Finkelstein (1996: 23) remarks that fashion is a versatile social and psychological mechanism that lacks a fixed point of origin. Lipovetsky and many others argue that fashion as a concept emerged as the phenomenon of fashion began. While clothes are almost universal, fashion is not. Fashion does not belong to all ages or to all civilizations; it has an identifiable starting point in history (Lipovetsky 1994).
Fashion is an outstanding mark of modern civilization (Blumer 1969a). J.C. Flugel (1930) specifically indicates that fashion is linked to a particular society and culture, those of the West. Bell (1976[1947]: 105) also points out that fashion, as we know it in the West, is not and never was a universal condition of dress.
It is a European product and is not nearly as old as European civilization, and it is an expanding force, it affects an ever greater number of people in an ever greater part of the world although the expansion of fashion has not been a regular phenomenon.
On the other hand, Craik (1994) questions whether fashion can be confined to the development of European fashion and argues that the term ‘fashion’ needs revision because fashion is too often equated with modern European high fashion.
Similarly, Cannon (1998: 24) says that because fashion is normally seen as a more recent and specifically Western development, its role in the creation of style among smaller-scale societies is generally unrecognized.
Cannon (1998: 23) argues that current definition of fashion excludes the systematic changes in style that occur in all cultures, and that in smaller-scale societies systematic style change may only occur sporadically as it is activated by circumstances, and continue only so long as the conducive conditions exist.
Therefore, a more inclusive definition of fashion must encompass the basic process of style change, without the requirement that it be the continuous process evident in recent Western industrial societies (Cannon 1998: 23).
Are there societies without fashion? If so, in what social context does fashion exist? Is the system of changing styles of dress universal? Whether fashion is universal or not, or whether fashion is a Western phenomenon or not, all depends on how one defines fashion. Indeed, fashion can be applied to non-industrialized, non-Western cultures depending on the definition of fashion.
Like Craik (1994), Cannon strongly disagrees with the perspective that fashion is a Western phenomenon and argues: ‘Although the processes of fashion comparison, emulation and differentiation are more noticeably apparent in the rapid changes that characterize systems of industrial production, the same processes are observable or at least inferable in most cultures . . . The universality of fashion is . . . evident in its general definition as an agent of style change’ (1998: 23). Based on her premise, therefore, fashion is found not only in modern societies but exists in all known societies.
Explanations of fashion, as defined in recent Western contexts, typically focus on its psychological motivation and social purpose (Blumer 1969a; Sproles 1985). Its psychologcial basis, which is the desire to create a positive self-image, is recognized as widely if not universally applicable cross-culturally, but the social role of fashion is often restricted by definition to those societies that exhibit a clearly-defined class structure (McKendrick, Brewer and Plumb 1982; Simmel 1957[1904]).
This definition is unnecessarily restrictive, and ignores pervasive but much more subtle distinctions in status based on personality, wealth and skill. These are equally capable of giving rise to fashion-based differentiation and emulation, especially in circumstances where the basis for prestige recognition is uncertain or undergoing change (Cannon 1998: 24).
Cannon continues: fashion is an inherent part of human social interaction and not the creation of an elite group of designers, producers, or marketers. Because of its basis in individual social comparison, fashion cannot be controlled without undermining its ultimate purpose, which is the expression of individual identity.
If self-identity were never in doubt and social comparison never took place, there would be no demand for fashion, and there would be no need or opportunity for style change. (1998: 35) Cannon focuses on the phenomenon of fashion, that is the changing styles in dress, but does not explain whether the term that is equivalent to ‘fashion’ exists in traditional societies.
The investigation of fashion as an institutionalized system will answer the question as to why fashion exists in some cities and cultures. Flugel (1930) distinguishes between ‘fixed’ and ‘modish’ forms of dress. He suggests that fashion is linked to a particular type of social organization, particular type of society and culture, those of the West.
Fixed costume changes slowly while modish costume changes very rapidly in time. For him, it is this latter type of costume which predominates in the Western world today, and which indeed (with certain important exceptions) has predominated there for several centuries; a fact that must be regarded as one of the most characteristic features of modern European civilization, since in other civilizations, both of the past and of the present, fashion seems to have played a very much more modest role (Flugel 1930: 130). Like Flugel, in separating fashion, as a process of continuous change, from short-term, ephemeral fads, Blumer (1969a), for example, largely removed fashion from the domain of traditional societies (see also Kawamura 2004).