7-2 | Table of Con­tents | DOI 10.17742/IMAGE.VOS.7-2.5 | Hal­l­i­dayPDF


Abstract | Since the mid-2000s, street style blogs have doc­u­ment­ed indi­vid­u­al­ized fash­ion in inter­na­tion­al cities. With their rise to promi­nence, pho­to-blog­gers turned their lens­es towards mobil­i­ties out­side fash­ion show venues in the dom­i­nant indus­try cap­i­tals. Fash­ion Month is the bi-annu­al cir­cuit of women’s ready-to-wear pre­sen­ta­tions in New York, Lon­don, Milan, and Paris. Each Fash­ion Week is an enact­ment of what fash­ion schol­ars, pace Pierre Bour­dieu, term the field of fash­ion (Entwistle and Rocamo­ra). This exclu­sive assem­blage can also be described as a scene. This arti­cle con­tends that the cir­cu­la­tion of media rep­re­sen­ta­tions of fash­ion show atten­dees, under the ban­ner street style, appro­pri­ates a con­test­ed term and rein­scribes fashion’s elit­ist social and mate­r­i­al ideals. I exam­ine the career of Cana­di­an pho­tog­ra­ph­er Tom­my Ton and per­form con­tent analy­sis on pho­tographs cap­tured from the Spring/Summer 2014 and Fall/Winter 2014 sea­sons post­ed to Condé Nast Media’s Style​.com. I trace the term street style to its def­i­n­i­tion as fash­ion “observed on the street” (Wood­ward) and to his­tor­i­cal ref­er­ences to sub­cul­tures. I then sit­u­ate online street style pho­tog­ra­phy with­in a his­to­ry of depic­tions of cit­i­zens in urban loca­tions and con­tes­ta­tions between the “real” and the “authen­tic” in edi­to­r­i­al fash­ion. Com­bin­ing Gillian Rose’s notion of social modal­i­ty with Agnès Rocamora’s fash­ion media dis­course analy­sis, I describe how Ton’s aes­thet­ic com­bines non-place-spe­cif­ic archi­tec­ture with ide­al bod­ies and lux­u­ry sig­ni­fiers to com­mu­ni­cate social dis­tinc­tion. Ton’s pho­tographs do not fore­ground fea­tures of cities but rather depict the lit­er­al­ized street itself as a sta­tus signifier—an edi­to­r­i­al back­drop against which to empha­size fashions.
Résumé | Depuis le milieu des années 2000, les blogues de mode de rue ont doc­u­men­té la mode indi­vid­u­al­isée dans les grandes métrop­o­les. Leur pop­u­lar­ité ne ces­sant d’augmenter, les pho­tographes de rue et blogueurs se sont tournés vers l’évolution du style ves­ti­men­taire, et ce, en dehors des défilés des cap­i­tales mon­di­ales de la mode. Le Mois de la mode est un événe­ment bisan­nuel con­sacré au prêt-à-porter féminin avec des présen­ta­tions à New York, Lon­dres, Milan et Paris. S’appuyant sur les travaux de Bour­dieu, les spé­cial­istes de la mode sou­ti­en­nent que chaque Semaine de la mode est une matéri­al­i­sa­tion du domaine de la mode (Entwistle and Rocamo­ra). Ce rassem­ble­ment exclusif peut égale­ment être décrit en tant que scène. Cet arti­cle sou­tient que la dif­fu­sion des représen­ta­tions médi­a­tiques des spec­ta­teurs des défilés de mode, sous la ban­nière mode de rue, s'approprie un terme con­testé et réin­sère les idéaux soci­aux et matériels éli­tistes de la mode. J'examine la car­rière du pho­tographe cana­di­en Tom­my Ton et je réalise une analyse de con­tenu avec les pho­togra­phies pris­es durant les saisons Printemps/Été 2014 et Automne/Hiver 2014 et pub­liées sur Style​.com de Condé Nast Media. J’examine le terme mode de rue selon sa déf­i­ni­tion de mode « observée dans la rue » (Wood­ward) et selon les références his­toriques aux sous-cul­tures. Je con­tex­tu­alise ensuite la pho­togra­phie de mode de rue en ligne selon les représen­ta­tions des citoyens dans les lieux urbains, mais aus­si en fonc­tion des con­tes­ta­tions entre le « vrai » et l’« authen­tique » dans la mode édi­to­ri­ale. En com­bi­nant la notion de modal­ité sociale de Gillian Rose avec l'analyse du dis­cours de la mode dans les médias d'Agnès Rocamo­ra, je décris la façon dont l'esthétique de Ton réu­nit l’architecture sans lieu spé­ci­fique avec des sym­bol­es de corps par­faits et de luxe afin de com­mu­ni­quer la dis­tinc­tion sociale. Les pho­togra­phies de Ton ne met­tent pas en évi­dence les car­ac­téris­tiques des villes, mais représen­tent plutôt la rue elle-même en tant que sym­bole iden­ti­taire : une toile de fond édi­to­ri­ale qui per­met d’accentuer les modes.

Rebec­ca Hal­l­i­day | York and Ryer­son University

HOMOGENIZING THE CITY/ RE-CLASSIFYING THE STREET:
Tommy Ton’s Street Style Fashion Show Photographs

The Ital­ian fash­ion edi­tor Anna Del­lo Rus­so perch­es on a red motor­bike. She sports a sweater dress and a quilt­ed leather purse in a near-iden­ti­cal shade, embla­zoned with what appears to be McDonald’s “gold­en arch­es” logo but is actu­al­ly a dou­bled sig­ni­fi­er for the Ital­ian brand Moschi­no (Fig. 1). Del­lo Russo’s look debuted dur­ing Fall/Winter 2014 Milan Fash­ion Week, where Moschino’s col­lec­tion received crit­i­cism for its mix of high and mass cul­ture icons. How­ev­er, the sole clue that this pho­to­graph has been tak­en in Milan is the motor­bike, a com­mon mode of trans­porta­tion in Ital­ian cities; the name Deloitte, the inter­na­tion­al finan­cial firm, is vis­i­ble on mir­rored win­dows that reflect brick facades. This pho­to­graph is one of 386 images that Cana­di­an-born Tom­my Ton cap­tured of atten­dees at the Fall/Winter 2014 pre­sen­ta­tions and post­ed to Condé Nast Media’s Style​.com under the ban­ner street style. The “Big Four” Fash­ion Week cir­cuit refers to the bian­nu­al show­case of women’s ready-to-wear col­lec­tions in New York, Lon­don, Milan, and Paris—the com­plete series is termed Fash­ion Month. From 2009 to 2015, Ton cap­tured thou­sands of pho­tographs of the out­door scenes of Fash­ion Month, in addi­tion to Paris Cou­ture Week and small­er-scale fash­ion weeks in oth­er inter­na­tion­al cities.[1]

Fig. 1

In a phe­nom­e­non known as the street style parade, in-house and free­lance pho­tog­ra­phers  com­pete to doc­u­ment atten­dees’ and mod­els’ ensem­bles as they enter and leave Fash­ion Month venues. Street style blogs, the medi­um from which this spec­ta­cle arose, claim to cap­ture the fash­ions of “real” peo­ple on the streets of inter­na­tion­al cities. Fol­low­ing the medium’s rise to pop­u­lar­i­ty in the mid-2000s, fash­ion pub­li­ca­tions offered pho­tog­ra­phers lucra­tive con­tracts to con­tribute street style images from Fash­ion Month to enhance col­lec­tion reportage. This arti­cle exam­ines Tom­my Ton’s pho­tographs for Style​.com to inter­ro­gate the media rep­re­sen­ta­tions of fash­ion show atten­dees and the class pol­i­tics com­mu­ni­cat­ed in the met­ro­pol­i­tan streets on which Fash­ion Month mate­ri­al­izes. I con­tend that these pho­tographs, and their inclu­sion in press con­tent, appro­pri­ate the con­test­ed term street style as a site on which to inscribe fashion’s elit­ist social, mate­r­i­al, and embod­ied ideals. I fur­ther scru­ti­nize depic­tions of Fash­ion Month cities to sit­u­ate the clothes with­in fashion’s inter­na­tion­al­iza­tion under neolib­er­al­ism. Fashion’s con­se­cra­tion of the Fash­ion Month insid­er pho­to­graph as palimpsest has dis­con­nect­ed the medi­um of street style pho­tog­ra­phy from its (ten­u­ous) ideals of can­did­ness. The pho­tographs’ cir­cu­la­tion via pro­fes­sion­al web­sites and media out­lets has ren­dered the sar­to­r­i­al choic­es of fashion’s arbiters arguably more influ­en­tial than col­lec­tion pho­tographs and has blurred dis­tinc­tions between the fash­ions worn in the indoor and out­door envi­ron­ments. Jen­nifer Craik describes a form of “glob­al high fash­ion worn by fash­ion jour­nal­ists, styl­ists, and celebri­ties who trav­el world­wide to attend fash­ion weeks and spe­cial fash­ion events” (354). It is this sub­set that cul­tur­al par­lance terms street style. Ton’s aes­thet­ic uti­lizes streetscapes to pro­mote this inter­na­tion­al­ized mode of dress that com­mu­ni­cates wear­ers’ sta­tus not just in fash­ion cir­cles but as mem­bers of a larg­er cul­tured class. Cities func­tion as sta­tus enhancers with­in a dis­cur­sive sys­tem that priv­i­leges beau­ti­ful clothes and bod­ies. Ele­ments that do reveal loca­tion, such as his­tor­i­cal land­marks, func­tion with­in exis­tent cul­tur­al dis­cours­es to pro­mote cities as ide­al­ized fash­ion cap­i­tals (or fash­ion cities) and tourist des­ti­na­tions (see Gilbert).[2]

This arti­cle is part of broad­er research sit­u­at­ed in fash­ion, media, and cul­tur­al stud­ies: this research exam­ines the medi­a­tion of the fash­ion show as a micro­cosm of online media’s effects on con­sumer cul­ture and assess­es the social dis­cur­sive pro­duc­tion of fash­ion shows and their atten­dees via diverse tex­tu­al and visu­al plat­forms. It is cru­cial to con­tex­tu­al­ize Ton’s pho­tographs as embed­ded with­in the aca­d­e­m­ic and social his­to­ries of the dis­cur­sive terms and prac­tices that they appro­pri­ate. Fur­ther­more, one must account for the pro­duc­tion of cul­tur­al and aes­thet­ic ideals spe­cif­ic to the cities in which these rep­re­sen­ta­tions are locat­ed, includ­ing inter­sec­tions with oth­er aspi­ra­tional brand­ing and con­sumer prac­tices, such as those of tourism.

I first out­line the meth­ods used to ana­lyze Ton’s pho­tographs and defines a the­o­ret­i­cal con­cep­tu­al­iza­tion of Fash­ion Month as scene. I then doc­u­ment Ton’s rise to promi­nence with­in fashion’s indus­tri­al struc­tures. Fur­ther, I describe how the mobil­i­ties of Fash­ion Month with­in dom­i­nant cities enact fashion’s con­di­tion of inter­na­tion­al­iza­tion. Next, I offer a scholas­tic geneal­o­gy of street style to illus­trate the class and racial ten­sions in which Ton’s dis­cur­sive rep­re­sen­ta­tions cir­cu­late. Fur­ther, I sum­ma­rize research in street style pho­tog­ra­phy as both pho­to­graph­ic genre and mate­r­i­al prac­tice, con­tex­tu­al­ized with­in his­tor­i­cal rep­re­sen­ta­tions of mod­ern cities and fash­ion­able sub­jects. Ton’s pho­tographs demonstrate—and are sit­u­at­ed within—a per­sis­tent dialec­tic between “real” or “authen­tic” depic­tions and fashion’s edi­to­r­i­al or com­mer­cial dic­tates: this dialec­tic reflects inter­na­tion­al cities’ con­tes­ta­tions in the cul­tur­al posi­tion­ing of urban envi­ron­ments and class-based and/or racial­ized con­structs of the “street.”

Methods

I per­formed man­u­al con­tent analy­sis on a non-ran­dom sam­ple of all of the pho­tographs that Ton post­ed to Style​.com dur­ing the Spring/Summer 2014 (n=339) and Fall/Winter 2014 (n=386) ready-to-wear women’s col­lec­tions, for a total of 725 pho­tographs (n=725). The break­down of cities is as fol­lows: Fall/Winter 2014—Paris (44.3%), New York City (27.7%), Milan (17.9%), Lon­don (10.4%); Spring/Summer 2014—Paris (47.8%), New York City (24.2%), Milan (16.5%), Lon­don (12.1%). To obtain an accu­rate count of cities depict­ed, I cross-ref­er­enced the pho­tographs with the archives on Ton’s per­son­al web­site, which names the loca­tions.[3] Paris pho­tographs com­prise almost half of the sam­ple, sug­gest­ing that Ton either attend­ed more fash­ion shows or pre­ferred to take more pho­tographs there; this sta­tis­tic also attests to Paris’s dom­i­nance as a fash­ion cap­i­tal (Rocamo­ra).

Gillian Rose’s Fou­cauldian approach to visu­al dis­course analy­sis inter­sects Ton’s pho­tographs with relat­ed media dis­cours­es and aes­thet­ic and embod­ied trends pred­i­cat­ed on an ele­vat­ed class ech­e­lon. Rose’s notion of social modal­i­ty con­sid­ers the “eco­nom­ic process­es” and “social prac­tices” that inform the pro­duc­tion of visu­al mate­ri­als (24-31). Cen­tral to recep­tion is the ele­ment of com­po­si­tion­al­i­ty, the pre­sen­ta­tion and rela­tion of items (22). Agnès Rocamora’s for­mu­la­tion of fash­ion dis­course, or fash­ion media dis­course, com­bines Bourdieu’s sym­bol­ic val­ue pro­duc­tion and Foucault’s rela­tion of dis­cours­es to insti­tu­tion­al struc­tures in order to read rep­re­sen­ta­tions of Paris and oth­er fash­ion cap­i­tals and of the per­sons that inhab­it these cities.

The Fashion Month Scene

This arti­cle applies a Bour­dieu­sian lens to the mate­r­i­al and social struc­tures of Fash­ion Month and to the con­sumer dis­tinc­tions com­mu­ni­cat­ed in fash­ion show atten­dees’ sar­to­r­i­al choic­es. Joanne Entwistle and Agnès Rocamo­ra, pace Bour­dieu, describe Fash­ion Week as a lit­er­al man­i­fes­ta­tion of the field of fash­ion in which cul­tur­al inter­me­di­aries com­pete for cul­tur­al, social, and eco­nom­ic cap­i­tal (736). This for­mu­la­tion par­al­lels Will Straw’s char­ac­ter­i­za­tion of scenes:

 [A]s col­lec­tiv­i­ties marked by some form of prox­im­i­ty; as spaces of assem­bly engaged in pulling togeth­er the vari­eties of cul­tur­al phe­nom­e­na; as work­places engaged … in the trans­for­ma­tion of mate­ri­als; as eth­i­cal worlds shaped by the work­ing out or main­te­nance of behav­iour­al pro­to­cols; as spaces of tra­ver­sal and preser­va­tion through which cul­tur­al ener­gies and prac­tices pass at par­tic­u­lar speeds, and as spaces of medi­a­tion … (477)

Fash­ion Weeks coa­lesce the industry’s social rela­tions and mate­r­i­al prac­tices: audi­ence ris­ers cre­ate a Fou­cauldian “regime of looking”—a reverse Panopticon—in which mem­bers that pos­sess the most influ­ence are seat­ed in the front row, vis­i­ble to oth­ers (Entwistle and Rocamo­ra 744). Insid­ers’ dis­play of per­son­al fash­ion cap­i­tal con­sti­tutes a per­for­mance of habi­tus, sets of tastes and dis­po­si­tions that Bour­dieu iden­ti­fied as the prod­uct of class posi­tion (Entwistle and Rocamo­ra 740). What can pro­duc­tive­ly be called the fash­ion scene, or the Fash­ion Month scene, is ren­dered vis­i­ble on an inter­na­tion­al scale and in an imme­di­ate time­frame via online pho­to­graph cir­cu­la­tion. Bourdieu’s hier­ar­chi­cal the­o­riza­tion of con­sumer cul­ture has its crit­ics: Gilles Lipovet­sky declared that the intro­duc­tion of mul­ti­ple mar­kets facil­i­tates indi­vid­ual choice, while Mike Feath­er­stone posit­ed that con­sump­tion in post­mod­ern cul­ture should be eval­u­at­ed based on tastes. Sub­cul­ture research, out­lined below, fur­ther indi­cates alter­na­tive direc­tions of fash­ion adop­tion. How­ev­er the press’s increased focus on fash­ion show atten­dees indi­cates fashion’s reasser­tion of class-based hier­ar­chies in the Inter­net era. Cul­tur­al inter­me­di­aries must appear to oth­er field mem­bers, through their dress and embod­i­ment, to pos­sess appro­pri­ate eco­nom­ic cap­i­tal, design knowl­edge, and pro­fes­sion­al con­nec­tions (Entwistle and Rocamo­ra 746). Con­sumers who access Fash­ion Month pho­tographs per­ceive atten­dees as rep­re­sen­ta­tive of an elite class, and their abil­i­ty to trav­el to inter­na­tion­al fash­ion cap­i­tals as evi­dence of finan­cial flex­i­bil­i­ty and indus­tri­al clout. 

The Rise of Online Street Style Photography

Online street style pho­tog­ra­phy became a rec­og­nized prac­tice through the work of pho­tog­ra­phers such as Ton, Garance Doré (Garance Doré), Phil Oh (Street Peep­er), Yvan Rod­ic (Face­hunter), and Scott Schu­man (The Sar­to­ri­al­ist, who pho­tographed for Style​.com from 2006 to 2009). These pho­tog­ra­phers doc­u­ment­ed inter­na­tion­al street fash­ion, pur­port­ing to cap­ture cities’ sar­to­r­i­al exper­i­men­ta­tion. Pho­tog­ra­ph­er and ethno­g­ra­ph­er Brent Luvaas con­tends that street style blogs’ “cul­tur­al val­ue” resides in their illus­tra­tion of “spe­cif­ic cities at spe­cif­ic moments in time … well beyond the tra­di­tion­al bound­aries of the glob­al fash­ion indus­try” (4). Print and online street fash­ion pho­tog­ra­phers have earned their rep­u­ta­tions tour­ing cities with a casu­al, all-see­ing approach that schol­ars liken to the fla­neur of the Parisian arcades. Fash­ion and visu­al cul­ture schol­ars have writ­ten on Schu­man and Rodic’s por­trai­ture as demon­stra­tive of the form. Pop­u­lar claims of street style blogs’ demo­c­ra­t­ic nature are pred­i­cat­ed on online media’s geo­graph­i­cal reach and inter­ac­tive capac­i­ties (includ­ing com­ment forums); depic­tions of clothes from dif­fer­ent price ech­e­lons; and the fact that blog­gers earned pro­fes­sion­al notice through ama­teur prac­tices. How­ev­er, schol­ars prob­lema­tize such utopi­an ideals, not­ing the pro­mo­tion of a homoge­nous aes­thet­ic that adheres to fashion’s lim­it­ed embod­ied stan­dards. Fur­ther, fashion’s stake­hold­ers exert­ed an influ­ence in the medi­um from its ear­li­est incar­na­tions via brand col­lab­o­ra­tions, adver­tise­ments, and invi­ta­tions to prac­ti­tion­ers to attend fash­ion shows.[4]

Ton’s posi­tion as one of the ear­li­est online street style pho­tog­ra­phers facil­i­tat­ed his rapid rise to influ­ence in the field of fash­ion and the for­ma­tion of an inter­na­tion­al forum for his work. Ton cre­at­ed his blog Jak & Jil in 2005 while work­ing as a buy­er at the lux­u­ry depart­ment store Holt Ren­frew in Toron­to (Amed). Cana­di­an retail­er Lyn­da Lat­ner, impressed with Ton’s online work, paid for Ton to trav­el to Paris Fash­ion Week: there, Ton honed a “can­did” and fre­net­ic pho­to­graph­ic style that dif­fered from his peers’ por­trai­ture (though he does shoot por­traits) (qtd. in Amed). Still in his 20s, Ton was not as estab­lished in fash­ion as pre­de­ces­sors such as Schu­man, who had worked in menswear (de Perthuis 4; Ross­er 158). Nonethe­less, his posi­tion at Holt Ren­frew rein­forces the fact that sev­er­al street style vision­ar­ies already worked in fash­ion pri­or to start­ing their recre­ation­al online pur­suits. In 2009, Ton was one of four blog­gers invit­ed to sit front-row at Dolce & Gabbana’s Spring/Summer 2010 pre­sen­ta­tion, a moment that schol­ars pin­point as fashion’s con­se­cra­tion of the medi­um. That same year, Condé Nast hired Ton as its “res­i­dent” pho­tog­ra­ph­er of Fash­ion Month street style (replac­ing Schu­man). Dur­ing Ton’s tenure, the street style parade became a doc­u­ment­ed phe­nom­e­non. Nicole Phelps lists Ton’s recruit­ment as a cat­alyt­ic event before street style explod­ed in the form of blog­gers’ increased Fash­ion Month pres­ence and the per­va­sive influ­ence of brands and media sites on the prac­tice. The sea­sons cov­ered in the sam­ple rep­re­sent street style pho­tog­ra­phers’ dom­i­nance in the streets of Fash­ion Month, lat­er to be out­num­bered by press and com­mer­cial pho­tog­ra­phers (Luvaas 284).

Ton’s pho­tographs for Style​.com demand analy­sis, as those few schol­ars that have addressed his work sit­u­ate him with­in street style pho­tog­ra­phy but do not exam­ine his oeu­vre in detail. In 2011, The Busi­ness of Fash­ion deemed Ton “the world’s most influ­en­tial street style fash­ion pho­tog­ra­ph­er today” (Amed, my empha­sis). Luvaas cites Ton as a cre­ator of street style stars (270). Oth­er pho­tog­ra­phers observe whom he shoots, and his cho­sen inter­me­di­aries gain pub­lic recognition—Dello Rus­so, who appears 22 times in this sam­ple (at least with her face dis­cernible), is the fore­most exam­ple (Tit­ton, “Styling the Street” 132-33).[5] Fur­ther­more, Ton’s aes­thet­ic has become rep­re­sen­ta­tive of street style pho­tographs and is often used as a visu­al ref­er­ent for the term itself. Style​.com is not the sole out­let to pub­lish Fash­ion Month pho­tographs under a street style ban­ner: how­ev­er, it is (or was) an essen­tial resource that con­tains news sto­ries, prod­uct rec­om­men­da­tions, and a com­pre­hen­sive data­base of col­lec­tion reviews and pho­tographs.[6] Announc­ing his depar­ture, Ton praised the site as “the most influ­en­tial and rel­e­vant fash­ion pub­li­ca­tion” (qtd. in Wolf). For such a rep­utable site to fea­ture street style—doc­u­ment­ed dur­ing Fash­ion Month—represents fashion’s appro­pri­a­tion of online street style pho­tog­ra­phy. The move did not just con­flate street style with the out­fits worn at Fash­ion Month but nat­u­ral­ized its direct, delim­it­ed asso­ci­a­tion with inter­me­di­aries’ ensem­bles. In the site’s con­text, the street style pho­to­graph becomes sole­ly a rep­re­sen­ta­tion of Fash­ion Month and reads in rela­tion to col­lec­tion pho­tographs and adver­tise­ments.[7] Style​.com does not invite read­er com­ments but instead com­piles a click­able album, a more com­mer­cial mode of pre­sen­ta­tion (see de Perthuis). Ton’s images thus com­mu­ni­cates aes­thet­ics from with­in Fash­ion Month as a scene to an online spec­ta­tor­ship. Karen de Perthuis notes that doc­u­men­ta­tion of “how fash­ion works in [a spe­cif­ic] street style blog offers a mod­el that can be trans­lat­ed or applied … to oth­er types of blogs across the field” (4). Analy­sis of Ton’s Fash­ion Month street style pho­tographs illu­mi­nates the medium’s enfold­ment into estab­lished discourses.

Fashion on the “Street”

The pres­ence of Fash­ion Weeks inform cities’ cul­tur­al posi­tions, while their rep­re­sen­ta­tions are sit­u­at­ed with­in his­tor­i­cal ref­er­ents (Craik; Gilbert). Fash­ion cap­i­tals have become inter­na­tion­al due to increased cor­po­ra­ti­za­tion of fash­ion hous­es and spon­sor­ship of Fash­ion Week events—a phe­nom­e­non that Frédéric Godart terms impe­ri­al­iza­tion (14, 129-42). Fash­ion Weeks impress a set of clas­sist sig­ni­fiers onto urban envi­ron­ments, through the arrival of edi­tors, retail­ers, celebri­ties, and pho­tog­ra­phers and their enactments—what de Certeau terms spa­tial prac­tices (96). Pre­sen­ta­tions occur in tourist-cen­tered cos­mopoli­tan areas rather than in res­i­den­tial (or dis­en­fran­chised) com­mu­ni­ties. Alan Blum exam­ines scenes as prod­ucts of cities’ “urban the­atri­cal­i­ty” and notes that “fash­ion scenes” are posi­tioned as exclu­sive (365-67). Rocamo­ra and Alis­tair O’Neill con­trast “the pub­lic space of ordi­nary peo­ple” with “the exclu­sive space of the fash­ion show and its extra­or­di­nary audi­ence of celebri­ties and oth­er fash­ion insid­ers” (189). Fash­ion Month has assumed such spa­tial pro­por­tions, dis­tinct ensem­bles, and the­atri­cal inter­ac­tions that colum­nists and schol­ars com­pare it to a cir­cus or a red car­pet affair (Menkes; Shea; Tit­ton, “Styling the Street”). On-site obser­va­tion that I con­duct­ed of New York Fash­ion Week in Feb­ru­ary 2016 con­firmed a sar­to­r­i­al dis­tinc­tion between elite atten­dees and out­siders, the “real” inhab­i­tants whose quo­tid­i­an, work-relat­ed mobil­i­ties under­write the streets (de Certeau 93). Peo­ple famil­iar with Fash­ion Month pho­to­graph con­ven­tions can deter­mine which indi­vid­u­als will attract pho­tog­ra­phers based on their out­fits and attrac­tive­ness (see Luvaas 266). Nonethe­less, com­ments from locals and tourists indi­cat­ed that even out­siders could con­clude that atten­dees’ dress tran­scend­ed the main­stream. Craik stress­es that event pro­duc­ers fab­ri­cate a “cos­mopoli­tan atmos­phere” via “inter­na­tion­al” asso­ci­a­tions (366): this con­struc­tion fol­lows tourism adver­tise­ments that turn cities into sim­u­lacral des­ti­na­tions (362). Notions of the inter­na­tion­al street as simul­ta­ne­ous­ly acces­si­ble and elit­ist exist along­side alter­na­tive imag­in­ings of the glob­al street as a site of polit­i­cal resis­tance (Sassen). Fash­ion Month’s depic­tions of the urban street com­ple­ment and clash with its often Euro­pean asso­ci­a­tions to edi­to­r­i­al effect: manip­u­lat­ing sub­ver­sive for­mu­la­tions just as, pace de Certeau, the fash­ion scene per­for­ma­tive­ly appro­pri­ates cities’ phys­i­cal spaces (98).

Street Style in Discourse

Schol­ars trace the term street style to its ref­er­ences to pop­u­lar trends and sub­cul­tur­al move­ments, sit­u­at­ing its tra­di­tion­al asso­ci­a­tions in urban com­mu­ni­ties. Sophie Wood­ward defines street style as fash­ion worn and “observed on the street” and out­lines how the term is con­sti­tut­ed via a cir­cuit of dis­cours­es: “as part of pop­u­lar par­lance, with­in media rep­re­sen­ta­tions of fash­ion in the street style sec­tions of mag­a­zines, in out­fits that are assem­bled, in exhi­bi­tions and aca­d­e­mics’ accounts” (84, my empha­sis). Mon­i­ca Tit­ton delin­eates between notions of style, as indi­vid­ual exper­i­men­ta­tion, and fash­ion as sub­ject to com­mer­cial imper­a­tives (“Fash­ion in the City” 136).  David Gilbert observes that com­mu­ni­ties influ­ence cities’ cul­tur­al fab­rics in a man­ner that fash­ion nar­ra­tives over­look: “the cre­ativ­i­ty aris­ing from the inter­mix­ing and chaos … the per­for­mance of fash­ion on the streets” (29). Research in sub­cul­tures illu­mi­nates prob­lem­at­ics between exam­i­na­tion of street style as rep­re­sen­ta­tive of demar­cat­ed com­mu­ni­ties and acknowl­edg­ment of its diverse influ­ences (Wood­ward 85). Car­o­line Evans observes that attempts to cat­e­go­rize sub­cul­tures over­look the nuances of cul­tur­al state­ments as derived from mul­ti­ple sites, ref­er­ences, and prac­tices.[8] Sub­cul­tures have offered well-doc­u­ment­ed inspi­ra­tion to fash­ion: hip-hop and punk aes­thet­ics have recurred in the col­lec­tions of Chanel and Jean Paul Gaulti­er and in main­stream retail lines (Barnard 45-46). Ted Pol­he­mus for­mu­lates a “bub­ble-up” mod­el of influ­ence that con­tra­dicts clas­si­cal social the­o­ries. Dick Heb­di­ge asserts that the dom­i­nant cul­ture incor­po­rates state­ments’ sub­ver­sive intent for com­mer­cial and polit­i­cal inter­ests (94). For pub­li­ca­tions to name Fash­ion Month pho­tographs street style rep­re­sents not just an incor­po­ra­tion of the medi­um but also fashion’s tex­tu­al incor­po­ra­tion of the term. In lim­it­ing street style as a ref­er­ent to Fash­ion Month ensem­bles, the press eras­es dress as a sit­u­at­ed prac­tice and describes items from high fash­ion, posi­tioned at a socioe­co­nom­ic remove from urban com­mu­ni­ties. Jour­nal­ists com­plain that for media dis­cours­es to use the term to refer to inter­me­di­aries’ out­fits dimin­ish­es the indi­vid­ual locat­able expres­sion that true street style should con­sti­tute, and lament a lost space “free from” fashion’s “trans­ac­tion­al com­pro­mis­es” (Berlinger; see also LaFer­la, Shea). Indeed, edi­tors’ out­fits are often donat­ed or loaned from fash­ion hous­es and pub­lic rela­tions com­pa­nies, and high-pro­file atten­dees have become noto­ri­ous for chang­ing out­fits between presentations.

Street Style in Photographs

The his­tor­i­cal pres­ence of cities and streets, as place and idea, illu­mi­nates how fash­ion pho­tog­ra­phy oper­ates on a spec­trum between the authen­tic and the pro­duced, invok­ing a con­tentious pol­i­tics of urban rep­re­sen­ta­tion. Fash­ion needs “the street” to posi­tion itself as upper-class, while the “street” needs fash­ion to read as authen­tic (Rocamo­ra and O’Neill 189). In an echo of Wood­ward, Luvaas defines street style pho­tog­ra­phy “as sim­ply fash­ion pho­tog­ra­phy tak­en ‘on the street,’” in con­trast with stu­dio shoots and fash­ion shows (23, my empha­sis). Pre­de­ces­sors include street pho­tog­ra­phy; anthro­po­log­i­cal por­traits; fash­ion pho­tographs of mod­els in out­door loca­tions or stu­dio-repli­cat­ed streets; street style pho­tographs in which sub­jects are not aware of the cam­era; and por­traits of non-pro­fes­sion­al sub­jects (see Luvaas).[9] Tit­ton com­ments that cities have occu­pied a “cen­tral” posi­tion “as both scene and real space for the pho­to­graph­ic stag­ing of fash­ion” (“Fash­ion in the City” 128). Luvaas and Tit­ton (“Styling the Street”) trace street style pho­tographs to the mod­ern peri­od and its fas­ci­na­tion with man-made envi­ron­ments, notably Haussmann’s Paris. Luvaas artic­u­lates the pre­dom­i­nance of “the street” as “a sub­ject of street style pho­tog­ra­phy, per­haps even the sub­ject, a flu­id, amor­phous enti­ty that accu­mu­lates mean­ings as it snow­balls into fash­ion world ubiq­ui­ty” (25, orig­i­nal empha­sis). Fash­ion pho­tog­ra­phers such as Irv­ing Penn and Edward Ste­ichen roman­ti­cized the street as a con­struct of urban impov­er­ish­ment: a loca­tion “where upmar­ket fash­ion­istas could go slum­ming in search of ‘real life’” (Luvaas 43; see also Rocamo­ra & O’Neill 187). Fashion’s embrace of sub­cul­tures and coun­ter­cul­tures cel­e­brat­ed the street as a site of raw expres­sion (Luvaas 44; Rocamo­ra & O’Neill 188-89). The work of print media street fash­ion pho­tog­ra­phers such as Bill Cun­ning­ham and Amy Arbus in New York demon­strates a con­flu­ence of these aes­thet­ics (Luvaas 45-47; Tit­ton, “Styling the Street” 128-29).[10] iD Mag­a­zine’s icon­ic 1980s “straight-up” por­trait show­cased the UK’s “real” fash­ion choic­es via its com­par­a­tive lack of pro­duc­tion. Sub­jects were cap­tured against a white wall on an actu­al street, rep­re­sent­ed as a “site for the cre­ative per­for­mance of ‘real’ peo­ple” (Rocamo­ra & O’Neill 185; see also Luvaas 49). Cre­ator Steve John­ston shot most of the por­traits in front of the same wall—the loca­tion was both spe­cif­ic and rep­re­sen­ta­tion­al (Luvaas 51). Rocamo­ra and O’Neill con­tend that print media’s co-opta­tion of street fash­ion erased the street in lieu of a metaphor­i­cal (and per­haps racist) white space or brick wall: i-D’s 2003 stu­dio-pro­duced homage to street fash­ion ren­ders the street “a blank can­vas” or a reduc­tion­ist “urban waste­land” (195). The Los Ange­les mag­a­zine NYLON and the Japan­ese mag­a­zines FRUiTS and TUNE return to a more untouched street fash­ion por­trai­ture (Luvaas 55-56).

While online street style pho­tog­ra­phy returns to lit­er­al streets, it com­mits a sim­i­lar act of erasure—the wall reap­pears, but its con­no­ta­tions are edi­to­ri­al­ized. Luvaas posits that the street has been turned into a “con­cep­tu­al screen” (25), blur­ring social and loca­tion­al con­texts. Susan Ingram observes that The Sar­to­ri­al­ist ren­ders cities visu­al­ly indiscernible:

[T]he city forms an anony­mous back­drop against which fash­ion­istas can look urban. The [sub­jects] … are in an inter­est­ing way place­less. In many of the images, the city dis­ap­pears com­plete­ly, and it is rarely clear from the pho­tos them­selves where they have been tak­en, which is why each has to be labeled. Viewed with­out their labels, it becomes appar­ent how lack­ing in speci­fici­ty these places are, and how sim­i­lar the looks. (188)

Eliz­a­beth Wil­son notes that mar­keters use the term “urban” to invoke the lifeblood of streets or allude to waste­lands (35): these invert­ed asso­ci­a­tions become con­nect­ed to cos­mopoli­tanism. Sarah Banet-Weis­er asserts that “street” and “urban” are racial­ized in Amer­i­can cul­tur­al dis­cours­es, con­not­ing dan­ger­ous ghet­tos or nos­tal­gic his­tor­i­cal sites (105). For Luvaas, the street remains con­test­ed: “the last ves­tige of authen­tic­i­ty in a com­mod­i­fied cul­ture and … a stage on which that very com­mod­i­fied cul­ture per­forms some of its most osten­ta­tious dis­plays” (68). Ton’s pho­tographs col­lapse the dis­tinc­tion between the authen­tic and the con­struct­ed, impos­ing the fash­ion scene upon the “street” and repo­si­tion­ing the street itself as sta­tus marker.

Ton’s pho­tographs must be read beside his con­tem­po­raries’ ambiva­lent real­iza­tions of the “street.” Luvaas likens Ton’s aes­thet­ic to that of H. B. Nam (streetf​sn​.com), Youngjun Koo (koo​.im), Michael Dum­ler (onab​bot​tkin​ney​.com), Nabile Quenum (jaiper​du​mavest​.com), Driely S. (Driely S.), and Adam Katz Sind­ing (Le 21ème) (63-64). These pho­tog­ra­phers’ move­ment-based shots include “the details of the gar­ment” as but one com­po­nent and instead recon­sti­tute the mod­ernist, Euro­pean street “of the poet­ic moment … of roman­tic pos­si­bil­i­ty, of hap­py acci­dent … [the rest] dis­solves into a field of lens blur” (Luvaas 65). Ton remains, how­ev­er, a pio­neer in the use of the hor­i­zon­tal frame and cropped focus (see Phelps). While lens blur and streetscapes are promi­nent com­po­si­tion­al ele­ments, Ton’s con­cep­tu­al­iza­tion of the street is much more com­plex: here, it becomes aes­theti­cized and often effaced. More­over, his focus on fash­ion is far from (and can­not be) inci­den­tal. Ton’s is the inter­na­tion­al street of fash­ion tourism, of tourist mobil­i­ties pred­i­cat­ed on con­sumerism, and the arrival of the inter­na­tion­al fash­ion set (Craik 354). Ton’s com­po­si­tion is more read­able than that of his peers, pri­or­i­tiz­ing opu­lent com­modi­ties and their aspi­ra­tional wear­ers over mood. How­ev­er, the pho­tographs are not demo­c­ra­t­ic: rather, the aes­thet­ic treads a line between the exper­i­men­tal and the commercial.

Analysis: Tommy Ton’s Cities as Streetscapes

Ton’s pho­tographs share numer­ous ele­ments: fore­most are the atten­dees walk­ing or run­ning to or from venues, while in the back­ground are rows of town cars, taxis, and motor­bikes and/or tex­tured archi­tec­ture. Ton also offers cropped tor­so shots or close-ups of hand­bags, shoes, and oth­er acces­sories (Fig. 2). Ton posi­tions the street as an edi­to­r­i­al back­drop against which to empha­size fash­ion; cities are often rec­og­niz­able only to those who are already famil­iar with them. Weath­er helps to indi­cate loca­tion: shifts inform light and shad­ow, while select pho­tographs rep­re­sent extreme con­di­tions. New York endured wet snow­fall dur­ing Fall/Winter 2014 Fash­ion Week, and sev­er­al pho­tographs depict insid­ers pro­tect­ing them­selves from the ele­ments. Taxis and bus­es, in addi­tion to license plates, often become the only mark­ers of place. Six­teen pho­tographs tak­en at New York Fash­ion Week (eight from each album) show edi­tors in front of icon­ic yel­low taxis; sim­i­lar­ly, red dou­ble-deck­er bus­es fea­ture in sev­er­al Lon­don pho­tographs. Nonethe­less, the vehi­cles’ pres­ence becomes nat­u­ral­ized as a scene of inter­na­tion­al mobil­i­ties and an adver­tise­ment for these cities as tourist des­ti­na­tions: not cities as lived but cities as dis­cur­sive­ly pro­duced. The vehi­cles become a flat­tened and often blurred ele­ment. More than half of the pho­tographs (56.1%) make vis­i­ble the lit­er­al street and its ref­er­ents (54.7% for Spring/Summer 2014 and 57.3% for Fall/Winter 2014). 349 pho­tographs (48.1%) illus­trate cars; 104 (29.8%) of these fea­ture cars in a promi­nent posi­tion. 211 pho­tographs (29.1%) con­tain traf­fic, park­ing, or direc­tion­al sig­nage, or bar­ri­ers and traf­fic cones. 219 pho­tographs (30.2%) depict sub­jects on or in the street, while 69 (31.5%) of these show an indi­cat­ed cross­walk (Fig. 3). 174 pho­tographs (24.0%) cap­ture indi­vid­u­als close in front of an archi­tec­tur­al struc­ture, while half (50.1%) illus­trate archi­tec­tur­al struc­tures in the dis­tance. 33 pho­tographs (5.0%) were cod­ed as “per­spec­tive shots” that Ton took from the mid­dle of a street, cre­at­ing a strik­ing aes­thet­ic that recalls a mod­ern-era fas­ci­na­tion with urban archi­tec­ture (Fig. 4).

Fig­ure 2

Fig­ure 3

Fig­ure 4

Ton’s pho­tographs fre­quent­ly con­vey a sense of place­less­ness, sim­i­lar to those of The Sar­to­ri­al­ist. Esther Ross­er observes that pho­tographs’ loca­tion in the dom­i­nant fash­ion cap­i­tals lends clout to the insid­ers who appear (161; see also Tit­ton, “Styling the Street” 132). How­ev­er, sta­tus is com­mu­ni­cat­ed through the fact of the sub­jects’ loca­tion and not the cities’ spe­cif­ic archi­tec­tur­al fea­tures. I cod­ed 343 pho­tographs (47.2%) as “streetscape,” in which ele­ments of the urban set­ting com­prised sig­nif­i­cant addi­tion­al space in the frame or were oth­er­wise instru­men­tal to the com­po­si­tion (Fig. 5). This per­cent­age is con­sis­tent across sea­sons (51.3% for Spring/Summer 2014 and 43.8% for Fall/Winter 2014). His­tor­i­cal archi­tec­ture with friezes and columns reads as Euro­pean but not loca­tion-spe­cif­ic: it increas­es the cachet of the loca­tions as muse­um cities. It suf­fices that the archi­tec­ture appears to be anti­quat­ed and Euro­pean. 76 pho­tographs (10.5%) cap­ture sub­jects in front of walls or doors, whose colours and tex­tures reflect or con­trast with their out­fits (11.5% for Spring/Summer 2014 and 10.0% for Fall/Winter 2014). 20 of these pho­tographs (26.3%) fea­ture a brick wall. One par­tic­u­lar beige brick wall in New York (Fall/Winter 2014) match­es an insider’s par­ka (Fig. 6). In a sub­se­quent pho­to­graph, it offers a plain can­vas to fore­ground Russ­ian fash­ion edi­tor Mirosla­va Duma’s flower-print­ed coat (Fig. 7). 404 pho­tographs (55.7%) use lens blur to ren­der streets indis­cernible or erase them (53.1% for Spring/Summer 2014 and 58.0% for Fall/Winter 2014). 129 pho­tographs (17.8%) con­tain sculp­tures, walls, archi­tec­tur­al struc­tures, land­marks, or (torn) street posters or adver­tise­ments that bear sim­i­lar or oppo­site colour palettes and/or tex­tures to sub­jects’ outfits.

In 18 pho­tographs (9 from each album), from New York and Milan, Ton jux­ta­pos­es ensem­bles with graf­fi­ti. Banet-Weis­er exam­ines street art’s “ambiva­lent” role, both con­tentious and pro­duc­tive, in cities’ cul­tur­al posi­tion­ing: “street art’s asso­ci­a­tion with graf­fi­ti and tag­ging … are not only deeply racial­ized in the US imag­i­na­tion but also fetishized for their links to racial oth­er­ness” (101). Graf­fi­ti emerged out of the 1970s and 1980s US hip-hop scene in response to the encroach­ment of com­mer­cial cul­ture onto pub­lic spaces and the dis­en­fran­chise­ment of Black and Lati­no neigh­bour­hoods under New York’s “urban ‘renew­al’” poli­cies (Banet-Weis­er 102). As “fig­ures” that rhetori­cize urban spaces, such “cal­ligra­phies howl with­out rais­ing their voic­es” and resist pho­to­graph­ic pin­ning down (de Certeau 102). Cities’ use of street art to self-brand as cre­ative—mak­ing it palat­able for a white audi­ence (Banet-Weis­er 105)—parallels pho­tog­ra­phers’ use of graf­fi­ti to mark streets and per­sons as fash­ion­able. In a Fall/Winter 2014 Milan pho­to­graph, Ton frames Del­lo Rus­so in pro­file in a fringed black jack­et and pen­cil skirt in front of black, curled scrawl (Fig. 8). In anoth­er, a woman stands in a white trench coat (print­ed with red lips) and embell­ished red heels in front of a yel­low wall with red graf­fi­ti (Fig. 9). The tagged walls invoke “urban” hip-hop aes­thet­ics to cre­ate a class con­trast that pri­or­i­tizes the expen­sive fashions.

Fig­ure 5

Tourist Locations

Ton has begun to depict spe­cif­ic loca­tions more often, as cer­tain fash­ion shows are held at rec­og­niz­able tourist des­ti­na­tions; how­ev­er, he con­tin­ues to use attrac­tions to con­struct a fash­ion­able aes­thet­ic. Rocamo­ra recalls that the Eif­fel Tow­er is Paris’s most per­sis­tent visu­al sig­ni­fi­er, func­tion­ing, like a cou­ture label, as a “geo­graph­i­cal sig­na­ture” (172). Artists depict the Tow­er as a fem­i­nine form, as the shape of its base recalls the lines of a dress or skirt (167). Three pho­tographs jux­ta­pose the Eif­fel Tow­er with female fash­ion per­son­nel. In the first, Del­lo Rus­so stands in black stilet­to boots and a black mini-dress. Lean and mus­cu­lar, she appears half as tall as the struc­ture, while the chain­mail pat­tern on her dress echoes its crossed steel beams (Fig. 10). In the sec­ond, edi­tor Gio­van­na Engel­bert stands cross-legged, wear­ing a sweater dress that flares out past the knee and black stilet­to heels (Fig. 11). In the third, styl­ist Sarah Chavez stands in pro­file, bent over to light a cig­a­rette; her ankle-length skirt blows in the wind (Fig. 12). Ton com­ments that “there’s a cer­tain chic­ness to the way that peo­ple smoke” (qtd. in Hainey). The Eif­fel Tow­er cre­ates a sense of place­less­ness, as the view from the top “nat­u­ral­izes” Paris with­in the mod­ern peri­od as sim­u­lacrum (Rocamo­ra 166), in a sim­i­lar man­ner to de Certeau’s view from New York’s World Trade Cen­ter (92-3). Craik declares that the “trav­el­ing … spec­ta­cle” of Fash­ion Month “rivals the more famil­iar attrac­tions of the tourism indus­try” (368). In one Paris pho­to­graph, edi­tor Michelle Elie per­forms an air kick that frames a group of tourists and their guide (rec­og­niz­able for his flag) (Fig. 13). Ton’s pho­tographs there­fore reduce land­marks to icons for inter­na­tion­al tourism and invoke their asso­ci­a­tions as a the­mat­ic, lux­u­ri­ous backdrop.

Fig­ure 13 

Fashionable Mobilities as Exclusive

The pho­tographs’ com­po­si­tion presents fash­ion as an exclu­sive realm in which access is denied via sub­jects’ visu­al­i­ties and posi­tion­al­i­ties. Just 84 pho­tographs (11.6%) depict sub­jects that look at the cam­era: all oth­ers look ahead or to the street, are shot from behind, or have their heads omit­ted from the frame. 199 pho­tographs (27.5%) illus­trate sub­jects wear­ing sun­glass­es. 258 pho­tographs (35.6%) fea­ture sub­jects hold­ing a cell phone, while 94 (36.4% of these) illus­trate sub­jects talk­ing or tex­ting, detached from the chaos or coor­di­nat­ing their sched­ules. Ton claims that insid­ers’ non­cha­lance attracts his lens: “the fact that they don’t want to be pho­tographed or they’re run­ning away from you makes you want to pho­to­graph them more” (qtd. in Hainey).[11] Atten­dees main­tain an aware­ness of Ton’s sur­veil­lance, as he has the pow­er to ren­der them vis­i­ble out­side of the field of fash­ion. While the total­i­ty of pho­tographs depicts the “fash­ion set” as a col­lec­tive, Ton’s selec­tive focus on spe­cif­ic mem­bers indi­cates that the com­pe­ti­tion for dis­tinc­tion hap­pens at an indi­vid­ual lev­el. 83.6% of the pho­tographs (606) fea­ture one indi­vid­ual (even if oth­ers appear in the back­ground) while none fea­tures more than five. The rest of the scene becomes enfold­ed into the spec­ta­cle: 261 pho­tographs (36.0%) fea­ture mem­bers in behind, near or at a dis­tance (38.1% in Spring/Summer 2014 and 34.2% in Fall/Winter 2014), while a hand­ful (45, or 6% of total) cap­ture oth­er pho­tog­ra­phers shoot­ing the same sub­jects, boost­ing their vis­i­ble social influence.

The sense of exclu­sion is enhanced via icons and invo­ca­tions of urban mobil­i­ties: recall­ing de Certeau, the scene is con­sti­tut­ed via the modal­i­ties of walk­ing (99). Direc­tion­al sig­nage appears with arrows point­ing to oth­er parts of cities (Fig. 14). Traf­fic mark­ers indi­cate “walk” or “don’t park,” pre­vent­ing per­sons from becom­ing sit­u­at­ed. Street names func­tion as “metaphors … detached from actu­al places … a fog­gy geog­ra­phy of ‘mean­ings’ held in sus­pen­sion, direct­ing the phys­i­cal deam­bu­la­tions below” (de Certeau 104). Here, street names indi­cate every­where and else­where. 401 pho­tographs (55.3%) depict sub­jects walk­ing, often with their skirts, coats, or hair bil­low­ing behind them or in the oppo­site direc­tion. 430 pho­tographs (59.3%) are shot at a 45-degree angle. 219 (30.2%) posi­tion sub­jects at the side of the frame to show­case the streetscape or the crowd as addi­tion­al ele­ments. 101 (13.9%) depict sub­jects in pro­file. 84 (11.6%) tilt sub­jects’ bod­ies. The bod­ies’ ephemer­al pres­ence in the frame invokes Peg­gy Phelan’s famous obser­va­tion that the dis­ap­pear­ance of the female form as unmarked is pow­er­ful, just as performance’s dis­ap­pear­ance informs its cul­tur­al sta­tus. 149 pho­tographs (20.5%) com­mu­ni­cate an over­all sense of move­ment due to the cur­va­ture of a side­walk or traf­fic cir­cle; to the posi­tion of vehi­cles in extreme close-up, or par­al­lel or oppo­site to the subject’s fac­ing direc­tion (Fig. 15); or to sub­jects depict­ed rid­ing bicy­cles or motor­bikes. That Ton pho­tographs hun­dreds of these move­ments emblema­tizes de Certeau’s obser­va­tion of mobil­i­ties as indi­vid­ual and frag­ment­ed: “The mov­ing about that the city mul­ti­plies and con­cen­trates makes the city itself an immense social expe­ri­ence of lack­ing a place … bro­ken up into count­less tiny depor­ta­tions (dis­place­ments and walks)” (103). For the dura­tion of Fash­ion Month, per­son­nel (sev­er­al of whom work in inter­na­tion­al mar­kets) become place­less, as do their ensem­bles. Atten­dees often do not inhab­it these cities out­side of the hec­tic pre­sen­ta­tion sched­ules (Craik 367; Skov 773). Ton’s pho­tographs, how­ev­er, posi­tion these insid­ers as arbiters of “real” fash­ion: street names are immaterial—rather, fash­ion is con­struct­ed as an aspi­ra­tional realm with­in its inter­na­tion­al cities.

Fig­ure 14

Fig­ure 15

Embodied Fashion Capital

The fash­ions and bod­ies that appear in Ton’s frame ref­er­ence high fashion’s ideals of embod­ied social dis­tinc­tion. Bour­dieu observed that the upper class­es base con­sumer choic­es on con­sid­er­a­tions of clean­li­ness, smooth­ness, and fab­rics to con­vey finan­cial ease (Dis­tinc­tion 247-48). Fash­ion insid­ers here sim­i­lar­ly com­mu­ni­cate a mon­eyed aes­thet­ic through lux­u­ri­ous fab­rics. Out­er­wear appears in 504 (69.5%) photographs—166 (49.0%) from Spring/Summer 2014 and 338 (87.6%) from Fall/Winter 2014. A total of 598 pieces are depict­ed, due to mul­ti­ple peo­ple in the frame or to lay­er­ing prac­tices.[12] 239 coats (40.0%) appear to be con­struct­ed from wool or felt; 126 (21.1%) appear to be leather or suede (often the clas­sic black leather jack­et); and 80 (13.4%) read as fur, faux fur, or (in two cas­es) feath­ers. Dana Thomas states that such mate­ri­als have func­tioned as sig­ni­fiers of priv­i­lege since pre­his­toric times (6), and that leather hand­bags con­tin­ue to be fashion’s most cov­et­ed item (188-194). Iden­ti­fi­able brand logos do not con­sis­tent­ly appear, though Louis Vuitton’s “Dami­er check can­vas” pat­tern and Chanel’s quilt­ed leather are still vis­i­ble on hand­bags (see Thomas 19). 492 pho­tographs (67.9%) con­tain hand­bags or purs­es. 564 hand­bags appear in total, while 60 pho­tographs con­tain more than one item: hand­bags are the focus of 148 (30.1%) of these pho­tographs. 405 bags (71.8%) appear to be made of leather, croc­o­dile, suede, or oth­er ani­mal skins, while 163 (40.2%) are black leather. Jour­nal­ist Con­nie Wang mus­es that, because insid­ers’ ensem­bles’ worth resides in fab­ric and con­struc­tion, prove­nance is dis­cernible only to mem­bers: “The peo­ple who know about these things know that the plain grey sweater is from The Row and costs $1,000” (qtd. in Shea). Authen­tic field mem­ber­ship is thus indi­cat­ed through authen­tic mate­ri­als, which denote authen­tic lux­u­ry brands to those that pos­sess authen­tic fash­ion capital.

Ton’s pho­tographs fur­ther pro­mote per­va­sive indus­tri­al stan­dards of attrac­tive­ness that are both clas­sist and racial­ized. Tit­ton com­ments that street style blogs “rein­tro­duced the body image, racial stereo­types, and sar­to­r­i­al style of main­stream fash­ion into a new media for­mat and an old pho­to­graph­ic genre” (“Styling the Street” 135). 98.0% (711) of the bod­ies in Ton’s pho­tographs were cod­ed as “lean,” “lean–athletic,” or “lean–petite,” while anoth­er 13 (1.8%) were cod­ed as “petite.” Half (50.0%) of all out­er­wear pieces were cod­ed as “over­sized”: the exag­ger­at­ed pro­por­tions serve the simul­ta­ne­ous func­tion of ren­der­ing the clothes dis­tinc­tive and the wear­ers’ bod­ies slim­mer.[13] 34 coat-wear­ing indi­vid­u­als (20.6%) in Spring/Summer 2014 and 50 indi­vid­u­als (14.8%) in Fall/Winter 2014 drape coats over their shoul­ders, empha­siz­ing a lithe frame under­neath. Tit­ton claims that the repeat­ed appear­ances of edi­tors such as Gio­van­na Engel­bert and Han­neli Mustaparta, who both had pri­or mod­el­ing careers, illus­trate street style blogs’ aes­thet­ic reduc­tion­ism (“Styling the Street” 135). Engel­bert appears four­teen times in the sam­ple, and Mustaparta four times; oth­er edi­tors such as Emmanuelle Alt (five appear­ances) and Car­o­line de Mai­gret (eight appear­ances) also worked as mod­els. Ton also fea­tures cur­rent mod­els: blonde Bel­gian mod­el Hanne Gaby Odiele appears in thir­teen pho­tographs (third behind Del­lo Rus­so and Engel­bert). East Asian mod­els Ming Xi, Liu Wen, Soo Joo Park, and Xiao Wen Ju appear 29 times com­bined. Oth­er faces-of-the-moment include Joan Smalls, Sask­ia de Brauw, Car­o­line Brasch Nielsen, Binx Wal­ton, Edie Camp­bell, Chloe Nor­gaard, Alan­na Zim­mer, and Grace Mahary, all pho­tographed three or more times. The racial break­down reflects fashion’s dis­pro­por­tion­ate white­ness: Caucasian—502 (69.3%); East Asian—95 (13.1%); Unclear—91 (12.6%); Black—34 (5.0%).[14] 

Elements of “Real” Streets

Ele­ments of the “real” streets per­sist that resist incor­po­ra­tion, such as con­struc­tion sites or refuse; how­ev­er, Ton con­tains these with­in an aes­thet­ic frame. In Fall/Winter 2014, Ton cap­tures Toron­ton­ian blog­gers and socialites Saman­tha and Cail­lianne Beckerman—profiled for their eclec­tic, expen­sive tastes (Sanati)—at New York Fash­ion Week, pos­ing along­side street work­ers (Fig. 16). The pho­to­graph illu­mi­nates the labour that main­tains cities, but also smacks of class tokenism. One of the twins dons a worker’s vest and a neon toque, mak­ing her resem­ble a traf­fic cone, while holes in her sweater and jeans sug­gest burns or con­tact with the pave­ment. Jeans appear in 175 pho­tographs (24.1%), often ripped or with over­sized patch­es. Cal­cu­lat­ed dis­tress­ing increas­es their retail val­ue and cre­ates an appear­ance of con­spic­u­ous waste. In con­trast, the work­ers’ uni­forms are intact and clean. Three street work­ers are black, while the Beck­er­man twins rep­re­sent the white sub­jects that dom­i­nate Ton’s pho­tographs. Luvaas observes street style pho­tographs’ capac­i­ties to ren­der “occa­sion­al cri­tique” of the class-based nature of Fash­ion Month’s social enact­ments (64). How­ev­er, the posed, even touris­tic appear­ance of this pho­to­graph elim­i­nates such poten­tial. The com­bi­na­tion of high fash­ion and street work­ers’ uni­forms abstracts street fash­ion from sit­u­at­ed streets and occludes the cul­tur­al speci­fici­ties of fash­ion cap­i­tals, in addi­tion to the high-low sar­to­r­i­al com­bi­na­tions that once char­ac­ter­ized notions of street style.

Fig­ure 16

Conclusion

Analy­sis of Tom­my Ton’s Style​.com Spring/Summer 2014 and Fall/Winter 2014 pho­to­graph albums demon­strates that high fash­ion has incor­po­rat­ed the con­test­ed term street style to refer to the ensem­bles worn by mem­bers of the elite indus­tri­al scene with­in fash­ion cities. Schol­ars and colum­nists pro­pose that fash­ion edi­tors have become the pri­ma­ry arbiters of trends, per­haps more so than the col­lec­tions. Tit­ton doc­u­ments a rec­i­p­ro­cal rela­tion­ship between inter­me­di­aries who have advanced their careers via appear­ances in street style pho­tographs and behind-the-scenes tastemak­ers and deci­sion-mak­ing process­es that dic­tate what is fash­ion­able (“Styling the Street” 135). Edi­tors are trust­ed to “incor­po­rate the newest fash­ion trends into their wardrobes” because their posi­tions place them ahead of a rep­re­sen­ta­tion­al curve (135). How­ev­er, close exam­i­na­tion and sea­son-to-sea­son com­par­i­son of Ton’s pho­tographs reveals that ensem­bles are uni­form: a flat­tened mode of dress via which mem­bers of the fash­ion set com­mu­ni­cate indus­tri­al and social dis­tinc­tion, rather than a mode of inno­v­a­tive, indi­vid­ual expres­sion. Fur­ther­more, edi­tors who wear items direct from the run­ways dis­sem­i­nate trends deter­mined by fash­ion hous­es (Berlinger), but do not demon­strate that these trends can be made wear­able. Tit­ton declares that “the estab­lish­ment of street style blogs was only pos­si­ble through the intense coop­er­a­tion with fash­ion indus­try insid­ers and result­ed in the rein­force­ment of pre­vail­ing pow­er struc­tures and visu­al nar­ra­tives” (“Styling the Street” 135). Ton’s Style​.com albums can be seen as evi­dence of this col­lu­sion. How­ev­er, the pho­tographs’ aes­thet­ic stan­dards are not those of main­stream fash­ion but rather those enclosed with­in the field of fash­ion, a (mate­ri­al­ized) realm pred­i­cat­ed on class-based forms of cap­i­tal. Style​.com, while acces­si­ble to con­sumers thanks to the osten­si­bly demo­c­ra­t­ic medi­um of the Inter­net, is nonethe­less ded­i­cat­ed to high fash­ion aes­thet­ics. The com­pre­hen­sion required to read the pho­tographs is pred­i­cat­ed on habi­tus: if one rec­og­nizes a spe­cif­ic loca­tion, archi­tec­tur­al ele­ment, or design­er, one feels a sense of inclu­sion with­in an elite and mobile fash­ion scene. At the same time, it becomes suf­fi­cient to rep­re­sent these cities as fash­ion cap­i­tals rather than as spe­cif­ic geo­graph­i­cal loca­tions. Since not all con­sumers pos­sess the means to trav­el or to pur­chase the prod­ucts or the clout to attend fash­ion shows, street style pho­tographs become a tool for the pro­duc­tion of desire. The pro­lif­er­a­tion of these images as rep­re­sen­ta­tive of the “real” is intend­ed to fuel the lux­u­ry and main­stream mar­ket­places via con­sumers’ imi­ta­tion. Fur­ther crit­i­cal analy­sis of Fash­ion Month rep­re­sen­ta­tions should account for con­sumers’ social inter­ac­tions with fash­ion con­tent, and their mate­r­i­al effects, in the Inter­net era.

Works Cited

Amed, Imran. “The Busi­ness of Blog­ging | Tom­my Ton.” The Busi­ness of Fash­ion 28 Mar. 2011. Web. 23 Oct. 2016.

Banet-Weis­er, Sarah. Authen­tic™: The Pol­i­tics of Ambiva­lence in a Brand Cul­ture. New York and Lon­don: New York UP, 2012. Print.

Barnard, Mal­colm. Fash­ion as Com­mu­ni­ca­tion. 2nd ed. Lon­don and New York: Rout­ledge, 2002. Print.

Berlinger, Max. “Op-Ed | What hap­pened to street style?” The Busi­ness of Fash­ion 23 Jan. 2014. Web. 23 Oct. 2016.

Berry, Jess. “Flâneurs of Fash­ion 2.0.” Scan Jour­nal 7.2 (2010). Web. 23 Oct. 2016.

Blum, Alan. The Imag­i­na­tive Struc­ture of the City. Mon­tre­al: McGill-Queen’s UP, 2003. Print.

Bour­dieu, Pierre. Dis­tinc­tion: A Social Cri­tique of the Judge­ment of Taste. Trans. Richard Nice. Lon­don: Rout­ledge and Kegan Paul, 1984. Print.

---. The Field of Cul­tur­al Pro­duc­tion. Ed. Ran­dal John­son. Cam­bridge: Poli­ty P, 1993. Print.

Craik, Jen­nifer. “Fash­ion, Tourism, and Glob­al Cul­ture.” The Hand­book of Fash­ion Stud­ies. Ed. Sandy Black, Amy de la Haye, Joanne Entwistle, Agnès Rocamo­ra, Regi­na A. Root, and Helen Thomas. Lon­don: Blooms­bury, 2013. 353-70. Print.

de Certeau, Michel. The Prac­tice of Every­day Life. Trans. Steven Ren­dall. Berke­ley: U of Cal­i­for­nia P, 1984. Print.

de Perthuis, K. “Peo­ple in Fash­ion­able Clothes: Street Style Blogs and the Ontol­ogy of the Fash­ion Pho­to­graph.” Fash­ion The­o­ry: The Jour­nal of Dress, Body and Cul­ture (2015): 1-21. Tay­lor & Fran­cis Jour­nals Com­plete. Web. 23 Oct. 2016.

Entwistle, Joanne, and Agnès Rocamo­ra. “The Field of Fash­ion Mate­ri­al­ized: A Study of Lon­don Fash­ion Week.” Soci­ol­o­gy 40.4 (2006): 735-51. Schol­ars Por­tal. Web. 23 Oct. 2016.

Evans, Car­o­line. “Dreams That Only Mon­ey Can Buy … or, the Shy Tribe in Flight from Dis­course.” Fash­ion The­o­ry: The Jour­nal of Dress, Body and Cul­ture 1.2 (1997): 169-88. Tay­lor & Fran­cis Jour­nals Com­plete. Web. 23 Oct. 2016.

Feath­er­stone, Mike. Con­sumer Cul­ture and Post­mod­ernism. 2nd ed. Los Ange­les: SAGE, 2007. Print.

Gilbert, David. “From Paris to Shang­hai: The Chang­ing Geo­gra­phies of Fashion’s World Cities.” Fashion’s World Cities. Ed. Christo­pher Bre­ward and David Gilbert. Lon­don: Blooms­bury Aca­d­e­m­ic, 2006. 3-32. Print.

Godart, Frédéric. Unveil­ing Fash­ion: Busi­ness, Cul­ture, and Iden­ti­ty in the Most Glam­orous Indus­try. New York: Pal­grave Macmil­lan, 2012. Print.

LaFer­la, Ruth. “Who Am I Wear­ing? Fun­ny You Should Ask.” The New York Times 12 Sep. 2012. Web. 23 Oct. 2016.

Hainey, Michael. “The GQ+A: How to Get Your Pho­to Tak­en by Tom­my Ton.” GQ. Condé Nast Media, 11 Feb. 2014. Web. 23 Oct. 2016.

Heb­di­ge, Dick. Sub­cul­ture: The Mean­ing of Style. Lon­don: Methuen, 1979. Print.

Ingram, Susan. “Blow­ing Up Mon­u­ments: A Trans­dis­ci­pli­nary Per­spec­tive.” Die Rück­kehr der Denkmäler: Aktuelle ret­ro­spec­tive Ten­den­zen der Musik­wis­senschaft. Eds. Markus Grassl and Cor­nela Szabó-Knotik. Wien: Mille Tre Ver­lag, 2013. 179-91. Print.

Lipovet­sky, Gilles. The Empire of Fash­ion: Dress­ing Mod­ern Democ­ra­cy. Trans. Cather­ine Porter. Prince­ton, NJ: Prince­ton UP, 1994. Print.

Luvaas, Brent. Street Style: An Ethnog­ra­phy of Fash­ion Blog­ging. Lon­don and New York: Blooms­bury Aca­d­e­m­ic, 2016. Print.

Menkes, Suzy. “The Cir­cus of Fash­ion.” The New York Times 10 Feb. 2013. Web. 23 Oct. 2016.

Phe­lan, Peg­gy. Unmarked: The Pol­i­tics of Per­for­mance. Lon­don and New York: Rout­ledge, 1993. Print.

Phelps, Nicole. (2016, Apr. 13). “A Brief Oral His­to­ry of Mod­ern Street Style. Vogue. Condé Nast Media, 13 Apr. 2016. Web. 23 Oct. 2016.

Pol­he­mus, Ted. Street Style: From Side­walk to Cat­walk. Lon­don: Thames & Hud­son, 1994. Print.

Rocamo­ra, Agnès. Fash­ion­ing the City: Paris, Fash­ion and the Media. Lon­don and New York: I.B. Tau­ris, 2009. Print.

Rocamo­ra, Agnès, and Alis­tair O’Neill. “Fash­ion­ing the Street: Images of the Street in the Fash­ion Media.” Fash­ion as Pho­to­graph: View­ing and Review­ing Images of Fash­ion. Ed. Eugénie Shin­kle. Lon­don and New York: I.B. Tau­ris. 185-99. Print.

Rose, Gillian. Visu­al Method­olo­gies: An Intro­duc­tion to Research­ing with Visu­al Mate­ri­als. 3rd ed. Lon­don: SAGE, 2012. Print.

Ross­er, Esther. “Pho­tograph­ing Fash­ion: A Crit­i­cal Look at The Sar­to­ri­al­ist.” Image and Nar­ra­tive 11.4 (2010): 158-170. (2010). Web. 23 Oct. 2016.

Sanati, Maryam. "Bright young things: they trad­ed York Mills for New York and launched a hot cloth­ing line. No won­der the Beck­er­man sis­ters can't stop smil­ing." Toron­to Life Mar. 2006: 31+. Cana­di­an Peri­od­i­cals Index Quar­ter­ly. Web. 23 Oct. 2016.

Sassen, Sask­ia. “The Glob­al Street: Mak­ing the Polit­i­cal.” Glob­al­iza­tions 8.5 (2011): 573-79. Tay­lor & Fran­cis Jour­nals Com­plete. Web. 23 Oct. 2016.

Shea, Court­ney. “How street style lost its cred (and a look at five who are still get­ting it right).” The Globe and Mail 14 Nov. 2014. Web. 23 Oct. 2016.

Skov, Lise. “The Role of Trade Fairs in the Glob­al Fash­ion Busi­ness.” Cur­rent Soci­ol­o­gy 54.5 (2006): 764-83. Schol­ars Por­tal. Web. 23 Oct. 2016.

Straw, Will. “Some Things a Scene Might Be.” Cul­tur­al Stud­ies 29.3 (2015): 476-85. Tay­lor & Fran­cis Jour­nals Com­plete. Web. 23 Oct. 2016.

Thomas, Dana. Deluxe: How Lux­u­ry Lost its Lus­ter. New York: The Pen­guin P, 2007. Print.

Tit­ton, Mon­i­ca. “Fash­ion in the City: Street Style Blogs and the Lim­its of Fashion’s Democ­ra­ti­za­tion.” Texte zur Kun­st 78 (2010): 133-138. Print.

---. “Styling the Street – Fash­ion Per­for­mance, Star­dom and Neo-Dandy­ism in Street Style Blogs. Fash­ion Cul­tures Revis­it­ed: The­o­ries, Explo­rations and Analy­sis. Ed. Stel­la Bruzzi and Pamela Church Gib­son. Lon­don and New York: Rout­ledge, 2013. 128-37.

Wil­son, Eliz­a­beth. “Urbane Fash­ion.” Fashion’s World Cities. Ed. Christo­pher Bre­ward and David Gilbert. Lon­don: Blooms­bury Aca­d­e­m­ic, 2006. 33-42. Print.

Wolf, Cameron. “Tom­my Ton Says Good­bye to Style​.com.” Com­plex 22 Jul. 2015. Web. 23 Oct. 2016.

Wood­ward, Sophie. “The Myth of Street Style.” Fash­ion The­o­ry: The Jour­nal of Dress, Body and Cul­ture 13.1 (2009): 83-101. Tay­lor & Fran­cis Jour­nals Com­plete. Web. 23 Oct. 2016.

Image Notes

Fig. 1: Anna Del­lo Rus­so at Milan Fash­ion Week, Fall/Winter 2014. Pho­to cred­it: Tom­my Ton. Source: Tom​my​ton​.com.

Fig. 2: Milan Fash­ion Week, Spring/Summer 2014. Pho­to cred­it: Tom­my Ton. Source: Vogue​.com/​r​u​n​way.

Fig. 3: Edie Camp­bell at Paris Fash­ion Week, Spring/Summer 2014. Pho­to cred­it: Tom­my Ton. Source: Tom​my​ton​.com.

Fig. 4: Hanne Gaby Odiele at Milan Fash­ion Week, Spring/Summer 2014. Pho­to cred­it: Tom­my Ton. Source: Tom​my​ton​.com.

Fig. 5: New York Fash­ion Week, Spring/Summer 2014. Pho­to cred­it: Tom­my Ton. Source: Tom​my​ton​.com.

Fig. 6: New York Fash­ion Week, Fall/Winter 2014. Pho­to cred­it: Tom­my Ton. Source: Tom​my​ton​.com.

Fig. 7: Mirosla­va Duma at New York Fash­ion Week, Fall/Winter 2014. Pho­to cred­it: Tom­my Ton. Source: Tom​my​ton​.com.

Fig. 8: Anna Del­lo Rus­so at Milan Fash­ion Week, Fall/Winter 2014. Pho­to cred­it: Tom­my Ton. Source: Tom​my​ton​.com.

Fig. 9: Milan Fash­ion Week, Fall/Winter 2014. Pho­to cred­it: Tom­my Ton. Source: vogue​.com/​r​u​n​way.

Fig. 10: Anna Del­lo Rus­so at Paris Fash­ion Week, Spring/Summer 2014. Pho­to cred­it: Tom­my Ton. Source: Tom​my​ton​.com.

Fig. 11: Gio­van­na Engel­bert at Paris Fash­ion Week, Spring/Summer 2014. Pho­to cred­it: Tom­my Ton. Source: Tom​my​ton​.com.

Fig. 12: Sarah Chavez at Paris Fash­ion Week, Fall/Winter 2014. Pho­to cred­it: Tom­my Ton. Source: Tom​my​ton​.com.

Fig. 13: Michelle Elie at Paris Fash­ion Week, Spring/Summer 2014. Pho­to cred­it: Tom­my Ton. Source: Tom​my​ton​.com.

Fig. 14: Milan Fash­ion Week, Fall/Winter 2014. Pho­to cred­it: Tom­my Ton. Source: Vogue​.com/​r​u​n​way.

Fig. 15: Lon­don Fash­ion Week, Spring/Summer 2014. Pho­to cred­it: Tom­my Ton. Source: Vogue​.com/​r​u​n​way.

Fig. 16: Saman­tha and Cail­lianne Beck­er­man at New York Fash­ion Week, Fall/Winter 2014. Pho­to cred­it: Tom­my Ton. Source: Tom​my​ton​.com. 

Notes

[1] In July 2015, Ton resigned from Style​.com. Style​.com became an e-com­merce site while fash­ion show infor­ma­tion migrat­ed to the new Vogue​.com/​r​u​n​way.

[2] A draft of this arti­cle was pre­sent­ed at the “Cities and their Fash­ions: Cap­i­tal Con­nec­tions” sem­i­nar at the Amer­i­can Com­par­a­tive Lit­er­a­ture Asso­ci­a­tion con­fer­ence in New York in March 2014.

[3] In Sep­tem­ber 2015, Ton launched an epony­mous web­site with sep­a­rate archives; sev­er­al pho­tographs over­lap with those on Vogue​.com/​r​u​n​way. The FW 2014 Vogue​.com/​r​u​n​way archive omits 22 pho­tographs from the ini­tial Style​.com album. I retained these pho­tographs in the sample.

[4] Schu­man, based in New York, start­ed to shoot New York Fash­ion Week in 2005 (Ross­er 160).

[5] The artist-muse rela­tion­ship that Del­lo Rus­so devel­oped with Ton was the sub­ject of a 2011 pho­to­graph exhi­bi­tion in Toronto.

[6] Luvaas pro­vides a list of street style pho­tog­ra­phers (with Ton as top earn­er) that con­tribute to print and online media pub­li­ca­tions (235).

[7] Street style blogs increas­ing­ly fea­ture adver­tise­ments and/or col­lec­tion pho­tographs (see Luvaas).

[8] For street style in spe­cif­ic cities, see Intellect’s street style series.

[9] Thanks to New York-based pho­tog­ra­ph­er Dan Bend­jy for out­lin­ing these categories.

[10] The process of pho­tograph­ing fash­ion show atten­dees has also been com­pared to the approach of paparazzi.

[11] Men appear in just 16 pho­tographs (2.20%), and no man is pho­tographed solo. This could be because Ton pho­tographs men’s street style for GQ; nonethe­less, Style​.com cov­ers men’s and women’s fashion.

[12] The Fall/Winter pre­sen­ta­tions occur in Feb­ru­ary and March, and Spring/Summer in Sep­tem­ber and Octo­ber. Almost half of Spring/Summer 2014 pho­tographs fea­ture out­er­wear despite milder weather.

[13] Ton’s web­site also lists “over­sized” as a trend.

[14] Latin Amer­i­can, East Indi­an, and Mid­dle East­ern sub­jects did not appear enough to be con­sid­ered sta­tis­ti­cal­ly significant.


This arti­cle is licensed under a  Cre­ative Com­mons 3.0 License although cer­tain works ref­er­enced here­in may be sep­a­rate­ly licensed, or the author has exer­cised their right to fair deal­ing under the Cana­di­an Copy­right Act.