does size matter

Headlines announce Kmart decides to stop using the term ‘plus’ and instead brand these items ‘fabulous sized’. Part of me rolls my eyes and another part of me wonders if this is the disruption that the industry needs.

For years I hovered in the purgatory that exists between ‘regular’ size 14 and ‘plus’ size 16. I didn’t fit in either. There was a short period when I fit into the no longer Additionelle size 12. It was great. I shopped at one store and everything was always on sale because no one really fit that size. Before that it was flip-flopping the aisles at Cotton Ginny where a plus size 12 fit better than a regular size 14 but cost between $5 and $8 more because they used more fabric – no word of a lie this was their rationale for charging larger women more for their clothes. Instead of being honest and admitting they had a captive market with almost no alternative and they could get away with it.

Fortunately the industry keeps adjusting sizes and adding “00” – what used to be size 2. So now I can, mostly, comfortably buy clothes, provided ‘that bitch’ doesn’t get there first and clear out the one size 12/14 that the store has. Although admittedly I most buy knit wear anymore so I have a little give to work with.

I’m not a size warrior. I really don’t care what the label says I just want the clothes to fit properly and be flattering. But what I have never understood is that we know there is a market out there for larger sizes and yet retailers continue to leave money on the table pretending this market doesn’t exist. 

Or perhaps even worse, they shutter this group into online shopping, keeping those larger bodies out of the shops to fit some sort of aesthetic that really shouldn’t exist. And frankly, if you asked most people, nobody is that offended by. Yes I know there are major fat shaming issues out there. I’ve seen it. I’ve heard it. I’ve had it done to me. What I’m hoping to address in this post isn’t this subject. It’s the completely and utter lack of interest in a market that makes money.

Let’s back up for a minute. Buying your clothes off the rack is a relatively new idea. Up until midway through the last century you picked your dresses from a model or a drawing, you were measured and your garment made. If you couldn't afford that you often made your own garments. For centuries prêt a porter was limited to unfitted garments, night clothes and gloves. Simply; your clothes were made to fit you. When ready to wear became prevalent the idea of sizing came into play and suddenly you needed to fit your clothes. But ask any well dressed person and the secret they’ll keep is tailoring. There is no such thing as standard sizing and sizes are designed to make the most efficient use of fabric, not to fit an actual body.

There’s always the fact that conspicuous consumption, the concept of disposable clothing is also fairly new. And it’s an entirely different subject. Not so long ago you had a few well made garments that were expected to last for years. When your good dress wore out a bit you kept wearing it but it was downgraded to day dress or house frock. There is a massive environmental issue surrounding disposal of seldom worn garments and the lack of recycling of textiles but again I’m trying to focus here.

I have a range of friends in a range of sizes. And we all struggle to find pants that fit. Many of my self-proclaimed ‘fat’ friends have taught themselves to sew. Something I also do. However even the pattern industry doesn’t go past a size 24. There, it seems, is no winning.

Does Kmart have the right idea? I have no idea. Kmart isn’t a Canadian entity anymore so my first hand experience won’t be happening any time soon. Does my decision to try to shop in size inclusive establishments make a difference? I hope so, but so many of those continue to only cater to the larger size market via online, so I can’t shop with these friends. Does size designation really making shopping easier or does it just isolate us by labeling us in a negative way?

Am I really going to go out and ask if a shop carries ‘fabulous’ sizes? Or am I just going to ask; why can’t we just say size and get on with it?

is it a 'video killed the radio star' thing?

Retail is a finicky thing.  Betting the farm on the whims of a fickle buyer and the ever fluctuating trend.  Very few models are bulletproof, and building a reputation is that magic elixir of well planned marketing, a lot of good old work and a generous pinch of magic fairy dust.  So why is it when the now dusty or dysfunctional giants of the past shutter their doors are we so nostalgic about it?

I expect the answer includes some left over bit of fairy dust.  But are we putting too much emphasis on what once was and not evaluating what is?  Or do we only create nostalgia when we no longer shop there?

Over the past few months Toronto lost both the majority of the urban Sear's stores, the legendary Honest Ed's and very shortly mall staple, Jacob.

At first blush it seems like old institutions had had their day. But if this is my argument then why are we watching HBC resurrect itself, arguably, again.

Before Jacob, there was Cotton Ginny, or as we called it at the end, Polyester Ginny, both radically changing a well liked brand to their eventual decline.  Cotton Ginny tried to reach out beyond the basics and cotton, and it wasn’t what their customer wanted.  Jacob closed their casual store front, upped their prices and eradicated that pesky size XL from their offerings.  The quality also significantly deteriorated.  The shop was less and less full; those of us who enjoyed the casual line or needed that XL size had been abandoned.  All the while the sale section got bigger and was the first place many customers headed whenever I was in the store, myself included.  After not shopping there for several season’s I happened in recently and noted that the pricing was still more than I wanted to pay and the store wasn’t full for a weekend day.  Two days later the company announced its bankruptcy. 

Honest Ed's demise, looks from the outside to be the victim of the dollar store phenomenon and a bit of disinterest.  As in, the Mirvish's younger weren't all that interested and got an offer on the property they decided not to refuse.  Granted this is a very oversimplified answer.  But I'm not a customer of theirs, having last graced their door sometime in the mid 90's and being willing to pay just a little more for something of better quality I never went back.  I didn't get the appeal.

Sears Canada is an entirely different kettle of fish. An odd fit for downtown Toronto from the start, they set up shop in Eaton's old Toronto Eaton's Centre location shortly after Eaton's bit their own dust.  (Having worked at Eaton's TEC store in the early 90's I have some insight into what-the-what happened there, but back on point.)  Sears took up trade with modest renovations of Eaton's tired space, essentially used Eaton’s same merchandise floor plan and never really stepped it up.  It was handy if you needed a mattress or to look at vacuums, but the balance of the offerings didn't really appeal to an urban market.  As the mall upgraded their store mix and retail in general did well through the early 2000's Sears just sat there getting dusty and providing a handy hallway between the mall and the subway entrance.

If you're partial to analysis having the physical store be in competition with your catalogue was an odd choice, considering you could pick up your catalogue orders there.  And truthfully in a large centre the idea of paying for the order processing never sat well with me.  If you're partial to rumour there's a lot of accusations of using the division as a corporate type of ATM thereby devaluing the entire thing.  Oh and that stuff about an 'Ayn Rand' business philosophy used by people with 'C's' in their title.  An idea that is so farfetched I'm going to leave it over there rather than to make any sort of sense of it.

Eaton's also failed to innovate & renovate, held an entirely too large management team (people working in the walls as we called them) and a huge shrinkage and theft problem.  Yes that’s my perception, but not all of it is unfounded.

So why are we so upset when these giants fall?  Are we harbouring a nostalgia, which by definition, is no longer the reality?  Did we really think they would pull their socks up and get it sorted out or are we stubbornly hoping things never change?

By way of placing myself into a particular part of the city's history I was a very little girl when I both went to the closing of the Eaton's College Street store and then visited their new TEC location.  Later, I did at first find it weird to go to my old work location and find it was a Sears, but I got over it.  And in both the case of Eaton’s and Sears, by the time they were ready to close I wasn't shopping at either of them.

Perhaps the potential of something new in their place placates our loss?  But the new entrant is another enterprise fraught with uncertainty.  I don't know a single person who was sad to see Zeller's go but then again Target hasn't quite been a direct hit either.  I'll write soon about the anticipation by Canadians of US retailers and how we sometimes have to be careful with our expectations.

So I guess it is nostalgia. I have fond memories of the small town Woolco of the 80's but if I went there now would I be impressed?  I still sorta wonder if Cotton Ginny would have lasted now that so many retailers have decided to carry expanded size lines.  Although we still have some work to do there, but another time, another blog post.  It seems time and exposure to more choices does temper out expectations.

And sometimes, it's just that, the times, they are a changin'.

The now famous Honest Ed Signs