Skip to main content

The Strawberry Dress: An Analogy for our Fast Fashion Mindset

Although I am not a fashion expert, I am someone who recently made the decision to buy exclusively ethically and sustainably-made clothing. I made this decision after discovering that one in five cotton products sold worldwide is tainted by human rights atrocities against the Uighur minority in Xinjiang. Uighur Muslims are being tortured, sterilised, shackled and blindfolded - these are crimes against humanity, and by buying cheap clothing, I am complicit in them.

Fashion historian Karolina Ĺ»ebrowska recently brought to my attention a trend sweeping social media in the form of a strawberry-patterned midi dress designed by Lirika Matoshi. Influencers are going crazy for it, but the dress has also been the subject of some controversy, notably regarding its $490 price-tag.

Unsurprisingly, many high street fashion brands have jumped on the trend, creating their own, cheaper versions of the dress. TikTok users have been quick to point out the flaws of such dresses, raising the question of why it is impossible to recreate a $490 dress and sell it for less than $20.

Lirika Matoshi's strawberry dress
Strawberry dresses available on AliExpress



Hearing people's complaints about the price of the Strawberry Dress made me wonder: how did we get here? When did we decide to abandon the quality of our clothes and the conditions under which they were made?

Fashion historian Bernadette Banner made an excellent video comparing the quality of her handmade reconstruction of a medieval dress and a $40.98 knockoff available online. She explains that clothing, when it's made properly, with good-quality materials, will last a significant amount of time - as it did all throughout history.

We are able to identify periods of history through clothing because fashion didn't use to change every few months. Each decade had its own unique silhouette, which was largely based on the silhouette of the preceding decade. That is to say, clothing was reused and remodelled to fit new trends, instead of ending up in a landfill. Clothing was an investment - fabric was expensive, labour was expensive - because it was made to last, and hopefully not made by a persecuted minority!

Not only could people not afford to simply buy something and then discard it a year later, but there was no need to do so because it was high-quality. Of course, clothing shouldn't become unaffordable - but it shouldn't be dirt cheap, either.

Image by Chloe Roche

We have also lost the ability to mend our clothes - it's easy not to care if you rip your t-shirt when you can buy another one in H&M for $6. Compare that mentality to this 1909 sewing manual which helps readers maintain their clothes by reminding them - four times - to "never wait for a hole." Imagine where the fashion industry would be today if that was still our motto.

So, looking back at the Strawberry Dress, I wonder how we dare be so outraged at its price tag. The companies that are attempting to rip it off are not only stealing Matoshi's design, but they are also contributing to the mindset that fashion should be cheap, unethically-made, and ever-changing.

By investing in our clothing, it both lasts longer and reduces the textile industry's significant environmental impact. The TikTokers criticising knockoffs of the Strawberry Dress are simply exposing the fact that quality does and always has cost money. It's time for us as a society to come to terms with that.

This article was originally published by TheLatest.com

Popular posts from this blog

We Need To Talk About Bridgerton (spoiler alert)

My social media has been spammed lately with fans of the programme Bridgerton lamenting the departure of the much-loved Duke of Hastings (Simon) played by RegĂ©-Jean Page. The seriousness with which people have taken this is what I am lamenting. No, @regejean ! You CANNOT leave me like that. I WILL NOT have it! @bridgerton !!!!!! — Dionne Warwick (@dionnewarwick) April 3, 2021 I have an admittedly unpopular opinion on the programme Bridgerton, in that I think it is objectively bad. Bridgerton is a Netflix series based on a series of novels by Julia Quinn. The programme is set in London during the reign of King George III, and the first series followed the life of the upper-class Daphne Bridgerton, and her courtship with the aforementioned Duke of Hastings during her first season out. Daphne and Simon Bridgerton, Netflix I watched the first series of Bridgerton upon the recommendation of several friends, and I had (relatively) high hopes. I really like period dramas, and I am a fan of...

Power Play at the Olympics

I have really enjoyed these Olympics. We have been treated to new sports, surprise victories (naming no names, Italy), and the usual astonishment when humans achieve the impossible. However, there is always an extremely political side to the Olympics, and that's what I wish to analyse in this article. Superpowers wear gold The term “superpower” was first used in 1944 to describe the UK, US and the USSR. During the 20th century, Britain lost influence and, with the collapse of the USSR in 1991, the US became the only superpower. This led Samuel Huntington to write : “There is now only one superpower. But that does not mean that the world is unipolar [rather] a uni-multipolar system with one superpower and several major powers.” So what we can learn about the current world order from this year’s Olympics? It's no secret that sport isn't the only thing in play during the Olympic Games. Many will remember the US boycotting the 1980 Olympics in Moscow, and medal races between Ru...

On the health of our leaders

In May 1996, journalist Alistair Cooke remarked, “I thought I knew everything about the physical condition of President Kennedy and how much of it was, by an unspoken agreement in those days, kept secret.” Cooke describes a “code, unwritten, never brought up, which would have made it tasteless to mention such things”. [1] He describes how, during the 1960 Democratic primary campaign, then Senator Lyndon Johnson’s team suggested that then Senator Kennedy had Addison’s disease. At the time, this was a “foul accusation” (although true) which was quickly denied by the Kennedy camp. However, secrecy regarding the health of our leaders can be dated to much further back. For example, in October 1919, President Woodrow Wilson, with 18 months left in office, had a stroke which left him bedridden and partially paralysed. First Lady Edith Wilson became the intermediary between the President and his Cabinet, deciding which matters were important enough to be brought to her husband. The President...