds us, for example a colour pallet, or a pattern, or an item of clothing or even the environment (building, tiles, stain glass window etc.).

The other reason why I found this interesting is because it seems that ‘aesthetically pleasing’ seems to stand for the words ‘accessorise’ or ‘glamorise’ yourself. I feel one way that most people achieve this would be jewellery, most people use jewellery is most definitely a way people target their personal aesthetic and vibe, and it’s definitely a way for them to add a bit more glamour to something that doesn’t particularly speak for itself, such as earthy aesthetics, they carry a lot of green colours and warm tones but isn’t known to be extremely glamours. So way people would do that is by choosing some jewellery to pair with their personal aesthetic to make it  aesthetically pleasing to the people around them. 

Adornment is extremely important in fashion and dress because it’s a great way of expressing yourself but also finding a way to advertise, it allows you to draw the eye and it also adds to that artistic mindset of understanding colour pallets. Understanding what contests in a bad or good way, looking at what colours compliment each other in a way that will draw in people. That also comes back to an idea that was pointed out in the lecture that adornment is extremely inspired on the environment of the person, so things that body painting, tattooing, piercings, makeup, hairstyles etc. are very influential and have a lot to contribute into what the persons personal aesthetic is and what they’re aesthetically pleasing; appearance is for the people in the environment surrounding is. It really talks about those finer details put into dress that we don’t see and that may or may not be a permanent adjustment to fit a certain aesthetic.  

Before the technology of the 19th century made ready to wear clothes accessible, clothes, specifically for the upper class, would be made by tailors and dressmakers. Thinking about this, alongside the idea that fashion and dress shows identity and taste. This made me question what the relationship between dressmaker and client would be. I’m curious to know what is the balance between the clients taste and the dressmakers taste. How much of the design would be up to the dressmaker, how much creative freedom would the dressmaker have?

After learning what exactly fashion and costume means and how they differ, I ask how much they overlap. Learning that costumes are worn to specific events, outside of a day-to-day identity, I thought that there would be influences on costume that would be specific to the people at these events, not only the influences the change fashion. So my question would be is costume and fashion changing in the same way, or does the specificity of costume mean it changes at its own pace outside of fashion, how intertwined are fashion and costume?

In the 18th and 19th century, many factors led to France becoming essentially the first fashion capital of the world. Rebecca Arnold said that new fashion cities are constantly emerging. Taking this into consideration, I still think that France, more specifically Paris, has maintained its image as the fashion capital of the world. So my question is if all these new cities are emerging as fashion capitals or cities, is the idea of Paris being a leader in fashion reinforced by its history, or is today’s ideology of fashion still relevant to what Paris is offering the industry.

Theorists such as Thorstein Veblen and Simmel had views which interestingly contrasts with the Morden fashion industry. Thorstein takes note of the ever changing market and expectations to keep up with it. Simmel instead talks about the divide between fashion in the social classes and how it affects independent fashion. A hundred years later Rebecca Arnold, a well respected writer and lecturer in history of art, had her take on the matter. Expanding on fashion between classes and how social pressure to show off wealth through the means of a high-end brands. I was intrigued neither Thorstein or Simmel talked about working class fashion as it wasn’t as provident at that time. Rebecca brings up high end fashion a century later showing how much the fashion culture has changed over the 1900s. Global fashion is another topic which drew me in, Globalisation has effected every other aspect of our world including fashion with New fashion city are taking the lead with ethnic culture at the forefront.

Fashion Global Phenomenon: 

Only over the last century have other cultures been able to expand on the western wardrobe of fashion. Eric Wolf talks on how ‘The West’ oppressed other cultures in order to conserve western ideology, Explaining why we didn’t have much Asian and African cultures in our society. The fashion community has leant a lot from other cultures and their history leading a fast constantly evolving fashion movement over the last hundred years. Riello and McNeil agree with this, talking on how most western history book are not a reliable source as it’s been manipulated and twisted to conserve western culture. ‘What is The Function of Dress/Fashion?’ links In perfectly with Globalisation as fashion evolves based on factors such as religion and location, with middle eastern muslim country’s having dresses such as hijab linking with The Quran. 

Fashion History:

Linda Welter and Abby Lillethun in their 2018 book ‘Fashion History: A Global View’ illustrates the perception on non-western countries and their fashion, using dresses as one example. Asian Cultures used numerous techniques and tribal pattens unique to that region in-order to express themself on the human body. Parallel to Western society the majority of fashion was established through your political, economic and social status with royals being dressed in high-quality tailored garments with flamboyant colours and luxurious materials such as gold and silver. Low socioeconomic status groups were often left passing down generational clothing or self tailoring, usually by the woman of the house hold.

With how fashion was limited in previous centuries by it’s time, trends within fashion could have been seen as fashionable for a longer time due it being less accessible for everyday people; being fashionable was more so being in an exclusive club and it was a luxury to be seen wearing clothes made by a reputable tailor or dressmaker. It distinguished one's class from the upper to the lower.

Whereas today, fashion is much more accessible and is mass-produced, with many more creatives in the field, so while people can dress themselves in any variety of clothes, trends can last only a matter of months or weeks due to the speed of technology and production. This can cause trends seen as fashionable to be oversaturated and change to something else very quickly, which can make it harder for fashion designers to create garments that really ‘stick out’ and stay fashionable.

To me, costume has and continues to be a form of expression, I agree that costume is when a garment can provide a phycological sense of comfort or protection for some, I agree that costume can create a sense of escapism for the everyday character. Costume can be used to create conversation on less acknowledged topics in today's society, for example, Harry Styles’ British Vogue cover from December 2020, it gathered attention, opinions and conversations- not only as he was the first man to solo-cover the magazine, but to wear a Gucci dress while doing so, the dress created conversations about in-equality, gender roles and stereotypes.        

Growing up in the North of Ireland; A heavily politicalised, government-less country, from what I’ve noticed that costume is often and casually worn to show off and flaunt statements with provocative meanings which reference the last 100-years of the country's continuous unsettlement around religion and political status. 

Another curiosity about fashion photography is that a man called Edward Steichen believed he was the first fashion photographer because he did a shoot in 1911 which was to promote fashion as fine art in his work, photographing dresses designed by the leading French Fashion designers. Even though he was established not to be the first fashion photographer his shoot is known to be the first modern fashion sheet and because of this people started to say they see no difference between regular photography and fashion photography. Due to these opinions people like Brandon Adolf, Vogues first staff fashion photographer in 1911; would take qualities from Steichen’s work showing that fashion photography wasn’t just designs being reproduced and wasn’t just showing the styles, colours and shapes, but they were very much photographed for their own artistic qualities instead. 

It’s all very interesting because it really answered that question people had of “what is fashion photography?” And just showed everyone the fashion world and what it’s capable of being in the future.   

When talking about modest fashion, the first thing that comes to mind is religious fashion. Muslim women cover themselves with hijabs, the Kittel worn by Jewish prayer leaders and some Orthodox Jews on the High Holidays, or nuns with Nun-Habits. All over the world, societies and different religions have created their modest clothing based on what the religion stands for. I’m from Brazil and I’m part of a religion called Candomblé where many parts of the body are considered sacred but the most important part is the top of the head where there’s the ‘Ori’ which means head, the place that houses the Orixás, the sacred entities worshipped by the members. There are many different ways to do that, with special vests or just with a hat. The Ori is usually covered when going to a place with heavy energy or surrounded by death, such as hospitals, cemeteries, and even parties, depending on the medium's intuition.

Religion around the world has influenced the modern world, the act of covering their bodies is very much linked to the idea of conservatism or submission, as it has been for a long time. However, in some countries, religions, and cultures, modest fashion is a matter of choice, just as it can be empowering to wear a short skirt, it can be empowering to wear long trousers. Women must be increasingly dressing for themselves and focusing on their style and comfort rather than living to please the male gaze.

However, from my personal experience as a woman who until a few years ago was an atheist, modest fashion and wearing looser clothes ends up being very much linked to self-protection against sexual harassment in the street, public transport, uber, or literally any environment. Even though clothing is no excuse for harassment, some women prefer to cover up out of fear rather than to attract unwanted attention. It's very common for women to wear T-shirts or large coats in public places when they're going home from a party, for example, which ends up destroying the idea that modest fashion is a choice in all cases.

Overall, it may be said that t's important to respect each individual's choice to cover up or not, depending on how they feel most comfortable, happy and free, even if that choice is different from yours, the important thing is to use fashion to express yourself. The question that remains is where religion and the belief that dressing in a certain way is a divine wish begin, and where society's structural sexism and women's fear of exposing their bodies and suffering violence begin.

 

 

 

That particular moment that anything related to the human being is being created will reflect the influences, the culture, the psychogeography, the influences of the model, in some cases, but also the artist behind the piece of art or fashion.

It's difficult to know which was the first representation of fashion, after all when talking about fashion photography for example it can be confused with portrait or theatre photography so it's hard to date the first one. However, I believe that when we're talking about fashion, something with blurrier barriers among other spheres of art, the relevance of classification diminishes. They all should be studied and can become a fashion project inspiration.

And when you look at history, you realize that this movement of rejection is cyclical. Every moment of innovation or disruption is followed by a return to the conservative, the safe. Romanesque (austere), Gothic (lighter, more florid), Renaissance (classical), Baroque (dramatic and far-fetched), Neoclassical (back to tradition)... Between one historical moment and another, there is always a social, economic, or political event of disruption. And this continues to this day, even if these changes are less spaced out in contemporary times than they used to be, the cycle repeats itself, not identically, as it includes new references, but still interspersing previous styles and trends.

This need for a return to conservative tendencies about the role of women in society after traumatic events can easily be seen in the silhouettes of the post-war dresses with more traditional silhouettes. But when we look at female trauma from the point of view of those who have lived through it, showing the sense of fragmentation, uncertainty, fear, and violence, it may be that the feeling invoked, despite the distance of time, is very familiar. After the collective trauma of colonization, which has an impact on my psychogeography, or the trauma of COVID-19, which was collective but also very personal for me. How does this change a person or a society? This is a very abstract subject for me and Elsa Schiaparelli's surreal and innovative way of playing and provoking in an outrageous, non-offensive way is a poetic and inspiring way of dealing with trauma artistically without being appealing and obvious.

 

The image most closely associated with Carmen Miranda is her Bahian costume. The outfit adopted by the singer and actress in 1939 underwent variations throughout her career, but always featured large earrings (usually hoops) and a turban full of fruit and flowers, platform shoes and sandals and frilly clothes. The outfit was very successful around the world and came to be used as a costume at different festivals, such as Carnival.

The baiana costume worn by Carmen continues to be used today in cultural and religious contexts. It is the basis of the clothing of Candomblé, a religion brought during colonisation by slaves, and Umbanda, which is a mixture of elements of Catholicism (brought from Portugal), spiritism, Candomblé and other beliefs around the laws of nature and Afro-Brazilian influences. This clothing is part of the clothing and history of Brazil as a country seeking its identity after colonisation and the same thing that happened in Angola between the 1940s and 1950s when many young people began to appreciate Brazilian and US film stars, trying to see clothing as a form of emancipation from this colonising model, a search for identity beyond Portuguese colonialism.

In addition to the emancipation of Portugal, there is a very troubled and strong power relationship between Brazil and the United States, which despite dividing the continent into 35 countries and 18 independent territories, makes a point of calling itself America, and the replication of this around the world makes the erasure of developing countries in Central and South America even more intense. Carmen Miranda even wrote a song that was a show of nationalism on "Disseram que Voltei Americanizada" (Portuguese for They said I've come back Americanized) is a which is a samba song . It is a direct answer to accusations that Miranda put her Brazilian roots aside to become famous enough in Hollywood. She's an example of the cultural bricolage that being Brazilian is and how inspiring and beautiful it is, even if some call it 'exotic'.

I find this interesting because menswear was pretty much ignored throughout the 1920s- 1930s or even qualities and characteristics of menswear was taken and put onto womenswear designs focusing completely on the idea of easing women clothing. I feel this took away from that individuality and personality of menswear that mens fashion had to begin with. It’s a sniper of what mens fashion had been up to during that time. 

The same can be said for the work of Madeleine Vionnet, who although she worked with the idea of classicism, proportion, and elegance, also used draping in her work to create the shape of her dresses that would accentuate the curves and folds of the female body, an idea that combined the ideals of classism fashion from the 1930s (a more elegant and modest look) and the more free and sensual aesthetic similar to the work of Pioret a few decades before. This highlights that sensual and immodest dress started to become more integrated into society around the first half of the 20th century and that the journey to sexual freedom through fashion was well underway.

Besides of fashion magazines, fashion films, and fashion photographs, there are a few medias that are popular among quite a lot of young people. The ACGN, origins from Japan which refers to anime, comics, games, and novels. In facts, they are not made for fashion imaging or illustrations, however they do the same jobs. The character designs included a lot of fashion designing in it, and the spread of these medias also affect how people dress.

For example, the popularity of the “JK style” dressing in China among a number of young women. This type of dressing is actually the Japanese school uniforms, and it get very popular because a number of Japanese anime that on heat have included main characters dressing like that.

I would like to look into how the ACGN from different cultures background are influencing the fashion in different places.

This change has reminded me with the Maslow’s hierarchy. During the war, while people were facing surviving problems, their first consideration of clothing was its function, flexibility for movements, which met their basic needs and safety needs. Then after war, when the conflicts of women’s social status occurred, women fashion was then developed to meet the physiological needs. Finally, when people were reaching their self-fulfillment needs, creativeness, artistic elements, and designers’ personalities were brought into fashion design.

This is interesting how connected they are between peoples’ needs and fashion while the development of the society. This has inspired me to look at how Chinese fashion was developed along the history of China, which is based on my own culture background. And I have experienced a little bit before so it will be nice if I could continue exploring and evolving.

However, what I was putting my eyes on are the two types of photographing styles. One focuses on the figure itself, shooting straight forward and making the clothing to be the subject. While the other one is considering about the atmosphere, the whole content in frame, and the emotions, making it a kind of performance. They are actually two main styles of photographing in not just fashion area. 

However, it reminded me with the two styles of Chinese paintings, the “Gongbi” (Chinese traditional realistic painting) which is detailly painted with layers and fine lines, and the “Xieyi” (freehand brush work), which is no drafting, painting in one go, and focused on presenting the artistic conception.

What I am thinking is, it seems like finding the matching painting style when illustrating for specific fashion workpiece is necessary. Rather than always making work in the style I preferred like doing fine art painting, trying the best to present the fashion workpiece itself may be another key point. And this is new for me.

I found Paul Pourer’s ‘Thousand and Second Night’ party to be reminiscent of an early MET Gala. The modern day event already draws inspiration from the elite socialite parties of old, but Poiret’s party in particular was an example of an explicitly fancy dress party hosted by an actual designer. The party itself would have acted as informal advertising among attendees and this has transformed into the formalised event we see today. The MET Gala is treated similarly to a fashion show with obvious competition among designers to grab headlines. This is why celebrities are used as models for publicity over a global livestream. Despite increased regiment and arguably decreased sincerity, this type of event remains a uniquely enjoyable form of advertising which engages with the wearer who acts as a representative for the label. The gala falls somewhere between a runway show and a party like Poiret’s. 

Avant Garde designers like Schiaparelli finding success at a time when gender roles and Classicism were making their comeback can only make sense if women’s fashion had seen a loss of unity following World War 1. Feminine, masculine and avant garde trends appeared simultaneously throughout the 1930’s, giving women the freedom to truly play around with self expression for the first time. The new breadth of women’s fashion showed a desire for comfort and utility in their clothing to be an option, not a restriction. The 19^th century had bound women to structured silhouettes and multiple appropriate outfits throughout the day. The war then necessitated their utility and forbid excess. The emergence of such varied styles all at once shows how women were excited to embrace their own choices in self expression, free from societal restrictions.

While designers were always able to gain notoriety from working with high profile clients, designs seemed to become increasingly associated with their wearers around the 1950’s. Celebrities and the introduction of cinema presented designs to an audience outside of the fashion-conscious, who would naturally associate styles with the celebrities who adopted them, given their lack of knowledge from where said styles originated. This was hugely beneficial for publicity’s sake, but I imagine it would have damaged the industry’s integrity considerably. Celebrity advertising encourages elitism, making it more and more difficult for new designers to make a name for themselves. 

Although this influence helped Poiret evolve, he fell out of style as his designs didn’t change with the trends of the time. This is relevant to todays world and shows how cyclical fashion even though trends move faster now. This parallel shows how fashion may change there is always some element of continuity.

The development of fashion trends and their designs that completely transformed in the 1900s. Leading fashion designers such as Jenna Paquin (1869-1936) and her spouse, Isidore-Rene Jacob-Paquin (1862-1907) launched and operated a popular fashion business ‘House of Paquin’ known for innovating the fashion scene which revolutionised garments, particularly in woman-wear. Jenna was responsible for the designing and targeting high-class consumers using high quality designs which flowed more casually while also keeping-interesting shape, sometimes with over-exaggerated shoulders but still moving in a direction away from corsets, the breast line would also often have a “pout pigeon” look. Paquin helped launch the brand into international waters opening shops not just in Paris but London, Buenos Aires and Madrid. He indulged in public marking stunts sending models dressed in the ‘House of Paquin’ clothes out to operas and horse racing this also included a tour across America with another attempt to internationals the business. The brand would often work with fashion illustrators such as Leon Bakst and George Barbier, showing once again the constant pursuit to show their work through many mediums in-order to get the recognition they deserved. I find the work of Jenna and Isidore to be completely fascinating, pioneering woman-wear and international marketing at the time is incredibly advance. Working with Fashion illustrators and using international marketing ideas proves how dedicated they were to their craft, constantly expanding and reinventing fashion as we know it.

Lucile, Lady Duff-Gorden set up her luxury brand ’Lucile Ltd’ in 1903, selling mainly to wealthy clients such as royalty, theatre stars and arisocacy. Corresponding with the theme of international businesses that ‘House of Paquin’ set which ‘Lucile Ltd’ followed setting up overseas with retail stores in New York, Paris and Chicago becoming the leading international corset retailer in three countries. The most famous garments Lucile produced was tea gowns and evening wear, a more casual setting for the high-class fashion scene in the early 1900s. Hand-made silk and soft fabrics gave it the basis to be a high-end brand and drooping dresses which got rid of the corset made for more of a comfortable experience. The most intriguing thing I find about Lucile is her use of early fashion shows and her guerrilla marketing techniques such as her original “catwalk” shows, which she called “mannequin parade”. I find the fact she used woman from off the street as models extremely captivating, for a brand advertised for the rich this is a very socialist thing to do. Another technique used was the naming of clothing items examples such as; gowns of emotion, The sayings, captain whiskers and twilight memory. You can see this being reinvented in Morden-day with brands such as ‘Balenciaga’ naming their looks with human names such as Ella, Liu, Cathy etc. 

Paul Poiret (1979-1944) set up his ‘Poiret fashion House’ in 1903, established for his dress making skills dismissing the corset and the petticoat for more of a free flowing practical dresses. It’s said he based his fashion shows of Luclie (Lady Duff Gordon) as she had already attracted tremendous publicity, using exuberant window displays and hosted a dynamic fancy dress party’s constructing of his own version of the phantasmagoric east. The work of Poiret shows the evolution of marketing in fashion and the continuous need to surpass and build up foundations set by previous fashion houses, although controversial his party’s set up a new medium to display his fashion. Considering how successful his business grew, even expanding it to a fragrance shop in 1911, his outlandish marketing schemes clearly worked and advertised his work to the wealthy perfectly. 

The fallout of World War One was followed by deep-rooted trauma and devastation, the financial crash of 1929 and the fear of a Second World War breaking out caused global anxiety. The creative industry took major inspiration from the fear of war wounds, amputation and casualties. It disclosed itself in forms of mediums such as illustration and magazines with artist such as Cecil Beaton, while working for vogue, Expressing their foresight on the matter. Well-known brands such as ‘Poiret fashion House’ advertised there perfume in the bust, replacing missing limbs with flowers. Throughout the 1930s “woke” fashion was regressed, producing more of a Gender roll theme. Dresses returned to more traditional shapes with feminine silhouette and defined waste and hip lines. As the 1930s carried on the economic depression, and political instability only added to the fear and anxiety, the recession followed after the economic boom of the 1920s. With no wealthier system in place this depression was the worst we have seen. Surprisingly, new ascetics around the west arrived with themes of classism, visual language, war aftermath and Imagery of the female body classical or fragmental.

Madelene Vionnel (1876-1975) was a key designer who captured the classical fashion style with a Morden take. She used experimental techniques to start the design of her dresses. Instead of illustration of photography, she dropped the fabric onto small dolls of the human body, something she would call “Design philosophy”. Working with new fabrics and techniques she was seen as a pioneer of modern fashion, moving to roam to set up her own brand inspired more of a greek origin style of dress. The time period of a great depression and seeing how the creative industry responded to it is captivating, the financial crash and war fears pushed more of abstract side of art that hadn’t been seen before. Madelene was another sign of globalisation in the 1900s taking Greece as inspiration and reworking it for other countries, making me wonder ‘How much did the war affect fashion globalisation?’ 

Theo suits have their own features that can speak to the younger people expressing themselves, it had panels in the shoulder, the waist was tampered and the trousers were quite “baggy” and they accessorised the suits. It just seems they had a real understanding of fashion in their own culture. All these things they do to experiment with fashion has been carried on and even adapted over time to fit the century. It’s also interesting how the zoot suit was carried by men and women so you can see the inclusive culture the young people had.  

After watching the lecture, the word that stuck in my mind the most was disruption and I believe that this has a lot to do with the beginning of the valorization of youth, with brands and designers being inspired by the intensity, willingness to change, and open-mindedness to receive the unexpected from young people that made a lot of things change between the 60s and 70s.

The popularisation of the mini skirt followed by the popularisation of the Yves Saint Laurent new look proposing that women wear heavy coats and trousers is just one example of how fashion was becoming increasingly diverse and giving women more options to dress and express themselves without so much moralism and restrictions. And with the 1970s being the decade of polyester and other synthetic fabrics, fashion became increasingly fun, colorful, and much more experimental than in previous decades. Along with this came the political and social context with various movements fighting against capitalism and the problems we came up with as a result, such as the punks, and these problems and pains were reflected in the way they dressed too. Around the world, in different contexts, many resistance movements arose against the colonialist or dictatorial world in which many countries lived. On the African continent, countries like Nigeria, Kenya, Zambia, Congo, and Gambia were finally freeing themselves from British and Belgian colonialism and beginning to search for a national identity.

day. Moving further around the globe, in the 1960s and 1970s, Brazil, ruled by the military, set up the cruelest repressive system the country has ever experienced. The military government that was only established with the help of the United States to, them, deal with the communist attack, which never existed and was just a way of causing panic among the population to establish a dictatorial regime. These were the so-called "Years of Lead", which were fought back with great resistance and art.

In response, many movements in Brazilian popular music began to emerge, with Gal Costa in the Tropicalia movement, Rita Lee in rock and roll and Elis Regina in Mpb bringing revolutionary lyrics, rhythms, and styles that inspire Brazilian fashion to this