Fashion Designers become Brands

Back in 2003, Annie Leibovitz and Grace Coddington produced one of the greatest Fashion Editorials for the American Vogue. Their "Alice in Wonderland" was not only styled with the best Fashion Brands, but the Fashion Designers themselves where featured in the shot where their garments were used. Each scene required the designer, or the designer duo, to play a character.

Tom Ford looked great as the white rabbit, Jean Paul Gaultier as a very convincing Cheshire Cat, and the duo Victor and Rolf, looked amazing as Tweedledum and Tweedledee. Karl Lagerfeld, too, starred in the Editorial.

Alice in Wonderland
Alice in Wonderland
 Photos by Annie Leibovitz

Photos by Annie Leibovitz

His character was Pepper, in the scene Pig and Pepper. This shot though, shows Lagerfeld as we know and love him - in his black and white Karl Lagerfeld Outfit. He refused to be photographed as someone else, than Karl himself.

 Photo: Annie Leibovitz

Photo: Annie Leibovitz

Karl Lagerfeld is not only a persona, or a designer. He is a very known and popular brand, as well. So acting or pretending he is something or someone else would be contradictory to his brand image and brand idea. There is no one better than Lagerfeld to market himself as a celebrity, brand on its own, and fashion designer! Karl Lagerfeld here is a good example of the relationship between celebrity, brand and fashion, in our society today.

If it is about designer labels, fashion and brand go hand in hand, as designer clothing is very much about “labels, logos and signifiers and all of this is in turn encapsulated, condensed and summarised by the power of the brand”, (Edwards, 2011: 142). The designer dress, as Baudrillard sees it, is a “commodity sign”, carrying its own signifiers, which have been defined by the brand, (1972, 1983). What you buy nowadays is therefore not a simple dress, but the much esteemed label in the back.

Thus, fashion can be seen as “a symbolic communicator, or signifier of status, rank and affiliation, and it is this factor that creates its strength of bond with branding, for brands are also primarily symbols, shorthand verbal and visual languages for wider values”, (Edwards, 2011: 145). However, the relationship between fashion and brand is incomplete without the third factor. The desire for a piece of fashion means only an engagement with an object, so the desiring subject is looking out for more – he or she is looking for something, which was filled in by the phenomenon of the celebrity. Tim Edwards describes it as following: “The culture of celebrity and the designer label have their part to play in abstracting desire, in turning human needs such as wanting to be attractive, valued  or  loved  into  goods  to  be  bought  and  sold  as  brands,  and  once commodified, then rehumanised as hologram personalities called celebrities”, (Edwards, 2011: 151f).

Therefore, in the world of capitalism, celebrities might be seen as a  perfect means to maximise profit, and as Rojek describes, minimise political resistance. What follows, is that today’s world “of aspirational design and high end yet mass market fashion is now next to inseparable from celebrity”, Edwards, 2011: 137). Thus, for a clever and business orientated designer, the use of a celebrity is inevitable, particularly in view of the fact that celebrities are considered to be fashion opinion leaders; a role, which is “crucial for the social legitimation of new (…) fashion ideas”, (Weisfeld-Spolter, Manesh Thakkar, 2011: 135).

Valentino, who seems to be the first one to recognise the importance of a celebrity, dressed celebrities like Victoria Beckham in his unique gowns. Many of other renowned designers then followed his example and “have learned to exploit the new economic power of celebrity in a variety of ways”, (Church-Gibson, 2012: 184). Finally, the fashion figures themselves became celebrities. The designers are now stars.

Looking back to Gabrielle Chanel’s career, it does not seem a novelty. Having created fame and mystery around her personality, even gave her the power to escape prison, after she had been accused of having a romantic relationship with a Nazi figure. Instead, her influential contacts allowed her to be exiled to Switzerland. At that time, Chanel was an exception. Today, however, designers are in fact expected to feature in the public domain”, (Church-Gibson, 2012: 186). Now it is more difficult than ever to keep themselves out of the public eye, as Balenciaga preferred to do.

It is argued that “the current designer-as-celebrity era began with the publicity created for Vivienne Westwood by Malcolm McLaren during the so called birth of punk”, (Church-Gibson, 012: 192). Also with Karl Lagerfeld creating his own signature outfit the cult for branding of the designer was confirmed. John Galliano didn’t miss the opportunity to ensure that his theatrical couture outfits were only related to his persona. The designer-as-celebrity does not only allow them to have a specific trademark appearance, but through publication and the circulation of their pictures, the demand for their products grows and enriches their business, (Church-Gibson, 2012). This is what you could call: a recipe for success!


-Chruch‐Gibson, P. (2012) Fashion and Celebrity Culture. London: Berg.
-Edwards, T. (2011) Fashion in Focus: Concepts, Practices and Politics. London: Routledge.
-Rojek, C. (2001) Celebrity. London: Reaktion Books.
-Weisfeld-Spolter, S & Thakkar, M. (2011) “Is a Designer Only as Good as a Star Who Wears Her Clothes? Examining the Roles of Celebrities as Opinion Leaders for the Diffusion of Fashion in the US Teen Market”, in Academy of Marketing Studies Journal, Vol. 15, Number 2.


Fashion Bloggers take over control!

Fashion Blogging, so normal and popular now, is actually a new phenomenon. In the year 2000 most people would have looked completely clueless if you asked them, what fashion blogs they read. What happened then, was that quite rapidly the blogs and bloggers started multiplying and became an important part of the fashion media landscape.

The blog history has started in 2004 with the appearance of personal style blogging. Very popular until 2006 , it can be considered as a subgenre of blogging. In 2008 an important turn took place, when the fashion industry and media started paying attention to those blogs, and lend substance to them. The beginning of fashion blogging was highly influenced by the digital culture that was beginning to spread. Platforms like fashion forums, myspace, flickr represent the first opportunities for the fashion blogs to derive from. Rosie Findlay in her work “The Short, Passionate, and Close-Knit History of Personal Blogs” argues that “an aesthetic of bricolage informed early personal style blogs”, thus giving them “an alternate feel”, (Rocamora, 2015:151). In 2008, when the traditional fashion press started referring to fashion blogs and their tendencies more and more, professional collaborations between the bloggers and the industry individuals started to appear.  Dazed & Confused started working with Susie Lau of Style Bubble, and the American Vogue had a collaboration with the Sea of Shoes creator. Now, bit by bit blogging was becoming financially worthwhile for their creators, as fashion brands realised the importance of the bloggers and their influence. “Thus Findlay characterized the first wave of style blogging by ‘independence’ and the second wave by ‘aspiration’ to argue that the key distinction between the two resides in the ethos fueling the blogs”, (Rocamora, 2015: 151).

The information fashion blogs include, are more revealing than you would think at first sight. They show tons of data on practices of production, consumption and representation of fashion on the whole globe. “Words, sounds, still and moving images, their creation as well as their reception, can be analysed to shed light on various dimensions of fashion, digital culture, and contemporary society”, (Rocamora, 2015:150). The phenomenon of fashion blogging has grown so big now, that not only its influence on consuming and branding is worthy of scrutinising. But also it offers a huge insight into digital media culture, and its influence on cultural and social reality.

The value behind the blogs is that even if to a certain extent the blog might be influenced by a ‘sponsor’, it is a “realm whereby voices that have been “othered” by the fashion industry and its Western-centric values can be expressed and heard. Bodies excluded from a fashion visual landscape dominated by white, Western, young, thin bodies are rendered visible, their practices of fashionable and stylish adornment encouraged and supported, hopefully supporting them in carving out for themselves positive spaces of expression offline too”, (Rocamora, 2015: 153). Even though, it seems that blogging only possesses a virtual reality, it is also a social reality. In the end they have influence on the everyday experience of consumers and producers across the world. What a blogger can do, is to make the complex fashion industry more transparent, relatable and more available to the masses in a unique, interactive manner. New and fresh designers get an inexpensive chance to be exposed, and valued mostly on their creativity, in contrast to the branding and financial power the big designers already have. The bloggers might be criticised for overtly branding of their selfhood, overexposure of themselves in their “flamboyant outfits and the ways they ‘gag’ for the attention of steet-style photographers, all in the name of fame”, (Findlay, 2013). That their appearance at a fashion show makes it all about themselves and not the newly presented designs. Maybe bloggers and their taste is not everybody’s cup of tea. But their biggest credit, is that they found a way into a closed industry, which they try to open for all of us, to enjoy in a different matter.



Why Fashion can't stand still

In the world of fashion trends come and go, but the work of a small number of designers has survived to stand the test of time. From pioneers such as Coco Chanel and Christian Dior to the era-defining figures of Alexander McQueen and Paul Smith, they all have one thing in common: each of them was responsible to completely change the fashion of their time.



The intruding questions of why fashion changes, and what forces are behind it, have opened many discussions. Thus a number of theories have evolved. The three main fashion theories, being cited most often, should be explained further.

 Christian Dior, Haute Couture 2008, photo by Patrick Demarchelier (WWD)

Christian Dior, Haute Couture 2008, photo by Patrick Demarchelier (WWD)

The trickle-down theory associated with Georg Simmel and Thorsten Veblen leans on the nature of class society (Veblen, 1899). It was suggested that “fashion became a mechanism to display class difference through the adoption of new styles of dress that differentiated the elite from the mass”, (Craik, 2009: 106). However, due to their eagerness, the middle class succeeded to recreate the elite style through mass production, and so adopted it for their own.

Thus, in order to preserve the conspicuous uniqueness of the upper class, the elite strived for creation of new styles.

The pursuit “for status through consumption is never ending. What at one time may confer status, may later be acquired by all, and confer no status”, (Trigg, 2001: 101).  To distinguish themselves from others, new goods have to be created and appropriated. In doing so, the elite creates a cycle of fashion.

This theory suggests an explanation for the rapid change of fashion, however it faces difficulties, dismissing the notion of a possible trickle up effect. As a strong example the jeans-phenomenon is often mentioned, to criticize the theory. As the popular wearing of jeans emerged from the lower classes, and at some point has been adopted by the upper classes.

However, Herbert Blumer’s theory of ‘the collective behaviour model of fashion’, argues that fashion originates from a collective desire of society to be fashionable (Blumer, 1968: 341-345). It is about being “’in fashion’ through the articulation of a sense of taste at a given moment and endorsement of certain styles and looks over others”, (Craik, 2009: 107). Blumer suggests that fashion changes due to new models of taste, which appear in order to be fashionable. Fred Davis criticises, that Blumer’s theory fails “to adequately consider the palpable influence of the elaborate institutional apparatus surrounding the propagation of fashion in the domain of dress”, (Davis, 1992: 120).

The third theory is George Sproles’ six-stage fashion process, which tries to integrate sociological, economic and psychological factors (Sproles, 1985: 55-69).  From the invention of fashion, following the demands of the market or norms of society, the process moves to the second stage of acceptation through the elite and celebrities. Next stage describes conscious spreading of the fashion, followed by adoption of the fashion by non-fashionable groups. In the fifth stage the fashion shifts its novelty status to symbol of the times, while new fashions are already being experimented with. Finally the last stage describes obsolescence of the adopted fashion, and the beginning of the new phase.

Sproles’ theory is being criticised for being too broad, though it “explains general trends and cycles of fashionability, but not deviations from fashion norms or new stylistic inventions that usher in a new fashion era or sensibility”, (Craik, 2009: 109).

As we can see, there are different approaches to explain the complex system of fashion’s change, and many more remain unmentioned.

 Yves Saint Laurent, Photo: Richard Avedon

Yves Saint Laurent, Photo: Richard Avedon

Nonetheless there is one common notion from all the theories, mentioned above, and there seems to be a consensus about that “fashion is a matter not only of a purely factual, but also of a socially commanded change”, (König, 1973: 54). To put it another way, changes in fashion happen due to changes in society.

René König argues, that in order to undergo change, fashion has to gain stability (König, 1973: 54). Stabilising is a central point in terms of change, as it possesses a “decisive function in the realization of the aims of fashion because it always occurs during that period when the accomplished change becomes in its own right, that is, gains the upper hand quite irrespectively of whether this fashion crystallizes into a custom or a style”, (König, 1973: 55).

He further argues that fashion’s principal orientation point is time, and therefore fashion subjects to the dynamic laws of society.

However, it is important not to distract fashion, which is a socially constructed product, from the social body. Joanne Entwistle suggests that dress transmutes the body into, for society recognisable subject, creating meaningful signals and transforming the body appropriately within the framework of a certain culture, (Entwistle, 2001: 33).

When being observed outside of a fleshy body, e.g. a dress in a costume museum, it is often perceived as strange and almost alien, as we are accustomed to a dress as alive, i.e. on the body.

Thus, the dress can be considered to be a boundary between self and society. The dress “serves as a visual metaphor for identity; it is also social since our dress is structured by social forces and subject to social and moral pressures”, (Entwistle, 2001: 37).

David Lynch and the genre of Fashion Film

One of the most exciting fashion films produced in the past years, is David Lynch’s promotion motion picture “Lady Blue Shanghai” produced 2010 and starring Marion Cotillard. Dior, responsible for the financing of the film imposed only three conditions: the Dior bag, the Oriental Pearl Tower in Shanghai and parts of old Shanghai should be featured in the short film, (Berra, 2012).

 Photo Source:

Photo Source:

Although Lynch is a recognised auteur, whose signature style and techniques were unmistakable in Lady Blue Shanghai, a big discussion whether it is a commercial or a short film have begun. It was argued, that it is not a fashion film “due to its status as a narrative piece that utilises many of director’s signature techniques and tropes”, (Berra, 2012: 234). It was also argued that although Marion Cotillard has a leading role, the actual protagonist of the short is the Lady Dior Bag, in terms of narrative and brand promotion: “The branded product becomes a central character that undergoes a transformation from a source of anxiety to a fetish object that replaces Cotillard’s love interest”, (Berry, 2012). Lynch himself describes his work as belonging to an ‘in-­‐between’ artistic space: “This falls between a regular film and a commercial”, (Copping, 2010). Finally, examining the short film, John Berra (2012) suggests that this collaboration resulting in Lady Blue Shanghai represents a “convergence between the artist and brand, achieving product recognition through the appropriation of Lynch’s trademark techniques”, (Berra, 2012: 246).

As we know today, there are different kinds of fashion films, such as “Sex and the City” or “The Devil wears Prada” – which due to their length, can be portrayed as feature films. Nevertheless, all of them have one thing in common: fashion is their central theme. Putting the discussions aside, about whether it is a feature, short or promotion film, let’s have a look on the emergence of the fashion film as such.

The first fashion film can be identified in the early years of the cinema around 1909 to 1918. The short fashion show films simply offered a display of gowns. Later on short films it would include a narrative built around the mere showing of the dresses. This type of fashion newsreel, including a narrative lasted into the late 1930s, (Herzog, 1990; Leese, 1976).

At the same time, haute couture found a way to be a part of the new entertainment business, as MGM offered a contract to Coco Chanel in 1931. What Chanel contributed, was “the glamour of a name”, (Bruzzi, 1997: 3). This development, as we would see later in similar collaborations with Givenchy, Armani, Gaultier, etc., would question the use of clothes in films, as a simple contribution to the narrative. Chanel’s garments stood out and offered a spectacle, which would be recognised as “the prerogative of the couturier”, whereas “the overriding ethos of the costume designer is conversely to fabricate clothes which serve the purpose of the narrative”, (Bruzzi, 1997: 3).

Hollywood possessed the motion picture costumer’s code; its task was to find the right balance between the design and the dramatic text. This idea had to do with the  “primary  function  of  costuming  in  classical  realist  cinema  where  every element in the mise-­‐en-­‐scène – from painted backdrop to lighting cue – serves the higher purpose of the narrative”, (Gaines, 1990). Therefore, the duty of the clothes is to contribute to the narrative ideas, as its place is on the lower level of the hierarchy of screen discourses. However, in the 1930s and 1940s recruiting more couturiers, Hollywood contributed to a shift away from its own code, by reducing the gap between costume and couture fashion. Elsa Schiaparelli commented on this development, by saying “what Hollywood designs today, you will be wearing tomorrow”, (Haggard 1990: 6).

The ultimate collaboration between Hubert de Givenchy and Audrey Hepburn took the relationship of the couturier and the star to a completely new level, as the designer also dressed the actress off screen. The creation of the garment by the couturier clearly sought for the purpose of spectacle. In the films Sabrina and Funny Face, where the character of Audrey Hepburn undergoes a transformation à la Cinderella, the task allocation was simple: whereas the costume designer Edith Head had the responsibility to design pre-­‐transformation clothes, the couturier Givenchy was responsible for the unforgettable ball gowns with the Parisian chic factor. Thus, “Givenchy and other couturiers since have used films to showcase their designs”, (Bruzzi, 1997: 6).

For Peter Wollen this very spectacular gown is an artistic piece. He describes fashion as art as “good”, but only accepts extravagant designs as “art”, (Bruzzi, 1997). With his notion of fashion as art, he leans towards the idea, which Anne Hollander describes as following: “In the middle of the nineteenth century the French invented, fostered, and spread the idea of the dress designer as an original genius, like a painter – someone totally responsible for his creations”, (Hollander 1993: 351). Stella Bruzzi does not share Wollen’s view, criticising that in this way he excludes men’s film fashion and couture, dismissing  the works of designer like Giorgio Armani and Nino Cerrutti, who created “common” clothes, which still can be “items of display in cinema without being spectacularly extrovert”, (Bruzzi, 1997: 8). She goes on to criticise, that Wollen fails to understand “the double meaning of classic fashion, namely that even the least extravagant item of clothing is spectacular because it can be recognised as exclusive”, (Bruzzi, 1997: 25).

Unlike Armani and Cerrutti, most couturiers designed spectacular gowns, which were there to dominate the scenes. Their essence is to portray their own meaning. For the director Pedro Almodóvar the couturier’s gown is a chance to impose meaning within the story, giving the film the essence of a “very radical puzzle”, (Strauss 1996: 127). Again, the difference between the costume designer and a couturier is that the former are not “doing fashion – (they)’re doing characters, building energy, portraying a slice of life”, (Vance-­‐Straker 1191: 5). For the couturiers, however, it is a major concern to preserve their house look, as the costume designer Lindy Hemming (1994) states. “Designing for a film is, for a couturier, an ambiguous process of maintaining a balance between self-­‐ promotion and immersing the designs in the film”, (Bruzzi, 1997: 26).

To ridicule haute couture, Robert Altman created an interesting fashion film named Prèt-­‐à-­‐Porter. In focus, are the unwearable clothes of high fashion, with their impracticality underlined. Like Barthes and Bell, Altman “cannot see the point of fashion and is certainly not inclined to elevate it to the status of art”, (Bruzzi, 1997: 32). However, with Prèt-­‐à-­‐Porter, Altman unaware of what was to follow created a role model for later fashion films. He “set up a series of tropes which would come to characterise these later films: the appearance of real designers as themselves, the shots of their runway shows within the cinematic narrative, the appearance of recognisable supermodels and other fashion-­‐ friendly celebrities, the use of fashionable locations and settings, the interiors of well-­‐known shops and finally the centrality of luxury brand names and their now recognisable logos as reference points, even as character in their own right”, (Church-­‐Gibson, 2012: 84).

Films such as The Devil Wears Prada (2006), Confessions of a Shopaholic (2009) and Sex and the City: The Movie (2008) borrowed a lot from Prèt-­‐à-­‐Porter, with the only exception: their immense financial success. It seems the audience was not ripened for Altman’s film, not “as designer-­‐aware, or as fashion hungry (…).

It seems ironic that Altman, always proud of his outsider status, should have unknowingly created what could be described as a new genre”, (Church-­‐Gibson, 2012: 85).

The Issue with Age

“Of course it's no fun getting old and sick and dying.We all know that's coming and it's a bore. But people are living longer, they’re healthier longer, they have sex longer. Why shouldn’t we be allowed to age and why shouldn’t we be respected for it? When I turned 50 I felt a sense of achievement. I’ve lived 50 years! I made it. I think there’s something to be said for that and to be celebrated”, (Rowley, 2012).



Jerry Hall, who was a supermodel from the 70s and 80s, talks about ageing in Timothy Greenfield-Sanders' documentary About Face: Supermodels then and now. The director interviewed twelve supermodels from that time period for his documentary, because he was “fascinated by how one reinvents oneself as one gets old in a society that’s so youth oriented”, (Rowley, 2012).

These women, whose beauty was their main capital, are probably affected the most by the ageism of our society. 

Youth serves as ideology, and constantly seeks its emphasis in the exhibition and worship of young bodies. Mainly those bodies are female, as they are considered to be “the universal consumer image of desirability”, (Featherstone & Wernick, 1995: 7).  It can be suggested that one of the driving forces behind this particular attitude is the emergence of mass production and consumption, while the accumulation of experience and knowledge are losing relevance, (Featherstone & Wernick, 1995).

The media in its various forms is contributing to reinforcing this image. Research, in the United States for example, shows that elderly people are underrepresented in the media context, according to their numbers in the actual population, (Robinson & Callister & Magoffin, 2009).

Primarily, it should be taken into account that “like class, ethnicity, and gender, age is a social category through which people define and identify individuals and groups within society. Age is both an important part of how we see ourselves and how others see us”, as it “acts as an important basis for the distribution of social prestige (…) access to power, material resources, and citizenship”, (Pilcher, 1995: 1).

The current idea of ageing goes back to the beginning of the twentieth century, as the impacts of industrialisation were exploring the boundaries between useful and useless, and efficient and inefficient regarding the employment of a person for its job. The psychologist George Beard was seeking for the age, at which ‘the best work of the world’ would be done, (Beard, 1874). The result of his studies was, that the period between 30-45 years in a person’s life was the optimal one.

In the late nineteenth century, it was the time as the “American society passed from an acceptance of ageing as a natural process to a view of it as a distinct period of life characterised by decline, weakness, and obsolescence”,  (Hareven, 1995: 120).

With the rise of the consumer culture the dominance of the visual media arose, which concentrated on portraying exciting images of lifestyle, to be closely linked to goods. “Certain themes, infinitely revisable, infinitely combinable, recur within advertising and consumer culture imagery: youth, beauty, energy, fitness, movement freedom, romance, exotica, luxury, enjoyment, fun. Yet whatever the promise in the imagery, consumer culture demands from its recipients a wide-awake, energetic, calculating, maximising approach to life – it has no place for the settled, the habitual or the humdrum”, (Featherstone, 2001: 174).

Hollywood, too, was more than eager to present and promote the images of youth. Beauty was coded in young and slim bodies, “signs of ageing, such as flabbiness and wrinkles, were emblems of ugliness”, (Blaikie, 1999: 93).

This particular concentration on presence and self-presence becomes an even more problematic matter for ageing women, as our representations of women a priori are constructed in terms of physical appearance. This very issue is what Susan Sontag calls ‘double jeopardy’, (Sontag, 1978). She argues that ageing women face a combination of ageism and sexism, as they are expected to keep up with the ideal adolescent, regardless their age.

It seems that in our society “[a]geing is a woman’s issue”, (Cohen, 2002: 600). As the representation of the white ageing man differs immensely to the one of the woman, since they are considered to be wise through their life experience and are highly respected for their contribution to society. Women by contrast seem no longer to achieve any contribution to the society, and are facing devaluation through it. Frueh argues that nowadays “the old(er) woman is doubly different, doubly degraded, and doubly injured by exterior identity: she is visibly female, different from men, and visibly aging, even when cosmetically altered, different from young”, (Frueh, 1997: 202). Thus, they are better “ignored or treated with embarrassment”, (Church-Gibson, 2000: 79).

Harriet Cohen (2002) suggests that there are three main examples, of how the status of the older women is lowered. Firstly, older woman are being made invisible, “so that we do not have to confront our patriarchal myths about what makes life valuable or dying painful”, (Garner & Mercer, 1999: 3). Secondly, through the society’s obsession with beauty and youth, women do not seem attractive anymore, once they achieve certain age. As it is the looks the women are cherished for, whereas men are cherished for what they do. Finally, older women are considered to lose interest in sexuality, despite of being heterosexual. Thus, they fail to be seen as sexual beings.

Repeatedly these ideas of women are propagated in all parts of the society, and so we suffer a “lack of proactive and effective inventions at a societal or institutional level, including family, religious institutions, and media to interrupt and reconstruct these messages”, (Cohen, 2002: 601).


- Beard, George (1874) Legal Responsibility in Old Age, Based on Researches into the Relationship of Age to Work, New York: Russels.

- Blaikie, Andrew (1999) Ageing and Popular Culture. Cambridge University Press. 

- Church-Gibson, Pamela (2000) “’No-one Expects Me Anywhere’ – Invisible women, ageing and the fashion industry”, In Fashion Cultures - Theories, Explorations and Analysis, edt. Church-Gibson, Pamela & Bruzzi, Stella. London: Routledge.

 - Cohen, Harriet L. (2002) “Developing Media Literacy Skills to Challenge Television’s Portrayal of Older Woman”, In Educational Gerontology. Vol. 28: 599-620. New York: Rotledge.

- Featherstone, Mike (2001) “The Body in Consumer Culture”, In The Body – Social Process and Cultural Theory, edt. Featherstone, Mike & Hepworth, Mike & Turner, Bryan S.. London: Sage Publications.

- Featherstone, Mike & Wernick, Andrew (1995) Images of Ageing – Cultural Representations of Later Life, London: Routledge.

- Frueh, Joanna (1997) “Visible Difference: Women Artists and Aging”, In The Other Within Us: Feminist Exploration of Women and Aging, edt. Pearsall, Marilyn. Boulder, CO: Westview.

- Hareven, Tamara K. (1995) “Changing Images of Aging and the Social Construction of the Life Course”, In Images of Ageing – Cultural Representations of Later Life, edt. Featherstone, Mike & Wernick, Andrew. London: Routledge.

- Pilcher, Jane (1995) Age and Generation in Modern Britain. Oxford University Press.

 - Robinson, Tom & Callister, Mark & Magoffin Dawn (2009) “Older Characters in Teen Movies from 1980-2006”, In Educational Gerontology. Vol. 35: 687-711. New York: Rotledge.

 - Rowley, Laura (2012) “'About Face': Timothy Greenfield-Sanders' Film Focuses On Aging Supermodels“, in Huffington Post (online). , Accessed on 08/07/2013.

- Sontag, Susan (1978) “The double Standard of Ageing”, In An Ageing Population edt. Carver, Vida & Liddiard, Penny. London: Hodder & Stoughton.