In this chapter, a mapping131 will be performed that is intended to organize almost two centuries of theories concerning trend mechanisms. Most theorists covered in the Mapping are aware that the emergence and diffusion of a trend is the result of various mechanisms that are informed by many actors and factors. As Fred Davis argues, trends cannot be explained in terms of ‘any single psychological motive, human propensity, or societal exigency.’ Rather, the process of fashion change “is sustained through some complex amalgamation of inspiration, imitation, and
institutionalization.”132 The Mapping is an attempt to unfold and organize this amalgamation that includes even more factors than the ones suggested by Davis. The categories were not defined prior to the mapping. Instead, I attempted to let the material ‘speak’ and organized the various theories and approaches accordingly. The result is five key trend mechanisms – referred to as Positions133 – which are gathered in what is intended to be a theoretical Toolbox offering a comprehensive set of tools for understanding how and why trends change and how contemporary consumer behavior can be decoded. The five Positions are: Social Mechanism, Neomania, Market, Seduction, and Zeitgeist.
As discussed in the Introduction, the method for the Mapping is inspired by Sandra Harding’s notion of ‘strong objectivity’ as unfolded in Whose Science? Whose Knowledge? (1991). In order to establish Positions with a sound analytical potential, the aim of the Mapping is to achieve an organization of trend theory that is
131 I refer to my treatment of the theoretical material on trend mechanisms as a mapping rather than for instance a literature review, which seems to connote a general orientation of the literature of a particular field whereas a mapping attempts to be comprehensive in order to make the material operational for instance in an analysis. In the dissertation, I will refer to this chapter as the Mapping.
132 Fashion, Culture and Identity, 124. There are many such listings of factors necessary in trend mechanisms. Another example is Grant McCracken who states that a new fashion trend is dependent on “leader adoption, historical continuity, marketing strategy, mass availability, social appropriateness, and the pressures of social conformity,” Culture and Consumption, 43.
133 ‘Position’ refers to the perspective, site or approach from which the trend mechanisms are understood.
historically, sociologically, and culturally situated, while offering perspectives that are as universal as possible.
A multidisciplinary approach, and the emphasis on interpretation of a variety of academic text offers a conceptual framework for the Mapping in which texts are included from a wide range of fields – from material culture, sociology, psychology, forecasting, cultural history, and economy to anthropology, philosophy, forecasting, and marketing.
Though it would have been interesting to include material from a broader spectrum – from the evolutionary approach of Richard Dawkins in The Selfish Gene (1976) to the complex adaptive systems rooted in physics and biology of Stuart
Kauffmann in At Home in the Universe: The Search for the Laws of Self-Organization and Complexity (1995) – I have opted to maintain the focus on trend mechanisms in fashion in order to economize with the limited space of the dissertation. Therefore by far most of the textual material in the Mapping is concerned specifically with trends in fashion.134
Question of commensurability
While the Positions will be compared to a certain extent both in the Mapping but particularly in the Analysis, this is not a comparative analysis of the Positions. Any comparison is used as a way of bringing out potentials and problems of the Position in terms of determining the analytical potential of the Position. While Positions at times overlap and all deal with the same matter, each one constitutes its own unit of
measurement and they are hence non-commensurable. That is to say, that comparing two Positions would be like comparing liters and kilometers. One cannot be used to measure the other.
As mentioned in the Introduction, the five Positions might be seen as constituting a prism where trend as a phenomenon is broken into its constituents.
Each Position is an integrated component of the whole. Therefore what might seem as incommensurability, for instance in terms of autonomy versus context, is in fact an expression of the complexity of trends and hence a potential rather than a limitation.
134 Though there are some examples where the focus is more generally on trends but might still include fashion such as Everett Rogers’ Diffusion of Innovations (1962), Stanley Lieberson’s A Matter of Taste (2000), and Malcolm Gladwell’s The Tipping Point (2000).
Overlapping and other possible Positions
There are, of course, many other ways I could have organized the Positions. For instance, I could have included a psychology/psychoanalytical approach. However, the psychological aspect runs through several of the Positions most clearly in the Seduction Position. I might have added a Position that looked at the role of intuition and embodied knowledge in trends as unfolded in “The Field of Fashion Materialized:
A Study of London Fashion Week” (2006) by Joanne Entwistle and Agnès Rocamora.
Yet, this aspect is inherent to the Market Position and is briefly discussed in Chapter 6 in relation to the question of inner logic. Another possibility was a Position on
communication. However, I find this perspective is already covered by other sections in the dissertation such as the Position on Social Mechanism and Zeitgeist as well as Chapter 4 on magazines.
I could also have included more obscure approaches such the theory developed by psychologist Ernest Dichter (1907-1991) that fashion changes are a remedy against death in the sense that every time we put on a new dress and shed an old, we feel renewed: “Fashion is one of the oldest fountains of youth.”135
Another aspect I considered was for some of the Positions to be grouped together such as Zeitgeist and Neomania if postmodernity was to be considered a sign of the times. However, not all Zeitgeist is postmodern and as we shall see Neomania and Zeitgeist each offer different analytical potentials and raise different issues.
To sum up, the purpose of the Mapping is to develop as Toolbox of five Positions that constitute the theoretical tools for the Analysis in Chapter 5 and 6. The Analysis sets out to consolidate the field of trend studies by qualifying, updating, and challenging the validity of the Toolbox through a case study of the Retro Trend in the period 2000-2009. While the Analysis will unfold the analytical potentials of the Positions, the limitations and problems will also be unfolded. These issues will motivate the development of a sixth Position, the Rhizomatic Position, which is inspired by the botanical and philosophical concept of the rhizome.
The Mapping divides the theory into five main Positions:
1. Social Mechanism: Process of social distinction and imitation
135 Dichter, ”Why We Dress the Way We Do,” Psychology of Fashion, 30.
2. Neomania: Expression of the postmodern condition 3. Market: Market forces
4. Seduction: Sexual allure
5. Zeitgeist: Reflection of current spirit of the times