Welcome to the 174th insertion of DEMUR®, an analytical series highlighting the intricacies of the artistic world and the minutiae lying within. In this episode, we dissect the fashion industry’s sudden interest in skate culture, questioning the ethics behind niche capitalism.
It feels that ever since the Nike SB Dunk swung back into trend, so did the whole of skateboarding. As the pendulum fell from the heights of minimalism, brands like Visvim and Acne Studios were discarded, pushing focus toward age-old skate labels like Blind, Hookups and 5Boro. Preppy, white-collar fittings became distant in place of the classic dirt-bag attitude, bringing vintage tees and baggy bottoms.
Explained by fashion’s cyclical nature, this shift was rather expected. We anticipated 90s style to resurge as the 2010s progressed, but the outright pillaging of skate culture seemed to be overlooked. For decades, skateboarding has been shadowed by a rather derogatory light, belittled as a reckless and disruptive activity. Yet in recent years it’s been glorified on a widespread scale, seen in the likes of both fast and high fashion.
Today, it seems as if everyone strives to embody the thrashed persona, and with little to no funding, ultimately can. When studying trends, this phenomenon is referred to as ‘upwards flow theory’, which assumes that fads root in the lower class youth, and “gain approval by upper class or the fashion elite”. With regard to skateboarding, the niche’s subtleties have been echoed in the mainstream on the backs of Supreme, Palace and now Stussy, before leeching into the industry’s superiors.
Referencing the likes of Louis Vuitton, J.W Anderson and most recently, Kidill, the runway's introduction to skateboarding has received mixed reviews. From the time Virgil Abloh signed Lucien Clarke to create the ‘first luxury skate shoe’, to Anderson’s broken skateboard sweater, it all seems to teeter on the edge of either homage or misuse. Skateboarding’s origins reside in the grime of cityscapes, not on wooden hangers and silk textiles, leading us to debate the monopolization of sub-cultures for profit or celebration.
Comments