The Clothed Body and Alessandro Michele's idea of Genderless Gucci

When analyzing the fashion phenomenon, we are operating in the terms of Fashion Theory, that is "an interdisciplinary field which conceives fashion as a system of meaning within which cultural and aesthetic depictions of the covered body are reproduced" (Calefato, 2007).

It's advisable, before moving on with our analysis, to try to understand what sociologist Patrizia Calefato meant when talking of the clothed body (corpo rivestito), a definition she made a whole book for: Il Corpo Rivestito (1986). The scholar starts her dissertation with the assumption that the body, even if physically naked, is actually covered with cultural meanings and, thus, never is a neutral biological reality: make up and shaving, tattoos and tans ... all these elements clothe the body, shaping one's identity and creating a dense weaving of information and messages that are transmitted to anyone that looks at it.

It's precisely because of this intrinsic characteristic of the human body that nudity is perceived as a form of protest: "Walking naked into a public place occupied by those wearing clothing is a simple and elemental method of dissent" (Benda, 2020).

The bare-breasted protes in Nigeria led by women victims of abuse and violence makes a good example; in this case, the nudity had the purpose of speaking out against the Nigerian society's indifference to said abuses and claiming the right to physical integrity.

And more, the feminine and feminist movement #freethenipple that started to spread in the United States since 2012 and that supports female topless legality.

In both cases, the (female) nipple - even though is just an anatomical structure of the human body common tho both the male and the female one - represents centuries of female body regulation that has always confined women in a subordinate position compared to men.

In fact, from the human sciences literature one finds that the bodies' behaviors, morphology and physiology are the outcome of processes that have occurred and through which each society acts on human bodies shaping them, clothing them.

These processes start from implicit social representations (of the body) that exert a normalizing function (Sciolla, Torrioni, 2020). There are numerous examples that validate this claim: from the pale skin - purposely not exposed to the Sun - as a sign of belonging to the high society to the female total-body shaving because naked skin is still associated to the idea of femininity (the connection comes from the idea of shaving as personal care - a practice associated for centuries to women's frivolousness). Even more explicitly, clothing - understood as a language - covers the body with signs and meanings, transforming it into a symbolic surface. As Patrizia Calefato states, “clothing is the architecture of the body: the designer creates axonometries and forms that give rise to actual constructions” (Calefato, 1986, p. 10). Each garment thus becomes a device of meaning, capable of communicating identity, belonging, and intention. The only exception to this semantic charge appears to be the uniform which " can be conceived as an impersonal sign, neutral, that and renounces what would make the individual unique and recognizable" (Calefato 2000, p. 193).

The body - clothed in garments - conveys, in particular, information related to gender. In fact, male and female bodies have undergone different forms of discipline, closely tied to the meanings of being a man or a woman, which are learned through socialization. This is evident in the differing shapes and functions of clothing designed for different genders: “the sexualization of clothing was oriented in a utilitarian sense, as Veblen has extensively explained: male clothing allowed action, while female clothing restricted it” (Attimonelli 2007, p. 16).

Already in ancient Greece and Crete—but especially from the 16th century onwards, following its adoption by Catherine de’ Medici at the French court—the female body was constrained by the corset, justified by the supposed need for correct posture to ensure good health. However, this rationale concealed the true purpose of the garment: to limit women’s movements deemed inappropriate according to a specific sexual morality which prescribed a woman’s purity as a necessary requirement to secure a good marriage. The body has always been "subjected to deformations and pain in order to satisfy the gaze and pleasure" (Calefato 1986, p. 18) or, as in this case, morality.

In The Function of Folk Dress in Moravian Slovakia, written in 1937, Bogatyrëv argues that “clothing is a sign insofar as wearing it corresponds to precise functions […] when the dominant function is very strong, it manages to neutralize the others” (ibid.). In this case, “it is the aesthetic function that cancels out the practical one” (ibid.).

Going back to the question of gender, even today—as noted by Lurie—“the sexualization of clothing begins with the assignment of the layette” (Lurie 2007, p. 206). Everything for the girl is strictly pale pink—a color associated with emotional and sentimental dimensions—while the baby boy’s layette is light blue—a color linked to action—signifying that “the girl will deal with emotional life” (ibid.), whereas the boy will be expected to work hard.

Gender distinctions persist in clothing: from the way garments are fastened (right side for men, left side for women) to their size and shape. Men’s clothing tends to add volume to the figure—for example, blazers with padded shoulders—communicating physical dominance, a situation in which “agent A communicates to opponent B, or to other participants or bystanders: ‘I have more power than you’” (D’Errico, Poggi 2020, p. 79); a form of power which—socially and culturally—has historically been attributed to men rather than women.

One of the Creative Directors who truly challenged gender norms is Alessandro Michele, famously known because of his work for Gucci from 2015 to 2022 (now Valentino's CD since 2024).

While he was still working for Gucci, Michele was interviewed by journalist and fashion critic Alexander Fury in occasion for the Fashion Masculinities Exhibition at the V&A Museum.

It was the perfect opportunity for him to - as Federica Salto (2022) wrote - "reiterate his way of making fashion. A way that transcends gender not to unify it but to exalt every facet of it".

Indeed, when talking about unisex clothing, he stated:

It’s not a term I particularly like, just as I don’t like the idea of creating clothes for women or for men. To me, it’s more about designing clothes for human beings. We’re here talking about fashion masculinities precisely because there isn’t just one way of being a man (or a woman)—far from it. And in this sense, it’s quite striking that the suit—traditionally the ultimate symbol of masculinity, and later of the powerful, masculine woman—has now become a medium through which to speak about different identities.

This was thoroughly visible in his A/W 2020 Men Collection called Masculine Plural, an ode to masculine freedom as it was possible to read in the show notes:

It’s time to celebrate a man who is free to practise self-determination, without social constraints, without authoritarian sanctions, without suffocating stereotypes.

"A man who is able to reconnect with his core of fragility, with his trembling and his tenderness" was the protagonist of Michele's concept and, thus, runway.

This collections was definetly appreciated by whom we could call Michele's muse: Harry Styles, who chose Gucci to make his 2021 (Love on) Tour wardrobe. One of these looks actually came directly from the runway we previously talked about: a white and light blue checkered dress with little red hearts and strawberries decorating it. The dress was chosen for the concert that was held on Halloween's night, paired with red tights with open-work embroidery and a pair of red sparkly boots resembling a pair of ballerinas so that Styles could take on the appearance of Dorothy from The Wizard of Oz.

---

Our sources

Attimonelli, C., 2007, Introduzione. Dalla Fashion Theory alla Fashion Practice, in A. Lurie, Il Linguaggio dei vestiti, Roma, Armando editore.

Calefato, P., 2007, Fashion Theory, "Dizionario degli Studi Culturali", StudiCulturali.it

Calefato, P., 1986, Il Corpo Rivestito, Bari, Edizioni dal Sud

Calefato, P., 2000, Segni dell’Ordine, Segni del Disordine: le Altre Uniformi, in F. Bonami, M. L. Frisa, S. Tonchi, a cura, Uniforme Ordine e Disordine, Milano, Edizioni Charta.

D'Errico, F., poggi, I., 2020, Comunicazione Multimodale e Influenza Sociale, Roma, Carocci editore.

Benda, C., 2021, Dressing the Resistance, New York, Princeton Architectural Press.

Lurie, A., 2007, Il Linguaggio dei vestiti, Roma, Armando editore.

Salto, F., 2022, «Non creo abiti per donne o uomini ma per esseri umani». In conversazione con Alessandro Michele, "Vogue Italia"

Sciolla, L., Torrioni, P. M., 2020, Sociologia dei Processi Culturali, Bologna, Società editrice il Mulino

---

PART OF THIS POST/ARTICLE WAS TAKEN FROM MY BACHELOR'S THESIS IN VISUAL STUDIES AND DIGITALS CULTURE.

THUS, I WOULD LIKE TO THANK AND ALSO CREDIT MY INCREDIBLE RAPPORTEUR!

ALL THE TRANSLATIONS FROM ITALIAN INTO ENGLISH WERE MADE BY THE AUTHOR OF THIS POST!