Critical Analysis-Fashion Ethics

Design  is  a  logical  place  to  start  when  undertaking  an  ethical  analysis  of  the  supply  chain,  and   simultaneously  tracking  a  lifecycle  analysis  (LCA).  Ethics  and  the  designer  are  central  to  this  chapter,   and  importantly,  the  ethical  issues  which  can  inform  design.  Yet  these  may  differ  from  some  of  the   expected  issues,  and  include  several  unanticipated  additions.  In  one  sense,  design  is  as  an  area  much   like  marketing:  it  harbours  some  contentious  issues  that  are  dangerous  to  ignore.  Both  these  areas  of   the  fashion  industry  are  visually  powerful  and  purposefully  attractive:  selling  a  story  or  an  image.  In   reviewing  the  supply  chain,  some  may  prefer  to  sidestep  the  responsibility  that  might  lie  firmly  in  the   design  area,  but  there  is  a  great  deal  of  connectivity  with  other  issues  and  phases  in  the  process  of   the  loop.  As  indicated  in  Chapter  1,  throughout  the  book  the  phases  identified  in  The  Fashion   Design/Production  Loop:  Version  2  (Thomas,  2011)  will  be  followed;  the  Design  Phase,  the   Production  Phase,  the  Pre-­‐Purchase  Phase  and  the  Post  Consumption  Phase;  see  Figure  2.1  (page  16).   To  begin  the  design  discussion,  it  is  essential  to  comprehend  the  reality  of  fashion  design,  and  to  also   recognise  the  surrounding  myths.  A  clear  insight  is  vital  to  understand  the  fantasy  aspect  of  creation,   as  well  as  the  global  impact  of  its  rea-­‐  lisation.  One  of  the  key  myths  of  design  is  that  it’s  an  individual   pursuit.  Yet,  a  progressing  theme  in  the  book  is  that  design,  along  with  other  aspects  of  the  supply   chain,  is  collaboration.  Furthermore,  the  choices  a  designer  may  make  will  affect  ownership,   originality  and  intellectual  copyright.  Consequentially,  these  choices  will  also  impact  cultural   copyright  protocols,  environmental  (via  fabrication)  and  ethical  outcomes,  sentient  rights  and  age,   size  and  race  in  the  market.   Apropos  the  ethics  discussion,  design  is  contentious  both  as  a  seat  of  influence,  and  in  its  definition,   which  needs  to  be  better  understood  before  analysing  issues   16  Design,  ethics  and  the  designer   FIGURE  2.1  The  fashion  design/production  loop.  Courtesy  of  Lorna  Hendry/Text  and  Type   Apropos  the  ethics  discussion,  design  is  contentious  both  as  a  seat  of  influence,  and  in  its  definition,   which  needs  to  be  better  understood  before  analysing  issues  with  which  a  designer  may  engage.   Essentially,  there  is  a  great  deal  of  mis-­‐  information  and  hyperbole  surrounding  design,  coupled   unfortunately  with  a  lack  of  comprehension  of  the  genuine  knowledge,  skills  and  practice  involved  in   the  profession.  The  term  ‘designer’  can  be  contentious  and  has  a  recent  history  of  misuse.  The  1980s   saw  the  rise  of  the  influence,  and  notoriety  of  design;  thus  the  term  ‘designer’  in  contemporary  life   was  endemic.  Both  as  a  description  and  preface,  particularly  in  job  definitions,  designers  were   ubiquitous  in  many  areas  of  manufacture  and  production.  Cars  were  customised  according  to  a   designer’s  aesthetics,  mineral  water  was  ‘designer  water’  (Evian,  Perrier),  and  Philippe  Starck’s   number  of  licenses  vied  with  those  of  Cardin,  Lauren  and  Versace.  It  became  an  expectation  for  the   informed  customer  and  fashion  observer,  to  be  able  to  name  and  pronounce  the  designer  of  their   purchase.  Wardrobes  were  full  of  first  names  –  Yohji,  Jean-­‐Paul,  Rei,   Azzadine  and  Thierry  –  thus  enlarging  both  financial  bottom  lines  and  some  egos.  Although  the   current  situation  is  probably  not  as  immediately  superficial,  as  a  measure  it  has  become  a  standard   opening  question  at  any  televised  formal  event  to  ask  a  woman  (and  some  men);  not  ‘what’,  but  ‘who   (which  designer)  are  you  wearing?’   Myth  busting   Before  examining  the  reality  of  the  designer,  there  are  several  myths  that  need  to  be  dispatched   relating  to  what  a  designer  is,  or  how  they  practice.  Industry  pro-­‐  fessionals  and  insiders  will  be   aware  of  the  lack  of  veracity  in  these  myths,  but  outsiders  or  people  new  to  the  industry,  may  not.  A   realistic  understanding  of  a  designer’s  contribution  is  vital  to  comprehend  how  ethics  are  part  of   their  function.  Importantly,  to  be  ethical  it  is  necessary  to  have  a  good  grasp  of  reality.  And  so  let  us   proceed  to  the  new  and  established  myths  relating  to  the  role  and  influence  of  the  fashion  designer   and  how  they  function.   The  lone  designer  myth   First,  the  essential  myth  of  the  designer,  which  continues,  is  the  designer  as  the  lone  creative  force   behind  each  major  decision  in  the  company.  Is  it  ethical  to  perpetuate  that  myth  which  is  in  fact  an   untruth?  In  reality,  fashion  design  is  a  group  effort.  It  is  a  collaboration  of  a  professional  team  with   experience,  expertise  and  knowledge.  For  example,  it  is  not  uncommon  for  a  senior  designer  when   moving  to  a  new  job  to  bring  the  chief  pattern-­‐cutter  because  a  designer’s  look  and  ideas  are  not  just   implemented,  they  are  interpreted,  resolved  and  very  likely  improved  by  the  pattern-­‐cutter  or   garment  technologist.  Likewise  a  good  sample  machinist  is  a  highly  prized  employee;  not  only  can  

she  sew,  but  she  can  also  help  identify  and  solve  construction  problems  before  the  garment  goes  into   production.  In  addition,  she  is  likely  to  be  familiar  with  the  contractor’s  capabilities,  and  preferred   methods  relating  to  quality  assurance.  By  virtue  of  their  insight,  knowledge  and  experience,  both  the   pattern-­‐cutter  and  sample  machinist  can  improve  on  a  design  idea  in  terms  of  line,  detail,   construction  or  economy  of  cut  before  it  ever  reaches  the  production  phase.  Many  industry   professionals  including  the  technical  designer,  product  developer,  production  manager,  buyers,  or   sales  managers  actively  improve  the  realisation  of  the  design  aesthetically  through  their   contributions  in  construction  and  costing.   In  most  cases  a  designer  oversees  the  realisation  of  a  garment  to  at  least  the  sampling  stage;  even   then  an  assistant  designer,  pattern-­‐cutter,  an  assistant  pattern-­‐cutter  and  sample  machinist  and   presser  could  have  been  involved.  Thus  the  myth  (or  trope)  of  the  lone  designer  is  challenged.  At  its   most  compact,  the  team  could  consist  of  a  designer  and  a  sample  machinist,  in  which  case  it’s  a   partnership.  This  is  not  a  major  revelation:  several  film  and  television  documentaries  including   Valentino  –  The  Last  Emperor  (2008),  and  The  Day  Before  (2009),  an  episodic  mini-­‐series  focussing   on  several  iconic  designers  at  work  with  their  teams  in  the  thirty-­‐six  hours  before  a  showing,  reveal   the  co-­‐dependent  nature  of  the  design   Design,  ethics  and  the  designer  17   18  Design,  ethics  and  the  designer   progression,  plus  the  varieties  of  professional  working  relationships  that  exist  within  it.  Thus,  it  is  an   irritating  industry  and  media  myth  that  one  person  is  responsible  for  the  entire  design  aesthetic  and   process  when  others  make  significant  contributions  to  the  end  result.   Ownership,  intellectual  property  and  copyright:  myth  and  reality   The  second  myth  to  be  discussed  is  a  consequence  of  the  first:  that  of  sole  ownership  of  a  creative   idea.  This  is  the  assumption  that  an  idea  belongs  to  one  person,  and  with  the  notions  of  belonging   and  ownership  come  the  presumption  of  legal  right.  It  is  perhaps  an  expectation  in  contemporary   society,  and  undeniably  in  the  media,  however,  the  reality  is  both  legally  and  ethically  unlikely  that   one  individual  is  the  creative  capital  titleholder.  Most  fashion  designs  are  created  whilst  in  the   employ  of  a  company  or  label,  whether  as  a  freelance,  contract  or  fulltime  designer.  A  designer  does   not  usually  own  the  design,  rather,  it  is  owned  by  their  employer.  Few  designers  work  for  themselves   even  if  their  name  is  on  the  label.  For  example,  the  international  fashion  industry  name,  ‘Karl   Lagerfeld’  is  owned  by  a  British  invest-­‐  ment  fund,  Apax  Partners.  ‘Stella  McCartney’  is  a  50/50  joint   venture  with  Kering  (formerly  PPR):  designers,  then,  work  for  companies  with  their  name  on  the   label  (although  they  may  have  shares).  The  name  is  owned  (or  shared)  by  a  company  or  investment   fund,  thus  the  designer  answers  to  a  board  of  directors.  To  what  extent,  or  how  far  they  wish  to   exercise  their  control  and  input  depends  on  the  company,  the  particular  designer  and  their   employment  contract.   No  longer  is  a  design  a  ‘creation,’  it  is  intellectual  property.  There  is  legal  ownership  of  creative   output;  but  of  more  importance,  in  this  instance,  is  the  ethical  ownership.  That  is,  who  owns  it   ethically  and  a  possibly  more  interesting  question:  is  it  even  possible  for  one  person  to  ‘own’  a   fashion  design,  if  it  is  created  by  an  individual,  resolved  by  a  team  all  working  for  a  company?  Woven   into  the  western  constructs  of  creativity  is  this  traditional  notion  of  sole  ownership,  that  the  design  is   ‘owned’  by  the  individual  executing  the  design.  However,  in  a  group  environment,  whether  industrial   (or  educational),  designers  are  likely  responding  to  a  briefing,  and  probably  to  preselected  colour,   fabric  and  price  ranges  tethered  to  a  company  or  label’s  brand  image/aesthetics.  Mostly,  design  is   created  on  demand  in  the  industrial  environment,  working  with  pattern-­‐cutters,  sample  machinists   and  various  other  technicians.  Whilst  keeping  a  keen  eye  on  the  last  season’s  sales,  customers’   favourite  pieces,  and  the  direction  of  competitors,  the  range  is  created  by  a  team  in  response  to  the   data.  That  is  not  to  mention  the  economic  state  of  the  intended  markets,  and  the  socio-­‐political  and   cultural  directions  of  the  market.  Thus  it  could  be  argued  that  sole  ownership  is  not  ethically   possible.  Part  of  the  creative  process  involves  observations  from  the  sales  manager,  and  insights   from  the  merchandiser,  ideas  from  marketing,  and  sometimes,  even  from  the  chief  executive  officer’s   wife.  Many  student  designers  are  anxious  at  the  notion  of  working  in  groups  on  a  design  project:  the   fear  of  losing  their  hard  earned  (and  new)  creative  identity  is  understandable.  Yet  experience   invariably  proves  it  is  not  

Design,  ethics  and  the  designer  19  quite  as  scary  as  they  imagined,  and  furthermore,  the  group  work   benefits  from  all   their  talents,  and  the  outcome  is  often  much  improved.   Designer  as  artist  myth   Finally,  the  third  myth  to  be  discussed  is  that  of  the  artist/designer.  A  designer  sketching  in  a  book,   or  on  a  screen,  alone  without  input,  directions  or  contribution  from  a  line  manager  or  colleagues  on   the  team  is  both  an  unlikely  scenario,  and  not  an  intelligent  business  model.  This  image  is  borrowed   from  the  nineteenth-­‐century  trope  of  a  lone  artist,  or  poet  (not  a  designer)  suffering  for  his  art.  In  the   late  twentieth  century,  there  was  a  blurring  between  artist,  author,  auteur  and  designer,  a  confusion   that  worked  well,  for  marketing,  media  and  the  designers  themselves.  By  unpacking  the  ‘lone   designer’  myth,  it  is  possible  to  comprehend  clearly  at  this  stage  in  the  analysis,  and  later,  that   decisions  are  made  in  groups,  teams  or  part-­‐  nerships.  Indeed,  the  importance  of  collaboration  as  a   future  ethical  strategy  will  be  argued  in  Chapter  6.  Thus,  it  is  important  that  all  participants  are   aware  of  the  ethical  and  aesthetic  impacts  of  these  choices  and  the  accompanying  responsibilities.   How  do  designers  work?   Design  is  about  creating  for  a  market,  and/or  a  client,  and  resolving  the  idea  until  the  client  is   satisfied.  Philosophically,  design  cannot  exist  without  a  customer,  or  as  they  are  now  referred  to,   ‘consumers’.  Although  certain  designers  aspire  to  unfettered  self-­‐expression,  there  is  always  a  client   or  market  to  consider.  Toiles  or  prototypes  have  to  be  reviewed,  fit  and  sizing  checked,  problems   solved,  pricing  calculated,  units  sold,  and  sales  recorded.  For  most  people,  design  by  definition   relates  to  crea-­‐  tion  and  originality.  Making  one  garment  look  appealing  is  not  difficult.  However,   making  30,000  units  of  an  original  design  which  sells,  and  leaves  human  rights  intact,  wears  well,  and   can  still  be  worn  for  many  seasons,  and  has  little  or  no  environmental  impact,  is  really  difficult.  It   requires  knowledge,  forethought  and  skill.  To  claim  sole  ownership  or  authorship  of  a  design  in  the   normal  professional  team  environment  is  likely  to  be  inaccurate,  contrary  to  terms  of  employment,   and  unethical.  Following  the  argument  it  is  germane  to  comprehend  more  clearly  the  role  of  the   designer  and  the  design  process  in  order  to  understand  where  ethics  have  influence.   There  are  many  interpretations  of  the  designer  role,  which  are  attributable  to  company  practice,  or   the  designers’  expertise,  or  both.  Stripped  back  to  basics,  the  designer  conceives  ideas,  or  concepts.   Usually,  these  are  drawn,  and  then  she  or  he  supervises,  or  cuts  first  patterns,  and  oversees  the   sampling.  The  process  may  be  done  digitally  with  design  occurring  in  the  company  headquarters   then  uploaded  into  a  Product  Lifecycle  Management  (PLM)  or  Product  Design  Management  (PDM)   software  system  or  cloud,  with  pattern-­‐cutting  and  sampling  completed  offshore  by  a  contractor.  The   design  process  can  be  plotted  in  a  number  of  ways:  the  order  and  methods  change  according  to  the   company  and  individuals’  protocols.  Most  often,  the  process  is  as  shown  in  Figure  2.2.   20  Design,  ethics  and  the  designer   FIGURE  2.2  Design-­‐to-­‐production  flow  chart.  Courtesy  of  Lorna  Hendry/Text  and  Type   Certain  steps  may  be  in  different  order,  or  parallel.  A  designer  may  not  start  a  collection,  range,  or   drop  from  scratch  with  a  completely  fresh  concept  and  look.  On  the  contrary,  she  or  he  is  more  likely   to  review  the  previous  year’s  sales  with  the  design  and  sales/buying/or  management  teams.   Garments  will  be  selected  according  to  their  sales  and  store  feedback  for  reworking,  and  offered   again  in  different  fabrication/colour/trim/length  for  the  coming  season  or  drop.  This  prac-­‐  tice  can   develop  brand  loyalty  as  in:  ‘I  always  know  their  jeans  will  fit  my  body  shape.’  Sustainably,  this   makes  sense;  garments  are  perceived  as  still  relevant  each  season.  Thus,  the  customer  can  team  new   styles  with  pieces  from  a  previous  range,  rather  than  discarding  garments  considered  no  longer   fashionable  or  that  won’t  coordinate.   Ethical  impact  of  a  designer   When  the  meaning  and  role  of  the  designer  is  better  understood,  it  becomes  easier  to  grasp  the   potential  ramifications  of  choices  and  decisions.  The  Design  Phase  (Thomas,  2011)  is  one  of  several   phases  within  the  supply  chain  where  key  ethical  decisions  are  located,  and  ethical  behaviours  begin.   Consequently,  it  is  from  here  that  unethical  behaviour  can  be  tracked.  Choices  made  in  the  Design   Phase   contribute  to  the  ethical  profile  of  a  designer’s  practice,  impact  and  output.  In  regard  to  the   environment,  it  is  important  because,  according  to  the  European  Union,  ‘More  than  80%  of  the   environmental  impact  of  a  product  is  determined  at  the  design  stage’  (European  Union,  2012).  It’s  no  

surprise  that  poor  ethical  choices  made  during  the  Design  Phase  can  potentially  do  most  of  the   damage  in  production.  Subsequently,  it  is  here  that  an  ethical  designer’s  skill  becomes  apparent.   Being  aware  and  having  the  knowledge  to  change  thinking  and  prac-­‐  tice  is  not  only  a  highly   desirable  but  a  key  professional  skill,  essential  for  the  planet,  and  its  inhabitants  for  the  middle  and   late  twenty-­‐first  century,  and  beyond.  Here  is  where  any  industry  professional  starts  her  or  his   reflection,  and  an  analytical  evaluation  of  their  behaviour:  a  risk  analysis  of  the  potential  current  and   future  consequences.   As  identified  earlier  various  holistic,  sustainability  and  ethical  issues  arise  at  the  beginning  of  the   garment  lifecycle  and  supply  chain,  at  the  first  phase.  Likewise,  as  mentioned  previously,  there  are   eight  significant  ethical  issues  in  the  Design  Phase  (Thomas,  2011)  that  need  to  be  considered.  Of  the   thirteen  identified  ethical  issues  in  a  garment  lifecycle,  the  eight  issues  related  to  design  are  listed   below:  

1. Intellectual  Copyright     2. Cultural  Copyright     3. Environmental  Impact  (fabric  and  trims  selection)     4. Animal  (sentient)  Rights     5. Speciesim     6. Ageism  (in  Design  and  Market  Selection)     7. Sizeism  (Sampling  and  Production)     8. Racism    

These  key  issues  and  the  decisions  related  to  them  shape  the  designer’s  ethical     philosophy/stance  and  thus  the  outcomes  and  brand  profile.   Intellectual  copyright/property   Responsibility  and  impact  are  rarely  part  of  the  popular  culture  image  of  the  design  skill  set.  Usually,   when  ethical  or  sustainability  issues  are  identified  and  discussed  intellectual  copyright  is  a  rare   inclusion.  In  its  own  right,  it  is  a  topic  of  interest  and  controversy  in  the  industry  and  general  media,   and  a  specific  area  of  international  legal  practice.  Yet  theft  of  intellectual  property  is  often  perceived   as  a  legal  issue  alone.  However,  taking  a  holistic,  analytical  perspective  as  is  advocated  here,  theft  of   any  sort  is  both  a  measure  of  an  individual’s  and  a  company’s  ethics.  Copying  another  individual’s  or   company’s  design  is  theft  of  intellectual  copyright.  Design  theft  is  not  a  new  phenomenon,  but  as  with   most  aspects  of  the  industry,  it  occurs  at  a  much  faster  and  more  pervasive  rate  now  due  to   technology.   Design,  ethics  and  the  designer  21   22  Design,  ethics  and  the  designer   When  is  a  knock  off,  a  knock  off?   Digging  deeper  into  the  notion  of  the  ethics  of  design  and  ownership,  designers  new  to  the  fashion   industry  (sometimes  students)  say  ‘if  you  change  only  20%  of  a  design,  it’s  no  longer  stealing   copyright’.  This  is  not  the  case.  If  the  discussion  has  started  about  how  much  will  be  changed,  as  a   designer  you  have  already  aban-­‐  doned  ‘the  innovative  designer  role’.  You  are  adopting  the  role  of   plagiarist,  knockoff  merchant,  rip-­‐off  artist;  thief  in  everything  but  name.  Furthermore,  you  have  left   ‘the  ethical  zone’  too.  Being  ‘a  bit  unethical’  is  like  being  ‘a  little  bit  pregnant’.  Simply,  it  is  not   possible  to  make  a  knockoff  of  another  garment,  and  be  ethical.  Rarely  is  this  aspect  of  design   practice  mentioned  as  part  of  the  ethical  expectation  of  a  designer,  and  other  industry  professionals.   A  point  of  difference  is  also  defined  in  the  area  between  sustainability  and  ethics.  For  example,  in   making  a  copied  garment  in  organic  cotton  it  is  in  part  sustainable  but  there  is  a  genuine  dissonance   in  intent,  behaviour  and  outcome:  the  garment  is  still  a  knockoff.  Thus  ethics  are  a  bigger,  more   encompassing  topic  than  sustainability.   A  note  for  new  designers;  including  a  generic  garment  in  the  range,  because  it  is  ‘a  season’s  look’  is   not  theft.  For  example,  a  designer  may  choose  to  include  a  fitted  jacket  with  a  mandarin  collar.   However,  if  it  is  a  fitted  jacket  hip  length,  with  a  mandarin  collar  and  bellows  pockets  in  a  red  bold   floral  print  with  contrast  gold  buttons,  like  designer  X  in  Milan  has  produced  this  season,  it  is  theft.  It   may  seem  arbitrary  or  splitting  hairs,  but  this  is  an  expensive  area  in  which  to  make  mistakes,   especially  ethical  ones.  Most  fashion  cities  in  the  developed  world  have  reports  of  intellectual   property  cases  in  their  fashion  industry  press.  Ignorance,  or  flouting  of  these  laws  can  be  very  costly   financially,  and  again  for  public  and  industry  reputa-­‐  tion  and  perception  of  the  label.  There  is  a  

robust  area  of  intellectual  property  law  relating  to  fashion  with  specialist  lawyers  in  most   international  cities.  Legal  practices  are  retained  by  large  brands  to  register  trademarks,  graphics  and   identifiable  logos  and  to  police  them  in  different  territories.  Changing  or  altering  brand  graphics  also   constitutes  copyright  infringement;  as  seen  in  Figure  2.3  where  the  ‘L’  and  ‘V’  of  the  recognisable   Louis  Vuitton  logo  have  been  adapted.  Furthermore,  copying  the  designs  of  a  Northern  Hemisphere   label  in  the  Southern  Hemisphere  or  vice  versa  is  unethical:  geographical  distance  is  no  protection.   Furthermore,  for  a  practicing  designer,  being  linked  with  a  plagiarism  case  can  severely  damage  a   professional  career.   Unfortunately  rip-­‐offs,  knock-­‐offs,  and  outright  copying  are  an  industry  standard  methodology.  In   fact,  it  has  been  considered  a  way  in  which  small  budget  com-­‐  panies  could  gain  a  toehold  within  the   industry.  It  is  a  common  human  response  to  desire  to  have  a  beautiful  object,  often  beyond  our   means.  To  this  end  in  the  past  new  garments  by  expensive  labels  and  couturiers  were  stolen  or   purchased,  or  unpicked,  studied  and  copied.  In  addition,  throughout  the  years  before  the  cell  phone   enabled  immediate  creative  capture,  artists  made  quick  clandestine  sketches  at  salon  shows;  later,   photographs  were  developed,  and  sketches  were  faxed.  Today,  any  smartphone’s  mega  pixel  camera   can  email  a  detailed  digital  image   Design,  ethics  and  the  designer  23   FIGURE  2.3  Copyright  infringement  images.  Courtesy  of  The  Fashion  Law  –  www.  thefashionlaw.com/Julie  Zerbo   across  the  world  in  a  matter  of  seconds.  In  the  past,  it  would  have  taken  at  least  a  season  (six  months   later)  or  more.  Contemporarily,  the  design  and  the  fabric  can  be  photographed  on  a  runway,  or  red   carpet,  then  digital  fabric  print  copies  commis-­‐  sioned,  patterns  adapted,  and  facsimiles  can  be  in   production  in  a  matter  of  days.  In  a  vertical  organisation  with  manufacturers  close  to  an  international   transport  hub,  the  knock-­‐off  garments  can  be  in  store  –  or  online  –  in  just  under  a  couple  of  weeks.   There  is  an  argument  that  infers  if  design  work  is  stolen  and  if  the  designer  of  the  original  concept  is   that  good,  then  the  theft  does  not  matter  because  she  or  he  is  already  working  on  the  next  collection.   According  to  this  theory,  theft  is  not  a  problem  for  an  innovative  designer.  This  may  have  been  true   twenty  years  ago.  Yet  in  our  time  phones  have  cameras,  Skype,  assorted  connectivity,  and  thirteen-­‐   day  lead  times;  it  is  possible  to  pass  in  the  street  a  garment  you  have  designed,  but  which  has  been   copied  from  a  runway  and  made  by  another  company,  whilst  your  own  product  is  still  offshore  being   manufactured.  Furthermore,  the  notion  of  moving  on  for  the  constant  new  is  at  odds  with  fashion   design  for  sustainability  (D4S);  contributing  to  the  notion  of  consumption  and  disposability;  in  this   case,  of  ideas.   Ethical  ownership   So  it  is  possible  to  ask  ‘is  a  design  ever  ethically  original?’  Particularly  in  the  Pre-­‐  Purchase  Phase:  on   a  hanger  in  a  store.  An  idea  is  very  much  determined  and  realised  in  its  intellectual  and  commercial   location.  Essentially,  it  is  a  team  effort  because  so  many  people  have  been  involved  with  other   choices.  And  this  is  even  before  the  toile  or  prototype  has  been  accepted  into  a  collection  (range,  or   ‘drop’),  and  put  into  production;  be  that  by  the  Première  in  a  Paris  atelier,  or  a  sixteen-­‐year-­‐  old  girl   in  a  factory  outside  Ho  Chi  Min  City,  Vietnam.  To  establish  a  broad  and  fuller  view  of  ownership,  it’s   always  useful  to  consider  an  alternative.  Creative   24  Design,  ethics  and  the  designer   Commons  is  a  not-­‐for-­‐profit  organisation  dedicated  to  protecting  whilst  expanding  the  notion  of   copyright  licensing  in  the  public  domain.  Founded  in  2001  by  Laurence  Lessig  Roy  L.  Furman   Professor  of  Law  at  Harvard,  Hal  Abelson,  an  MIT  professor,  and  literacy  advocate/founder  of  the   Eldritch  Press,  Eric  Eldred,  with  the  support  of  the  Center  for  the  Public  Domain.  Describing  the   notion  of  ‘collaborative  consumption’  in  their  book,  What’s  Mine  is  Yours:  The  Rise  of  Colla-­‐  borative   Consumption  (2010),  Rachel  Botsman  and  Roo  Rogers  wrote  that  Creative  Commons,  ‘provides  free   copyright  licenses  to  encourage  sharing  and  collaboration,  but  which  still  restricts  usages  to  which   the  creator  does  not  consent  ...  Creative  Commons  is  used  by  the  White  House,  the  film  director   Ridley  Scott,  and  musi-­‐  cian  Gwen  Stefani’  (2010,  p.  90).  It  offers  another  way  of  recording  and   sharing  work.  Holly  McQuillan,  a  zero-­‐waste  designer  based  in  Aotearoa  New  Zealand,  licenses  some   of  her  work  uploaded  on  her  website  under  a  Creative  Commons  Attribution-­‐Share  Alike  3.0   (McQuillan,  n.d.).  The  topic  of  ethical  ownership  extends  even  further,  to  the  ownership  of  cultural   knowledge,  imagery  and  arte-­‐  facts.  As  such,  it  has  not  been  included  previously  in  analysis  of  fashion   industry  and  design  ethics.  

Cultural  copyright   A  fascinating  area,  the  study  and  awareness  of  cultural  copyright  enables  non-­‐  indigenous  designers   to  perceive  and  recognise  design  in  a  different  manner.  Again,  it  is  another  area  that  is  rarely   included  under  the  umbrella  term  ‘ethical  design’.  A  designer  appropriating  a  cultural  image,  or   shape,  or  detail  without  permission  is  inexcusable.  In  the  past,  there  have  been  cases  of  non-­‐ indigenous  people  and  organisations  using  creative  work  without  permission.  There  was  a  media   storm  (including  First  Nations  media)  when  singer  Pharrell  Williams  wore  a  First  Nations  feather   headdress  on  the  cover  of  UK  Elle,  July  2014.  The  idea  of  cultural  copy-­‐  right  in  design  again   challenges  the  idea  of  sole  ownership  of  creative  property.  It  also  confronts  the  notion  of  use  and   context,  that  is,  when  and  where  an  image  or  pattern  can  be  placed  and  used.  Contemporarily  it  is  a   contentious  and  highly  sensitive  area;  a  form  of  post-­‐colonial  theft.  However,  the  deeply  felt  wishes   of  indigenous  artists  and  tribes  to  share  their  heritage  with  others  need  also  be  acknowledged.  The   intention  in  this  chapter  is  not  to  urge  designers  and  customers  to  avoid  contact  with  different   cultures,  but  to  establish  an  early  mutual  dialogue,  observe  their  protocols  and  be  mindful  of  others’   expectations  and  beliefs.   Gathering  ideas  from  the  internet,  that  is,  the  taking  of  concepts  without  per-­‐  mission,  is  standard   procedure  for  many  designers  who  may  interpret  the  process  as  post-­‐modernist  bricolage.  Few   designers  work  entirely  from  primary  research;  for  example,  researching  the  Inuit  in  Canada,  first   hand,  as  seen  in  Figure  2.4  where  two  Inuit  women  are  seen  practicing  a  labour-­‐intensive  (slow)   traditional  craft  which  can  take  time  and  funds.  Thus  voyeuristic  cultural  skimming  via  the  internet   can  be  ‘explained’  as  design.  But  it  can  trivialise  the  imagery  and  techniques  of  cultural  importance.   In  attempting  to  rationalise  the  practice,  a  variety  of  reasons   Design,  ethics  and  the  designer  25   FIGURE  2.4  Inuit  women  sewing  traditional  clothing.  Courtesy  of  Sue  Flood   are  employed  but  they  often  disregard  the  inequality  and  incipient  ethical  problems.  Taking  an  image   for  a  T-­‐shirt,  or  a  summer  range  may  seem  a  minor  ethical  infrin-­‐  gement  to  some.  However,  if  the   infringement  is  added  to  a  list  of  other  ethical  misdemeanours  endured  by  a  disempowered  tribe,   experienced  over  hundreds  of  years,  the  impact  is  magnified  exponentially.  Viewed  from  this   perspective  the  cumulative  effect,  the  absence  of  ethics,  and  damage  by  cultural  appropriation  are   startlingly  clear.  For  a  member  of  a  financially  privileged  and  powerful  culture  to  take  artwork  or   imagery  without  equality  in  consultation,  or  permission,  or  payment,  is  to  perpetrate  post-­‐colonial   appropriation,  or  cultural  theft.  In  a  dis-­‐  cussion  and  analysis  of  ethics,  this  can  never  be  condoned  or   supported.  This  is  not  an  ethical  issue  of  the  past,  but  a  concern  of  both  the  present  and  the  future.  In   the  early  twenty-­‐first  century,  many  indigenous  cultures  are  still  struggling  to  obtain  recognition  for   their  human  rights.  These  rights  include  ownership  of  their  cultural  imagery.   If  a  designer  or  company  is  considering  working  with  indigenous  creative  con-­‐  tent,  there  are   suggested  general  ethical  design  protocols  (listed  later  in  the  chapter),  which  can  be  followed  to   minimise  misunderstandings  over  ownership  and  proto-­‐  cols.  For  example,  in  some  indigenous   communities,  past  and  current  creative  works  are  not  considered  as  being  individually  owned.  They   are  the  creative  out-­‐  comes  of  a  family,  or  tribe’s  cultural  history.  It  can  be  the  case  that  ownership  is   shared,  thus  one  individual  may  not  be  able  to  give  permission.  Hence  it  would  be  necessary  to  speak   with  tribal  elders  to  request  permission  from  the  tribe  to  use  images,  artwork  or  artefacts.  An   alternative  is  to  have  new  artwork  created  and  hire  an  indigenous  designer  or  artist  if  original   content  is  required.  There  are  design   26  Design,  ethics  and  the  designer   practices  internationally  who  provide  the  service:  in  Australia,  for  example,  the  indigenous  artist   John  Kundereri  Moriarty  founded  the  Balarinji  Design  Studio  which  created  Wunala  Dreaming,  the   image  that  was  traced  on  a  Qantas  aircraft  in  1993,  or  Maori  artist  and  designer  Johnson  Witehira  in   Aotearoa,  New  Zealand  and  his  brand  Made  by  Johnson.  Melbourne,  Australia  based  accessories   designer  Catherine  Manuell  of  Catherine  Manuell  Design  worked  directly  with  several  indigenous   women  artists  in  The  Aboriginal  Artists  Project  to  use  their  works  in  a  line  of  her  bags,  wallets  and   cases  (Stock,  2010).  Pictured  in  Figure  2.5  with  bags  fea-­‐  turing  her  artwork  is  Amy  (Jirwulurr)   Johnson  from  the  Ngukurr  Community  in  Arnhem  Land  in  the  Northern  Territory,  Australia.   FIGURE  2.5  Artist  Amy  Johnson  (Jirwulurr)  with  luggage  featuring  her  artwork.  Courtesy  of  Amy  Johnson  

Some  indigenous  peoples  working  with  the  governments  have  organised  their  own  printed  and   online  reference  materials  as  guides  to  working  with  cultural  imagery.  For  example,  the  Protocols  for   Producing  Indigenous  Australian  Visual  Arts  2nd  Edition  (2007)  produced  by  the  Australian  Council   for  the  Arts  explains  the  protocols  and  their  role:   Indigenous  protocols  arise  from  value  systems  and  cultural  principles  devel-­‐  oped  within  and  across   communities  over  time.  Agreeing  to  comply  with  accepted  protocols  of  cultural  groups  promotes   interaction  based  on  good  faith  and  mutual  respect,  thus  encouraging  ethical  conduct.   (Australia  Council  for  the  Arts,  2007,  p.  4)   The  precepts  are  listed  in  the  documents,  and  the  protocols  are  explained  in  depth  to  provide  an   overview  of  the  predominant  principles:   The  principles  outlined  are  a  framework  for  respecting  indigenous  heritage.  

1. Respect     2. Indigenous  control     3. Communication,  consultation  and  consent     4. Integration,  integrity  and  authenticity     5. Secrecy  and  confidentiality     6. Attribution  and  copyright     7. Proper  returns  and  royalties     8. Continuing  cultures     9. Recognition  and  protection    

(ibid.,  p.  9)     However,  earlier  in  the  document  the  same  principles  and  protocols  are  qualified  to  note,   importantly,  that  they  do  not  apply  in  every  situation;   It  is  important  to  recognise  the  diversity  and  complexity  of  many  different  indigenous  cultures  in   Australia.  Ways  of  dealing  with  issues  and  cultural  mate-­‐  rial  may  differ  from  community  to   community.  There  are  also  many  different  protocols  across  the  diversity  of  urban,  rural  and  remote   communities.   (ibid.,  p.  4)   It  is  always  wise  to  source  informed  guidance  in  any  area  when  considering  utilis-­‐  ing  borrowed   imagery.  For  non-­‐indigenous  designers  or  companies  hoping  to  work  ethically  with  indigenous   creative  content  there  are  some  very  broad  protocols  that  can  be  considered:   �  Research  the  image,  pattern,  object  or  artwork  in  as  much  depth  as  possible.  It  is  important  to   identify  for  your  own  knowledge/information  the  context  within  which  it  is  usually  used  or   displayed.  This  may  indicate  the  relevance  and  importance  of  the  work,  and  how  it  is  expected  to  be   used.   Design,  ethics  and  the  designer  27   28  Design,  ethics  and  the  designer  

• �    Remember,  creative  work  past  and  current  can  be  sacred:  it  can  be  perceived  as  living   with  very  specific  uses  within  the  culture,  and  areas  where  the  works  are  forbidden  to  be   used.  

• �    It  is  not  always  possible  to  purchase  a  work/object  outright.   • �    Consider  where,  how  and  the  length  of  time  required  to  use/license/borrow  

the  creative  work.   • �    Consider  in  which  manner  the  indigenous  owners/custodians  (the  traditional  

owners)  may  receive  benefit  from  entering  into  this  agreement  –  be  innovative  and  flexible.   Essentially,  it  is  wise  to  seek  a  mutually  beneficial  holistic  outcome.  

• �    Respectfully  approach  the  elders  of  the  tribe/family/iwi  from  which  you  think  the  work   may  originate.  

• �    Imagine  being  approached  by  a  stranger  to  use  the  only  remaining  photograph  of  a  loved   deceased  grandparent  as  a  fabric  print.  Would  you  want  the  image  used?  Where  would  you   want  it  used,  and  what  would  the  rest  of  the  family  have  to  say?  Would  they  all  agree  with   your  decision?  

• �    Ask  yourself/company  colleagues/your  manager,  if  it  is  necessary  to  buy  the  creative   work  outright,  or  could  it  be  leased  or  licensed?  

• �    Explain  the  possible  utilisation  to  the  traditional  owners,  and  ask  for  their  permission.  

• �    Be  ready  to  discuss  and  explore  alternative  mutually  beneficial  options  that  may  not   relate  to  financial  compensation  alone.  Are  there  other  ways  the  tribe  could  benefit?  

• �    Be  prepared  to  negotiate,  and  be  refused.   Several  designers  have  incurred  controversy  as  a  result  of  cultural  copyright,  or  the  cultural   reading  of  their  work.  Jean  Paul  Gaultier  referenced  the  clothing  and  styling  of  Orthodox   Jewish  men,  which  was  worn  by  both  men  and  women  on  the  catwalk  in  his  Fall/Winter   collection  of  1993.  Rei  Kawakubo  designed  a  Commes  des  Garcons  range  for  men  in  1995   entitled  Sleep  in  which  models  wore  striped  ‘pyjamas’,  which  to  some  observers,  looked   eerily  like  the  uniforms  worn  by  prisoners  in  the  Nazi  death  camps.  There  are  many  cases   where  cultural  property  is  used  in  an  apparently  unmindful  manner;  Chanel  used  Arabic   calligraphy  embroidered  on  evening  gowns  modelled  by  Claudia  Schiffer  and  Karen  Mulder   in  the  Haute  Couture  collection  of  Spring/Summer  1994.  At  the  time,  the  script  was   externally  alleged  to  be  extracts  from  the  Quran.  Understandably,  the  idea  of  the  sacred  text   on  secular  clothing  could  be  perceived  as  inappropriate.  Chanel  removed  the  garments  from   the  collection  quickly;  later  it  was  identified  as  a  Mughal  love  poem  taken  from  the  Taj  Mahal   (The  Polyglot,  2010).  It  is  unclear  what  the  House’s  initial  intentions  may  have  been:   perhaps,  a  celebration  of  the  decorative  qualities  of  Arabic  calligraphy.  However,  it  is  very   unlikely  that  the  script  was  used  to  offend.  It  is  possible  to  ask  how  Arabic  text  could  be  used   in  a  more  appropriate  manner.  Based  in  New  York,  Iranian-­‐born  designer  Nima  Behnoud  in   his  label  NIMANY  (see  Figure  2.6)  provides  an  example;  using  typographical  

Design,  ethics  and  the  designer  29   FIGURE  2.6  Behnoud  for  NIMANY.  Courtesy  of  Mani  Zarrin/NIMANY   quotes  from  the  Persian  poets  Rumi  and  Hafiz.  A  case  study  of  his  thoughts  and  creative  referencing   methodology  concludes  the  chapter.   Fashion  has  always  been  an  eclectic  bowerbird  pursuit:  searching  for  the  rare,  bright,  unusual  and   different,  an  example  of  cultural  fusion.  This  should  not  change,  but  rather  if  the  rare,  bright,  and   different  belongs  to  others  or  has  cultural  or  social  significance,  it  is  an  ethical  responsibility  of  the   designer,  or  other  industry  stakeholders  including  the  customer  to  look  further  than  mere   representation  of  the  image.  Be  better  informed,  respectful  and  ask  for  permis-­‐  sion.  From  a  subject   new  in  the  ethics  analysis  of  the  supply  chain  and  design  practice,  the  following  section  addresses  a   cornerstone  of  the  ethical  debates  –  the  environment.   30  Design,  ethics  and  the  designer  Environmental  impact   Progressing  through  the  design  decisions  that  start  a  garment  lifecycle,  an  early  choice  is  cloth   selection  or  fabrication.  Until  recently,  environmental  impact  relating  to  cloth  was  a  primary  area  of   ethical  critique  in  regards  to  sustainability  in  the  fashion  industry.  As  an  initial  area  of  evaluation  by   the  media,  NGOs  and  charities,  it  would  be  foolhardy  as  a  designer,  or  any  other  industry  professional   to  ignore  or  treat  lightly.  If  unsure  of  the  provenance  of  cloth,  it  is  wise  to  question  the  supplier  for   evidence  of  certification  of  content  and  ensure  the  environmental  profile  is  provided.  Or,  make  no   claims  regarding  the  cloth  that  are  ‘greenwash’  (Thomas,  2008),  the  environmental  form  of   whitewash.  Making  vague  or  inaccurate  or  hyperbolic  claims  will  undermine  the  product,  and  the   ethical  credibility  of  the  brand.  Environmental  accreditation  as  an  area  is  advancing  in  leaps  and   bounds  with  many  more  new  fabrics  and  fibres  achieving  new  industry  standards.  But  industry   professionals  have  to  deal  with  a  difficult  world  of  changing  ‘greys’,  rather  than  black  and  white   answers  in  the  hunt  for  environmental  veracity.  From  coun-­‐  try  to  country,  textile  legislation,   accreditation,  fibre  prices  and  availability  change.  It  is  not  always  easy  to  say  ‘yes,  it’s  organic’  or  ‘no,   it  isn’t  organic’.  It  is  better  to  ask  by  whom,  how,  and  where  it  was  certified,  for  example  by  Global   Organic  Textile  Standard  (GOTS).  It  is  for  the  designer  or  the  person  in  charge  of  textiles  sourcing  to   initially  scrutinise  any  ‘green’,  ‘ethical’,  ‘natural’,  ‘organic’  or  ‘eco’  claims.  Advice  and  support  can  be   sourced  and  textile  testing  information  com-­‐  piled.  ‘Eco  fibres’  should  be  closely  scrutinised;  some   have  merit,  but  many  are  not  as  ‘green’  or  ‘eco’  as  we  would  hope,  or  they  claim.  The  National   Resource  Defense  Council  (NRDC)  in  their  Clean  by  Design  campaign  under  Fiber  Selection  (2012b)   published  a  paper  with  an  Environmental  Comparison  of  Fiber  Types  table,  which  is  a  useful  start,  as   is  their  Guide  to  Greener  Fibres  (2011),  an  expedient  beginning  for  designers  starting  to  research.   It  is  not  the  intention  here  to  delve  into  textile  specifics  in  depth,  but  to  alert  and  encourage   designers  and  customers  alike  to  challenge  the  information  they  are  routinely  given.  Ask  for  

international  certification,  to  support  any  claims  made  on  behalf  of  the  textile,  its  cultivation,   processing,  manufacture,  content,  production,  finishing,  laundering  and  disposal  impact.  Accurate   current  information  is  available,  but  so  is  misinformation.  Beware  of  replies  that  relate  to  fulfilling   compliance  requirements.  A  label  appears  (or  claims)  to  be  ethical  but  what  does  it  mean  exactly,  and   how  is  it  enacted?  Establishing  context:  examining  which  accreditation  your  competitors,  industry   leaders,  and  also  your  ethical  heroes  are  using  is  a  good  way  to  start.  So,  a  critical  approach  to   statements,  facts,  figures,  percentages  and  provided  information  is  essential.  For  example,  the  use   and  disposal  of  water  is  a  key  indicator  of  environmental  impact  as  it  is  crucial  in  textile  cultivation,   proces-­‐  sing,  and  disposal.  Likewise,  the  amount  used  and  in  what  state  it  is  returned  to  the   waterways  is  significant.  From  a  holistic  perspective,  it  is  also  important  to  research  labour   involvement,  and  conditions  in  all  those  prior  aspects.  In  the  cultivation  of  cotton  –  a  ‘natural’  fabric  –   for  instance,  herbicides  and  pesticides  are  often  used  in   large  amounts  but  the  impact  on  the  growers,  their  families  and  their  local  eco-­‐  system  is  rarely   mentioned.  The  accreditation  of  fabrics  is  varied,  with  over  one  hundred  fabric  or  eco-­‐labels   worldwide  observing  different  standards.  Some  of  the  standards  currently  being  used  include:   �  �  �  �   OEKO-­‐TEX®  Standard  1000   Global  Organic  Textile  Standard  Version  4.0  (2014)  (GOTS)  The  European  Commission  –  Eco  Label   bluesign®  system   As  mentioned  earlier,  misinformation  or  partial  information  relating  to  positive  aspects  of  fibres  is   not  uncommon.  Polyester  is  recyclable,  is  hardwearing  and  washes  well  but  it’s  a  by-­‐product  of  the   petroleum  industry.  Currently,  however,  recycled  polyester  requires  new  polyester  added  to  it  to   make  it  serviceable.  Ethical  paradoxes  continue:  recycling  polyester  bottles  enables  carbonated  pop   drinkers  not  to  feel  guilty  and  buy  more.  Likewise  why  are  we  drinking  from  polyester  bottles  when   a  high  percentage  of  the  population  have  access  to  drinkable  tap  water?  Paradoxically,  it’s  not  only   the  ramifications  of  the  unethical,  but  also  ethical  choices  within  the  ethics,  which  must  be   considered.   Fabrication  selection  determines  how  a  garment  will  wear,  and  be  washed  and  dried,  which  is  often   the  largest  source  of  environmental  impact  (Allwood  et  al.,  2006).  Other  contributing  factors  include   where  the  fibres  are  grown,  processed,  spun  and  constructed  (usually  woven  or  knitted);  how  often   and  far  the  goods  are  transported  (‘cloth  miles’),  before  the  fabric  is  cut  and  manufactured  (‘fashion   miles’).  Importantly,  the  fabric  choice  also  establishes  how  it  may  be  recycled.  Multi-­‐fibre  or  blended   fabrics  and  garments  are  not  easily  recycled.  So  if  in  rea-­‐  sonable  condition  on  disposal,  they  may  be   destined  for  a  charity  shop.  If  not,  they  could  be  downcycled  to  cleaning  cloths  or  used  to  make   removalist  blankets,  an  aspect  covered  in  more  depth  in  Chapter  6,  ‘Disposal  and  reincarnation’.  If   they  were  single  fibre,  however,  they  could  either  go  to  a  charity  shop  and  be  worn  again  for  a  second   life,  or  they  can  be  deconstructed  and  made  into  another  pro-­‐  duct  as  a  form  of  upcycling;  all   accomplished  more  easily  as  less  fibre  sorting  would  be  involved.  Sorting  a  mixed  or  blended  fibre  is   currently  difficult,  although  there  is  research  being  pursued  in  this  important  area.   Regarding  textiles,  there  is  a  holistic  perspective  to  be  considered,  not  only  in  fibre  cultivation   (herbicide,  pesticide  and  water),  but  also  in  the  processing  (washing,  scouring,  dyeing  and  washing).   Each  fibre  has  a  process  that  can  be  harmful  in  varying  degrees.  For  example,  in  the  cultivation  of   cotton,  countries  in  the  devel-­‐  oping  world  are  often  sold  hazardous  chemicals  –  toxic  to  the   immediate  envir-­‐  onment,  the  growers  and  their  families.  Or,  growers  can  be  given  genetically   modified,  non-­‐reseeding  cottonseeds,  the  long-­‐term  impacts  of  which  are  yet  to  be  fully  realised.   Therefore,  the  choice  of  say,  cotton  as  fabric,  is  not  an  uncompli-­‐  cated  one  for  either  designer  or   customer.  Uzbekistan’s  decision  to  use  water  from  the  Aral  Sea,  a  fresh  water  in-­‐land  water  mass,  in   the  cultivation  of  its  cotton  crops   Design,  ethics  and  the  designer  31   32  Design,  ethics  and  the  designer   FIGURE  2.7  NASA  image  of  the  Aral  Sea.  Courtesy  of  NASA  Earth  Observatory   meant  that  the  sea  shrank  to  10  per  cent  of  its  original  size  directly  as  a  result  of  this  practice.   Satellite  cameras  have  recorded  the  evidence  over  decades  (see  Figure  2.7).  This  combined  with  the   use  of  forced  labour,  and  on  occasion,  child  labour  and  a  resulting  campaign  led  by  The  

Environmental  Justice  Foundation  has  led  to  several  large  companies  banning  the  purchase  and  use   of  Uzbek  cotton  fibre.   This  disturbing  image  proves  undoubtedly  that  the  planet’s  resources  are  finite.  Yet  cultivation  isn’t   the  only  part  of  the  garment  lifecycle  to  use  water  resources.   Customer  role   Washing  contributes  to  the  negative  impact  of  a  garment  throughout  the  lifecycle.  The  largest   environmental  impact  per  garment  occurs  during  the  post-­‐purchase  behaviour  of  the  customer;  in   laundering  for  example  ‘tumble  drying  (which  uses  60%  of  the  use  phase  energy’  (Allwood  et  al.,   2006,  p.  40).  Laundering,  or  rather  poor  laundering  has  a  severe  environmental  impact  and  this  is   further  investigated   in  Chapter  5,  ‘Wear’.  Faced  with  the  multifaceted  knowledge  required  at  the  Design  Phase  (Thomas,   2011),  it  is  important  to  identify  how  far  around  the  supply  chain  the  garment  care  information   (referencing  laundering)  is  commu-­‐  nicated.  And  how  much  support  training,  or  education  is   provided  for  the  industry,  community  stakeholders  and,  ultimately,  the  customers.  Aware  of  the   impact  of  laundering  and  the  urgency  of  communication  of  information,  Redress,  a  Hong  Kong  based   NGO,  working  on  sustainability  in  fashion  collaborated  with  domestic  appliance  manufacturer  Miele,   to  organise  workshops  and  a  video:  Consumer  Care  Matters  (Redress  Asia,  2013)  aimed  at  a  young   demographic.  This  project  is  covered  in  a  case  study  Interview  with  Christina  Dean,  Redress  founder   and  CEO  in  Chapter  5.   There  are  drawbacks  in  using  most  fabrications  and  these  can  include  price,  handle  and  colour.  But   when  assessing  fabrication  in  regard  to  environmental  impact,  it  is  wise  to  remember  most   fabrications  have  some  form  of  impact.  Closed-­‐  loop  fabric  manufacture,  combined  with  garments   designed  to  extend  their  usage  can  alleviate  some  of  the  damage.  However,  there  can  be  preferences   –  to  use  a  fabric  which  may  be  natural  can  mean  a  shorter  life  due  to  durability,  but  does  not  support   the  petrochemical  industry.  For  example,  viscose  is  naturally  occurring  in  wood  pulp,  bamboo,  etc.,   but  requires  acid  to  break  it  down  into  a  useable  polymer.  The  acid  has  to  be  processed  before  it  can   be  discarded.  Tencel®  is  an  envir-­‐  onmentally  friendly  viscose  as  it  uses  a  closed-­‐loop  manufacturing   process,  in  which,  as  its  producer  Lenzing  claims:  ‘Close  to  100%  of  the  solvent  is  recovered  and  the   remaining  emissions  are  broken  down  in  biological  water  treatment  plants’  (Lenzing,  2015).   Alternatively,  man-­‐made  fabrics  will  wear  longer,  launder  and  dry  with  less  heat,  but  are  non-­‐ biodegradable  and  support  the  petrol  industry.   Not  always  included  in  the  environmental  impact  discussion  is  the  role  of  the  pattern-­‐cutter.  Their   expertise  can  be  shown  in  their  skill  cutting  a  pattern  to  achieve  the  garment’s  shape,  but  also  in   utilising  the  fabric  thriftily.  Likewise,  the  layplan  or  marker  of  the  style  can  achieve  a  high  utilisation   of  the  fabric,  which  means  less  waste.  This  is  not  an  exact  art,  however,  it  results  in  saving  fabric   (hence  money)  and  this  has  made  it  an  important  long-­‐standing  skill  within  the  industry.  So,  although   there  is  preproduction  fabric  waste,  it  is  not  usually  a  large  amount  because  of  its  conspicuous  waste   of  money.  Saving  money  has  always  been  a  strong  driver  for  avoiding  waste,  often  more  potent  than   being  ethically  motivated.   Discussing  the  potential  end  of  the  lifecycle  (post  purchase  and  disposal)  of  the  garment,  it  is   important  as  a  designer  to  examine  the  possible  final  impact  of  a  garment.  The  next  question  is  likely   to  be:  is  it  biodegradable?  The  notion  of  biodegradability  can  be  problematic  as  fabrics  may  not   readily  biodegrade  by  themselves.  What  are  the  required  conditions  including  heat,  moisture,  air  for   this  to  occur?  In  addition  it’s  germane  to  ask  how  long  it  takes.  Further,  while  decomposing,  does  the   fibre  give  off  hazardous  chemicals,  gases  or  any  form  of  toxic  emission,  poison  the  earth  or   contaminate  water  table?  In  the  case  of  some  natural  fibres,  they  emit  methane  and  thus  the   biodegradable  break  down  becomes  a  climate  hazard.  Still  considering  fabrication,  the  prospect  of   using  fur,   Design,  ethics  and  the  designer  33   34  Design,  ethics  and  the  designer   may  be  part  of  design  decision-­‐making.  So,  besides  environmental  impact,  there  are  a  few  more  hot   button  ethical  issues,  and  one  that  has  gained  in  prominence  is  animal  rights.   Animal  (sentient)  rights   Fashion  has  been  the  location  of  some  highly  provocative,  and  on  occasion,  effective  anti-­‐fur   campaigns  over  the  years.  It’s  these  campaigns  that  most  people  think  are  the  beginning  and  end  of  

animal  rights  ethics  in  the  fashion  industry.  It  is  a  dynamic  area  of  debate  acknowledged  by  the   industry,  as  Alex  Williams  wrote  in  The  New  York  Times:  ‘Fur  has  always  been  a  hot-­‐button  issue  in   fashion,  and  now  more  than  ever  because  the  consumer  has  the  ability  to  research  and  decide  for   themselves  where  they  want  to  stand,’  said  Robert  Burke,  founder  of  the  luxury  consultancy  in  New   York  bearing  his  name.  ‘It  is  really  the  one  area  where  money  and  ethics  converge  in  fashion’   (Williams,  2015).   But  the  holistic  perspectives  being  employed  in  this  book  take  the  arguments  beyond  just   acknowledging  the  fur  trade  and  the  killing  of  animals  as  being  cruel.  Imagination  and  empathy  are   required,  and  an  understanding  of  the  meaning  of  sentient:  ‘having  the  power  of  perception  by  the   senses’  (Thompson,  1995).  The  notions  of  life  and  sentience  touch  upon  beliefs  of  the  Buddhist,   Hindu  and  Confucian  religions,  which  many  industry  workers  follow.  Acknowledging  sentience  does   not  mean  simply  caring  about  cute,  furry  animals  with  large  sad  eyes.  It  is  the  belief  that  all  life  is   sacred,  and  that  many  living  things  have  sentience.  Thus,  the  farming  of  silk  worms  and  their  death   by  boiling  to  obtain  the  uneaten/unbroken  fibres  is  a  source  of  contention.  Likewise,  the  practice  of   mulesing  sheep  in  Australia  is  pro-­‐  blematic  to  many  animal  rights  followers.  The  duty  of  care   belongs  to  the  most  highly  evolved  primates  –  humans.  As  such,  it  is  believed  in  many  cultures  that   we  are  responsible  for  the  stewardship  of  all  life  on  the  planet.  How  that  stewardship  is  interpreted   and  enacted  is  defined  by  ethics.   In  regard  to  the  ethical  issue  of  the  use  of  fur,  there  are  two  questions.  First,  is  it  wrong  to  take   another  life,  in  this  case  for  decoration?  The  second  question  is  if  animals  are  to  be  killed  for  this   purpose,  should  they  suffer  before  they  are  killed,  by  being  hunted,  trapped,  or  farmed  in  poor   conditions?  It  should  be  noted  that  decoration  as  trim  is  mentioned  here  as  due  to  technological   advancements  in  fabrication  and  home/work/leisure  space  heating;  it  is  no  longer  necessary  for  the   average  person  living  and  working  in  most  developed  urban  cities  to  wear  fur  for  warmth.  If  we  were   to  pursue  the  ethical  argument  further  and  consider  the  hunting  of  animals  for  meat  and  clothing  by   indigenous/First  Nations  peoples,  there  would  be  a  deeper  complex  issue  of  indigenous  rights  and   environment.  This  will  not  be  broached  in  this  discussion,  as  it  does  not  apply  to  fashion  directly,  but   to  clothing.   The  ethical  choice  is  not  to  use  fur,  which  is  reason  enough  in  itself.  As  Alex  Williams  observed  in  his   article,  ‘the  anti-­‐fur  contingent  remains  vociferous’   (Williams,  2015).  However,  if  ethics  were  not  strong  enough  grounds,  there  has  also  been  the  growth   of  litigators  identifying  their  concerns  relating  to  animal  welfare;  exemplified  in  Lawyers  for  Animals   in  Australia,  and  in  the  US,  the  Association  of  Lawyers  for  Animal  Welfare  (ALAW),  and  the   Nonhuman  Rights  Project.  Therefore,  fear  of  prosecution  may  be  alternative  grounds  for  not  using   fur.  It  could  be  proposed  that  caring  for  animals  and  their  feelings  is  the  extension  of  living  and   working  ethically,  and  not  making  other  beings  suffer  for  personal  embellishment/decoration.   If  a  company  had  been  practising  futuring  ethics  (as  detailed  in  Chapter  7),  it  would  not  find  the  next   development  surprising.  With  the  growth  of  urbani-­‐  sation  in  developed  and  developing  countries,   families  are  smaller,  more  people  are  living  alone,  and  the  social  phenomenon  of  ‘companion  animals’   and  ‘fur’  kids  (pets  as  ersatz  children)  is  becoming  more  common.  This  rise  of  awareness  and  interest   is  being  adopted  in  developing  countries;  animal  rights  now  come  with  the  developed  country   package  of  ‘the  fashionable  urban  life’.  There  has  been  an  enormous  increase  in  animal  welfare   groups  over  the  last  two  decades,  for  example,  in  China  where  pet  ownership  is  growing,  young   activists  have  adopted  the  slogan  ‘Friends,  not  Food’  to  tackle  the  dog  meat  trade  (O’Dwyer,  2012).   The  relationship  with  animals  and  other  sentient  beings  has  to  be  under-­‐  stood  and  decided  early  in   the  supply  chain,  as  it’s  something  that  can’t  be  fixed  later.  For  fuller,  holistic  comprehension  of  all   the  ethical  perspectives  relating  to  the  interaction  (for  example;  leather,  fur,  wool,  silk)  of  the  supply   chain  and  garment  lifecycle  with  sentient  beings  in  the  supply  chain,  a  further  issue  should  also  be   considered.   Speciesism   The  concept  of  speciesism  is  an  extension  of  animal  (sentient)  rights  arguments.  If  not  convinced  that   humans  are  entitled  to  be  at  the  top  of  the  species  pyramid,  or  managing  stewardship  well,  then   speciesism  has  to  be  the  next  topic  for  considera-­‐  tion.  Within  our  culture,  speciesism  is  endemic;   that  is,  the  favouring  of  the  human  species  above  all  other  creatures  in  our  behaviours  and  decision-­‐ making.  Essentially,  it  is  regarding  animals  only  from  the  perspective  of  their  use  or  interest  to  our  

lives  and  existence.  With  our  advanced  technology,  insight,  empathy  and  respect  towards  other   species,  it  could  be  hoped  our  response  to  environmental  ownership  situations  would  be  beyond   what  could  be  described  as  the  infantile  ‘mine,  mine,  mine’  reac-­‐  tion.  In  essence,  as  humans  our   response  has  been:  ‘if  it  is  desirable  it  must  belong  to  us.’  With  the  rise  of  the  ecology  movement  from   the  1960s,  it  could  be  hoped  we  could  have  progressed  further  in  arbitrating  decisions  with  humans   as  a  species  in  consideration  (or  the  foremost).  To  be  fair  and  ethical,  one  could  ask:  what  is  our  right   to  have  first  choice  of  everything?  How  is  our  stewardship  of  the  planet  faring  so  far?  Are  we  the   most  numerous,  the  largest,  the  heaviest,  the  longest  living  species?  Have  we  the  largest  brain?  The   answer  is  mostly  ‘no’  to  those  queries.  Yet,  we  persist  in  favouring  ourselves,  and  creatures  that  look   like  us,  when  making   Design,  ethics  and  the  designer  35   36  Design,  ethics  and  the  designer   decisions  for  the  industry,  the  planet  and  the  future.  We  may  support  organisations  trying  to  benefit   other  species,  yet  considering  our  high  functioning  brain  capacities,  and  desired  capacity  for   compassion,  are  we  not  coming  a  little  late  to  the  ethical  notions  of  diversity  and  species  rights?   Before  leaving  this  area  of  debate  there  is  another  fashion  related  issue  that  links  animals  with  the   planet.   Deep  ecology   Relating  to  speciesism  when  linked  with  environmental  impact,  ecology  and  philosophy,  Deep   Ecology  and  its  fashion  connection  provides  further  context.  As  a  concept,  it  originated  in  1973  in  an   article,  ‘The  Shallow  and  the  Deep,  Long-­‐  Range  Ecology  Movement:  A  Summary’  written  by  Arne   Næss  (1973).  What  followed  later  was  an  eight-­‐point  series  of  statements  or  structure,  written  by   Næss  with  George  Sessions  relating  to  the  shared  utilisation  of  the  earth.  It  has  a  particular   resonance  in  the  discussion  relating  to  sentience,  the  environment  and  speciesism.  Four  of  the  points   from  The  Deep  Ecology  Platform  (1984)  are  particularly  pertinent:  

2. Richness  and  diversity  of  life-­‐forms  contribute  to  the  realisation  of  these  values  and  are  also   values  in  themselves.    

3. Humans  have  no  right  to  reduce  this  richness  and  diversity  except  to  satisfy  vital  needs.     4. Present  human  interference  with  the  nonhuman  world  is  excessive,  and  the  situation  is  

rapidly  worsening...     8.  Those  who  subscribe  to  the  foregoing  points  have  an  obligation  directly  or  indirectly  to  participate   in  the  attempt  to  implement  the  necessary  changes.  (Næss  and  Sessions,  1984)   The  essential  premise  is  that  there  are  other  life  forms  with  inherent  worth,  beyond  how  useful  they   are  to  man.  As  a  philosophy  it  takes  humans  away  from  perceiving  the  world  in  a  narrow  linear   manner  indicating  instead  a  more  capacious  and  nuanced  vision.  The  fashion  connection  is  with  the   late  Douglas  Tompkins,  founder  of  North  Face,  and  former  part-­‐owner  of  Esprit,  and  his  wife  Kristine   McDivitt  Tompkins,  formerly  CEO  of  Patagonia.  They  left  their  previous  profes-­‐  sions  inspired  by   Næss’  writings  and  founded  the  Foundation  for  Deep  Ecology  to  protect  the  environment:  ‘they’ve   conserved  nearly  2.2  million  acres  across  the  Patagonia  region  and  won  national  park  status  for  three   parks,  in  Argentina  and  Chile’  (Wieners,  2014).  Having  looked  broadly  at  environmental  impact  and   sentient  rights,  the  next  ethical  issue  within  the  Design  Phase  relates  to  inclusion  and  exclusion  of  the   human  customer  and  market.   Ageism  in  market  selection   In  the  early  twenty-­‐first  century,  the  fact  that  the  population  in  the  developed  countries  of  the  world   is  ageing  is  a  truism.  In  contrast  is  the  inclusion  of  mature   customers  which  is  not  often  perceived  as  a  designer’s  ethical  responsibility.  Is  design  about  how   many  customers  can  be  included  in  your  market,  or  how  many  you  can  exclude?  When  designers   make  the  presumption  that  consumers  over  40  or  50  are  not  interested  in  fashion,  or  worse  do  not   deserve  innovative  fashionable  clothes,  they  are  both  uninformed,  unethical  and  missing  a  lucrative,   exponentially  growing  market.  A  good  designer  should  be  able  to  design  for  a  variety  of  ages  beyond   her/his  own  immediate  experience.  For  example,  do  childrenswear  or  menswear  designers  have  to   be  children,  or  male?   There  are  many  icons  of  elegant  contemporary  ageing:  Cher,  Judy  Dench,  Meryl  Streep,  Helen  Mirren,   or  Katherine  Bigelow,  or  Rachel  Ward,  Charlotte  Rampling,  Jane  Fonda,  Cyndi  Lauper,  Denzel   Washington,  Mary  Roberts,  Hillary  Clinton,  Diane  Keaton,  Antonio  Banderas,  Bruce  Willis,  and  Bill  

Nighy  to  name  a  prominent  few.  The  American  Association  for  Retired  Persons  (AARP)  publishes  a   monthly  magazine  for  their  members  with  fifty-­‐year-­‐olds  and  older  celebrities  gracing  the  front  page,   including  several  from  the  list  above.  It  becomes  clear  that  it  is  not  a  narrow  definition  or   demographic.  Photographer  Ari  Seth  Cohen  created  a  blog  Advanced  Style,  then  a  documentary  of  the   same  name  about  the  stylish  older  women  and  men  he  photographed  initially  in  New  York.  The   popularity  of  the  blog  has  led  to  other  projects  for  him  and  his  subjects.  Several  of  the  women  are   featured  in  advertising  campaigns,  and  model  for  major  international  designers,  for  example  Lanvin,   others  in  a  campaign  for  Kate  Spade  accessories,  which  may  all  seem  wonderfully  progressive.   However,  as  Vanessa  Friedman  (2015)  observed  in  The  New  York  Times,   But  while  it  is  one  thing  to  pay  lip  (and  advertising)  service  to  the  importance  of  the  mature  market,   it’s  another  thing  entirely  to  design  for  it.  And  the  truth  is,  catwalks  are  still  speckled  by  short  skirts   and  skinny  trousers,  the  sheer  and  the  sleeveless.   Dressing  an  older  demographic  is  not  difficult.  Separate  brands  for  the  mature  market  are  not   required,  but  as  Friedman  noted,  there  are  certain  details  and  aspects  of  fit  that  exclude  rather  than   include.  Within  a  range  of  garments,  or  a  smaller  drop  there  may  be  more  than  one  fit:  for  example,   one  fuller  and  more  fluid  whilst  another  may  be  narrower  and  defined.   Marketeers  call  them  Baby  Boomers,  Grey/Gray  Boomers,  Grey  Nomads,  Generation  Jones  and  soon   Generation  X;  they  still  have  high  expectations,  big  dreams  and  are  financially  stable.  So  they  want  to   look  healthy,  fit  and  sexy,  whatever  their  age.  In  2014  a  Bank  of  America/Merrill  Lynch  (Nahal  and   Ma,  2014)  report  ‘The  Silver  Dollar  –  Longevity  Revolution  Primer’  called  them  the  ‘longevity   revolution’.  Economists  refer  to  the  ‘grey  pound’,  the  ‘grey  euro’  and  the  ‘gray  dollar’.  As  Robin   Mellery-­‐Pratt  noted;  ‘In  the  US,  people  over  the  age  of  50  own  80  percent  of  the  country’s  financial   assets  and  are  responsible  for  half  of  the  country’s  discre-­‐  tionary  spending’  (Mellery-­‐Pratt,  2015).   Yet,  the  industry,  in  general,  is  politely  sidestepping  their  needs.  As  with  sizing,  when  a  famous   designer  uses  one  or  two   Design,  ethics  and  the  designer  37   38  Design,  ethics  and  the  designer   larger  sized  or  older  models,  the  media  becomes  over-­‐excited  and  declare  it  a  trend.  Perhaps  this   might  be  patronising  and  infuriating  to  any  disenfranchised  group  to  be  put  on  to  a  runway  as  a   token,  or  novelty.  Innovative  design  and  fit  is  not  the  exclusive  right  of  pale,  young,  slender  girls  (or   boys)  in  the  developed  world.   Sizeism  (sampling  and  production)   A  question  then  emerges:  is  it  fair,  kind,  or  ethical  or  good  business  not  to  make  clothes  for  real  sized   women?  A  further  question  can  be  posed:  what  does  fashion  retail  tell  us  about  sizes  and  sizing?  It  is   globally  acknowledged  that  the  population  of  the  developed  world  (besides  growing  older)  is   growing  larger,  whether  in  height,  due  to  improved  quantities  and  quality  of  food,  or  weight  due  to   over-­‐eating,  and  lack  of  exercise,  or  both.  Yet  how  is  the  fashion  and  clothing  industry  addressing  the   situation?  Why  are  fashion  designers  and  marketers  side-­‐stepping,  or  ignoring,  these  markets?  Is  it   ethical  to  deny  any  market  the  benefit  of  good  design?  Could  we  have  an  industry  that  celebrates  the   fit,  and  healthy  whatever  size,  age,  or  race  they  may  be?  In  this  case,  sizeism  is  being  examined  in   relation  to  sampling  and  production.  Sampling  within  a  company  is  usually  done  in  one  specific  size   (often  UK  8  or  10),  which  is  usually  interpreted  as  the  perceived  ideal  size  for  showing  a  specific   design,  and  often  worn  on  the  runway.  But  unless  the  company  is  sampling  in  UK  sizes  14  or  16  and   over  (most  represented  in  the  female  population  of  UK),  they  are  excluding  a  high  proportion  of  the   population.  Indeed,  if  this  is  perpetuated  into  the  more  diminutive  size  range  (UK  6–12)  in   production,  an  opportunity  to  increase  sales  is  lost.  Another  irritant  within  the  topic  of  sizing  is  the   practice  of  Vanity  Sizing;  that  is,  placing  incorrect  (smaller)  sizing  labels  on  a  garment,  which  is  not   ethical  as  it’s  a  lie.  It  both  infantilises  and  patronises  the  customer  and  perpetuates  self-­‐delusion.   However,  with  the  rise  of  online  purchasing,  the  likelihood  of  this  continuing  is  lessened;  because   often  size  charts  with  real  measurements  are  posted  to  the  website  to  help  potential  buyers  ascertain   correct  measurements  without  fear  of  ridicule  or  shaming  (self  or  otherwise)  as  may  occur  in   physical  stores.   In  both  the  previous  issues  of  ageism  and  sizeism,  there  are  the  elements  of  inclusion  and  exclusion.   Fashion  has  often  laid  claim  to  exclusivity;  the  rarity,  only  available  to  a  stylish,  informed,  and   wealthy,  few.  But  realistically,  this  is  not  an  efficient  business  model  as  retailers  such  as  UNIQLO,  

H&M  and  Zara  demonstrate  by  making  inexpensive  fashionable  clothing  available  to  most  of  the   developed  world.  Considering  the  other  (person)  is  an  ethical  premise,  thus  inclusion  can  be  part  of   an  ethical  holistic  response.  To  include  would  require  more  breadth,  and  availability  in  styles  for  a   variety  of  ages,  sizing,  cultures  and  beliefs,  which  brings  the  argument  to  the  question  of  whether   racism  is  perpetuated  in  the  Design  Phase.   Racism   Racial  diversity  among  models  is  an  ongoing  influential  discussion.  During  design,  even  the   illustrations  can  include  more  diverse  representation  (besides  age  and   sizes).  Different  shades  of  skin,  strong  large  features,  or  any  features  different  from  the  Western   norm  are  uncommon  in  advertising  on  the  runway,  and  in  the  sketchbook.  This  is  recognised  in  the   initiative  All  Walks  beyond  the  Catwalk,  Diversity  Now  campaign  and  competition  for  fashion   students.  Having  an  illustra-­‐  tion  section  in  the  competition  underlines  the  gap  in  representations  of   racial  diversity.  A  broader  ‘seeding’  and  thinking  of  diversity  could  begin  in  design;  for  student   designers  and  designers  at  design  and  product  development  stage  through  inclusion  and   representation.  The  shared  issues  often  relating  to  inclusion  will  be  developed  further  in  Chapter  4,   ‘Marketing’.   Conclusion   From  the  conception  of  a  collection,  to  the  disposal  and  recycling  of  a  garment,  there  are  implications   of  the  designer’s  ethical  choices  made  at  the  earliest  stages  of  the  garment  lifecycle.  The  selections   made  can  enable  or  circumvent  variables  such  as  better  wear,  ease  of  laundering,  or  less  animal   suffering.  As  the  EU  Ecodesign  Directive  stated  in  Ecodesign  –  Your  Future  (European  Union,  2012):   ‘80%  of  all  product-­‐related  environmental  impacts  are  determined  during  the  design  phase’  (p.  3).   Copying  designs  constitutes  theft  of  intellectual  copyright;  use  of  cultural  artefacts  without   permission  or  protocols  is  appropriation,  all  of  which  can  happen  even  before  a  pattern  has  been  cut.   Choices  made  in  the  selection  of  colour  and  fabric,  affect  dyeing,  fibre  growth/production;  with  the   associated  social  and  environmental  impacts.  Use  of  fur  is  a  highly  contested  choice  (for  certain   markets)  affecting  animal  rights,  with  implications  for  the  animals,  but  also  the  customer,  the   designer’s  reputation,  company  profile  and  media.  Sample  and  production  sizes  can  exclude  major   parts  of  potential  markets,  community  and  ultimately,  profits,  whereas  styling  and  cut  can   marginalise  certain  ages,  religions  and  cultures.  Conversely,  a  skilled  pattern-­‐cutter  can  utilise  fabric   well  and  eliminate  waste.  Style  and  con-­‐  struction  techniques  chosen  can  impact  the  time  required   for  construction,  which  affects  the  cost  of  labour  and  resources.  If  deemed  too  expensive,  the  style   may  be  cancelled,  or  the  production  contracted/subcontracted  to  a  different  location  with  cheaper   labour,  possibly  less  pay  and  worse  conditions.  Before  the  sample  leaves  the  studio,  the  designer’s   choices  will  have  ramifications  around  the  supply  chain  and  define  the  lifecycle(s)  of  the  garment.   Choices  made  at  this  key  point  echo  along  the  supply  chain.  To  comprehend  this  further,  the  next   chapter  following  the  supply  chain  will  explore  production.   CASE  STUDY   Nima  Behnoud,  New  York-­‐based  Iranian  designer  –  label  NIMANY  (Email  interview)   ST:  When  did  you  first  start  designing  clothes,  and  how  long  has  the  label  been  going?   Design,  ethics  and  the  designer  39   40   Design,  ethics  and  the  designer   NB:  The  concept  of  hand-­‐modified  clothing  started  when  I  was  fifteen  with  a  group  of  friends.  We  made  hand-­‐ distressed  denim  and  held  shows  in  the  underground  parties  in  northern  Tehran.  We  sold  them  to  the  hipster   crowd  not  to  make  money  but  to  be  cool!  The  first  proper  experimenta-­‐  tion  was  done  at  school  (Fashion   Institute  of  Technology)  in  New  York  during  2004  –  I  was  studying  Graphic  Design  and  I  was  playing  with  dif-­‐   ferent  motifs  on  fabric.  I  don’t  consider  myself  a  fashion  designer.  I  received  my  B.A.  in  Graphic  Design  and  after   my  brand  was  established  [started  in  2004,  officially  registered  as  a  company  in  2007]  went  back  to  get  my   masters  in  Global  Fashion  Management;  which  is  mostly  the  business  side  of  fashion.   ST:  Can  you  describe  the  role  your  cultural  background  plays  in  your  designing?   NB:  It  plays  a  major  role.  Unfortunately  most  of  what  we  were  presented  while  growing  up,  through  the  context   of  Persian  culture  and  image  in  the  art  scene  was  a  melodramatic  and  sad  depiction,  referring  to  a  tragic  former   existence  that  is  no  more.  That  detached  and  melancholy  presentation  of  the  Iranian  life  style  always  bothered   me.  Not  because  it  was  not  true,  but  because  it  completely  ignored  an  entirely  different  face  of  life  and  energy,   which  drives  and  energizes  the  youth  of  Iran.  My  aim  was  to  show  that  my  culture  is  cool  enough  to  be   implemented  in  an  everyday  fashion  and  in  a  city  like  New  York.  

ST:  When  did  you  first  start  using  Persian  calligraphy  in  your  design  work?  Can  you  describe  how  that  came   about?   NB:  From  the  very  beginning,  I  collaged  writings  that  I  found  in  old  manu-­‐  scripts  and  some  new  ones  that  I   commissioned  calligraphers  to  write  and  mixed  them  until  they  were  completely  illegible.  It  was  about  a  form   and  shape  not  a  meaning  of  a  passage.  This  was  so  that  everyone  can  connect  to  it.   ST:  The  Persian  alphabet  was  adapted  from  the  Arabic  alphabet,  and  four  extra  letters  added.  And  there  at  least   six  genres  of  calligraphy.  Could  you  explain  which  one  do  you  use,  and  why?   NB:  FromthesixgenresthatyouarereferringtoIusedSolsfewtimesbutsincethe  technique  I  employ  is  transformation   of  calligraphy  into  an  overall  aesthetic  form,  Sols  did  not  give  me  the  result  I  was  looking  for.  In  the  seventh   century  when  ‘Naskh’  and  ‘Reghah’  were  merged  into  ‘Ta'liq’  and  later  on  into  Nas-­‐  taliq  in  the  fourteenth   century  and  the  result  remained  predominantly  Persian!  Nastaliq  is  all  I  use  now.  Nastaliq  is  playful;  its  curves   are  magically  beautiful;  they  merge  into  each  other  and  create  a  gripping  shape  yet  keep  its  DNA  intact.   ST:  Are  any  of  the  images  sacred  political  or  both,  if  so  which  ones?   NB:  Sacredisabroadterm.WhatIcreateendsupbeingsacredformyselfatleast,  but  I  do  not  use  any  religious  or   political  connotation  or  reference  in  any  of   my  work.   Design,  ethics  and  the  designer  41   ST:  You  utilise  other  images  and  text  in  scarves  and  t-­‐shirts;  which  appear  to  have  artistic,  cultural  and  political   significance.  Could  you  explain  how  you  came  to  use  the  poetry,  quotes,  newspaper  articles/cuttings?   NB:  Most  of  what  I  use  has  social  and  or  artistic  significance.  I  grew  up  [in  Iran]  during  the  Iran/Iraq  War;  war   had  an  undeniable  effect  in  my  growing  up.  I  have  designed  scarves  that  have  quotes  from  the  newspapers  of  the   time  about  war!  I  still  get  very  emotional  when  I  recall  the  sacrifices  everyone  made  regardless  of  their  political   orientation  during  the  war.  I  use  money  [banknotes]  in  some  of  my  scarves,  because  Iranian  currency  is  what   social  life  is  depending  on.  At  times  it  has  been  the  topic  of  the  mass  and  I  mix  it  with  other  elements  to  keep  the   aesthetic  values  of  it  as  the  most  important  part  of  the  process.   ST:  How  would  you  describe  your  market?   NB:  My  market  changes  from  region  to  region.  In  USA,  New  York  is  the  stron-­‐   gest  and  young  fashionistas  are  the  main  shoppers.  In  UK  and  Paris  there  is  a  mix  of  Persians,  Arabs  and  the   younger  crowd.  In  Canada  it  is  mostly  Persians  and  in  Middle  East  it  is  mostly  Arabs.   ST:  How  do  the  general  public  respond  to  them?  Has  that  changed  at  all?  NB:  So  far  we  had  an  exceptional   support  from  our  fans  and  supporters.  Something  that  I  could  never  dream  about.  Throughout  the  times  the   demand  has  shifted  from  one  product  to  another  but  yet  enjoying  the   same  concept.   ST:  How  would  you  feel  about  non-­‐Persian  designers  using  Persian  calligraphy   without  understanding?   NB:  Great  designers  like  Karl  Lagerfeld  and  Azzedine  Alaïa  made  an  attempt   much  before  me  to  implement  this  beautiful  calligraphy  into  their  amazing  designs.  In  my  opinion  two  waves   were  working  against  them  and  against  this  fusion  being  successful.  One  the  world  was  not  ready  for  it,  and   second  and  most  important  the  sensitivity  and  knowledge  of  usage  was  missing.   ST:  You  have  generously  given  permission  for  the  use  of  the  image  of  the  men’s  ‘Black  Pledge’  t-­‐shirt;  can  you   explain  what  it  says  and  its  sig-­‐  nificance  if  any?   NB:  It’s  the  only  design  in  which  I  have  used  Sols.  It’s  popular  among  our  Arab  clients  and  it’s  very,  very,  bold  and   daring.  But  there  is  a  soft  and  beautiful  poem  of  Rumi  resting  inside  those  harsh  and  bold  lines.  My  intention  was   to  create  this  contrast,  Sols  is  very  violent  and  here  it  has  been  used  to  write  a  very  spi