nothing new #4: being influenceable is my most unattractive quality
the curatorial eye is critical
Day 52/365. Nothing new.
Wardrobe update: Progression is at a standstill.
As a photographer, I have always been proud of my approach to fashion documentation. An open playing field of style draws me in and speaks more to uplifting individuals with unique perspectives rather than some hidden fashion industry agenda. In front of my camera, if your outfit piques my interest, honestly - anything goes.
Because of my openness to everything in fashion - I am very easily influenced. And being influenceable is my most unattractive quality. *Influenced in a commercial sense.
My style was once defined by gifts that brands would throw in my direction, filled in by trend purchases and a cycle of new basics. My identity changed quicker than the seasons, so fluid there wasn't anything to hold onto. No depth - no clarity - just online reassurance and empty compliments - reaffirming that I was participating in fashion as long as I remained on trend.
When I started to ask questions, the edges of my identity began to clarify and the woman I am now started to come into view.
Who am I? What am I? And how do my clothes reflect that?
When asked to describe my style, I told people it was a work in progress. An undefined aesthetic based on values rather than the look of my clothes.
Now, as I recycle outfits from my wardrobe owning nothing new, I know my visual style and values strengthen beneath the clothes I wear.
On nothing new #3 Sarah asked a series of thought provoking questions. The next section is a series of notes and thoughts based off these questions.
Sarah: “We often dress to express ourselves, our identities, our feelings, our beliefs... and yet something like identity (and all it encompasses) is so malleable and susceptible to change (in ways good and bad). I'm curious to know what you have learnt about your identity or sense of self through your no-shop journey. Does your set number of clothes restrict your sense of self or accommodate it? Has this journey shaped your identity, or has it been this way all along? Have you changed or just "grown into" yourself? What about your clothes?”
LS: Sitting comfortably on day 52 of not shopping, I realise that my identity should not be so susceptible to change.
Identity is reliant upon some sort of defined individuality. How will I be remembered or recognised if my character is forever changing?
Sarah: “Have you changed or just "grown into" yourself?”
Neither. I have simply stopped responding to the outside opportunity for influence and started cultivating my creativity within the bounds of my wardrobe. In short, I look to myself.
Could you do the same? *asked in a curious and questioning tone.
Sarah: Does the number of clothes you own restrict your sense of identity? And in turn your sense of self?
My identity and character are not defined by the volume of clothes, but rather by the strength and conviction, I have had in cultivating my taste over these last few years. If style is taste over time and not the industry of clothes, then identity is tightly connected to my ability to curate a closet that suits not only my body shape, proportion and colouring but also my lifestyle - all echoing a feeling that is very ‘me’.
The curatorial eye is critical - not the number of clothes I own or how often I buy them.
Most people I have encountered over the lifespan of this project say they dress to their mood, and in reflecting on my own behaviour, I don't think I dress to my mood, but more to my needs for the day and then, in turn, that strengthens my mood.
My daily life varies greatly. Sometimes, I spend my time within luxury spaces photographing beautiful women who love clothes as much as I do; other days are spent having one professional conversation after another in art galleries, offices, creative studios or boardrooms. Then there are the days I load my car with various types of equipment and head on a photo assignments where I can walk an excess of 20k steps as I pound the pavement looking for style, and on weekend when I have my hands deep in the soil of my garden or hang with kids shooting hoops or wrestling on the couch, I don't want to think about my clothes.
I want to get dressed at the beginning of an activity and trust that my clothes will carry me through. No matter whether that is in a fashion, business or family context. Trust that I look good - on every angle, as I am photographed more often that I care for - and can live my life with a level of comfort that poses no distraction from the task ahead.
Whether it's a feeling, a knowing, your beliefs, your physical self or your creative self…consistency defines character.
Having less objects or influence strengthens my identity.
Yet, somewhere along the line, I had been sold the idea that having more clothes is better. That it's good to have options so you can dress to your mood, keeping up with trends, which in turn validates your style and sense of self. But in truth, it's the opposite… in truth, stronger style is set by boundaries, consistently wearing clothes that become easily identifiable as you. Whether you are the guy in the coffee shop or Anna Wintour - for me, less clothes equals a stronger identity.
*Consistency doesn't mean a lack of creativity or flexibility. It just means using the building blocks you have. It means refining, not defining.
**As with all opinions about clothing, we should always acknowledge that getting dressed is personal and what is right for me should not be a carbon copy approach for someone else. Don’t aspire to be like me or anyone, aspire to give yourself the time to decide what is truely meaningful to you.
These last few weeks, the key players in my fashion identity have been:
My vintage D&G leopard collar coat (from this post).
A pair of wide-leg jeans from KAHE, made in Melbourne.
A pair of whiskery vintage blue Levis.
Sunglasses - the last thing I will buy this year.
A Dior bowling bag.
A few basic tees.
Black on black branded Chanel loafers.
White or blue socks.
A black collarless blazer with a slight balloon sleeve.
My JLC watch.
This post is part of a larger body of work that explores Our Relationship With Clothes. Australia is the largest consumer of textiles in the world; we ask questions in the hope of encouraging self-reflection and change.
To expand on the poll, I think a limited number of clothes helps to establish a fashion identity, but I don't think the number has to be low. I think I have quite a lot of clothes, which is still about 50% of what I used to have, so I don't think it's an excessive amount. I used to follow quite a lot of people who had very restricted capsule wardrobes, and they would just end up constantly buying more stuff and getting rid of the old stuff, because they were bored wearing the same thing asll the time but were obsessed with the idea of it being a numbers game.
I think the issue is when a large wardrobe just consists of the same things being bought over and over again, when people get so caught up the cycle of always "updating" the same basic pieces - its always a blazer and jeans, whatever shade of beige or hem width is currently trending, and that's a game you can never win.
thank you for your reflections Liz, they're insightful and just as thought provoking! 💓 I love what you mentioned in your reply to Louise about being an intentionalist.
it strikes me with greater clarity now that following trends/microtrends can also be a form of (unconscious?) intentionality — but maybe towards art or experimentation or validation or something else altogether, which then seems to "justify" all the purchases and consumption. whereas your intentionality appears to stem more from the activities you dedicate your time towards, and your intentional selection of clothes then reflect you when you're doing what you do to give you purpose :-) in other words, while both types of people look to fashion as an outlet to express identity, they find their inspirations/definitions for "who they are" in different places, which informs what and how (!) they consume fashion. there is something to be said too about the no-shop approach vs maybe "less-shop", but perhaps a conversation for another day! 🤭