We are now at a new crossroads in our culture in which old definitions and ideas of fashion design and

clothing are no longer able to define who we are and what we want to communicate about ourselves.
Modernism was not clearly defined to those that lived through its initial inception and similarly, those
living in the present cannot accurately predict the direction the 21 st century. One apparent component
of our new age is that aesthetics and the “designed object” have become increasingly important in the
marketing of all products, clothing or otherwise (Postrel, 2003). We are a society in which the new and
novel are far more important than quality; where buying a lot of cheap goods is more important than
buying a few well built goods (Brosdahl, 2007; Hawley, 2008). Fashion design has always been
somewhat nebulous in its definitions of quality and excellence. Within the design community as well as
the larger society, fashion design is often seen as a capricious edict of taste that revolves around
frippery or just plain craft. There are many fashion designers however, who are engaging in highly
conceptual practices more closely akin to art (Gregg-Duggan, 2006; Lipovetsky, 2006). Marketing is used
as a strategy by fashion designers to generate enough commercial success to allow them to fund
theoretical pieces which are created from an intellectual perspective (Gregg-Duggan, 2006). A schism is
created between what is sold and what is seen on the runway. While these intellectual practices are
important to the advancement of fashion design, they are ultimately wasted as only theoretical ideas
and not used for practical innovations.
The multi-billion dollar fashion industry is the source of incredible amounts of waste and pollution as
well as perpetrators of harsh working conditions for underprivileged communities’ world –wide
(Fletcher, 2008). There is an increased amount of literature focused on environmental issues directed at
the fashion industry (Hoffman, 2007; Fletcher, 2008; Hethorn & Ulasewicz, 2008) without a discussion of
how to create the means of change in fashion design curriculum. Learning institutions and educators
should consider shifting curriculum, encouraging a cross fertilization of specializations and a focus on
design innovations to better accommodate wide sweeping shifts in our society shaped by media,
technology, the economy and environmental awareness.

Present Industry
The current fashion industry is in a state of overabundance from the amount of clothing that is
produced annually to the number of hopeful students that enroll in fashion programs. The romance
and mystique of the fashion industry has been heightened by the focus on fashion shows, the designer
as celebrity and the desire to manipulate self representation by consumers. The surplus of clothing and
quick turnover of trends is a result of the hybridization of cultures and a more global aesthetic which
opens new possibilities to create a “unique look”. Consumers find themselves in a loop of over-
consumption, never finding just what is wanted and continuing to buy what isn’t really needed (Pine and
Gilmore, 1999; Fletcher, 2008). This glut of over production often results in a loss of retail sales as
consumers are not willing to spend large sums of money on something that has the potential to go out
of style quickly (Pine and Gilmore, 1999; Brosdahl, 2007).

1
The trend of fashion has become a quick turnover of style and image aimed at maximizing profits;
manufacturers are forced to pursue options in under-developed countries which often resort to
inequalities in pay and working conditions (Fletcher, 2008; Orzada and Moore, 2008). Traditional
production centers are being vacated, such as the garment district in New York City and textile centers
in the United States and Italy are being abandoned due to the availability of less expensive options
flooding the market (Gill, 2008). Creative designers are less and less the part of a production process
that relies on twice a year visits to the factory by a technical designer or computerized Production
Design Management systems. The craft and artistry of clothing that fosters satisfaction are often lost as
production has to be refined to allow for lower costs and ease of management. The result is a
downward spiral of over consumption and yet a lack of contentment in what is being bought (Pine and
Gilmore, 1999).
These habits within the garment industry contradict the increased value that consumers are placing on
environmentally friendly product and fair trade practices (Luke,2008; Ulasewicz, 2008). The terms
“Green Awareness”, Sustainability, and Fair Trade have become buzzwords throughout the western
world. The fashion industry has begun to advance the concentration on environmental concerns. By
sharing the best practices of other design disciplines that have already navigated many of these issues,
fashion design can address societal and ethical issues which have shifted consumer attitudes towards
goods. Future designers will need fluency in these areas for economic viability as well as nourish
personal or the generation’s sense of a moral mandate.
One of the most obvious symbols of waste within the fashion industry is the fashion show. The trend of
runway collections has moved away from wearable or functional clothing and offers more highly
conceptual representations of a designer’s inspiration. Fashion shows function more as performance
rather than an accurate representation of what will be offered to stores and customers. Showpieces that
are never seen after the fashion show are now the norm rather than the exception (Horyn, 2008). The
common practice is that clothing collections are adapted via a second show for actual orders that
appear in stores. Designers therefore spend enormous sums of money and labor on clothing and show
productions that will never be seen off the runway and have no other benefit then to momentarily
dazzle the public and press alike.
The current reliance on the fashion show is based on the emphasis of licensing as the primary generator
of income for a fashion house. Consumers buy into life style brands by purchasing the less expensive
licensees such as eyewear, perfume, bedding, or diffusion lines such as CK for Calvin Klein, DKNY for
Donna Karan, D&G for Dolce and Gabbana. High-end designers also accept design contracts with large
fashion conglomerates to help fund their designer collections and runway shows. The list of examples is
increasing rapidly such as Vera Wang for Kohl’s or Proenza Schouler, Jonathan Saunders, Patrick
Robinson, Alexander McQueen and Isaac Mizrahi for Target or Stella McCartney, Karl Lagerfeld and
Comme des Garcons for H&M or Yohji Yamamoto for Addidas or Alexander McQueen and Jil Sander for
Puma. This trend is a strong indication that consumers are looking for name recognition and a desire for
more unique qualities in their clothing choices, yet also indicates how unprofitable their primary
collections can be.

2
Licensees are needed to fund the conceptually driven art fashion yet without the art fashion consumers
would not buy the licensees which leads to a cycle of disposable fashion running counter to
sustainability, environmental concerns, and the continued reliance on fashion shows. It is also felt by
many in the fashion press that watered down design efforts meant to appeal to the mass market
overwhelm the original design vision. If there is no innovation in fashion and it becomes clothing simply
to cover the body, how do we advance a culture through design? We need to lead the industry to more
efficient best practices through education to allow for the melding of innovative design reflecting 21st
century needs while also connecting to the masses, allowing the designer to have an “undiluted vision”
of product.
These conceptually or artistically driven fashion collections often serve as a barometer of the cultural
climate and have the practical benefit of serving as a brand identity. By using art market practices,
designers are seeking to explore new aesthetic and design approaches. As legitimate as these pursuits
are, they remain largely within the late 20th century tradition of making clothing (Gregg- Duggen, 2006;
Horyn, 2008). There are many similarities between art and designer level fashion in their approach and
affects on the larger market. Conceptual fashion and art consistently critique the larger market seeking
to undermine the very industry it is a part of, yet is eventually adapted and absorbed by the mass
market population. Thus fashion and art must continually re-investigate itself as a means of preserving a
self-directed dialogue (Gregg-Duggan, 2006; Lipovetsky,2006).
Fashion designers that are borrowing from the art world and who are labeled “conceptual” approach
the thought process of fashion design differently than the “traditional” fashion designer. Traditional
designers approach the creative process in a more empirical practice. The collection must start with
inspiration; have a consistent color story and fabric which results in a saleable collection based on a
direct interpretation of an inspiration or history of the inspiration. An example of such an interpretation
might be the 1950s housewife; the colors, the artistic theories, or the historical events that surrounded
the pop culture icon. Designers often cannot explain why they have chosen particular types of
silhouettes as it is primarily based on taste and what looks “fresh” or trends that have been predicted by
a forecasting company . This time honored approach to fashion has helped to build the stereotype that
fashion is purely capricious in nature and without any real heft in the design world. Conceptual
designers approach the design collection in a more multi-dimensional way, often not adhering to
popular trends. Collections often center on an abstract idea or emotion and the application of this
approach is sometimes extreme in message and execution and highly personal to the designer much in
the same way a fine artist may approach their work. The future of design is reliant on taking the best of
both approaches into the design process to create a new paradigm in design, utilizing concept and
higher level thinking while truly creating a designed garment that allows for maximum usage.

Design Education
To help create this new paradigm in fashion design it will be appropriate to shift the educational focus
away from present practices and utilize pedagogy which may be more suitable for 21 st century needs. It
is becoming increasingly clear that problems and possible solutions are multifaceted with overlaps into
other disciplines. A designer can create a better solution by taking into consideration a bevy of

3
information outside their normal scope. Education must allow students to approach learning through
multi-disciplinary methods with technology and sustainability as a part of every solution. Fashion
education programs are often segregated by discipline with no connection to other majors or
specializations. Additionally, student work processes’ and all final outcomes are attributed to individual
students, discouraging group thinking and problem solving.
The future of good fashion design suggests the designer as a problem solver or generator of ideas to
explore and create solutions. This means that fashion programs need to restructure current traditional
practices such as grading structures that focus on the individual student and instead encourage a holistic
approach to design education. Many curriculums which offer a Bachelor of Arts rather than a Bachelor of
Fine Arts, sacrifice a detailed study of basic design or aesthetic principles for a focus on vocational study
of sewing and construction. Fashion students need to have a mastery of fabrics and drape as one of
many tools to develop their design ideas. The hand mastery of sewing will not assist the student to
understand the physical properties of design. Design programs teach traditional manufacturing,
seasonal deliveries and old business practices which seem increasingly outdated. The results of this
continued focus are graduates who are non-contextualized thinkers that employ re-interpretations of
existing product and fail to advance a new design dialogue.
Universities need to become places of conceptual and innovative thinking utilizing interdisciplinary
practice labs as a large component of the educational layout. Textile and production technology, global
awareness, and sustainability must become undercurrents to any design solution. At present these
three components are focused primarily in a superficial way, using them as branding ideas rather than
substantive tools or considerations (Fletcher, 2008). The ideal graduate therefore would change from
vocational master who dictates personal taste to conceptualist or innovator who utilizes well researched
methodologies when approaching the design process.

Movement Away from Vocational Study

Traditionally, fashion design has close associations to a vocational craft-based industry in which concept
is not as essential as aesthetic choices in connection to dress. This trend historically stems from the
couture tradition that requires a garment be fitted at least three times to the intended figure with the
cut, fabric and color being the primary consideration. These same craft practices were extended into the
industrial vocational model to produce beneficial sensitivities but which resulted in basic choices made
on preference. In our contemporary society couture is seen as rarefied for a smaller and smaller
audience which has both the ability to afford the labor intensive clothing but also the time to participate
in the necessary fittings. The concerns of the economically dominant middle class means that clothing
has moved away from conspicuous consumption represented by couture based craft to a desire to re-
define the self by constant consumption (Brosdahl, 2007; Fletcher, 2008). Since there is a decrease in
demand of hands on processes such as sewing and pattern drafting and a greater focus on local wage
and work conditions for factory workers, traditional vocational training is no longer needed due to
centers of production physically moving away from design room centers (NYC, Milan, London, etc)
(Gill,2008).

4
Designers need to understand process of craft, or more specifically the principles of sewing and pattern
drafting, but no longer for hands on production purposes. Designers do not need craft-based skills for
production but the ability to experiment and to be informed with methodologies so they may abstract
them; in other words they must learn the rules so they can then break them. Draping and a close
familiarity with fabric are essential as they are the primary medium of the actual garment. However, the
labor involved in hand skills and sewing in a straight line are not conducive to greater understanding of
the design process or the ability to innovate. Additionally, the current practice of illustration as an end
product does not maximize its pedagogical value, since the resulting abstract aesthetic ideas and visual
thinking that can be generated by drawing are vitally important. Comprehension of craft based
methodologies can generate new solutions if designers come to the table without finite answers; the
very act of experimenting and researching will take the practitioner to other pathways of understanding
and modernization.

Global Awareness and Changes in Aesthetics

A greater spotlight needs to be placed on aesthetic sensitivity and an increased understanding of the
diversity of global aesthetics. The old definitions or stereotypes of geographically based fashions are no
longer relevant. As one of many examples, the German based design house of Jil Sander employs
Belgian Raf Simons and shows collections in Milan and is an acclaimed success (Horyn, 2009). Western
designers are routinely influenced by non-Western cultures but the interpretations are always
translated back for a Western market. Design curriculum must train students to utilize a global
perspective pushing the creative envelope to compete in an increasingly homogenized community. The
surge of interest around fashion aesthetics and the emphasis on sophisticated design for all price points
has resulted in the formation of increased sub-groups of consumers and aesthetic communities. Future
designers must be attuned to these diverse groups through research centered on usage. Additionally,
traditional market categories must be redefined based on aesthetic sensibilities and end use rather than
age or socio-economic status.

Conceptual Thinking and Interdisciplinary Practices

The importance of conceptual designers is the concentration on intellectual applications of clothing,
shifting the paradigm away from a vocational craft to a representation of an idea beyond the traditional
business model of just selling clothing. This approach fosters maximum innovation and exploration in
design, usage, and eventually alternative markets, and consumers. A curriculum that emphasizes
conceptual practice over vocational skills allows students to become more interdisciplinary as the
pedagogy centers around idea and solution rather than the medium being worked in. The shared
experiences of interdisciplinary learning promote the approach and application of design, enriching the
end product in both content and context. Designers not trained in fashion bring an uninhibited point of
view largely due to lack of familiarity to rules which in turn may produce highly innovate approaches,
both technically and conceptually.

5
How will “Good” Design be Defined in the Future?
Presently, a main attraction to designer collections is the focus on process. Clothing must now have a
context or specialized content and tell a narrative; this gives aspiration to the consumer and increases
unique identity to the brand. As consumers are inundated with new information and images, designers
must compete with one another to be noticed. Over-homogenization of brands leaves consumers
yearning for heightened individual brand style that helps to define their perceived identity (Fletcher,
2008). This results in an increased demand for more creative, innovative, conceptual products and
increasingly with a moral or social component (Luke,2008; Ulasewicz, 2008). The primary directive of
educators will be to enable students to utilize developments of the far reaching future and abandoning
closely held practices of the past.

Sustainability and Technology

The spotlight on sustainable technology is due to increased awareness of environmental concerns
which seems intractable as the signs of global warming are ever present and our participation in the
global economy and community are cemented (Fletcher 2008). There is a mounting population of
consumers who understand that changes need to be made and monetarily supported through a possible
increase in price (Luke, 2008; Ulasewicz, 2008). Designers and consumers must demand better products
from manufacturers that fit sustainable practices such as more efficient production methods,
sustainable or biodegradable fabrics, and a greater sensitivity to the carbon foot print of all products.
Awareness does not necessarily translate into tangible action since consumers are unaware of how to
affect change. Designers must become a conduit for the seemingly overwhelming shift in our long held
notions of capitalism, consumption, and sense of identity. As consumers become more willing to invest
in products that are better for the environment, fashion designers should be able to create clothing that
matches the aesthetic sensibilities of the 21 st century yet answer to the new “greener” focus.
A few of the most interesting and plausible concepts are under development rather than widely
available for practical applications and use by the mass market. The possibilities are astounding for
those fashion design students who have been prepared to handle such exciting opportunities. A perfect
example of the marriage of technology and environmentalism would be the Cradle to Cradle Concept in
which all materials in a product are designed for perpetual reuse in cycles that use either natural or non-
harmful industrial processes (Braungart & McDonough, 2002). The authors of this concept acknowledge
the basic principles of consumption as a trait that humans are not likely to abandon, but insist that
technology has the ability to create textiles that do not harm the environment and in fact leave no trace
of its existence (Braungart & McDonough, 2002). There are also developments into alternative textiles
such as organic cotton, hemp and bamboo and increasing replacements of environmentally taxing
processing, dying and manufacturing of garments (Gagnon, 2007). An example of this is active wear
company Patagonia, which has developed a business plan and design mandate centered on developing
sustainable fabrics and manufacturing processes such as ‘Common Threads Recycling’ in which old
garments are recycled to create new ones.
Textiles and technology are further melded in applications from the bio-medical field to space
exploration and futuristic concepts by fashion designers such as Nicolas Ghesquiere, Junya Watanabe
6
and Muiccia Prada. The future possibilities are endless as textile chemists develop multiple use
applications to soft, easy to care for, breathable fabrics (Quinn, 2002; Braddock Clarke and O’Mahony,
2005). What will fashion be like when light weight textiles easily change their heat absorption based on
the external environment? How will designers manipulate metaphor and style when fiber- optic thread
can easily transmit various images within garments? What would happen if garments were beneficial to
the environment rather than taxation on it? What is exciting about these developments in technology
that are couched in sustainable ideals is the suggestion of a whole new approach to a design process.

The concept of “Slow Fashion” is often promoted as an idea in which consumers would simply buy less
garments at a higher level of quality and craftsmanship. While this sounds like an ideal tonic against
increasing landfills it does not seem realistic. Society is obsessed with fast fashion because there is an
overwhelming desire to define the individual. Self branding or identity construction has become more
modular, involves a greater variety of styles to play with and with a larger ideological reach then ever
before. The alternative to so much choice does not seem plausible to a society which continuously
invents new ways and means of expression. It might be a better idea to take the path that we are
already entrenched in and create a new more environmentally sound solution. The focus on technology
in clothing’s end function would help create products that have a longer life both stylistically as well as
functionally.

Shifting Focus: Closing

The need for a seismic shift in the approach of methodologies within the 21 st century fashion industry
and all its manufacturing tributaries argues for a change in practice. What remains to be determined are
the practical applications that become a catalyst for change within the environment of design,
production, manufacturing and distribution. These changes are contingent on the fashion design
educational system breaking free of a present context that has largely remained unchanged since its
inception since standard vocational preparation for the industrial age is no longer relevant as the
primary focus of design education. An apt analogy might be that an architect is not a carpenter or a brick
layer, just as a fashion designer is not a seamstress or knitter. Conversely, aesthetic energies that are
currently focused on conceptual pieces for marketing purposes would be more usefully directed
towards solutions for 21st century problems. Classes are currently in development within our own
college curriculums to create multi-disciplinary environments in which the process of research and
development that engages analytical thinking is the primary learning objective, not the end product.
Prompts centered on a re-evaluation of need, product usage, and consumption will include hypothetical
problems focused on environmental, sustainable, and societal concerns. Students will be encouraged to
think of alternative solutions to mass market homogenization such as experiential design involvement in
which the consumer chooses design options to create a personal product. Another prompt could involve
the development of multiple-functional garments that would prolong the life of the garment and may
inspire greater loyalty from the consumer.
As educational institutions formulate and construct pedagogy to reflect contemporary shifts in design
practice, the present fashion industry must evolve to better serve the design and production
communities, consumers, and the planet. “Good design” will be contingent upon how we nurture

7
students to utilize their formative years; one in which an analytical and research-based design process is
emphasized to create innovations of previously prescribed systems. Intellectual, analytical, and
conceptual considerations through research and experimentation must be foremost within a college
design curriculum, yet should be grounded in ideas of practical application

8
References
Braddock Clarke, S.E. & O,Mahony, M.( 2005). Techno textiles 2. London: Thames &Hudson Ltd.

Braungart, M. & McDonogh, W.(2002). Cradle to cradle: Re-making the way we make things. New
York: New Point Press.

Brosdahl, D.J.C. (2007). The consumption crisis in Leslie Hoffman (Ed.) Future fashion: White papers.
New Jersey: Earth Pledge.

Fletcher, K. (2008). Sustainable fashion and textiles: Design journeys. Sterling, VA: Earthscan.

Gagnon, S. & Gagnon, Y. (2007) Eco-fabrics: Balancing fashion and ideals in Leslie Hoffman (Ed.)
Future fashion: White papers. New Jersey: Earth Pledge.

Gill,P. (2008). Economy of scale: A global context in Janet Hethorn and Connie Ulasewicz (Eds.)
Sustainable fashion why now: A conversation about issues, practices and possibilities. New York:
Fairchild Books, Inc.

Gregg-Duggan,G. (2006). The greatest show on earth: A look at the contemporary fashion shows and
their relationship to performance art in Jan Brand & Jose Teunissen (Eds.) The power and meaning of
fashion: About design and meaning. Netherlands: ArtEZ Press.

Hawley, J. (2008) Economic impact of textile and clothing recycling in Janet Hethorn and Connie
Ulasewicz (Eds.) Sustainable fashion why now: A conversation about issues, practices and possibilities.
New York: Fairchild Books, Inc.

Horyn, K. (2008) Review of Balenciaga New York Times on line blog retrieved February 2009

Horyn, K. (2009) Review of Jil Sander New York Times on line blog retrieved August 2009

Lipovetsky,G. (2006) Art and aesthetics in the fashion society in Jan Brand & Jose Teunissen (Eds.)
The power and meaning of fashion: About design and meaning. Netherlands: ArtEZ Press.

Luke, R. (2008) Popular Culture, Marketing, and the Ethical Consumer in Janet Hethorn and Connie
Ulasewicz (Eds.) Sustainable fashion why now: A conversation about issues, practices and possibilities.
New York: Fairchild Books, Inc.

Mc Robbie, A. (1998). British fashion design: Rag trade or image industry? New York: Routledge.

Orzada, B. and Moore M.A. (2008). Environmental impact on textile production in Janet Hethorn and
Connie Ulasewicz (Eds.) Sustainable fashion why now: A conversation about issues, practices and
possibilities. New York: Fairchild Books, Inc.

Postrel, Virginia (2003) Substance of style: How the rise of aesthetic value is remaking commerce,
culture and consciousness. New York: HarperCollins Publishers Inc.
9
 Pine, B.J.&Gilmore, J.H. (1999). The experience economy: Work is theatre and every business a
stage. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Quinn, B. (2002). Techno Fashion. Oxford: Berg Publishing.

Ulasewicz, C (2008). Fashion, social marketing, and the eco-savvy shopper in Janet Hethorn and
Connie Ulasewicz (Eds.) Sustainable fashion why now: A conversation about issues, practice and
possibilities. New York: Fairchild Books, Inc

10