Date post: | 12-Apr-2017 |
Category: |
Retail |
Upload: | shreshtha0000 |
View: | 688 times |
Download: | 0 times |
A DETAILED ANALYSIS OF PATTERNS OF CONSUMPTION OF CLOTHES IN
GANGTOK, SIKKIM
BY
SHRESHTHA RAIZADA
RACHEL L. KHIANGTE
TO
DEPARTMENT OF SOCIOLOGY
LADY SHRI RAM COLLEGE FOR WOMEN
UNIVERSITY OF DELHI
2014
A DETAILED ANALYSIS OF PATTERNS OF CONSUMPTION
OACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
To the Department of Sociology, Lady Shri Ram CollegeFor Women for giving
us the opportunity to conduct a sociological research as a part of college
project.
To Ms. Nivedita Ghosh and Dr. Saswati Bhattacharya for guiding us
throughout our fieldwork with necessary valuable insights and suggestions
To Mr. Govind Singh, a dear uncle, for helping connect with local people in
Sikkim and assisting us in conducting surveys.
To our friends and parents for their love and support
1
CONTENTS
S.NO CHAPTERS PAGE NO.
1 INTRODUCTION 2-4
2 THE FIELD 5-7
3 LITERATURE REVIEW 8-21
4 BODY OF ESSAY 22-38
5 APPENDIX 39-41
6 CONCLUSION
42-43
7 BIBLIOGRAPHY 44-45
2
INTRODUCTION
This project contains the consumption patterns of clothes in Gangtok. Our aim was to study
the development of branded retail clothing in Gangtok. Though the city has branded stores
like Puma, UBC, The Raymond Shop, Reebok, or Allen Solly, the local Lal bazaar and
M.G.Road is flooded with fashionable and cheap clothing and accessories from China and
other parts of South Asia. Therefore we thought that an insight into the consumption
patterns of youth might be useful to understand the influences of demand and supply of
branded and non-branded clothing items in the retail market.Before we started with the
field work, we were unaware of the fact that in Gangtok, there does not exist any
production of clothes. Our initial aim was to trace the circulation of clothes in the market
i.e. to study the production, distribution and consumption of clothes as a cycle. But later we
realized that clothes are brought from other states of the country such as Ludhiana,
Kolkata, Mumbai, Bangalore, Kathmandu, Dhaka,Bangkok and China.We conducted our
research by going to their 6 major local markets such as, M.G.Road, LalBazaar, Paani House,
Nam Nang Road, Highway and Deorali. Our primary method involve survey method and
conducting structured interviews among the shopkeepers and the shoppers among the age
group of below 18 years,18 -34 years, and above 35 years,the target group of the retail
brand market. By doing all these, we also study the influences and motivations of people
when it comes to fashion.
Sociology endeavors to establish the conditions in which the consumers of cultural goods,
and their taste for them, are produced.Tastes (i.e. manifested preferences)are the practical
affirmationof an inevitable difference.Taste classifies, and it classifies the classifier. Social
subjects distinguish themselves by the distinctions they make, between the beautiful and
the ugly, the distinguished and the vulgar. And statistical analysis does indeed show that
oppositions similar in structure to those found in cultural practices also appear in dressing
habits.In the course of everyday life people constantlychoose between what they find
aesthetically pleasing and what they consider tacky, merely trendy or ugly. The different
aesthetic choices people make are all distinctions- i.e. choices made in opposition to those
made by other classes.
3
For our survey, we printed out around 50 copies of our questionnaire everyday and
distributed to 30-50 people every day. The average time it takes for one person to fill up
the questionnaire was around 5-10 minutes. After they marked the option, we tried to
convince them to give their feedbacks and suggestions for improvisation. At the end of the
day, we used to start our counting of all the responses and categorize each and every
question-type. We discovered how local people in Gangtok are the least brand conscious
people. Branded clothes are considered a bonus to the wardrobe. The unbranded clothes,
on the other hand, are mostly used for everyday wear or daily use. Gangtok is a fashion-
conscious society and people love to keep themselves updated on latest style by browsing
through fashion magazines, Internet and fashion channels. The influence of Korean
superstars/celebrities/movie-stars is immense in Gangtok because people can relate to the
physical features, shapes and body-sizes very easily.
For the people of Gangtok, the priority is to feel and look good. Dressing up is not a
compulsion but a habit. It is important to look good because people like to hear
compliments from friends and colleagues. The general idea that we got from our interviews
and survey was that females are more fashion conscious whereas males are brand-
conscious.The feeling of competition is very strong when it comes to shopping clothes.
People want to outdo others by wearing equally trendy clothes the next time they meet
their friends. The competitiveness goes to such an extent that sometimes there is a cold
war between ladies.It is not enough to have the capacity to perform within specific
contexts, it becomes essential to be able to project constantly a “winning image”. Behind
the emphasis upon performance lies a deeper interest in manipulating the feelings of
others.
In most of the North-East States, children are brought up very differently, appearance
means so much to them. Since their childhood, they are taught to dress up properly, to
wear matching clothes and are repeatedly told not to dirty their clothes even when they
play. People who don’t know how to dress up properly are sometimes looked down upon
and regarded as those who are not socialized. People judge others by their outer
appearance, therefore, if a person has a bad fashion taste, he is not smart, and might end up
4
being teased by others or people might laugh behind his back. Therefore no one wants to
look bad in front of anyone so, they usually choose a matching and contrast pair even for
their casual wear. Dressing up is the way of showing respect to others. They need to look
presentable when they are seen by others. One important fact is that look comes before
comfort. Though they are living in hilly area, people still prefer to wear 5th- 6th inch heels.
The first thing that majority of people want when they enter a clothes shop is looks,
followed by quality, price and lastly the brand.
“Fashion, as noted above, is a product of class distinction and operates like a number of other
forms, honor especially, the double function of which consists in revolving within a given circle
and at the same time emphasizing it as separate from others. Just as the frame of a picture
characterizes the work of art inwardly as a coherent, homogeneous, independent entity and at
the same outwardly severs all direct relations with the surrounding space, just as the uniform
energy of such forms cannot be expressed unless we determine the double effect, both inward
and outward, so honor owed its character, and above all its moral rights, to the fact that the
individual in his personal honor at the same time represents and maintains that of his social
circle and his class. These moral rights, however, are frequently considered unjust by those
without the pale. Thus, fashion on the one hand signifies union with those in the same class,
the uniformity of a circle characterized by it, and the exclusion of all other groups”(p. 308, as
cited by Edles&Appelrouth, 2010)
Simmel wrote beautifully about the concept of fashion long time back which is still applicable
for our worldtoday; in fact it is absolutely relevant in our research also. Today, people can
browse the latest trend in market through internet, television, magazine, etc. Our survey of
nearly 300 people of Gangtok included questions such as: what people look for when they go
shopping? Why people in Gangtok are so influenced by Korean Fashion? Which is the winner,
“branded” or “Unbranded” in Gangtok? What are their opinions about dressing up? What
meaning does it have on people? In our survey, consumers were asked to fill up theten
objective type questions and specify their preferences for outfits and brands. After our survey
was done, we conducted structured interviews to get qualitative information.
5
BACKGROUND
This research project aims to study retail clothing in Gangtok. According to 2011 Census
report, the population of Sikkim is the least in all of India i.e. around 6 lakhs. Gangtok city
has branded stores like The Raymond shop, Puma, Reebok, Van Heusen, Levi’s, AllenSolly.
But, there exist markets such as Lal Bazaar andM.G. Road who cater to a large proportion of
the population. These markets areflooded with fashionable and cheap clothing from
Bangladesh, Bangkok and China. An insight into the consumption patterns of clothes helps
us understand the influences, choices, interests and preferences of people on clothing
which talks a lot about Sikkim style and culture. Our initial aim was to trace the circulation
of clothes in the market i.e. to study the production, distribution and consumption of
clothes as a cycle. But later we realized that clothes are brought from other states of the
country such as Ludhiana, Kolkata, Mumbai, Bangalore, Kathmandu, Dhaka,Bangkok and
China. Therefore we change our title into Consumption patterns of clothes in Gangtok. The
location of our field-work included 6 major areas i.e. M.G. Road, Lal Bazaar, Nam- Nang
Road, Deorali, Paani- House and National Highway.
M.G. Road, the main street of Gangtok is a great place to hang around in the evenings with
friends and family. The country’s first litter and spit free zone, no vehicular traffic is
allowed on the Marg. M.G Marg, set in the heart of the city is the most happening place in
Gangtok, stretching over a kilometer with hotels and shops. M.G. Road has a mixture of
Branded and Unbranded shops. Since, it is a free vehicle zone, people come here not only to
shop but also to sit and relax on the benches all the way. We observe an inter-mixture of
culture among people. Some people are highly westernized in their outfits whereas some
are dressed up in a purely Indian fashion like Sarees and Suits. Most women ranging from
middle-age to older women are seen with their Traditional Bakhau. We find branded shops
in MG Marg such as Levis, Lee Cooper, Nike and Puma, John Players but most other shops
have unbranded material. Their sense of fashion can be seen even in their College Uniform
which is similar to Korean fashion. We noticed that women are highly competitive on their
child appearance. Young children even below 5 years are dressed up as stylist as adults,
they came out with jeans, uggs and colorful tops.
6
Lal Bazaar mainly has unbranded shops and customers are mainly from Lower and middle
class. Since their material and items are cheap and reasonable, the area is always stuffed
with different kinds of people. Most branded shops such as Allen Solly, The Raymond Shop,
Van Heusen, Reebok, United Color of Benetton are found in Paani House. Compare to M.G
Market and Lal Bazaar, people are much less in number and the shops are found empty
most of the time. At Nam Nang Road, we found Big Bazaar which is the biggest shopping
complex in the area.
Deorali is located in the down side of the city.Though there are several shops, the area
does not look like Market as such because all shops are sparsely located. Unlike M.G. Road,
the street is full of vehicle all day, therefore it was quite a problem to move from one place
to another since crossing the road was difficult.
Conducting a survey was difficult than what we had thought. We had to print out around 50
copies of our questionnaire every day and distribute to 30-50 people on a daily basis for
over 2 weeks. Every day we discovered new mistakes and had to edit our questions. Some
people were really open and pleasant to talk to but some people at the same time were
difficult to approach and literally scared of what we were doing, perhaps some didn’t have
any idea about what we were doingeven though we always introduced ourselves and
explained the purpose of our project to each respondent. The average time taken for one
person to fill up the questionnaire was around 5-10 minutes. After they marked the option,
we try to get their feedback and suggestion everytime to dig deeper. We could understand
from their facial expressions that some people were really happy and they found the
questions quite amusing and start giggle sometimes. This was perhaps because their
responses, choices and what they like to wear was being given so much importance so they
appreciated the fact that someone was so deeply interested to know more. Some people
were curious to know about the results of the survey so we promised them to send our
reports on their mail-Ids. They found the question interesting and felt valued.The general
feedback was that most of the people thoroughly enjoyed the survey. As per our
observation, some people felt hesitant to fill questions pertaining to their incomes and
choices on fake clothes. Also, some of the respondents told us that nobody had conducted
this kind of research before in Gangtok. At the end of the day, we used to start our counting
7
of all the responses, categorize and tabulate the data.In fact Counting has been the most
time consuming and cumbersome task during our seventeen day research.
As rightly said by Simmel, clothing individualizes us and simultaneously groups us. When we
have the resources to choose our clothing (not everyone is privileged with being able to
choose) we tend to select looks which we think match “our style” or mimic a style we hope to
achieve. I have heard so many times when shopping, “I love this, it’s so unique!”, many people
try to separate themselves from the majority and assert their individuality. We forget,
however, that the “unique” items we are buying are often produced in mass quantities and sold
across the country to millions of other shoppers hoping to look just as “unique” as ourselves.
As much as we try to be unique, it is nearly impossible to actually achieve this.Just as there are
many people looking to assert their individuality, there are also people who want to “fit in”
with the norm or fit in with the look of a certain social class. These people recognize which
designs (often labels) are associated with their look. While clothing has practical uses (can
shield us from the weather), fashion does not. Fashion is a different shade of blue; it is a
different hemline, a different cut of jeans. Fashion has purpose, though. It is an indicator of
class; it distinguishes us from others while simultaneously grouping us.
Richard Sennett’s book “the Fall of Public Man” examines the historical origins of the new belief
that appearance and bodily presentation express the self. In the 18th century, he suggests,
appearance was not regarded as a reflection of the inner self but more playfully distanced from
an individual’s character which was regarded as fixed at birth. Sennett sees the development of
the department store in the second half of the 19th century as crucial to the process. The
department store sold the newly available cheap mass produced clothing by using increasingly
sophisticated techniques of advertising and display. Clothing which indicated a fixed social
status came to be avoided and an individual’s dress and demeanour came more and more to be
taken as an expression of his personality: clothes in the words of Thomas Carlyle became
‘emblems of the soul’. This encouraged greater bodily self-consciousness and self-scrutiny in
public life.
8
LITERATURE REVIEW
The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life is a book that was published in 1959, written by
sociologist Erving Goffman. In it, he uses the imagery of theater in order to portray the
importance of human and social action and interaction. He refers to this as the
dramaturgical model of social life. According to Goffman, social interaction may be likened
to a theater, and people in everyday life to actors on a stage, each playing a variety of roles.
The audience consists of other individuals who observe the role-playing and react to the
performances. In social interaction, like in theatrical performances, there is a front region
where the actors are on stage in from of an audience. There is also a back region, or back
stage, where individuals can be themselves and get rid of their role or identity that they
play when they are in front of others. Goffman uses the term ‘performance’ to refer to all
the activity of an individual in front of a particular set of observers, or audience. Through
this performance, the individual, or actor, gives meaning to themselves, to others, and to
their situation. These performances deliver impressions to others and information is
exchanged to confirm identity. The actor may or may not be aware of their performance or
have an objective of their performance, however the audience is always attributing
meaning it and to the actor. Appearance functions to portray to the audience the
performer’s social statuses. Appearance also tells us of the individual’s temporary social
state or role, for example whether he is engaging in work (by wearing a uniform), informal
recreation, or a formal social activity. Here, dress and props serve to communicate gender,
status, occupation, age, and personal commitments.
The symbolic interaction perspective, also called symbolic interactionism, is a major
framework of sociological theory. This perspective relies on the symbolic meaning that
people develop and rely upon in the process of social interaction. Although symbolic
interactionism traces its origins to Max Weber's assertion that individuals act according to
their interpretation of the meaning of their world, the American philosopher George
Herbert Mead introduced this perspective to American sociology. It is suggested as a very
useful theoretical basis for advancing consumer self-concept and product symbolism
research. Earlier marketing literature is replete with studies which attempted to relate
9
purchases of product types or specific brands to personality traits of the buyers. Tucker
(1957) is the first who proposed that consumers' personalities can be defined through
product use. Evans (1959) in his landmark study attempted to examine the differences in
personality variables between the owners of different cars. Westfall (1962) found that
owners of different models of cars exhibited different personality characteristics. Claycamp
(1965) reported that personality variables were better than demographic variables in
predicting patronage for different financial service organizations.
These studies treated the personality traits as "enduring" characteristics of people and
focused on the self-expression of the inner nature of the consumer through product use.
However, they neglected the influences of others with whom a consumer interacts through
social process on his choice of the product or brand. Although some of these studies found
relationships between consumers' personalities and the products they consume, the
overall results of this line of research are inconsistent and equivocal. Thus, it is concluded
that this kind of simplistic paradigm could not properly account for product choice
processes (Kassarjian and Sheffet 1975).
Later, researchers advanced the notion that consumers' buying behavior is determined by
the "interaction" of the consumer's self-concept and the image of the product or brand
purchased. The "symbolic property" of certain products was initially suggested by Goffman
(1951) and Hall and Trager (1953). In the marketing literature, Levy (1959) initially
emphasized the importance of the consumer's self-concept by proposing that the act of
consumption as symbolic behavior- is more important to the consumer than the functional
benefits of the product. Products and services are assumed to have an image determined
not only by the functional attributes but also by a host of such intangible factors as brand
recognition, price, advertising, country of origin, stores, packaging, etc. Following Levy's
proposition, a number of self-concept studies were undertaken. Woods (1960) asserted
that where ego-involvement with the product is high, product image is important to the
consumer. Birdwell (1968) empirically tested the premise that one's self image would be
more congruent with the image of the chosen brand than with the images of rejected
brands. Grubb and Hupp (1968) and Dolich (1969) reported similar findings.
10
In the product symbolism study, there was a stream of research which attempted to treat the
self-concept from the sociological perspective. Boune's typology (1957) is based on the degree
to which products are subject to "social influence." The main dimension of his classification is
"product conspicuousness", i.e., the degree to which a product is visible. This classification is of
great interest because product conspicuousness can be conceptualized in light of interpersonal
relationships in social process and also links the product to the concept of self. If a product
consumption is conspicuous in public and is socially visible, consumers are likely to use the
visibility of the product to communicate symbolically something about themselves to the
"significant others" in the consumption situation. This symbolic communication is based on the
premise that there exists a commonly shared meaning and experience about the product in
specific consumption situations. Boune (1957) postulated that the degree to which a product is
perceived to be conspicuous will influence the degree of "perceived social risk" associated with
its usage. Social risk is one of the multiple dimensions of perceived risk which consumers
subjectively have in product purchase and/or consumption situation. Initially introduced in
marketing literature by Bauer (1960), the perceived risk construct has since evolved into
different areas. Functional risk is defined as the risk that the product will not perform properly
(Cox 1967). Performance risk is defined as the extent to which consumers think that the various
products perform differently in what is important to them (Brody and Cunningham 1968). Social
risk is defined as the extent to which consumers think that other people judge them on the
basis of the product or a brand they use (Jacoby and Kaplan 1972). Among these perceived
risks, the perceived social risk is the factor which can invoke the socially oriented self-concept
(situational self; to be discussed) in consumption situations. Also many studies found that social
risk is the most important component of perceived risk. Jacoby and Kaplan (1972) reported that
the strongest determinant of social risk was the degree to which the product usage is socially
"visible." Perry and Hamm (1969) proposed that social significance refers to how the purchase
decision would affect the opinion other people hold of the individual. Their study concluded
that social risk was related to product usage conspicuousness and social importance. In
addition, there are some studies which attempted to connect product "conspicuousness" and
"socially oriented self-concept." Witt and Bruce (1970) found that as perceived product
11
conspicuousness increased, subjects (housewives) were more likely to use fellow members'
preferences to guide their own preferences. Midgley (1983) also reported that a majority of
men formed their preferences and made purchase decisions for new suits on the basis of
recommendations from others (generally their- wives or peers).
Symbolic interactionism appears to offer a theoretical basis for conceptualizing the "socially
oriented self" and its relationship with product conspicuousness. Symbolic interactionists view
the basic nature of society as a system of interpersonal communication and interaction and
view the basic nature of the individual (self) as the product of society. It incorporates
consideration of communicational dynamics rather than focusing on a communicational
participant in isolation from the others with whom he interacts (McCall and Simmons 1978).
Thus, it points to the positions that underlie structural relationships among per ions and to the
social roles that accompany these positions as the significant sources of relevant variation in
the self.
James (1890) viewed humans as having a variety of types of self and argued that the human
being has as many "social selves" as there are distinct groups of persons about whose opinion
he cares. Thus, multifaceted self is the product of a heterogeneously organized society. Cooley
(1902) saw that there is no individual apart from society: personality develops from social life
and from communication among those sharing that social life. Specifically, the self is the
product of a process summed up in the phrase "looking glass self" which refers to an individual
perceiving himself in the way others perceive him. Things become stimuli (objects) only as they
take on meaning for the person engaged in the social process. The self is essentially a social
structure, and it develops in social experience. In other words, we come to know who and what
we are through interaction with others. The self may be said to exist in the activity of viewing
oneself "reflexively." That is, we become "objects" to ourselves by attaching to ourselves
symbols which permit use of the standpoint of others in order to view oneself as an object
Assumptions
12
Thus, symbolic interactionism proposes a dynamic theory about how individuals formulate and
reassess their plans of action in terms of the objects and people encountered in their social
environment, and in terms of their own assessments of themselves. A most fundamental
proposition of the symbolic interactionism is that a focus on the person without a correlative
focus on social structure, or vice versa, is necessarily partial and incomplete. The "self-concept"
can be conceptualized as an organization (structure) of various identities and attributes, and
their evaluations, developed out of the individual's reflexive, social, and symbolic activities.
Among the diverse orientations within the symbolic interaction, situated identity theory
appears to lend itself to the direct application to the study of product symbolism and the
consumer's self-concept. Building on Goffman's idea about the "self presentation" in everyday
life (Goffman 1963), Alexander and his associates (1971; 1977; 1981) have defined situated
identities as "the dispositional imputations about an individual that are conveyed by his action
in a particular social context." They argue that when a person acts, he communicates
information about the kind of person he presumes to be and obliges others to regard him as
being that kind of person. In Mead's terminology, behaviors are "constituted" into-action,
because they have implications for the creation, affirmation, or transformation of an actor's
situated identity. Alexander has postulated that if there is relative consensus about the
meaning of actions within a population, situations are socially defined. That IS, there must be
some agreement about the dispositional dimensions relevant to describe an individual's
conduct, and about how a particular action is to be evaluated along those dimensions. When
these conditions are met, a situation has consensual meaning or social reality. When a social
situation exists by these criteria, behavior can be predicted if the situated identity that results
from the choice of one action out of some alternatives is considered more socially desirable
than those associated with alternative actions.
An identity is considered as a working self-meaning constructed out of the material of a
particular situation. People act to create the most socially desirable situated identity available
because of the "self-esteem" motive (Alexander and Wiley 1981). This argument is based on
Goffman's notion that social identity attributes organize and orient social interaction
13
(Goffman1963, the situated identity perspective conceives of individuals as structuring complex
activities and stimuli sequences in terms of their implication for participants' dispositional
attributes. When members of a given population consensually invoke the same dimensions to
characterize actors, their attributional process creates social situations. Behavior is predicted if
there is a "most favorable" situated identity to be gained from one- of the behavioral
alternatives that are possible under the circumstances. People are expected to choose to
become the kind of person that will be most highly valued in each condition.
Situated identity theory is expected to be used to conceptualize the socially oriented self-
concept discussed in the aforementioned product symbolism studies. This symbolic
interactionist perspective can explain how a consumer's purchase decision is influenced by an
anticipated reactions of others and how the consumption may influence others in the social
interactive processes. The "situational self' is defined as the meaning of self that the consumer
wishes others to have of himself. He seeks to achieve this by means of the product or brand he
owns and uses in a typical consumption situation. The situation-specific self-concept may
include attitudes and perceptions that the consumer feels the need for others to form of his
internal disposition. Thus, the situational self is dependent upon the parameters of a product
(symbolic meaning) and its consumption situation (social process) as suggested by situated
identity theory.
The situational self-concept is able to describe and predict the consumer's brand choice
decision of the product which is used in public, and hence involves conspicuousness and
visibility. In this product category alternative brands are assumed to be easily distinguishable
and have well established images. It is also assumed that each brand implies a differentially
desirable identity and there is relative consensus about the symbolic meaning of each brand
within a population. The theoretical basis for the existence of brand images that are more or
less the same for members of a social system lies in the propositions of symbolic
interactionism. That is, people classify objects which they come into contact with in social
processes, and in that process they also learn the symbolic meanings of the objects.
14
Consequently, in the social process emerges the consensual meaning of the objects among all
those who are interacting.
When a product is used in public, its use involves high social visibility and conspicuousness
because others are aware of one's possession and use of the product and can easily identify the
brand. Thus, the consumer becomes conscious of the people in the consumption situation and
is more concerned about how other people would judge him on the basis of the brand or the
product he uses, which is defined as the perceived "social risk." Therefore, as the consumer
subjectively assesses appropriate role behaviors and forms a meaningful evaluation of
significant others to be encountered in the anticipated and/or typical consumption situation of
the product (meaningful in terms of the plans of the consumer; enhancement of self-esteem
motive). In this process, he establishes the "situational self' concept or draws one from his "self
schema," if he has well established situation specific self concepts in relation to the product use
situation. The consumer then identifies the self within the consumption situation in which the
symbolic meaning of the product mediates the communication between him and others
encountered as symbolic interactionists suggest. Therefore, the invoked "situational self'
concept is to guide the brand choice process. He then searches through the evoked set of the
brands in the product class and compares the images of brands with the situational self
invoked. Each brand is to have a different degree of fit to the invoked situational self image
because each has a different set of intrinsic an extrinsic values as a means of self enhancement
when presented to significant others. In many product categories, alternative brands are easily
distinguishable and brand images are relatively well differentiated (or differentiable). Also,
there is relative consensus in the market because of marketers' promotional efforts to
differentiate their brand from competing brands (market segmentation and brand positioning).
Each brand has a different symbolic meaning commonly shared by the majority of consumers.
Therefore, the brand whose image is closest to the situational self will be selected (or will be
the most preferred) for consumption in the anticipated situation. This process warrants more
elaboration from the symbolic interactionist perspective to gain more insight into the dynamics
involved. In this process, the consumer attributes "meaning" to the product symbolically which
is to be communicated to the others encountered in the consumption situation in order to
15
enhance his self-esteem. Goffman (1963) indicated products could serve as props to aid in
communication of the situational self.
This private and individual symbolic interpretation of a brand is largely dependent upon an
understanding of the symbolic meaning associated with the brand which one has learned
from previous interactional experiences and/or from marketers' brand positioning efforts
(e.g., image-oriented ad) to map their brand on consumers' perceptual space distinctly
from other competing brands. Therefore, although the consumer may treat this process in a
private manner, his evaluations of symbolic contents of the brand depend upon his
"perceptions" of how other people would evaluate the brands. As the consumer attributes
meaning to it, so the others interacting with the consumer in the consumption situation
also attribute meaning to the symbol. This represents the symbolic interactionist
perspective of how the individual and social structure maintain reciprocal relationships
through symbolic communication. If a brand has a commonly-shared meaning between the
consumer and others, then the desired communication (self-enhancement) can take place
and the interaction process will develop as desired by the consumer.
Meanwhile, when a product is consumed in a personal way (e.g., private necessities such as
mattresses), it does not involve conspicuousness or social visibility because almost nobody
would be aware that the consumer owns or uses the product. When purchasing this kind of
product, the consumer would be mainly concerned whether the product turns out to be
defective or to be different from what he expected in some important physical and
functional attributes. If that happens, he may be frustrated about or regret his purchasing
decision. Thus, the consumer is expected to be more concerned about perceived functional
and performance risks than the perceived social risk. "Functional risk" is defined as the risk
that the product will not perform properly. "Performance risk" is defined as the extend to
which the consumer thinks that different brands of a product perform differently in what is
important to him. Therefore, in this situation, actual self-concept is expected to be invoked
and guide the brand choice.
16
In the 20th century, much has been written on fashion, yet systematic and general theories
of fashion are few. The best remains one of the earliest: Fashion by Georg Simmel
(published in 1895). According to Simmel, Fashion is a form of imitation and so of social
equalization, but paradoxically, in changing incessantly, it differentiates one time from
another and one social stratum from another. It unites those of a social class and segregates
them from others. The elite initiates a fashion and, when the mass imitates it in an effort to
obliterate the external distinction of class, abandons it for a newer mode- a process that
quickens with the increase of wealth. Fashion does not exist in tribal and classless societies.
It concerns externals and superficialities where irrationality does no harm. It signalizes the
lack of personal freedom: hence it characterizes the female and the middle class, whose
increased social freedom is matched by intense individual subjugation. Some forms are
intrinsically more suited to the modifications of fashion than others: the internal unity of
the forms called “classic” makes them immune to change. Simmel views fashion as
developing in the city, "because it intensifies a multiplicity of social relations, increases the
rate of social mobility and permits individuals from lower strata to become conscious of the
styles and fashions of upper classes." In the traditional and small circle setting, fashion
would have no meaning or be unnecessary. Since modern individuals tend to be detached
from traditional anchors of social support, fashion allows the individual to signal or express
their own personality or personal values. Simmel noted that fashion provides the best
arena for people who lack autonomy and who need support, yet whose self-awareness
nevertheless requires that they be recognized as distinct and as particular kinds of beings.
Ritzer notes that fashion can be considered to be a part of objective culture in that it allows
the individual to come into conformity with norms of a group. At the same time, it can
express individuality, because an individual may choose to express some difference from
norms. Fashion is dynamic and has an historical dimension to it, with acceptance of a
fashion being followed by some deviation from this fashion, change in the fashion, and
perhaps ultimate abandonment of the original norm, and a new norm becoming
established. There is a dialectical process involved in the success of the fashion involved in
its initial and then widespread acceptance also leads to its eventual abandonment and
failure. Leadership in a fashion means that the leader actually follows the fashion better
than others, as well as there being followers of the fashion. Mavericks are those who reject
17
the fashion, and this may become an inverse form of imitation. Fashion allows personal
values to be expressed at the same time as norms are followed. The two exist together, and
the one without the other would be meaningless. In all of this, social interaction is of the
essence - what others think, what one thinks that others think, how one conceives of
fashion.
According to Simmel, fashion derives from a basic tension specific to the social condition of
the human being. On one hand, each of us has tendency to imitate others. On the other, we
also have a tendency to distinguish ourselves from others. Undoubtedly, some of us tend
more towards imitation while others tend to distinction but fashion's flux needs both of
these contradictory tendencies in order to work. From one side, an individual tends to
imitate others they admire. From the other, they tend to distinguish themselves from
people towards whom they are indifferent or who they despise.For Simmel "... fashion
represents nothing more than one of the many forms of life by the aid of which we seek to
combine in uniform spheres of activity the tendency towards social equalization with the
desire for individual differentiation and change." (F, p. 133) Fashion is an example of the
way in which actual social life always includes in some way its own opposite, an asocial life.
Fashion is the effect of the dynamical play between these two batteries of opposites. But
fashion exists only in so far as one of the two poles does not ultimately prevail in the end.
Fashion is the effect of an always unstable balance between two poles from which the self-
destructive parabola of fashion derives:As fashion spreads, it gradually goes to its doom.
The distinctiveness which in the early stages of a set fashion assures for it a certain
distribution is destroyed as the fashion spreads, and as this element wanes, the fashion also
is bound to die.
Now, the impulse to imitate, to unify, toequalise - is not directed towards our neighbours:
we imitate instead people who are, in one way or another, superior to us. From which
follows the Simmelian principle, "... fashion ... is a product of class distinction ..." (F, p. 133).
For fashion to exist, society must be stratified, some members must be perceived as inferior
or superior - or simply as worthy or unworthy of being imitated. And as far as the "inferior
one" imitates their direct "superior" and never vice versa, the conclusion is: "... fashion - i.e.,
18
the latest fashion affects only the upper classes." (F,p. 135.) For example, suppose some
upper class girls begin to wear a new skirt designed by a prestigious couturier. Soon, the
desire for lower class girls to imitate them will force the market to supply low-priced
copies. Thus, moving down from one level to another, in a short space of time this skirt no
longer distinguishes the upper class girls, since everyone is wearing cheap imitations. So
the girls from the upper classes will once again have to look for something else to
distinguish themselves, which will once again be imitated, and so the cycle will goes on.
Do we thus imitate persons who we admire and/or envy because we perceive them to be
superior? Envy creates a social link - not in spite its negative aspect, but precisely because
of it. I can envy somebody only if I admire them, to the degree that I make them my ideal of
behaviour or social achievement. Envy marks the distance between myself and my ideal of
being or having, when I see this ideal realised in my neighbour. But fashion is also a remedy
for envy, because, in imitating the person I admire, I become or appear like them, and thus I
identify myself as one who appears admirable. Fashion dilutes envy among individuals by
watering it down with social inclusiveness. But is the distinction versus imitation tension
really unshakeable? That is, must we absolutely suppose that there exists a small group of
persons which invent and create certain cultural traits by which they aim only to
distinguish themselves from a large mass of people destined, at most, to imitate them? Even
at the level of that innovating elite, not only is the drive to distinguish oneself already at
work, but the drive to imitate as well. Real innovators without peers are few and far
between. But the same is true in fashion: one distinguishes oneself from the crowd by
imitating some admired and envied personality. On the other hand, even the millionth girl
who decides to cut her hair "according to the latest fashion" still distinguishes herself: from
her mother or from the girl next door who still does not dare to do it.
Distinction and imitation are thus two faces of the same coin: one imitates an idealised
other in order to distinguish oneself from the rest, and also by changing ones imitative
allegiance. Therefore the fashion tension is not really structurally different in various
cultural and social classes; rather, only the extension of the distinction varies. In short, the
elite is characterised by the maximal extension of the distinction: the type of hat or the
19
aesthetic taste adopted by the elite is distinct from almost all else, and for a while, the elite
does something unique. In the most prestigious and influential fashion shows - in Milan, Paris,
or New York - the great designers strive to present clothes so eccentric that nobody will
dare to wear them. These big shows followed by the world press represent a distinctive
apex, the peak of a singular, distinctive uniqueness: well, those famous models may be the
only ones in the world to wear those clothes designed expressly to scandalise the
"conventional folk". Yet the very same designer has available more moderate, and less
expensive, versions of the same "idea" which he will sell to a wider market.
According to Pierre Bourdieu, different conditions of existence produce different habitus,
the practices engendered by the different habitus appear as systematic configurations of
properties expressing the differences objectively inscribed in conditions of existence in the
form in the form of systems of differential deviations which interpret and evaluate their
pertinent features, function as lifestyles. Lifestyles are the systematic products of habitus,
which, perceived in their mutual relations through the schemes of the habitus, become sign
systems that are socially qualified. Systematicity is in the synthetic unity of the habitus, the
unifying, generative principle of all practices. Taste is the generative formula of life-style, a
unitary set of distinctive preferences which express the same expressive intention in the
specific logic of each of the symbolic sub-space, furniture, clothing etc. the system of
matching properties is organized by taste. Taste is the basis of the mutual adjustment of all
the features associated with a person. It is the practical operator of the transmutation of
things into distinct and distinctive signs, of continuous distributions into discontinuous
oppositions; it raises the differences inscribed in the physical order of bodies to the
symbolic order of significant distinctions. It continuously transforms necessities into
strategies, constraints into preferences and it generates the set of choices constituting life-
styles, which derive their meaning i.e. their value from their position in a system of
oppositions and correlations. It is a virtue made of necessity which continuously
transforms necessity into virtue by inducing choices which correspond to the condition of
which it is the product.
20
The working classes make a realistic or functionalist use of clothing. Looking for substance
and function rather than form, they seek value for money and choose what will last. The
middle classes have a degree of anxiety about external appearances both sartorial and
cosmetic. The increased quantity and quality of all purchases of men’s clothing is summed up in
the opposition between the suit, the prerogative of the senior executive and the blue overall,
the distinctive mark of the farmer and the industrial worker or between the overcoat always
much rarer among men than women but much more frequent among senior executives than
the other classes. Among women who spend more than men, the number of purchases
increases as one moves up the social hierarchy; the difference is greatest for suits and
costumes. The interest the different classes have in self-presentation, the attention they devote
to it, their awareness of the profits and the investment of time, effort, sacrifice and care which
they actually put into it are proportionate to the chances of material or symbolic profit they can
reasonably expect from it. They depend on the existence of a labour market in which physical
appearance may be valorized in the performance of the job itself or in professional relations
and on the differential chances of access to this market and the sectors of this market in which
beauty and deportment most strongly contribute to occupational value.
Charm and charisma designate the power to impose their own self-image as the objective and
collective image of their body and being; to persuade others, as in love or faith, to abdicate
their generic power of objectification and delegate it to the person who should be its object,
who becomes an absolute subject, without an exterior, fully justified in existing, legitimated.
The charismatic leader makes the opinion which makes him; he continues himself as an
absolute by a manipulation of symbolic power which is constitutive of his power since it
enables him to produce and impose his own objectification.
The spaces defined by preferences in food, clothing or cosmetics are organized according to the
social space determined by volume and composition of capital. Fully to construct the space of
life-style within which cultural practices are defined, one would first have to establish, for each
class and class fraction, the generative formula of the habitus which retranslates the necessities
and facilities characteristic of that class of homogeneous conditions of existence into a
21
particular life-style. One would then have to determine how the dispositions of the habitus are
specified by implementing one of the stylistic possible offered by each field and then obtain a
rigorous representation of the space of life-styles, making it possible to characterize each of the
distinctive features ion the two respects in which it is objectively defined, i.e., on the one hand
by reference to the set of features constituting the area in question, on the other hand by
reference to the set of features constituting a particular life-style within which its social
significance is determined. For example, the universe of sporting activities and entertainments
presents itself to each new entrant as a set of ready-made choices, objectively instituted
possible, traditions, rules, values, equipment, symbols, which receive their social significance
from the system they constitute and which derive a proportion of their properties, at each
moment, from history. Thus a sport is in a sense predisposed for bourgeois use when the use of
the body it requires in no way offends the sense of t high dignity of the person, flinging the
body into the rough and tumble of forward-game rugby or the demeaning competitions of
athletics. Ever concerned to impose the indisputable image of his own authority, his dignity or
his distinction, the bourgeois treats his body as an end, makes his body a sign of its own ease.
Style is thus foregrounded and the most typically bourgeois deportment can be recognized by a
certain breadth of gesture, posture and gait, which manifests by the amount of physical space
that is occupied the place occupied in social space by a restrained, measured, self-assured
tempo.
22
BODY OF ESSAY
The main argument of our project is to study the consumption patterns of apparels in
Gangtok. On the basis of our interaction with retailers we came to a conclusion that
clothesin Gangtokare brought from other states in India (for example, Ludhiana, Bangalore,
Mumbai, Kolkata)and abroad such as Bangladesh, Bangkok and China.
I. METHODOLOGY
The methodology of our project was based on the survey method. The sample size was 260
surveys in total. There were 10 multiple choice questions along with profile based
questions on gender, occupation, age etc. Out of 260 surveys we used two parameters to
understand the patterns of consumption of clothes. Firstly, we segregated the surveys on
the basis of gender i.e. male and female. Secondly, we divided the responses and
categorized into 3 age- groups i.e. below 18 years, between 18 to 35 years and above 35
years. The number of females surveyed was 102 and the number of male respondents was
158. (Refer Table No. 1)
BELOW 18 YRS BETWEEN 18-35
YEARS
ABOVE 35 YEARS
MALE 15 81 50
FEMALE 15 75 21
Table No 1: This table shows the number of respondents on the basis of gender and age
groups
23
II. SURVEY FINDINGS
Firstly, in the occupational analysis, we notice that both male and female below 18 are
mostly students. Between 18 to 35 years, majority of males are pursuing business whereas
females are students. Also, males and females above 35 years are into business and a large
percentage of women are homemakers i.e. 33% (See figures 1 -6)
The second category deals with the monthly budget of clothes across all age groups. More
than 70 % of respondents below 18 years said that they spend up toRs. 5000 every month
on clothes. The money spent by students on clothes is through their monthly pocket-money
given by their parents. We also notice that few males and females between 18 to 35 years
spend up to Rs. 10,000 monthly on shopping clothes. (See figures7 -12)
The third category is frequency of buying clothes which includes 5 options as follows: once
a week, once a month, once in three months, once in 6 months and once a year. We observe
that some youngsters buy clothes every week or once in a month at least. Females between
18 to 35 years buy clothes more frequently than men of the same age group. Also, old
people buy clothes once in 6 months or once in a year. This means that young people
purchase clothes more frequently as compared to old ones. (See figures 13- 18)
The fourth aspect is that of decision making which is most crucial when it comes to buying
clothes. We see an interesting pattern among males across all age groups who are
independent and choose clothes of their own choice. It is very important to note that males
below 18 years are more dependent on their fathers than mothers when it comes to
deciding the type of clothes to buy. On the other hand, males above 18 till 35 and above
play the role of key decision makers when it comes to buying clothes not just for
themselves but other family members as well. Similarly, we see a clear pattern among
females who are more dependent on their mothers especially the ones below 18 years. The
dependence of females on their mothers reduces as they grow older. In fact, among the
females between 18 to 35 years, kids between 5 to 15 years give their opinion and play a
role in decision making when their mothers buy clothes for themselves. (See figures 19-24)
24
Next, our survey question focused on the choice of markets in Gangtok that people love to
visit. The favorite shopping markets among males across all age groups is Lal Bazaar. 40 %
of male respondents between 18 to 35 years chose M.G. Road. Among the females, the
pattern changes because females who prefer M.G. Road over LalBazzar but young girls still
like to buy cheap unbranded clothes from Lal Bazaar. Paani House, which is full of brands,
is most visited by femles between 18 to 35 years. Other markets such as Deorali and Nam
Nang Road are least preferred markets in Gangtok. (See figures 25-30) Some people also
shops outside Gangtok like Siliguri and Bangkok because of the variety of clothes, and the
prices are more reasonable.
In the sixth category we explored the type of clothes that people love to wear i.e. Western
Formal, Western Casual, Indian Formal or Indian Casual. Among the male respondents we
find that the choices continue to vary. This is because Males below 18 years chose Western
Formal, Males between 18 to 35 years chose Western Casual and Males above 35 years
chose Indian Casual clothes as their preference. On the other hand, females below 18 chose
Indian casual, Females between 18 to 35 years chose Western Casual and Females above
35 years chose Indian Casual. Therefore, we can say both males and females have same
choices on the type of clothes. (See figures 31-36)
Our seventh category was the preference of outfits that people wear i.e. Western Formal,
Western Casual, Indian Ethnic and Traditional / Bakhau.. Here, we asked the respondents
to choose the option which they would prefer to wear on special occasions such as a
wedding or family’s functions. The answers that we received show a pattern that
drastically changes among people above 35 years age group. It is quite interesting to see
that both males and females above 35 years do not wear Western clothes much. Old women
wear traditional clothes such a half –Bakhau or a full length Bakhau whereas old men do
not prefer traditional clothes. Western Casuals are mostly worn by both males and females
between 18-35 years. Young people i.e. below 18 years wear either Indian ethnic or
Western casual on special occasions. (See figures 37-42)
25
The eighth category discusses the brand choices that people make in everyday life. Here,
we asked our respondents to choose their favorite brand for Western Casual wear. The
options were as follows: Denim, Levis, Lee, Pepe Jeans, Others, ‘Don’t Prefer Brands’ and
‘Don’t wear Western Casuals’. Here, we see that Levis stands out to be the most preferred
brand for Western Casual among males below 35 years. However, majority of the males
above 35 years chose ‘Don’t Prefer Brands’ though among all other brands, Levis tops the
list. Among the young girls, Lee and Denim are best options for Western Casuals. Therefore,
we can safely say that both females as well as males love what Levis has to offer. (See
figures 43-48)
The ninth category looks at the brands that people wear for
Western Formal Wear for example, Van Heusen, The Raymond Shop, Allen Solly, Others,
‘Don’t Prefer Brands’ and ‘Don’t wear Western Formal’. Our result shows that Allen Solly is
most preferred brand among males and females between 18 to 35 years. Among the
youngsters below 18 years, Van Heusen, Allen Solly and Others are most popular for formal
wear. A large proportion of males above 35 years “Don’t Prefer Brands” while the females
above 35 years “Don’t wear formal wear”. (See figures 49-54)
The last category discusses the choices that people make when it comes to buying fake
unbranded and duplicate clothes. Here, 53% of male respondents and 80% female
respondents below 18 years said that if given a choice, they would buy unbranded
duplicate clothes rather than expensive branded clothes. This pattern changes for people
above 35 years where majority of both male and female respondents said that they would
not prefer fake clothes.(See figures 55-60)
26
III. INTERVIEWS
Though our project was based on quantitative analysis, we also tried to incorporate and
substantiate our survey results through structured interviews. There was a lot of overlap in
terms of our results and what came out of the interviews. We conducted 15 structured
interviews with people who were between 20 to 35 years. We asked people what fashion
means to them and we got many interesting responses. For some people, fashion exists in
every nook and corner of Gangtok while some believe that fashion must match one’s
culture and should not be vulgar. For the people of Gangtok, fashion is only important to
look smart and presentable. Also, one of the respondent said that fashion must also meet
one’s pocket expenses. There are kids who sometimes pressurize their parents to buy
something that does not meet parent’s budget. So, he termed fashion as a ‘pesticide’ that is
eating our pockets.
Fashion is not about an individual’s choice but involves a lot of imitation. Even though
Indian brands such as Indian terrain are cheaper as compared to a foreign brand like John
players, people assume that foreign brands always provide a better quality. This perception
is because of the price tags of foreign brands. According to retailers, the fact is that
sometimes branded clothes are also poor in quality. Thus, it is not always true that brands
provide us with better quality goods. For, example, UBC uses the same kind of linen like
unbranded linen and sells a T-shirt worth Rs. 3500/- whereas an unbranded T-shirt worth
Rs.1200 will use a better quality linen. This is the primary reason why unbranded clothes
prove to be the winner in the Gangtok markets. Unbranded fake clothes are preferred
because of the following reasons. Firstly, unbranded clothes are attractive in terms of
designs and match the latest ‘cool trends’. Secondly, they are cheap and most people can
afford to buy T-shirts and jeans in reasonable prices. Thirdly, fakes and unbranded material
offers a wide range of clothes in terms of variety. Lastly, they are ‘use and throw’ clothes
which can be later replaced by new trends as fashion changes every 6 months. People do
not spend much time to think before they buy anything.
27
Another interesting insight was that it is extremely difficult to differentiate people on the
basis of their financial status in Gangtok. This is because people from all economic
backgrounds dress the same way so we cannot identify the class of a person by merely
looking at the kind of clothes they wear. So, clothes deceive the viewer and also act as an
equalizer.Dressing up well is a part of the Gangtok lifestyle. As we interviewed the
youngsters, their opinion was that people don’t like to repeat the clothes they wear. An
MBBS Student studying in Sikkim Manipal University defined fashion as a way of carrying
oneself and it makesyou and others around you feel good. Alamode is a 2 month old store
in Lal Bazaar, Gangtok where the owner has tied up with Korean brand designers and sells
brands such as Zara, Mango, Calvin Klein, Jack and Jones. According to Alamode owner,
brands such as Zara and Mango are essentially designed for European sizes and therefore,
for North-east people who are short and have Mongoloid features find it difficult to wear
those sizes.Dublicate/fake clothes also can be seen everywhere. According to owner of
Zipper, (which is the most popular apparel store among youngsters) people love the Zipper
clothes because of the variety as they have new stock coming every week in reasonable
prices. The latest trends are combat boots, skinny jeans/pants, pencil skirts, stripes and
animal prints. The interesting fact about Gangtok is that since it is the smallest state in
India, therefore, most of the people know each other very well and that motivates them to
look presentable and smart all the time.
Therefore, we can conclude that the moment people enter the showroom, ‘looks’ are the
most important ; then comes quality, followed by price and lastly the name of the brand.
Hence, price is secondary factor and brand is the last thing that people look out for.Also, the
design and location of the shops plays a crucial role because people judge the interiors of
the store and make up their minds whether it is meant for them or not.Poor people fear to
enter attractive shops.There are customers who regularly visit their favorite stores and this
makes the people of Gangtok high on customer-loyalty quotient.The youngsters imitate the
Korean fashion trends whereas the Middle-aged people are more influenced by Western
style. Korean fashion suits the people’s body shapes and sizes and they keep themselves
updated on latest Korean styles and trends. Usually, Nylon and Polyester is used instead of
cotton because of cold temperature.Jackets are worn nine months a year. Sweaters are of
28
two kinds- summer and winter and hoddies are also very common. Young people like to
wear bright colours such as red, blue and green while old ones wear dull colours.
29
1. OCCUPATIONAL SEGMENTATION
BELOW 18 YEARS
MALE FEMALE
Figure No: 1BETWEEN 18-35 YEARS Figure No: 2
Figure No: 3ABOVE 35 YEARS Figure No: 4
Figure No: 5 Figure No: 6
6%
60%
27%
0% 7% 0%
Service Student Business
Homemaker Unemployed Nil
7%
79%
7%7% 0%0%
Service Student Business
Homemaker Unemployed Nil
37%
8%47%
1% 1% 6%
Service Student Business
Home-maker Unemployed Nil
24%
34%
29%
10% 3% 0%
Service Student Business
Home-maker Unemployed Nil
21% 0%
67%
2% 0% 10%
Service Student Business
Homemaker Unemployed Nil
19% 0%
43%
33%
5% 0%
Service Student Business
Homemaker Unemployed Nil
30
2. MONTHLY BUDGET FOR CLOTHES
BELOW 18 YEARS
MALE FEMALE
Figure No: 7BETWEEN 18-35 YEARS Figure No: 8
Figure No:9ABOVE 35 YEARS Figure No: 10
Figure No: 11 Figure No: 12
73%
7%
7%0%
13%
1000-5000 5000-10,000 Above 15000
Above 15000 Nil
75%
6%13%
0% 6%
1000-5000 5000-10,000 Above 15000
Above 15000 Nil
74%
21%
3% 0%2%
1000-5000 5000-10,000 10000- 15000
Above 15000 Nil
66%
24%
6% 4% 0%
1000-5000 5000-10,000 10000- 15000
Above 15000 Nil
67%
17%
2% 0%
14%
1000-5000 5000-10,000 10000- 15000
Above 15,000 Nil
52%29%
5%0%
14%
1000-5000 5000-10,000 10000- 15000
Above 15,000 Nil
31
3. FREQUENCY OF BUYING CLOTHES
BELOW 18 YEARS
MALE FEMALE
Figure No: 13 Figure No: 14
BETWEEN 18-35 YEARS
Figure No: 15ABOVE 35 YEARS Figure No: 16
Figure No: 17 Figure No: 18
1/ week 1/ month
1/3 months
1/ 6 months
1/year
2
5
3 3 3
1/ week 1/ month
1/3 months
1/ 6 months
1/year
2
6
3
1
3
1/ week 1/ month
1/3 months
1/ 6 months
1/year
2
34
25
17
3
1/ week 1/ month
1/3 months
1/ 6 months
1/year
14
35
20
4 3
1/ week 1/ month
1/3 months
1/ 6 months
1/year
1
10 11
18
11
1/ week 1/ month
1/3 months
1/ 6 months
1/year
1
56
8
2
32
4. DECISION MAKER ON BUYING CLOTHES
BELOW 18 YEARS
MALE FEMALE
Figure No: 19 Figure No: 20
BETWEEN 18-35 YEARS
Figure No: 21ABOVE 35 YEARS Figure No: 22
Figure No: 23 Figure No: 24
012345678
Below 5 years
5 -15 years
Above 15
years
Yourself Wife Father Mother Kids
01234567
Below 5 years
5 -15 years
Above 15
years
YourselfHusband Father Mother Kids
0102030405060
Below 5 years
5 -15 years
Above 15
years
Yourself Wife Father Mother Kids
05
10152025303540
Below 5 years
5 -15 years
Above 15
years
YourselfHusbandFather Mother Kids
05
101520253035
Below 5 years
5 -15 years
Above 15
years
Yourself Wife Father Mother Kids
02468
101214
Below 5 years
5 -15 years
Above 15
years
YourselfHusbandFather Mother Kids
33
5. MARKET PREFERENCE
BELOW 18 YEARS
MALE FEMALE
Figure No: 25 Figure No: 26
BETWEEN 18-35 YEARS
Figure No: 27 ABOVE 35 YEARS Figure No: 28
Figure No: 29 Figure No: 30
27%
46%
7%
13%0% 7%
M.G. Road Lal Bazaar
Paani House High way
Nam Nang Road Deorali
27%
46%
7%
13%0% 7%
M.G. Road Lal Bazaar
Paani House High way
Nam Nang Road Deorali
40%
36%
8%
9%3% 4%
M.G. Road Lal Bazaar
Paani House High way
Nam Nang Road Deorali
45%
38%
10% 1% 6% 0%
M.G. Road Lal Bazaar
Paani House High way
Nam Nang Road Deorali
29%
57%
2% 4% 4% 4%
M.G. Road Lal Bazaar
Paani House High way
Nam Nang Road Deorali
48%
35%
9% 0%4% 4%
M.G. Road Lal Bazaar
Paani House High way
Nam Nang Road Deorali
34
6. PREFERENCE OF TYPE OF CLOTHES
BELOW 18 YEARS
MALE FEMALE
Figure No: 31 BETWEEN 18-35 YEARS Figure No: 32
Figure No: 33 ABOVE 35 YEARS Figure No: 34
Figure No: 35 Figure No: 36
38%
31%
25%
6%
Western Formal Western Casual
Indian formal Indian casual
19%
25%
19%
37%
Western Formal Western Casual
Indian formal Indian casual
19%
34%28%
19%
Western Formal Western Casual
Indian formal Indian casual
20%
37%21%
22%
Western Formal Western Casual
Indian formal Indian casual
5%
22%
35%
38%
Western Formal Western Casual
Indian formal Indian casual
8%
17%
29%
46%
Western Formal Western Casual
Indian formal Indian casual
35
7. PREFERENCE OF OUTFITS
BELOW 18 YEARS
MALE FEMALE
Figure No: 37 Figure No: 38
BETWEEN 18-35 YEARS
Figure No: 39 ABOVE 35 YEARS Figure No: 40
Figure No: 41 Figure No: 42
Traditional/Bakhau
Indian Ethnic
Western Casual
Western Formal
2
6
5
1
Traditional/Bakhau
Indian Ethnic
Western Casual
Western Formal
1
7
5
3
Traditional/Bakhau
Indian Ethnic
Western Casual
Western Formal
13
33
36
14
Traditional/Bakhau
Indian Ethnic
Western Casual
Western Formal
22
22
39
5
Traditional/Bakhau
Indian Ethnic
Western Casual
Western Formal
5
34
13
1
Traditional/Bakhau
Indian Ethnic
Western Casual
Western Formal
11
9
2
1
36
8. PREFERENCE OF WESTERN CASUAL BRANDS
BELOW 18 YEARS
MALE FEMALE
Figure No: 43 BETWEEN 18-35 YEARS Figure No: 44
Figure No: 45 ABOVE 35 YEARS Figure No: 46
Figure No: 47 Figure No: 48
Denim
Levi's
Lee
Pepe Jeans
Others
Don't Prefer Brands
Don't wear Western Casual
2
5
2
0
4
2
1
Denim
Levi's
Lee
Pepe Jeans
Others
Don't Prefer Brands
Don't wear Western Casual
3
1
4
1
3
2
1
Denim
Levi's
Lee
Pepe Jeans
Others
Don't Prefer Brands
Don't wear Western Casual
9
41
15
9
17
5
11
Denim
Levi's
Lee
Pepe Jeans
Others
Don't Prefer Brands
Don't wear Western Casual
6
28
11
10
27
2
1
Denim
Levi's
Lee
Pepe Jeans
Others
Don't Prefer Brands
Don't buy Western Casual
2
10
3
2
13
15
3
Denim
Levi's
Lee
Pepe Jeans
Others
Don't Prefer Brands
Don't buy Western Casual
2
7
1
0
4
4
3
37
9. PREFERENCE OF WESTERN FORMAL BRANDS
BELOW 18 YEARS
MALE FEMALE
Figure No: 49BETWEEN 18-35 YEARS Figure No: 50
Figure No: 51 Figure No: 52
ABOVE 35 YEARS
Figure No: 53 Figure No: 54
Van Heusen
The Raymond Shop
Allen Solly
Others
Don't Prefer Brands
Don't wear Western Formal
3
1
3
4
3
1
Van Heusen
The Raymond Shop
Allen Solly
Others
Don't Prefer Brands
Don't wear Western Formal
3
2
0
7
2
1
Van Heusen
The Raymond Shop
Allen Solly
Others
Don't Prefer Brands
Don't wear Western Formal
9
18
20
17
16
2
Van Heusen
The Raymond Shop
Allen Solly
Others
Don't Prefer Brands
Don't wear Western Formal
6
16
26
24
4
2
Van Heusen
The Raymond Shop
Allen Solly
Others
Don't Prefer Brands
Don't buy Western Formal
3
9
5
14
19
0
Van Heusen
The Raymond Shop
Allen Solly
Others
Don't Prefer Brands
Don't buy Western Formal
0
5
2
4
3
8
38
10. PREFERENCE OF PURCHASING DUPLICATES
BELOW 18 YEARS
MALE FEMALE
Figure No: 55 BETWEEN 18-35 YEARS Figure No: 56
57
Figure No: 57 ABOVE 35 YEARS Figure No: 58
Figure No: 59 Figure No: 60
53%
47%
Yes No
20%
80%
Yes No
22%
78%
Yes No
17%
83%
Yes No
16%
84%
Yes No
24%
76%
Yes No
39
APPENDIX
SURVEY QUESTIONAIRRE
AGE: below 18 ( ) between 18-34 ( ) above 35 ( )
SEX: Male ( ) Female ( )
OCCUPATION: Service () Business () Student ( ) Home-maker ( ) Unemployed ( )
Average Monthly Income: Please specify separately
Only your own:
Household Income:
Please mark your most preferred choice:
1. Shopping Items Monthly Budget
Groceries 1000-5000( ) 5000-10000( ) 10000-15000( ) Above 15000( )
Clothes 1000-5000( ) 5000-10000( ) 10000-15000( ) Above 15000( )
Households 1000-5000( ) 5000-10000( ) 10000-15000( ) Above 15000( )
Food 1000-5000( ) 5000-10000( ) 10000-15000( ) Above 15000( )
2. Who is the decision maker in the family when it comes to buying clothes?
Yourself ( )
Husband/ Wife ( )
Father ( )
Mother ( )
Children Below 5 years ( ) 5 to 15 years( ) Above 15 years( )
40
3. How frequently do you purchase clothes?
Once in a week ( )
Once in a month ( )
Once in three months ( )
Once in six months ( )
Once in a year ( )
4. Who do you purchase clothes for? You may tick both.
Yourself ( )
Others (please specify):
Don’t buy clothes ( )
5. Which is your favourite shopping market in Gangtok?
M.G. Road ( )
Lal Bazaar ( )
Paani House ( )
High way ( )
Nam Nang Road ( )
Deorali ( )
6. What kind of clothes do you buy?
Western- formal ( )
Western casual ( )
Indian formal ( )
Indian casual ( )
7. What kind of outfit do you prefer? You can choose more than one.
Traditional/ Bakhau ( )
Indian ethnic ( )
Western casuals ( )
Western formals ( )
41
8. What brands do you prefer for western casual?
Denim ( )
Levi’s ( )
Lee ( )
Pepe Jeans ( )
Others ( ) Please specify:
Don’t Prefer Brands( ) Why?
Don’t wear western casual ( )
9. Which brand do you prefer for a western formal wear?
Van Heusen ( )
The Raymond Shop ( )
Allen Solly ( )
Others ( ) Please specify:
Don’t Prefer Brands ( ) Why?
Don’t wear western formal ( )
10. Would you prefer to buy fakes?
No ( )
Yes ( ) If yes,why ?
42
CONCLUSION
In our study of the consumption patterns of clothes in Gangtok, theories in symbolic
interactionism and cultural sociology provide us an understanding of the inter-relationship
between, individual and group in producing consumer cultures that create distinctive
identities of class and status.The brand choices of individuals are influenced by the
interaction of self and society, i.e.presentation of self and perception of others. Our choices
of what to buy to an extent is determined by ideas of fashion, which says Simmel (1904), is
governed by motives of imitation and distinction, which are transmitted vertically to the
community by a particular social circle. For both individuals and groups, it is a system of
social cohesion that allows the individual’s membership of a group to be dialectically
reconciled with his relative independence. Much later, Bourdieu (1984) too has argued in
his Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste, that tastes in food, culture and
presentation are indicators of class because trends in their consumption seemingly
correlate with an individual’s fit in society. Bourdieu himself believes class distinction and
preferences are “most marked in the ordinary choices of everyday existence, such as
furniture, clothing, or cooking, which are particularly revealing of deep-rooted and long-
standing dispositions because, lying outside the scope of the educational system, they have
to be confronted, as it were, by naked taste.” Therefore, we believed that explorations in
branding and consumer culture provide us an insight into the interrelationship of economy
and society.
For the people of Gangtok, the priority is to feel and look good. Dressing up is not just a
choice but a habit. All of us live surrounded by mirrors. In them, we seek reassurance of our
capacity to captivate or impress others, anxiously searching out blemishes that might
detract from the appearance we intend to project. According to Simmel, fashion is a
product of class distinction. For fashion to exist, society must be stratified, some members
must be perceived as inferior or superior - or simply as worthy or unworthy of being
imitated. And as far as the "inferior one" imitates their direct "superior" and never vice
versa, the conclusion is: "... fashion - i.e., the latest fashion affects only the upper classes."
43
Distinction and imitation are thus two faces of the same coin: one imitates an idealized
other in order to distinguish oneself from the rest, and also by changing ones imitative
allegiance.George Simmel articulates beautifully an idea that fashion is a social creation and
serves as an indication of social class. Fashion is not just about clothing, it’s also about
sending a message to those around you. Depending on how someone is styled, different
inferences can be made about that person. Fashion changes quickly, so it’s fairly apparent
when someone is wearing an “outdated” look. Outdated looks are often associated with
lower social classes. Clothes also show wear, so when someone is wearing damaged
clothing; this is an indicator of a lower social class as well. Clothing also has labels, which
indicate class more explicitly because they can indicate the cost of a garment. In Gangtok
and most society in North East, people judge others by their outer appearance, therefore, if
a person has a bad fashion taste, he is not smart, and might end up being teased by others
or people might laugh behind his back. Therefore no one wants to look bad in front of
anyone, so, they usually choose a matching and contrast pair even for their casual wear.
Dressing up is the way of showing respect to others. They need to look presentable when
they are to meet or seen by others.In North-East, there is a strong perception of a lady i.e.
to look pretty all the time. A lady should look presentable to anyone, otherwise she is not fit
for her role.
According to our survey results, the majority of people below 18 years age group prefer to
buy fakes or duplicate clothes because they find it easier to use the clothes and throw them
once the new trends come in. Since the fashion trends change every 6 months youngsters
wear unbranded cheap clothes that provide more variety. Therefore, fashion is not about
utility, rather it is the way to show one’s identity.However, according to our survey and
interviews, we can say that local markets pose a challenge to brand retailers. Unbranded
clothes are preferred because people find them attractive as they are cheap, provide more
variety and can be used as ‘Use and throw’.The major reason why people prefer unbranded
clothes is that fashion changes, so people like to be updated according to new trends.Also,
‘Looks’are considered more important than ‘Quality’. However, the best part of our
experience was that People are very nice and helpful, we really enjoy their warm
hospitality to us.
44
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Goffman, E. (1959). Presentation Of Self In Everyday Life. Peter Smith Publisher
Bourdieu, P. (1979). Distinction: A Social Critique Of The Judgment Of Taste. Harvard
University Press
Simmel, G. (1957). The American Journal Of Sociology, Vol 62, No 6. The University Of
Chicago Press
Alexander, C. Norman and G. Knight (1971), "Situated Identities and Social Psychological
Experimentation," Sociometry, 34, 65-82.
Cooley, Charles. H. (1902), Human Nature and the Social Order, New York: Scribner.
Alexander, C. Norman and P. Lauderdale (1973), "Situated Identities and Social Influence,"
Sociometry, 40, 225-233.
Alexander, C. Norman and Mary A. Wiley (1981), "Situated Activity and Identity Formation," in
Social Psychology: Sociological Perspectives, eds. Morris Rosenberg and Ralph Turner,New York:
Basic Books.
Bauer, Raymond (1960), "Consumer Behavior as Risk Taking," in Proceedings, ed. M. L. Bell,
Chicago: American Marketing Association.
Birdwell, Al E. (1968), "A Study of Influence of Image Congruence on Consumer Choice," Journal
of Business, 41 (January), 76-88.
Boune, Francis S. (1957), "Group Influence in Marketing and Public Relations," in Some
Applications of Behavioral Research, eds. R. Likert and S. P. Hayes, Unesco, Paris.
Brody, Robert and Scott M. Cunningham (1968), "Personality Variables and Consumer Decision
Making Process," Journal of Marketing Research, 5 (February), 50-57.
Copeland, M. T. (1923), "Relation of Consumers' Buying Habits to Marketing Methods," Harvard
Business Review, 1. 282-289.
45
Cox, Donald F. (1967), "Clues for Advertising Strategies," in Risk Taking and Information
Handling in Consumer Behavior, ed. D. F. Cox, Boston: Harvard University Press, 112-151.
Dolich, Ira J. (1969), "Congruence Relationship Between Self Image and Product Brands,"
Journal of Marketing Research, 6 (February), 80-84.
Sennett, Richard (1977),The Fall of Public Man, Publisher W.W. Norton & Company;
Reissue edition (June 17, 1992)
Fashion Trends in Gangtok, Sikkim (India)
Picture 1:“We don't need fashion to survive; we just desire it so much.” ~Marc Jacobs (Creative Director, Louis Vuitton)
Picture 2:"I like being a woman, even in a man’s world. After all, men can’t wear dresses, but we can wear the pants."
~Whitney Houston
Picture 3: “I want everyone to wear what they want and mix it in their own way. That,
to me, is what is modern.” ~Karl Lagerfeld (Creative Director, Chanel)
Picture 4: School girls wearing smart uniforms with coloured hair and short skirts on Nam Nang Roag, Gangtok
Picture 5: An old woman above 35 years wearing traditional Bakhau dress with
people in the background sitting on the bencheson M.G. Road, Gangtok
Picture 6: AnOldlady walking down Lal Bazaar market wearing a full length
traditionalBakhau
Picture 7:A middle aged woman wearing Indian Ethnic Suit with sweater
Picture 8: A young girl wearing a leather jacket andboots filling up the survey
questionnaire while sitting on bench on Nam Nang Road
Picture 9: Popular brand stores in Gangtok include Reebok, Big Bazaar, Puma, Allen
Solly , The Raymond Shop and Alamode
Picture 10: Levis is the most preferred brand for Western Casuals among males and
females between 18-35 years.
Picture 11 :A stock of unbranded shirts and jeans displayed inside and outside a
store in Kanchanjunga Complex, Lal Bazaar
Picture 12:Influence of Korean fashion is immense as retailers imitate the looks in
unbranded clothes
Picture 13: Zipper is the most famous and sought- after shop for trendy and latest
clothes among the youth in Gangtok