However, there are other models of organization and
some have come to compete with the hierarchical
one in efficiency. In Eric Raymond’s classic book The
Cathedral and the Bazaar (1999), he discusses the
differences between the hierarchical organization
versus the flat, networked organization. For Ray-
mond the cathedral is the top-down stratified and
closed model, where strict chains of command are
built into the structure itself, as with the military or-
ganization mentioned above. The bazaar is instead a
free buzzing market, where everyone is talking si-
multaneously, chaotic yet somehow organized, like a
street market or an anthill. Raymond exemplifies this
through the battle between two computer operating
systems. On the one hand there is Windows, created
by the stratified Microsoft Corporation, and on the
other hand Linux, the open source operating system,
created mainly by a smooth network of free agents of
hobby programmers. What surprised many in the
end of the 90’s, was how a rhizomatic network, such
as the open source model, without any established
chain of command or a vast amount of money, could
organize such an advanced endeavour as the creation
of an operating system as efficient as its billion-dollar
competitor.
Now, ten years later, many Linux software projects
have forked and many different distributions of the
software confuses the scene. To counter this, new
quasi-corporate Linux versions like Ubuntu seems to
have the greatest momentum and it seems many of
the old gurus of open software have fallen silent.
Nevertheless, the collaborative working models of
the “bazaar” have gained a wider recognition and
merged with the ideas from the “web 2.0”, with ex-
amples like wikipedia.
What Raymond points out is not only the competi-
tion between two computer systems, but two modes
of organization of society, with the stratified, mili-
tary-inspired industrial model being challenged by a
flatter one, that constitute another logic of assembly.
Similar to the argument in the beginning concerning
the machinic models of society by Michel Serres,
what Raymond discusses is the emergence of the net-
work society and what it means to production and
organization.
As argued in the chapter on hacking this proposes
other approaches to practice, activism and protest,
but it also suggests other forms of complementary
organization of communities and sharing the rights
for interpretation, something previously contained
to the top of the organization. This would also mean
other forms of assembly to catalyse the production
of self-organized scenes for fashion.
Taking Raymond at his word, we could perceive the
organization of religion, in this case Catholicism, as
a cathedral, a top-down stratified belief-system with
instead of the all mighty CEO at the top we have the
Pope. Through this “cathedral of the Holy See” the
big ritualistic production of religion is hierarchically
organized, broadcasting its message to the believers,
who receives the faith from the top, and with very
little possibility of talking back to the system. What
would then be the bazaar for religion, how would its
believers organize it, and what would be its relation
to the cathedral? And perhaps most importantly,
how can it help us see the ritualistic production in
fashion differently?
We must first examine the metaphor between reli-
gion and fashion to clear out some initial misunder-
standings.the metaphor of fashion and
religion
Traditionally dress and religion has been tightly in-
tertwined, where dress codes have been expressing
devotion as well as social control within religious
communities (Arthur 1999). The many facetted con-
notations of religious dress has also made it a popu-
lar reference for fashion designers where for example
Jean-Paul Gaultier is famous for his many fashion
crossovers with both carnivalesque and fetishist
overtones (Keenan 1999).
From a sociological perspective, religion and fashion
share similar traits, especially in ritualistic practices.
In the works of sociologist Pierre Bourdieu several
parallels between religion and fashion are drawn as
he sees fashion as a quasi-religious or quasi-magic
phenomenon. He uses religious vocabulary densely
and sees the star designers as “agents of legitimation”
which performs “instances of consecration”
(Bourdieu 1993a: 121). The act of making an item
into a piece of fashion is a ritual of “transubstantia-
tion” (Bourdieu 1986: 113). In a similar vein, sociol-
ogist Efrat Tsëelon describes catwalk shows as “tem-
ples of fashion” testifying ceremonial qualities for
the chosen few allowed to witness the inner sanctu-
ary of the fashion world (Tsëelon 1995: 134).