The Evolution of Fast Fashion

by C James, Year 10

The Evolution of Fast Fashion

Picture yourself as a five-yearold child, in a primitive squatter settlement, in Nekemte Town, Eastern Ethiopia. Barren vachellia abyssinica bark comprises a bedroom wall, mahogany dust, fine grey pebbles, and a frayed “biridi libisi,” for a bed. Torturous, sixteen-hour shifts are standard, for as little as 3p per hour, to feed your four siblings: Yonas, 3, Amadi, 4, and Kofi, 7 who come to work with you. It’s a scorching 38C. Your “habesha kemis” wrings with sweat and the stench of toxic chemicals, dyes and bodily fluids never subsides. You’re lucky to return home without a bruise. But this remains the only option. For 3p an hour, so Yonas will get his portion of Shiro de Kibbe.

Fast Fashion: it is characterised as a highly-profitable business model, based on replicating ‘catwalk’ trends and highfashion designs, and mass-producing them at a low cost. And it’s been ripping through Europe’s streets uncontrollably – criminally, but discreetly. This is nothing new: Fast Fashion in the UK has its origins deep-rooted in the mid-19th century, gaining speed exponentially after the Industrial Revolution, and introducing new, industrial textile machines, and bulk-clothing.

But the game-changer? First introduced in 1846 to decrease manual sewing labour in factories, it’s a given these days. The sewing machine catalysed a dramatic fall in the price of clothing, and an increase in the sale of manufactured clothing… merely a foreshadow of the ongoing environmental catastrophe almost 200 years later. Even the term “sweatshop” has ancient ancestry, used to refer to a group of lowly-paid employees in small workshops, to whom certain aspects of production were outsourced in the 19th century, called “sweaters.” This novel practice continued in the early 20th century, but only marginally – by today’s standards anyway. Many affluent, middle-class citizens employed a dressmaker, whilst poorer, lower class women still made many garments themselves, hence much of the sewing work was completed at home, or in small workshops, until the approach of World War II. continued → Environmental Evolution

World War II brought fabric restrictions and more functional clothing styles, that, rather out of necessity than choice, forced an increase in standardised production of all clothing, which the middleclass market became accustomed to, continuing to purchase cheaper, mass-produced clothing even after the war, that essentially planted the exponential growth of this trend in the 1960s. It’s no surprise that retailers had to immediately source a method of response to the sheer demand for affordable, fashionable produce, as old trends faded. In other words, when the “Made in China” label became customary, when dozens of European and American fashion businesses, namely Primark, H&M, Zara and the Arcadia group - saved millions by opening textile mills around the world: China, Bangladesh, India, Indonesia, the Philippines, Vietnam… Nekemte Town, where today, collectively over 250 million children walk in Yonas’ broken sandals, in the same “habesha kemis” for 0.0174 Ethiopian Birr an hour.

It’s a term dreaded by most fashiongiant CEOs, as demonstrated by Phil Knight, Nike CEO and founder, whose refusal to unpick atrocious allegations of child labour in Third World countries sparked criticism of the brand. Considering for every £1 profit Nike generates, approximately only 0.5p will fall into Yonas’ hands – if that. So, it’s a wonder how convincing a one-liner really is at the bottom of Nike’s website about ethicality.

Here’s why we cannot pause the evolution of fashion here: The Fast Fashion industry generates a staggering 80 billion cheap, poor quality, mass-produced garments per year - a 400% increase than a mere 20 years ago – averaging at 10 garments per person per year. And, according to the clothes waste charity “TRAID,” each garment is only worn an average of 10 times. This continual cycle of disposal is fuelled by the knowledge of a new trend rapidly replacing the one the previous year, hence, there is a lack of incentive to take care of these older clothes. And you can guess where they end up. Most garments end up in landfill sites, or are incinerated – taking 200 years to decompose.

There are other issues too. Among energy consumption, and toxic waste water – the latter of which is currently threatening 1 in 3 people’s access to safe water worldwide, as well as the abhorrent human rights issues lying behind each loose thread. But the point of this article is to suggest an alternative, by looking at a path already walked, and a path that is having appalling consequences.

There are ways out. Fair Trade Fashion, for instance, is an option. Of course, the hefty cost is an immediate let-down and contradicts the cheap, appealing lure of Fast Fashion. The question, ultimately, is not why is this good, but why is it better? And here comes the power of a few extra pounds: structure, policy, livelihood. Yes, it is expensive, but yes, the superior quality and longevity of sustainably-sourced, low-impact fabric is a major advantage, coupled with a guaranteed wage that suitably reflects a manageable workload, completed in safe, harassment-free conditions, without the use of forced-labour or miners. And to answer the question, it should be emphasised the value of the human being, whose existence and well-being are at the core of these organisations’ ethics and objectives, not the dollar sign on the ripped white label.

Consequently, this article has demonstrated that it is largely – but not all – a matter of evolution – of the economy, of style, of production, and of ease, speed and convenience. And this cannot stop here, for the sake of tomorrow’s generations who work to satisfy today’s demands, behind stiff closed doors. The question is, will we be able to evolve, as a society, to appreciate the social, economic and environmental damage that an insatiable craving for more is doing? Or will we evolve, to continue to forget, or take advantage of what other’s risk their lives doing, for our own pleasure?

Evolution is a process, evolution is continuous, but firstly – for how long are we prepared to sit on what we know, and secondly, what are we or you – going to do to evolve our habits and who for? For the environment’s sake, for the quality or the dollar sign? Or for human life, for the three-year-old, so his portion of Shiro de Kibbe won’t run low tonight.