FASHION THINK PIECE
I keep seeing the same fashion think pieces over and over again. They're either about personal style or the algorithm, and more recently, how we should stop blaming the algorithm for everyone’s lack of personal style. I'm not sure I agree, as I have a hard time separating cultural output from the dominant media source of our time, but it's certainly true that the algorithm is to blame for the proliferation of hot takes that generalize the so-called crisis of style in our current era.
Most of these think pieces play on Washington Post fashion critic Rachel Tashjian's quest to get kids off of the apps and into theaters and bookstores—a noble endeavor in an era where most art forms, whether they be runway shows, movies, or even think pieces, are consumed in increments via yes, algorithmically sorted social media channels. But the bloggers who are mobilizing under Rachel's call to action seem to be confused as to how we can "fight back" against machine-mediated trends.
This morning, I saw an Instagram clip from a paywalled article that blamed bad style on wider industry issues as well as the feeds that social media users allegedly craft for themselves. "If you're passively consuming and not actively trying to bait your algorithm to show you something outside of who it perceives you to be, you're stuck in sameness," commented one Substacker. This is interesting, insofar that gaming the algorithm might be seen as a new form of media literacy. But there is no beating the apps, and asking users to fight against manipulation with more time-wasting forms of consumption seems antithetical to any sort of liberation.
Instead, I'd like to propose something else, or rather something I've proposed before. It's time to stop thinking so much about being different. Besides, is it really noble to recoup someone’s old skinny jeans in the name of trendsetting? I’m asking because I’ve done it, and it didn’t make me important. And one more thing: if you're truly worried about algorithmic manipulation, my advice is the same as Rachel's. Read a fucking book.
I entirely agree with both you and Rachael in this, which echoes a greater critique of culture right now around agency and the Internet. There's massive irony with the proliferation and fetishization of "subcultures" in trend and style, a superficial scraping of past scenes' aesthetics without diving deeper into the nuances of their codes and histories, and never actually having to embody the labor, emotional and of research, one had to do to find out and join those subcultures. One had to, as the saying goes, "touch grass" to find them.
My greater worry is the lack of intuition we have culturally. There's very little tolerance for discomfort and no vulnerability which is so crucial for genuine curiosity to be acted upon, which is fair when you're constantly being observed and judged, and trained to make oneself into a tight "brand." It's wild that in 15 years we've been trained to think social is the only means of discovery and sharing oneself, of performing both our productivity and also creativity. That, despite fashion literally being about the body, it's become so bodiless.
I also just wrote the dreaded “fashion think piece” but also think the issue is too many people trying to manufacture influence from personal style, not the algorithm. The algorithm is a reflection of ourselves and our wishes, not some external corporate agenda coming down from Zara