In 1995’s Clueless, one of the most seminal films “about” L.A. (and, more to the point, its priorities), Cher Horowitz (Alicia Silverstone) famously drags a slew of high-quality wares out of her house to donate to “the Pismo Beach Disaster Relief.” Seeing her traipsing in and out of their lavish Beverly Hills home with everything from red caviar to last-season designer clothing, it’s only when Cher’s father, Mel (Dan Hedaya), notices her carting away a pair of skis that he finally says something. Specifically, that he doesn’t think anyone needs a pair of skis in the aftermath of what happened (needless to say by now, the “Pismo Beach disaster” is an imagined event of Amy Heckerling’s own making for the purposes of this plot point). Cher replies, “Daddy, some people lost all their belongings. Don’t you think that includes athletic equipment?”
This sentiment, said in a “California lilt,” is precisely how Charli XCX sounded when she posted a message to her Instagram story days after the fire. A message that urged, “Any brands reading this please donate to those who have been tragically affected by these horrific L.A. fires.” By “brands,” of course, what she refers to are the high-fashion labels so often gifted to her (and other celebrities of her “status”) so that those who follow/watch her every move can be influenced enough to perhaps buy the items themselves (even though the average person in a fandom is a regular broke ass). Thus, Charli also mentioned, “As a person in the public eye I am often being sent clothes and other things by brands wanting to gift me something. This is very kind and sweet but I want to encourage brands to give to people who really truly need it.” Even though, only recently, she was “shamelessly ask[ing] for free stuff” from Laneige, also inserting herself as a brand spokesperson for the skin care product (more to point, the lip balm). Which means, of course, endless supplies of her favorite expensive lip balm. And one doubts she’s going to start turning away free, high-quality products just because there’s presently a very public calamity afoot.
So while XCX’s intentions might have pure—and she might well be donating to the relief fund in other ways herself—the statement came across as decidedly naïve a.k.a. decidedly Cher Horowitz. For a start, it’s in a similar vein to Ariana Grande requesting that everyone stop commenting on other people’s bodies, with Grande, like Charli, ignoring the elephant in the room. In Ari’s case, that was willfully overlooking the reality that it would decimate far too many industries to quell the voices that stoke one’s physical insecurities. In Charli’s case, it’s overlooking the fact that brands want their clothes to be seen pretty much solely on celebrities because those are the people with the most visibility—not the average joe…regardless of whether his house burned down or not. And because, like the Beverly Hills shopgirls that gatekeep Vivian Ward (Julia Roberts) in Pretty Woman, designer brands don’t really want “trash” who can’t afford it sniffing around their labels and lowering the pristine cachet of the image.
Any who, other relief efforts Charli posted about featured the mention of clothing donations with the specific callout that nothing old or dirty should be given (because, yes, beggars can be choosers—especially in Los Angeles). But the newly-formed entity she propped up the most was started by a fourteen-year-old from Altadena named Avery Colvert. Dubbing her effort to supply local teen girls with various clothing and beauty items: “Altadena Girls.” It went on to grab the attention of “eternal teens” Paris Hilton and Kim Kardashian (via Skims). And, like XCX and Cher H., Colvert doesn’t believe that just because you’re homeless, you actually have to look that way. So it was that she told Time magazine, “We have not been accepting used items… These girls have nothing. I don’t want them to have to dig through a bin of used clothes. I want them to have new things. The whole community in Los Angeles—entertainment, beauty, everything, fashion—is so amazing. And there’s influencers [donating]. I was thinking, ‘There’s probably some influencers who get PR and stuff.’” As in: PR for donating to a good cause, ergo further motivation to be seen donating to that cause. For, don’t kid yourselves, everything in L.A. is still about image—even a time of unprecedented disaster.
To that point, Colvert continued, “I envisioned my own bedroom and I was thinking about how my clothes, makeup and shoes—everything—is my identity and it’s my sense of self. And it’s the same thing for all of my friends and all these girls who lost everything in the fire. I was like, okay, Pasadena Civic Center has the necessities, but I want specific items for these girls so they can feel like themselves again and get their confidence back.” A feeling that is whole-heartedly approved by “brat” women like Charli XCX and Paris Hilton (who recently billed herself as “the original brat”). Women who are, even in times of utter devastation, still looked to by people in Colvert’s age bracket for guidance (such is the power of celebrity…and yes, Colvert did mention how special it would be if Billie Eilish also reached out).
And yet, there is a glaring disconnect in terms of wanting to keep having access to “the things that make you ‘you’” and how the want of those things is exactly what’s destroying the planet and causing catastrophic events like these. That there’s been a constant mention of how numerous brands and corporations have been “generous” enough to donate “free” goods to those who have lost their homes in the fires seems to ignore the point that these are the very organizations that have helped turned the Earth into a tinderbox in the first place. So no, nothing is “free,” not really—whether given to a celeb like XCX or an “everygirl” like Colvert. It all comes at the cost of continuing to be seduced by the idea of “brand responsibility.” All while none of these brands take actual responsibility for what they hath wrought.
+ There are no comments
Add yours