What does ‘sustainability’ mean?
Oxford dictionary:
- The quality of being sustainable by argument; the capacity to be upheld or defended as valid, correct, or true.
- a. The quality of being sustainable at a certain rate or level. b. spec. The property of being environmentally sustainable; the degree to which a process or enterprise is able to be maintained or continued while avoiding the long-term depletion of natural resources.
I am interested in the second oxford dictionary meaning of the word, and could include this in my pre-amble in interviews and focus groups – or alternatively, I could leave this deliberately un-specified, and utilise the data from a question like ‘what does sustainable practice mean to you’ to gain insight into perceptions, and therefore behaviours.
What does ‘sustainable practice in costume’ mean?
This subject is something I already have some foundational knowledge in as a practitioner, but I have not applied it specifically to the context of higher education before. Sustainable practices are notoriously difficult to measure and asses. However, as discussed with Saffie, this is about working towards sustainable practices, rather than expecting to be able to achieve quantitative data proving a specific level or quantity of sustainable practice. It about attitudes, philosophies and experience, rather than numerical measurements. This is partly why I am planning to collect qualitative data.
Reading EcoScenography (Beer, 2021)
Beer discusses the need for a philosophically ecological approach to theatre/costume thinking and practice, which breaks down pre-existing hierarchies, and presents performance design as an opportunity for “ecological, holistic, interconnected and symbiotic processes”.
She suggests a need to move beyond the vital but basic concepts of eco-efficiency, describing these as privileged, white, western ideas about doing ‘less harm’.
“Eco-efficiency has traditionally been focused on a quantitative approach to measurement and procurement (mechanistic worldview) without activating social, cultural and environmental potential (ecological worldview). A holistic socio-ecological approach to sustainability cannot be achieved if we continue to relate to natural systems with overly simplistic terms of ‘impact reduction’ or ‘limiting the damage’ (Eisenberg and Reed 2003, 6). Similarly, the emphasis on quantification produces an emphasis on predicting and assessing negative impacts, rather than aspiring to strategies that can create positive impacts long term (Birkeland 2012, 80). Mechanistic thinking, focused on technological, industrial and economic systems, undermines the development of more innovative possibilities in sustainable practices (Eisenberg and Reed 2003, 1). It ignores the cultural, social and economic complexity that underpins our environmental issues and undervalues our creative and contributive capacity as humans.” (pg 66)
In practice, this is complex and multifaceted. It includes ecological thinking combined with creativity, taking an ecological worldview, a widening of concepts of identity, an expansion of aesthetics, and new approached to design (biophillic design, circular design, upcycling, bio-inspired and regenerative design). As an educator, encouraging sustainability may require a broader, more holistic, collaborative approach, involving curriculum design, senior management, and institutional policies.
Another major issue raised by Beer is the existing hierarchies within the industry.
“…scenographers— including myself— have been trained to work towards Opening Night. How we ‘get there’ or what happens to our sets and costumes after the production ends has been neither a priority nor a consideration. Our focus as designers has typically been to create ‘experiences of impermanence’—often extravagant spectacles with little regard for the prevailing permanence of unwanted remains. This emphasis on the new and disposable in theatre practice has largely mirrored the consumptive habits of the modern era.” (pg 3)
It would be interesting to ask students about both their ideologies, and their behaviours, and staff about what behaviours they observe (and therefore values and ideologies they deduce) in working with students within my research, in order to better understand how these complex concepts can be understood and encouraged in the students and their work.
Fast Fashion and Costume
The easy with which cheap, low quality garments can be procured by our students often leads to them using this as an alternative to making their own costumes, particularly when they find themselves close to a deadline, without the skills and experience to create their designs in time for the production.
This could be resolved through the shifting of hierarchies within theatre production, and allowing students to develop more technical costume making skills, in order to better equip them to plan and realise their ideas. The impact of this might also be lessened through prioritisation and planning, and supporting students through this in a more direct capacity than we already do.
Social Justice in Costume
As prevoiusly touched on in an earlier blogpost (Exploring Action Research Ethics) I described some of the intersectional issues at play in sustainable practices. Garment production, and its western association with women, and the domestic sphere is known to cause the undervaluing of the time and skill required to realise a costume. This issue is apparent in the cultural attitude found in the costume industry (lack of appreciation, renumeration, and respect), as reported by industry professionals.
“For costume designers, it has not been a coincidence that their field, traditionally dominated by women, has also been underappreciated, undercompensated, and, with imprudent disregard, labeled as “women’s work”. Even the costume designer’s tools—cloth and the needle— are those traditionally ascribed to women’s domestic labor” ( Banks, 2009).
This leads to a further, compounded issue when looked at in conjunction with the accessibility of cheaply available, quickly delivered garments. Not only does this affect women disproportionately, it affects the global south disproportionately.
“The systemic issues in the garment industry, such as weak labor regulations and lack of enforcement, have only worsened these conditions, allowing brands to continue exploiting vulnerable workers without consequence. This exploitation disproportionately impacts women, who make up approximately 80% of garment workers, primarily aged 18 to 35. When it comes to garment manufacturing in the global south, the clothes we wear often come at the cost of women’s dignity and safety. Gender discrimination is pervasive in all countries where garments are produced. Women are frequently subjected to verbal and physical abuse, as well as sexual harassment, often in unregulated factories where workplace violence goes unchecked. ” (Helm, 2024)
The disregard for these issues, could be interpreted as patriarchal, racist, and colonial.
References
Banks M.J. (2009) ‘Gender Below-the-line: Defining feminist production studies’ in Banks M.J., Caldwell J.T. and Mayer V. (eds.) Production Studies: Cultural studies of media industries. New York: Routledge pp. 87-98.
Helm, M (2024) Fashion for the Earth: Beneath the Seams: The Human Toll of Fast Fashion. Available at: https://www.earthday.org/beneath-the-seams-the-human-toll-of-fast-fashion/ (Accessed 20 October 2024)
Beer, T (2021) Ecoscenography : An Introduction to Ecological Design for Performance, Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore. Available from: ProQuest Ebook Central. [24 October 2024].
“Sustainability, N.” Oxford English Dictionary, Oxford UP, July 2023, https://doi.org/10.1093/OED/1046043524. (Available at: https://www.oed.com/dictionary/sustainability_n?tab=meaning_and_use), Accessed 4 November 2024