The Empire of Fashion: Dressing Modern Democracy (review)

Book Reviews Gilles Lipovetsky. The Empire of Fashion: Dressing Modern Democracy. Trans. Catherine Porter. Princeton, NJ: Princeton UP, 1994. Pp. χ + 276. $24.95. In The Empire of Fashion, French philosopher Gilles Lipovetsky provocatively places the individual and individualism at the center of his interpretive history of the past 600 years of fashion in the West: the distinctive modern fashion system, which began to emerge in the late middle ages, has been driven, Lipovetsky argues, not merely by conspicuous consumption and social distinction, as sociologists from Thorstein Veblen to Pierre Bourdieu have argued, but by a celebration of the individual and an aesthetic of novelty, frivolity and subjectivity. Modern consumer culture, according to Lipovetsky, is not the nightmare of totalitarian discipline suggested by Marxist and Foucauldian critics alike but a system in which individuals still maintain enough autonomy to "opt out." Far from enslaving us, Lipovetsky argues, "the age of fashion remains the major factor in the process that has drawn men and women collectively away from obscurantism and fanaticism, has instituted an open public space and shaped a more lawful, more mature, more skeptical humanity" (12). In short, the modern fashion system is the very foundation of modern democracy. The first section of the book, "The Enchantment of Appearances," charts the ways in which the modern fashion system emerged, beginning with the first celebrations of novelty by the upper classes of the fourteenth century, continuing through the birth of haute couture in the nineteenth, and climaxing with the "open fashion system" which emerged with the mini-skirt in the 1960s. The second section of the book, "Consummate Fashion," considers how this predilection for novelty—witnessed today not only in our clothing but in our media, politics and society at large—has created communities capable of democratic citizenship. As Lipovetsky argues, "fashion contributes to a more rational edification of society because it socializes human beings to change and prepares them for perpetual recycling" (149). In an open fashion society in which seemingly anything—from vintage dresses to designer jeans—is accepted, Lipovetsky optimistically asserts, "Social divisions are no longer explosive; they function like fashion, in a non-dramatic mode of marginal differences. Even radically antithetical viewpoints no longer give rise to inhibiting exclusions " (236). Although Lipovetsky offers a paean to modern individualism and to fashion culture, he concludes with a disturbing caution: although fashion may help create more functional social systems and democracies, at the personal, subjective level "it generates greater malaise in living. The lesson is a harsh one: the progress of enlightenment and the progress of happiness do not go hand in hand. The euphoria of fashion has its counterparts in dereliction, depression, and existential anguish" (241). Although good for society, the narcissism fostered by fashion may well be disastrous for individuals. Lipovetsky provides an engaging and important history of fashion and politics that deserves to be read by a broad audience. His bold arguments will provide students of consumer , mass, and political culture with much to ponder and debate concerning the role of human agency and the seductive power of material goods in the creation of liberal societies. Although many readers will fundamentally reject Lipovetsky's arguments about fashion and democracy, few will disagree that Lipovetsky's book marks a major watershed in both political and fashion history for the questions it asks about the social meaning of dress and the political stakes of fashion. Jennifer M. Jones Rutgers University VOL. XXXVII, NO. 1 109 ...