Political Theater and Guerrilla Accessorizing: Adornment as a Method of Political Communication

Political Theater and Guerrilla Accessorizing: Adornment as a Method of Political Communication

Rebecca Schena HPSS Research Seminar May 17, 2019

1

Table of Contents Section I:​ Introduction

2

Section II:​ Symbolic Communication

5

A. Background of Symbolic Communication B. Symbolic Construction of Community C. Symbols in Politics Section III:​ Adornment and Communication

10

A. Adornment as a Method of Communication B. Private, Personal, Public, and Publicized C. Adornment and Identity Section IV:​ Adornment as Political Communication

15

A. Two Ways of Operating B. Political Theater C. Guerrilla Accessorizing Section V:​ Historical Examples

17

A. Political Theater a. Conforming b. Sending a Message c. Causing Public Scandal d. Imposing on Citizens B. Guerrilla Accessorizing a. Blatant Statements b. Hidden Statements c. Coded Statements d. Performative Activism Section VI: ​Conclusion

29

2

I.

Introduction

Before we even open our mouths to engage in discourse, our social interactions are mediated and altered by our appearances. Beyond the frequently studied physical categories of race, sex, and age, our adorned appearances communicate our identities before we ever exchange language.1 Often dismissed as culturally irrelevant or shallow, accessories provide us with the symbolic means to manipulate our perceived identities and to share our political positions, values, and experiences with those around us. Jewelry and other objects of adornment are unencumbered by the demands we place on clothing: to cover, physically protect, warm, or maintain cleanliness.2 They are unique in that their ​primary​ function is to serve as social equipment or identifying symbols.

Throughout political and social history, adornment has demonstrated its ability to encourage discourse, display identity, unify communities, and project a public or publicized image of the self. Thus, in this essay, I will argue for the potential for dress — particularly non-clothing adornment — to serve as a nonverbal symbolic communicator that assists in the transmission of personal and group identity. I will demonstrate how accessorizing supports various types of political costuming and image-making,3 and how such theatricalization is used in the political sphere to either enforce or demolish socio-political structures.4 This paper will begin with a discussion of the role of symbols in communication and how communication — whether verbal, written, or image-based — relies on our ability to substitute objects through metaphor. While the ability to understand symbolism is universal, our understanding of specific symbols and symbolic languages is contingent on our culture. Thus, symbols are used to construct and enforce community boundaries, where the ingroup and outgroup are separated by their different understandings of a set of symbols.5 Propaganda posters will serve as the primary example of how symbolic imagery helps to construct political parties and ideological groups.6 Such propagandistic imagery capitalizes on confirmation bias and our tendency towards ideological homogeneity to increase positive associations between politicians and their constituents.7 Next, I will expand the symbolic construction of community to encompass the identity-projecting properties of symbolic dress and adornment. Mary Roach argues that in order to engage in productive discourse, we must first be able to “identify” the person with whom we are hoping to communicate.8 Then, we can understand how their position in the world may be impacting their understanding of our message, and adjust our message accordingly. Even if ​Roach, Mary Ellen, Joanne Bubolz Eicher, and Kim K.P. Johnson, eds. ​Dress and Identity. N ​ ew York, NY: Fairchild Publications, 1995. 21.

2 ​Roach, Eicher, Johnson. ​Dress and Identity. ​10-11.

3 Finkelstein, Joanne. ​The Art of Self Invention: Image and Identity in Popular Visual Culture​. London, UK: I.B. Tauris, 2007. 2.

4 Parkins, Wendy, ed. ​Fashioning the Body Politic​. New York, NY: Berg, 2002. 3.

5 ​Cohen, Anthony P. ​The Symbolic Construction of Community​. Edited by Peter Hamilton. Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2001. 15.

6 Holtz-Bacha, Christina, and Bengt Johansson, eds. ​Election Posters around the Globe: Political Campaigning in Public Space​. Cham, Switzerland: Springer, 2017.​ 7.

7 Huckfelt, Robert, and John Sprague. ​Citizens, Politics, and Social Communication.​ Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1995. 124.

8 Roach, Eicher, Johnson. ​Dress and Identity. ​21.

1

3

unintentional, the first way we identify someone is often through their appearance, both natural and augmented. Thus, accessories and dress are communicative because of their placement between the internal and external self, symbolizing the boundaries between the private, personal, public, and publicized.9 Adornment acts as a walking billboard and a token of membership, donned and removed in accordance with the self we wish to project into the social world.

After separately discussing the importance of symbols in the political sphere and in personal identity, the majority of this paper will focus on synthesizing these two areas in order to argue that personal adornment plays an active role in both the reinforcement and dismantling of political structures.10 The first arena I will analyze in which the world of adornment and politics collide is that of the “political theater”: the world of theatricalized politicians and the political media circus.11 An array of historical examples — such as Madeleine Albright’s usage of political brooches,12 the overwhelming prevalence of American flag pins, and the Nazi Party’s forcible usage of identifying patches — will demonstrate the ways in which adornment is used in the political theater to encourage ideological conformity, communicate a message, transmit a publicized identity, or directly infringe on the rights of citizens by enforcing socio-political hierarchies.13 The second arena is that of political activism and “guerrilla accessorizing,” where citizens leverage adornment as a method of opposing harmful political structures. In this context, I liken adornment to the bold “night discourse” of activist posters, but with the unique ability to move through space and to directly encourage discourse.14 I will use historical examples such as the British Suffragette movement’s usage of feminine clothing and color-coded badges; hidden political buttons and patches sewn inside the clothing of women in communist China, 1840s German students, and Polish protestors under martial law; and the modern performance of the “pussyhat,” to demonstrate the problems, power, and progress that can come with guerrilla accessorizing.15 Through this theoretical and applied discussion of adornment in politics, I will demonstrate that adornment and accessories are not, in fact, reserved for the making of shallow statements or braggadocious displays of wealth. In contrast, adornment can be understood as a unique group of communicative symbols, accessible to every class and identity group in its various forms, to be used in the creation of communities and the dismantling of oppressive socio-political systems.

Nooter Roberts, Mary. "Inscribing Identity: The Body." In ​Inscribing Meaning: Writing and Graphic Systems in African Art​, by Christine Mullen Kreamer and Sarah Adams, 55-69. Washington, DC: Smithsonian, 2007. 55.

10 Prokopovich, L.V. “ИССЛЕДОВАНИЕ КОСТЮМНЫХ УКРАШЕНИЙ И АКСЕССУАРОВ КАК СРЕДСТВ КОММУНИКАЦИИ В ПОЛИТИЧЕСКОМ «ТЕАТРЕ»” [Study of Jewelry and Accessories as a Means of Communication in a Political “Theater”]. Science Rise, no. 42 (2018): 16-19.

11 Rai, Shirin M., and Janelle Reinelt, eds. ​The Grammar of Politics and Performance.​ Abingdon, UK: Routledge, 2014.

12 Albright, Madeleine. Read My Pins: Stories from a Diplomat's Jewel Box. New York, NY: Harper Collins, 2009.

13 Friedman, Vanessa. "It's 2018: You Can Run for Office and Not Wear a Pantsuit." New York Times (New York, NY), June 21, 2018.

14 ​Jacobs, Karrie, and Steven Heller. ​Angry Graphics: Protest Posters of the Reagan/Bush Era​. Salt Lake City, UT: Peregrine Smith Books, 1992. 8.

15 Roach, Eicher, Johnson. ​Dress and Identity. ​80-81.

9

4

II.

Symbolic Communication

A.

Background of Symbolic Communication

The ability to comprehend and manipulate symbols underlies all systems of syntactic language and most systems of communication.16 At its basis, the ability to understand symbolism (i.e. the substitution of one concept for another within a set of syntactic rules) divides lingual from non-lingual communities. Pierce differentiates three types of representations used to classify and understand the world: icons, indices, and symbols.17 Icons are representations of an object that mimic the appearance of an object, such as the retinal image of a horse.18 Indices are the categorization of a set of objects which are understood as similar enough to warrant being categorized together, such as the idea of a “horse” as a category of like objects. Symbols, on the other hand, require a step beyond the basic perception and categorization of objects into indices.

19 The understanding of symbols requires two steps: 1) the substitution of one object for another and 2) the combination of the substituted object (the symbol) with other symbols to create meaning. Symbolic understanding is required for a community to make the leap from direct, signal-based communication to more advanced symbolic communication and language.20 Symbols leave the external world of ​being​ and enter the constructed human world of ​meaning.21 While the most common example of a basic symbol is a word — which can be combined with other words according to rules of syntax to create symbolic meaning — in contemporary societies, symbols of all sorts constantly surround us, creating and transmitting meaning. Beyond symbolic communication through written language, symbols take the form of spoken language, images, logos, objects, and even people themselves who serve as symbolic figureheads for larger groups.

Fundamentally, symbolic communication is the “transaction of meanings.”22 This transaction requires that the sender makes an effort to share meaning with the receiver such that their original meaning is understood.23 Whenever symbolic communication occurs, the threat of miscommunication is present, as the receiver's understanding of a communicated message is based on their knowledge of the world, their perception of the sender, and their understanding of the symbols used. While the ability to understand symbolism is universal among humans, the understanding of specific symbols is dependent on culture, experiences, and historical context. In a 2015 study, participants from various geographic locations were shown an image of a shadow beneath a tree and were asked to represent how this image made them feel by selecting an icon of a smiling or frowning face.24 Those from warmer climates chose the smiling icon, as to them the image of a shadow represented a pleasant respite from the scorching sun. Those from colder ​Whitney, Elwood, ed. ​Symbology.​ New York, NY: Hastings House, 1960. 21. ​Cangelosi, Angelo. "Evolution of Communication and Language Using Signals, Symbols, and Words." ​IEEE Transactions in Evolution Computation​ 5 (2001): 93.

18 ​Cangelosi. "Evolution of Communication.” 93.

19 Ibid. 93.

20 ​Chesebro, James W., and Dale A. Bertelsen. ​Analyzing Media: Communication Technologies as Symbolic and Cognitive Systems​. New York, NY: Guilford Press, 1996. ​9.

21 Chesebro and ​Bertelsen. ​Analyzing Media. 9​ .

22 Cohen. ​The Symbolic Construction of Community.​ 17.

23 Bergstrom, Bo. ​Essentials of Visual Communication​. London, UK: Laurence King Publishing, 2008. 30.

24 ​Pater, Ruben. ​The Politics of Design​. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: BIS Publishers, 2016. 145.

16 17

5

climates, on the other hand, chose the frowning face. Although people from all cultures recognized the image as having ​a​ symbolic meaning, the ​specific​ meaning that they associated with it was dependent on personal experience. Due to this difference in perception of symbols, communicated messages at all levels — interpersonal, public, and media-based — must be carefully formulated to account for the identity and symbolic repertoire of their intended receiver.

Mead theorizes that our ability to communicate effectively, and to avoid miscommunication in the face of different experiences, is dependent on the process of “identification.”25 The efficacy of symbolic communication relies on the similarity of all parties’ understanding of the symbolic message. In other words, “meaning is present in communication when the responses that are symbolically mobilized only more or less coincide.”26 If the symbolic meaning portrayed by the sender is entirely outside of the receiver's arsenal, complete miscommunication will occur and the receiver will be left with utter nonsense. Total miscommunication will always occur between two people speaking languages utterly unknown to each other. However, miscommunication can still occur between those with similar symbolic repertoires if they do not take into account the social experiences of their partner. In the contemporary American political sphere, such communication failure could occur when discussing a “Make America Great Again” (MAGA) hat if the sender of the communication does not account for the political leanings of their receiver. While the MAGA hat may be a recognizable symbol for both partners, their experiences may cause them to associate different meanings with the symbolic object.

Thus, Mead argues, symbolic communication requires the sender to identify and characterize their receiver: to categorize them according to their experiences and social position.

While identification relies on the same social categorization process that underlies negative stereotyping, identification is necessary in order to empathize with communicative partners.

Initial verbal communication — where the communicative partners speak tentatively at first in order to learn about each other — aids identification. However, identification often begins far before either party makes an explicit attempt to communicate verbally or otherwise. This pre-communicative identification is based on bodily characteristics (eg. perceived race, sex, age) as well as our chosen appearance, constructed through dress, cosmetics, and — important to my line of inquiry — adornment.

B.

Symbolic Construction of Community

Before discussing the roles that symbols play within politics or adornment, it is first necessary to address a theory presented by Anthony P. Cohen in​ The Symbolic Construction of Community.27 T ​ he theory of the symbolic construction of community proposes that differences in symbolic understanding provide the basis for the enforcement of social community boundaries.

Generally, community groups are defined by the set of similarities shared by the ingroup and differences that separate them from the outgroup. Although the most readily apparent communities, such as a neighborhood or ethnic group, may be defined by important shared experiences, communities may be defined by far less consequential similarities. A small gesture Roach, Eicher, Johnson. ​Dress and Identity. ​21.

Ibid. 21.

27 Cohen. ​The Symbolic Construction of Community.​ 25 26

6

such as wearing the same musician's T-shirt may be enough to create a feeling of communion between people. Communities may also be defined by particular experiences they have in common which are not experienced by the outgroup, such as a shared experience of discrimination. Although many community boundaries are enforced by geographic location or government statutes, the meanings we associate with objects and images also serve to unite some and divide others.

For example, although the words “justice, goodness, patriotism, duty, love, peace” hold meaning for all English-speakers, the exact meanings we associate with these concepts may be broad in scope.28 My understanding of justice may be different from yours, just as your understanding of patriotism may be different from mine. These differences in understanding form symbolic boundaries, where communities are grouped together by their understandings of symbols. The MAGA hat is an illustrative example of this community construction, as one’s understanding of this object is based on one’s political values. To a person with liberal leanings, the MAGA hat is a symbol of racism, xenophobia, and blatant corruption. To a conservative, the MAGA hat is a symbol of a moral societal structure to which America ought to return.

Although potent political symbols such as the contemporary MAGA hat may divide communities cleanly, with only a few popular meanings associated with the object, symbols are rarely set in stone or so divisive. Symbols are moldable, malleable, and adaptable. They are a method of ​creating​ meaning as much as they are a method of sharing it. For instance, many groups may feel comfortable marching under the icon of a peace sign as a symbol of their political and social values. However, “Were they to debate among themselves the merits of unilateralism as opposed to multilateralism; the advisability of one kind of campaigning strategy as opposed to another; their attitude towards NATO or to the Soviet bloc; the importance of Christianity, pacifism or socialism to their support for nuclear disarmament, the simple symbol would become revealed as an effective, but very superficial gloss upon an enormous variety of opinion.”29 Although this variety of conflicting opinions within one seemingly symbolically constructed community may appear to prove symbolic boundaries weak, it instead demonstrates the fluidity of symbols. Each may ascribe their own beliefs to a symbol such that sub-communities may be united under a common symbol. A country’s flag serves to unite its citizens while at the same time separating them from non-citizens. Political propaganda uses symbols to unite groups by bolstering shared ingroup values and insulating the ingroup from those who do not share these values.

C.

Symbols in Politics

Democratic systems of government are dependent on the multi-directional flow of information between their representatives, media, and constituency.30 For, while monarchical and authoritarian governments depend only on the ability of their leaders to communicate with or 28

Ibid. 15.

Ibid. 18.

30 ​Lilleker, Darren G. ​Key Concepts in Political Communication.​ N.p.: Sage, 2006. Introduction.

29

7

make demands of their subjects, democracy necessitates productive and open discourse.31 In theory, citizens are able to communicate with their representatives through a variety of means: the simultaneously private and public process of voting,32 directly contacting their representatives through verbal and written means, and the symbolic actions of protest and public demonstration. Alternatively, politicians communicate to their constituents through lawmaking, direct verbal address in public speeches or statements, propagandistic messaging, and through the symbolic image they present via adornment. Amongst constituents, political information can be conveyed symbolically and literally through “informal social mechanisms: political discussions on the job or on the street, campaign buttons on a co-workers shirt, even casual remarks.”33 Although politicians and civilians alike do use logical arguments to argue their positions in the public sphere, much of the communication between these groups is instead based heavily on symbolic representation in the form of a) metaphor,34 b) aestheticized representation,35 and c) symbolic imagery. While the ideal democracy would be founded on an accurate debate of facts and figures, most political discourse more closely mimics a performance than a window of communication between minds.36 Conceptual, embodied, and image-based symbols alike are manipulated by invested parties in hopes of swaying public and political opinion. As Lilleker explains: “As news of political scandals, in-fighting within coalitions, the power of and collusion of governments with corporate interests, battled between governing and opposition parties is deemed to make politics more interesting, it becomes a spectacle. Politics, arguably, is a circus, with clowns, big beasts, lion-tamers, and high-wire acts.”37 The first type of symbolic manipulation frequently used in political arguments is metaphor. Metaphor appeals to our innate drive to create meaning through relating and substituting concepts, and it is often leveraged as a method of making effective arguments without any logical basis.38 Saying that immigrants will “​pour into and infest our country”​ or describing immigration as a “limitless flow,” a “flood of asylum seekers”, or a “tide” forms an argument against immigration by associating it with disease and moral erosion.39 Immigration is

​Habermas, Jurgen. "Political Communication in Media Society: Does Democracy Still Enjoy an Epistemic Dimension? The Impact of Normative Theory on Empirical Research." ​Communication Theory​ 16, no. 4 (November 1, 2006). ​412.

32 Huckfelt and Sprague. ​Citizens, Politics, and Social Communication.​ 4.

33 Ibid. 124.

34 ​Moir, James. "Chapter 6: Presenting Politics: Persuasion and Performance Across Genres of Political Communication." In ​Title: Analyzing Genres in Political Communication : Theory and Practice,​ edited by Piotr Cap and Urszula Okulska, 224-36. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, 2013. 229.

35 ​Lilleker. ​Key Concepts.​ Aestheticization.

36 ​Habermas. "Media Society.” 413-414.

37 Lilleker, Darren G. ​Political Communication and Cognition.​ New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014. 73.

38 Moir "Chapter 6: Presenting Politics.” 229.

39 Jacobs, Tom. "How Metaphor Can Be a Potent Tool in Fostering Anti-immigration Sentiment." ​Pacific Standard (Seattle, WA), February 1, 2019. 1.

31

8

metaphorically associated with harmful pathogens and processes, making it seem harmful itself.

This metaphor has the power to convince despite its lack of logical argument.

The aestheticization of politicians and political groups is another example of the use of symbolism within the political sphere. It occurs when the perceived image of a person or group gains more importance than their message.40 This type of symbolic representation will be discussed in-depth in the latter part of this essay since adornment plays an integral role in this aestheticized “image-making.” The aestheticization of politics manifests itself through adornment in the political sphere’s strict ​de facto​ dress code. There is an insistence that politicians wear blazers or pantsuits in formal political arenas while they don jeans and unbuttoned shirts on the campaign trail and “disaster casual” in times of natural disaster.41 The “branding” of both mainstream and grassroots movements is also prevalent. The Republican strategy of branding left-wing politicians such as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez as “Communist” is an example of language-based political branding, while Hillary Clinton’s white pantsuit worn to Donald Trump’s Inauguration is a more literal type of visual aestheticization.

Symbolic imagery is the third form of symbolic manipulation and is utilized by everyone from guerrilla activist groups to corporations and political parties. The quintessential example of such symbolic imagery is the political poster, adapted as a mass-producible, cheap, and accessible method of communication by just about every politically involved entity.42 In Holtz-Bacha and Johansson’s ​Election Posters Around the Globe, ​the authors discuss a variety of election posters from a diverse array of cultures and election periods. While they do not claim that election posters can, by themselves, make or break a campaign, they do stress the importance of posters as a method of communicating ideas with the public. Such communication is necessary to increase the perceived correlation between the values of a candidate and their constituents, thus increasing the likelihood that individuals will vote for the candidate and convince their social circle to vote similarly.43 In order to effectively convince voters that a candidate’s values align with their own, posters and advertisements must account for pre-existing schemas and the symbolic repertoires of potential voters.44 If they do not account for existing schemas, they are simply filtered out as nonsense and will not break into new or highly interdependent communities of voters. Voters seek out messaging that relates to their understanding of the world: “They are seeking representation from politicians who understand their everyday experiences and who might be most likely to create a political framework that benefits people like them; of their social class, educational level, social standing, etc. Voters might seek verbal cues, such as references to small business owners, workers, doctors, or housing tenants; or visual cues relating to where politicians chose to be and who with.”45

Lilleker. ​Key Concepts.​ Aestheticization. ​Mazzei, Patricia, and Alan Blinder. "A Hurricane's Coming, but Fear Not, the Governor Is Here. And Here. And Here." New York Times (New York, NY), October 9, 2018.

42 Holtz-Bacha and Johansson. ​Election Posters around the Globe​. 8.

43 Huckfelt and Sprague. ​Citizens, Politics, and Social Communication.​ 7.

44 Lilleker, Darren G. ​Political Communication and Cognition.​ New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014. 47.

45 Lilleker. ​Communication and Cognition​. 9.

40

41

9

In order to align with the existing symbolic language, the styles, images, and language of political posters are directly related to their cultural context. In Chile from 1993-2013, politicians of all parties used symbolic slogans46 such as “Para los nuevos tiempos” (For the new times), “Crecer con igualdad” (Growth and equality), and “Estoy contigo” (I am with you), combined with simple graphical styles.47 These slogans, in combination with simple graphics, were intended to demonstrate an awareness of the everyday struggles of the local populace. In contrast, election posters in India — where a significant portion of the voting populace is illiterate — are not typographic. Instead, they are more graphically complex and image-based: icons such as the lotus, raised hand, and clock are used to denote political parties.48 These icons are accompanied by bright national colors, creating a library of dense visual symbols that communicate effectively with voters.

In contrast to the carefully planned and executed symbolic imagery of national campaigns, posters are also frequently adopted by “guerrilla” and grassroots movements. Such guerrilla activists use subversive methods to reinterpret or denature establishment communication methods. In 1940s Germany, the White Rose, a group of student protestors, distributed posters and leaflets protesting the Nazi party. In the 1980s, Gran Fury and the SILENCE = DEATH Project protested government inaction in relation to the AIDS crisis; they posted powerfully acerbic statements on billboards and wheatpasted the pink triangle forced upon LGBT+ prisoners in Nazi Germany on the walls of the Big Apple.49 In ​Angry Graphics,​ Karie Jacobs describes this guerrilla adoption of public communication methods as “night discourse”: the bold, uncensored communication of oppressed communities, wheatpasted and tacked to the public domain under the protective cover of darkness.50 In many ways, adornment serves this same purpose of unfiltered communication and the sharing of identity. However, while posters are “materially fixated in public space and serve as one-directional external communication with a disperse population,” adornment is able to serve the same communicative function but with mobility and input from the wearer. Adornment is, in essence, a walking billboard: capable of projecting identity, sharing ideas, and unifying communities through a mobilized symbolic language.

III.

Adornment and Communication

A.

Adornment as a Method of Communication

As Mead explains in her theory on the role of “identification” in productive communication, our social interactions are mediated and altered by our appearances before verbal communication is attempted.51 Both our perceived bodily characteristics (eg. race, sex, age) and the modifications we make to our physical bodies (eg. adornment, clothing, tattoos) place us within the social categories that construct our individual identities. In the case of Scottish family tartans or the color-coded bandanas worn by members of kink subcultures, ​Rickards, Maurice, comp. ​Posters of Protest and Revolution.​ New York, NY: Walker and Company, 1970. 6.

Holtz-Bacha and Johansson. ​Election Posters around the Globe​. 84-88.

48 Ibid. 193.

49 Jacobs and Heller. ​Angry Graphics​. 11.

50 Ibid. 8.

51 Roach, Eicher, Johnson. ​Dress and Identity. ​21.

46 47

10

appearances are modified to demonstrate community membership. A pattern, bead, color, or image serves as a symbol of belonging; a wearable membership token.

Often dismissed as culturally irrelevant or shallow, accessories provide us with the symbolic means to alter our perceived identities and to share our political positions, values, and experiences with those around us. Jewelry and other objects of adornment are unencumbered by the demands we place on clothing: to cover, physically protect, warm, or maintain cleanliness.52 They are unique in that their ​primary​ function is to serve as social equipment or identifying symbols. In the case of jewelry, elaborate imagery and ornamentation are not to be dismissed with Adolf Loos-ian disdain and disregard.53 Objects of adornment — beads, necklaces, neckties, hats, bandanas, patches, sashes, buttons, brooches — are not a criminal waste of material or a mark of degeneracy. They are instead a necessary category of social tools and equipment.

As early as 70,000 to 90,000 years ago, shells were drilled and worn as beaded necklaces, to be traded and gifted. Shell beads from the spondylus (thorny oyster) were made and worn broadly from 900 BCE- 200 CE to “mark elite status” and serve as a “symbol in a complex iconography that linked up local chiefdoms and legitimized their political order.”54 These portable, wearable status symbols were not merely a shallow display of material value or worn purely for aesthetics. They were “closely linked to language and the creative genres of social communication” and served to “express social relations between time and space.”55 Although the forms of adornment may have changed through the millennia, from simple shell necklaces to the politically charged campaign pins of the modern era, their function to locate their wearer within larger social systems remains just as important. Communication through adornment is essentially universal across place and time.

This function of social location — of defining symbolic community boundaries — makes adornment communicative even in its less explicitly political forms. A wearable object need not necessarily be emblazoned with a flag emblem or a written political statement in order to serve a socio-political purpose. Adornment’s participation in the process of identification is itself a form of political communication since the action of defining a body as having a social position in relation to other bodies is inherently political. In ​The Messages We Send: Social Signals and Storytelling, G ​ .R.F Ferrari argues that the function of adornment is slightly different from explicit communication where a message is intentionally transmitted and received: “‘I don’t just want you to know’, I ‘want you to know that I want you to know’.”56 This argument does not necessarily weaken the communicative abilities of adornment. Appearance is powerful ​because​ it “operates below the level of words.”57 Adornment communicates freely without requiring intentional engagement: a wedding ring flashed in a grocery store communicates one’s marital status and a political patch on a jacket communicates one’s values without being asked.

In a world where discourse is increasingly impeded by social media algorithms and xenophobia, adornment is able to communicate where more explicit forms of discourse may fall Ibid​. 1​ 0-11.

Loos, Adolf. "Ornament und Verbrechen" [Ornament and Crime]. ​Les Cahiers d'aujourd'hui​, 1913. Digital file.

54 ​Smail, Daniel Lord, Mary C. Stiner, and Timothy Earle. "Chapter 9: Goods." N.d. Digital file. 219.

55 ​Smail, Stiner, Earle. "Chapter 9: Goods." 221.

56 Ferrari, G.R.F. ​The Messages We Send: Social Signals and Storytelling​. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2017. 2-3.

57 ​Crane, Diane. ​Fashion and Its Social Agendas: Class, Gender, and Identity in Clothing.​ Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press, 2000. 127.

52 53

11

short, allowing for the development of empathy and sharing of identity.58 Social media platforms are increasingly utilizing algorithms to drive content instead of relying upon user-driven models.

This practice alone has the potential to feed into our natural tendencies towards biased information sources. However, such algorithmic skewing of information is made even worse by models which prioritize ideology over topics of interest; pushing information that the algorithm predicts will align with a user’s ideology instead of merely topics they have shown interest in.59 With so much of our knowledge being obtained online through channels with little concern for polarization, the open communication provided by adornment may offer a possible solution for resisting systemic bias.

B. Private, Personal, Public, and Publicized Adornment’s function as a social communicator is directly related to its position on the boundaries of the human body. While clothing’s placement on the surface of the body serves a concrete function by protecting the body from the elements, shielding it from potentially harmful surroundings, and maintaining cleanliness by covering bodily orifices, non-clothing adornment’s relation to the boundaries of the body is more symbolic. A necklace does not protect against contamination of the fleshy inner body by the external world, rather it serves as a boundary-defining mechanism between the internal and external self in a social context.

In Nooter’s “Inscribing the Body”, she defines the act of communicating the internal self through marking the external self with symbolism as “inscription.” Tattooing, painting, and scarification are visceral forms of this inscription process, wherein the inscribed symbols are understood as communicating characteristics of the inner self to the outside world and traversing the boundaries between “interior/exterior, surface/orifice, totality/fragment, and public/private.”

60 However, inscription can also be performed through the placement of temporary and situation-specific adornment such as patterned fabrics and amulets. Adornment and inscriptions that are placed on highly visible portions of the body, such as the chest or in proximity to the head, are especially capable of communicating within social contexts. This is demonstrated by the volume of inscription-like adornment made to fit these portions of the body: Somali amuletic pendants, protective prayer shirts from Sierra Leone, American flag lapel pins.61 Through the lens of inscription, the body is simultaneously a contained self (a self experienced in the privacy of one’s own mind and without social relation to other bodies) and a container self (an exterior physical self that is inextricably tied to its relationships with other bodies). To inscribe the body's surface with meaningful symbols is political because “of all inscribed surfaces, the body is perhaps the most politically charged canvas for imparting meaning, for it is intrinsically linked to personhood, identity, gender, race, and class.”62 For the Yoruba of Nigeria, inscription through scarification goes beyond simply marking one’s social status or communicating, but is understood as the act of relating the interior and exterior self.

Inscriptions are capable of either concealing or revealing internal characteristics, following the

58

Dylko. "How Technology”. 389-390.

Ibid. 389-390.

60 Nooter Roberts. "Inscribing Identity." 55.

61 Ibid. 60-62.

62 Ibid. 55.

59

12

proverb: “may my inner head not spoil my outer one.”63 This ability to mask one’s internal characteristics is also inherent to American political branding through adornment, wherein one’s external image is used to mask internal values or private actions which could be viewed negatively by constituents.

In relation to political communication through adornment, it is revealing to consider more than the single private/public boundary as the boundary on which adornment places itself.

Although on an interpersonal level this dichotomy may be sufficient, when it comes to the use of adornment by politicians with a ​publicized​ image instead of merely a ​public​ one, it is necessary to further subdivide this internal/external boundary.

Thus, I propose there to be four “selves” which can be transferred and transformed through bodily inscription in the form of jewelry: the private, the personal, the public, and the publicized self. The private self exists only within one’s own body; with values, thoughts, and intentions separate from the external world. The personal self is the self revealed to one’s close interpersonal relationships, with whom one can share the broadest array of their overlapping identities. The public self is a more tailored self, where one’s seemingly incongruous or complex identities are concealed and one is made aware of their position within social webs. Finally, the publicized self arises when one is in the public eye. The publicized self is the image presented in the media or during a public address and goes beyond the simple reputation that precedes ordinary civilians. This self is often a façade and a figurehead, carefully constructed to represent something other than one’s private values, thoughts, and intentions.

C.

Adornment and Identity “To have an identity is to join with some and depart from others.”64

In our postmodern era, where sumptuary laws are often considered to be bygone frameworks of the past and such hierarchies are easily ignored by those unaffected by them, some have argued that the relationship between dress and social identity has become entirely un-fixed.65 To such theorists, the public identity produced through adornment is one’s only identity and the internal self has no inherent values to be inscribed onto the external body. Thus, adorned identity is a series of façades, unfixed to any core self, to be donned and removed with complete meaningless freedom. This identity-less self has supposedly resulted from the uncertainty produced in consumer culture, where “career trajectories, durability of relationships, and one’s place of abode have become increasingly unpredictable.”66 According to this theory, the self at all levels is a performer. Intrinsic identities cease to exist.

If this theory were correct and the adorned self was nothing more than an entirely hollow performance, communication through clothing would be impossible. One’s adorned appearance would be meaningless, and to adopt the correct uniform would become all that would be needed in order to enter into communities whose boundaries are enforced through symbolic dress. This is not the case. Dressing up as a member of a group is not the same as being a member of that 63

Ibid. 57.

Roach, Eicher, Johnson. ​Dress and Identity. ​28.

65 Negrin, Llewllyn. ​Appearance and Identity: Fashioning the Body in Postmodernity. ​New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008. 11.

66 Negrin. ​Appearance and Identity. 1​ 1.

64

13

group if one is not equipped with the same experiences and values. As David Muggleton states, “style is not simply put on for the sake of visual spectacle, it refers to the ideology of the wearer.”67 Dressing as a punk will not gain you entry into that community, nor will dressing as a “politician of the people” imbue you with the appropriate values. Nor does the community-creating power of a symbolic adornment disappear when donned in a culture that devalues it. This is the case with the wearing of natural hair and traditional braiding techniques amongst African Americans as a method of reclaiming identity in the face of western hegemony.

68

To adorn oneself is not to create an identity off of a blank slate. There is no such neutral body. Rather, to adorn oneself is to inscribe one’s external self with an identity which may or may not match one’s internal self. Adornment is not responsible for ​self-invention​, rather it serves the purpose of ​self-expression,​ where one may choose whether to display each part of their intrinsic identity or try to cover such intrinsic identities with false ones. Appearances ​can​ be dishonest and undisplayed identities do not cease to exist when they are symbolically unreadable.

Through the layering of dress and adornment upon our body, we are able to make aspects of our identities and personalities more salient and to share our values with those around us. “As the self is dressed, it is simultaneously addressed, for, whenever we clothe ourselves, we dress toward or address some audience whose validating responses are essential in the establishment of our self.”69 We adorn ourselves for two primary reasons: to ​express​ or to ​join​. Although these two methods of communication inescapably place the wearer within a social network and political system, they are different in the directionality of their communication.

In the case of dressing for the sake of expression, the body becomes a walking billboard, transmitting an image, value, or position into the world as a unidirectional communication.

Adornment here is a radio signal transmitted into the social world: “This is me. This is where I stand.” Flag pins state: “I am patriotic.” A campaign pin states: “I support this candidate and their values.” A flashy diamond ring defines the social class of its wearer.

In the case of adornment worn for the sake of joining a community, the wearer is signaled to be a member of a community inside of which they wish to engage in sympathetic discourse.

Often these symbols are secretive, able to be read only by those with the same symbolic repertoire as the wearer. For instance, LGBT+ pride patches, Slavic temporal rings, and even “the notorious crimson jackets and massive gold chains of the “New Russians”.”70 Our inclination to adorn ourselves is tied to our simultaneous desires to belong to a group while also expressing ourselves as individuals defined by our unique set of overlapping group identities. Adornment allows us to take part in theatrical displays of individuality while remaining rooted in larger symbolic groups.

“The visualization of cultural identity through costume and costume jewelry is directly related to the eternal desire of the person to theatrical everydayness.

Jewelry, participating in the creation of an image, allows a person to demonstrate

67

Ibid. 31.

Ibid. 31.

69 Roach, Eicher, Johnson. ​Dress and Identity. ​28.

70 Prokopovich, L. V. (2016). Visualization of Cultural Identity Through Costume Jewelry as a Form of Theatricality of Everyday Life. ScienceRise, 11 (28), 15-19.

68

14

their originality, their cultural identity; or, on the contrary, change images depending on the circumstances, playing different roles in the “theater” of life.”71 As we select our daily adornment, we are aware of the social impressions that these objects will make. In the complex web of objects which surround us in our homes and on our bodies, each object is a word in a symbolic language. To adorn ourselves is to place our bodies in relation to the bodies of others within our socio-political systems.

III.

Adornment as Political Communication

A.

Two Ways of Operating

Over the course of the previous sections, I have provided a basis upon which to understand the relationship between symbolic communication, political communication, and communication through adornment. Succinctly put, all language and image-based communication depends on an understanding of symbolism. Thus, symbols (eg. words, images, and objects) can be manipulated to communicate meaning in a variety of contexts, including within the realm of explicit political and social interaction. Because of adornment’s role in the expression of social identity, it is integral to identifying each other within a socio-political context.

The following sections will expand upon this foundation in order to demonstrate the ways in which politics and adornment collide and to provide evidence for adornment’s ability to serve as a method of political communication in a variety of contexts. For the sake of clarity, this discussion will be divided into the two primary ways that adornment plays a political role: political theater and guerrilla accessorizing. In section III, these two arenas/methods will be defined, before historical examples are provided in section IV. B.

Political Theater

The first arena in which adornment and politics collide is within the realm of political theater. In American politics specifically, I define the “political theater” as encapsulating political institutions (eg. the White House, Congress, state legislatures), political affairs (eg. elections, campaigns, speeches, media outreach), politicians themselves (eg. the president, congresspeople, state and local representatives), and those witnessing the political pageantry (eg. constituents, foreign governments).

Although referring to the explicit political arena as a “theater” is a loaded term that implies a level of dishonesty and false spectacle, this metaphor is nonetheless helpful in defining the relationship between politicians and their constituents. As Rai and Reinelt argue in ​Grammar of Politics and Performance,​ theatrical and political institutions are in many ways based in the same grammatical structures. Politics and theater both contain “conflict, leadership, persuasion, narrative tension, resolution, dramatic time, motives, character development, and private/public personas.”72 In such a metaphor, the play becomes a speech or media appearance, the performers 71 72

Prokopovich. Visualization of Cultural Identity. 15-19.

Rai and Reinelt. ​The Grammar of Politics and Performance.​ 20.

15

become the politicians, the audience becomes the constituents, and the theater becomes political institutions themselves.

Like the theater, political institutions can be understood as providing a set-like framing to political affairs. Thus, although many arguments have been made which equate political performance to outright dishonesty, political institutions are self-aware. Just as an audience and actors are aware that a play is, in fact, a performance, constituents and politicians are aware that their actions are performative. This does not necessarily excuse politicians of their responsibility to be honest about their beliefs and intentions. However, it does bring politics into the realm of performative ritual, where actions are carried out according to strict guidelines in order to elevate them beyond regular interpersonal communication. Politicians are manipulated by the rituals of their institutions at the same time as they manipulate their constituency through messaging.73 They are sworn in on religious texts, pitted against each other in publicized debates, and adorned in robes, suits, and military fatigues; costumed in order to play their part more accurately. This elevated ritual aspect of political theater is upheld at the intersection between adornment and politics: in the costuming.

Just as a play would be difficult to follow or take seriously if the actors were to perform in their street clothes, politicians use adornment in order to present a specific character to their constituency. In many cases, this costuming is aimed at “not stirring the pot” and is used to project the “correct” image of a politician. A male politician is to wear a dark suit with a patriotic, but not-too-loud, tie and an American flag pin on his lapel. A female politician is to dress in a pantsuit of an intriguing but not garish color, with a simple strand of power pearls around her neck and a Liberty Eagle pinned on her collar. This uniformed image is one of propriety, lending legitimacy to political affairs. Breaking from such an image is acceptable only in certain circumstances. On the campaign trail, the tailored suits are turned in for denim jeans and untucked shirts. Ties, lapel pins, and cufflinks are removed and baseball caps are added.

Pearls and pants suits are traded in for casual pants and dresses. On the campaign trail, politicians are adornment chameleons, portraying themselves as a “politician of the people” to every group of people they meet.

Beyond the halls of Congress or the White House, political costuming is extended into citizen’s communities as well, often as a form of dehumanizing social control. Citizens are physically marked and sorted into hierarchies by enforced dress codes and sumptuary laws.

Within the political theater, adornment is often used as a method of manipulation which seeks to uphold existing power structures. However, in the next arena of collision between politics and adornment, it will be shown that adornment is also capable of demolishing socio-political institutions.

C.

Guerrilla Accessorizing

The second arena where politics and adornment collide is in the phenomenon of “guerrilla accessorizing,” wherein adornment is leveraged as a communicative mechanism to break down oppressive political systems rather than uphold them. I chose the title “guerrilla accessorizing” because of its shared connotations with the accessible DIY art of the Guerrilla Girls and the riotous “night discourse” that Karie Jacobs discusses in ​Angry Graphics.74 As 73 74

Ibid. 20.

Jacobs and Heller. ​Angry Graphics.​ 8.

16

discussed in section I, night discourse is the title Jacobs gives to the DIY communication methods of political activist groups who pasted posters and stickers to public areas under the protection of darkness. Such discourse does not have to adhere to written rules about advertising space or unwritten rules about social propriety within the publicized political sphere. Messages are unchained and fluid. They are free to move about, spreading their dissenting message.

Guerrilla accessories share much of the same directed political fury as protest posters but have the unique ability to be worn and transported on the body. Their position on the body allows them to move throughout public space, forcing ideological interventions in a more insidious way than large format graphic posters. These accessories are the wearable equivalent of protest posters and chants but blend into daily life.

Additionally, many examples of guerrilla accessorizing take advantage of the intimate, secretive powers of jewelry and adornment. Often, these accessories serve as layers of signs: stacked, concealed, or coded in some way which makes them readable only under the correct circumstances. Such adornment may conform on one level and remain deviant on another.75 Sometimes, their meaning is hidden because reading their symbolism requires a certain symbolic repertoire. Other times, they are literally concealed inside of clothing or worn in ways which allow them to sneak into the halls of power or through the public realm in order to deliver their anti-establishment message. Their messages are flashed to political accomplices or contained privately for only the wearer to know: “we are our own audience and the signs we extend to ourselves and of ourselves do matter, even when the external world is not cognizant of our statements.”76 IV.

Historical and Contemporary Examples

A.

Political Theater

In this final section, I will provide historical and contemporary examples of political theater and guerrilla accessorizing in order to support my central argument that adornment is able to serve as a method of political communication which can either enforce or work to demolish political systems. Examples of both ways adornment operates will be subdivided further into the specific functions they serve in their political context. Within the political theater, adornment a) is used by politicians to conform their image to norms, b) is used by political actors to send an ideological message, c) causes scandal within the publicized political sphere, and d) is used to enforce norms by directly imposing on citizens.

Conforming: The first way adornment operates within the political sphere is allowing its wearer to conform to the proper dress code of their government. Both democratic and non-democratic governments take advantage of uniforms to imbue their leaders with a certain level of legitimacy, and non-clothing adornment is often part of this uniform. A uniform such as a suit, robe, or military fatigues, is related to the concept of the symbolic construction of community.77 By Roach, Eicher, Johnson. ​Dress and Identity. ​81.

Ibid​. 8​ 1.

77 Cohen. ​The Symbolic Construction of Community.​ 75 76

17

enforcing a uniform symbolic image, uniformed members can see themselves as part of a cohesive group while projecting this united image to constituents and other outgroups, helping to build the ​esprit de corps.78 Uniforms are used to “verify their political identities in public and to declare their right to power as allocated to them by the nation-state or other government unit.”

Uniforms become highly important when an ingroup finds itself confronting an adversary. Hence the necessity of military and, problematically, police uniforms.79 Often these uniforms become especially complex and important in times of great political upheaval, where representatives must demonstrate their political affiliations at all times. This was the case with the “dramatically changed dress that signaled and promoted the leveling of classes after the French Revolution in the 18th century and the establishing of communist regimes in the USSR and mainland China in the twentieth.”80 Additionally, during the War of Roses in England (​1455-1485)​, house members wore a rose to symbolize the house they identified with: a red rose for the House of Lancaster or a white rose for the House of York.

In the United States, no suit or pant-suit is complete without a flag lapel pin, campaign pin, eagle pin, or a power pearl necklace. While there is no strict written dress code in Washington, criticism is immediately lodged at clothing and adornment which deviates from the few categories of dress permitted for politicians, such as Barack Obama’s tan suit, which was apparently so egregious that even a flag lapel pin could not save it.81 To deviate from the costumed norm is to threaten the symbolically constructed and meticulously maintained boundary between the politician and the civilian. If the mask were to slip, the ritual which lends legitimacy to political institutions may crumble. To wear a tan suit is to threaten the very fabric of democracy, and therefore is believed to be deserving of public condemnation.

Male politicians must wear casual streetwear while on vacations (graphic shirts, sandals, sports watches, sunglasses), work wear for demonstrating that they can get their hands dirty (blue collar trade uniforms and clothes for manual labor), dressy casual for public events (trendy shoes, belts, and ties), business casual to appear relaxed in formal settings (ties, blazers, vests, plain scarves, suede), formal for business and other formal occasions (d​ress shoes, classic ties and belts, fine leather accessories, cuff-links), and uniforms to signal authority (military dress uniform, judicial robes, religious ceremonial garb).82 In formal settings, a red tie is the standard to demonstrate patriotism and is almost always paired with a flag lapel pin. When on the campaign trail, candidates often adopt copious amounts of denim in order to demonstrate that they are “one of the people”. Occasionally, this strict dress code is acceptably broken with small details worn upon a conservative blazer. For example, Representative Blumenauer of Oregon substitutes the traditional flag pin with a larger, brightly colored bicycle pin, demonstrating his love for biking. He also substitutes the traditional tie with a patterned bow-tie.83 For female politicians, proper dress and adornment are of such importance that the ​2018 Women’s Campaign School program at Yale University ran an entire class devoted to training

Roach and Eicher. ​Dress, Adornment, and the Social Order. 126.

Ibid​. 126.

80 Roach, Eicher, Johnson. ​Dress and Identity. ​14.

81 ​Ngan, Mandel. Barack Obama's Tan Suit "Controversy" Is Now Three Years Old. Photograph. GQ. August 29, 2017.

82 ​Levy, David. David Levy to LinkedIn web forum, "Dress Codes for Men in Politics," August 21, 2015.

83 ​Zaru, Deena. "Dressing like a Politician." ​CNN​, January 25, 2014.

78 79

18

upcoming female politicians how to dress to impress and to conform.84 Often, this means adhering to the traditional notion that conservative dress allows for a female politician’s message to be heard without the media or other politicians latching on to her appearance instead. ​Pantsuits in feminine colors such as red or pink are permitted, as long as they are paired with conservative accessories that are not distracting,85 and a strand of pearls is considered ​protocol.86 Stacey Abrams, the Democratic candidate for governor or Georgia, was upheld as a prime example of this conservative yet feminine look: “the champion of the dress.”87 In some instances, straying from this conforming image does present real problems for female politicians, as critics are quick to criticize appearance over message.88 Representative Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut became known as the ‘hipster congresswoman” because of her quirky scarves,89 and Barbara Bush’s signature strand of pearls was originally adopted because she was worried she would be criticized for the wrinkles on her neck.90 However, there is a faction of female politicians leveraging clothing as part of their public persona as opposed to providing a supposedly blank slate for their message.91 Some are ditching the Ann Hand Liberty Eagle pin worn by Hillary Clinton and Cindy McCain in favor of more expressive accessories. A recent example is Junior Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who wore bright red lipstick and gold hoops to her swearing-in ceremony, stating: “​Lip+hoops were inspired by Sonia Sotomayor, who was advised to wear neutral-colored nail polish to her confirmation hearings to avoid scrutiny. She kept her red. Next time someone tells Bronx girls to take off their hoops, they can just say they’re dressing like a Congresswoman.”92 This recent trend towards openness and personal expression within the political costume coincides with an uptick in demands of more political transparency and honesty by young voters discontented with political pageantry. As more women and people of color are elected to office, the focus on a uniform image only achievable by white men may lessen, opening more room for the expression of personal identity through the political costume.

Sending a Message: Perhaps the most famous example of adornment being used to transmit a political message is former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, who used her extensive pin/brooch collection as a way to send political messages during her diplomatic affairs. Her collection consists of pins from every corner of jewelry design, from cheap gold-plated costume jewelry 84

Friedman. "You Can Run for Office.” ​Zaru. "Dressing like a Politician."

86 Prokopovich. Jewelry and Accessories. 16-19.

87 Friedman. "You Can Run for Office.”

88 ​Martin, Michel. "What Is She Wearing? Fashion Laws of Politics." ​Tell Me More.​ Podcast audio. September 10, 2018.

89 Friedman. "You Can Run for Office.”

90 Roach, Eicher, Johnson. ​Dress and Identity. ​4.

91 Friedman. "You Can Run for Office.”

92 ​Solá-Santiago, Frances. "What Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's Hoop Earrings Mean to Latina Women Like Me." Glamour,​ January 11, 2019.

85

19

from second-hand stores, to a brooch designed by contemporary jeweler Gijs Bakker featuring the Statue of Liberty with clocks for eyes.93 Albright states that, although she had been collecting pins for years prior, she first began using jewelry as a diplomatic tool when she met with Iraqi officials following the First Persian Gulf War. After Albright criticized Saddam Hussein publicly when he refused to comply with a settlement agreement that involved a UN inspection of Iraq’s weapons programs, Iraq’s press released a poem about Albright calling her an “unparalleled serpent.”94 On a whim, when deciding what to wear to this diplomatic meeting, Albright chose a golden serpent pin. In a press interview after the meeting, a journalist asked her about her decision to wear the brooch, given the recently published poem. Albright replied that it was just her way of “sending a message.”95 This was just the beginning of a long career spent using accessories as a diplomatic tool.

Since then, Albright has worn her pins to mark a variety of diplomatic occasions. After Cuban fighters shot down two civilian aircraft in February of 1996, Albright wore a bluebird pin with its head pointed downwards instead of soaring upwards as usual to a press conference, symbolizing her mourning for the murdered civilians.96 In 1997, while paying respects to the victims of the Rwandan Genocide, Albright wore a simple golden dove pin to symbolize peace.97 While Albright does not claim that her diplomatic pins are the strongest possible political bargaining chip, she believes that the correct jewelry worn at the correct moment has the power to “add warmth or needed edge” to a diplomatic relationship.98 Wearing a golden sun pin could serve as a friendly gesture of international friendship while donning a wasp could add sting to an already tense relationship. She cites the ancient practice of gifting precious jewelry as a sign of diplomatic friendship as proof of the power of such a gesture. By marking herself with these symbols, Albright communicates her values, position, and identity before entering into verbal discourse. In alignment with Mead’s theory of identification, Albright’s diplomatic pins demonstrate the power of adornment to set the mood of a relationship or communicative exchange.

While the strategic glory of the Crown Jewels and the extravagant colorful jewelry of Indian rulers has demonstrated the messaging power of jewelry for centuries, Albright’s usage of jewelry as diplomatic messaging has brought the discussion of adornment as a method of symbolic communication back into the American political sphere.99 While others may demand that their international partners and foes “read their lips!”, Albright asks that you instead “read [her] pins.”100 Causing Publicized Scandal: Although Albright was quite skillful in her use of adornment to send a political message during diplomatic affairs, choosing when and whom to offend by her strategic choice of pin, this 93

Albright. Read My Pins. 141.

Ibid. 17.

95 Ibid. 17.

96 Ibid. 19.

97 Ibid. 85.

98 Ibid. 20.

99 Ibid. 28.

100 Ibid. 20.

94

20

is not always the case. When a political figure leverages adornment as a way to send a message, they are participating in the subtle manipulation of their publicized image via a complex symbolic language. During Albright’s diplomatic meetings and televised appearances, she was not solely manipulating her personal or public identity, but in fact her publicized identity. She effectively became a figurehead, representing the values of the United States through the symbolic values of her jewelry.

When a political figure does not extend great care towards curating their symbolic image, scandal can be caused. In a rare adornment misstep by Albright herself, she chose to wear a pin with two balloons to meet with Russian diplomats, who interpreted this pin as Albright supporting the rise and unification of Russia, when that was not her intended message.101 In some cases when adornment is badly chosen, constituents feel lied to and scammed, seeing right through this badly composed publicized image to the personal values of the politician. The cheap mask falls off and the costume rips in the middle of the performance. In other cases, the symbols reveal a politician’s ignorance of the everyday problems of the populace.

One such example of jewelry-based political scandal occurred in Ukraine in 2016 and involved a pearl necklace worn by Yulia Tymoshenko, the leader of a group of political parties referred to as the Yulia Tymoshenko Bloc (BYuT).102 Although pearl necklaces are essentially protocol for female politicians internationally, Tymoshenko was criticized in parliament for her pearls: “Speaking in parliament, the deputies from the Party of Regions, Yevgeny Kushnaryov, criticizing the populism of the BYuT leader, said: “One Yulia Tymoshenko's [pearls] is enough to feed several average people for several years”.

After these words, Tymoshenko rose from her seat in the session hall, walked to the podium, tore off her necklace and threw it. [The] MP from the Communist Party of Ukraine Kravchenko offered to give the beads of the BYuT leader for examination in order to find out how much they cost. To which Yulia Tymoshenko [replied]: “There is not a single real pearl. This is common jewelry.”103 Tymoshenko’s pearl necklace became a national scandal and she was mocked on television for the supposed price of her pearls. This scandal demonstrates how the meaning of symbolic objects is malleable and able to be manipulated to serve political interests. For, while those taking Tymoshenko’s side may never have seen pearls as symbolizing wealth or ignorance of civilian struggles, Kushnaryov’s comments instantly altered this symbol into one of foolishness, to be publically and mercilessly mocked by his ideological community.

Tymoshenko’s constructed publicized image was further demolished by the media who already opposed her and used this adornment faux pas as further justification of their disdain. As in the case of patriotic pins, the scandal was never really about the pearls themselves as much as what they symbolized.

Another political scandal revolving around the perception of a piece of jewelry relates to an insensitive brooch worn by Princess Michael of Kent in 2017. During a Christmas dinner with the Queen, the Princess wore a “blackamoor” brooch. The brooch was similar to imagery 101

Prokopovich. Jewelry and Accessories. 16-19.

Ibid. 19.

103 Ibid. 19.

102

21

prevalent art in the 17th and 18th century, portraying a racist depiction of an African man in golden clothing. After images of the event were released, “users of social networks angrily condemned the princess's choice,”104 especially given that Meghan Markle, who was present at the dinner, is of African American descent. Citizens were outraged and alarmed that such a brooch was intentionally chosen as if Princess Michael was ignorant of England’s historical laundry list of racial injustices.

A third, less broadly reaching but still distasteful jewelry decision was Sarah Palin’s wearing of a large Star of David pendant during her 2011 visits to Israel and to New York, which has a large Jewish population. Jewish religious symbols such as the Star of David are worn as a statement of religious belief and community, making her decision to wear one as an Evangelical Christian, odd. Palin’s decision to wear such a symbol demonstrates my earlier point that adopting a publicized image is not equivalent to adopting an earnest community identity. Palin stated that her decision was based on her support of Israel and American Jews. However, given that the American Jewish community is largely Democratic and does not align itself with Palin’s Christian Conservative views, her decision instead became a peculiar way of demonstrating allyship with the Israeli government as a believer in an Evangelical, Israel-centric interpretation of the Bible.105 Such a statement of allyship is already politically loaded, even without the added confusing display of a historically oppressed religion’s community-building symbol. Thus, while Palin’s wearing of the Star of David may not have caused the same scandalous shockwaves as Tymoshenko’s pearl necklace or Princess Michael’s racially insensitive brooch, it demonstrates the interpretive confusion that can be caused by a publicized image poorly constructed through adornment.

Imposing on Citizens: Up to this point, I have discussed the role of adornment in the political theater in terms of how it is used by politicians to present a specific publicized image to their constituents or diplomatic partners. However, adornment’s role in the political theater does not end with politicians themselves. Adornment is also used as a method of controlling the lives of citizens on behalf of government entities. This is done through strict regulations about the types of clothing that can be worn by citizens of particular communities.

Traditionally, sumptuary laws have existed in countries across the world, where laws were made determining the color, fabric type, and ornamentation that was permitted to be worn based on social rank. The most sumptuous, high-quality, and rare-colored materials were reserved for rulers and their ilk. In Ancient Rome, only the Roman Emperor was permitted to wear a cloak of purple and gold thread and in 18th century Japan, similar laws restricted the use of golden embroidery.106 In addition to dividing up the populace based on social rank, sumptuary laws have also been used historically to “unify” entire countries under one ideology. In these cases, clothing becomes a common symbol responsible for constructing a uniform community. After Argentina gained its independence from Spain in the 1800s, two parties found themselves vying for power 104

Ibid. 19. ​Franke-Ruta, Garance. "Why Did Sarah Palin Wear a Star of David in Israel?" ​The Atlantic​, March 22, 2011.

106 Roach, Eicher, Johnson. ​Dress and Identity. ​80.

105

22

and hoping to lead the country in different ideological directions.107 The Unitarians looked to the European elite and the elites of Buenos Aires for guidance and wore clothing of a similar European style. Their clothing and adornment featured light greens and blues as well as distinctive u-shaped beards. On the other hand, the Federalists desired autonomy of local leaders, as most of them were landowners. In contrast to the light, cool hues of the Unitarians, the Federalists wore crimson with a mustache and sideburns.108 During the Federalist regime of Juan Manuel de Rosas, greens and blues were deemed illegal and all citizens were forced to wear crimson by law.109 Such laws were aimed at unifying the country under the Federalist ideals, forcing a uniform image upon their entire populace. As will be touched on in the next section, opposition to these oppressive laws was carried out through adornment and home ornamentation, as even the type of dinner plate one had in their home was meant to indicate allegiance to either group.110 While Argentine sumptuary laws under the Federalists were aimed at unifying the entire country through forcible uniforming, adornment is also used as a method of differentiating the “other” from mass society. What one wears becomes a visible manifestation of social hierarchy and difference. The most infamous case of this in contemporary culture is the identifying patches the Nazis used to differentiate Jews and other groups for mistreatment. After Kristallnacht (​November 9 and 10, 1938), Reinhard Heydrich proposed that the Nazi Party resurrect a long-standing discriminatory practice of using clothing and adornment to identify and differentiate Jews.111 Despite the fact that such practices were originally outlawed in the 19th century, local Nazi officials began enforcing the mandatory wearing of identifying patches in September of 1939. These identifying symbols took the form of yellow fabric patches with the Star of David or white armbands with the same symbol. Refusal to wear these mandatory symbols could result in severe punishment including death: “the Jewish Council (Judenrat) of the ghetto in Bialystok, Poland announced that ‘the authorities have warned that severe punishment – up to and including death by shooting – is in store for Jews who do not wear the yellow badge on back and front”.”112 Such labeling practices enforced the dehumanization of Jews, marking them for discrimination and facilitating their removal from society “and subsequent ghettoization, which ultimately led to the deportation and murder of 6 million Jews.”113 Similar dehumanizing symbols were forced upon other “undesirable” groups within concentration camps, following a system of color-coded inverted triangles. Criminals were labeled with green, political prisoners with red, “asocials” (Roma, non-conformists, vagrants, etc.) with black, and homosexuals with pink.114 In the wake of the horrific events of the Holocaust, many members of the LGBT+ community have reclaimed the symbol of the pink triangle in both wearable and non-wearable forms as a symbol of pride and community. ​In the 1980s, the SILENCE = DEATH Project protested government inaction in relation to the AIDS Parkins. ​Fashioning the Body Politic.​ 72.

Ibid. 72.

109 Ibid.​ ​72.

110 Ibid. 4.

111 ​Holocaust Memorial Center. "Holocaust Badges." Holocaust Memorial Center.

112 ​Holocaust Memorial Center. "Holocaust Badges."

113 ​Ibid.

114 ​United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. "Classification System in Nazi Concentration Camps." Holocaust Encyclopedia.

107 108

23

crisis; pasting the pink triangle on the walls of New York.115 ​However, even though this symbol has been reclaimed by many as a symbol of empowerment, it is important to keep in mind the life-destroying potential of mandatory clothing and adornment. As, in the hands of an authoritarian government, such social identifiers can encourage dehumanization and erasure.

Another example of this erasing ability of clothing is the literal and symbolic blanketing of the bodies of indigenous peoples in Australia. During the explicit colonization of Australian land by the English, blankets were “gifted” to indigenous peoples as a way to erase their bodies and presence.116 Although these blankets were distributed under the guise of a philanthropic gift and even a peace offering, they served to cover the othered bodies of indigenous Australians which were seen as a threat to European society. These loose-fitting garments erased their bodily forms, serving a similar dehumanizing purpose to the Nazi’s bastardized Stars of David.

In the time since this explicit colonization, indigenous rights groups in Australia have used clothing in order to demand visibility on behalf of their community. Clothing has been reclaimed as a strategy to tell the story of their own identity. Initially, this was done in the form of red headbands, but now includes striped beanies, black stockman style hats, and printed T-shirts. T-shirts, in particular, have been frequently used to convey group solidarity and resistance, printed with the same graphics and imagery as protest posters. Shirts can be produced cheaply in mass and printed with images that are front-and-center on the body. They are “gender non-specific, ephemeral, and unpretentious.”117 Specific examples include shirts worn in the 1980s protests such as the Lands Council shirts, those worn at the handover of title to Uluru in 1985, and those worn to protest aboriginal deaths in custody in 1986-87.118 Similar examples of clothing and adornment being reclaimed by oppressed communities in order to fight back against harmful political systems will be explored more in depth in the following section on “guerrilla accessorizing.”

B.

Guerrilla Accessorizing

Building off the complicit roles that adornment plays in supporting structures and institutions in the political theater, I will now discuss contemporary and historical examples of adornment being used as protest in the form of “guerrilla accessories.” Under the umbrella of guerrilla accessorizing, adornment a) presents a blatant statement, b) presents a hidden statement, c) presents a coded statement, and d) serves as a performance of activism.

Blatant Statements: In section III, I discussed the similarities between protest posters and accessories, citing their common ability to present a blatant public message through words and image-based symbolism. Often, when one thinks of political jewelry or accessories, it is the genre of blatant political messaging that first comes to mind in the form of campaign and opinion pins. The campaign pin has become a mainstay of contemporary political discourse in the United States.

Pins are sold at rallies, marches, and online, and are both mass-produced and made by Jacobs and Heller. ​Angry Graphics.​ 11.

Parkins. ​Fashioning the Body Politic.​ ​ ​200.

117 Ibid.​ ​201.

118 Ibid.​ ​201.

115 116

24

small-scale artists. It would be hard to walk anywhere in a populated city without seeing a single political pin on a backpack or jacket.

Political pins are particularly interesting because the blatancy of their messages and prominent position when worn makes them a prime candidate for sharing ideas outside of one’s ideological group. As Huckfelt and Sprague explain in ​Citizens, Politics, and Social Communication, h​ umans have a tendency to remain within community groups with a similar worldview.119 We rarely ask the opinions of strangers when developing our political orientations, leading to increasing bias and close-mindedness. Especially in the modern era of social media where our natural tendency towards biased viewpoints is further enhanced by algorithms which prioritize engagement over facts, political pins remain a curious example of how messages can be spread with less bias.120 In the course of daily life, especially in metropolitan areas, pins worn on outer garments and accessories like jackets and backpacks are likely to be seen by countless people with different experiences than those of the wearer. Thus, these small objects are unique in the openness of their communication.

Similar examples of blatant communication through adornment can be found in the jewelry of the French Revolution.121 During the upheaval of the French Revolution, just about every decorative and worn object became imbued with political meaning as people searched for some semblance of order in a world that seemed to be collapsing. Everything from colors, clothing, plateware, money, calendars, and playing cards became symbolically meaningful.122 As politician’s uniforms became highly specific during this political upheaval, so did the adornment of regular citizens: “Representatives of opposition aristocratic youth introduced black dress coats [...] as a sign of mourning for the monarchy” and in female fashion “flirty hats were replaced with headdresses that resemble helmets, and diamonds in rings [were replaced] with stones from the walls of the Bastille. [...] Glass earrings with engraving “Fatherhood” became fashionable, and on the other, tortoise rings with the inscription “Keep the King”.”123 Citizens on all sides of the conflict adopted jewelry and adornment with a sense of vigor and even militarism, presenting their political alignment blatantly in public. In a literal sense, they carried symbols of their crumbling political institutions as adornment upon their bodies; both relishing in and mourning the demolition of their political order.

Another group that used blatant adornment in their political movement were the British Suffragettes of the late 1800s.124 As women attempted to enter the public sphere, they were met with an incredibly dismissive male-dominated society which was quick to relegate all misbehaving women to the position of unladylike degenerates to be ignored. Thus, much Suffragette fashion was centered upon presenting a proper feminine image that could not be Huckfelt and Sprague. ​Citizens, Politics, and Social Communication​.

Dylko, Ivan B. "How Technology Encourages Political Selective Exposure." ​Communication Theory​ 26, no. 4 (November 2016): 389-409. PDF. 389-390.

121 Roach, Eicher, Johnson. ​Dress and Identity. ​14.

122 Parkins. ​Fashioning the Body Politic.​ 4.

123 Prokopovich. Study of Jewelry and Accessories. 17.

124 Parkins. ​Fashioning the Body Politic.​ 97 119 120

25

dismissed as easily. The Women’s Social and Political Union stressed the importance of being perceived as “dainty and precise” in their protest.125 They wore white, frilled dresses and exquisite hats to protests and delicate green and purple sashes as they threw rocks through windows, leading them to be labeled “the epidemic of purple, white, and green.”126 As well as being inviting and fashionable, this recognizable color scheme served the same role as modern campaign pins: visibility. To don these colors was to be instantly associated with the movement without even needing to engage in spoken discourse. Suffragettes could recognize their allies as well as make a unified statement against their political leaders; standing together in a sea of colorful fury. To the Suffragettes, “fashion was a form of agency,” carried out in the form of “stationary, card games, jewelry, badges, buttons, ties, scarves, handkerchiefs, tablecloths, [and] tea sets.”127 They knew the furious response their badges and jewelry would elicit and wore them for precisely those reasons.

“Those who wore suffragette jewelry did so in the knowledge that it would evoke an immediate response, sometimes supportive, but more often fiercely and violently antagonistic. Suffragettes were often attacked in the streets. An iconic image of Flora Drummond, General Officer of Field Forces for the WSPU, hangs today in the Scottish National Portrait Gallery in Edinburgh. A woman of diminutive stature but of powerfully impressive presence, she is portrayed proudly wearing her suffragette jewelry and honors. A remarkable necklace in Arts & Crafts style, set with purple, white, and green cabochon stones, is the focal point of the portrait.”128 Hidden Statements: In many ways, the blatant statements of modern political pins and the jewelry of the Suffragettes are a statement of bravery and resistance in the face of political oppression.

However, to be able to wear one’s political identity so openly, especially if that identity counters political power, is a sign of a certain level of privilege. Many Americans who wear political pins do so within a political environment which, although it may not agree with their sentiments, will protect their right to free expression. Many of the Suffragettes in the UK and US were also of a certain privileged position; many of them middle-class white women who, although they bravely suffered horrific abuse at the hands of the police, were not at the same systemic disadvantage as women of color. Particularly in the United States, the efforts of black women fighting for women’s suffrage has been written out of history.129 This legacy of erasure of the dangers faced by women of color fighting systemic oppression continues today, as members of the Women’s March placed a pussyhat — a symbol which will be discussed in a subsequent section — on a

Ibid.​ ​103.

Ibid. 97.

127 Ibid. 101.

128 ​Goring, Elizabeth. "Jewelry and Communication: Breaking the Code." ​Metalsmith Magazine,​ 2006. RISD Fleet Library. 8.

129 ​Staples, Brent. "How the Suffrage Movement Betrayed Black Women." ​New York Times (​ New York, NY), July 28, 2018.

125 126

26

statue of Harriet Tubman.130 In societies that threaten their citizens much more openly with harm, and for historically marginalized communities, blatant political adornment is often not worth the risk that accompanies it. As a result, there is an extensive history of secretive political adornment; sewn inside of coats and pinned under lapels, only to be flashed to trusted allies.

In 18th Century Japan, strict sumptuary laws required plain kimonos. In order to avoid punishment while still ornamenting their kimonos, merchants would embroider patterns in gold thread on the inside of their kimonos for their own private enjoyment.131 In the 1840s, German students concealed ribbons representing their taboo political beliefs beneath their coats.132 Under Mao, Chinese women continued to wear colorful blouses but would cut the sleeves short so that they were effectively invisible beneath their jackets. Flowered patches were then sewn into these jacket linings, to be “flashed” at friends as a friendly gesture.133 Similarly, Poles under martial law wore their Solidarity Union buttons hidden underneath their lapels.134 In all of these cases, community could be expressed secretly, for the private knowledge of the wearer and their trusted companions.

Layers of clothing and adornment are able to provide the protective image of a rule-following citizen while allowing for the expression of personality and political alignment safely beneath.135 Just as “night discourse” allows for bold statements to be made via protest poster under the cover of night, hidden guerrilla adornment allows anti-establishment ideas to be protected under the cover of outer clothing: ready to be revealed when the time is right, or worn only for the knowledge of the wearer. These examples of concealed adornment illustrate the importance of expressing identity through adornment, even if such identities are never witnessed by the public. The act of translating one’s inner, intrinsic identity to the physical world is often an act of self-acknowledgment and acceptance: a statement that one’s experiences are real and worthy of being expressed. Intrinsic identities do not cease to be important when they are unviewable.

Coded Statements: Entirely hidden statements are not the only example of concealed adornment used for anti-establishment purposes. Often, political adornment is not hidden outright but is instead coded so that those without the correct symbolic repertoire are unable to understand its message.

For instance, in order to understand the meaning of the colorful bandanas worn by some members of the sexual kink community, one must have knowledge of the color codes used to denote the sex acts a wearer is interested in.

Another influential example of adornment being used to make coded statements took place in Argentina shortly after its independence from Spain, as was discussed previously.

During the Federalist regime of Juan Manuel de Rosas, strict sumptuary laws were enacted that forced citizens to wear the Federalist color crimson, criminalizing the greens and blues ​St. Felix, Doreen. "The Day Harriet Tubman Wore a Pink Pussyhat." ​The New Yorker (​ New York, NY), January 22, 2018.

131 Roach, Eicher, Johnson. ​Dress and Identity. ​80-81.

132 Ibid​. 8​ 0-81.

133 Ibid​. 8​ 0-81.

134 Ibid​. 8​ 0-81.

135 Ibid​. 8​ 0.

130

27

associated with the European styled Unitarian party.136 In addition to these strict sumptuary laws, the media was heavily censored for political statements of dissent and those responsible for spreading messages against Rosas would be punished and exiled. As a result of this peculiar combination of highly symbolic fashion trends and strict censorship, a group of young Argentine writers and intellectuals hatched a plan to disseminate enlightenment political ideas under the guise of fashion writing. Fashion was considered a shallow genre of study and writing; insubstantial, non-threatening, and perfect to surpass censorship. The resulting magazine was titled​ La Moda​ and included pieces about music, poetry, literature, and customs including fashion.

La Moda​ pushed for the importation of French and English clothing styles, with the coded implication that their political ideals could also be imported. They wrote about hairstyles, urging women to look beyond the complicated updos and peineton hair combs that were worn to counteract Spanish domination. Instead, they argued, women should wear simple, democratic hairstyles. Especially daring was an article specifically discussing the crimson color required by Rosas. Which, although it spoke negatively of the color, did so in such a coded way that it could be interpreted as patriotic support and would not be caught by censors. They claimed to support crimson because it was the current “democratically” chosen fashion, the implication being that crimson could just as easily go out of fashion, to be replaced by a new color and an accompanying set of enlightenment ideals.137 ​La Moda​ even outrightly critiqued ideological stagnation and entreated how a fashion magazine could possibly encourage people to seek progressive design and styles if they were unwilling to listen to new ideas. This question, of course, really had nothing to do with fashion.

La Moda’​ s most daring article was written in 1838, as the magazine became aware that they were being watched closely by censors and were likely to be caught. This article took an outwardly revolutionary stance, revealing the ways in which they had used fashion writing to espouse their values. The writers were swiftly exiled from their country for life.

Performative Activism: Having discussed the blatant and insidious ways that adornment has been used by citizens to push for political change, I wish to conclude with an example of “activism” which is in many ways more similar to the performative aspects of political theater than to the examples of guerrilla accessorizing discussed above. This contemporary example is the famous and infamous “pussyhat.”138 The pussyhat rose to national popularity shortly before Donald Trump’s inauguration in January 2017 as a symbol of left-wing “resistance.” Thousands of women donned these bright pink, eared hats for the Women’s March, an international protest intended to honor women and protest against Trump’s corruption and lack of respect. The pussyhat — designed and titled as a humorous pun about pussycats and Trump’s “grab them by the pussy” comment — was intended by its creators, ​Jayna Zweiman and Krista Suh,​ to serve as a unifying symbol of the strength of

Parkins. ​Fashioning the Body Politic.​ ​ ​72.

Ibid. 84-85.

138 ​Zweiman, Jayna, and Kristah Suh. "Pussyhat Project: Design Interventions for Social Change." Pussyhat Project.

136 137

28

women of all races, ages, and backgrounds.139 In many ways, it has done just that: thousands of women marched together under this neon pink symbol.

However, the pussyhat is far from a revolutionary symbol of political resistance and the centering of marginalized experiences. A poll conducted by SurveyMonkey found that an astounding 70% of Women’s March participants were white, 52% were college graduates, and 43% made over $75,000 annually.140 Such statistics demonstrate that the Women’s March, despite its earnest hopes to support women of all experiences, has failed to do so.

The pussyhat itself is not the inclusive symbol needed for a truly radical movement.

Although it is based on a well known Trump quote, the pussyhat’s name itself is less than inclusive: centering a celebration of womanhood on cis women, neglecting to include trans and non-binary communities.141 The pussyhat’s array of pink hues could also be interpreted as a symbol of white women’s genitalia, a subtle symbolic meaning which has the opposite effect of including women of color in the Women’s March movement.142 There are no two better symbolic events to illustrate the performative activism of the pussyhat than one marcher’s decision to place a pussyhat on a statue of Harriet Tubman in Harlem while others marked the grave of Susan B. Anthony with “I Voted” stickers, despite Anthony’s statement that she would rather cut off her arm than fight for the suffrage of black Americans.143 The pussyhat is nothing more than a hollow, performative symbol aimed at projecting a certain public image as an activist, donned with the promise of inclusion but without the action to support this interpretation. The pussyhat, despite its sincere best intentions, has failed to put any skin in the game, and therefore does not serve as a worthy symbol of contemporary American political resistance.

V.

Conclusion

Over the course of this paper, I have built upon the importance of symbolism in both political and adornment-based communication in order to argue that adornment plays a central, active role in both the enforcement and demolition of socio-political structures. All language and image-based communication depend on symbolism. Thus, symbols can be manipulated to communicate meaning in a variety of contexts, including within the realm of explicit politics and social interaction. Because of adornment’s role in the expression of social identity, it is integral to identifying each other within a socio-political context. Adornment can be used to create false publicized images, transmit messages and ideas, share experiences, build communities, encourage discriminatory “othering”, and express marginalized identities. While adornment operates differently within the realms of political theater and guerrilla accessorizing, the act of adorning oneself is a powerful one, capable of altering not only ourselves and our immediate interpersonal interactions but also the socio-political structures of our society.

Through this analysis of the role of adornment within the political theater and social justice, I hope to provide a new perspective on adornment as an active, dynamic, and malleable symbolic language. Because adornment is a mediator between the internal and external self, it ​Zweiman and Suh. "Pussyhat Project”.

Pinkus, Erin, and Mark Blumenthal. "SurveyMonkey Poll Profiles Women's March Participants." SurveyMonkey.

141 ​St. Felix. "The Day Harriet Tubman Wore a Pink Pussyhat."

142 ​Ibid.

143 ​Ibid.

139 140

29

can enter into social interactions in a concrete way, allowing for the simultaneous expression of personal and group identity. It is unbridled and unrestricted by the functions placed on clothing or gallery-based artwork, free to share its messages throughout social space. It is accessible, communicating beyond the strict ideological communities and echo chambers in which we often find ourselves trapped. As inevitable as political divisiveness may seem, it is my hope that adornment can provide some new ways of considering social justice. With increased awareness of the complicit role that adornment plays in upholding oppressive political systems, it is my hope that we may work towards a more transparent political system with room for the expression of personal identity. It is also my hope that by examining the precedent for adornment in social justice movements, we will be able to formulate truly inclusive guerrilla accessories under which to unify our communities. Adornment alone will not fight for equity, but it may open conversations directed at achieving the presence of justice, not merely the absence of tension.144

144

"True peace is not merely the absence of tension: it is the presence of justice." -Martin Luther King Jr.

30

Bibliography Albright, Madeleine. Read My Pins: Stories from a Diplomat's Jewel Box. New York, NY: Harper Collins, 2009.

Cangelosi, Angelo. "Evolution of Communication and Language Using Signals, Symbols, and Words." ​IEEE Transactions in Evolution Computation​ 5 (2001): 93-101. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/5ba9/ e1dcb7546e2736344f422bd67db3a82f26ad.pdf.

Chesebro, James W., and Dale A. Bertelsen. ​Analyzing Media: Communication Technologies as Symbolic and Cognitive Systems​. New York, NY: Guilford Press, 1996.

Cohen, Anthony P. ​The Symbolic Construction of Community.​ Edited by Peter Hamilton. Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2001.

Crane, Diane. ​Fashion and Its Social Agendas: Class, Gender, and Identity in Clothing​. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press, 2000.

Bergstrom, Bo. ​Essentials of Visual Communication.​ London, UK: Laurence King Publishing, 2008.

Dylko, Ivan B. "How Technology Encourages Political Selective Exposure." ​Communication Theory​ 26, no. 4 (November 2016): 389-409. PDF. Ferrari, G.R.F. ​The Messages We Send: Social Signals and Storytelling.​ Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2017.

Finkelstein, Joanne. ​The Art of Self Invention: Image and Identity in Popular Visual Culture​.

London, UK: I.B. Tauris, 2007.

Franke-Ruta, Garance. "Why Did Sarah Palin Wear a Star of David in Israel?" ​The Atlantic,​ March 22, 2011. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/03/why-did-sarahpalin-wear-a-star-of-david-in-israel/72884/.

Friedman, Vanessa. "It's 2018: You Can Run for Office and Not Wear a Pantsuit." New York Times (New York, NY), June 21, 2018. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/21/style/female-politicians-dress-to-win.html.

Goring, Elizabeth. "Jewelry and Communication: Breaking the Code." ​Metalsmith Magazine​, 2006. RISD Fleet Library.

Habermas, Jurgen. "Political Communication in Media Society: Does Democracy Still Enjoy an Epistemic Dimension? The Impact of Normative Theory on Empirical Research."

Communication Theory​ 16, no. 4 (November 1, 2006): 411-26. http://my.ilstu.edu/~jkshapi/Habermas_Media%20Society.pdf.

Holocaust Memorial Center. "Holocaust Badges." Holocaust Memorial Center. https://www.holocaustcenter.org/visit/library-archive/holocaust-badges/.

Holtz-Bacha, Christina, and Bengt Johansson, eds. ​Election Posters around the Globe: Political Campaigning in Public Space.​ Cham, Switzerland: Springer, 2017.

Huckfelt, Robert, and John Sprague. ​Citizens, Politics, and Social Communication.​ Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1995.

Jacobs, Karrie, and Steven Heller. ​Angry Graphics: Protest Posters of the Reagan/Bush Era.​ Salt Lake City, UT: Peregrine Smith Books, 1992.

Jacobs, Tom. "How Metaphor Can Be a Potent Tool in Fostering Anti-immigration Sentiment."

Pacific Standard​ (Seattle, WA), February 1, 2019. https://psmag.com/social-justice/howour-political-language-provokes-anti-immigrant-anger.

Kaiser, Susan B. The ​Social Psychology of Clothing: Symbolic Appearances in Context​. 2nd ed.

31

New York, NY: Fairchild Publications, 1997.

Levy, David. David Levy to LinkedIn web forum, "Dress Codes for Men in Politics," August 21, 2015. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/dress-codes-men-politics-david-levy/.

Lilleker, Darren G. ​Key Concepts in Political Communication.​ N.p.: Sage, 2006. https://search.credoreference.com/content/title/sageukpc.

— ——. ​Political Communication and Cognition​. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014.

Loos, Adolf. "Ornament und Verbrechen" [Ornament and Crime]. ​Les Cahiers d'aujourd'hui​, 1 913. Digital file.

Martin, Michel. "What Is She Wearing? Fashion Laws of Politics." ​Tell Me More​. Podcast audio.

September 10, 2018. https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=94453553.

Mazzei, Patricia, and Alan Blinder. "A Hurricane's Coming, but Fear Not, the Governor Is Here.

And Here. And Here." New York Times (New York, NY), October 9, 2018. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/09/us/florida-politicians-hurricane-michael.html.

Moir, James. "Chapter 6: Presenting Politics: Persuasion and Performance Across Genres of Political Communication." In ​Title: Analyzing Genres in Political Communication: Theory and Practice​, edited by Piotr Cap and Urszula Okulska, 224-36. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, 2013.

Negrin, Llewellyn. ​Appearance and Identity: Fashioning the Body in Postmodernity. ​New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008.

Ngan, Mandel. Barack Obama's Tan Suit "Controversy" Is Now Three Years Old. Photograph.

GQ. August 29, 2017.

Nooter Roberts, Mary. "Inscribing Identity: The Body." In ​Inscribing Meaning: Writing and Graphic Systems in African Art,​ by Christine Mullen Kreamer and Sarah Adams, 55-69.

Washington, DC: Smithsonian, 2007.

Parkins, Wendy, ed. ​Fashioning the Body Politic​. New York, NY: Berg, 2002.

Pater, Ruben. ​The Politics of Design.​ Amsterdam, The Netherlands: BIS Publishers, 2016.

Pinkus, Erin, and Mark Blumenthal. "SurveyMonkey Poll Profiles Women's March Participants."

SurveyMonkey. https://www.surveymonkey.com/curiosity/surveymonkey-poll-profiles -womens-march-participants/.

Prokopovich, L.V. “ИССЛЕДОВАНИЕ КОСТЮМНЫХ УКРАШЕНИЙ И АКСЕССУАРОВ КАК СРЕДСТВ КОММУНИКАЦИИ В ПОЛИТИЧЕСКОМ «ТЕАТРЕ»” [Study of Jewelry and Accessories as a Means of Communication in a Political “Theater”]. Science Rise, no. 42 (2018): 16-19.

— — — “ВИЗУАЛИЗАЦИЯ КУЛЬТУРНОЙ ИДЕНТИЧНОСТИ ПОСРЕДСТВОМ КОСТЮМНЫХ УКРАШЕНИЙ КАК ФОРМА ТЕАТРАЛИЗАЦИИ ПОВСЕДНЕВНОСТИ” [Visualization of Cultural Identity Through Costume Jewelry as a Form of Theatricality of Everyday Life]. ScienceRise, 11 (28) (2016)., 15–19.

Rickards, Maurice, comp. ​Posters of Protest and Revolution​. New York, NY: Walker and Company, 1970.

Roach, Mary Ellen, and Joanne Bubolz Eicher. ​Dress, Adornment, and the Social Order.​ New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, 1965.

Roach, Mary Ellen, Joanne Bubolz Eicher, and Kim K.P. Johnson, eds. ​Dress and Identity.

New York, NY: Fairchild Publications, 1995.

Rai, Shirin M., and Janelle Reinelt, eds. ​The Grammar of Politics and Performance.​ Abingdon, 32

UK: Routledge, 2014.

Solá-Santiago, Frances. "What Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's Hoop Earrings Mean to Latina Women Like Me." ​Glamour,​ January 11, 2019. https://www.glamour.com/story/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-hoop-earrings.

Smail, Daniel Lord, Mary C. Stiner, and Timothy Earle. "Chapter 9: Goods." N.d. Digital file.

St. Felix, Doreen. "The Day Harriet Tubman Wore a Pink Pussyhat." ​The New Yorker (​ New York, NY), January 22, 2018. https://www.newyorker.com/culture/ annals-of-appearances/the-day-harriet-tubman-wore-a-pink-pussyhat.

Staples, Brent. "How the Suffrage Movement Betrayed Black Women." ​New York Times ​(New York, NY), July 28, 2018. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/28/opinion/sunday/ suffrage-movement-racism-black-women.html.

United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. "Classification System in Nazi Concentration Camps." Holocaust Encyclopedia. https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/ classification-system-in-nazi-concentration-camps.

Whitney, Elwood, ed. ​Symbology.​ New York, NY: Hastings House, 1960.

Zaru, Deena. "Dressing like a Politician." ​CNN​, January 25, 2014. http://sotu.blogs.cnn.com/2014/01/25/dressing-like-a-politician/.

Zweiman, Jayna, and Kristah Suh. "Pussyhat Project: Design Interventions for Social Change."

Pussyhat Project. https://www.pussyhatproject.com/.

33