As a young girl, there was nothing more I wanted than a crossbody messenger bag. The casual, adventurous persona it seemed to hold within its linings enticed me, cooly promising its veil to whoever wore it –– me. Then, in the fall of my seventh grade, I became totally enamored with Kanken backpacks, leaving my dream satchel thoughtlessly in the dust after entertaining its fantasy with such dedication. High school found me in the grips of Fossil, nursing an addiction to the brand. I find it difficult to explain the fanciful nature of my obsessions, my fickle gaze and aesthetic convictions, but have attempted here to recover the hidden influences that are concealed by the desires they produce in fashion-forward individuals.

From fast fashion to economic and social ideologies, there are many factors which produce a desire to follow certain trends as a means of personal, aesthetic expression. As an individual, the urge to display certain archetypal traits or own certain coveted pieces is instinctual but, at the same time, can be understood differently by others. For example, I have apparently jumped onto every trend since I gained consciousness, as displayed by my proclivity for Kanken bags during the “art hoe” era of the late 2010s. At the same time, I consider my style to be very authentic to myself, and am very meticulous about my self-expression.

Trends and Performance

Within the complex identity politics of the fashion world, seeping into notions of lifestyle and aesthetics, the word performative is recurrently introduced, asserted, and questioned. Immediately, it brings to mind the issue of authenticity, resulting from a hyper-consciousness of performance by a collective which both participates in and consumes fashion media. The popular phrase “performative male” flatly describes someone who regularly embodies trendy behaviors whether it be in lifestyle or appearance. Despite its humorous connotation, it reveals an awareness and apprehensiveness towards those who are able to afford the tenets of the culture, who are often socially-detached and profit from their image. 

In short, the term “performance” is used in reference to popular aesthetics as a way to criticize the authenticity of participants’ expression — condemning them as simulacra of an unattainable “true” version of an aesthetic or way of being, rather than accepting them as manifestations of an amorphous cultural ideal. 

Los Angeles lies at the heart of this discourse, and long has been considered “fake” in many ways. Even before influencers began relocating to NYC complaining about the atmosphere of artifice in the city, Eve Babitz wrote about feeling alienated by the stifling diet culture and small conversations. Today, Silverlake has gone from a relatively anonymous neighborhood to a well-recognized location that foregrounds Rachel Sennot’s I Love LA and is burdened by a cultural weight. Being students at UCLA, thus, the tension between the symbolic, culturally ingrained, and mundane experiences of reality and identity is something that is experienced very frequently.

Holy Grail Items

One of the key components of this culture, prevalent in anyone ranging from performative wanna-be to clean-girls to proponents of indie sleaze, is the coveted-ness of items that have become viewed as necessary to the performance of aesthetics.

Alo’s sets grace the Instagrams of fitness influencers, who in turn are permitted to enjoy its exclusive gym and classes. Meanwhile, the old queen of athleisure, Lululemon, is only called for by hunters of the esoteric retro scuba zip up. At the same time, there is a thirst for a curated yet casual 2010’s aesthetic, think Addison Rae’s Headphones On music video, fed by Tank Air, Intimissimi, and American Apparel’s basics — the list goes on. In my case, the fatal discovery of the Chloe “Paddington” bag a couple of years ago has cost me many hours on eBay and Poshmark to this very day...

From time to money, sourcing each of these items is costly in a variety of forms, requiring an investment that becomes implicit within the symbolic nature of clothing.

Consequently, the phenomenon of accessibility as an indicator of authenticity comes into light. The more difficult or strenuous it is to get one’s hands on an item, the more indicative it is of a person’s true commitment to their image. In this way, owning symbolic pieces is a means to communicate authenticity through the language of tokens. To have these communicable goods is to fill in the lines on the template of a desirable cultural archetype, fleshing them out to surpass the fine line between what is perceived as imitation and embodiment. 

“Shallowness”

When faced by the exclusivity of prevalent modes of self expression (those tantalized on TikTok and replicated by larger corporate retailers), the commodification and codification of image is so striking that one can’t help but desire for an explanation of this hyper-demarcated fashion landscape. 

Returning to the premise of performativity, the origins of the modern, in the context of fashion, the concept of “inauthenticity” begs exploration. What substantiated this collective desire for verification of image, and hyper-consciousness of identity as a performance instead of as an effect of existence? 

Fast Fashion and Fashion Archetypes

A notable event in the fashion landscape was the rise of fast fashion, something which was vaguely present in 90s mall culture and then progressed over time. The late 2010s were fertile grounds for the industry, with new technologies in manufacturing and marketing that could cater to and perform the needs of a demanding public alongside the rise of niche memes. Apps like Pinterest provided accessible inspiration and associated items by algorithmic aesthetics, allowing users to curate their images and explore a wide variety of popular styles.  That, in tandem with the manufacturing aspect, facilitated the adoption of archetypal aesthetic identities, bridging the gap between cultural or personal attire and products or staples of a given “uniform.” 

Later on, during the COVID quarantine, TikTok played a substantial role in the ways in which people communicated and formed communities, solidifying the necessity to display one’s identity through clothing and visuality in order to replicate the closeness of physical proximity. 

Niche algorithmic experiences such as alt-TikTok and its resulting “cores” relied on labels to easily encompass lifestyles and identity. For example, “fairycore” with its mossy, drapey, excessive use of toadstools and corsets that became a culturally recognizable yet amorphous interpretation of what a “fairy” is. The line between costume, fantasy, and casual dress was blurred as large numbers of people were able to easily access otherwise unique items of clothing and therefore replicate “cores” for themselves.  Fast fashion played an incredibly pivotal role in easily providing replicas of unique pieces coveted by niche communities, it facilitated the uniformity of these aesthetics leading to a growing immediacy of fashion-based identity formulation.

Disillusionment

The allure of fast fashion has faded and left a distaste in the minds of conscious shoppers, continuing the popularity of thrifting which emerged in the late 2010s, and bringing its consignment-based subculture into the mainstream — think Balenciaga “city bags,” vintage Miu Miu, holy-grail 2000s runway pieces. Instead of roaming contemporary clothing landscapes, there is a sense of unfulfillment that necessitates the extraordinary hunt for items that are considered to be of quality and artistry. 

Being subjected to an influx of rapidly-produced clothing, self expression has begun to covet specificity and retrospectiveness which has created a larger number of designer names casually in circulation, and a fine line between modern and traditional status signifiers exists in tandem with each other. In a way, the modern fashion landscape, in all its “inauthenticity" can be viewed as progressive through the ways that people are able to achieve stylistic goals through very intentional evocations of certain images; on the other hand, it can be viewed as wealthy people shallowly adopting traditionally “lower class” aesthetics and practices such as second hand shopping in a social environment where it is very normalized. 

Ultimately, the current stylistic climate is complexly shaped by both its ancestral trends, a desire for individuality, and a class dynamic that is ambiguous but undeniable in relation to the accessibility of style.