Fetish: Fashion, Sex & Power (Paperback)

~ (Author)

Editorial Reviews

Amazon.com Review

Because this is Valerie Steele's second book on the topic of fetishistic clothing, her opening statements that she is an outsider to the paraphilias and perversions that she discusses seems a bit hollow. When she says that she is only "a cultural historian specializing in fashion" there's no need to fear: while the book is rigorously researched and loaded with valuable bibliographic references to previous researchers in the area, it's apparent that underneath her cool prose Steele really gets a kick out of her subject, if only on an intellectual level. Dividing her book into sections based on the various fetishes (corsets, shoes, second-skin fabrics, underwear), Steele shows a remarkable facility with the history and trivia of each item of clothing. This produces some amusing juxtapositions, such as when she reveals little-known information about the Chinese practice of footbinding, and a page later presents a Tom of Finland picture of a nude man surrounded by motorcycle-booted feet. There are plenty of drawings and photographs here, ostensibly to supplement the reading. Photos range from 19th-century Viennese ultra-high-heeled shoes to contemporary neo- gothic hipster chicks in corsets and leather. This is obviously not a book for children, but it's also far more than a collection of erotica in that it presents an informative and well-researched history of fetishism and the theories that have been put forward to explain it.

From Publishers Weekly

Drawing on psychoanalytic, poststructuralist, feminist and Marxist theory, cultural historian Steele (Fashion and Eroticism) explores the role fetishist sexual practices play in shaping fashion history. She asserts that fashion trends both reflect common sexual fantasies and help construct gender identities; in this sense, clothing can function as an important marker of a culture's sexual politics. The fascination with fetishist garb?corsets, underwear as outerwear, the use of "kinky" fabrics like rubber and leather?among prominent contemporary designers may, she proposes, signal our own culture's willingness to blur the boundaries between the "normal" and the "perverse." Steele puts forward a fluid definition of fetishism, noting that its devotees exhibit a wide range of behaviors and that one particular style or object can have a variety of different meanings for different people. Consequently, psychoanalytic arguments that the fetish is always a stand-in for the phallus or feminist claims that certain fashions like corsets and high heels are intended to oppress women are potentially valid but reductive. Steele's greatest strengths here are her flexible perspective and her deft negotiation of various theoretical perspectives. Her analysis is sometimes sketchy, but this is a thought-provoking overview of the relationship between sex and clothing. Photos not seen by PW.
Copyright 1995 Reed Business Information, Inc. --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Paperback: 280 pages
• Publisher: Oxford University Press, USA (July 31, 1997)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0195115791
• ISBN-13: 978-0195115796
• Product Dimensions: 9.8 x 7.1 x 0.7 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.3 pounds
• Average Customer Review: 3.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (6 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #811,063 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

17 of 18 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars veiled neutrality, August 20, 1999

By A Customer

Steele's book is thoroughly researched and does an excellent job of placing fetish fashion in a historical context. What the author fails to do, however, is make a clear argument. When she states that she cannot claim to be for or against a particular piece of clothing (in this case, the corset), her well-crafted "neutral" stance weakens the very course of her history. As Steele demonstrates, each article of clothing featured in her book has a complex cultural and intellectual history imbedded with meaning. By refusing to go beyond, "feminists believe..." or "Freud argued...," the purpose of Steele's glossy work remains obscured. Moreover, the author's overuse of quotations further confuses the argument. I was lost between Steele's words and those of her sources and find that her failure to truly engage with her research rings of a forced objectivity.

My second objection is perhaps not a new criticism. I tend to cringe when I hear that the combination of being sexy and powerful rescues woman from the bad old days of obligatory femininity. Steele implies this by refusing to take a stance. The strong, yet sexy, woman remains a male fantasy. After all, the corset-clad, high-heel wearing dominatrix acts out the role to please her slave. She is there to help him live out his fantasies. Her pleasure (and this is generally the case whether the woman is dominant or submissive) tends to remain secondary. Steele's modern fetish woman gains pleasure from being pleasing to men and power from being sexually desirable. I would have liked the author to examine this issue further and even to deconstruct it.

18 of 20 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars a dominating opinion, February 18, 1999

By A Customer

A very well-written and -researched essay whose clarity and wit is all the more remarkable for its breadth of subject matter (fetish and fashion, along with all the psychology, sociology, sexuality, feminism, etc. that they entail) and the high degree of subjectivity authors usually bring to that subject matter. Steele's writing is observant, engaging, stylish and piercingly critical--she gains much credibility in my mind by debunking the corset myth, for example. One flaw is that the wide implications of the subject matter often lead her off on tangents. It often takes her some time--in some cases, the entire book--to fully elucidate her points. You have to trust her to explain everything in the end--a trust which is largely well-placed.

Oddly, the largest overarching theory about the connection between obscure fetish gear and high fashion is left implicit in a "perhaps. . ." phrase at the end. That theory is that most behaviors and interests previously thought perverse are being accepted into the mainstream as our society becomes ever more leisure-oriented and pleasure-based. Also unresolved is why fetishism seems to be largely Western and modern--is this a function of social organization, the definition of "fetishism", new sex research, sexual liberation, mass-media communication, all of these? There's an interesting correlation here with the equally culture-specific and modern outbursts of schizophrenia and serial killing (killers who are of course sexually motivated, highly perverse and often fetishistic). This is a query of high social concern, and I'm now more convinced of the role of the mass media--fetishism requires visual stimulation, Steele says, and there's more of that in a wider variety of subject matter than ever before. Not to simply psychology, but it's an interesting factor.

The notion that males rather than females are prone to fetishism is almost borne out by this book itself, as though it took a woman to write sensibly and objectively about fetish/fantasy issues. Conversely, she trips up in fashion, her academic field, which she's too close to for that degree of objectivity. In dicussing whether fetish-inspired fashions empower or degrade women (a discussion wisely complicated with reader-response and intentionalist critiques), she doesn't realize the question she's begging: Why are fetish fashions almost exclusively produced for and worn by women? You could argue that fetishism is almost exclusively male activity projected onto female items. But many fetishists are just as satisfied wearing the fetish items themselves. And as Steele distinguishes, fashion is about "normal" fetishizing, not fetishism, and works by far looser rules. All she really says to this question is that men's fashions are "slower to develop" and suggests a psychoanalytic theory (interesting, though far from convincing) about why women like dressing up more than men do. I think the obvious answer she misses is that whether women feel empowered or degraded, the very reason they're allowed (or required) to dress up at all is because they have a subservient social position to men. When men are required to dress up, it's a relatively simple and standardized uniforming, whereas women are required to puff up a la a court jester or similar colorful figure of subservient/entertainment social standing. Whatever a women chooses to wear, there's no choice about dressing up, and that's where real power lies.

These lacunae aside, it's an honest, thoughtful and meaningful examination of the unspoken--and often misunderstood--meanings lurking within our clothes, and a timely, necessary study of what's going on in the 20th century sexual mind.

Also wanted to add that today's radical forms of bodybuilding should be considered as body modification in the corseting/tattooing/piercing vein. It's been a rapid movement from Schwarzenegger's Greco-Roman classical perfection to today's insanely bulging, wildly exaggerated look.--J.Ruch

6 of 6 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars A must for your collection, January 3, 2003

By A Customer

overall this book is very good, however it leaves out some important elements of fetishism and fetish culture. It pin points important elements of fetish and fashion, while skimming over the importance of emotions, trust, childhood,sex, power. When Steele addresses sex and power she uses a freudian approach. this is simply because steele's educational backround is limited to maintinly fasion history.

The book is complete with fetish photos, and describes the history and evoltion of the fetish well. Steele, describes one fetish party that she has attended and makes assumptions about fetishes, however i find it difficult to fully accept her conclusions due to her limited exposure. She does not accuratly address the role of fetishism in the gay and lesbian and bisexual community, but rather sticks to trannies and crossdressers. Futhermore, much of the evidence that she uses to explain fetishes is based on biological sex and gender roles. Both of which i would argue are downplayed among those who are open minded enough to participate in fetish culture.

This book is very well written and hard to put down. The book is well edited and well sectioned to keep you entertained and statisfied. It great book for someone who wants a brief and PG 13 explaination of fetishism-- for someone who knows little about the history of fetishims--or for your slightly kinky friend. Please keep in mind that Steele looks at fetishes from a fashion perspective--if you are looking for a more indept explaination of fetish culture you wil left, without it