It’s the first week of winter here in Australia. Time to move the herbs to a sunnier spot; to fetch the heater up from the shed; to throw an extra blanket on the bed … And, of course, to dig out the jackets and jumpers from the walk-in robe, and stow the colourful summer gear: the sarongs, the short-sleeved shirts, the shorts, the beachwear, the Political Lace …
Sorry? You’ve not heard of Political Lace? Oh but it’s the latest thing, and very, very beautiful! It’s what’s known in the fashion world as “a wearable” – part art, part garment, part technology. And it’s lace, you see, but political. Hence the name: “Political Lace”.
But perhaps I’m not explaining this well. I’ll let the cool-hunters at PSFK expand:
A wearable can do more than just catch your eye – it can start an important conversation.
Wearables continue to make their way into conversations about innovative fashion. Just recently, they made appearances at both New York Fashion Week and Paris Fashion Week. But beyond their aesthetic appeal, wearables can serve as a way to discuss important issues. Curator, artist and creative technologist Melissa Coleman wanted to find “the most minimal way to represent data” related to women’s rights.
Using data from a UNICEF report, Coleman found that the number of “girls dying in childbirth every year due to preventable circumstances” meant one woman was dying every 7.5 minutes. The result: Political Lace, a fashion piece that lights up every 7.5 minutes to symbolize another death.
Coleman explained more about the thought process behind the piece in an email:
“I thought: if you only have one LED, what can you say? I realized the most powerful thing you could do with it is count lives, which was perfect for representing a political cause. I am passionate about women’s rights, so the piece became about the sad intersection of poverty, youth and education that results in teenagers dying in childbirth all around the world.”
Political Lace starts a discussion through its visual nature – the wearer would stand out in virtually any situation or location with the piece. When strangers ask about the nature of the piece, it creates a way for the wearer to discuss an ethical and political issue in an unexpected way.
So, there you go. Want to look like a million bucks and “start an important conversation” about women and girls who die in childbirth? Then treat yourself to some Political Lace, “a fashion piece that lights up every 7.5 minutes to symbolize another death”. Classy! [More here.]
Hello Richard,
Gee-whiz, I don’t have much empathy for this font… but I’m not going to stop there, I’m going to do everything in my power to change it. 🙂
I really enjoyed reading, ‘The Empathy Trap’.
It made me think a little (no, a lot) more deeply… but I would still suggest that a healthy dose of empathy (maybe the ‘right’ sort of ’empathy’) is often a catalyst for challenging a lousy, cruel and manifestly unfair system.
Loved, ‘Keep the heart on fire and the mind on ice.’
Yahoo for Noam Chomsky !!!
Enjoy your Book Reviews, by the way.
Cheers,
Peter
Many thanks Peter for the kind words. I agree that empathy is important, though this kind of instrumental compassion (as I’ve called it) does tend to reinforce, I think, the very ideology underpinning our lousy, cruel etc. system. Sometimes it’s a catalyst. More often it’s an invitation to regard social ills as individual flaws. It lets the system off the hook.
Thanks again for reading 🙂
Yes, thanks for that Richard… how would you describe the ‘ideology’ that underpins our ‘system’?
I mean, my ‘system’ is very different from Trump’s ‘system’… are you speaking of some vast, overarching ideology of rapacious capitalism within which we all play our little (sometimes ‘big’) part?
Last of all, really appreciate your thoughts on Noam Chomsky. Someone to admire?
Cheers,
Peter
Lionel Trilling (who gives this website its name) described ideology as ‘the haunted air’. What he meant by that is that it isn’t a system of thought or doctrine or dogma so much as the distortion of thought inevitable in a system set up along certain lines. Our system is set up along capitalist lines, and so the defining idea of capitalism — liberal individualism — shapes even the thinking of those who may seem, on the face of it, to be against ‘the system’. My point about empathy is precisely that: that it reduces problems of political economy to problems of individual psychology, and, in so doing, reinforces the thinking that led to the original problem. Don’t get me wrong: I’m not down on empathy. I’m down on instrumental compassion, which is the belief that empathy can effect political change — that it’s a political force in and of itself. Helen Razer (mentioned in the article) had an excellent piece on Crikey yesterday, making this point with reference to Manus Island. (It’s pay-walled, but check it out if you can: https://www.crikey.com.au/2017/11/07/razer-our-empathy-will-not-save-the-souls-on-manus/)
I think Noam is a great and necessary man. His clash with Buckley on Firing Line — available on YouTube — should be compulsory viewing for all students of politics IMHO.