4 ms·

From a former Gap exec: > How did your time at The Gap shape your thinking about what you do at Herman Miller? > I interviewed a guy who became my head of dig

From a former Gap exec: > How did your time at The Gap shape your thinking about what you do at Herman Miller? > I interviewed a guy who became my head of digital. He had worked in retail, and he said, “Do you know what excites me most about coming to this industry? I feel like I’m going from making landfill to making heirlooms.” The fashion industry is the landfill industry.

helloplanets 5y ago
Making a generalization off of that specific anecdote is pretty unfair IMO, there's a huge difference between Gap and Herman Miller. Gap is closer to IKEA while Herman Miller is closer to a well tailored suit. A range of quality exists in both industries.
ryanlol 5y ago
The fast fashion industry is the landfill industry.
homero 5y ago
Much less toxic than most landfill though
- qmmmur 5y ago
  In what sense? Clothes contain tonnes of a chemicals which break down when left in the ground and the rate which we are dumping them is disgusting.
  - ClumsyPilot 5y ago
    A cotton t-shitt doesn't contain 'chemicals', but a synthetic one is obviously made of microplastic, and it's manufacturing process might produce them and release them .
    - colinjoy 5y ago
      that statement is false for the majority of cotton clothing. from dyes to preservation or even agents that prevent wrinkles, a new cotton shirt can be blessed with a nice array of potentially carcinogenic substances. and since you mention the manufacturing process: look up some studies on the deaths and environmental havoc caused by pesticides used in cotton production. chemicals are everywhere.
      - ClumsyPilot 5y ago
        Dyes are meant to be non-toxic, pesticides are super dangerous, but they are meant to decay in a few weeks, I dont know anything aboit wrincle agents.
        teclordphrack2 5y ago
        "Dyes are meant to be non-toxic" On a shirt? Yes. In your drinking water? No.
globular-toast 5y ago
There is also the water consumption. One cotton t-shirt uses more than 2000 litres of water. That's about a month's worth of daily showers. It wouldn't be too bad if the garment would last 10+ years, but they don't. Unfortunately the people (mostly women) who drive this are addicted to the churn of clothes. It's not about a basic need to be warm and protected. It's about maintaining a constant source of novelty by buying new clothes almost every week. In my experience, half of the clothes they buy don't fit and/or they don't like them when they get them home. When I was little my mum used to buy most our clothes second hand from car boot sales and the like. I can't believe people buy brand new children's clothes. You know they are going to grow out of them. Unfortunately, in the UK at least, second-hand clothes have been largely stigmatised and many people won't even consider them. I have recently seen apps which specialise in second-hand clothes. This would be great but I think it's going to take a lot to convince people not to think of clothes and consumables.
- himinlomax 5y ago
  > There is also the water consumption. One cotton t-shirt uses more than 2000 litres of water. That's about a month's worth of daily showers. It wouldn't be too bad if the garment would last 10+ years, but they don't. What does that even mean? Does the water just disappear?
  - jonplackett 5y ago
    No but it had to be turned into fresh water suitable for use which uses energy and also can’t be used by someone else. There are water shortages all over the place.
    - himinlomax 5y ago
      Well those areas with low water shouldn't be used to grow cotton, like almonds shouldn't be grown in water-poor California to make vegan milk ersatz. Instead, cattle adapted to grazing in those arid areas could be a better and more environmentally friendly use of the land.
bgeeek 5y ago
For me that depends on the position in the market. I doubt some of the major clothes designers feel quite the same way.

helloplanets 5y ago

Making a generalization off of that specific anecdote is pretty unfair IMO, there's a huge difference between Gap and Herman Miller. Gap is closer to IKEA while Herman Miller is closer to a well tailored suit. A range of quality exists in both industries.

ryanlol 5y ago

The fast fashion industry is the landfill industry.

homero 5y ago

Much less toxic than most landfill though

qmmmur 5y ago
In what sense? Clothes contain tonnes of a chemicals which break down when left in the ground and the rate which we are dumping them is disgusting.
- ClumsyPilot 5y ago
  A cotton t-shitt doesn't contain 'chemicals', but a synthetic one is obviously made of microplastic, and it's manufacturing process might produce them and release them .
  - colinjoy 5y ago
    that statement is false for the majority of cotton clothing. from dyes to preservation or even agents that prevent wrinkles, a new cotton shirt can be blessed with a nice array of potentially carcinogenic substances. and since you mention the manufacturing process: look up some studies on the deaths and environmental havoc caused by pesticides used in cotton production. chemicals are everywhere.
    - ClumsyPilot 5y ago
      Dyes are meant to be non-toxic, pesticides are super dangerous, but they are meant to decay in a few weeks, I dont know anything aboit wrincle agents.
      - teclordphrack2 5y ago
        "Dyes are meant to be non-toxic" On a shirt? Yes. In your drinking water? No.

globular-toast 5y ago

There is also the water consumption. One cotton t-shirt uses more than 2000 litres of water. That's about a month's worth of daily showers. It wouldn't be too bad if the garment would last 10+ years, but they don't. Unfortunately the people (mostly women) who drive this are addicted to the churn of clothes. It's not about a basic need to be warm and protected. It's about maintaining a constant source of novelty by buying new clothes almost every week. In my experience, half of the clothes they buy don't fit and/or they don't like them when they get them home. When I was little my mum used to buy most our clothes second hand from car boot sales and the like. I can't believe people buy brand new children's clothes. You know they are going to grow out of them. Unfortunately, in the UK at least, second-hand clothes have been largely stigmatised and many people won't even consider them. I have recently seen apps which specialise in second-hand clothes. This would be great but I think it's going to take a lot to convince people not to think of clothes and consumables.

himinlomax 5y ago
> There is also the water consumption. One cotton t-shirt uses more than 2000 litres of water. That's about a month's worth of daily showers. It wouldn't be too bad if the garment would last 10+ years, but they don't. What does that even mean? Does the water just disappear?
- jonplackett 5y ago
  No but it had to be turned into fresh water suitable for use which uses energy and also can’t be used by someone else. There are water shortages all over the place.
  - himinlomax 5y ago
    Well those areas with low water shouldn't be used to grow cotton, like almonds shouldn't be grown in water-poor California to make vegan milk ersatz. Instead, cattle adapted to grazing in those arid areas could be a better and more environmentally friendly use of the land.

bgeeek 5y ago

For me that depends on the position in the market. I doubt some of the major clothes designers feel quite the same way.