Skip to content
1981
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. International Journal of Fashion Studies
  4. Volume 11, Issue 1
  5. Article
B(l)ending Research Methods: Reimagining a Theoretical Turn in Fashion Scholarship
  • ISSN: 2051-7106
  • E-ISSN: 2051-7114

Abstract

Criticism on the Eurocentric character of the concept of fashion has been raised already for almost four decades within fashion studies. Yet, the growing entanglement with globalization studies and postcolonial and decolonial theories has accelerated an epistemological turn within fashion studies. The epistemological turn not only fostered new research on the empirical level, it also challenged the theoretical framework of the discipline. Even the concept of fashion itself, entrenched as it is in modernization theories, has gradually come under attack. The concept of fashion has been held accountable for defining only ‘modern’ western fashion as its research object, while side-lining, even erasing, other ‘traditional’ sartorial systems. In order to redress the Eurocentric character of fashion theory and the exclusionary effects it engenders, fashion has been redefined as a ‘universalism’. Although this view became quite mainstream, in its turn it also became gradually criticized. It has been rightly argued that redefining fashion as a universalism is only another way of re-inscribing fashion scholarship in the hegemonic western ‘modern/colonial’ way of knowledge production. Studying sartorial practices positioned outside the western capitalist fashion system through the lens of fashion obscures an understanding of their own specific characteristics. In this article, I will turn more specifically towards the question of which methodologies we can mobilize if we, scholars versed in western modern knowledges and modern knowledge production, are committed to a multiplicity of sartorial worlds in as well as outside ‘the West’. The article proposes a hermeneutic–dialogical method of interpretation and translation as an epistemological as well as an ethical tool towards a more adequate understanding of ‘other’ ways of wearing, making, feeling, thinking of and living through clothes. Finally, this article offers a tentative analysis that shows what this dialogical approach might entail.

© 2024 Intellect Ltd
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1386/infs_00100_1
2024-04-29
2024-12-06
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Adriaans, T. J. (2017a), ‘Community dressing: Marken, Episode 2’, Theodorus.Johannes., https://theodorusjohannes.nl/storytelling/community-dressing. Accessed 5 March 2024.
  2. Adriaans, T. J. (2017b), ‘Community dressing: Noord-Brabant, Episode 1’, Theodorus.Johannes., https://theodorusjohannes.nl/storytelling/community-dressing. Accessed 5 March 2024.
  3. Adriaans, T. J. (2018a), ‘Community dressing: Bunschoten/Spakenburg: Episode 3’, Theodorus.Johannes., https://theodorusjohannes.nl/storytelling/community-dressing. Accessed 5 March 2024.
  4. Adriaans, T. J. (2018b), ‘Community dressing: Urk, Episode 4’, Theodorus.Johannes., https://theodorusjohannes.nl/storytelling/community-dressing. Accessed 5 March 2024.
  5. Adriaans, T. J. (2019), ‘Community dressing: Staphorst, Episode 5’, Theodorus.Johannes.,https://theodorusjohannes.nl/storytelling/community-dressing. Accessed 5 March 2024.
  6. Allwood, C. M. (1989), ‘Hermeneutics and interpretation in anthropology’, Cultural Dynamics, 2:3, pp. 304–22.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Almila, A. M. and Inglis, D. (2017), ‘What is “fashion” really? The promise of an ecumenical analytic for fashion studies and beyond in a globalized world’, in Z. Delić (ed.), Epistemology and Transformation of Knowledge in Global Age, London: INTECHopen, pp. 63–84, https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.68614.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Arnolli, G. (2016), Sits, Katoen in Bloei, Zwolle: Uitgeverij WBOOKS.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Baizerman, S., Eicher, J. B. and Cerny, C. (2008), ‘Eurocentrism in the study of ethnic dress’, in J. B. Eicher, S. L. Evenson and A. Hazel (eds), Visible Self: Global Perspectives on Dress, Culture and Society, New York: Fairchild Publications, Inc, pp. 123–32.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Baudrillard, J. (1972), Pour une critique de l’économie politique du signe, Paris: Gallimard.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Bhambra, G. K. (2010), ‘Sociology after postcolonialism: Provincialized cosmopolitanisms and connected sociologies’, in E. G. Rodríguez, M. Boatcă and S. C. Burlington (eds), Decolonizing European Sociology: Transdisciplinary Approaches, Burlington, VT: Ashgate, pp. 33–47.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Blaser, M. (2013), ‘Ontological conflicts and the stories of peoples in spite of Europe: Toward a conversation on political ontology’, Current Anthropology, 54:5, pp. 547–68.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Blaser, M. (2014), ‘Ontology and indigeneity: On the political ontology of heterogeneous assemblages’, Cultural Geographies, 21:1, pp. 49–58.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Bourdieu, P. and Delsaut, Y. (1975), ‘Le couturier et sa griffe: Contribution à une théorie de la magie’, Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales, 1:1, pp. 7–36.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Craik, J. (1993), The Face of Fashion: Cultural Studies in Fashion, London and New York: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Craik, J. (2009), Fashion: The Key Concepts, Oxford and New York: Berg.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Dallmayr, F. (2009), ‘Hermeneutics and inter-cultural dialog: Linking theory and practice’, Ethics & Global Politics, 2:1, pp. 23–39.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Eicher, J. B. (2001), ‘Introduction: The fashion of dress’, in C. Newman (ed.), National Geographic Fashion, Washington DC: National Geographic Society, pp. 17–21.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Eisenstadt, S. N. (2000), ‘Multiple modernities’, Daedalus, 129:1, pp. 1–29.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Entwistle, J. ([2000] 2015), The Fashioned Body: Fashion, Dress and Modern Social Theory, Cambridge: Polity.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Gómez-Rincón, C. M. (2023), ‘Taking the truth of others seriously: The perspective of intercultural hermeneutics’, Journal of Intercultural Studies, 44:4, pp. 521–35.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Jansen, A. (2020), ‘Fashion and the phantasmagoria of modernity: An introduction of decolonial fashion discourse’, Fashion Theory, 24:6, pp. 815–36.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Jansen, A. and Craik, J. (2016), ‘Introduction’, in A. Jansen and J. Craik (eds), Modern Fashion Traditions: Negotiating Tradition and Modernity Through Fashion, London and New York: Bloomsbury Publishing, pp. 1–21.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Jansen, A. and Slade, T. (2020), ‘Letters from the editors: Decoloniality and fashion’, Fashion Theory, 24:6, pp. 809–14.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Kettle, A. (2019), ‘Textile and place’, Textile, 17:4, pp. 332–39.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. La Cadena, M. De and Blaser, M. (2018), ‘Introduction: Pluriverse’, in M. De La Cadena and M. Blaser (eds), A World of Many Worlds, Durham, NC and London: Duke University Press, pp. 1–22.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Leeuw, K. de (1998), ‘Voorschrift, verandering en variatie in de streekdracht’, in D. Verhoeven (ed.), Klederdracht en Kleedgedrag: Het Kostuum Harer Majesteits onderdanen, 1989–1998, Nijmegen: Sun, pp. 11–22.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Lillethun, A., Welters, L. and Eicher, J. B. (2012), ‘(Re)defining fashion’, Dress, the Journal of the Costume Society, 38:1, pp. 75–97.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Maranhão, T. (2003), ‘The politics of translation and the anthropological nation of ethnography of South America’, in T. Maranhão and B. Streck (eds), Translation and Ethnography: The Anthropological Challenge of Intercultural Understanding, Tucson, AZ: The University of Arizona Press, pp. 64–84.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Marotta, V. (2009), ‘Intercultural hermeneutics and the cross-cultural subject’, Journal of Intercultural Studies, 30:3, pp. 267–84.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Niessen, S. (2003), ‘Afterword’, in S. Niessen, A. M. Leshkowich and C. Jones (eds), Re-Orienting Fashion: The Globalization of Asian Dress, Oxford: Berg, pp. 243–66.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Niessen, S. (2016), ‘Afterword: Fashion’s fallacy’, in A. Jansen and J. Craik (eds), Modern Fashion Traditions: Negotiating Tradition and Modernity Through Fashion, London and New York: Bloomsbury Publishing, pp. 209–17.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Pillay, N. (2002), ‘The significance of Gadamer’s hermeneutics for cross-cultural understanding’, South African Journal of Philosophy, 21:4, pp. 330–44.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Rabine, L. W. (2002), The Global Circulation of African Fashion, Oxford and New York: Berg.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Reichertz, J. (2021), ‘Limits of interpretation or interpretation at the limits: Perspectives from hermeneutics on the re-figuration of space and cross-cultural comparison’, Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 22:2, https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-22.2.3737.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Riello, G. and McNeil, P. (2010), ‘Introduction’, in G. Riello and P. McNeil (eds), The Fashion Reader: Global Perspectives, London and New York: Routledge, pp. 1–15.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Roodenburg, H. (2007), ‘Their own heritage: Women wearing traditional costumes in the village of Marken’, in P. J. Margry and H. Roodenburg (eds), Reframing Dutch Culture: Between Otherness and Authenticity, Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing, pp. 245–58.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Rovine, V. L. (2015), African Fashion: Global Style, Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Seth, S. (2009), ‘Historical sociology and postcolonial theory: Two strategies for challenging Eurocentrism’, International Political Sociology, 3:3, pp. 334–38.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Seth, S. (2013), ‘“Once was blind but now can see”: Modernity and the social sciences’, International Political Sociology, 7:2, pp. 136–51.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Seth, S. (2014), ‘The politics of knowledge: Or, how to stop being Eurocentric’, History Compass, 12:4, pp. 311–20.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Spariosu, M. I. (2014), ‘Some observations on the prospects of intercultural hermeneutics in a global framework’, in M. Xie (ed.), The Agon of Interpretations: Towards a Critical Intercultural Hermeneutics, Toronto: University of Toronto Press, pp. 187–209.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Swartz, C. and Cilliers, P. (2003), ‘Dialogue disrupted: Derrida, Gadamer and the ethics of discussion’, South African Journal of Philosophy, 22:1, pp. 1–18.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Taylor, C. (2002), ‘Understanding the other: A Gadamerian view on conceptual schemes’, in J. Malpas, U. Von Arnswald and J. Kertscher (eds), Gadamer’s Century: Essays in Honor of Hans-Georg Gadamer, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 279–97.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. van Altena Boneveld, N. (2021), in-person interview with C. Delhaye, Marken, 11 August.
  46. Vázquez, R. (2011), ‘Translation as erasure: Thoughts on modernity’s epistemic violence’, Journal of Historical Sociology, 24:1, pp. 27–44.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Vázquez, R. (2012), ‘Towards a decolonial critique of modernity Buen Vivir, relationality and the task of listening’, in R. Fornet-Betancourt (ed.), Capital, Poverty, Development, Denktraditionen im Dialog: Studien zur Befreiung und interkulturalität, vol. 33, Aachen: Wissenschaftsverlag Mainz, pp. 241–52.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Vázquez, R. (2017), ‘Precedence, earth and the Anthropocene: Decolonizing design’, Design Philosophy Papers, 15:1, pp. 77–91.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Xie, M. (2014), ‘Introduction’, in M. Xie (ed.), The Agon of Interpretations: Towards a Critical Intercultural Hermeneutics, Toronto: University of Toronto Press, pp. 3–19.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1386/infs_00100_1
Loading
  • Article Type: Article
Keyword(s): decolonial theory; Eurocentrism; intra- and intercultural dialogue; intra- and intercultural hermeneutics; methodology; universalism

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a success
Invalid data
An error occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error