Vivienne Westwood's "stop shopping" shocker

Posted by:

9 February, 2010

This morning I almost choked on my cornflakes when one of our great British designers Vivienne Westwood popped up on the BBC London regional news telling the public to stop shopping for clothes to help save the planet.

That it was just a week an a half before London Fashion Week, which is partly designed to create a consumer buzz around fashion, made it stick in the throat even more.

The eccentric Westwood is among a number of celebrities to have signed up to a scheme led by London mayor Boris Johnson, which is designed to encourage debate on climate change and develop ideas on how we can make the capital more energy efficient. See more here www.london.gov.uk/climatechange. Ironically Boris Johnson has, up until now, been quite vocal in his support of fashion in the capital, himself regularly attending LFW.

Yes climate change is a very real issue but for such a leading and influential fashion figure to go on record publicly to stop consumer spending when the economy is already so fragile is quite mad and quite frankly irresponsible.

It is consumer spending that is going to keep this country out of recession and therefore shopping for clothes needs to be encouraged at this time.

We need to keep people in jobs, not threaten employment in our sector and we must ensure the survival of our colourful and creative brands and recapture the vibrancy of our high streets.

Quite frankly, not buying clothes for six months as Westwood suggests is not going to save the planet.

Perhaps the environmental impact of the clothing sector should at some point be examined, but this needs to be at a time when fashion is in full health.

I’d be interested to hear the thoughts of our readers on this subject.

Readers' comments (10)

Anonymous | 9 February 2010 11:12 am
Here here. The designer sector so often appears to operate in a different world to the rest of the market. Where sales and only kudos seems to matter. Westwood has always pioneered environmental issues and courted controversy. But for Boris to support this drivel is not only madness but totally out of step with the £1m marketing campaign he unveiled in April to encourage spending in London's West End. Conservative's and their contradictions eh?
Unsuitable or offensive?
Anonymous | 9 February 2010 12:44 pm
I second all comments made above and am not suprised at all by yet another ill informed and idiotic statement by one of fashions most hypocritical designers!
In her crazy envoromental manifesto which I'm sure is all well intentioned, Westwood bleets about enviromental change, yet when asked directly what she does as a design house and business to recycle, reuse and reduce waste she was unable to answer stating that 'she doesn't think about that and someone else take's care of it'. What kind of message is that?Frankly, this rude women is doing more damage than good when she is in a position to really make a difference!
Off with her head!
Unsuitable or offensive?
sonja francis | 9 February 2010 3:47 pm
Surely you clever fashion entreprenurial types can come up with some wonderfully imaginative fashion using recycled clothes - would help charities too! I personally do most of my clothes shopping at charities shop as I refuse to pay silly prices for designer labels as worn by clone women.
New fabric uses valuable resources - preserve it for underwear, bedding, furnishings etc.though some scope here for using recycled fabrics!
Saving the planet is a very serious matter - much more serious than expensively designed and made clothing for the better off. OK I would spend on a new dress or something for a special occassion.
Unsuitable or offensive?
Becki Rowe | 9 February 2010 4:19 pm
Whilst I 100% agree that the environment is a highly important issue, I also know that we are still in an economically fragile position.

I would have preferred a lead by example/actions speak louder than words approach! Give us something we can look up to rather than just letting out a stream of buzz words...
Unsuitable or offensive?
9 February 2010 4:37 pm
Although I'm an online retailer, I largely agree with Vivienne and with Sonja's comments. There's so much sense in recycling - as well as investing in vintage clothing and accessories, rather than buying new ones. Alternatively, buy well designed, timeless items that are made to last - like many of Westwood's pieces. What I find really offensive is being treated like an idiot and told to go out and spend money (my own, or borrowed) to save the country: This is the very approach that got us into this mess in the first place. Worse still is the attitude that encourages us to buy designer fashion and luxury goods, based purely on the season and trends, and/or the brand name and the celebrities endorsing it - i.e. without any regard to requirement, budget, practicality, quality, style or taste. The choice we're given seems pretty simple: A) waste money on throwaway clothes in order to look like everyone else and also contribute to polluting the planet - or B) mix well made, unique, recycled and vintage pieces to create your own individual look, whilst helping to save the planet from unnecessary additional pollution. No contest.
Unsuitable or offensive?
Poul WEDEL | 11 February 2010 11:57 am
So after 6 months we can start byiung Miss Westwoods design again, so what will the Westwood company do in the meantime, let all staff go on holiday??
Oh dear, what are the rest us going to do, as we have a business to run, and cannot shut down for 6 months.
Hopefully Miss Westwood can tell us what we should do instead.
Unsuitable or offensive?
Danuta Szerszynska | 11 February 2010 7:15 pm
Yes Vivienne Westwood is rather mad, especially not to address the extreme contradiction in her statement, and many she's made in the past...but it ought to drive someone mad to spend every waking moment creating products and convincing people to buy them while knowing full well the toll it is taking on the very environment that sustains us.
Jessica Brown, I'm afraid you are living in a bubble. You are right to say that not buying clothes for six months is not going to save the planet - obviously. But to say that 'perhaps the environmental impact of the clothing sector should at some point be examined' is very short-sighted and frankly ridiculous! 'Perhaps'!? 'At some point'!? To put the economy and fashion's 'health' before the survival of potentially the majority of life on earth is a joke.

It is our economic model which is mainly at fault in making many people believe that continual growth on a finite planet with finite resources is somehow the answer. Furthermore the fashion industry encourages this growth model by manufacturing desire for products that will not ultimately lead to happiness through mindless trends and patronising marketing techniques. Maybe if we stop blindly believing that spending sprees will somehow save us, the Government will be forced to accept that an economic model which is driving us to the brink of self-destruction needs a swift and radical re-think.

If Vivienne Westwood really gives more than a crazy sound-bite's worth of a hoot about the planet why the heck doesn't she start acting like it? Where is the recycling? Where is the environmentally sustainable business model? She needs to grow up and realise she can't have her cake and eat it.
Unsuitable or offensive?
Hannah-Jane Taskis | 20 March 2011 7:23 pm
Vivienne Westwood appeared as a guest on the Jonathon Ross' Friday night show a couple of years ago and announced this. Her message then - and I haven't seen her in this year's announcement - was that we should stop shopping and consuming such vast quantities of clothing.

**But she continued** asking us, consumers, that you should (as I remember) 'save up, save up, and then spend it on one-off, luxury/high-quality/long-lasting pieces. I think Wossy asked her, 'isn't that self-defeating?' but she replied that 'you could save up your pot of money, and there'll probably be more than you realise, and you can come and spend it in my store'. It's a message that's stayed with me since then - I started thinking about a capsule wardrobe before I discovered the term!

Don't choke on your cornflakes, I think it's a good idea :-)
Unsuitable or offensive?
Hannah-Jane Taskis | 21 March 2011 8:44 am
Sorry - had time to sleep on this. I forgot to mention, I think the SOS campaign is brilliant. Coming from the sustainable fashion viewpoint, social & environmental justice is high on my agenda - so I am directly opposed to mass consumption, and fast-fashion. However, I agree to an extent that shopping will help Britain recover from the recession - and here SOS has an incredibly vital role to play. One of the best ways to support the economy, I think, is to spend money on the service. So, a tailored suit, a made-to-measure pair of shoes. Consumption is dramatically decreased, and the price points are a lot higher. The money goes through the system twice. But we've got address the severe shortage of tailors et al., first (and cue SOS).

I appreciate this approach is not accessible for all budgets/lifestyles and it takes a lot of will-power (for 'saving up') and long-term thinking to create a wardrobe that is complete. But maybe those who can, should?

Always looking for the better alternative, of course.
Unsuitable or offensive?
merry | 8 September 2011 6:56 am
flirt con patient. Fides dans son physiciansuffer me sentir les pulsations de votre c?ur, et puis je vais vous dire ce qui vous rend parle tellement chaussures timberland homme nonsenseyou ?excusez-moi. A ce moment, soldes timberland une lettre a été apporté par un serviteur.? Je pensais ?, a déclaré Lord Mowbray maussade, prenant la lettre,? que j'ai eu au moins échappé à ce fléau jusqu'au PostTime de demain. "" Eh bien, tandis que vous, mon Seigneur, sont parcourant votre ép?tre, je vais, si vous me le permettez, se retirer dans la . drawingroom, où je conclus que je ne trouver du matériel pour écrire une de ces choses très appelées lettres, à laquelle vous avez si grande aversion ?Seigneur Mowbray fit signe que oui, et d'être laissé seul, il se tourna le papier dans sa main, botte timberland et chercha cachet de la poste: il n'y avait personne; tournai et rond; enfin brisé le sceau, et vit un caractère clairement petits, qui mesure à la fois qu'il soit écrit d'une femme. Il jeta un regard sur la première page; regardé dans le second, botte timberland et encore il était étroitement écrit: ?a aussi, être assuré sa lettre d'une femme. Il a regardé pour la signature, il y avait aucune La lettre indiquait un cas d'un certain intérêt:.. Une femme, dont les perspectives de la vie était juste, mais dont le sort flirt avait été l'inverse, et qui, aujourd'hui sans abri, et entra?née par la eruelty des proches parents de la maison qui ait jamais seule avait été la sienne, était devenu un vagabond sur la face de la terre,Timberland Bebe avait saisi la première idée qui se présentait à elle pour le soulagement, à savoir, d'écrire un livre. Elle s'est déclarée être totalement ignorant de toute atteinte scientifiques ou profondes; n'étais même pas s?r qu'elle a écrit une langue correctement et qu'il n'avait pas encore déterminé quel genre de livre à écrire. Voyages ont été ignorés, sauf si le nom du voyageur ont été précédées de la page. soldes timberland Biographie de recherche nécessaires trop, trop de connaissances de la nature humaine en général, pour une personne qui avait seulement déplacé dans un cercle particulier; l'impossibilité de consulter les livres de référence, Timberland Chukka Homme aussi bien de sa situation particulière et la peur d'être ridicule pour prétendre être sage. Histoire, sauf celui de "Goody Two Shoes" et "Jack l'GiantKiller,? entièrement delà de son entendement. Encore at-elle déclaré qu'elle se sentait, que sur les magasins son propre coeur est seule,
timberland pas cher

elle pouvait tirer des matériaux qui ne serait pas dépourvu d'une espèce particulière d'intérêt. Tout ce qu'elle demande waspermission de consacrer son travail à une personne dont le nom serait d'assurer /intexmerry110908
Unsuitable or offensive?