Sunday, August 12, 2007
As far back as the Middle Ages, Western Europe has been an influential force in dressing up the modern world. In the modification of costumes from the medieval up to the contemporary times, Western Europe generally prevailed. Today’s elite fashion centers include Milan, Paris, Dusseldorf and London, and while already being seriously challenged by the faraway American city of New York as fashion capital of the world, each of these relatively close cities remains a fashion mecca in itself. What is noteworthy is that these fashion centers are all located in Western Europe. What allure is it that Western Europe possesses which makes it a fashion supermodel since the 14th century?
It is easy to consider the cultural factor in bedecking Western Europe with the world’s most glittering fashion jewels. Until the United States of America loomed in the global picture, Western Europe has been the seat of many cultural movements—beginning from the Renaissance—that helped shape the modern world. Long before America can yet again boast of its imminent dominance, this time in the arena of clothing, Western Europe has already established itself as fashion innovator. However, this paper hopes to explore, besides the area’s history of emergence as fashion leader, other possible yet divergent factors like political, social and economic influences that historically fortified Western Europe’s hold of its throne as fashion queen.
The history of Western fashion is the narrative of the altering fashions in clothing for both males and females from Western Europe’s medieval period up to the present. The habit of continually changing the style of clothing worn is a distinctively Western one, although it is now worldwide, at least among urban populations. Mid-14th century saw the sudden drastic shortening and tightening of the male over-garment, from calf-length to barely covering the buttocks, sometimes accompanied with stuffing on the chest. This created the distinctive Western male outline of a tailored top worn over leggings or trousers which is still seen today. The 1400’s saw the climb of fashion and interior decoration in Western Europe. Style trends were set by royal and prominent personalities and were disseminated by travelers through descriptions in their letters and by the trade of costumed fashion dolls. The latter lost its popular footing when the first fashion magazine was published in Renaissance Frankfurt in Germany. Several magazines mimicked its style, a phenomenon that is as realistic today when differently branded but suspiciously similar fashion magazines crowd a section of bookstores and news stands. The decadently fashionable Marie Antoinette, the infamous Austrian-born wife of the French monarch, was costumed by no less than her period’s most influential designer, Rose Berlin.
The pace of fashion change shortly before the Renaissance accelerated considerably, and women’s fashion, especially in the dressing and adorning of the hair, became laborious and changing. Changes in fashion led to a breaking of what had previously been very similar styles of dressing across the upper classes of Europe. Meanwhile, the development of distinctive national styles, which remained very different until a countermovement in the 17th to 18th centuries imposed similar styles once anew. Though fashion was always led by the rich, the increasing affluence of Early Modern Europe led to the middle class and even peasants following trends at a distance sometimes uncomfortably close for the elites—hence the changing fashion with the elites as trendsetters.
Fashion houses and their in-house fashion designers as well as high-end consumers including celebrities, seem to have some role in determining to what proportion or where fashion change goes. The greatest arbiter of fashion ever since the Renaissance, Paris was witness to the dwindling influence of celebrities and the coincidental emergence of designer-dressmakers in the middle of the 19h century. France’s capital city has continued trailblazing women’s fashion dresses with its haute couture. These fashion houses include such heavyweights as Charles Frederick Worth, Coco Chanel, Lucien Lelong, Elsa Schiaparelli, Cristobal Balenciaga, Christian Dior, and Yves Saint Laurent. Only in the latter part of the previous century did Parisian designers get ferocious competition against American designers. London was the leading house for men’s fashions in the early 19th century under such a Regency leader as Beau Brummell. The English capital was a one-time fashion center, in the middle of 1960’s.
When our own Philippines was suffering a considerable cultural ferment courtesy of the Marcos dictatorship from 1970’s up to ‘80s, fashion designs in Western Europe have already become divergently vibrant. This was due to the rising popularity of ready-to-wear collection by famous designers, an event that paved the way for the middle-class to become fashionably dressed and brand-conscious like the much-imitated elite. European fashion giants like Gianni Versace and Giorgio Armani led other successful designers in broadening their horizons by licensing their names and putting these distinctive marks on such fashion accessories as fabric and perfumes. The ethnic-punk style of the ‘70s and the luxurious look of the ‘80s were challenged in the ‘90s with the proliferation of classic understated clothing. The garment industries of Western Europe led the rest of the West in mass-producing fashion clothes originally draping the rich and the famous.
The aforementioned fashion trendsetting history of Western Europe may be deconstructed in such ways as political, social and economic. While equally important as cultural factor in making Western Europe the world’s leading fashion star, these factors are often overlooked, giving the impression that they have contributed less to the stature of Western Europe as fashion leader. The foregoing shows the truth: that political, social and economic influences helped catapult Western Europe in the forefront of global fashion.
Political activities in Western Europe starting the Age of Exploration contributed to Western Europe’s fashion supremacy. As countries comprising the area began to discover lands with which to conduct commercial links, some went so far as conquer their discoveries and set up an empire there. By the early 19th century, the world had been acquainted with four centuries of continuous European imperialism. This was the offshore expansion of Western European power over continents like Australia, Americas, Asia and Africa. Spanish, Portuguese, Dutch, French, and British colonial empires had come in the heel of one another in colonizing lands. These extensions of rule over non-European territories had, in varying degrees, involved trading, missionary works, adventure, homesteading, looting, national pride, conquests, and wars between rival powers. Colonial institutions were founded in the newly acquired territories in order to appropriate the Orientals according to the prospect of the conquistadors. Governments, schools, and the like were established in the colonies, in which case many aspects of the natives’ lives were fashioned according to the colonizers’ will. Needless to say, cultural aspects from language to fashion in these territories were strongly Western-oriented, purposed at amalgamating the old identity with a new, colonial one.
As a result of Western European colonization and imperialism, Western-style fashion has a hovering presence in non-West countries. In the Philippines as in other Asian countries, blue jeans and T-shirts with English-language imprints are more likely to be seen than kimonos or cheong-sams. Western fashion magazines from Mademoiselle to Elle have counterpart editions in former colonies but featuring Western fashion. As popular demand rose and the buying power grew, Western designers have opened fashion boutiques from Tokyo to Johannesburg to Rio de Janeiro. Western European fashion has planted its glamorous flag onto former colonies’ territory. Helped by half a millennia of imperialism, these Western designers’ countries have garnered a dictatorial, colonial role.
In Asia, Africa, and the rest of the colonial world, Western fashion is the “fetishized colonial culture.” The spread of Western designer boutiques and fashion magazines in these territories is patterned after the more formal cultural and political colonialism of the Old Imperialism. These fashion gods of Western designers who attempt to penetrate a large mass market out of the colonies are not unlike the Christian missionaries trying to convert pagans and imperialist rulers foisting their colonial language on the conquered. As the Westerners’ “Other,” colonial consumers are encouraged to copy the colonizers via their dress, makeup, and beauty standards. Hence, seeing blacks or Latinas with hairs dyed blonde or taking whitening products to achieve the meztisa look is no alien apparition. Nonetheless, inherent in this colonial mimicry “is the desire for a reformed, recognizable Other, as a subject of a difference that is almost the same, but not quite."
Paradoxically, the failure of the colonial model to convert colonial subjects wholly is necessary for the colonizer. Only then can the colonial hierarchy remain stable and the dichotomy separating the colonizer and the colonized stay clearly defined. This colonial irony has even given way to the phenomenal mimicry of the colonized by the colonizer, not just the mimicry of the colonizer by the colonized. This fashion anomaly is discussed in the foregoing in order to establish further the point that politics gave Western European fashion an upper hand over its Oriental fans.
This mimicry of the colonized by the colonizer has white models being photographed in magazines, Caucasian beauties like almost all the fashion designers. Visible in the absence of Oriental faces is the colonizing, necessarily white fashion industry’s customization and mimicry of Orientalness. They are milky-complexioned, non-chinky-eyed, aquiline-nosed. These models are sometimes blonde, casting them further from “Oriental.”
The fashion shoots stress that the white models, while wearing Oriental clothing, are almost the same but not Oriental. Using black or Latina or Asian models would not achieve the fortified division between the West and the non-West. Meanwhile, using Oriental dress is done in order to delineate the West from the Orient. Western fashion makes it a point to ascertain the objectification of the Oriental. In which case, the Orient assuredly remains the object of Western gaze rather than vice versa. In other words, the colonization of the Oriental remains to this day through current Eurocentric fashion even as it has seen better days in the Old Imperialism.
By creating Western-mimicking natives, Western fashion has sustained the dominant position of the West. On the other hand, with the subverted position of the colonizer mimicking the colonized, it can attempt to maintain this dominance. Critic Edward Said writes, "as a cultural apparatus Orientalism is all aggression, activity, judgment, will-to-truth, and knowledge." The Western fashion industry, true to its colonizing color, is aggressive, renders itself in an active position, and shows greater knowledge than the Orient. It also wills its version of Oriental “truth”—weak, traditional, ever lacking. This creation of an Orient is agreeable to the imperialist mentality. “[O]nly an Occidental could speak of Orientals," Said continues, suggesting that in speaking of Orientals, Occidentals materialize the idea of them into existence; as a result, they create "Orientals." To make a paraphrase, only an Occidental could create and wear Orientals; fashion designers sketch and sew "Orientals" while magazine editors conceptualize "Orientals" into being. The "Oriental" is the creation of the West, and the West has fashioned an "Oriental" that is colonized. Not only do the Orientals wear Western-style dresses and accessories for five centuries now; also, the Western fashion designers become more Other than the Other with their colonizing creation of the Oriental-mode fashion. By colonizing the “Orient” in more ways than the usual, the Western European fashion remains at its mighty peak of success.
Closely related to the colonizing factor of the Orient, economic ventures also secured Western European fashion’s leadership in the world. During the time the Age of Discovery raged from the early 15th century until the early 17th century, European ships journeyed across the globe in search of new trading routes and partners to support the growing capitalism in Europe. Likewise, they were in search of trading products like gold, silver and spices. Western Europeans have nothing much to offer their would-be colonies in exchange for gold, silver and spices, so eventually their colonizing mission had to be appropriated in these far-flung territories. Once colonized, the territories may become dumping ground for various products, including clothing apparels, of the West.
The West’s imperialism is more than just the sale or purchase of its commodities to its colonies. As such, it should not be confused with commerce or with the opening of commercial markets in Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Pacific. It is the West’s complex action on a territory, providing the natives with the use of capitals, among other systems. It opens an area not only to the commodities of the colonizing country, but to its capitals and savings. Since such a transformation of the colonized country cannot be achieved by simple trade relations, imperialism is systematically used to organize the colonized country. It is this system that made the Western European fashion industry flourish not only in the home continent but also in offshore territories.
Colonization by way of capitalism involved the Western European capitalists who placed their savings in an industrial venture which builds railroads, digs canals, erects factories, clears the land in the acquired territories. In putting their savings to this use, the capitalists are not in any way negligent in their duty to their home country. With enormous capitals, the home country finds it difficult where to employ its colossal savings. The substantial funds of these Western European countries can always be put into industrial, agricultural or social improvements in the home country but the export of a part of these funds across the seas to the colonized countries becomes much more productive and lucrative. The same capital which will produce 3 or 4 per cent when invested in agriculture in the mother country brings 10, 15, or 20 per cent in an agricultural enterprise in the colony. It is the same for funds put into building railroads. In general terms, the capitalist countries thus are becoming investors. Their investment included clothing, so this economic enterprise actually helped strengthen Western Europe’s hold of the fashion leadership. Western European dresses find their way to the colonies, and as the natives purchase them, the fashion industry grows robust. The inherent changes in fashion lushly roll in money, for the Oriental fans are much too willing to follow clothing updates being shown in Europe-based Fashion TVs.
The great value of colonies is not only because they serve to catch the overflow population of the mother country, nor even because they open a particularly reliable area of investment for excess capital. It is also that they give a sharp stimulus to the commerce of the country, that they strengthen and support its industry and provide for its inhabitants—industrialists, workers, consumers—a growth of profits, of wages, or of interest. However, these advantages resulting from the prosperity of the colonies are much more manifested in countries of Western Europe. For instance, cheap labor in India or the Philippines means bigger surpluses for the countries with international investment. When this gains large sums of profit, it will further enrich Western Europe. Since this enrichment happens with the bustling industry of Western European fashion among the colonies, the West’ fashion industry remains on top. In fact, there is not a Western European nation which does not derive a real benefit from this productivity of their offshore investment. Imperialism has caused the opening of new sources of production for Western Europe, at the expense of the colonized countries. It is thus that unknown products have been brought to the consumers of Europe supposedly to increase their comfort, to make the natives feel as if they needed the Versace shirts or the Yves Saint Laurent accessories. That is the first and incontestable result of imperialism. The home countries gain a special advantage from their own colonies. It is the capital of the citizens of the mother country which is sent there, and in this more productive field it is assured of higher interest. This case improves the fortunes of the investors. The second result is to open the new markets for the sale of products manufactured in Europe, markets more profitable and more expandable than the limited market in the home country, because the new societies have an ability to grow and to create and accumulate riches infinitely greater than the mother countries. Thus trade is stimulated and extended; industry having wider openings can and must produce more and such production on a greater scale calls for new improvements and new advances. When capitalism grows, it strengthens the owner of the capital. As such, Western European capitalists in the fashion industry make lots of money out of the comprehensive fashion market that includes all colonies with buying power. With tremendously popular economic hold like that over imperialized countries, it is not likely that Western European fashion will experience a financial meltdown.
Finally, social factors such as class can build a strong foundation on which Western European fashion was anchored, making it a star of its own fashion show. If Western fashion indicates robust economy, it is by way of production and, finally, consumption issues. In both issues, class is inextricably embedded. This class underpinning keeps fashion in general into existence and Western fashion in particular into dominance.
Generally, fashion shows semiotic distinction since fashionable clothes, accessories and body adornment are easy for others to spot for their signs. Hence, branded products like handbags, footwear, jewelry, accessories and new hairstyles are eye-catching status symbols. The cycle of class influence goes as such: first, a fashion is approved by the society. Next, it is copied because of class or design competition. Ultimately, when it becomes commonplace and stopped to fulfill its utility of distinction, it gets replaced by a fashion that has the society’s nod. The fashion cycle then has come full circle.
The strong economy sustaining Western European fashion industry was generated by the active role of the capitalists and the labor force in manufacturing the demands of the society depending on the production sector for the realization of their imagined fashion. With the boom of fashion since the last few decades, manufacturers from the advanced industrialized countries (AICs) transferred their resources to less developed countries (LDCs) to cut labor and operational costs. With the exploitation of women and minority workers, i.e. cheap salary, the capitalists can rechannel their sources on more production of fashion as dictated by elite consumers in both AICs and LDCs and, eventually, by the other consumers down the social strata. More capital to use means more production of miniskirts, pantyhose and boots, among others, first for the can-afford elites, and then the larger mass of fashion-hungry consumers. The faddish characteristic of fashion will merit that the elite consumers will demand for new styles (to set trends and to sustain their high-end identity) once their present styles get copied by the rest of the society, and so the production does not die down, sustaining the life of factories empowered by the labor force and funded by the capitalists. Whatever is in vogue, be it a miniskirt, a textured legging and leather boots, it will be manufactured by the production of labor. This fashion production is beneficial to designers in many ways, since this can attract elites who are wiling to pay off a high price just so they can set the fashion trend. The considerably moneyed bourgeois may also demand for branded clothing in order to mimic the elite. The designers may profit from them as well. Since the designers are aware that the larger mass of people will bring in more profit too, it only takes time when they mass produce the fashion of the elite so the low class may eat their cake too while the designers part away with the poor’s money. Therefore, Western Europe’s fashion industry cannot just die down because the social classes count on them less for their clothing but more for the prestige their cloth lends on them. Western fashion remains on top because it caters to all social classes, who are amenable to splurging on clothing if this can give way to social acceptance, elitism, and/or assumed identity.
More importantly, fashion spells consumption issues in that the capacity to purchase indicates an economy alive and well. The class differentiation discussed above shows to what degree consumption is being taken by both the elite and the lower classes. They have both the power to buy, but more so with the elites, so they are the primary targets of fashion designers. They have to show a distinct culture, apart from the rest of the social strata. One such manifestation is the way their fashion distinguishes them from everyone else. Their separation may be observed with outward signs, one of which is fashion. They can buy fashion so they can set its trend. Corollary to this, the bourgeois which is the next closest to the elites will want to copy the elite trend in order to get identified with their social status. They would copy their fashion given their money’s worth of second-class fashion. Emulating the elite gives the bourgeois the sense of superior status associated to the elite. In turn, the classes lower than the bourgeois copy their fashion, still aiming to share superiority of the upper classes and repeating the fashion down the social strata. All of the social strata are now consuming, feeding the economy with its necessary lifeblood: money. When the elite class loses its uniqueness, it will think of novel signs of class differentiation to create yet again the lines demarcating it from the classes down its status. The social stratification remains, though, since those who wore tailor made clothing look richer than those who wore other people’s cast offs. The poor simply looked poor because their fashion sense, or lack thereof, betrayed them. While the rich and the new rich displayed their wealth through an iconography of signs and symbols namely fashion and the accessories, those who saw themselves inferior saw these upper classes with enhanced body image, hence the need to mimic them. After a trend is set, the classes will proceed with its mimicry, fueling the consumption needed to strengthen the economy. Fashion, whether an elitist’s or a low-life’s, is generated through the consumption process, and so are the associated accessories, which are essentially fashionable themselves.
True, the economy is strong because fashion fuels the mutualism between production and consumption. As money evolves in the economic cycle, production will have the capital to manufacture fashion, and consumption will be consummated because all of the social strata can afford to have a varying taste of what is manufactured. As long as this cycle does not get disturbed significantly, economy will remain robust. This points to one thing: the fashion designers can whip the classes into frenzy by way of their creations, so the dominant fashion industry that is Western European will not wane as yet in popularity among the former colonial territories.
Indeed, the rise of Western Europe as the fashion star of the world cannot be entirely credited to cultural factors alone, from which fashion logically springs from. Moreover, political, economic, and social factors played respective roles in cementing Western Europe’s reputation. This institution in fashion still soars high because the factors contributing to its fashion establishment were social systems through which class, status and power were structured. These systems show relationhips between the oppressor, the West, and the oppressed, the Orient, but which are masked by the superficial glamour of fashion and by the workings of social ideologies, here barely noticed and, hence, rarely subverted.
This East-West binary in fashion as in other more socially significant disciplines promotes the Eurocentric view of the West as deserving of occupying the centerstage of dynamic world history, both previous and current. As may be gleaned from the discussion of several factors cementing Western European fashion’s world dominance, this Eurocentrism has saved the Orient by favorably responding to the white man’s burden, by offering capitalism to deliver it from misery and into the light of modernity and by playing up on class hierarchical structures. While this is familiar, popular and even dangerously deceptive, Eurocentrism carries a false note of Oriental salvation for it actually exacerbates the Orient’s plight by way of colonizing it in fashion as well as in other exploitative strategies.
By being bullied into submission to the falsity that the rise and triumph of the modern world is solely the West’s doing, the Orient seemed suggested to have stood by passively as the world developed historically. A graver complication arises from this as this seems suggestive of the need of the Orient to be legitimately marginalized fro world progression for having been a willing victim or bearer of Western power. In fact, the Orient was the West’s predecessor in civilization building, as may be proven by the Mesopotamian, Chinese, Indian and Nile civilizations which all laid foundations to the Western civilization. Peering through the lack of European offering during the Exploration trade will yield the fact that important fashion elements like silk and cotton were drawn largely from the Orient. The aforementioned statements only clarify that while the Orient, with its resources and manpower, can create its own fashion center, why still look up to a foreign one?
Eurocentrism has been accompanied by an ideological power which was used to legitimize, extend, and maintain itself and its rule over the Orient. This also accounts for the top rule of Western European fashion. Drawing from this power’s political, economic, social aside from cultural aspects, Western European fashion has made legitimate its rule in the world. The most succinct examples of this include the predominance of white models in the catwalk as well as white designers in runway projects. Another example is the drawing power of Europe-based Fashion TVs which features the latest in Western fashion. This attractiveness divests the viewers of the chance to see the local fashion, not that the latter is not likely patterned from Western models which, in fact, it is. It remains a question when cheong-sams, kimonos or our very own maria clara or butterfly gowns will figure in world fashion but not in an objectified, exoticized or Orientalized manner. The very idea is already suspect, since Oriental fashion well have to be beamed also in European fashion TVs for all the Westerners to gaze and, pitifully, consumed. Yet another example is the continuous economic and imperial influence of the West over the Orient. This means that the former colonies are deluged with fashion items from the West, the consumption of which generates surpluses that will enrich the capitalist countries of the West. The Western intervention over the local political affairs also crystallizes even in fashion for who will allow foreign products to compete rapaciously against the likely less-favored local fashion items except the West-influenced government? It has to be goaded into submission under the pains of withdrawal of economic or whatever aid.
Showing how cultural, political, economic and social factors contributed to the rise of Western Europe as the star of world fashion also shows how these factors contributed to the overall rule of the West over the rest of the world. This rule, of course, was detrimental to the creation of the unique identity of the Orient. These factors contaminate the Orient’s identity by foisting on it how it should look, feel and think like. The West could revel at the frustration of the Orient to mimic the European model in style, even perhaps in speech and thoughts, only to fail miserably. Besides seeing Western-fashion-crazed Orientals wearing denims and tank tops with hairs in burgundy or mahogany coloring, they speak with independent thinking, often in English. There is something wrong with this especially in the light of juxtaposing these acculturations with one’s unique culture. Changing the appearance of Orientals into something identifiably, more modernly Western is dispensing with one’s identity in favor of a foreign one. There is also a suggestion of self-deprecation, even phobia of the self, by having to embrace decidedly the Western culture. Does it follow that just because the West is in the dominant position at present, it should be held as more beautiful or more acceptable than the Orient? The answer is, of course, not. Never. The politics of Eurocentrism in fashion as well as other aspects of human life corrupts the self of the Orient by virtue of the fragmentized or incomplete identity of the Orient. An oriental cannot justifiably and satisfactorily call oneself as such if one trades one’s own language for a foreign tongue, if one swaps one’s sarong for the perceived modern t-shirt and mini of the West, or if one looks up to a foreign model to emulate, whether that model is a literal six-foot tall fashion model or a political personality whose views are decidedly Western. One can always look for the homegrown culture for models to imitate, for fashion to accentuate one’s identity and for ideas and ideals to believe in. Almost always, one’s culture shows its richness; only, one has to have the appreciation so one does not have to look any further, in a cable-featured FTV channel perhaps or Western brand-carrying malls, to discover, construct and celebrate one’s identity.
Up to the present, the beauty standard is largely Western, and fashion dresses, makeup, and accessories are predominantly oriented from the West owing to cultural as well as political, economic and social factors. Only when the oppressed get to reclaim their position at the center that paradigms will be shifted and the fashion dominance of Western Europe will be challenged not only by its fellow superpower, the US, but also by nationally identified, class empowered people from the margins.
Batterberry, M. and A. Batterberry. Fashion: The Mirror of History. New York: Greenwich House, 1982.
Beaulieu, Paul Leroy. “Imperialism: A French Viewpoint.” In Documents of European Economic History. Pollard, S. et al. Vol. 2.
Bhabha, Homi. “Of Mimicry and Man.” From The Location of Culture. New York, Routledge, 1994.
Boucher, F. C. C. 20,000 Years of Fashion. tr. 1967.
Cosgrave, B. ed., Sample: Cuttings from Contemporary Fashion. London: Phaidon, 2005.
Cumming, Valerie. Understanding Fashion History, "Introduction." London: Costume & Fashion Press, 2004.
Ellis, Elizabeth Gaynor. Prentice Hall World History: Connections to Today. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 2001.
Laver, James. Costume and Fashion: A Concise History. New York: Penguin, 1982, p. 43.
__________. The Concise History of Costume and Fashion. New York: Penguin, 1979.
Perry, Marvin. A History of the World. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1989.
Said, Edward. “Orientalism.” From Orientalism. New York: Vintage, 1979.
Steele, V. ed., Encyclopedia of Clothing and Fashion. New York: FIT, 2005.
T. Agins, The End of Fashion: The Mass Marketing of the Clothing Business. New York: William Morrow and Co., 1999.
 Cosgrave, B. ed., Sample: Cuttings from Contemporary Fashion. London: Phaidon, 2005, p. 1.
 Ellis, Elizabeth Gaynor. Prentice Hall World History: Connections to Today. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 2001, p. 180.
 Cumming, Valerie. Understanding Fashion History, "Introduction." London: Costume & Fashion Press, 2004, p. 1.
 Boucher, F. C. C. 20,000 Years of Fashion. tr. 1967, p. 72.
 Cumming, Valerie. Understanding Fashion History, "Introduction." London: Costume & Fashion Press, 2004, p. 1.
 Laver, James. The Concise History of Costume and Fashion. New York: Penguin, 1979, p. 62.
 Cumming, Valerie. Understanding Fashion History, "Introduction." London: Costume & Fashion Press, 2004, p. 346.
 Boucher, F. C. C. 20,000 Years of Fashion. tr. 1967, p. 72.
 Laver, James. The Concise History of Costume and Fashion. New York: Penguin. 1979, p. 62.
 Boucher, F. C. C. 20,000 Years of Fashion. tr. 1967. p.74.
 Ibid, p. 76.
 Perry, Marvin. A History of the World. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1989, p. 325.
 Ibid., p. 330.
 B. Cosgrave, ed., Sample: Cuttings from Contemporary Fashion. London: Phaidon, 2005, p. 3.
 Bhabha, Homi. “Of Mimicry and Man.” New York, Routledge, 1994, p. 88-92.
 Perry, Marvin. A History of the World. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1989, p. 325.
 Steele, V. ed., Encyclopedia of Clothing and Fashion. New York: FIT, 2005, p 679.
 Said, Edward. “Orientalism.” From Orientalism. New York: Vintage, 1979, p. 33.
 Perry, Marvin. A History of the World. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1989, p. 340.
 T. Agins, The End of Fashion: The Mass Marketing of the Clothing Business. New York: William Morrow and Co., 1999, p. 56.
 Perry, Marvin. A History of the World. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1989, p. 340.
 Beaulieu, Paul Leroy. “Imperialism: A French Viewpoint.” In Documents of European Economic History. Pollard, S. et al. Vol. 2, pp.165-7.
 Batterberry, M. and A. Batterberry. Fashion: The Mirror of History.1982, New York: Greenwich House,p. 536.
 Laver, J. Costume and Fashion: A Concise History. New York: Penguin, 1982, p. 43.