Fashion's Obsession With Status Symbols and it's Implications

Image via

The Birkin bag. Louboutin heels. The Love bracelet. The Gucci belt. The Chanel flap bag. All of these fashion “it” items are always in high demand and are easily recognized by anyone interested in fashion (or even those who aren’t into fashion) for what they are: luxury items. Of course, being a luxury item, it goes without saying that these accessories are very expensive, and thus by association, the person wearing them probably has money or wants to present themselves in that way. People wait for years to get a Birkin or save for months to get their hands on a pair of red bottoms, but why are these items so popular? Are they really so much better than non-luxury items? Well, it depends who you ask (I’ve personally heard that some Louboutins are quite uncomfortable, but people deal with it because they’re gorgeous shoes); some people will argue that these items are more expensive because of the craftsmanship, whereas others will argue that you’re really just paying for the name, and still others will say it’s a combination of both. However, this article is not about the debate over whether or not people should be spending money on these things; this article is instead about how this obsession within the fashion world over status symbols is not at all a new phenomenon. In fact, I think that as long as fashion has been around, it has had an obsession with presentations of status. However, this craze towards status has also given rise to more serious issues in the fashion community, such as the counterfeit trade and massive debt amongst consumers.

Image via

Back when it was harder and more expensive to dye fabric, the color and shade of your clothes was a signifier of how much money you and your family had. Purple is probably the most famous example of this; since purple dye could only be made from a certain mollusk that was only found in one specific region of the Mediterranean, purple fabric was extremely expensive. Only royalty could afford it, and sometimes even they could not afford purple garments because of the price. In Elizabethan England, it was the law that only members of the royal family could wear the color, making purple a signifier of not only someone’s wealth and social class but also their royal status, which further distinguished its wearers from everyone else. It stopped being a status symbol, however, in 1856 when an English chemist accidentally found a way to create a synthetic purple dye, which made the color accessible and affordable to a wider variety of people.

Even in recent years, the idea of a status symbol also continues to be something used to emulate the rich and famous, a new kind of royalty in which net worth is king. Over winter break, I was watching a docu-series with my parents about the 1980s, and one episode discussed the rise of shopping malls, the broader interest in fashion that came from shows like Dynasty, and the emergence of fashion icons such as Madonna and Princess Diana. The episode discussed the new obsession with status symbols in general, such as the car phone (which inspired people to buy fake car phones to give the impression that they had one), so of course, this desire to display status carried over to fashion. Collections were released in department stores to look like the expensive clothes on Dynasty so that people could get a taste of the luxury life for themselves.

This is something that has continued today, with many non-luxury brands making designer-inspired items, such as the number of sock boots and sock sneakers that emerged following the Yeezy sock boots and the Balenciaga sock sneakers. There are many pins on Pinterest and articles about “designer dupes” or fashion items that look like luxury “it” items, such as the Valentino Rockstud heels and even the elusive Birkin bag.

Image via

However, in this obsession with status and keeping up with the Joneses (or the Kardashians), there is a dark side oftentimes overlooked. Some people, in a desire to keep up with the trends and have the designer “it” items, go into credit card debt or ignore the fact that they do not have their financial priorities in order. One of the most famous examples of this is in popular media is Carrie Bradshaw from Sex & The City; she spent so much money on shoes that she almost lost her apartment and was only able to stay in it because of her friend, Charlotte’s, help. While this seems like an extravagant example, it’s not that far off from what some people experience; my parents have told me many stories about the dangers of the credit system and spending money that you don’t have before making sure your necessities, like rent, utilities, and food, are taken care of. In short, keeping up with the “it” items is not worth ruining your credit score.

Another dark aspect that has come out of this culture is the sale of counterfeit goods. Not only do these goods take designer’s ideas, many times the counterfeit items are connected to a wide array of criminal activities, such as child labor, human trafficking, drug trafficking, and weapons trafficking; some of the money acquired from selling them has also been linked to funding terrorism and corrupt regimes. So while counterfeits seem like an inexpensive solution to the desire to keep up but not go into massive debt, the trade-off is terrible since so many people are negatively affected by the act of purchasing faked goods.

In summary, fashion has been, and probably always will be, preoccupied with these “it” items and status symbols, and consumers will naturally want them, but one needs to consider the worth of those items and the trade-offs. At the end of the day, balance is the key since too much of anything is never good.

Thumbnail via