The Thread Magazine Fall/Winter 2016

THREAD

ISSUE NO.9

THE GREEN ISSUE

FALL / WINTER 2016

Thread is an independent student publication and the only fashion, lifestyle and art magazine at Cornell. Thread is a conglomeration of student-made fashion, art, photography, styling, and design. It is published semesterly, and aims to showcase the interdisciplinary talents of individuals within the Cornell community through its attention to compelling visual and written storytelling.

Thread encourages students of all disciplines to join our team. If you are interested in working on Thread, please contact us.

Web thethreadmagazine.com Email thethreadmagazine@gmail.com Facebook facebook.com/thethreadmagazine Instagram @threadmag

The Thread Magazine, an independent student organization located at Cornell University, produced and is responsible for the content of this publication. This publication was not reviewed or approved by, nor does it necessarily express or reflect the policies or opinions of, Cornell University or its designated representatives. Funded in part by the Student Aseembly Funding Commission.

Editorial Avidan Grossman John Payne Isabelle Phillippe Ruojia Sun

Associate Editor-in-Chief Olivia Friedman Nadine Fuller Elena Jiao Matthew Ormseth

Photography

Ariel Hsu President Daniel Preston Editor-in-Chief Claire Bowie Creative Director Katie Roscoe Technical & Web Director Hannah Babb Vice President

Director Omar Abdul-Rahim Lily Croskey-Englert Tina He Maya Jacks

Cameron Pollack Emily Keenan Tiffany Li Jerry Liu Monika Patel

Business Business Director Kristina Linares Abigail Macaluso Emily Wan Kendra Sober Marketing Marketing Director Yodai Yasunaga

Creative Andrea Gonzalez Del Valle Emily Keenan Hebani Duggal Eliza Lesser Jessie Harthun Kaya Middleton

Art Director Michael Choe Lily Croskey-Englert Grace Lawson Weihong Rong

Charlene Luo George Tsourounakis Jill Wu Ally Yuan

Tina He Charlotte Hersh Akanksha Jain Juhwan Park Alessandra Piccone Emily Wan

Web Javier Agredo Christine Relander Saqif Badruddin Weihong Rong Karson Daecher Audrey Tirtohadiguno

Special thanks to:

Beauty Director Charlene Pires Elena Jiao Jenny Yi Diane Tsang Handan Xu

Styling Director Quincy Blair Nadine Fuller Lucrezia Giovannini Sam Muscarella Justin Parratt Kate Rabin

Ben Abeles Christina Chin Michelle Dan Alexa Eskenazi Nadine Fuller Kelaiah George

Brenna Louie Edna Samron Lauren Song Ravenna Stafford Ruojia Sun Handan Xu

BreakFree The Cornell Store Loco Cantina Printing Center USA Student Assembly Funding Commission & other non-members who have contributed to Thread in any way Models Hebani Duggal Nadine Fuller Pamely Gomez

Claire Guffey Soren Malpass Alice Zheng

Advisor Prof. Denise Green dng22@cornell.edu

letter from the editor I sit here, less than eighteen hours after Donald J. Trump was announced as this country's next President-elect.

Still catching my breath—trying to find a solid footing in the haze of social media outcry and personal torment—I question the next four years. I grieve for the morals of our country which were stripped from every single citizen in the early hours of November 9th. I grieve for the future of all Americans who fear their existence in the country they’ve called home now balances in the stubby fingers of a man who doesn’t deserve a chance at leading the most powerful nation in the world. But right now, as I write this, I grieve for the future of our dying ecosystems and for a cataclysmic future with a Presidentelect who has publicly denounced climate change.

This is the issue of our generation.

This is the issue that will determine the future of the human race.

Every civil human right that we, as a country, have fought for over the past sixty years—equal rights for people of color, LGBTQ+ equality, advancement of women's rights, freedom of choice—all mean nothing in a world that is slowly eating away at its own flesh. We can no longer hide from the wounds of our planet, now visible like the deep bruises of a rotting peach.

2

This is our time.

This is a call to action.

Fashion and apparel consumption are one of the largest contributors to worldwide pollution that we have seen in our lifetime. This is our time to recognize that we can make a difference. We can no longer hide behind the guise of fast fashion — behind ‘eco-labels’ and ‘sustainable’ business practices. We have been to the dark side of the moon and back and we have to recognize that a fundamental change needs to occur. We have taken our stance and we hope this season’s issue helps you recognize the flaws in the ways in which you consume, in which you buy, in which you waste. This is The Green Issue and this is the issue of our generation.

- Daniel Preston

3

letter from the creative director Last issue we focused on our Cornell community, digging our hands into the work of our gifted neighbors and dissecting the dust of their growth and their progression to a shining star.

But as the formidable dawn of senior year and my impending plunge into the real world struck me at the start of this semester, the peaks and valleys of the world around this small university became apparent. We found ourselves looking at a world of consumers suffocating in this season’s hottest trend with their faces all turning this year’s Pantone’s Color of the Year. But there’s green behind this Rose Quartz and we discovered that sustainable still looks pretty fierce.

For the final issue leading my squadron of unparalleled visionary composers, I wanted to plant my heart’s seed in the pages of this magazine and let the world around us blossom in all of its grimy and glorious splendor. We stripped fashion to its tendrils, clay, and shoestrings, tearing back the fabric to reveal the oil drenched skin and concrete jungle. This is our ode to the planet, our ode to Leonardo DiCaprio, our promise to question our future. This is The Green Issue.

The Green Issue was conceived out of a deep conflict between our culture of perpetual consumerism and an unrelenting love for our natural world.

This summer I found myself sitting in the middle of Joshua Tree National Forest at five in the morning asking myself the simple question of ‘what kind of footprint do I want to leave?’

—on this magazine, on this squeaky library chair, on this planet. If I learned anything during my time here at Cornell, it’s that we all have the power to improve the world around us if we just ask questions. So this issue is our collective head scratch and chin rub as we look at the choices we make every day as consumers and how we cope, rationalize and strip apart the schemes of our fashion industry.

So here we are. With dirt in our fingernails, oil on our jeans and a whole lot of charcoal on our teeth, we come to you fresh from the depths of our voyage to give you our Adidas x Parley, our heart on our sleeve, our souls sunken within the pages waiting to blossom. We ask only one thing of you. Never stop asking questions.

- Claire Bowie

This is our time.

This is a call to action.

contents 6 9 10 16 18 20 26 28 34 37 42 46

Literal Trash Dress to Kill The Cost of Copycatting A Cloth is a Living Thing Out with the Old, In with the Sustainable Too Much of a Good Thing Fiberizer Stay Grounded #depopfamous Making Up Under the Sink In Consequence

Literal Trash Nadine Fuller Through the magic of the internet and the multitude of platforms for which content is created and distributed, it seems as though Instagram in particular presents an easy road to personal fame and admiration. The appeal of Instagram celebrities resides largely in their accessibility to their viewers. With the right bag, filter, and destination, you too, can attract the followers, likes, and praise displayed in their carefully curated pages and profiles. The Instagram “influencer” embodies the quest for personal satisfaction via interpersonal acceptance, constantly promoting a new look to acquire, a new pursuit to achieve.

Social media has provided us with a 24hour trend forecast making the consumer constantly aware of trend lifecycles dictating how we dress in the morning after we finally stop scrolling through Instagram and actually get up from our beds.

This emphasis on ephemeral materialism has permeated into our culture through seemingly unrelated cultural touch points, like the phrase “retail therapy”, or the tragic relatability of Confessions of a Shopaholic. Instead of the traditional two seasons the fashion industry has conventionally adhered to, the fast fashion cycle has established fifty-two.

High fashion has, until very recently, always persisted with annual seasons.

However, it has never attempted, nor considered, mass producing the quantity of clothing necessary to restock shelves

6

with the new items constantly being demanded. The very appeal of couture lies in is its uniqueness and limited quantity. Fast fashion mimics this rarity but with a quick turnover of items, only to restock different iterations of the same style for shoppers to buy again and again. Although the notion of cheap clothing bringing style to the masses and democratizing fashion is not an entirely unpleasant one, the methods required to keep pace with production makes it a problematic one.

The retail industry contributes significantly to global pollution. According to the world bank, almost a quarter of global industrial water pollution is generated by the treatment and dyeing of textiles.

Apparel accounts for ten percent of the total global carbon output. However, the true impact of the textile industry can only be understood in the context of its entire lifecycle, from raw material to disposal.

Textiles can be made from fibers that are either natural or synthetic. Depending on the nature of the fiber, the ecological footprint of the item will differ greatly.

Polyester, a fiber derived from petroleum, is the most common material used to construct mass-produced clothing. In the making of the fabric itself, several kinds of hazardous byproducts are also produced.

Natural alternatives aren’t much better.

Cotton is the largest consumer of water in the apparel supply chain, and accounts for a disproportionate amount of the

7

world’s total pesticide and insecticide use. Textiles are dyed using chemical and water intensive processes that create so much wastewater the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) classifies sites exposed to the process as hazardous waste generators. Often wastewater is not properly treated and disposed of, especially in less rigorously regulated countries, like Indonesia, which are favored by producers for exactly that reason. When the fabric is finished, cut and sewn, often in an entirely different country, it is exported to countries around the world, ready to be posted online.

As one refresh of any social media page will tell you, every trend eventually dies, often quite quickly. Not shown, however, in the glamourous lifestyle ads endemic online is the other side of compulsive consumerism. Annually, the average American throws away sixty-eight pounds of clothing. Once an item finds its way to consumers, they are responsible for more than half of its respective carbon footprint. Washing clothing in a conventional washing machine and dryer uses significant amounts of water and energy. No matter how careful you are though, even using cold water, any polyester products washed will experience microshedding, releasing small plastics into our waterways and oceans.

Most of the options for transitioning to a more sustainable future are rather straightforward; however, they are often overlooked and underdone. Production of new materials should be minimized.

Buy less, and buy better. Outputs of production should be minimized. This is best done by opting for natural or sustainably sourced synthetics (such as tencel), using vegetable based or nontoxic dyes and tanning processes.

Transportation should be limited: try to buy as locally as possible. Generally, more mindfulness and consideration should be applied to the items you choose to buy and the companies you choose to buy them from. The phrase vote with your dollars is not, or not usually, a reference to the state of democracy in this country, but rather the privilege and duty of you, the consumer, to direct trends in the production, distribution and lifestyle of your products. How’s that for your next #ootd caption?

S

F a T F S i N a H o ‘16

the cost of copycatting Elena Jiao With the growth of digital media and consumer demand, the fast fashion industry, now valued at over three trillion dollars, is growing faster than ever. Based on the constantly changing trends and seasons, fast fashion copies the latest styles directly off the runway and immediately manufactures them at affordable prices. On the surface, fast fashion acts as an outlet to help everyone afford “designer” clothing. It acts as an opportunity to create jobs and alleviate poverty, or so people think. In order for companies to keep up with the rising demand for products at low prices, the majority of companies resort to detrimental, impractical practices. The appalling and dangerous working conditions, to some, might amount to modern day slavery.

How can a business model so blatantly detrimental to the environment simultaneously be so well funded in today’s society? The fact is, the contemporary consumer either doesn’t know or doesn’t care. Despite its large presence and target audience, little is known about the industry—only 3% of all clothing purchased is manufactured in the US. Unfortunately, people don’t take notice of a condition until something disastrous happens, such as the H&M Bangladesh Collision of 2014—deemed ‘the worst industrial accident anywhere in the world for a generation’. Over 1,000 workers died during the Rana Plaza building collapse, in which H&M did not comply with the Safety Action Plans. However, these working conditions aren’t unique to H&M. Day by day, workers, particularly women, are faced with inhumane conditions, and aren’t provided reasonable wages or clean, safe work environments.

While many fashion brands, such as H&M and Zara, have taken efforts to reduce their environmental footprint with new sustainability initiatives, these focus on using renewable resources, which benefit the environment,

10

rather than avoiding actions that are inhumane to their employees, which will in turn increase costs.

Even so, these renewable resources don’t seem to be any less detrimental to the environment.

“There’s misinformation in the marketing message. The eco label is not deserved. The eco is a minor improvement, but unfortunately, it’s communicated to the consumer as if it’s problem solved.” comments Nikolay Anguelov, author of The Dirty Side of the Garment Industry, a book about fast fashion’s negative impact on the environment.

Fortunately, many modern fashion brands such as Girlfriend Collective and Reformation focus on sustainable practices through efficient, ecofriendly technology and pro-social practices. Not only will a green building infrastructure benefit the workers, it will also minimize the waste and devastating carbon footprint. Companies like these dedicate extra care to pay workers above the minimum wage; many also provide health benefits to full-time employees including the manufacturing team. However, sustainable practices come with much higher pricing—one that many consumers aren’t able to afford.

Consumers are forced to choose between sustainable humane practices and the desire to wear the latest, affordable fashion trends— and too often it’s the latter. The industry won’t change so long as we, as consumers, continue to fuel it. Unless these companies completely alter their entire business structures, they’ll still be producing huge amounts of waste regardless of how many sustainable lines they introduce to combat bad press, or to make consumers forget the harsh reality of a disaster on the scale of the one in Bangladesh.

This isn’t to say consumers should completely abandon fashion completely. The largest problem stems from the extreme demand for quick and cheap clothes. 150 billion new clothing items are made annually, and many are only worn several times before being discarded, creating the second most waste in the world. In order to meet these demands at affordable prices, companies inevitably will utilize unsustainable working conditions. Regardless of fast fashion brands’ sustainability and eco-friendly campaigns, the overarching goal for companies is to sell more inventory. Ultimately, the most effective solution is to become more aware of the problem and reduce the amount of waste we consume.

11

12

13

dressed to kill

14

15

ぼろ

ボロ 16

17

The cloth is a living thing, a patchwork of rag and scrap that’s outlived generations of its owners. It’s called boro, and you can find it in Shibuya, stitched into jackets that go for four figures and jeans for three, but also in the surf-battered villages of northern Japan, where fishermen still ward off the cold with coats and blankets pieced together from boro.

Boro refers to homespun cotton cloth that’s been worn to pieces before being patched up and sewn back together, a jigsaw puzzle of fabric that is passed down generation after generation. The word loosely translates to “the state of objects that have been used, broken, or worn to tatters, then extensively repaired and sometimes used far beyond their normal expected life cycle,” according to Yoshiko Iwamoto Wada, the author of “Boro no Bi: Beauty in Humility — Repaired Cotton Rags of Old Japan,” an essay which she presented at the 2004 Textile Society of America Symposium.

While boro is now a sought-after commodity among Japanese designers, the practice of piecing together rags was born out of necessity in Japan’s northern fishing villages, where cotton was in short supply.

Cotton was first brought to Japan from China in the 14th century; prior to cotton’s arrival, Japanese peasants, who were too poor to afford silk, wove rough textiles out of natural fibers like hemp, mulberry and wisteria. These were then dyed with indigo, which had been cultivated in Japan since the 7th century.

These fiber-based textiles did not retain heat well, and were rough to the touch and difficult to weave.

Poor farmers, fishermen and loggers discovered they could sew bits and pieces of cotton rags — whatever they could get their hands on — into their fiber-based garments. The patchwork practice of boro took off.

A flourishing rag trade developed between the northern Japanese islands of Hokkaido and Edo, now modern-day Tokyo. Fishermen shipped byproducts of their operation — fish oil and fertilizer — south in exchange for scraps of cotton cloth from the city. This specific route was called kitamaebune — Japanese for “northern-bound ships.”

It was not uncommon to see a particular garment undergo a radical transformation to fill a specific need — a blanket could be taken apart for a new coat, and the coat could likewise be reassembled into a futon once the weather turned warm. A boro shirt may have lived many lives — a futon, a blanket, a pair of pants, perhaps — with each generation disassembling and reassembling the raw material into whatever shape was needed most.

“Subject to exhaustive repairs to maintain an element of functionality, they often underwent significant transformation from their original form,” Wada said.

“These humble cloths are tangible remnants of stories

lived by the common people—farmers, fishermen, and lumberjacks in rural areas along the Sea of Japan and the northeastern Honshu Island.”

Japanese denim heavyweight Kapital, based in Kojima — the “capital” of the country’s denim industry — was one of the first to debut boro in their designs, and designers like Junya Watanabe have since incorporated boro into their collections.

Is it jarring to see a jacket fashioned from boro — a product of thrift, necessitated by poverty — retail at well over a thousand dollars? Perhaps boro is merely the latest victim in a string of appropriations that culminated in John Galliano’s 2000 spring collection for Dior. In reviewing the collection, which spawned the now-ubiquitous term “homeless chic.”, New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd referred to the shock in seeing “models who starve themselves” posing “as the starving. They came down the runway raggedy and baggy, some swathed in newspapers, with torn linings and inside-out labels, accessorized with empty little green J&B whiskey bottles, tin cups dangling from the derriere, bottle caps, plastic clothespins and safety pins.”

“Jogging around the Seine has thrown Paris into a whole different light for me,” Galliano said after the show. “‘Some of these people [the homeless] are like impresarios, their coats worn over their shoulders and their hats worn at a certain angle. It’s fantastic.”

But perhaps in couture’s embrace of boro it is not poverty but imperfection that is being elevated to the stuff of reverence. The idea of wabi-sabi — which translates roughly to “wisdom in natural simplicity” or “flawed beauty” — is ingrained in Japanese culture.

Wabi-sabi celebrates the crack in a teacup, a glaze with discolorations, pottery fashioned on a slightly off-kilter kiln. Imperfections in the final product are scrutinized and meditated upon. Materials that decay or change over time — parchment, fabric, and soft woods — are prized for their transience. Like boro, these materials are living things.

In this light, the elevation of boro to the world of couture is not an idealization of thrift. Boro is not celebrated because it is beautiful in spite of the thrift that necessitated it. It is celebrated because it is beautiful without ever intending to be.

The cloth is a living thing Matthew Ormseth

out with the new, in with the sustainIsabelle Philippe The term “thrift shop” has come to represent a staple phrase among different people everywhere.

What was once coined as a specific destination for a certain socioeconomic class, has transformed into a revolutionarily all-inclusive movement.

Thrift stores have come to be the embodiment of modern day ‘retro’ style. With budgeted apparel and ready-to-be-made fashionable clothing, second-hand shops represent a new kind of affordability, one where the old, the new, and the sustainable, are all interchanged in an economically sound system.

In past decades, second-hand-stores were a necessary way of acquiring clothing. In terms of production and affordability, reused clothing were a reliable way of minimizing excessive cost with the benefit of knowing clothing was available.

Through mass production, people were gradually able to shift gears from acquiring second-hand items, to buying new and store-bought materials.

The current day has brought about a trend in which environmental activism contributes greatly to the way people decide to use money, in terms of what is sustainably beneficial and minimizes impact on the environment. In response, across the world, individuals are expressing newfound support for the promotion of sustainable alternatives in the forms of food and energy consumption and material usage. Fashion is no exception to this growing effort. In response to this wave of activism, many consumers are turning to thrift stores in order to minimize harm.

What once began as a necessary and often times stigmatized way of acquiring clothing has transformed into a movement, leading to not just the flourishment and acceptance of thrift stores worldwide, but the opening of resale boutiques or luxury thrift stores in which designer clothing, all secondhand, is available for purchase.

The proliferation of thrift stores transformed into resale boutiques is partially a result of societal acceptance of second-hand clothing, largely made possible by household names in the media.

In popular culture, Macklemore and Ryan Lewis’

18

“Thrift Shop” revels in the “second-hand culture” that is thrift shopping. The video’s anthem glamorizes the act, thanking others for their handme-downs and donations. The effects of celebrity and other high profile names in the spotlight have helped garner attention for thrift shops, and in turn, normalize the act of purchasing second-hand items. With imagined visuals of beaten down bluejeans, worn out leather jackets, and supple fur coats, thrift shops have fostered a new kind of reemergence of hipster 70’s fashion that appeals to many and is now considered favorably by societal standards. It is in fact, the younger generation that is bolstering this usage of second-hand apparel.

AuH20, a popular thrift boutique located in the East Village of NYC has particularly felt the effects of this uprising support of second-hand apparel by the younger generation. The shop was opened

by Kate Goldwater, who was born and raised in Compton. A frequent thrift-shopper, Goldwater would take apart second-hand clothing items, and generate outfits by matching and mismatching them to her mother’s apparel. After moving to New York, the creator thought she would be able to find many affordable clothing stores, but to her displeasure, she could not. Thus, AuH20 was born. The clothes produced in the store are mostly a composition of natural fibers, like wools and denims, with denim in particular being the one of the highest items sold. Most customers of the store are high school and college aged students, ranging from eighteen to twenty-five years old.

The students come from primarily disadvantaged backgrounds, where buying high end clothing can be difficult. Longtime employee Lucy Espinal describes the importance that AuH20, and many thrift stores alike have for young adults. The products are more affordable, Espinal explains, and students and other young people who are saving money are suddenly able to buy different necessities like food and textbooks. Shoppers no longer feel guilty about purchasing nice items.

Espinal described the feeling of the boutique as a community and a support system for people experiencing similar problems. Best of all, items

19

found in a thrift store are often the only one of their kind, allowing each individual and unique customer to leave with a one of a kind item, unique in its entirety.

In this way, perhaps the most obvious appeal of second-hand clothing stems from its ability to bridge the gap between what is economically affordable and acceptable to wear for some, versus what others are able to afford that may not contain the best options in terms of clothing material and overall style choice. Thrift shops provide an opportunity for many consumers with less discretionary income to spend on clothing the chance to purchase fashion forward clothing for sustainable pricing.

Every second-hand shop that opens presents a way to improve not only the environment, but an individual’s self-worth, lifestyle, and activism. In promoting the re-wearing of clothing, each product reused is one less made, sparing energy sources, natural resources, and prejudices alike. In the words of one particularly iconic thrift shopper, pop some tags with a twenty-dollar bill at a local second-hand shop, and support the sustainability cause.

20

TOO MUCH OF A GOOD THING

21

The everyday suffocation consumers face when confronted by an excess of choice

22

23

24

25

F

I

B

E

R

I

Z

E

R

26

Olivia Friedman The Fiberizer revives textiles by transforming scrap fabric into usable material. Needless to say, it is revolutionary.

This groundbreaking machine came about via a collaboration between Human Ecology professors Dr. Anil Netravali, of the Fiber Science department, and Dr. Tasha Lewis, of the Fashion Product Management department.

The pair are fusing science and retail to craft a sustainable solution for a notoriously wasteful industry. Named for the pre-existing term of the process it works to revolutionize, the Fiberizer, according to Lewis, “aims to reduce consumption of natural resources.”

Netravali first conceived of the idea while working with Lewis and a Canadian company, Local Buttons, on a project in Haiti in which they attempted to create garments out of scrap fabric.

According to Netravali, only 12% of discarded apparel is sold in thrift shops, such as The Salvation Army and Goodwill. The remainder of this clothing is then sorted and oftentimes resold by ‘middle-men’ to consumers in third world countries, especially Haiti due to its geographical proximity to the United States, placing the textile waste burden of unwanted apparel onto these nations, as well. Once consumers rid their closet of garments, they ultimately go into landfills.

The project team used pattern digitization software, like Optitex, to create garments out of scrap fabric found in Haiti. Netravali explains that 15% of fabric is wasted when creating a new garment from scratch, since each pattern piece has a different shape and cannot fit perfectly into the standard dimension of a fabric roll. Because textile waste scraps are already cut, a quarter of fabric is wasted.

Miniscule-sized pieces have potential use for trims, such as button covers, but do not have much use beyond that.

Faced with this problem, Netravali had the idea to “shred these fabrics into fiber form,” and Netravali, Lewis, and their team developed the Fiberizer in a short one and a half months and presented it to the Environmental Protection Agency, subsequently receiving a grant to conduct further research and development of the machine.

Through shredder and cutter blades, the end product emitted from the Fiberizer is a composite material that can be used for an endless number of applications. However, the fiberized material is not strong enough to be re-spun into fabric, except for very coarse yarns that cannot be applied to the apparel industry.

While Netravali and Lewis do not think it is possible to return the fiber to its original state, they are hopeful that one day this will be achievable.

Netravali’s initial idea for the fiberized material was for it to be used as raw material for stuffed animals, mattresses, and pillows.

The material used to make stuffed animals, specifically, is always new material and is thus unnecessarily wasteful. In hopes of exploring other applications for the fiberized material, Lewis and Netravali formed a research team of students from a diverse array of academic backgrounds and departments, including Fiber Science and Apparel Design, Design and Environmental Analysis, and Engineering, and are “asking students to think beyond the basics,” says Lewis. Each student on the team is currently working on an individual project focusing on a possible function for the fiberized material. One student on the team, Schuyler Duffey, is conducting research on how to create fiberized planting ‘pods.’ Soil pods are popular in landscaping, but are detrimental to the environment. The soil that makes up these pods is often “vacuumed up ecosystems,” explains Lewis. Duffey believes that a naturally fiberized material, like cotton and wool, can be used as a substitute to this damaging soil collection process. Duffey is testing to see whether this would be possible with a variety

27

of fiber types. He is also analyzing what the fibers are composed of to see if they are ‘clean enough,’ as fabric often has many substrates, in order to determine whether a ‘fiberized pod’ would be supportive of plant life. It’s essentially “fabric moss!” exclaims Lewis.

With the assistance of a student engineering team, Lewis and Netravali hope to “develop an industrial-grade Fiberizer for small and medium-sized businesses” through the funds they received from the 2016 US Manufacturing Innovation Walmart Foundation. The ‘Generation 2’ Fiberizer is set to debut by the end of this November.

“The US Manufacturing Innovation Fund is part of Walmart and the Walmart Foundation’s broader commitment to foster new economic growth and opportunity and create stronger communities,” said President of the Walmart Foundation Kathleen McLaughlin, who is also the corporation’s chief sustainability officer.

This fund appears disjointed from Walmart’s reputation as one of the most egregious abusers of the environment in the world and thus, one must wonder whether the Fiberizer project is compromised by accepting such a large grant from Walmart. However, Netaravali believes that as a fast fashion retailer, Walmart is “interested in reducing and eliminating waste” and hopes that the corporation will use the Fiberizer itself.

The ‘Generation 2’ Fiberizer is faster and more compatible with different types of fibers through the use of ‘cartridges,’ each of which are catered towards a different type of fiber with varying saws, teeth, and angles, to keep potential damage as minimal as possible.

“We are trying to create minimal damage— meaning more fiber strength and perhaps more applications” says Netravali. While “we cannot strengthen the fiberized fiber, we can give the fiber less harsh treatment so fibers are not damaged while fiberizing.” Once damaged, there is no way to make the fiber stronger. According to Netravali, it would take an approximately 1.5-inch fiber to be ‘respun’ into a coarser yarn.

Lewis, too, believes the Fiberizer “has evolved and [sees] a bigger picture for it.” It needs “its own Twitter page,” she laughs. Whether fiberized material can be respun or not, the invention is worth noting. The Fiberizer, Netravali explains, “opens up the possibility of a ‘zero-waste’ solution.”

28

Know What’s Up Adidas Stan Smith Leather

LEATHER EXTERIORS One kilogram of leather produces 10 times more greenhouse gases than synthetic or natural alternatives. Leather sneaker production often involves Hexavalent Chromium, a probable carcinogen, to toughen rawhide into leather.

A better option is to shy away from leather sneaker models and look for synthetic and vegan options.

COTTON SHOELACES Cotton production requires large amounts of chemicals. The cotton industry is responsible for 24% and 11% of global insecticide and pesticide use.

Converse Chuck Taylor All Star Hi-Top

Models made with organic cotton require half as much energy and no synthetic chemicals to produce.

SYNTHETIC RUBBER SOLES

Nike Roshe Flyknit

The manufacturing of synthetic rubber results in a higher volume of waste than what is produced. The resulting waste contains volatile organic compounds, some of which are probable and suspected carcinogens.

Unfortunately, there are few viable alternatives to synthetic rubber in sneakers so be sure to clean them periodically to keep your sneakers in good shape.

30

31

stay

The tension between our evolutionary needs and our ethical inclinations

#depopfamous

35

Ruojia Sun Last year, I discovered the secret to copping American Apparel everything for half the retail price, the cutest vintage windbreakers from all over the world, and pieces from my favorite fashion bloggers’ closets all on the same day. It was the day when I downloaded depop, a secondhand “social shopping” app, where anyone like you, me, or pop singer Melanie Martinez, can sell their clothes and other belongings (sadly, Melanie deleted her account after making some 300 sales).

only takes snapping a photo of the dress that’s been sitting in the back of your closet for a year, preferably on a clean, white background (like Instagram, depop users focus on aesthetics to attract likes and follows), and you’re good to go.

In my B.D. (before depop) years, my vintageloving side had remained largely latent; despite enjoying the thrill of the hunt, I couldn’t justify going through 10 racks of junk before finding one shirt I might wear if only it were two sizes smaller.

I know you’re probably wondering, “Why haven’t On depop, I still feel the same exhilaration from I heard about this invention of the gods until finding the perfect vintage Victoria Secret slip now?” The United States arrived late to this dress, but since I can follow sellers that are killin’ bustling marketplace due to the fact that depop the game and inspect the explore page curated originally kicked off in the U.K. in 2011. Founder by depop employees, there is no need to scroll Simon Beckerman envisioned a modern version of through miles of unappealing clothes before eBay that would appeal to millennials. He carried encountering a gem. The best part is, I can do out this concept by incorporating features of a all of this while lounging in my bed. Beckerman social network—modeling the feed and personal created depop to be akin to having “your own profiles after Instagram, implementing follow and shop in your pocket.” This means that people who like features, and are not fortunate enough providing a private “depop makes it convenient for to have access to good messenger for users thrift shops can finally everyone to shop second-hand.” stop worrying about to communicate directly. Only on an finding a Goodwill— app like depop where users not only care about depop makes it convenient for everyone to shop making sales, but also refresh their notifications second-hand. regularly to check if they have new followers, will you find Leandra Medine, of Man Repeller, Depop isn’t the only platform that provides Chiara Ferragni, of The Blonde Salad, and Marzia this service. Other mobile-based bazaars, Bisognin, or cutiepiemarzia on YouTube, putting such as mercari, Poshmark, Vinted, and online their wardrobe up for sale. Everyone wants to be sites that have been around for longer, like #depopfamous! eBay, Etsy, and ASOS Marketplace, all support transactions of second-hand items. Since they When I downloaded depop to buy a jersey have different features, these marketplaces top from one of my favorite YouTubers, I didn’t can each be suitable for different needs. anticipate that it would soon become my “check For example, shoppers who are primarily first thing when you wake up in the morning” concerned about receiving their purchases app. In addition to being a frequent buyer, I also safely may discover that mercari is their best started selling my own clothes. When I made my option—since buyers do not pay until they first post, my thought process went something rate the transaction after they have received like, “I’ll give it a try, but honestly, who would want the item, scamming is almost impossible my stuff?” Over 200 sales later, I’ve concluded on mercari. However, depop’s user-friendly that anyone can sell on depop. You don’t have platform still seems to be the most popular to come in with an internet following, have a with millennials. With 3 million downloads ridiculously drool-worthy wardrobe, or even and counting, depop is building an active commit a lot of time to running your shop. It community of younger shoppers that are

“I have come to love every item of clothing in my wardrobe.�

beginning to shift their consumption away from fast fashion and towards alternative sources.

Millennials like me are often credited with fuelling the fast fashion craze, constantly introducing new items into our wardrobes to keep up with trends.

By supporting the manufacturers that satisfy our fast fashion desires, our generation is buying into a business model that prioritizes profit over environmental protection and workplace ethics.

However, the same need to stay current that gives way to our shopping habits may end up being our saving grace. There is nothing more up-to-date than the Internet, so online shopping through depop, where people are making new listings every second, perfectly complements our obsession for newness. Furthermore, as social media increasingly dominates the lives of millennials, the idea of purchasing from people that you can interact with on a social network becomes more and more appealing. Although online second-hand marketplaces are only starting to gain popularity, judging from their success so far, the future in shopping may just reside in platforms like depop.

I would welcome such a revolution. Since I started using depop, my closet has gone from being 100% fast fashion to half pre-owned pieces, decreasing the environmental footprint of my consumption. However, depop is more than just a substitute for Zara; buying and selling through depop has also affected my outlook on fashion.

By finding clothes from different brands, time periods, and parts of the country and world, I have a better understanding of the diversity of apparel merchandising, and am less loyal to specific fast fashion stores. Most importantly, while fast fashion creates a disconnect between us and the clothing we buy, my experience with depop has done the opposite. Through the work that goes into finding the perfect pieces and selling pieces that are no longer perfect for me, I have come to love every item of clothing in my wardrobe.

36

37

making up

38

products 1

3

2

5

4

7 6

1 Botanics Ionic Clay Mask 2 Mountain Ocean Skin Trip 3 Poppy Austin Rhassoul Clay 4 Grown Alchemy Lotion

40

8

5 6 7 8

ACURE Brightening Facial Scrub

Burt’s Bees Lip Shimmer Trader Joe’s Organic Virgin Coconut Oil Ecotools LG Powder Brush

Under the Sink:

The Backdoor Politics and Profits of Sustainable Business John Payne Sustainability, as the United States Environmental Protection Agency defines it, is an endeavor to “create and maintain the conditions under which humans and nature can exist in productive harmony to support present and future generations.”

Sustainability is a political message roundly endorsed by the Democratic Party and a lifestyle adopted by a mass of disparate consumers whose belief in the merits of sustainable living have produced a growing market for guilt-free goods. The swollen “green” market “is predicated on social sustainability, and the ideological and attendant socioeconomic framework” with the latent power to steer, topple and reconstruct “economic structures,” as Thomas G. Whiston details in Global Sustainability: Rhetoric and Reality, Analysis and Action—The Need for Removal of a Knowledge-Apartheid World. U.S. households’ powerful, yet fickle, buying behavior arises from an ingrained notion of freedom of choice, an institutional consumer credo many households

42

perceive as a fundamental right. Economic choice imperils the efficacy of sustainable business practices not only because of the perceived intrusion of top-down regulation and Washington politics into the home, but also because “freedom of choice” incentivizes corporations to pander to consumers’ demand for the best products, and not necessarily the most ethical. Furthermore, the lack of universal standards and definitions for fair trade and eco-certifications confuses consumers and relegates “fair trade” and other sustainable models to niche markets, where they will likely stay until Americans are thoroughly sold on sustainability. However, the rise of virtue signaling via food and other goods, and social responsibility as viable social currency threatens to upend this longstanding trend.

2016 finds United States mass culture steeped in ethics. Due in part to the success of social network platforms in catalyzing a national discourse on morality

43

44

45

and propriety, consumer choice is now a public text to be criticized or lauded on the basis of morality. Add an American emphasis on personal opinion and the protective freedom surrounding that opinion, and, suddenly, businesses have a social mechanism that reinforces their instruction to think green, and encourages economicallyminded consumers to consider green products as added value to their lifestyles. In the land of the PSA and ad campaign, ethics is writ-large, albeit expensive. A study conducted by Maria Loureiro, a researcher in the field of environmental economics at the University of Santiago de Compostela suggests that “higher income, a high level of education and more sensitivity toward environmental issues” are key factors in steering the growth of sustainable business. If “sensitivity toward environmental issues” is an implied trait of higher incomes and education levels, then what of the millions of Americans who don’t buy green? The commodification of sustainability, or “greenwashing,” means that corporate eco-label hijackers could persuade an even bigger market than the one they currently supply. According to How Sustainability Ratings Might Deter ‘Greenwashing’: A Closer Look at Ethical Corporate Communication, a study led

by Béatrice Parguel, “sustainability ratings play a significant role in helping consumers make more responsible evaluations…[Which] can penalize non-virtuous companies through classical market mechanisms, sensitize consumers further and encourage virtuous firms to persevere in their [sustainable] practices.” When a heaping bowl of fair trade quinoa is more socially attractive than shredded wheat, industries are incentivized to back sustainability while maintaining a high price point. But, in the case of “environmentally friendly” products, “better” is synonymous with “virtuous.”

Business is bolstered further by a variety of definitions for each eco-label found on products and shelves nationwide, breeding an amorphous web of legal talk and obfuscation that doubles

as the perfect smokescreen for corporate maneuvering in the short run, but could impede growth down the line. Loureiro writes: “[The] future and broader expansion of [ethical and environmentally preferable] niche markets may be limited by the fact that different definitions and standards are being applied by the different international organizations involved in fairtrade and eco-certifications.” For now, however, ecojargon’s main commercial utility is the social virtue it implies; the apparent sophistication of eco-labels, and therefore of the consumer base and the loose ends of a dozen definitions, enforced a dozen different ways by a dozen different countries. The attitude-behavior gap, a boon to the “sustainability” industry, indicates consumer beliefs often do not align with their actual marketplace decisions. Brands adopt the vague rhetoric and commercial aesthetics of sustainability, raise prices (or keep them high), and profit. Consumers benefits from the added virtue of the ethical products, and companies benefit from an extant social economy informed by eco PSAs that strengthen environmentally friendly trends.

Ironically, as companies continue to rely on informed consumers, they also depend, often desperately, on those consumers’ naïveté. Yet it is not the consumer who is to blame for the commercial adoption of environmental sensitivity, nor is it the government’s fault for disseminating PSAs that emphasize the civic virtue of living and shopping green. It is simply the problem of discord: that the World Fair Trade Organization’s definition of fair trade as “a trading partnership, based on dialogue, transparency and respect, that seeks greater equity in international trade [and] contributes to sustainable development by offering better trading conditions to, and securing the rights of, marginalized producers and workers” does not necessarily represent the global consensus on environmentalism, human rights, ethics or the law.

Discovering a harsh reality in a landscape defiled by ignorance

trash/flower

46

in con sEque nce PART I

49

52

in con sEque nce part ii

From rack to landfill, clothing is our only remains

53

54

56

SOFT! S W E AT E R F L E E C E Shop our selection of warm sweaters for women & men

STO R E .CORNELL. EDU

Make America Green Again Across the country, sixty million Americans are at war: on ignorance, on indifference, and on privilege. We have been targeted. We have been denied.

We have been cast aside. We have been silenced.

Throughout a presidential campaign defined by a baseless rhetoric, and inevitably during the next four years to come, Donald J. Trump has stripped this nation of sixty years of progress, leaving it, and us, standing naked and alone atop a far off mountain, completely defenseless against the whipping wind on our bare, raw flesh. Only soon we won’t feel the cold because there will be no cold to feel. Our planet is dying. She is fragile but she is relentless.

She will repair the three hundred years of damage post-industrial humanity has made her endure, but we will not wake again in this new world. This is the dismal hope for our immediate future under our new President-elect. Now is our time to make a difference.

Donald has publicly denounced the most pressing issue of our generation.

He has threatened to rip up the commitments the United States has made to combat climate change. He has suggested—insisted—that he will pull America out of the monumental Paris Accords, defund the Environmental Protection Agency, and repeal environmental regulations set in place over the past eight years. With a republican legislature and soon to be republican Supreme Court he will face little resistance.

Our government has abandoned us and it is our turn, as consumers, as guests of the natural world, to protect our planet. We must continue, now more than ever, to live sustainable lives. Buy local. Buy Organic. Eat less meat. Recycle more. From this point forward, there will be no enforcement on sustainable practices and we must hold accountable companies and corporations eager and willing to exploit this opportunity to make a quick profit. The government has failed to do its job, and our generation—our children, our future—will be held accountable for their actions. It is now our responsibility, despite political and personal differences, to join forces and defend our voiceless planet, who has relentlessly tried to cry out in pain only to be faced with more human intervention. This is our turn; this is our planet.

- Daniel Preston