What Not to Wear: Who Needs Self Expression When you Have Stacy and Clinton?
What Not to Wear: Who Needs Self Expression When you Have Stacy and Clinton?
“This is a crime,” TLC’s Stacy London scolded to her next victim. And when you commit a crime visible to Stacy, there is no escaping unpunished. The method Stacy and her sidekick Clinton chose to institute this punishment is through a nation-wide television show that goes by the name of ‘What Not to Wear’. The show features a range of citizens who dare to break the fashion laws of America, and their emotional and physical change into an ‘acceptable’ person.
The crime mentioned above was serious; a big fashion no-no, a fashion faux pas even. Hanging limply between Clinton’s thumb and index finger was a knitted, grey sweater with reindeer embroidered on the chest. It had no form, no complimenting pattern, or any sort of ‘professional’ look. How dare she ever wear such a thing?
Or at least, that was what I would have thought when I used to be an avid fan. Recently though, I’ve realized how completely, utterly, ridiculous the show and hosts are.
If you watch the show with a skeptic’s eye, an overwhelming theme of hypocrisy can be seen: through the hosts of Stacy and Clinton, What Not to Wear shows that you can have your own opinion, style, and personality, but only if it fits within the restrictions and guide-lines of society or else you will encountering constant and harsh criticism. They also go on to criticize her for having only ‘five or six outfits’ that she wears, while later on (and in earlier episodes) explaining how it is okay to have only a few outfits, if they’re all expensive and stylish. The entire idea of having a style that reflects your personality is absurd when mentioned by Stacy and Clinton.
All the blame cannot fall on the show however. We call ourselves an ‘advanced’ society; dripped in synthetic materials, glued to technology, all while developing and consuming the latest anything to make life easier. This does not reflect our growth in wisdom or maturity however. Majority of our media promotes false identities that get pinned onto certain genres. And blindly, we follow.
If you’re well-kempt, clean shaven, and accessorized you must be a trustable person, who is also intelligent and reliable. Because you look like what the media considers ‘fashionable’ it would probably be a safer choice to buy insurance from you as opposed to, say, a fat person in sweat pants. God forbid you ever have to rely on some who looks frumpy, or gothic, or different. They must be lazy, and stupid, and wicked. For example, in one episode of ‘What Not to Wear’ the victim’s boss describes her as having, “a great personality”, and “customers [loving] her”. Overall, she was a good, hardworking, reliable, and kind employee. It didn’t matter though, she appeared outdated and plain, therefore she could not do well in business. They idealize a cookie cutter society where everyone has the latest, hot-off-the-rack designer jacket that matches their two hundred dollar jeans. You are not good enough the way you are, regardless of personality.
However, people now are supposed to be more accepting and unique. Hell, we even have pride parades for a human trait that used to be illegal. Females, males, and anything in-between are supposed to be able to break away from their stereotypes and form their own identities. Even some media attempts to promote this idea, with musician’s including Lady GaGa who constantly assures people of the beauty of being your own person. And even if you cannot bear the sound of her music, the message is one that allows teenagers and adults alike to finally express themselves. This is what our generation is supposed to embrace. But then there are shows like ‘What Not to Wear’ that obstruct the path to genuineness.
And don’t get me wrong, I’m all for assisting people to achieve self confidence, which is so very vital to survive in this world. I realize that’s what ‘What Not to Wear’ does for many people, but the reason behind this scrutiny is why they need this help. Why they have to look thin, show a bit of cleavage here, some leg there, and rely on others opinions to gain the confidence needed to be a happy, healthy individual.
The thing is, Stacy and Clinton do not share a mentality with the famous individuals who believe in self expression. They are generic, fashionable, immature, adults that single out others for defying their belief of being well-dressed. It saddens me to think that some people actually look up to these grown adults who cannot find anything better to do with their lives than to berate people on appearances. This type of vile media promotes the opposite of what is supposed to be happening in society. They pull people into the ancient practice of judgement, and even worse conceit. They invite people to laugh at and isolate human beings who deny their ‘basic rules of fashion’. This unfortunate immaturity is broadcast daily to all ages, and is the reason why only the bravest of people express and accept differences. It is why many people feel compelled to change the way they look, simply to lead an easier, happier life.
Society needs to break away from its superficial history. You can, in no way, base human worth, kindness, happiness, or dependability on appearance. Personal style may help to reveal some characteristics of a person, such as interests (band/group/logo clothing) but it does not solely describe the entire person’s being. TLC’s ‘What Not to Wear’ along with uncountable other media broadcasts and their fan army enforce harmful, restricting conceit.
All I ask, is that new viewers and old fans alike take a minute to really think about what they’re laughing at, who they’re agreeing with, and why.
And then I had to link it to an Archetype:
Stacy and Clinton: The gift of looking like everyone else (looking like everyone else allows you to escape criticism but it causes this weird thing called homogenization)
For this essay, I chose the archetype of God-Teacher. Media is modern societies God-Teacher, and shows like ‘What not to Wear’ simply broadcast the media’s self-created knowledge and the gift of knowing how to handle said knowledge. Stacy and Clinton (or really any media/ media host) believe they know best. And in a sense, they do. Because they define what is acceptable, they know what the majority of society expects from their peers. They tell people how they should be treated depending on how they dress, and until we stop worshipping their teachings, everything that they tell us is true. They provide us with the necessary information to make the decision to become either: like everyone else, and therefore free from harm, or to defy media and express individuality and rebellion, causing criticism and judgement. Their teachings and ‘gift’ is a double edged one that –in today’s world- does not offer joy or freedom, but imposes the ideas of one onto many.
We follow the hosts and media’s like god-teacher’s, even though their gift is abused and an unfortunate controlling device for mankind.
annaxmalina
gummygunk
dailybridgerton
izzy806
tangentwithtanner
