[ox] copyleft fashion design
- From: "Franz Nahrada" <f.nahrada reflex.at>
- Date: Fri, 05 Mar 2004 22:38:22 +0100
Ein interessanter Beitrag ist zur Konferenz reingekommen, den ich schon
gleich mal samt meiner Fragen und Anmerkungen von der Projektliste auch
auf die Hauptliste stelle.
sorry, ausnahmsweise englisch. ich bin dafür daß wir uns mit englisch in
den deutschsprachigen listen zurückhalten, aber hier sind einfach zuviele
unserer diskussionspunkte berührt - Übertragbarkeit der GPL, Brötchenfrage
und so weiter.
Franz
Avin Kruglanski writes:
hello,
i just found out about your conference. i'm afraid i missed
the proposal deadline. nontheless, i am sending you the
description of a project i am working on applying concepts
such as copyleft and free-software to garment design.
Graham has answered you allready with some hints; I can only add that
this is exactly the kind of contributions we need to see more
frequently ;-)
Avin, I am what some would call the "welcome-guy" or "greeting-uncle".
I am here to encourage or discourage, to register and answer mails
from potential speakers. All I can say is your approach is very
interesting.
When I use many questions and some harsh words, it shows more degree of
interest than rejection ;-)
You might want to decide telling us you made a serious submission and
want to come; still I prefer that speakers from far away start thinking
about
travel funding because even if we decide their contribution might be
very interesting we might not be able to pay for the trip of all that we
consider elegible for a speech at the conference .... . (We will,
however, provide accomodation for invited speakers).
So lets go through your proposal shortly and raise some questions.
the idea is to create new channels for people designing and
making clothes to communicate and create new processes for
the develpement of ideas and techniques.
(this is a remark rather than a question:)
In fact we have seen a tremendous lag in technology and tools for
tele-cooperation, especially simultaneous creative tele-cooperation.
So the tools we have are rather primitive, but I am convinced we are
at the beginning of a development towards sophistication.
There will be a lot of cross-inspiration if the style of work that
Andrius Kulikauskas calls "Working Openly" develops in various
fields. And we want cross - inspiration in the heart of [ox3]
We have allready* carpentry* on the conference faculty,
as well as a more general approach to *photovoltaics and ecological
stuff*. There is much more out there - several Open Source Car
projects and so on - but we have not as much conccrete stuff
on the conference as I hoped. Its still mirroring the state of
affairs :-(
..we think that we are far from "mission accomplished"
and this is maybe distinctive to similar approaches
http://wizards-of-os.org/
but we might meet with them in the quest for "new goals" ;-)
http://wiki.wizards-of-os.org/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?Free_Hardware
teaming up is good here!
if you have any feedback or comments regarding the proposal
i would be very interested in hearing them. if you know of
anyone that might be interested in collaborating on such a
project i would be delighted to talk to them.
Well even if you can't come because of geographical distance or
other reasons, I think we might 1. create a reference place at
the conference where one could get informed about all kind
of endavours to bring our minds into direct global cooperation
for creating wealth.
And of course 2. we want to have a VERY MUCH improved
comprehensive linklist of free"hardware", be it electronic
or non-electronic material products, as the result of
putting our minds together ;-)
our short list is here by the way: in German so far
http://www.oekonux.de/projekt/links.html#...bei materiellen Gütern..
hope you will find it interesting.
sincerely,
aviv kruglanski
I do.
Free softwear
sounds nice ;-)
this is a proposal to create a common web based space where
independent and DIY fashion designers can exchange
techniques and designs and create a platform for the
distribution of goods. It is modeled after free -software
developing communities, and after some fairly new ideas
regarding
intellectual property (copyleft licenses, the Wu-Ming
Foundation etc). It will be a space for collaboration and a
tool for sustainability and survival in this new economy of
social precarity and instability, a way to survive and not
sell out, a way to live in reality but not be pushed around
by it. And hopefully, it will be a slowly building pain in
the ass for the fancy fashion world and the dreary
Gapization of our every moment. The project is inspired
equally by hackers and grandmothers.
I would also say that garments are one of the spheres of "hardware" where
the likeliness of "indefinite reproduceability" is quite high.
Which means that the raw materials mostly grow on fields or are otherwise
renewable resources.
So that could be a source of inspiration, too.
Lets be inspired by farmers, growers, inventors....
the problematic
People involved in garment design and production have 3
options in terms of the space they occupy in world garment
culture:
1-take part in the globalized industry of mass produced
fashion.
2-produce independently and participate in the exclusive
boutique sector of the garment economy.
3-produce at home for family and friends without much
impact on the garment culture at large.
very interesting. You could say this in similar terms about other
fields of productive human activities!
My first reaction - none of these alternatives is very attractive!!!
is there a forth? ;-)
I think this is not by mistake the question you leave open throughout your
paper.
The first option is problematic. As a designer for a large
coorporate clothing manufacturer you have very little
creative freedom. The scale of production and distribution
leads these ubiquetous firms to a situation where
conservatism and homogeonization make the most economic
sense. When new interesting ideas are incorporated they are
usually ideas reappropriated from local subcultures. They
are stripped bare of their original context and politics
and resold as pure aesthetic.
This is a process that can begin with the scouting of the
inner cities by 'cool hunters' who communicate ideas (a
look) to the centralized operation of the firm. The whole
surrounding set of codes and local reasons for the
reapropriated style are always left behind. The clothes
themselves are usually produced in third world countries in
factories where workers do not recieve minimum rights or
services. The great distance between the design process,
the production, the source of inspiration and the consumer
is problematic.
The production of material culture is a constant back and
forth conversation between the producer, the material, the
user (consumer) and the contexts they are all in. The
current specialized and streamlined production situation
leaves everyone isolated and atomized. The person
fabricating the clothes, the person designing them and the
person wearing them, know nothing of each other's
situation.
One could add that of course the industrial copyers are most likely
destroying the base of indigenous producers, small firms etc, by sometimes
taking their "cool features", incorporating them into mass production and
ruining the original producers by price competition - i.e. lowering the
value of things. So producers are forced to compete with machines, and the
"weavers" drama is repeating again and again on this globe: putting many
peopl out of work, enforcing cheap and children labour and so on.
The second option also has its own problems. If using the
first option gives you access to a wide audience, the
second assumes that the influence you have as a designer is
based on the kind of audience you reach. The assumption
with 'trickle down fashion' is that what catches on in the
exclusive (and expensive) circles of the highly stylish,
will have its impact later on and be immitated by others.
As an independent designer you don't have much other
choice. With the time you spend learning, developing and
producing your craft on your own, plus the cash you spend
on materials (for some good money saving tips go to
www.yomango.net), you can't just give the stuff away . The
boutique scene is practically the only outlet for
independent designers and it bases its economy on
exclusivity. The stores also take a large commission on the
stuff you sell. A young independent designer working for
themselves cannot usually afford to buy their own clothes.
Their public is more upscale than them and would rarely
understand the situation in which they
live, or the context the clothes are produced in.
So that is "luxury production" and that means good quality is out of our
reach and only available for few. Also here, we are facing the situation
of gradual re-introduction of the feudal situation, where the rich can
afford using up the creative potential of several people for their own
personal needs. History is quickly running backwards.
The third option is us. Our designs are the most radical,
they are used in art projects, in fringe theater
productions, in direct actions. They are worn by people who
never spend much money on clothes but have more style then
anyone you would see in fancy magazines. We invest a lot of
time, we are constantly reinventing. We never do it unless
we are really enjoying it. we learned how to do it from our
mom's, our grandmothers, friends, from the internet or just
from playing around with a sewing machine. We never find
what we like in stores....but we are still relatively
isolated and invisible.
Well, I mean you point here to the weak point of the third alternative. By
being relatively isolated and invisible, we cannot do as much as we need
to do. It is like the do-it-yourself culture, where you have to
shortcomings:
- the tools for "home" use are largely unprofessional and clumsy.
- we cannot do very complex or ambitious projects because our division of
labour is limited.
- we cannot work at high productivity so industrial stuff will always be
cheaper (or better)
- we need to sometimes get questionable stuff falling off the planetary
labourmachine as raw materials instead of making things right from the
scratch.
So some of us would say the "third way" (I would still call it the "fourth
way") is not fully developed yet, it carries much more potential with the
development of p2p networks.
Open source fashion ? how can it work?
The intention is to create a communications tool where
ideas and techniques can be developped through information
and communication that is not being restricted by
intelectual property. Like software, professional fashion
design also uses a sort of standardized 'code'. It is the
language of patterns. One way designers can communicate
their work in a light, easy to understand way is to
contribute the patterns to be copied and used by others.
Why not also develop the patterns in cooperation?
Another designer who has used the patterns would be
obligated by contract (a copyleft contract. A brief
explanation of copyleft is to be found further down) to
continue publishing the patterns with any garment they
produce using it.
Thats like GPL. But maybe there is also the question of "source" in terms
that you do not just want an IMAGE of the pattern but rather an ALGORITHM,
so you can automatically re-knit the pattern on your weaving machine. Did
you consider that??
This would be the case even in the event
they made changes to the garment. They would also be
prevented from copyrighting these designs (the transformed
designs would also be published under the same copyleft
license).
Well there is a lot of cross - references here between GPL and GGPL
(General garment Pattern License ;-))
We are here in a very interesting field of crafting new licenses
everywhere which might be more appropriate to particular situations and
expandeable - hoping that copyleft eventually becomes the social standard
and we do not need them any more.
But we also face serious problems, especially with the approach that you
take. see below.
A changed design would be reposted onto the
common space and thus ideas and design 'advance' or more
appropriately 'expand'.
common space as repository. pattern description language, classification
schemes for easy tracking.
So practically speaking we are talking about a space where
people can publish their fashion work and sell it. All work
presented would include the pattern and or drawing and or
technique used to produce it.
That is interesting. So the same channel that facilitates professional
exchange of patterns (sorry, by exchange I mean the common cooking pot)
is also a brokerage for services.
How do they go together?
The project would not be restricted to the more official
professional language of patterns, the important thing
would be for the designs to be reproducible. Any type of
drawing, photo or written instruction, would be accepted.
There would also be a space for comments, and questions, in
case the instructions are not clear.
(see my remarks above about IMAGE vs. ALGORHITHM)
These patterns/drawing/techniques would be published under
a copyleft license that would allow use and change of the
pattern solely if the new design is also published under
the same copyleft license.
How can you make that sure when there are so many similar commercial
patterns out there? The GPL is only working because it is based on the
identifyable "DNA" of "source code", but without that I see serious
problems. Similarity is a wide range of issues!!!
Use of this space would be limited to garments that are
self produced. Mass production, or items which have been
outsourced would not take part in the project.
(This is a very deplorable and serious limitation to your project. Why
cant I give my design to a "print shop", where is the distinction between
"self produced" and "mass production" ???) Many in Oekonux would be very
curious about this point, because most of us really advocate the unlimited
self-unfolding. And sometimes we would need factories for that. Even a
fabber can mass-produce, as can a home printer or knittting machine..)
Selling procedure
the web will use a php script where people can freely
upload images of their work. The drawing and instructions
of how to make it will be included. The designer will place
their contact information with their post so that people
interested in purchasing can get in contact directly with
the designer. Thus the whole selling and distribution is
done in a decentralized manner directly between the
designer and the buyer.
This is an approach where you still have not explained why this should be
substantially different from "luxury production" as outlined above.
Especially because you refrain from mass production.
A space would be left for feedback so consumers can report
back with their experience of the transaction and the
clothes they have purchased.
Branding (well... sort of...)
the idea is that this production and development process
will be communicated as part of an image.
Hopefully, a kind of prestige will grow associated with
this community. This is not cynical use of something that
is idealistic and political. It is a way to slip our
politics and ways of doing things through the back door of
the fashion industry, using an 'underground' prestige or a
'radical' coolness that is by now quite mainstream.
I think we at Oekonux have no objections as long as the image is not just
a mask for another kind of boaring luxury production or - on the other
side of the spectrum - self - exploitation. Our only fear might be that
you are not escaping this "alternative" with the restrictions that you put
on yourself!
De-Massification needs sophisticated and very powerful automation in the
hands of people - this is exactly the kind of tools we miss.
'open source' and 'free software' are now common buzzwords
(just read the latest issue of wired, actually, do yourself
a favor and don't read it). That is not a reason to
abandon these methodologies. The marketplace is hard at
work reapropriating these concepts, trying to associate
them with nothing more than a smarter business model, and
with companies such as ibm. But there's is one thing that
they will have a hard time erasing. This way of working
takes advantages out of their hands and put us on a
slightly planer playing field with them. The fact that the
'open source' way of working is based on the generosity and
idealism of a decentralized network of participants brings
politics and ideology back into an arena where the only
players for a while now have been market forces.
I at least would be a little bit unhappy with emphasis on "generosity and
idealism". Some of us are thinking that we will only prevail if we can
show that this mode of the production is also simply more effective. A
large deal of controversies to expect at the conference!
The idea is to make (cynical ?) use of this cooption that
is taking place. A growing population is making the effort
to seek and use software that is a product of the free
software movement. The enthusiasm regarding this is both
related to the creativity of these programming communities
and the ideology they espouse. I jokingly titled this
section branding, but the idea is to be as transparent as
possible and to communicate as much as possible the work
process ( a lively back and forth conversation which
involves immitation and generosity) in which this fashion
is produced.
I do not comment on this, but I am not very enthusiastic about that.
Thus we take these politics and make use of them to
popularise this mode of producing fashion. For instance, a
logo of the copyleft fashion could be produced and
designers can place it as part of their labeling if they so
wish (maybe we can just use the inverted c of copyleft).
the politics of production are part of the image of the
clothes. It will be 'cool' to be wearing them not only for
style reasons but from the context out of which they come
from. For the consumer this means bringing context and
politics back into what is usually presented as purely
aesthetic decisions. Image decisions regarding one's 'look'
are never really clean of local political situations. They
only become so when filtered through the atomizing
streamlined machine of the Gapisizing globalized fashion
industry.
Well, I think there will just be a small and temporary advantage in this.
Adorno says you cannot beat them in the competition on image
representations and he was probably right. Whatever is cool meets their
hunters eyes. They have commodified EVERYTHING. And everything commodified
nowadays is more or less mere image. and everything can be image - or
spectacle. Che Guevara, the red flag, very soon the inverted c.
At least I hope we at Oekonux we are not dependent on image
representation, but tryining to deal with production itself.
Sharing resources
it occured to me that the lack of equipment could prevent
some people from being able to participate in the project.
A space on the site could be alocated for people who are
willing to share resources to post. The postings would be
divided by region. The sharing of resources, such as
scanners, digital cameras and internet connection, could
serve as a good excuse for participants in the project to
actually see each others faces once in a while.
(some stuff left out)
Questions for fashionistas:
1.does this seem like a useful tool for you?
2.Would you use such a space if it existed?
3.How would you change the proposal
4.are there any features you would add?
5.Any features you would remove?
6.General comments.
Thank you for sharing that with us - we will share it with the
fashionistas we know!
---
Sent from UnionMail Service [http://mail.union.org.za]
Greetings from Vienna !
________________________________
Web-Site: http://www.oekonux.de/
Organisation: projekt oekonux.de