Many people believe that our consumption choices express more than just our material desires, that they are representative of our character and our values. Vivienne Westwood has bet on the popularity of these beliefs and developed a brand narrative that invites its audience to get lost in her enticing world of whimsical designs, all in the name of saving our own. Westwood is a world-builder, crafting realms of pirates and witches through her collections on the premise that “sometimes you need to transport your ideas to a world that doesn’t exist and then populate it with fantastic looking people.” In return for her creative gifts, Westwood asks consumers to re-evaluate their consumption choices to create a more sustainable fashion industry. Is it possible that wearing Vivienne Westwood could be an ethical choice, a path towards a better world? Or is this kind of environmental activism performative, just another marketing strategy?
Westwood’s love of wild themes and fantastical narratives in her collections is not accidental. By endowing her clothes with stories, she makes each thing more precious, all in the hopes that garments can become lifelong treasures rather than fleeting amusements. Alongside this approach to her creative process, Westwood has also made efforts to scale down her collections, paying closer attention to production methods and the sourcing of materials. In 2016, she designed a gown using fabric made from recycled plastic bottles, which Lily Cole wore at the Oscars. Westwood also began the Made in Africa project in collaboration with the Ethical Fashion Initiative of the International Trade Centre, a joint agency established by the United Nations and the World Bank. Over five years, the project employed 1500 craftsmen in Kenya, paid wages higher than the local average. Her unisex collection was created from recycled materials found in Kibera, the largest slum area in Nairobi. She also claims that she doesn’t “let [her] company print T-shirts anymore unless they guarantee they can sell them for £100 or more. Cotton is a luxury product [because of its environmental footprint], and we can’t keep exploiting it.” Her SS20 collection was cut from organic cotton and naturally sourced flax, meaning that each item is biodegradable.
Vivienne Westwood SS20
While all of these initiatives sound great for the environment, one can’t help but wonder whether the solution to our climate woes can be found in £100 t-shirts. The dilemma of sustainable fashion is that every choice made to lessen environmental impact correlates with higher prices, making the clothing increasingly inaccessible. Even if buying Westwood was the ethical choice, it would be one that much of the world cannot make. Thus, it seems like environmental activism today is often the cause of the privileged. One could also argue that luxury brands dictate trends and are often the starting point for change in the fashion industry. Designers like Westwood may have the power to influence production on every level to seek out more sustainable practices while preserving affordability. However, the influence of couture houses is arguably waning, and the trickle-down of trends becoming less prevalent; social media puts increasing power in the hands of young consumers, and trends are dictated on the streets and in Instagram posts, making the argument that Westwood is “leading by example” rather tenuous.
Westwood has always used fashion as a tool of protest, from anti-establishment t-shirts in her punk days to anti-consumerism messaging today. In the 70s, Westwood was part of the punk scene and then abandoned it when it became mainstream, and the rage behind it died out. The paradox of a fashion rebellion is that eventually, capitalism will absorb the very thing that protests it; the challenging of an establishment often provides the same discourse that helps keep the establishment alive. Westwood stopped railing against culture, believing that working within it would be the best way of changing it. The classic Saturn symbol of her brand co-opts the orb and ring of the monarchy, but the satellite rings represent movement into a new age. Similarly, saving the planet may mean finding ways to work within the constraints of our society. Westwood tells us that fashion production can’t just grind to a halt; seasonal production, outsourcing, and cheap materials will continue to contribute to pollution production itself is reconfigured.
Is the consumer responsible for this?
We are steeped in a culture that tells us we have to shapeshift every month, constantly reaching for the perfect outfit to fulfill us. And if people turn away from fast fashion brands, they often aren’t so much worried about curbing their consumption as they are about sending a message with what they wear, displaying their morality through their clothes. What Westwood is trying to do is put value back into the garments themselves, to create emotional connections with clothing and encourage us to treat each item as a privileged guest on our bodies. Her desire is emblematic of a need for greater systemic change in the way we approach fashion consumption. She dreams of a sustainable future full of well-dressed people; we can only hope it’s a possibility and not a delusion.
