Modi suit, Kejriwal's muffler more politically fashionable than Gandhi's khadi

The sale of PM Modi’s pinstripe suit for for point three one crore rupees is not surprising, for celebrity wear has always attracted altruistic and commercial interests. It is the context in which this sale happened that leads to questions regarding how attire and social considerations of class and culture are intermingled.

Many would suggest that the recent Assembly elections in Delhi were fought between a ten lakh rupees suit with the woven name of the prime minister and the muffler of the AAP leader Arvind Kejriwal. But what it signals more importantly is the changing discourse in public life from khadi to more unidentifiable brands of clothing.

The fascination with political attire is not new. We have been riled enough with then home minister Shivraj Patil’s multiple dress changes during press briefings regarding the Mumbai terrorist attacks in 2008 to lead to his sacking. We have also been fascinated with the brand that the Gandhis endorse and wear in all their political campaigns, and with the absence of the same when Robert Vadra wore a pair of pink trousers on his way out to vote during the general elections. However, the recent battles on attire and its suitability have been fought in the public domain, impacting the way we think of social identity and class standing.

Endorsement

During the Obama visit, the comparisons between Modi’s pinstripe and erstwhile dictator Hosni Mubarak’s similarly styled suit rang alarm bells for many. The lack of subtlety added to the loss of the carefully constructed identity of the chaiwala rising up the ranks. Did the suit really have an impact on the average voter’s mentality? But what did it mean to have and wear a suit like that? And to flaunt it?

The muffler too was flaunted but to a different impact altogether. The "mufflerman" with his broom and his Gandhi cap with the embossed writing proclaiming "Main hoon aam aadmi" resonated in remarkable ways. Here was a man who didn’t care – he was invested in his commitment to public life and attire was secondary. The new superhero proclaimed that he could save the world by wearing a low-key dress and focusing on work rather than flaunting a costume.

But where did khadi go? The ubiquitous costume of the political class since before independence seems to be already dead. Today, khadi is a fashion statement on runways, but not a political clothing anymore. Almost like the Congress that endorsed it, and endorses it still – its use has declined. Historian Dipesh Chakrabarty notes how khadi morphed into a symbol of corruption once the political class began to be identified with complicity and "impure" values. The garment was used to "present" an image of purity to cover up the real image of the political class – but the real meaning was never really lost.

Political attire has come to signify the multiple aspirations the new India seeks. Taste and distinction are now embedded within the projection of oneself in the choice of particular clothing.

Aspirational

That is not to say that clothing was never the sign of the aspirational. Brand marketing has relied on differential meanings of coveted social and cultural values to sell their products – whether clothes or cars. However, the rule of distinction and taste also fall back on ideas of breeding and social class. So while khadi was both mass-based, it was also flaunted by the upper class for its understated style and social meaning. Interestingly, in the current political climate khadi has been displaced with the discourse on conspicuous consumption. That Modi’s suit was auctioned in Surat is a pointed reflection of those who value the ideology that comes attached with attire like this. Suddenly the middle class in Delhi is not intrigued or starry-eyed with the pinstripe, but values subtlety and some degree of altruism, selflessness – surprising, considering the traditional character of Delhi as status-driven.

Fascinating are the ways in which the urban democracy in India "decodes" attire and clothing to make meaning out of representations. French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu speaks of the ways in which symbols of class and cultural distinction (in the form of goods and services) are identified by those who possess these codes through education or upbringing. However, contemporary India exposed to a wide variety of social practices through the mass media and neo-liberalism meanings attached to political posturing are quickly consumed and decoded – across classes. This also explains why the pinstripe was shipped off to be auctioned very soon after the Delhi election results.

Consumption

While conspicuous consumption in the form of multiple shoe pairs and saris as seen in the case of politicians Jayalalithaa in India and Imelda Marcos in the Philippines have always earned public wrath – this is perhaps one of the few times that the Indian public was exposed to a signature personalised style like Modi’s pinstripe. It was daring, and in-your-face and flaunted in a way that caused discomfort to many people.

Interestingly, Kejriwal flaunted his muffler too. Not discreetly but in a way that channelised his image of a regular man – which is why the posters of mufflerman were sans his face. The Aam Aadmi Party also channelised a new image of the Gandhi cap with writing proclaiming, brazenly, the newfound meaning of being political in India. We can safely bury the quiet activism and deep meaning of the Gandhi cap, its not white anymore, and is choc-a-bloc with "identification".

Political attire will never be unfashionable in India. It will continue to lead to debates regarding propriety and ideology. As long as clothing is seen to be more than just skin deep, we will continue to be mesmerised by its multiple meanings.