The Princess Print

This is probably the only print I would buy for a little girl. I find this so appropriate  for every Christian woman. We are daughters of the KING of the Universe and thus are princesses. Do we behave like royalty?

Updates

No, none yet. I have been busy getting my Masters Proposal together and my head is filled with "Multimodal Literacy" and "Semiotic Chains" and some such things. If these terms do not make sense, don't worry, it's all about meaning-making. Actually the translation process from design to finish garment in the three major subjects in a Diploma in Fashion.

That being said, more God-related fashion-y stuff will follow soon. I have not run out of ideas yet. I am just not sure which direction to go - sub-cultures or accessories or current trends. Leave a comment and I will take it from there.

Accessories

Here is a brilliant alternative to the charm bracelet and standing up for purity in the process. Again, the story is taken from "Brining up Girls" by Dr James Dobson (2010) (for the purpose of this blog, I just want to paraphrase and not retell the entire story. Buy the book to read it. I found it to be the most touching part.) I know I did not write down the reference, for the original story, but the book was a gift for someone else, and although I read it, I do no longer have it :)


So, here is the story:

On her 16th birthday the woman, who tells the story, was taken by her parents to her favourite restaurant to officiate an agreement between her and them to being able to finally date. The agreement was that she could date any guy she wanted, and being a child of God had to agree to keeping pure in the following way:

Her dad handed over a charm braclet: Gemstone after gemstone was revealed on a silver bracelet. There were 6 gems, each diferent interspersed with 6 smaller ones in between (sapphires). The six different ones were 1) a piece of polished granite, 2) pink quarz, 3) an emerald, 4) a pearl, 5) a ruby and 6) a diamond.

All gems were symbolic: the six sapphires were there to remind her how beautiful and valuable she is to God and her parents. The granite was for the first time a guy held her hand, the quarz for her first kiss, the emerald for her first boyfriend, the pearl for the first time she said "I love you" to a guy other than her dad, the ruby for her first engagement and the diamond for the first time she will say "I do".

The deal, however was becomming more complicated. She had to remove the gem and hand it to the guy who held her had, kissed her, etc etc. She was feeling valued beyond belief, but I think her parents were very intelligent, because if she could not find it in her heart to hand over the gem, she could not give away the things they represented. She learned this lesson very fast - as quick as a few weeks later when I guy wanted to hold her hand and she could not see herself part with a piece of granite. Needless to say, she met a guy who admired her bracelet and never tried to do anything but ask her to marry him and on her wedding day she handed over the entire bracelet to him. Now her daughter is wearing it.....

Lets think about that a while - I'm not advocating we should spend the amount of money that her dad spent on her, but every cent was worth it, in the end. I do think, however if you want to make this a tradition, the stones need to be expensive and not just pieces of glass because it needs to hurt when you give the gem away.

The other alternative is a Salvation bracelet, that can also be decked out with various gems.

The colours are symbolic and represent the story of salvation (a very good talking point if people should ask)
Black: Sin, which separates us from God
Red: The blood of Christ, when He died for us.
Blue: Baptism - when we receive Christ and show our faith
Green: Our spirit grows in love for Him
White: We are made pure through forgiveness
Gold: Heaven, where the streets are paved with gold.

Modesty Part 3 (an Apology)

Apologies and corrections....

I have written previously about Pure Fashion, without actually knowing the real story behind it. I think I was quite critical of some of the outfits shown, but when I read the real reason behind Pure Fashion, I need to apologise and write it here.

I have taken this excerpt from Dr James Dobson's book "Bringing up Girls" (2010) - from the article "Standing Up to 'Girls gone Wild' Culture " by Michelle Malkin, as quoted by him:

First, let me tell you about my new hero. Her name is Ella Gunderson, and she's a student at Holy Family Parish School in Kirkland, Washington. As reported in the Seattle Times a few months ago, Ella recently wrote a remarkable letter to the Nordstom's department store chain.
"Dear Nordstrom," she began. "I'm an 11-year-old girl who has tried shopping at your store for clothes, in particular jeans, but all of them ride way under my hips, and the next size up is too big and falls down. They're also way too tight, and as I get older, show everything every time I move. I see all of these girls who walk around with pants that show their belly button and underwear. Even at my age I know that that is not modest. With a pair of clothes from your store, I'd walk around showing half of my body and not fully dressed... Your clerk suggested there is only one look. If that is true then girls are supposed to walk around half naked. I think maybe you should change that."

All it took was one little girl to speak her mind about the excesses of our "Girls Gone Wild" culture. And guess what? The market, in a small way responded. Nordstrom executives wrote back and pledged to young Ella Gunderson that they would broaden the clothes for girls. "Your letter really got my attention," wrote Kris Allan, manager of the local Nordstrom's where Ella shopped. "I think you are absolutely right. This look is not particularly a modest one and there should be choices for everyone."...

Here's the best part. She and her friends didn't wait around for Nordstrom's (sic) to change its inventory. With help from the mom and 37 of her classmates, Ella organised a fashion show to model decent clothes for girls aged 10 to 16. The sold-out show, called "Pure Fashion", drew a crowd of 250; two other clothing stores donated modest clothes; the girls got a standing ovation; and the event raised money for the Catholic Challenge Club network, which encourages young girls to stand up for their faith and their values in an increasingly secular and hostile world.

Well done!! I may have been too critical and judgmental and salute the effort of this courageous 11 (probably 13 year-old) to stand up for her faith and challenge the status quo of the fashion industry that prescribes what girls should wear.

Indigo

I have written about indigo before .... mentioning that it was produced from a marine snail, but at the same time indigo can also be obtained from the indigo plant. The entry on Wikipedia has quite a bit of information. it is a purplish-blue colour and usually quite expensive when manufactured from one of the two organic sources.

I'm more interested in the use in fashionable garb. The most fascinating use is for the traditional garments worn by the "Blue men of the desert".

Picture from: "Colors of Africa" by Duncan Clarke

The indigo in their clothing is not dyed in the usual way, since water is scarce. Therefore the indigo is pounded into the fabric, instead of boiled, giving the fabric a beautiful sheen (as seen in the picture above), but as the garment is worn, the dye rubs off onto the skin as can be seen in the pictures below. Because indigo is an expensive dye, it has become a status symbol amongst the Tuareg; the bluer the skin, the richer the wearer. The Tuareg have  always fascinated me and only after visiting quite a few sites did I come across the fact that the Tuareg use the indigo plant to dye their clothes.

Other African tribes use indigo for items like the one below.

 Indigo resist dye, hand-spun cotton; Dyula peoples, Bobo-Dioulasso region, Burkina Faso, 1990's
Taken from "The Art of African Textiles" by Duncan Clarke

All other pictures taken from this website

The most famous piece of indigo clothing we know, is denim (on which I will have to do another post).
Denim has been warp dyed, meaning that only the warp threads (the ones that run length-wise) have been dyed with the blue. Since the end of the 19th century synthetic dyes have replaced organic indigo, and linked mostly with practical fabrics and work clothes. Further information can be found here...

In the Bible, indigo is not mentioned by name, but whenever the cloth is dyed "purple" or blue, probably indigo was used. You can see that there are quite a number of references and each of them is found in relation to Kings, wealth or at least denoting some indication that the cloth was expensive. I have mentioned before that the "Proverbs 31 woman" is a trader in purple cloth, i.e. she is so rich that she can support her family so that they lack nothing.

As part of the rainbow, it is one of those colours that appear, but that people cannot usually distinguish from purple, or even see on the colour chart, because we divide the chart into three and then further into 6 (and not 7). Indigo sits between the blue and the purple on the colour chart and as such, is a beautiful colour, if you look at the reference in Wikipedia.

There is not much more to say.... happy browsing through the websites

Modesty Part 2

In the last few days I have come across a really good blog that shows some sewing skills and draping skills. The lady who blogs uses vintage design (mostly from the 50's) for all the outfits she sews.

Her post on a recent project seems to have sparked a lot of interest in a discussion / commenting of modesty in general. So, her post on modesty is seen from a feminist point of view and does not take into account that the survey she slates are not commands, but statements that men / boys reacted to. I think the most revealing results are the open questions that the boys / men answered which show the actual heart of Christian men and their struggles.

The one criticism that came through strongly on the sewing blog comment section,  was that women were not asked the same questions as well as questions about men's attire. I think that is a valid point, but when we think about it, women will dress modestly if men don't accept immodesty as a standard and vice versa.

What I read recently in Dr James Dobson's book "Bringing up Girls" is that girls think they are in control when they get the attention of the boys and then sleep with them, because they feel loved. However, the cycle continues if this happens more than once and the more it happens, the less loved the girl feels. The reason for this is, the boys get what they want without commitment and girls get nothing except pain. Dr Dobson makes the point that this is the worst form of male power, even though girls think that they actually are empowered.

Gertie confuses modesty with morality and religious superiority. This is something even Christians do. We can come across as being more spiritual, more moral or even show our superiority by the way we act, but in essence that is not the main point. Gertie argues that modesty is linked to religion and culture and she is correct, but at the end of the day, the question remains: Are we more moral when we can dress the way we want and even go without or entice men's minds to lust after us? Is modesty only one-sided and placed as an oppression on women? I have addressed this issue before.

I think Gertie misses the point of modesty in general - it's not only women who need to dress modestly to protect the visual minds of men, but also men need to dress modestly to curb the imaginations of their female friends. It goes both ways and mutual respect is at the heart of it - "love your neighbour as yourself" and "treat every older woman as if she were your mother and every younger woman as if she were your sister". No wonder that Gertie finds the underlying ideas disturbing, partly I think because they are religious in nature and partly because only men took part in the survey. I think her last point:

[...] that doesn't give any of us the right to demean other women for choosing to show more skin. And, above all, we deserve respectful treatment from men no matter how we're dressed.

 is on judgmental attitudes in all of us. As Christians we need to be really careful of that no matter whether it is on dress styles or on beliefs or on lifestyles.

Blue

Second-last post in the series "All the colours of the Rainbow"
We all have had the blues, right? Funny how blue in the English language is associated with feeling depressed or "down", when blue skies imply sunshine and a happy day.
Being of German descent, I cannot resist giving the meaning for being blue in German: drunk. The Afrikaans combines the two states into "dronkverdriet" (drunken depression), but does not associate that state of affairs with being blue.

There is a German kiddies song that goes:

Blau, blau, blau sind alle

   meine Kleider,

Blau, blau, blau ist alles, was ich hab.

Darum lieb ich alles, was so blau ist,

Weil mein Schatz ein Seemann,

   Seemann ist. 

Blue, blue, blue are all

   my clothes

Blue, blue, blue is all that I have

So I love anything that's blue

because my love is a sailor,

   a sailor.

On a more serious note: the sky above is blue, and sometimes the lakes and rivers reflect the blueness to then also be drawn / photographed as blue. (Case in point - pictures taken from deviantart profile: alexandru1988 - go to his profile for some awe inspiring work)

In the Bible, blue and scarlet are often used in conjunction. I have discussed this already in the post on scarlet and actually noticed that scarlet, purple and blue are mentioned as one and the same colour, or at least quite close to each other in shade and intensity. I think, that there is quite a difference between what we would call indigo (purplish blue - think denim) and blue and scarlet (reddish), but in biblical times the shades probably depended on the kinds of dye and the concentration used in the solution. Also, perhaps how much the fabric was "bleached" in the sun or eventually worn - time fades the colours and leaves a redder tint rather than a blue one.

The point remains though, that scarlet, blue and indigo (purple) are all royal colours and were extremely expensive. In the references given you will see that blue and scarlet are mentioned in the garments of the priests as well, setting them apart from the rest of the population. Mostly fine linen was used to be dyed in these colours, making the priestly garments even more expensive.

Finally, as Christians, we are called to be a "royal priesthood" (1 Peter 2:9) and in that sense set apart for service to God, showing by our dress that we belong to him by not conforming to the world. This does not mean we are to be dressed in scarlet and indigo, but that we show by our differences that we belong to someone else.

Modesty

After the book review, I felt I needed to do a post on modesty, since there seems to be a confusion (even amongst Christians) what that entails. I could say that it is "anything that does not offend someone else", but what does that look like? Mostly it is culture related. For example, in most African cultures it is unacceptable for a woman to (a) wear pants and (b) expose her knees when wearing a skirt.

So, what does modesty really look like in a society where states of undress are acceptable and leave nothing for the imagination?

My thinking centres on the following passage: (Romans 14:13-23)

¹³Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another. Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in your brother's way. ¹⁴As one who is in the Lord Jesus, I am fully convinced that no food is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for him it is unclean. ¹⁵If your brother is distressed because of what you eat, you are no longer acting in love. Do not by your eating destroy your brother for whom Christ died. ¹⁶Do not allow what you consider good to be spoken of as evil. ¹⁷For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit, ¹⁸because anyone who serves Christ in this way is pleasing to God and approved by men.
 ¹⁹Let us therefore make every effort to do what leads to peace and to mutual edification. ²⁰Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All food is clean, but it is wrong for a man to eat anything that causes someone else to stumble. ²¹It is better not to eat meat or drink wine or to do anything else that will cause your brother to fall.
 ²²So whatever you believe about these things keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the man who does not condemn himself by what he approves. ²³But the man who has doubts is condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith; and everything that does not come from faith is sin.

 Now, for those of you who are confused why I chose this passage - here is my thinking...
Firstly, let me say that I do not equate eating and drinking with wearing clothes as a disputable matter (Romans14:1), but the principle of not being a stumbling block to fellow brothers (and sister) still applies.
Secondly, in the 21st century, what we see as acceptable in one country might not be acceptable in another and this continues to be an issue, especially for missionaries who want to make a stand for Christ.

Down to the nitty-gritty:
According to the Mormons (The Church of Jesus Christ and the Latter-day Saints) Modesty is:

Modesty is an attitude of propriety and decency in dress, grooming, language, and behavior. If we are modest, we do not draw undue attention to ourselves. Instead, we seek to "honor God with your [our] body." (1 Corinthians 6:20b)

Two very helpful sites explain the concept - the first discusses guidelines for men and women and the second is partly a discussion of a book and partly really helpful biblical passages.

Now for the visual people.... Pictures taken from the Pure Fashion website

 Picture 1 - Critique: I like the lady's outfit, but two things bother me: 1) the buttons down the front, which, when walking can pop off and 2) the skirt is a bit tight and does not lend itself to walking very well.

Picture2: I like both outfits very much, but for an African context the skirt may be too short. This may be quite conservative in the United States, but still quite daring in other parts of the world.

Picture 3: this is more like it.

Picture 4: I really like this one too. The layered look works very well and the drooped hem of the skirt is a nice change.

Picture 5: also very nice - pants are 3/4 and perhaps not everyone's cup of tea - acceptable in Western countries, but again, not all over the world.

I have not come across anything for the African market (local stores), but the rest of the world thinks that we are quite conservative anyway. Still, the changes are quite obvious to me when I reflect on the 80's and compare them to today's fashions. Apart from dropped waistlines on skirts and pants, the tops and skirts get shorter and shorter and most clothing got tighter.

If we continue to apply the principle of not being a stumbling block to others, we are going to do fine as long as we can critically examine our outfits ourselves, or ask others to help us with it if we don't feel we can exercise our own judgment.

Dress and Morality (Rebeiro, A. 2003. Oxford: Berg Publishers)

In this book, Riberio discusses the relationship between dress, dress codes, the state of society and how the church through the ages preached against immoral dress. A the receiving end of reprimand were the upper class with the luxuries they could afford, but the peasantry did not escape, because anyone caught in the dress of the upper class was imprisoned and or fined.

There are a number of things I agree with in the book, but I also have some concerns. I will discuss the things I agree with first and then move on to my concerns. This post will also need a follow-up in terms of what constitutes modesty.

In each era, from Greco/Roman times, through the Middle Ages, right down to modern day, conspicuous consumption raised and raises eyebrows. Until the early 20th century, this was a prerogative of the rich, the upper class and royalty, but increasingly it has become part of the youth and youth culture, and even the middle class today cannot escape it.

The church during the ages commented mainly on the luxury of fabrics, like silk and lace or Quaker's linen, as well as the exposure or enhancing of parts of the body. (yes, men also enhanced their bodies, either by stuffing the doublet or hose (pants) or by wearing a codpiece). Sometimes kings were forced to implement sumptuary laws to limit the amount of fabrics used or the types of fabrics that different levels of society could wear. These only ever worked for a time, or were never enforced, because no one new what to do with offenders. When they did work, tailors and women were the main offenders and were ridiculed / shamed by parading them through the streets. The most recent sumptuary laws were enforced during WW II, where fabric was limited. Again, women were the recipients and eventually all outfits started to look like uniforms. No wonder then, that the "New Look" by Christian Dior found many takers.

Any exposure of the body was equated with loose morals and prostitution. In additions, any clothes handed down from masters to servants could be seen as an act of sexual advancement. Especially if this involved garments of silk or, even worse, undergarments.

Men usually were reprimanded for looking too feminine or wearing tight-fitting clothes. At times it became difficult to distinguish between males and females, especially when long hair and wigs, make-up and patches were the fashion for men.

During the 19th century, when cycling became a mode of transport the roles reversed and women adopted the knee-length breeches and general male attire. Trousers have been part of men's attire from the middle ages and any woman wearing them in public - right up to WW I stood a chance of being attested and fined.

Already in 1931, the idea that women brought calamity on themselves by "provocative" dress was voiced by a person named T.I.W:

 Remember, the girl who dresses in an alluring way cannot condemn anyone but herself if the lure of her dress brings her treatment which is usually accorded to women of questionable morals. (Rebeiro 2003:157) (quoted from "Modest Apparel. An earnest Word to Christian Women")

This idea is obviously carried over to modern times, when women are abused and raped. We still hear the complaint and accusation of the offender "She asked for it".

In addition, men often aggravated the problem of immorality by condoning the way women dressed, especially during the 1700's, when prostitution was rife, this played itself out in a major way. Even though women of the upper class wore revealing evening gowns and possessed many dresses, Knot-Rab in "Nothing to you, or Mind Your Own business" speaks to men:

We talk of morality - practice the vices, - make the rules for your ladies, but none for ourselves. (Rebeiro 2003:132)

I'm jumping around on the time-line a bit, but from the clinging dresses with wide sleeves and long trains of the Middle Ages, to the tight-lacing of the 19th century, women bore the brunt of the accusations for being immoral. Men did not escape and were ridiculed for excsses in jewelery, slashing, stuffing, over-exaggerating and tight fitting garments. In later stages they were shamed for leaving the doublet and trousers unbuttoned and many times for looking too feminine. By the mid-18th century, male fashion had stabilised and only sub-cultures like the macaroni, the dandy, English "aesthetic dress" of the late 19th century and then the hippies, Teddy boys etc. were satirically depicted in Punch and elsewhere.

Now all these points are valid, but what I don't agree with in the book is the way that Christianity is depicted. Rebeiro makes Christianity out to be too prescriptive and restricting on dress and condemning those who dress immorally or luxuriously. It seems that the author agrees with popular culture that the less people are prescribed what to wear, the more they will decide for themselves what is appropriate. In addition the point is made time and again that preaching advocates a life of poverty and humility and discomfort - because excess breeds vanity.

In as much as this is the popular opinion, the clergy were not exempt form conspicuous consumption. In the days when the church was rich and could afford many things, greed often came into play amongst its members. It just goes to show that man is fallen and prone to the world's vices. Also, the church should be a voice of reason in society, whether in dress or rational thought and morals. Lose that voice and you lose morality. Popular culture would have you believe that the less interference and prescription comes from the church the freer society becomes to choose and the more moral they become. Quite the opposite is true unfortunately. Rebeiro touches on this in the Postscript a bit, but she does not achknowledge that the disappearance of the church's voice may have something to do with it.

My other concern is that the reason why women have been at the receiving end of condemnation stems from the fact that Eve was the first to sin and then tempt Adam successfully. Obviously this idea has been taken to the extreme as to lay all immorality and sexual temptation at the foot of women, forgetting that Adam sinned as much as Eve. This idea can get out of hand very quickly: only seeing how women have sinned and keep seeing men as superior and purer, where they are just as fallen and sinful as women.

Don't get me wrong, I think that women are very powerful in the kind of hold that their temptations and exhibitionism have on men. As Billy Graham said in 1955:

It is as bad as murder to entice others into immorality. Many of you women have dressed in such a way as to bring impure thoughts to the minds of men. (Rebeiro 2003:164 - quoted from P. Binder, The Peacock's Tail, 1958:343)

I think, though the problem goes both ways and the underlying problem is not necessarily immorality, but sinfulness and sinful desires. The quote above may have been taken a little out of context, but he does have a point.

What Rebeiro also says, is that no-one can pin-point what "moral" dress should look like. Many of the people asked, said that it constitutes dress that is offensive to the greater society, but could not give guidelines on what that should and should not include. Most would agree that exposure of genitals (for men) and breasts (for women) would definitely be considered immoral, but nothing was said beyond that.

I will discuss this issue further in another post on modesty. As much as that sounds prescriptive and limiting, there are certain guidelines that can be followed today.

Leather

After the little side-track about sub-cultures Part one and two, I cannot bypass leather and leather products (a little overdue). Doing a plain google search yielded a few results concerning leather trade fairs in South Africa, although they do include other things as well. Also, you can get links from shoes and related accessories, to biker clothes, to lingerie (hmmmm sub-cultures again)

Did you know that the first garments in the Bible were made from animal skin?  Seriously - after the fig leaves, God provides Adam and Eve with skins as clothes (for protection and warmth I' assuming). Unfortunately for the poor animals...

Now tanning the leather is quite the smelly process - always was and always will be I suppose - since the hides arrive stiff and (usually) salted at the tannery, where they are soaked to remove the preservative and then scoured and pounded to remove any excess flesh and fat. At this point also the skin would be scraped clean of any hair. In ancient times, the skins would then be soaked in urine or painted with alkaline lime and then putrefied in a salt solution for several months. Oh yukky! After this process, they would be pounded with dung - just read the rest for yourself on Wikipedia.  I think that tanneries today have not lost much of the stink. I have lived down the road from one for five years, and can vouch for the fact that when the wind came from the wrong direction you rather fled the house....

Now thinking of tanning and leather products, one can argue the fact that poor animals are used from awful conditions to give us mink coats and other fur, where PETA will lead the way for animal rights. The main objections are about the fur trade, since environmental matters as well as slaughtering practices gave rise to outcries. My honest opinion is that humans were meant to rule over the animals, but not exploit them, so I'm torn between support for PETA and very much for fur and leather. I think there are ethical issues that we need to consider, but I'm not going to discuss them here. Having grown up in an environment where you would hunt for meat and use almost every single bit of flesh (and hide) for usage, I can understand that people would be up in arms if animals are bred to provide fur and kept in cages that are way too small.

I suppose there is a difference between fur and hide (leather), but when considering the wear one can get out of real leather shoes or the horrible PVC stuff, I'd rather wear something for a long time and get what my money is worth, rather than paying less, but having to replace things in a much shorter period of time. With fur it is slightly different, because no matter how the fur was treated, eventually the hair will fall off.

What I'm rally trying to say is that all things can be used in moderation.

Style

Ok, So I have a fashion crisis.... I see these beautiful things in the shop, try them on, and this is the result: (Please excuse the lighting, it's taken in the change rooms that have diffused light, for whatever reason). Jeans are mine, I tried on just the tops/dress.

So, in essence, I'm not a super model and I don't think I want to be, but style is important. You does have to wear things according to what suits you and your body type. In the first picture, there are several reasons why the outfit doesn't work, one being, that the jeans are too flared at the bottom, distracting from the shape of the dress. I think it would have worked better with tights, but then again, am I willing to wear them? It's also about modesty now, isn't it?

The second outfit works better, because the waist is accentuated and not flared.

This brings me to how critical we look at ourselves. How do we view our bodies and compare them to what we see in magazines. Sometimes our self-image changes from day to day. This day may have been not a great day for me and looking at pictures now makes me realise that both outfits don't look that bad actually. Just changing a mindset makes all the difference in the world. Isn't this exactly what the Bible teaches by taking every thought captive.....?

Branding

Developing a following in the fashion industry depends on the image that the brand portrays. This means that the brand name will evoke a certain image in the person's mind and thus, if they can and want to identify with it, they will usually support the brand. If they have been part of the brand since the beginning and then the brand re-invents itself, they still have the choice to continue following, or to switch. Usually switching comes at a cost tot he consumer, because they will now need to find another brand that will stand for what they themselves believe and stand for.

Is this not the same as worshiping? Even the experts agree in an article I read from the Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, (Fashion retailing and the bottom line by Robin Pentecost and Lynda Andrews) - yes, read that first surname again ;) The following was mentioned from research conducted by Redden and Steiner(2000) - reference to follow below:

Redden and Steiner (2000) [... suggest] that fanatical behaviour retains aspects of normal behaviour, based on the degree of enthusiasm, excietment, passion and commitment and /or extremes to which an individual is prepared to go to consume an identified product or service. Researching branding, they suggest behaviours such as loyalty or worshiping potentially denote a fanatical consumer. thus, higher degrees of fanship can relate to higher degrees of consumption. We argue that fans portray distinctive behaivour that means they are not necessarily fashion leaders but very enthusiastic fashion followers.

(Redden and Steiner published in Journal of Consumer Marketing Volume 17 issue 4 pages 322-337: Fanatical Consumers: towards a framework for research.)

So, what does that mean for the general Christian? Can we still be fashionable or do we need to walk around like our grannies? What do we make of the consumerism and branding of shops we like and go to? Where do we draw the line? If their advertising starts offending us, or if we cannot wear anything in the store? I think we really need to think about this more, especially when we look at advertisements.

I think this post will link up nicely with another one I have planned for future, discussing modesty.

Green

I have heard or read once that green has more shades than any other colour - just look at the colours when you try to change the colours in a program

Usually associated with hope and growth, but also with death, jealousy, sickness and envy. Nature is most likely to come to mind when thinking about green, though.

Just look at those shades....

Now we can get lost in nature - all of God's creation.

From the history of fashion we can learn a few things:
1) during the middle ages, right up to about the turn of the 20th century, fashion took forever to change -sometimes decades went by with only minor changes in dress.
2) Fashion was determined by the upper class - mainly royalty
3) Exclusive fabrics were only available to royalty - as in the Napoleonic era, where the French silk production was not allowed to be used for anyone else but the emperor and everything, from curtains to upholstery to fashion was done in silk. This also meant that the French silk industry flourished, but faltered thereafter, since it could not be sustained.

If we dig a little deeper, we can very quickly get to environmental issues and protection. This of course links up with environmental fashion or sustainable fashion. Unfortunately no-one really knows how to define sustainable fashion, since fashion is not really sustainable in any way, because of planned obsolescence. This means that every six months, if not more, fashion changes. This is either because we demand the change (instant gratification), or because we have become used to the changes that anything that lingers in the shops will be old fashioned. Now if you have linked to the article, you will notice that there is much work to be done, and though words like "green" and "Eco-friendly" and "Organic" pop up, what will that mean for the normal guy on the street?

I cannot answer those questions either and I suppose they turn into ethical issues as well - how much do we need to take care of our planet? Are we not supposed to be its steward? When it comes to fashion, how much are we destroying the planet in the process, with all the dyes and processes that a piece of fabric goes through? If we continue like this, where is it going to stop?

Hair

If any of you have by accident seen the musical Hair, this post has nothing to do with it.

Fashion in hair has become a major part of fashion shows. Trends in new cuts and colours have given rise to many magazines being published. I think celebrities have set some of the trends, like Lady Diana (back in the 80's)

More recent trends were set by Victoria Beckham (OK, it's the first one that came to mind)

For a few more ideas...

If I look at a biblical perspective of hair, there are several passages that have often been taken at face value, not taking into consideration the cultural background they were written in. For example.... 1 Corinthians 11:6, 14 and 15, 1 Timothy 2:9 and 1 Peter 3:3. The references are about women mainly, and that hair is their crowning glory, except when she prays, then her head needs to be covered - according to the passage in Corinthians. Unfortunately / fortunately times have changed and we do not live under law, but under grace. I think verse 13 gives a good indication : Judge for yourselves: Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? If we can judge for ourselves, then surely there is a place for the change of tradition and culture. For men, the rule is to let their hair be groomed - according to passages in Leviticus as well as uncovered when praying.

If our beauty is wrapped up in our hair, then 1 Peter 3 gives a great warning: be careful that your outward beauty does not consume you, but let your inner beauty shine.

Orange

This is more difficult than I thought. There are no matches for the word "Orange" in the Bible. But I think that there are some implied references just by the amount of sunsets and sunrises that are mentioned.

 

Also, one can link it up to "fire" of which there are a number of references. (437 in fact) 

Another aspect, I suppose is the fact that it refers to a fruit. Unfortunately, the orange is also linked with orange peel, which links it up with beauty and plastic surgery on a completely different level of interpretation.

Coming to orange fashion, it seems that orange is quite the colour this summer - although these trends will hit South Africa only next time around i.e. at the end of the year. Still, I think it is a very versatile colour and will suit most people's skin. 

Speaking of skin colour: the colouring of skin is divided according to seasons - so Spring, Summer, Autumn and Winter. Each has their respective colour scheme that goes best with hair, skin and eyes. So, for Autumn (which I am), this is the basic palette: Taken from this website.

There are some greys and darker browns that will work just as well. If you want to have your own analysis done, go the website above and try it out.

After all that linking you had to do, let me summarise. Orange, like all the colours of the rainbow enriches our lives in that provides for more shades to be produced. It is part of God's creation and without it the world would be rather dull. Who can imagine a sunrise/sunset without it?

The life of a Fashion Designer

If you ever thought that the life of a fashion designer was glamorous, think again....
 While I'm doing this (fitting)

 and this: (finishing off hem and zip)

 This definitely does NOT get done:

I did not take a picture of all the threads on the floor, that might just be overkill, but you get the idea.

Yellow

After contemplating yellow for a while, I did a Bible search, thinking that the colour would be mentioned in relation to the sun or radiance, but quite the opposite was true. There are only four references actually, three of which were quite yukky. The fourth had to do one of the beasts of revelation and the yukky smell of sulphur.

Hmmmm

Why then is it that we think of the sun as yellow, when in biblical terms it is white and pure? Although, when the sun is mentioned, often it relates to harvest and growth as well as sunrises and sunsets as indications of time as well as heat. If you read Ecclesiastes, there is a lot about life "under the sun", meaning life on earth without considering God.

This still does not have anything to do with yellow, right? Correct. Perhaps I read too much into the colour, and thought it had positive connotations, but even, according to Wikipedia, the colour used to be associated with cowardice and jaundice, caution (as on traffic lights) and aging - so not the most pleasing in any way. Also, sulfur is yellow, and we all know what that smells like....

So, fashionistas, for inspiration you can go to Wikipedia and get loads of colour inspiration for the future, although I'm not sure how the colour "Olive" wound up there, is that not a shade of green? Perhaps I also forgot that often yellow is used instead of gold. Now we are getting to positive connotations. The colour also often is associated with happiness, and isn't this what we all want fashion to give us? After all, isn't the Happy Face yellow and a fashion statement at that?

Not sure what else to say. I then did a search for yellow in fashion, and this yielded a few more results, but not quite what I was trying to say. Since this is part of the post about All the Colours of the Rainbow, I think I need to link this up with orange, so that the link with sunsets will become clearer, so until then.....

Plastic Surgery

In light of my trying to re-invent myself, I came across this picture:

 

The sign says: "Plastic Surgery ". 

Unfortunately the three ladies on the right are depicted as stereotypes, but are they really the only ones that are the main customers?

Here is my view on it:
"No matter where you go, you take yourself with you" I think these are the wisest words someone once said to me. I think not only does this apply to when people change work, their church, their place of study, or even countries, but also when people start surgically altering their bodies to become unrecognisable or to become more attractive (what the world views as attraction). No matter how much we change the outside, we still, in essence, are who we are and we still have a fundamental problem - that of sin.

Plastic surgery, like creams, and pills, can lead to addiction, and that is slavery. In the beginning, plastic surgery was used to make people look younger and stem the signs of ageing. Then methods were developed to alter the body with implants of all shapes and sizes and in more places than one, or reduce the areas that people were unhappy with. The film "She Devil" gives a dramatic picture, in the worst possible way of this.

What are people trying to achieve when they change their bodies by surgery? Well, in part, I think we all try to look like someone else, whether it be by dressing in the latest fashions, or using more invasive methods. Whether plastic surgery was made poular by celebrities or others, the fact remains, we can never be another person, no matter how much we change the outside.

I like how the Bible views ageing. It is seen as a crown - the epitomy of life. Grey hair shows that you are highly esteemed, because you have attained wisdom. (Proverbs 16:31, Isaiah 46:4) Also, the older you are, the closer you are to the day that the Lord can call you home. We can wear our age with pride. Also beauty is viewed as coming from other things than exterior looks (1 Peter 3:3)

What about going against what society teaches and strive to be more like us - who we are as individuals that we were created to be? In the process, if we become more like Jesus, we come to reflect His beauty. We can only shine if the fundamental flaw (sin) has been dealt with.

Alexander McQeen (1969-2010)

Alexander who?

Alexander McQueen.

McQueen was born in the East end of London the youngest of 6 children and left school at the tender age of 16. He was already making dresses for his sisters at a young age , but was given his first break when he joined Savile Row tailors as an apprentice. His next steps on the ladder to success found him working at Gieves & Hawkes , theatrical costumiers Angels and Bermans and Koji Tatsuno.

In 1994 he was accepted at Central Saint Martins College of Art and Design, his final collection for his Masters Degree was bought in its entirety by famous stylist Isabella Blow.

In 1996 he was named head designer for Givenchy in Paris and was dubbed the ''hooligan of English fashion'' and ''enfant terrible'' by the French press-although this was thought to be more of a reference to his close cropped hair and doc martens than his fashion style and he soon silenced his critics. His 1998 show caused controversy which included car robots spray painting models wearing white cotton dresses and a double amputee model walking down the catwalk with wooden legs. His shows became known for their lavish, unconventional theatrics and his fall 2006 show, "Widows of Culloden" included a life sized hologram of Kate Moss draped in rippling fabric.

In 2000 he started in new partnership with the Gucci group acquiring 51% of his company and McQueen serving as Creative Director.

His accomplishments include the following-
-Being named "British Designer of the Year", which he won four times between 1996 and 2003
-International Designer of the Year at the Council of Fashion Designer Awards 2003
-CBE (Commander of the Order of the British Empire) 2003

As the fashion industry is reeling from the discovery of his suicide, his genius will be sorely missed. I considered him a genius, since the cut of his garments were always immaculate. (That is what an apprenticeship in Savile Row does.) He may have been seen as a rebel at the same time, but no-one can deny that his clothes were amazing. He was also on the leading edge of technology in that his Spring / Summer 2010 show would have been streamed live over the net, if the site hadn't crashed due to the number of hits it got. The idea was that the mobile cameras on stage transmit the images straight to his website for live streaming. Go watch it! It is fascinating. His work with Nick Knight will continue to live on in this really amazing book.

For all of this, though, within two days his name has dropped from the number one spot of searches on Yahoo to not even feature and his name will perhaps live in the minds of this generation, but a new generation will grow up who will only see his name as history. Fact is that even though he had everything, he was not immune to human emotions and a sense of desperation. I find it quite interesting that I posted on this about two posts back (Subcultures Part 1).

Subcultures Part II

Identities are fashioned by the company we keep. We will identify with the "freaks" if we feel like one, or we will surround ourselves with beautiful people (in the superficial sense of the word) if we want to feel beautiful.
So, when we become the "freaks", what is it that lets us identify with them? Is it their acceptance of us, is it our need to belong somewhere, or is it our rebellion against the constructs of society and specifically our rebellion against everything our parents stood for?

Whatever  it is, whom we associate with, that is where we find our identity. This is an over-simplification, since I can put on many masks for different occasions, or as the mood strikes and identify with different groups of people.

What, then, is our identity? It's what the Bible would call our "heart". It's our centre, our deepest sense of who we are. Our problem arises out of looking for exterior things to define us - our wealth, our jobs, our clothes, our hair colour, our tattoos, our piercings, our friends, our car etc. When we find our identity here, we are in trouble, because all these things are transitory. We can also go the other extreme and say we will then find ourselves from within, forgetting that we are just as transitory as the rest. Our identity therefore needs to be found in something that is transcendent, and not part of this world. There is only one place where we can find this and that is in the arms of Jesus, who gives us an identity of sons and daughters of the living God.

Subcultures Part I

Name the subcultures:

Everyone can name them: Goth, Rasta, Punk, Hippie, Grunge, ..... And like everyone, we can pick a number of them out in a crowd. We might not be able to recognise the fine nuances of the sub-subcultures, but in general we either know  "Don't mess with these guys", or "these guys are harmless".

Each subculture has their drugs. Either physical powders, pills, liquids or herbs. But drugs can also be emotional and psychological. Emotional dependency is a drug which gets administered by a manipulator and the manipulated lap it up.

The psychological / emotional side is the worst, since it often comes in the form of depression. Some people, when they are depressed manipulate others, because even power can be a drug. Others, in their depression withdraw because they think that nobody cares. Self-pity can be a drug as well. So, let's talk about depression.....

The greatest story of depression (at least he had every right to be) is the story of Job. In a nutshell: He had everything going for him. He was wealthy, he had sons and daughters and he was respected in the community, because he feared God and brought the desired sacrifices (and then some) to atone for any sin he may have (even unwittingly) committed.

Then in one day he loses his livestock (all of it), his servants got killed, his sons and daughters get killed in a freak storm, when the house where they were partying got blown down. As if that was not enough, he develops a terrible skin disease and becomes an outcast and his wife utters the famous words: "curse God and die". His friends hear of his predicament and are so struck, they cannot speak for three days, but then when they do they accuse him of having sinned and he deserves this treatment from God, which he denies, since he has brought all the sacrifices that were required.

It's this just it? When things go well we praise and thank God, and when things go bad we curse him, as if it is his fault that we are suffering. If the story of Job is not depressing, I don't know what is. Job had every right to wallow in self-pity, yet he insists that "The Lord gave and the Lord has taken away; may the name of the Lord be praised." THAT is faith in a God who is in control and who knows what is going on. Job knew he had done everything in his power to be right with God.

The story turns out better than the beginning, with Job receiving twice as much as he had before, including seven sons and three daughters. He also was blessed with a long life (140 years) and could see his children's children to the fourth generation.

What does this have to do with fashion?

Fashion, by it's nature wants us to feel good about ourselves, and even if we don't, the promise is to at least look good as if we are ok. There are several ways in which the fashion industry capitalises on our need to feel good. I'm sure that as a woman we are drawn by the promises, where men get drawn by the visual. It is therefore no wonder that when women go through a slump, they go shopping. The promise is "buy what makes you feel good", "forget about your problems", "Look for happiness somewhere else." "I (fashion) can make you happy - for a while". All of these promises are empty, because they are fleeting. What is lasting is who we are and who we have to live with for the rest of our days.

There is a lasting joy that comes from a knowledge of being right with God, of having someone else in control who is stronger than I, especially when I don't feel like myself or feel like giving up, or when I feel like an outcast. This lasting joy comes from the knowledge of being loved beyond what I can imagine, for who I am and who will lift me up and give me hope that is eternal.

Why I started this blog in the first place

 The video below gives a rough idea of the process involved in creating the beautiful pictures we see in magazines and on billboards. Beauty is not what you think it is, it is what others tell you it is. This is so true in the world of fashion. My next two posts will deal with deeper issues surrounding the industry.

All the colours of the Rainbow

What are the colours of the Rainbow....?

Red
Orange
Yellow
Green
Blue
Indigo
Violet

The fact that there are seven seems significant to me, since it is the number that God uses to represent completeness.

However, I don't know why what we know as "purple" on the normal colour wheel would have been split to give indigo and violet.

I like the fact that when we talk about the entire spectrum we will refer to the colours as "All the colours of the rainbow". Even with technology we can try to reproduce the entire spectrum, but it is amazing that our eyes can identify changes in colour without any technological aids.

Looking at the colour wheel, we are taught that there are three primary and three secondary colours. we can split them up further to lessen the stark changes. Furthermore we can add black to each and get all the shades and then also add white to get all the tints, to produce a wheel similar to the picture.

Add a little more black or a little more white, and you have a different colour altogether. That is why one has to be so careful about dyelots when ordering fabric for production. One cannot mix dyelots within garments, because it will be noticed, especially under neon light or sunlight, and after washing the garment a few times it will start to show.

Unlike the fading of fabric, the promise behind the rainbow, to never destroy the earth again by flood will not ever fade away. (Genesis 9:12-16)

I started the blog with black and white and then went on to scarlet and violet (purple) in another post, which you can read by clicking on the relevant link in the list above. In the future I will look at each of the colours, just keep on reading.

Ok, Yellow and Orange have been added, follow the link above.
EDIT Green and blue are up - one remaining
EDIT: All colours are linked. Happy reading

Tattoos

Looking at our fascination with  the shocking and macabre....
Is the desire to shock not also at the same time the desire to be accepted or noticed? Why do I ask this question - well, if we can get someone to notice us, are we then less lonely / alone? At the same time the desire might stem from a rebellious attitude and our sinful nature.
Why would someone modify their body with a piece of permanent artwork? I'm not advocating tattoos, but I can admire a beautiful piece of art.

My understanding of tattoos are the combination of my worldview and my research into its origins.

1. Worldview: in the Biblical sense, our bodies are temples and a tattoo is like graffiti on its walls. I does not belong, no matter how beautiful the artwork is. Others may argue that it could be like the frescoes or murals in churches (although these were mostly on the inside). If one can argue like this, I will counter with:

2. Origins: Most tattoos have their origin in witchcraft / the occult / tribal rites of passage / superstition. Some of the most awesome tattoos are of the Maori of New Guinea (see picture on the left) which forms part of a rite of passage to prove strength to withstand pain.

Other forms of body modification are practiced by many African tribes, of which this picture is probably the most spectacular. This is not a tattoo per se, but touches on some of the more adventurous person, who has implants under the skin. To achieve the tribal "art", a small incision is made, into which ash or dirt is rubbed to form an infection and scar tissue. Over a period of time, this process is repeated to achieve the desired effect. Again this forms part of a rite of passage and also is believed to ward off evil spirits.

These days, the same effect (and worse) can be achieved by implanting titanium pieces under the skin, to even give a Braille effect as can be see below.


As Christians we have all an outer beauty that we need and all the spiritual protection to go with it. We do not need to modify anything to be accepted by the Most High, except our hearts and that is an internal change. What more do you want? The indwelling of the Holy Spirit makes our bodies into a temple and no amount of beautification, on the outside will make it any less.

Linen

For all the Wikipedia fans, here is the reference....

A particular type of flax is grown to long stalks that then have to be stripped of the pectin that holds the fibres together. This is achieved by a combination of washing and crushing the stalks through a series of wooden beams that physically flog the stalks into thin fibres. Once the pectin has been removed, the flax can then be spun, woven and then bleached. With technology of today a white linen can be achieved, but for early manufacture this was very difficult, and so linen was always off-white or beige in colour.

The process is quite intricate. The stalks are grown to about a metre high, and are similar to bast fibres, that run the length of the stalk.The fibres are normally released from the woody stem by retting (rotting), which today takes place when the harvested flax is left to rot for a while in the open fields. Traditionally it was done in rivers, ponds or retting dams.

To process flax by hand is quite arduous and requires great skill at all stages. This link gives a visual insight about the historical production. The nice thing about linen production is that nothing of the flax is wasted, since the seed (linseed) is used for a number of other things and the bark is used for chipboard.

After removing the bark (scutching), the fibres are combed (heckled) to separate the shorter and longer fibres from each other. There is quite an insightful video on Wikipedia that gives a brief summary of the above process.

After achieving the necessary softness of the fibres, they are spun. The two lengths are spun differently, the long ones are wet-spun and the shorter ones are dry-spun. After spinning the yarns are ready to be woven. If this process was done by hand, there would be several steps, as can be seen form the picture below. In Ireland this process was mechanised and some of these machines today still perform as in days of old.

The fabric, after weaving will be treated according to customer requirements, and can include bleaching, dyeing, coating, bonding, printing, texturising and calandering to name a few.

For information on Irish linen, follow this link
So far the modern version....

Linen is older than any other cloth and in ancient Egypt was considered the cloth of kings. Even still during the time of the Israelite kingdoms, it was considered expensive and luxurious. The pharaohs were mummified with roughly 1000 yards (914.4 metres). In Egypt the fabric that was produced could be extremely delicate,

even more delicate than some fabrics today, even with mechanised processes. For further information read here















Most probably the most famous piece of linen is the Shroud of Turin, believed to be the burial cloth of Jesus.

Coming to the crux: if the process of producing linen today is this expensive, with all the machinery that is availbale to us, imagine what it would have cost a women of the first century to produce a linen garement. It therefore is amazing that in Revelation, white (!) linen garments will be handed out to all the saints. Because we will be part of the royal family.

Worker's Plight

The factory workers are the worst off, and yet they are the ones that keep the industry running. Yes, I do agree we cannot go back to having everyone making their own clothes anymore, yet are we aware of how the price we pay in the shops gets expanded through the ranks?

When I did my preparation for one of the new subjects I'm teaching I found an interesting concept: in retail, nothing under a 250% Gross Profit Margin is viable. (gross profit = sales - cost of sales, excluding any overheads) This means that the bottom of the hierarchy will be pushed down as far as anyone can go. The people who are at the receiving end are the CMT's (Cut, Make & Trim)- usually. They will be asked to produce a pair of jeans that retails at about R200, for about R60. Unfortunately this is not really the price that the manufacturers are paid, since this price usually includes transport as well. The CMT's usually are also not responsible for buying the fabric and trims, so the price comes down even more. I'm not sure of the ratio, but it definitely is less than half of that price. This price will be even lower if the garment was manufactured in Asia.

As an aside.... each manufacturer will manufacture tens of thousands of units, so the amount the retailers pay is not necessarily peanuts, but taken at a unit price it becomes quite an eyeopener, especially since roughly 10 - 20 machines / people have worked on each pair of jeans.In the picture above, each row will manufacture one garment, starting at the back and moving through tot the front.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that all (and I'm including myself here) who are keeping the fashion industry going are not aware of what kind of labour is involved and how we perpetuate the cycle of poverty. Not sure if this makes sense.

As Christians are we not called to be as loving towards others as towards ourselves, including the alien and stranger in our midst, especially the poor? This includes treating our employees the way we want to be treated and giving them a fair wage. I'm  a little surprised that the factory workers do not strike more often. I suppose in South Africa our labour is quite expensive, but there are city rates and rates for the rural areas.
I'm not in any way advocating anything less than just keeping this in our minds next time we covet (!) that pair of shoes or that pair of jeans.