at first sight, human clothing is a very promising subject to research or
reflect upon: it is a complete phenomenon, the study of which requires
at any one time a history, an economy, an ethnology, a technology
and maybe even, as we will see in a moment, a type of linguistics. But
above all, as an object of appearance,^2 it flatters our modern curiosity
about social psychology, inviting us to go beyond the obsolete limits
of the individual and of society: what is interesting in clothing is that it
seems to participate to the greatest depth in the widest sociality. We
can imagine that researchers using the most recent social methods—
psychoanalysis, marxism or structuralism—must naturally be interested
in it, especially given that clothing is at first glance an everyday object,
and is thus one of those most prominent of observed features in society
that stimulates our keenest contemporary research.
Given this ideal set of interests, the published research results are
themselves actually rather meagre. If we look only at the bibliographical
indications, which are as abundant as they are anarchic^3 , clothing is a
disappointing subject; even to the extent to which it seems to invite a
unifying epistemology, it is elusive. here it is a picturesque spectacle
(in countless albums for the general public), there a psychological
phenomenon—but it is still never truly an object of sociological inquiry;
the best reflections it has generated remain incidental: they are those by
writers and philosophers, perhaps because they alone are sufficiently
free from its perceived triviality.^4 But if we move away from the realm of
the aphorism, towards that of sociological description, we find in the
Chapter 2
Language and Clothing
1