Fashion and Shopping (4)
And lastly, we had knobbly. This adjective means 'lumpy' or 'having many raised areas
on the surface' - like skin when it gets cold. Do you have anything knobbly on your foot, Neil?
Probably! My feet are killing me!
I think we've found your Achilles heel! However, it's time to go.
But we will be back. In the meantime, you can find us in all the usual places
online and on social media, just look for BBC Learning English. Bye for now.
Goodbye!
Hello. Welcome to 6 Minute English, I'm Neil.
And I'm Rob.
Rob, it's good to see you keeping up with fashion by wearing the high-vis
jacket – although I have to say it is a bit dazzling.
Neil, I'm no fashion victim – this high-vis or high-visibility jacket is for safety.
I wear it when I'm cycling around London and I've just forgotten to take it off.
And a fashion victim, by the way, is someone who always wears what's thought to be fashionable,
even if it doesn't actually look good on them. But wearing high-vis clothing
has become the latest fashion statement – that's something you wear to attract
attention and people who know something about fashion.
Well, I can assure you, I don't wear my bright jacket to look cool but in today's programme we'll
be discussing why some people do. But first Neil, have you got a question for us to think about?
OK, we know that fashions come and go but in which decade were leg warmers worn as a popular fashion
accessory? Was it… a) the 1970s,
b) the 1980s or c) the 1990s?
I do remember these so I'll say b) the 1980s.
Well, we'll reveal the answer at the end of the programme. Now let's talk more about the
oddest item of clothing to hit the catwalk this year - the humble high-vis jacket.
Yes, they were designed to be worn for safety by people like cyclists
and pedestrians and by workers who need to be seen if, for example,
they're working in the road or directing traffic. So it's strange to think that now
people choose to wear them to be on-trend – that's following the latest fashion.
Hannah Marriott is the Fashion Editor of the Guardian newspaper. She told the BBC
Radio 4 programme You and Yours, why she thought people were turning to bright,
luminous clothing. What was the reason?
There's also just a trend at the moment for people wearing very bright things, very eye-catching
things, it feels that with social media, you know, everyone's scrolling down their Instagram
screens at such speed and anything that sort of catches the eye, that seems yeah, like a bit of a
talking point, something that's going to get a bit of attention - those kind of trends are getting a
bit more traction at the moment - than the sort of understated cashmere jumper kind of fashion.
So her reason is social media. In our fast-paced lives, we're quickly scrolling through our
social media feeds and people want to stand out, attract our attention and be noticed.
And these attention-seekers need to wear some eye-catching – something
that will catch your eye and be noticed. High-vis clothing certainly does that!
Hannah mentioned that wearing something different creates a talking point – something that you or I
may discuss at work or on social media – even if it is to say "that guys looks ridiculous"!
And she also mentions that people are becoming interested in
and accepting these kinds of trends – the word she used was traction.
Traction here means this fashion trend is starting to stick.
Of course fashion comes at a price. While an ordinary high-vis vest
used for workwear is normally affordable, when they're sold as a fashion item they can go for
much higher prices, particularly if they have a designer label showing on the front.
This raises an important question. We know that many people wearing high-vis
jackets are doing important jobs, so does this fashion devalue what they're doing?
Yes, it's something Hannah Marriott talked about.
Let's hear from her again. What word does she use to describe a difficult issue?
Every time fashion borrows from workwear, there're always some
sort of thorny issues around it - particularly when you're charging £2000 for something that
is actually very similar to, you know, a uniform that somebody might be wearing who
doesn't actually make that much money, you know, there's obviously some thorny class issues there.
So she used the word thorny to describe the issue of things worn at work becoming expensive fashion
items. Thorny issues are subjects that are difficult deal with. Here she particularly
mentioned the issue of class – so different groups of people in society in different
economic positions – some can afford clothing for fashion, others can only afford clothing for work.
And the other issue is that if everyone starts wearing high-vis clothing,
then the people who need to stand out for their own safety may not stand out as easily.
And we wouldn't want to miss you when you're out cycling on your bike, Rob. But would we miss you
if you were wearing a pair of leg warmers? Earlier I asked in which decade were leg warmers worn
as a popular fashion accessory. Was it… a) the 1970s,
b) the 1980s or c) the1990s?
Yes, and I said b) the 1980s. It's got to be right!
Well, you know your fashion, Rob – it was indeed the 1980s.
Leg warmers were originally worn by dancers to keep their muscles from cramping after stretching,
but in the early 1980s they became fashionable for teenage girls to wear.
OK, let's move on and recap on some of the vocabulary we've mentioned today. Starting
with fashion victim – that's someone who always wears what's thought to be fashionable, even
if it doesn't actually look good on them. Like that pair of red jeans you used to wear, Neil.
They, Rob, were on-trend – that means 'in keeping up with the latest fashion'. Of course
wearing something red is very eye-catching which means attracting attention and being noticed.
Next we mentioned traction. If something gains traction it becomes accepted and popular.
And then we had understated. In fashion,
this describes something that does not attract attention and is not that impressive.
And then we discussed the word thorny. A tree or bush with thorns is difficult to touch and handle
and similarly a thorny issue is a subject that is difficult to deal with and discuss.
Well, we've covered some thorny and less thorny issues today
but we know that fashions change and maybe high-vis fashion won't be here forever.
That's it for now but please join us next time for 6 Minute English. See you soon. Goodbye.
Bye bye!
Hello. This is 6 Minute English from BBC Learning English. I'm Neil.
And I'm Sam.
Are you a saver or a spender, Sam?
Well, I'm trying to limit my spending right now
because I'm saving up for a deposit to buy a house.
Saving money is not always easy - as we'll find out in today's programme, which is all about
‘thrift'. ‘Thrift' is not a simple idea to define.
It's to do with living a simple life free from the need to constantly buy the latest products.
Today's consumer culture encourages us to ‘spend, spend, spend',
but it hasn't always been that way. The Victorians for example told people to
‘save up for a rainy day', meaning to keep some money back in case of unforeseen emergencies.
But before we discover more about that, it's time for today's quiz question.
If you're trying to save money you probably know how hard it can be. So my question is:
what percentage of people in the UK, do you think, have less than £1000 in savings?
Is it: a) 5%,
b) 15 %, or c) 30%?
Well, if I'm anything to go by I'd say c) 30%.
OK. Well, we'll find the correct answer out later.
I mentioned before that ‘thrift' is a difficult idea to define, so here's Alison Hulme, a lecturer
at the University of Northampton, explaining more to BBC Radio 4's programme Thinking Allowed:
There are two dictionary definitions of thrift. The older of the two comes from the word ‘thrive'
etymologically, and described thrift as the ability to live well and to flourish,
so it's that sense of human flourishing. The more recent definition is the one we're
probably more familiar with which is about frugality. All of that said, it's been used
historically of course by various people in various moments in various different places
in very different ways and they've often had a social or religious agenda.
It seems the oldest definition of ‘thrift' has nothing to do with saving money and is
connected to the verbs ‘thrive' and ‘flourish' - meaning to grow or develop successfully.
It was only later with the Puritans - 16th century English Christians with a reputation for
strict discipline - that the meaning of thrift changed and became associated with
frugality - being careful not to spend too much money or eat too much food.
The Puritans believed that being frugal was a religious
virtue and that people ought to save money in order to give to others in need.
Later on the meaning of ‘thrift' changed again. During the Victorian era,
it was connected to the idea of managing your own money in order to be a responsible citizen.
Throughout history then, there have been different versions of ‘thrift',
and this may be because different religions or social groups had their own agenda - a
specific aim or reason for a particular group to do something. For example, the Victorian
definition of thrift was based on a social agenda about being a respectable member of society.
Ideas about frugality and thrift changed again during the Second World War when the public
was encouraged to avoid waste so that every material resource could go into the war effort.
And in the post-war period, it changed again as
people's wealth and standard of living increased. Here's Alison Hulme again:
It's the idea that once people had enough to meet their kind of basic needs
there was this kind of moral slide into consumerism.
It's not a view that I subscribe to in a simplistic sense myself - I think there's
a very fine line to tread here. There's no point denying that, certainly in the developed world,
there's been a rise in consumer capitalism, that's just a truism, but thrift hasn't declined.
In modern times, people's motivation to save up and be thrifty declined once
they had enough to meet their basic needs - the basic necessities needed to survive, like food,
clothes and shelter and nothing extra.
Alison mentions that once these basic needs were satisfied, people moved
away from thrift into consumerism, the desire to buy ‘luxury' products
which were not absolutely necessary. According to some, this created a moral slide – a decrease
in the standards of behaving in good, fair and honest ways.
The rise in consumer capitalism we have seen around the world is an
example of a truism - something that is so obviously true it is not worth repeating.
What is worth repeating is the quiz question, Neil.
Yes, I asked you how many British people had savings of under £1000.
And I said, c) 30%.
In fact, Sam, it's b) 15%.
So I guess I'm not such a bad saver after all!
OK. Well, today we've been talking about the changing meanings of ‘thrift',
an idea connected to frugality - being careful not to spend too much money.
The original meaning of ‘thrift' was to flourish - grow or develop
successfully - but that definition changed as different religious groups,
like the Puritans, promoted their own agenda - aim or reason for a particular group to do something.
In recent times, people's ability to meet their basic needs – the necessities for
survival like food and shelter, have reduced the importance of ‘thrift',
which some believe has created a moral slide – a reduction in standards of moral behaviour.
