The Philippine Online Chronicles

There’s a very interesting Finnish saying that seems mighty contrary at first: “poor people cannot afford cheap things”. Now, nearly everyone who was brought up in a low to lower-middle income family would definitely think that this is one of the worst sayings ever, considering how it’s universal knowledge that poor people do not have the financial means to purchase anything other than cheap things. That’s because they don’t have a lot of money to burn on expensive things, obviously.

But there’s a truth to this saying, especially if you seek to understand what it’s really trying to show. See, the problem with cheap things is that they break down, quite easily. Ever gone shopping in one of Divisoria’s many malls? You can find exceptions, true, but for most of the clothes bought there, a month or two is enough to change the appearance, texture, or color of the item. In the long run, therefore, cheap clothes are much more expensive, as you will have to replace them more often than you would like.

Now it doesn’t follow that expensive is always better. However, high quality is always more expensive, given the care and effort that goes into the cut, the material, the design, the stitching, the lining, and everything else. High quality means the clothes will last a few years, not a few months. And no, something that still looks “sort of” like it did at the time you bought it, does not count as “lasting”.

French women don’t buy cheap

Consider the French. These glorious fashion icons are toasted around the world for their taste and style. However, what few people realize is that French women – for all of their fashion shows and brands and je ne sais quoi – simply can’t afford to buy cheap. It’s not that they are so snobbish that buying less than anything branded is abhorrent to them; it’s that clothes are so expensive that French women simply cannot be so haphazard with any of their choices.

Ellen Wallace of Cosmopolitan discovered this French “secret” after her time in Paris, seeing as how French women seemed to be put together at all times. What was the secret to this chic? Apart from an innate and possibly genetic desire to look good (after all, French fashion icon Coco Chanel did say, “I don’t understand how a woman can leave the house without fixing herself up a little – if only out of politeness”), clothes in France are either very cheap, or very expensive. Unfortunately, since cheap clothes in France were notably throwaway in nature, the penny-pinching French decided that to really save money, they could spend only on clothes that last.

Make it last

Make it last: this is the battle cry of practical French women who simply can’t afford to keep buying new clothes. You spend more at the beginning, to perhaps buy a sturdy pair of shoes, or a coat whose classic style can withstand fashion trends. In the end, you get to use these items regularly and the cost-per-wear returns will prove more practical.

See, “cost-per-wear” isn’t exactly a science, but practical women know that to identify the worth of a certain piece, you need to evaluate how often it will be worn. Divide the price by the “wear” regularity and you’ve got a good gauge of what it’s worth to you. So a dress you wear once (perhaps a style that’s all the rage this season), versus a classic dress you can wear for years to come: the answer is obvious.

Another interesting “tip” Wallace picked up in France was that women were actively working to make clothes last. It’s not just a matter of keeping their clothes in good condition. It’s a matter of keeping clothes relevant. French women are very much aware of the changing seasons, and obviously clothes will have to last beyond one season in order to be a practical investment.

The secret: alteration. You won’t have to keep buying new clothes or new shoes. Wallace noted that French women, upon buying new shoes, would take the pair to shoe repair stores to get protective soles. Pants that were no longer in style were brought to alteration shops to fit the new trend better. Coats now too large? Alteration shop it is.

Social cost – impossible to afford

But there’s a bigger reason why quality (and to a certain degree, price) trumps quantity. The last few years have seen the growth of so-called “throwaway” fashion – clothes so cheap there’s no point repairing them when holes or stains appear. Why bother when throwing them out and getting new ones is so cheap and easy?

Cheap as these clothes may be, the social cost is something anyone with a conscience cannot stand to pay. Behind every throwaway shirt you own is a child or a woman forced to work in squalor, producing clothes at barely minimum wage. No wonder these clothes are so cheap – labor costs barely make a dent in the production cost.

And that’s not even counting the environmental cost. Environews calls it “waste couture”, because fast fashion “leaves a pollution footprint”. Polyester, one of the most common materials used in cheap clothes, is energy-intensive to produce and the production process leaves waste and pollutants that affect the air and water surrounding the manufacturing plant. Hazardous wastes? Definitely. The problem isn’t just that there are pollutants; it’s that the pollution has doubled since cheap clothes have found an unprecedented foothold on the market.

Quality versus quantity

The low prices of clothes now available on the market have encouraged a “hoarding” mentality. Don’t just buy a shirt; buy one in five different colors! It’s so cheap, anyway. In the same way that buying five bags of toilet paper in one go (because they were “on sale”) isn’t exactly a way to save money, buying clothes that barely last a year can’t be considered practical at all.

More importantly, this “cheap and plenty” attitude towards clothes has serious social and environmental effects that should be taken into consideration. Does “quantity” warrant the sacrifice of children’s rights and the ecosystem?

[image screenshot from The Dark Knight (Nolan, 2008)]