Cool, Fashion, Menswear, Women’s Office wear and Branding

The phenomenon of cool fascinates me. I have seen people in their conversations often spit out the word ‘cool’ to describe something that seems to enjoy  high resonance and liking. The word’s usage is preceded by anything that eludes categorisation. It appears to be free from the floating currency of language as if everybody knows it and understands it. Anything like a shot on the cricket ground or a clothing ensemble on someone or an act on a street or a statement or décor of a room or hair cut or a brand is pronounced as cool. The meaning it contains is instantly decoded and recognised among members of a group but it appears to be a puzzle for the others. In a study I sought to explore and understand this cool phenomenon (Leveraging ‘Cool’ for Branding: Is It Paradoxical Juxtaposition or Radicalism?). As the title of the study suggests, cool was found to be paradoxical juxtaposition.

The culture which stands in bi-polar opposition of nature is created. It is a kind of lens through which the phenomenal world is seen. It helps people make sense. The beauty of culture is that it doesn’t operate at conscious level, rather, its presence is sensed upon moving into a different culture, and you say ‘oh god why do they do this, it is not like this’. This is as simple as- do you make a drink with water and ice or only ice. Body weight and its attractiveness are purely culturally defined. Sex is nature but gender is culturally constructed. Two important principles that help us understand the world are categories (male/female, work/leisure, good/ bad, ruler/ruled, dark/fair, cooked/raw) and principles (concept governing classification e.g. raw and cooked is about ready to eat or male/ female is strength and role, upper and lower class is about status or refinement (McCraken, 1986), Lord Krishna in The Bhagwat Gita also mentions  categories or binaries (pleasure/pain, love/hate, happiness/distress). These divisions or categories and underlying idea are crucial to understanding and negotiating the phenomenal world. This is possible only when categories are perceived through lens of value or importance (fairness is good because of the belief  that  it confers advantage; vegetarianism is good because of the belief that  killing is not good).

The intersection between categories and values provide blueprint for action. It is here that stories, myths and narratives become instructional. Accordingly members make choices to side with one cultural category or the other. Movies and stories are mostly developed around categories like good/evil, innocent/corrupt. These categories draw people to take clear sides depending upon interplay between overarching collective framework and an individual’s autonomy. We found cool does not radiate from conforming and being on either side of these binaries. On the contrary, it is sparked when binaries are juxtaposed.

Sometime back I came across two pieces one about menswear at Milan Fashion Week and regular office wear for women (Manish Mishra, Mint Jan 20, Feb 5, 2024). The dressing is implicitly governed by codes for men/women, office/sports/ morning/evening, classic/modern. So at Florence the designers showcased blending or re-contextualising code in menswear category: juxtaposing classic with playful touches. Here Prada and Simmons added as dash of colour to office wear, Dhruv Kapoor intersected sportswear with office wear and what characterised the show as sexiness in what otherwise has been masculinity in what men wear.

The other setting is dressing for office for women. Office dressing typically conjures images of  a uniform which robs one off individuality, identity and uniqueness. Here binaries at play are uniform versus uniqueness. The “cool” strikes when the categories are skilfully juxtaposed. The prescription reported is that well fitted could be crossed with identity expressive colour or pattern or accessory. An office is a playground of masculinity/feminity, hard/soft side, sameness/difference, formal/informal. The idea behind uniform is about transformation of differences into sameness for efficiency and productivity gains. The idea of ‘me’ militates against ‘us’. It is here that cool is sparked when individuality is expressed as a subtle expression through textures, watch, socks, belt or scarf; not as sign of rebellion but reconciliation.

Brands can learn a great deal if their name is to be prefixed with Cool.

Which brand is cool to you?

Luxury, Price and Brand Narrative

If you ask somebody in emerging luxury market the following questions.:

• What is  Rolex?

• What is  Louis Vuitton?

• What is Chanel?

• What is Hermes? 

• What is Goyard?

The answers fetched are likely to be different but many would be able to connect these with the brand’s most prototypical product category. One common running theme is likely to center around price or expensiveness. High price and luxury have gone together forever and it is what sits at the core idea of luxury. Semantically, it is opposite to ‘necessary’.  Necessaries are indispensable as these are essential for survival. Luxury has been associated with excess, abundance and opulence. One of the examples of ‘excess’ as the defining aspect of luxury is a watch.  Brands like Breguet make ultra-complicated watches by adding features which push designing and manufacturing to breach the limits of possibility and confer the status of luxury on the product.  Luxury can be viewed from several angles: 

Price: Most probably it is going to be  high price, very expensive, exorbitant, beyond reach. High price is the most overt sign of luxury brands.  The price is a relative indicator and it positions the product towards the top end of the spectrum. Consequent upon the high price two things happen. This superior position links them to high perceived quality. Quality is often  difficult to decipher especially by non-experts. So, price becomes a powerful surrogate for quality. Often, price itself serves as a signifier of a nebulous amalgam of physical reality and invisible undefinable. For instance, Patek Philippe Nautilus costs about 150000 dollars. 

Aspiration and expression:  The people on top of the social hierarchy become aspirational because of emulation in consumption practices. Luxury in this realm operates as visible markers for emulators who seek connections through consumption parity with people on higher pecking order. The essence of this aspect of luxury was articulated by Veblen as conspicuous consumption where brands are used as status markers. Luxury  is evocative of a lifestyle, typically associated with the elite. Luxury brands enable the aspirants to achieve parity with higher classes through commonality of consumption. Through this practice the customers gain a feeling of elevation by being able to buy products related with higher classes. Mercedes cars sport bigger and bolder three-pointed star on their hood to cater to this market.  A bag with big ‘LV’ sign is commissioned by the owner to shout out loud. This ,however, is not done by Birkin which does the same but silently. 

Uniqueness: The high price of luxury may stem from objective reasons traceable to unique ingredients or processes (rare fur or skin or metal or intricate craft). Louis Vuitton uses Vachetta leather known for

high quality or Rolls Royce is hand crafted machine or intricate Argyle pattern introduced by Pringle. The high price that draws from objective considerations adds differentiating dimension or  uncommonness pushing the product into the realm of uniqueness. Every Hermes bag is the outcome of ‘painstaking work of the craftsman’ where leather is still  pieced together by saddle stitch. 

Self-esteem: This uniqueness operates to serve luxury buyer in two ways: first as a device of signaling system of differentiation to the external world and second, as something of self reward or adding sheen to self-concept. A Rolex is not just a time keeping device or ‘certified chronometer’ but a symbol of achievement. The brand is credited for remarkable achievements in the domain of horology including waterproof and dust proof watch (Oyster), date display (Datejust) and Helium escape valve (Sea- Dweller).  Mercedes is credited with innovation including multi-valve engine, four- wheel suspension and ABS and many more. 

Spirit: A painstakingly crafted porcelain or intricately woven fabric or fine piece of jewel carries an invisible but perceptible aura of the maker. The intimate bond between the creator and created embeds the soul of craftsperson. Therefore, many luxury pieces are called ‘one of its kind’. The creation liberates itself from the narrow confines of utility into the realm of  art. It is artistic authentic expression of the spirit into physical form. Many luxury brands imprint their unique spirit or soul on to whatever products they carry. 

In a world of mass production and spread of prosperity, markets have been democratizing consumption. The descending economic entitlement is both boon and bane for the luxury marketers. The pursuit of ‘more’ is likely to negate the very essence of luxury. And luxury bought simply because of high price is unlikely to touch customer at deeper level without which it may tantamount to shallow or superficial consumption. Luxury without an appropriate brand narrative (its myth and mystique) is devoid of psycho-socio-cultural meaning rendering luxury consumption hollow. Suppose you can afford an expensive watch (not too expensive) which one would you buy?

Would it be a Rolex, Omega or Tag Heuer? 

Depends upon whether you choose to buy a time keeping instrument or a narrative that runs below visibility of assembled components.