Image via @coperni
As another fashion week, month, however long it is (still confuses me) draws to a close, let’s channel the spirit of a necessary slowness that fashion typically lacks and retrospectively contemplate a moment in the not-so distant past. Coperni’s Spring Summer ‘23 spray-on dress.
Footage from last October’s PFW of the moment Coperni designers sprayed a near-naked Bella Hadid with a non-woven fibrous suspension took the internet by storm. According to Launchmetrics and WWD, media attention of this fashion moment equated to a value impact of 26.3 million dollars, 20 of which were attributed to social media channels alone.
It’s not so much the dress itself, or the attention it garnered, that is the point of today’s column so much as the technology, time and history behind it.
Whilst novelty instantaneously dispersed through the air at the Coperni show, the spray-on dress is no new phenomenon. Actually, it was fathomed over two decades ago by the Spanish designer-gone-scientist, or ‘Chemical tailor’ (nice ring to it, right?), Dr Manel Torres. Blurring the lines between science, tech and fashion, Manel first addressed the futuristic concept of the spray-on garment in 1997 during his MA in womenswear design at London’s Royal College of Art where he forecasted what fashion might look like in 2050. Manel went on to complete his doctorate in a similar field, the result of which formed the foundations of his company, Fabrican, launching in 2003. This same company was behind the iconic Coperni dress.
When sprayed, nanofibres in the Fabrican suspension – made up of natural and synthetic nanofibres, polymers and a binder – adhere to each other on the skin creating a non-woven, non-sticky body covering much like a ‘second skin’. It’s an instant fabric, in a can, that can be applied on demand then washed, re-used or dissolved for re-spraying.
With zero toile, pattern, fastening (et cetera) and reduced temporal, technical and economical barriers to a customisable product, not to mention the potential of reduced transportation footprints, Fabrican defies the conventions of traditional garment construction. And, allegedly, utilises non-volatile, organic compounds that are non-ozone depleting therefore minimising environmental damage compared to harmful aerosols that contribute to the trapping of solar energy in the atmosphere and thus, global warming (food for thought). It seems spray-on garments offer a sustainable alternative to traditional manufacturing processes.
That being said, Coperni’s dress is by no means the epitome of sustainability. In actual fact, there has been much backlash against it. Vogue Business critiqued the dress for its sustainable shortfallings whilst other critics deemed it merely a fleeting gimmick. To add fuel to a burning fire, my research in terms of the processes involved in turning a fabric into its liquid form is relatively scarce. While Coperni’s spray-on dress doesn’t necessarily offer the solution, it took twenty years for an idea to become a tried, tested and tangible material good, making it a prime example of how research and development are key before any inkling of a revolution can take place.
Fashion’s toxic trait is its tendency to gobble through trends at a rate of knots, rapidly ruling the past redundant. The result, and I’m sure you’re familiar with it by now, hyper-production and hyper-consumption. A caveat of which is the assumption, and expectation, that things can and should be available overnight.
I get it. I frequently find myself in a state of frustration that action seems to be so slow. We’re pressed for time! What’s taking so long? The desire for new materials and sustainable technologies is definitely there. People want better, they want green. What are the solutions? Where are the alternatives?
That’s where expectation comes into play. And where it shouldn’t. The ever-increasing rate of production and the ease of access to an entire new wardrobe at the chime of ApplePay (that sound effect has me in a chokehold) has nurtured the misconception that a viable, sustainable alternative should, too, be immediate.
In an interview with SLEEK last year, Jen Keane, co-founder of biomaterial innovation company Modern Synthesis, put it well: “Consumer culture and technology have meant that the public are used to seeing things happen at the tap of a finger. People expect great new things to come about overnight. But, the truth is, real positive innovation takes time.”
It’s a bit of a Catch-22, really. The reality is, we have limited time to completely switch up manufacturing yet, time is necessary to avoid a monumental f*ck up – like we did with plastic or some vegan leather alternatives (one for another day).
Instead of instant and untested solutions, what we need is a gestalt shift in creation mentality from the design community and within fashion to think long term and educate on material futures. And, it’s very much begun. Systemic changes are happening. Yay. That’s not to say sit back, relax and let the trailblazers do the work. Grass root action remains important. But, we’re talking about here is a fourth industrial revolution. Don’t expect a fully fledged and functional biofabric overnight. It’s going to take some time.
