A Bag of Remembrance: A Cultural Biography of Red-White-Blue, from Hong Kong to Louis Vuitton

Stamped with its renowned logo, could the 2007 Louis Vuitton laundry bag – a replica of the ubiquitous plaid plastic carrier bag – be an ironic visual pun in response to the countless Chinese market stalls that had relentlessly ripped off their infamous ‘LV’ design? With its little-known origin in Hong Kong via Japan and Taiwan, the striped polyethylene material of the laundry bag, or migrant bag, was first used for burlap-type sacks or tarpaulin in the construction industry of Hong Kong, where it was subsequently made into carrier bags. In the 1970s and 1980s, plaid plastic carrier bags were often used to transport food and necessities from Hong Kong to mainland China through Shenzhen, the first city after crossing the British-Chinese border. Today, it is the plaid carrying bag that continues to be used widely in China and throughout the world. Commonly known as ‘Red-White-Blue’ in Hong Kong, the bag is imbued with symbolic meaning associated with the ‘local spirit’ of an industrious, trading city built by a ‘hardy and hard-working people’. In Hong Kong, the bag is emblematic of the city’s colonial days and serves as a potent symbol of an ever-changing city that seems to be perpetually under construction. The shortage of land and rising property prices in Hong Kong restricted the cluster of small producers of Red-White-Blue bags, who could not expand to develop economies of scale. Over the past two decades, the manufacturing of the bag has moved to mainland China to take advantage of low-cost labour and cheaper production facilities. The worldwide dissemination of inexpensive products made in China means that the Red-White-Blue carrier bag has found a global audience. Its little-known origin in Hong Kong permits new users to imagine new meanings for the bag; because of its low retail price and widespread availability, Red-White-Blues primarily suit the needs of the migrant, and is found in different corners of the world. The bag has different names in different countries, and has taken on new meanings in various localities. In the United States, it is called the ‘Chinatown tote’; in Trinidad, the ‘Guyanese Samsonite’; in Germany, ‘Türkenkoffer’, which translates as the ‘Turkish suitcase’; in the United Kingdom, ‘Bangladeshi bag’; in South Africa, ‘Zimbabwe bag’; in Thailand, ‘Rainbow bag’, and in Nigeria and Ghana, ‘Ghana must go bag’. This chapter discusses the extent to which a Chinese export has played a part in the realities and identities of varied communities, as well as the re-fashioning of Chinese exports into a fashion commodity. It traces the origin and development of Red-White-Blue, and its connotations and cultural significance to Hong Kong and communities across several continents. Through its biography, this chapter unpacks how various communities adopted and (re)interpreted their versions of Red-White-Blue bags. The chapter concludes with a discussion of Louis Vuitton’s replica of this plaid bag. The questions addressed here include authenticity, cultural identity, and the power dynamic between high and low culture. Specifically, the chapter juxtaposes Western fashion institutions and Asian street culture, and examines the relationship of Chinese production to the European-American fashion system. The analysis draws on empirical and ethnographic research, including interviews with makers and users, and detailed readings of the contemporary global fashion scene as represented in the traditional press and on the Web

Nationalism, Women and their China: What more the Chinese talk about when they talk about the qipao?

Recent years saw the proliferation of qipao exhibition in Hong Kong (2016, 2013, 2010), Taipei (2013) and Singapore (2012). All of which have seemingly different curatorial directions. What was transmitted through these qipao shows? Beyond the Chinese bodily appearance, what did the dress convey in different Chinese regions? This essay will commence with a brief history of the dress, followed by discussion of exhibitions in Hong Kong, Singapore and Taipei addressing the relation of Chinese women’s bodily appearance to their identities and perceived locality

Korea Vs Paris: There is no Fashion, Only Image or How to Make Fashion Identity

It is true, to a certain extent, that "the identity of a fashion centre is constituted not by a particular national style or regional costume, but by the localised capabilities that produce new styles or redefine old ones. Such capabilities include the presence of key industry activities – production, design marketing and distribution… [and] the interaction and coordination between industry actors" (Rantisi 2015: 261). For a viable fashion centre, several key factors are believed to be fundamental (ibid). They can be categorised as (a) place-specific elements, namely training and research institutes, cluster of skill and specialised subcontractors, promotional infrastructure and links between fashion and other cultural industries (Scott 2002); (b) fashion centre as a site for consumption (Gilbert 2006) and (c) the interaction and coordination within the fashion industry. In recent years, emerging fashion centres from Seoul to Stockholm to Shanghai to Hong Kong have taken production, design marketing, distribution, consumption and links within and across the fashion industry as key infrastructure for the construction of their own fashion system. Yet, can an identity for a fashion centre be constituted without a distinctive look and/or an outstanding style? How did a recognisable style or look be constituted in the first place? Is there a mechanism for its construction? This article discusses the construction of fashion identity through two cases: Paris and Korea. While Paris provides a definitive checklist constituting to a viable fashion identity, the rise of Korean fashion provides an alternative insight into its making in the 21st century

Italianerie: transculturality, co- creation and transforming identities between Italy and Asia

By exploring the processes and the effects of transculturality and co-creation on the transforming identities of Italy and/in Asia and vice-versa, we aim to go beyond both the scholarship on Orientalism and the J’accuse of the Post-modern critique, which often seem to recreate a dichotomous vision of the European-style Othering of Asia. We intend to offer instead a new approach to understanding the dynamics behind the multiple encounters and the uncanny enchantment (or disenchantment, perhaps) with Italy-in-Asia and Asia-in-Italy. Extending from the original French word and concept of Chinoiserie (the Eighteenth-century European ‘fascination for China’), this special issue introduces the concept and analytical-interpretive paradigm of Italianerie. Italianerie has been taken both as a possible theoretical framework and as an intellectual provocation for our contributors to analyse the relation between Italy and Asia, as well as the intrigue of Italy in Asia and vice-versa. We argue that the ‘fascination for Italy’ and its specific cultural materiality go both ways, from Italy to Asia and vice-versa, shedding light on the multiple connections, comparisons and circulations of people, goods and ideas through a global, interconnected method of inquiry

Fashion-making and co-creation in the transglobal landscape: Sino-Italian fashion as method

The ‘making’ of fashion cannot merely refer to garment production and manufacturing. It is the prerequisite for a nation to actively participate in the global stage. To establish a ‘recognisable’ fashion image, a country must go far beyond the competition of a specialised garment and textile industry. Being recognised as the ‘author countries’ for fashion creation is part of a process in which the (re)negotiation of national hierarchies and roles are constantly at play. For a country or a city, expressing an instantly recognisable aesthetic has become an important corollary to communicate political and economic strength. More than in the past centuries, fashion has been tasked with not only reflecting and representing social or individual needs, but also constructing ex novo territories in which old stereotypes and imaginer are creatively set free. This is because, unlike most production and commercial activities, fashion expresses an elaborate culture whose composition of symbols, ideologies and lifestyles (Crane 2004) can be drawn on. On the other hand, the accelerated production relocation in past decades has irrevocably changed the geography of fashion, as well as the rhetoric of the origin of national creativity. In particular, it leads one to wonder what happens when two or more players are engaged in the making of fashion. Specifically, what happens when Italy and China collaborate in transglobal fashion-making? How does one account for the national creativity that has sprung from the Sino-Italian co-creation? Drawing on the accounts of Italian fashion and Chinese fashion, this article discusses the intricacy of Sino-Italian collaboration and the entails of such a fashion co-creation, through which, a reflection on transglobal fashion-making is made with the proposition of a framework for its examination

Critical studies in global fashion

An issue on Global Fashion is very much needed given the crucial transition facing the disciplines of fashion in recent times, in the attempt to give an account of the increasing complexity of the material and symbolic flows of fashion. No other form of commerce, arguably, can claim to be more pervasive throughout the globe than the textile and apparel business, and no other visual culture is more pervasive than fashion. But global fashion is not simply about the global dissemination of dress and fashion. For most fashion theorists, global fashion should not be defined merely as brand circulation or the international expansion of Western fashion. What is more, the interchanges of fashion imply an understanding of the circulation of technologies, objects, and ideas around fashion

Critical Studies in Global Fashion

An issue on Global Fashion is very much needed given the crucial transition facing the disciplines offashion in recent times, in the attempt to give an account of the increasing complexity of the materialand symbolic flows of fashion. No other form of commerce, arguably, can claim to be more pervasivethroughout the globe than the textile and apparel business,1and no other visual culture is more pervasivethan fashion. Butglobalfashion is not simply about the global dissemination of dress and fashion. Formost fashion theorists, global fashion should not be defined merely as brand circulation or the interna-tional expansion of Western fashion. What is more, the interchanges of fashion imply an understandingof the circulation of technologies, objects, and ideas around fashio