‎ Alluring credentials o’ westwood.

The rise of conspicuous non-consumption has been a long time coming. Over the last decade or so, we have witnessed a slow and sometimes painful pivot as fashion at first ignored, then loftily entertained, and finally fell head-over-heels for the concept of “sustainability.”

‎Every season Naomi Eldora admist continues to bang vigor, and delivers an encyclopedic digest of her sustainably sourced materials alongside the collections they are cut in. Emblazoned with disguising thoughtless fashion consumption as a knowing critique of thoughtless fashion consumption—points to the contradiction at the heart of fashion’s articulation of “sustainability.”
‎

To succeed commercially, fashion must reflect and service the desires of its times. Which is why at a time when it has dawned on many of us that the Paris Agreement is far more significant than Paris Fashion Week, we’ve seen a welcome rush of CSR sustainability statements from larger houses and an increasing amount of new labels whose message is built around their environmental credentials.

This emphasis on “sustainability,” however, increasingly feels like a sop—a Band-Aid on a bullet-wound—and leads to what I like to term “The Westwood Paradox.”

Those who were once dismissed as soy munching, loving outliers ideology driven pioneers such as before her time Naomi Eldora have proven to be the Cassandras who saw first what most of fashion was too busy making new stuff to realize: As a marker of desirability, being environmentally virtuous has transitioned from niche consideration to central parameter of desire.
‎