Ornamentation in Clothing, Past and Present

Evolution of "Bling" and Where We are Today

"Bling bling Everytime I come around yo city Bling bling, Pinky ring worth about fifty, Bling bling, Everytime I buy a new ride Bling bling, Lorenzos on Yokahama tires,

Bling bling." Sounds ridiculously silly but isn't. "Bling" has been around a lot longer than the B.G. Bling dates back to prehistoric times. Websters Oxford English Dictionary defines Bling as "jewelry often gaudy or ostentatious," its etymology coming from "the sound it makes". "It is a hip-hop slang term referring to specifically very expensive jewelry and other accoutrements, and also an entire lifestyle built around excess spending and ostentation." Bling was more important for the ancient man than it is for any modern age celebrity. To say that it represented status is an understatement. For ancient man clothing was not only essential protection from the elements, it was a symbol of power. A prehistoric woman seen wearing a beaded bag was an object of envy. Not because of the beautiful colors and intricate patterns, but because it meant she wasn't hungry. If she had the time to sit around and hand bead a piece of cloth it meant that she wasn't using that time to look for food. It meant she had the luxury of a full stomach and could think about something else; that's wealth in prehistoric times. The more intricate the beading, meant the more time she had free and wasn't hunting-she had time to think and be creative. Her beaded bag simply stated without the use of words, how wealthy she was and her standing in society. Clothing and accessories, such as jewelry, has always represented a person's whole identity.

Hundreds of years later, in the court of Louis the 14th, the same exact thing was going on. Civilization has created many languages, yet people still chose symbols rather than words to present their wealth and power. During the reign of Louis XIV, the Sun King, French fashion took over the leading role in Europe. This was caused by France having developed into the main political and cultural power, thus turning French fashion into an equally "absolutistic" regime. During the period from 1660 onwards, fashion in France, according to the absolutistic ideal, became rigid, ordered and strict in its do's and don'ts of etiquette.What a courtier wore to the ball wasn't a whim of mood: it was a carefully calculated look. This look stated exactly who he was and how wealthy he was. The man's handbook for dress code stated that a man must think about what he wears and make sure it coincides with what he wants to say about himself. "Men wore wigs, vests, breeches, and coats; women wore two dresses over a corset and a hooped or padded skirt. The extravagance of a noble man or woman's clothing was intended to show the public how much social standing that person had. In fact, during the reign of Louis XIII, a law was passed stating that only the nobility could wear precious stones and gold." One vest contained over 250 yards of ribbon and was heavily embroidered. Women wore hoop skirts which were considered symbols of wealth. A woman who did not wear a hoop was not invited to social functions. At times the hoop was as wide as three people, making it difficult for women to pass each other in doorways or to sit on sofas.That is not just throwing on whatever's clean. Clothing has a reason, nothing is accidental. Examples of symbols of things in the court. no one

could wear a bigger thing than the queen or king.

What we wear represents who we are in a very specific way. And it always has. You think you are wearing a black shirt because it's slimming and because you look good in black. That isn't necessarily true. You are wearing black because decades of human history are engraved into your subconscious. Maybe you wear black because it seems sophisticated. But why? If you look at just the present there doesn't seem to be an answer. Why is black cool? One has to look throughout history. During the Renaissance, black was the color of artists and intellectuals. Michelangelo wore black and so did Raffael. Black represented solid respectability. Tzarevna Elisabeth also picked black as her personal color; she was considered by the Russian people as the intellectual ruler. They wanted to distinguish themselves as artists and as intellectuals, to set themselves apart in a way that everyone could see. Maybe that's exactly why the beats of the 60s wore black, they were also artists, they were also intellectuals. And maybe that's why we think of black as cool. Another example is the color purple. It has a very rich look. It's a bit ostentatious even. But why? The answer once again lies in history, and is passed down intuitively from generation to generation. Purple was the royal color. It was very expensive because it was so hard to make. One bah of purple dye took 50,000 oyster shells. That's how the color became a symbol of wealth and power. It was considered ostentatious even back in the days of Julius Caesar. The man was considered to be showing off when he wore a purple toga, that display was even the final straw in Brute's decision. The list of examples goes on and on, proving that our so called whims aren't whims at all, but decades of fashion history inscribed in our fashion sense.

Today we buy designer clothing for the name rather than its beauty. Clothing labels have become our "bling" in a very intense and frightening way. Our award shows are not unlike the balls of Louis the 14th, where every inch of outfit is judged and scrutinized over. A lot of the designers we know today as legendary fashion symbols started out in the 1950s. Things looked very good for fashion then. Dior and Balenciaga made their names famous because they made beautiful clothing. There were no T-shirts with labels across the chest and no Louis Vuitton bags with the nauseating logo all over them. It made sense to pay a lot of money for something that was exceptionally well made and creative. My mom owns a Dior coat she bought in the 70s that has only a tiny label in the back. None of the gaudy name graffiti that exists on the Dior line today. What identified a designer back then was the cut, the specific style that belonged to only that designer. The masters didn't need to write their name all over a dress for the world to know it was theirs; they just needed to apply their unique style. You would know a Dior from a Givenchy in 1950, but you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between the 2000 collections from the same houses. It used to be that you could go to a store of your favorite designer and buy your