How opulence leads of overconsumption.
By Zack Zens
“The party rages on.” says one socialite to another. “Yes,” the other replies, “but I can’t help but feel something is different”
Art is known to reflect the socio-political climate of the time it was made. We see this in fashion today. Ready-to-wear collections seem to have a confused and unsure visual journey, perhaps reflecting the sentiments of those who design them. As vast corporate consolidation efforts continue among conglomerates such as Kering Group and LVMH.This capitalization prioritizes trend-based design over inspiration. Designers are left with stifled creativity, offering regurgitated, unimaginative designs to the average American.1
For some upper-class Americans, life is a party of stock runs and flashy designer distractions. Brands like Skims and Swarovski collaborate to offer crystal capes that cost more than Luxury SUVs. The disparity between a lifestyle centered on opulence and those struggling to afford housing amidst a recession is reminiscent of a gilded yet bemoaned era of centuries past.
As the world seems to spiral out of control, the crumbling walls of fashion titans are hurriedly spackled up, filling the cracks with new creative directors and clever marketing stunts.
High fashion seems to raise
the stakes each year as the throes of late-stage capitalism clamor to collect recognition in what has become an unbearably oversaturated media landscape.
A need for garments that demand attention has pressured fashion designers to create pieces that favor “viral-ability.” Last spring’s MSCHF big red boots, for example, were woefully trendy and controversial. The brand’s unapologetically impractical design achieved its goal: centering the boots on fashion outlets for weeks. Flourishing in inaccessibility and taunting the separation between those who can afford the gag and those who cannot.
The demand to make collections stand out in an increasingly competitive market and a unique confluence of global crisis and social media has led to a series of shows that feel more surreal than ever, overtly lacking a connection to real-life experiences. Where models were once a canvas to present designs, they are now influencers. Couture fashion week highlights feature spray-on dresses by
Coperni and gravity-defying ball gowns by Viktor and Rolf.
Two diverging design trends continue to battle out on this forsaken, influencer-ridden runway: aggrandized opulence and pricey banality. Fashion-hungry consumers who find the faux lion head and gold sun
33
crown of Schiaparelli too rich can opt for equally expensive, quiet luxury brands like The Row, which adhere to traditional silhouettes and muted colors. While headlines such as “Maximalism Gets Its Revenge” from The New York Times perpetuate the glamorous battle between quiet and loud luxury, the truth remains: both are ephemeral trends, profiting off of the will to spend.
As the disparities in wealth continue to grow, the defining trait of the upper class is most often detached carelessness. This meaningless spending drives competition for luxury goods while simultaneously allowing overconsumption to take hold. While so many struggle to make ends meet businesses are comfortable knowing that the upper class will continue to spend, watching the world burn from balcony views.
1Kati Chitrakorn, “The year in retail: Store openings, collaborations and consolidation,” Vogue Business, Dec. 28, 2022.
2Tara Gonzalez, “Swarovski and Skims Came Together for a Bedazzled Collection,” Harper’s Bazaar, Nov. 7, 2023.
3Lucy Maguire, “Forget Viral Stunts: This Fashion Month Was All About Celebrities,” Vogue Business, Oct. 11, 2023.
4Kristen Bateman, “The Viral Fashion Show Is, in Fact, Nothing New,” W Magazine, March 24, 2023.
5Vanessa Freidman, “Maximalism Gets Its Revenge,” The New York Times, Sept. 29, 2023.
