How many times have you seen handbags that reminded you of Hermes’ Kelly or Birkin? Countless, right? Then, perhaps you’ve also noticed that they weren’t counterfeit bags, but rather models from well-known brands that have incorporated very similar bags into their collections, resembling the aforementioned models. They were imitations.
Well, maybe you’ve noticed it, but it doesn’t just happen with Hermes bags. There are garments, bags, or jewelry that are iconic and coveted by many, but they’re not always within reach. That’s why some companies reproduce them, perhaps making some modifications (often the material itself isn’t up to par with the original, sometimes it’s simply the price), but essentially copying successful models from other fashion houses. Surprisingly, this practice is accepted.
Fashion imitations: Crocs and Birkenstock
Let’s admit it, they’re ugly, yet people love them. They’re so beloved that even other brands now draw inspiration from their unattractive design. After all, it’s not uncommon for ugly fashion to become objects of adoration by fashionistas. And indeed, Crocs and Birkenstock have become subjects of imitation or, to put it more elegantly, inspiration.
Crocs have even inspired high fashion (see the collaboration with Balenciaga), while “birks” (a affectionate term used by enthusiasts) have become extremely expensive, hence imitated by other brands (I recently stumbled upon models from Scholl and Camper inspired by the world’s most famous sandals).
The question is: so what?
Is it good or bad that brands openly and shamelessly “draw inspiration” from models of many iconic fashion houses?
First of all, what is striking is that there is now a segment of consumers who don’t really care. Or they naturally accept that some products are imitations of more well-known and admired models. Not to mention, for example, the cultural appropriation that fashion champions although it’s natural to wonder how fashion can be creative if it doesn’t draw from other cultures, decontextualizing cultural symbols of any kind and origin.
The feverish desire to have certain fetishes is such that anything goes, even companies copying. Others make it a matter of money and cost, but on this, one can always argue that no one forces us to buy anything and fill our closets with garments that we’ll wear for a short while before burying them in a remote corner of the wardrobe or even in some garbage bag.
Obviously, however, the ethical element should immediately catch the eye. Assuming that our brains are bombarded and interconnected nowadays, so it’s not strange that we might think the same things, in fact, when a garment or accessory is already well-known and recognized worldwide, if some company “draws inspiration”, this should raise some alarm. Instead, it all goes under the radar, showing how the creative side that fashion companies pretend to seek isn’t actually so appreciated in the end.
Let’s say that copying gives a cultural portrait of those who wear the copy, even if it’s not counterfeit. The inability to appreciate the creative work of a designer or brand, the lack of knowledge of aesthetic codes, history, the language of a fashion or luxury brand, and much more.
In short, even though the “bubble-up theory” has been talked about for a long time, one cannot fail to notice that the old “trickle-down” theory is still extremely relevant. Dividing our society on one side, the alphas, and on the other, the followers.
(by Viviana Musumeci founder of Gaiazoe.life, the blogzine dedicated to sustainable lifestyle)