Syndicated from The Black Renaissance
A few months ago I was approached by Greenpeace who were recently launching their “Toxic Threads” campaign. The environmental initiative intended to gain worldwide publicity about the toxicity created from harmful fabric dyes and the ways the fashion industry is destroying the planet through unethical industry practices. Their campaign was prominently featured with a photo-shoot campaign by China-based photographer Lance Lee, with an Op-Ed article written by Creative Director Tommy Crawford on the Business of Fashion. Greenpeace asked me if I would like to feature them on my blog. Seeing an opportunity to open a dialogue, I agreed. I sent over questions, which in typical Black Renaissance fashion, were critical, analytical and in-depth. I was and am by no means a sustainability skeptic. But to earn a place in my blog, I asked Greenpeace, like all other people on my blog, to be honest, insightful, and willing to stand their ground about what they believe in. Nothing more, nothing less. I asked questions such as how can current fabric dyeing practices can be replaced if Greenpeace hopes to remove them, and why the typical fast-fashion customer should care about this campaign. I received no response despite a somewhat enthusiastic correspondence before. I gave the benefit of the doubt and emailed them again. Second time, no response. In fact, nothing has come over since then. It’s as if they had disappeared like ghosts. Or maybe they didn’t like the sort of questions I asked because they seemed like difficult questions, and would rather not confront the logistical nightmares that come with the term “eco-fashion”.
You see, what irks me most about certain (not all) activist groups is how they attempt to paint a reductive portrait of what is good and bad. The argument that ‘conventional, synthetic dyes are harmful for the environment and cancerous seeking therefore companies should not use them’ is childish and lacks understanding of fashion. In fact, such an idea does not consider the far-reaching impacts of such a statement. For instance, natural dyes are far less effective than their synthetic counterparts, and requires the use of mordants (a solution that ensures that dyes sticks to the fabric fibers). Moreover, steeping fabric in natural dyes requires greater water consumption, as well as energy to heat the fabric in these dyes over longer periods of time. So the truth, unlike what Greenpeace may like to tout, the reality is far less black and white and far more unsettling. Which is a better alternative? You tell me. Instead, smarter questions need to be asked about how to become a more eco-friendly industry. Are there smarter and more moderate ways of improving the fashion industry? What new and innovative technologies are being created to reduce the destructive impact of fashion? How will this affect the livelihood of commodity industries in third-world industries should demand shift profoundly? These are challenging questions to answer no doubt about it, but they reflect the very complex macro-economic reality of our global society. They are concerns that need to be considered because ultimately, people’s livelihoods depend on them if anyone hopes to make this world a better place. Under these conditions, I was granted the opportunity to speak with Dr Christina Dean about the issue. She is an ardent eco-fashion activist, founder of non-profit Hong Kong organization Redress, and one of Vogue UK’s Top 30 Inspirational Women. We talked about what it realistically takes to make the fashion industry more sustainable, charting the monumental and mammoth hurdle of how to change the fashion industry. Garment by garment, what are the daunting challenges that face her and her team, and indeed the eco-fashion community at large? She is informative, eloquent and humble, a figure who although willingly concedes that she may not know all the answers, is willing to point me to the right people and resources. Most importantly, she faces the tough questions head on which others (i.e. environmental skeptics and activists) seek to evade.
Fast Fashion Versus Luxury
Our discussion begins by identifying two sections of the fashion industry that are marked by their influential dominance, positioning and disparately unique challenges they face: fast fashion, and the luxury industry. Dean indicates that in fast fashion, “like in food, like in other sectors… consumers expect things to be cheap. They’ve been ridiculously spoilt for far too long.” The effects of globalization and squeezing every last drop from the supply chain has created an environment where price is king. So any form of improvement, any sort of change that looks to bring in newer processes, better materials, smarter methods of manufacturing that inverts the status quo is going to raise the price of these mass market goods. And no mass market retailer would find that desirable. Consumers have become short-sighted as well, taking for granted the horrendous assumption that clothes can be placed on racks for cheap prices and that the beauty and desirability of the garments reflect fair working conditions under which the fabric has been sourced and the garments have been made. How then to best disrupt such a cycle that is self-fulfilling and self-perpetuating? How then to fix a vicious circle where consumers are king, but their consumption habits are dependent on what companies provide? We also talk about the matter of H&M’s eco conscious collection, a project which draws a strange mixture of frowns and applause . Dean is on the fence about the initiative. On the one hand, the eco line creates a greater awareness and accessibility to ethical clothes that only a mass retailer like H&M can. On the other hand, eco-friendly fast fashion is a paradox in that it negates the motivation to reduce consumption. Especially in the case where discount vouchers are given to consumers as rewards for recycling their clothes in-store, consumption is actually encouraged. How then to best measure the tradeoff between the ideals of reduced consumption against the compulsive consumption of so-called “eco-friendly” fast fashion lines?
In comparison to their mass market counterparts, there is a markedly different portrait as to why luxury conglomerates are yet to embrace sustainability. Obviously enjoying the ability to command a higher price point, luxury brands do not face the detrimental concerns of production cost or pricing for the end consumer. Instead, luxury labels generally rely on bloated advertising, star designers, and shining retail stores to draw in consumers. These are the players who charge the most, and are often touted for being industry leaders and influential trendsetters. Yet despite their pedestal, so many of these companies are not transparent or honest. You only have to look at read books such as “Deluxe” by Dana Thomas to see the rife hypocrisy and disconnect between manufacturing and marketing so common in the luxury industry. Images of artisanal craftsmen dutifully dedicating themselves to the stitching of a calfskin wallet is more of a myth than a reality. We place luxury brands on a pedestal as if they were leaders, yet they do not lead. Many shirk the responsibility to take it onto themselves and create products that are both beautiful in its appearance and manufacturing.
The Importance Of Design
Obviously in an industry like fashion, the issue of design plays possibly the biggest role in the industry. Some designers and brands recognize that eco-fashion does not have to be synonymous with stereotypical tie-die shirts and brown hemp bags. Rather, there is a new wave of companies that aim to create clothes that are sustainable and considerate of how the modern citizens of today live. Stella McCartney is perhaps the most high profile of eco-friendly designers. She refuses to use leather, nor does she allow any of her products to be shot in any campaigns alongside it. Dean also notes the shifting demands now placed on eco-designers, and what they can bring to the table in this competitive industry. Expectations have shifted from easy praise that someone is a sustainable designer, to the now rather tough question as to whether they are any good. The reason why Dean asks these questions is “if you get a get a sustainable designer who’s not very good they actually mess up this industry for all of us.” Harmful stereotypes are reaffirmed about hippie apparel, a conception that may do no favours for the future of eco-fashion. Dean goes further, by stating that what the industry needs are amazing designers coming out of top universities who can also say that they are sustainable. They need to be doubly as good.
Damned If You Do, Damned If You Don’t
In the backdrop of public backlash against companies who greenwash (i.e. companies who tout their sustainability practices with the intention of deceiving consumers), other brands are now hesitant of marketing their products as eco-friendly. A new silence has emerged amongst corporations now dubbed “greenhushing”. Certain brands are maintaining a dignified silence about their green efforts for fear of backlash, and lack of confidence that their products can withstand full media and consumer scrutiny. These are the companies who refuse to label themselves as attention-seeking braggarts, may only be partially committed to sustainability at this time, and may feel uncomfortable with the term “eco-fashion” because of its hippie connotations. All of this creates an awkwardly silent environment where brands may feel damned if they do engage in sustainable activities, whilst others are damned for not caring enough about the planet. In any sense, such a balance is precarious, no doubt about it. But Dean contends that it’s all a matter of public relations. “[T]ry to communicate the little things you are doing and not make promises that they are going to change the world”.
And by the end of the day, change with positive intentions in a positive direction, however small or big is still a change in itself. In the end, this huge logistical obstacle of how to make fashion a more eco-friendly industry needs all the help it can get. In the end, Dean, concludes, “that’s the best we can ask for…. don’t hide it away, and don’t be scared of trying.” I cannot agree more.
To learn more about Redress, please visit their website here.
To read more about the uncomfortable truth about the luxury industry, read Dana Thomas’s book, “Deluxe” here.
To learn more about the future of a more sustainable luxury industry, read WWF’s report, “Deeper Luxury” here.
To learn more about the latest crop of sustainable designers, please read We Impact’s Fashion Sustainability report here.
Coming Soon: Part Two of “The Logistical Nightmare of Eco-Friendly Fashion” will look at challenges through the lens of a recently launched sustainable e-tailer, and the unique challenges that faces one Asia-based eco-designer.
Image Source: Strocchi Flickr, Redress, Redress