Abercrombie, Fitch, and Cattle

Abercrombie and Fitch was founded in the year of our Lord 1892.  Back then they didn't have T-shirts.  It was an all-around sort of place, from fashion to sportswear.  Ernest Hemingway wore their clothing, as did Ernest Shackleton and Katherine Hepburn.

Cut to 2010.  Ernest Shackleton would die in their clothes; oddball Hemingway would boycott the brand.

Katherine Hepburn would probably wear it, because she is just her enough to pull it off.

Why are people named Hepburn always so amazing, anyway?  I'm changing my name.  I hope it doesn't only work for females.

Anyway.  Abercrombie, Hollister, Aeropostale, American Eagle, Old Navy.  What do they have in common? Well, they are clothing brands.  No prizes for that.  But there are a lot of clothing brands out there--what separates these from the pack?  They all make a habit of blazoning their logo upon whatever item of clothing they produce.  I cannot be the only one who finds this slightly irritating. 

That said, it's not as if I am indulging in a personal vendetta against people who choose to drape their forms in such garments.  I like some people who wear such clothes.  But the brands are such a phenomenon that I just can't help doing a little acerbic analysis.  Clothing brands are a sort of minor subculture.  Everywhere you look you can see a peppering of Abercrombie and Fitch, some Hollister, and as many Aeropostale logos as your heart could desire or your nerves could take. Who?  Why?  How? 

I don't have a problem with the companies at all.  Actually, I kind of like them.  If things like this are doing well, you know capitalism is thriving.  Placing brand names on clothing is the most capitalist thing since the Invisible Hand.  It's a work of genius, a thing of beauty, a best-laid plan of mice and men that went not agley.  These companies are selling clothing like hotcakes.  They are making profits.  And whilst they are are making profits, they are getting advertising.  Free advertising. 

At its basic level, their customers are paying to advertise the product they are spending money on.  The privilege to have a clothing brand's name scrawled across one's chest and patootie is dear-bought.  That's why it's capitalism at its best.  The people who run these companies are capitalising in the truest sense of the word.  Why should we come up with advertising media when our products can be advertising media?  Shirts and rear ends across the world are walking billboards that don't get paid for being walking billboards.


 I have to consider the possibility that these clothing brands irritate me because I'm just jealous that I didn't think of it first.  Someday I too will be a capitalist.

And capitalism requires customers, or, as I prefer to call them, suckers.  Who buys Abercrombie and Fitch, Hollister, Aeropostale, et al, and why do they buy? 

I did some digging.  This isn't as hard as it used to be, as it no longer requires shovels, and it only occasionally requires bodies.  The internet makes everything easier. 

A lot of people say that they like buying the big brands because they're well-made.  I didn't bother to find thread counts and durability ratios, but I'll take their word for it.  Another popular answer was "they're cool".  I'm guessing this means image-wise, not temperature-wise, but you never know.  These shirts may be extra-breathable.  Well, if cool floats your boat, go for the look!  People with larger vocabularies say that the brand-wear "projects a good image". 

Most popular answer, though, even outranking "cool":  "Everybody wears it."

Like I said, I don't have a vendetta against people who wear this stuff, but I have a vendetta against this reason for wearing it.  Are we a mime now, hmm?  If people wear it because everybody else is wearing it, they're just following a herd.  Whatever happened to hard-edged individuality?!  Wear the shirt because you think it's cool, because it's well-made, because you have weird fantasies about strangers reading your butt, but for the love of all that is deep-fried, not because everybody else is wearing it.  You're supporting a gem of free-market capitalistic beauty here--show some free thought mixed with a dash of independence, please.

It's very American to wear a brand-name shirt.  I don't mean American as a derogatory term, as it's occasionally come to mean, but American as in industry-supportive.  Americans are stellar consumers and that's good for the economy.

At the same time, just because I feel like sending mixed messages, a large herd of beef cattle is also very American.

I have some other points to make that didn't fit anywhere else.  All right, they're more like complaints, but who's being pedantic anyway?

Besides me.

First of all, why do almost all the Abercrombie and Fitch shirts and all of their underwears--excuse me... "shorts"--have only the name "Abercrombie" on them?  Abercrombie left the company in the early twentieth century.  Fitch became the owner.  And his name is shorter.  Why does Abercrombie get 3/4 of the glory?

And then, why do the dang-flabbed shorts these days look more like underclothing?  Whoops; already mentioned that one.  I mean, why bother wearing these shorts, anyway?  You could just go out in your underwear.

But I forgot.  Society frowns on underwear.

Just not... shorts that look like underwear.

I don't think mere stupidity can explain this.

Also, what's with their stores?  If I want to buy clothes, I want to go in, find something I like, and get out with my life and sanity intact.  I do not want to be greeted, meet models, or have a three hundred and sixty degree shopping experience.  It makes me uncomfortable, and sometimes I punch people.  Fantasise about it, at least. 

These clothing brands have transformed me into a bitter old geezer before my time. 

In conclusion, I have been alternately cynical and tolerant, and have been cynical about tolerance. 

You won't catch me dead in a brand shirt.  I'm not ready to be hamburger just yet.

But I would be doing a disservice to capitalism if I told suckers--er, customers--not to buy the big brands.  Go for it.  As long as I don't have to wear the shreds of my dignity--er, the pride of my coolness--everywhere I go, I'm in favour of paying to advertise someone else's product.

Now excuse me while I go and figure out a way to exploit this.