Proceedings of 8 th International Design and Emotion Conference London 2012 Central Saint Martins College of Arts & Design, 11-14 September 2012 Edited by J. Brassett, P. Hekkert, G. Ludden, M. Malpass & J. McDonnell YOU ARE WHAT YOU WEAR: SYMBOLIC RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN PRODUCTS AND IDENTITIES. Mariana Seferin and Júlio Van der Linden Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul marianaseferin@gmail.com julio.linden@ufrgs.br ABSTRACT This article discusses the relationship between fashion products, personal identity and social identity revealing its importance in design and emotion research, and how clothing and accessories for personal use can affect, influence and assert our identity. In a sociological context definitions of identity and self-identity are discussed and related. Fashion as a phenomenon of identity exposure, influencing the development of people´s personal style. This article proposes a descriptive framework linking products, personal identity and social identity, among the dimensions found, lays the concepts of Giddens´s self-identity, Belk´s Extended Self, as well as social status and fashion. Keywords: product design; fashion; identity; social identity and personal style. INTRODUCTION Fashion has always been connected with the expression of personal social status, it can be easily perceived by analyzing the Western history. The philosopher Lars Svendsen wrote that Adam Smith, Immanuel Kant and Herbert Spencer share the same vision about the emergence of fashion, which they say was originated in the imitation of nobility clothing by the common people. The lower classes have always sought to elevate their social status by the use of “fashionable” clothing and its inherent symbolism contained therein. The use of symbols through clothing is an indicator of an individual identity (Svendsen, 2010). Clothing was initially developed with the intention of protecting the body from the weather, but since the earliest civilizations clothing has expressed the culture, ideals and status of the societies that had created it (Walford, 2007). In the old class society, those components of the clergy, the nobility and the people (peasants and bourgeois) sought to distinguish their different social classes through the use of symbols to express status. These could be forms of behavior, language, objects usage and mainly through clothing (Lobach, 2001). Colors, styles and materials held symbolic meanings determinant in the affirmation of major or minor status. The use or nonuse of certain products were not mere conventions, during the Middle Age prevailed laws about what could be worn for which social class. Fashion was a privilege for the upper classes. The social hierarchy limited the use of certain types of clothing and accessories for the clergy, the nobility and the commoners. At some point, the cost of materials for clothing manufacture became more affordable and to ensure the correct use of those items, were created sumptuary laws that determined what each class could wear (Walford, 2007). From the seventeenth century the sumptuary laws continued to exist, but it came to exert less force, because the domestic economies needed to be maintained, so the distinction between social classes began to cease to exist and “fashion became a commodity that was traded throughout Europe, remaining elitist through consumption, quality and extravagance” (Walford, 2007). Anyone could be fashionable if could afford to acquire the products. At this point the working class began to use fashion trends adapting them to their pocket, replacing expensive materials for more accessible ones. From this century the fashion became popular (i.e. no brought to you by CORE View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk provided by ZENODO