Before, the concern was to decipher the trend of a given moment. Then came the search for what will come tomorrow, and the need to be ahead of the curve. Today, more than knowing what comes next, we want to have the power to influence and determine it. The battle for popularity leaves no survivors, but what happens when the viral reaches its expiration date, the popular becomes obsolete, and what was so inescapably in becomes out?
Before, the concern was to decipher the trend of a given moment. Then came the search for what will come tomorrow, and the need to be ahead of the curve. Today, more than knowing what comes next, we want to have the power to influence and determine it. The battle for popularity leaves no survivors, but what happens when the viral reaches its expiration date, the popular becomes obsolete, and what was so inescapably in becomes out?
I begin this article with a brief collective exercise of abstraction. Close your eyes – are they closed? It’s the year 2018. Donald Trump is serving the second year of his presidential term in the United States. Meghan Markle marries Prince Harry and officially becomes part of the British royal family. The #MeToo movement gains recognition on a global scale after the appearance of the first allegations against Harvey Weinstein the previous year. The idea of a global pandemic is not part of anyone’s vision board. Among many other events considered relevant from a social and geopolitical perspective, allow me to direct your attention to one in particular: in 2018, the name “Khaleesi” was part of the ranking of the 1000 most popular baby names in the United States (“Daenerys” did not make the list, even though 171 babies were registered under this name in the same year). As an isolated event, these are figures that could raise some confusion and perplexity — of the very specific type that only the USA is truly capable of providing —, had it not been in 2018 that the Game of Thrones series (2011-2019) launched its seventh and penultimate season. Rewinding to this moment of obsession implies, at the same time, becoming aware that after May 2019, the release date of the last episode, we never heard a word about it again, and, consequently, the number of children subject to being dubbed “mother of dragons” their entire lives became, once again, residual. Continuing to call things by their names, this same 2018 ranking placed the name “Karen” at position 635, the decline of which in the last two years is not due to the wrap up of a global television phenomenon, but to the power of social networks, and of the Tik Tok algorithm. “Karen” became an adjective, more than a proper name, used to describe a very specific archetype of middle-aged women (the name was exceptionally common in the 50s and 60s in the USA), privileged, Caucasian, but above all, annoying—the kind that won't pass up an opportunity to talk to the manager. With this, I wanted to achieve a simple demonstration of results: the notion that talking about popularity, whether it be a name, a series, a book, or a trend, is only truly possible when taking into account its eventual (but certain) decline.
It doesn't seem like a particularly difficult conclusion to reach, but the pace and the very approach to the concept of popularity has undergone severe changes in recent years. As far as Fashion is concerned, this evolution is painfully obvious, if only because of the very structure of the system as we know it today. Let's do the math: a fashion brand produces two main collections, Autumn/Winter + Spring/Summer; to these we add Cruise, usually presented outside the official calendar of fashion weeks, at the beginning of Spring; two Couture collections (if the prestige level of the brand allows it), and possibly even two pre-collections for each season respectively. Therefore, the potential inherent to any item, silhouette, or look, has its days numbered, and has long ceased to be determined by the thumb rotation of one editor-in-chief or another, but by the level of desirability it is capable to produce when introduced to the stream of millions of articles and stimuli reaching the masses. The blaming of the collective need for something new every waking minute, together with the lack of ethical awareness in consumption, are almost immediate, but appear as mere symptoms in the general scheme of human behavior — the causes, these seem to be rooted elsewhere. We sat down with Rita Fonseca, Senior Product Manager at Farfetch, in an attempt to pinpoint the true driver of this evolution between what's in and what's out. Starting at the beginning implies looking at the past, at the way in which we identify not only the concept of a trend, but of a product. “In the past, we had ideas and products that were much more complex and elaborate. In contrast, nowadays, what sets a trend is something that is not only fresh and new, but real, clean, and authentic. A fundamental requirement is that the user or customer can easily relate to the message associated with the product beyond its aesthetic and visual value. A brilliant item or idea alone is no longer enough in this constantly changing market context — it is the importance of the message that makes the difference.” It thus becomes, as in so many other cases and analyses, practically inevitable to circumvent the connection between the success of a trend and the subtext that accompanies it. The simplicity of the object is filled with the projection of a sense of identity, of a self-definition of its user within the limits of a given moment in time, or generation. “Gen Z has been preponderant in introducing certain structural themes that influence the market, such as gender identity, the attempt to reinvent the past... High turnover speed makes the market more dangerous, but it also represents a challenge for creators and trend-setters: to discover how to establish deeper connections between the current panorama and the way we create memories in relation to art.”
It was roughly around this time that we entered a turning point in the discussion. When considering the positioning trend-setter vs. follower, the preference was — and for many still is — considered as obvious as any other analytical or economic law out there. I decided to pose the question, even at the risk of showing some apparent naivety: can we still assume this ranking with the same thoughtlessness? Or could it be that the priorities that are at stake today in trying to not only achieve, but maintain the popularity of a certain product or trend, have produced changes in how desirable that position really is? Simply put, is the optimal positioning still to always be ahead of the curve? “The answer is highly complex, and this is precisely where we have to consider the decisive input of technology, especially when it comes to current challenges such as stock management, distribution networks, among others. It was the very evolution of the architecture of algorithms that allowed for a much safer response to these needs.” Considering the preponderance of platforms like Farfetch in determining the longevity of one or another trend, it would be expected that this analysis was to be built around technology as the main keyword. In an attempt to translate decades of research and technological advances into a few words (and even fewer lines), Rita went on to compare the so-called algorithmic architectures of recent years, and their consequent repercussions on the lifespan of an idea or trend. “Artificial intelligence algorithms, until now, worked to respond to the needs of a given moment, of today or yesterday, in which the architecture mapped the tastes of that particular user or customer. Now, we have the possibility of associating these preferences in order of similarity between individuals, which allows the prediction of new tastes based on the existing information. An excellent reference for this generative AI concept is Spotify. Based on what we listen to, and what we don't, the weekly suggestion of playlists with new artists that are often unknown to us allows us to reveal what we're going to like tomorrow without us realizing it, and that's what we look for as consumers.” In other words, perhaps the most important exercise is to forget about the curve altogether. More than a simple attempt at prediction, the projection of what may turn out to be the preferences of a given sample opens the door to a much more exciting possibility - that of influencing what comes next.
While attempting to read and predict the popularity potential are seemingly remote concepts for the consumer, the “cancellation” or obliteration of a trend, product, or individual seems perfectly within the reach of a single person. The ease (and, one could argue, carelessness) with which online culture dictates the end of the reign of something that until then seemed to meet all the requirements of timelessness, highlights the power of the consumer — we have lost mental count of the number of influencers that fell in disgrace, viral aesthetic codes reduced to cognitive lapses, even colors that we associate with a “phase” with which we no longer identify, so often due to the upload of a single video, the expression of an opinion, or simply to the collective fatigue we feel in the face of constant stimulation. If the global attention span continues to plummet, the content we consume is increasingly succinct, its absorption more immediate, and the dopamine shot is always better than the gradual (and reflected) digestion of these incentives, how can a brand aspire to produce something more significant than a momentary bleep in the turmoil of the market? “The joint effort that takes place on the companies' side is to understand the timeline of the group's tastes, assuming its constant mutation. In the case of Fashion, the most successful brands are those that manage to ensure consistency between the online and offline experience, and that are not only present in the product discovery and purchase journey, but that manage to establish a meaningful relationship with the customer in the pre- and post-sale. The perpetuation of affinity with the brand makes it possible to go beyond that momentary contact, in which the interest becomes permanent. The production of relevant content, which is inspiring, and 'awakens' in the customer the availability for a more sustainable consumption pattern is what allows a more transversal positioning to the constant disturbances of the speed of the market.”
I couldn't help but entertaining a parallel thought, a slight provocation: there is nothing truly original. With rare exceptions (recurrently signed by E. Musk and company), the expiry date of the notion of popularity seems to have been catalyzed by the motivations of an eternally dissatisfied market, but that prefers to look inwards and backwards in search of evasion rather than forward. In what we can interpret as a kind of return to the future, we identify the clear desire to redesign, reinvent, and revisit the trends for which we nurture a stronger emotional connection. When we talk about storytelling, narratives capable of producing a lasting impression and that we subconsciously look for in almost everything we consume, we quickly reach the same conclusion. “Often, it is with the first years of life, and childhood in general, that we identify the creation of purer and more authentic memories. The references we establish in these decisive periods of our lives thus often end up touching on that feeling of nostalgia. The return of the 90s, Y2K... The past remains attractive when it is reinvented in light of current needs”, Rita concludes. Objectively, it is perhaps too ambitious to look for a mathematical formula that explains the validity of certain moments versus others as far as popularity is concerned. While technology hands us the tools to decide what we'll love or hate tomorrow, this consumerist version of childhood nostalgia suggests that what we've lived through for decades may have already cast the dice for us. Thus, the master key to our own sense of identity continues in an infinite digestion of trends, until the moment when we realize that we had it in our back pocket this entire time.
Translated from the original on The [Un]Popular Issue, published July 2023.Full stories and credits on the print issue.
Most popular
.jpg)
“Chamo-lhe campo de férias”: como é realmente ser um VIC (“Very Important Client”) na Semana de Alta-Costura de Paris
05 Feb 2025


Relacionados
.jpg)

.jpg)
Este foi o acessório que toda a gente usou durante a Semana de Moda de Copenhaga
06 Feb 2025