FASHION: Where do best-sellers come from?

the little black dress - observations of D. Miller

There are many best sellers or iconic products in the history of fashion: the Burberry trench, the Levis 501 jeans, the Hermès foulard, Saint Laurent’s tuxedo, and plenty of others. But none of them has the universal appeal of the little black dress. 

That initial observation is the start of a complex puzzle that Daniel Miller, an English anthropologist, has tried to solve. How to explain the long-term success of the "little black dress" , or more precisely, the success met by a certain category of dresses of black color, relatively short, popularized by Gabrielle Chanel in 1926.

 three possible explanations for this success: 
1/ The little black dress is imposed on the markets by the fashion industry – this is the capitalist explanation, 
2/ The little black dress refers to the to the iconic color of the bourgeois, in line with the progressive seizure of power by the bourgeoisie since the 19th century – this is the historical explanation, 
 3/ the little black dress is the sartorial expression of the minimalist style’s influence on contemporary styles – this is the modernist explanation. None of these explanations are considered satisfying by Miller. He objects to the first argument the plethoric offer of the fashion market, providing each year a diverse color and patterns choice.

To the historic explanation, Miller opposes the diversity of psychologic motivations observed in his contemporaries’ fashion choices. To the modernist explanation, the author objects that the theorists of the movement had taken fashion as a target, looking to put an end to the renewal of styles by coming back to functionality and rationality. Following the failure of these various attempts to put the light on the mystery of the little black dress, Miller suggests a field inquiry revolving around the fashion consumers’ behavior. It is an important shift: instead of relying on commercial, historical or aesthetical macro-trends, Miller searches for the cause of collective behaviors in the observation of individual behaviors. On the field, he observes that female consumers initially look for differentiation through the colorful garment choices. Yet, when it is time for the final decision, a certain resignation occurs, which make them shop fine more discreet, low-key fashion items. Miller interprets this change of mind as a manifestation of anxiety: women do not dare to distinguish themselves. As he writes it, the result of the London-based inquiry is that "the increasing emphasis upon black, grey and plain unadorned clothing at the expense of colourful, decorated or printed fabrics is based on consider anxiety about making any kind of fashion statement that strays too far out of what has become conventionally accepted norms". Yet, Miller is not entirely satisfied with this psychologic explanation: he proposes two other explanations of this particular phenomenon. He starts by reminding the philosopher Jürgen Habermas’ point of view on modern human condition: the subjects, in the modern world, become free to choose the principles guiding their behaviors. 

According to Miller, it complicates the decision-making process: as they are free of their choices, they also bear a certain responsibility.
Their fashion choices are immediately sanctioned by society: when faced with pressure, the temptation is to comply with the common taste. Mimicking close examples is an efficient strategy in the absence of a clear social norm to conform to. Miller adds another interpretation, more specific to the fashion industry. He observes the decline of the fashion industry prescriptive power, between the seventies and the nineties, while subcultures and sub-movements affirm their styles (for instance, the punks). In other words, the fashion industry portrays, on a short period, the path to modernity defined by Habermas, which only enhances the feeling of uncertainty that influences personal choices. Miller insists on the paradox induced by the superior level of liberty created by the feminist movement: women got rid of the necessity to submit to pre-determined social roles, finding themselves in need of criteria to define their fashion identity. The "little black dress", according to Miller, appears as the answer to the issue of the freedom experience within the field of clothing. However, Miller fails to explain the particularity of the little black dress as a successful item: why was it popular to begin with? Is it only the result of a social convention, or can we isolate material properties which make a garment more "wearable" than another? These questions remain for you to explore!