William Good: Clothing Re-Made from Second Hand Sources
by Collin Dunn, Corvallis, OR, USA on 11. 1.07
What do you get when you combine an iconic underwear designer and Goodwill's second-hand apparel? William Good, of course; it's a new project of Nick Graham, the San Francisco-based fashion designer behind Joe Boxer, who is teaming up with local Goodwill stores to create new apparel from old, second-hand clothing.
Here's how it works: after 30 days on the floor, whatever hasn't sold at Goodwill gets discarded. Graham grabs this bounty, which is 75% of all donations, and re-fashions, re-designs and re-makes them into whimsical one-of-a-kind creations that will go on sale at the very same Goodwill (on Fillmore and Post streets, for those of you in the Bay Area) in mid-November.
This is the first of what Goodwill hopes to be a country- and then world-wide trend; second-hand is already a greener way to go, and adding another life cycle to unwanted apparel headed for landfill makes it even moreso. If you aren't in San Francisco, you can shop online starting November 15. ::William Good via ::Core77
The link below has some good green fashion advice. Check it out...
http://greenpieceblog.blogspot.com/2007/10/green-fashionistas.html
Hi there - I work with the William Good line, and I just wanted to clarify that 75% number. It's actually that Goodwill diverts 75% of its donations FROM THE LANDFILL.
That means that when things don't sell in our stores, one of the (many) directions they go is to be collected for William Good. It's just one step in the process that keeps 17 million pounds of donations being reused and recycled each year.
Hi there - I work with the William Good line, and I just wanted to clarify that 75% number. It's actually that Goodwill diverts 75% of its donations FROM THE LANDFILL.
That means that when things don't sell in our stores, one of the (many) directions they go is to be collected for William Good. It's just one step in the process that keeps 17 million pounds of donations being reused and recycled each year.
Maybe I don't understand...So this designer get all the leftover from Goodwill stores for free?
It will be 3 years I buy regularly at my Goodwill store clothing in order to recycle them for my business.
I would never want these articles for free because the money which goes into the Goodwill association helps some people to get a decent work (and I love to see the staff laughing and kidding and having a good time at my local Goodwill).
So what would be the point into receiving clothing for free for Goodwill?
i LOVE EARTH GNAR
Nick Graham, Mr. Joe Boxer, made all of his money and success in overseas manufacturing and marketing. Applying this formula to a recycled clothing design company is not going to work. First of all, he does not uphold the purpose of recycling clothing as a global effort to save the world, he is simply backing a trend that is sweeping through San Francisco. Naturally, one assumes that the reason recycling clothing is so important is to avoid filling the landfill with materials that do not break down; rayon, nylon, spandex, and other synthetics. However, Nick, being the trendy individual he is, has removed all of these items from the line and insists that we use only naturally grown materials from plants and animals; cotton, wool, cashmere, etc. The trend being that 100% cotton is essentially "more green", more people are choosing to wear it, the mental association is there when using plant and animal grown fibers as RAW MATERIAL. Isn't the entire point of creative reuse to divert materials from landfill that don't break down?
Nick Graham is a very logo related individual. His marketing technique, according to the William Good business proposal written in December of 2006, is to view the label as "an amusement park, and the garment is the souvenir." He is relying solely on the label to carry this product into popularity. Of course everyone believes this partnership is a good idea, that it's important and necessary, and surely Mr. Boxer relishes all the attention he gets for being brilliant in the cause as he hands out his t-shirts with and cartoon dog sewn onto the back. The only problem, is that his garments are so trendy they won't last a season. The shirts are priced very high, the creative technique very low, essentially giving the garment one season cycle before it returns to Goodwill. I was under the impression that to avoid waste and give people a high priced one-of-a-kind garment would involve not creating the exact same looking t-shirt a person could buy in the store brand new for half the price. This changes nothing about the way people view fashion, the impact it has on the environment, the impact on how we treat each other; for if the notion that one cannot be judged on the clothes they wear, because no two garments are alike, then everything about fashion that made people, especially women, feel bad about themselves would change also. Why the need to get a Gucci, when you can get a Gucci mixed with Dior, a Target brand, and a handmade scarf and you will receive compliments on it's originality, enjoy a high quality material and construction, and no one can copy you. Though it seems that this is the direction of William Good, I assure you that the garments coming out the production room are the same as when they came in, except there is now some kind of "logo" appliqued to it, and maybe 15% of the garments are actually reconstructed.
So, here's how you divert materials to landfill, save the environment, and make a profit:
Offer a partnership with all the boutiques and designers around the city and beyond to get in on this "recycled design" idea. Grant them access to the as-is bins in return for 10% of their profits for as long as they use Goodwill as their source. As the popularity grows in the bay area and LA on the underground scene and bigger corporations start to take interest, extend the offer to them at the same price, and, of course, have your own boutique. The idea of Goodwill executing this idea individually is apart of the same problem that made the fashion industry so wasteful in the first place. Everyone wants their own boutique, everyone wants their own line, everyone wants their own million dollars. Meanwhile, all the natural resources are being swallowed up and labor exploited around the world to keeps all the "me me me's" happy. You cannot apply the formula that made that fashion industry a problem into the solution, nor should we pretend that it's "at least a start...it's a good start" because we weaken ourselves with this lie and it does not help the cause, it only nullifies it in the long run because history will look on Goodwill as an example of how creative reuse actually doesn't work, and will turn to other sources that have made it work, and if Goodwill still wants it's own boutique it will have to follow someone else's example at a serious loss. Build your network, extend the offer to more people at a lower price, because it will attract people from higher positions to take interest, this is the way of the fashion industry---everyone following around the cool kid.
Thank you for posting the analysis of the William Good label project by anon. I have been recycling by both shopping and donating to Good Will for years at my local Salvation Army store. Individual recycling makes a lot more sense than the trendy labeling option you commented on above.