One of Kaja Silverman's points that resonated with me was her assertion that the subject is defined by clothing. This very Lacanian view that the ego manifests itself through fashion is the fundamental idea behind the philosophy that sartorial style is a way of expressing oneself. Style gurus and clothing vendors alike subscribe to this view, the former proclaiming the cultivation of individuality and the latter attempting to reach the largest demographic to whom they can sell their products. They also both tout personal style as being an avenue to self-love and self-confidence, easing the conflict between how one feels on the inside and how one expresses that on the outside. This adds another layer to the significance of clothing: It is also a symbol of the amount of dissonance between the inner and outer selves.
This symbolism is highly flawed (and many style gurus are aware of this and are careful to make disclaimers about it), since one may dress without a care for appearance and be perfectly at peace with oneself, and one may dress in a way that does not show any kind of self-expression and be totally content as well. But it is certainly true that no matter how we dress ourselves and why, whenever we wear anything we send a message about ourselves out into the world for other people to read.
Great and concisely stated points. Also consider how these sartorial decisions are only "decisions" with quotation marks (as Sontag would have them) since they are, perhaps more often than not, unconscious "decisions."
ReplyDeleteI apologize for not having read this prior to discussion yesterday. It is similar to what I had said in class about the bodily ego as a projection of the surface.
ReplyDeleteBut Yael makes a fascinating point about the paradox of individual style and mass production.