La moda se inserta en el centro mismo de la modernidad occidental. El objetivo primero de este libro es el de reinterpretar este problema en su totalidad. ¿Cómo entender la aparición de la moda en occidente? ¿Cómo explicar la versatilidad de la elegancia? ¿Cuáles son los grandes momentos históricos, las grandes estructuras que han determinado la organización social de las apariencias?

I thought that this was an extremely interesting book, and well worth reading since it goes against so much common wisdom. I found it thoughtful, provocative, and convincing. This is part of a great change in perspective for this former Marxist. It was originally published in France in 1987 as L'Empire de l'éphémère : la mode et son destin dans les sociétés modernes.

Despite the English subtitle, Lipovetsky is not just discussing clothing, although that is his starting point. He also uses fashion in a very broad sense, meaning not so much to follow a particular mode, but the ability to select and create variants for oneself. He argues that fashion in clothing is a unique development in 14th century Europe. In other places and times, styles of dress remained basically the same for centuries, reflecting a reverence for the past, which was often viewed as a better time. Styles might change as one culture conquered another and either forced its own dress on the captive peoples, or as those peoples imitated those in power.

In 14th century Europe, for reasons that are not entirely clear, the aristocrats began to experiment with novelty, aesthetic experimentation, hedonism, and individualism in clothing. This developed over time, extending to lower classes, and expanding outward into other facets of life. Lipovetsky argues that this is, on the whole, good, and a necessary part of modernism and multiculturalism. Such societies are more flexible and more tolerant, and cherish human rights because they respect individualism. Lipovetsky is not blind to the possibilities of social anomie, but he does not feel that it is occurring to a degree that offsets the advantages of fashion as he defines it. Societies which look to the past for the model of perfection often force conformity upon others. He argues that Toqueville's (and other's) fears that democracy would lead to uniformity are unlikely to be realized, because, as Tarde argues, everyone doesn't imitate one or a few people, rather individuals draw ideas from many sources and create their own unique lifestyles. Interestingly, Lipovetsky uses words like narcissistic, hedonistic, and frivolous freely, because he feels that these terms, although usually viewed negatively, in the end have positive consequences.

Among other things, Lipovetsky casts doubt upon the ability of advertising to create needs and wants, rather than ferret them out. He doesn't say so, but I have read that most product launches fail, which does argue against the power of advertising.

The English edition, published in 1994, includes an epilogue updating his thoughts. He does not consider the effects of the Internet, which were just beginning at that time. My one criticism of the book is that it is occasionally repetitious, which sometimes blurs his points, and makes the book a little longer than it needs to be, but I consider that to be a small issue weighed against the very interesting and thought-provoking insights. I found it all the more important in view of the recent attacks on Charlie Hebdo, and other terrorist attacks, domestic and international. ( )