Cultural appropriation in fashion is the adoption of visual or material elements from one culture by members of another, typically more privileged, culture.
The term formalized in academic discourse during the 1990s but gained a public dimension significantly later—with the rise of social media and the amplification of voices from communities whose cultural codes had been used for decades without attribution.
In fashion, appropriation operates through several schemas. A luxury brand releases footwear that reproduces the shape of traditional Kolhapuri slippers without naming the source. A designer showcases headwear sacred to the indigenous peoples of North America on a runway as a decorative element. Prints that have belonged to a specific community for centuries appear in mass-market items without a license or compensation to the artisans. The underlying logic is the same: a cultural element is detached from the context that imbues it with meaning and is converted into an aesthetic resource.
The line between appropriation and cultural exchange is one of the most debated issues in contemporary fashion discourse. Critics of the concept point out that cultures have always borrowed from one another and that prohibiting the use of others' creations is a form of essentialism. Proponents counter that the issue is not the act of borrowing itself, but who benefits, who remains invisible, and whether there is historical inequality between the parties. It is the asymmetry of power—not the mere crossing of cultural borders—that turns exchange into appropriation.
In recent years, the industry has developed several ways of responding: collaborations with artisans from the source culture, direct attribution, royalty payments, and co-creation. None of these fully resolves the issue—but all of them shift the logic away from mere «inspiration» toward accountability.
Photo: Gucci FW2018
