Seven Oaks Magazine.

Camo-commercialism: The implications of military chic
January 25, 2007
Dale McCartney

It is easy for Canadians to forget that we live in a country currently at war, occupying an independent nation half way across the world. Although the death of every Canadian soldier receives extensive media coverage, the war otherwise receives little public discussion (if you don’t believe me, see Dave Markland’s recent piece on Operation Medusa). When it is discussed, it’s as a sort of peacekeeping venture in which Canada is generously bestowing independent liberal ideas to the benighted residents of Afghanistan.

But thankfully, fashion designers – at least the nameless sort that design the clothes that fill the Gap and other mall stores, and thus clothe most of us – are working to make sure that we never forget our fellow citizens in arms. A casual stroll through a mall here in the Lower Mainland will reveal what I mean: this season’s fashion is definitely military chic.

Sometimes, the military chic is subtle. Cargo pants, an omnipresent part of modern male fashion, originated as military fatigues, equipped with many pockets to store the various gadgets and supplies every soldier needs in the field. Their application to the modern urban environment is apropos, considering the heavy emphasis on urban combat in modern military operations.

In case you think that is too subtle, though, the Gap and others are prepared to be a lot more explicit. Military fatigues are back in, in camouflage no less. The front page of the “pants” section on gap.com announces the arrival of the “infantry pant.” As the ad tells us: “We’ve raised the stakes on cargo style with out new infantry pant. You’ll love the extra large pockets, soft durable cotton, and drawstring hems for the true military feel.” Of course, the true military feel would include extended tours of duty and the threat of IEDs, but I suppose verisimilitude only goes so far. The Gap’s sister store, Old Navy, describes the camo look as “rugged,” a sentiment American Eagle seems to echo in their camouflage shorts, which appear on the front page of the men’s section of ae.com.

It is difficult to assign responsibility for something like this fashion trend to any one thing, although it would be foolish not to recognize that it is linked to the wars, both in Afghanistan and Iraq. At first glance, the prevalence of military symbolism – American Eagle even sells dog tags as jewelry, encouraging their customers to “show ‘em who you support” – may seem to run counter to the agenda of mainstream media, which tends to downplay the war, especially in Canada. But first glances can be deceiving.

Of course, mainstream media sources are working hard to brand the war as peacekeeping, and the crass camo-commercialism of the Gap and its competitors seems at odds with this. But there is a clear cultural place for this sort of fashion, one that actually helps elite attempts to justify the war. While news media make the war seem less severe, the Gap makes the war more palatable, by making the symbolism more popular.

There is an interesting parallel with the role professional sports have often played in times of war. Although they have certainly not always been bastions of conservative support for Imperialism (Muhammad Ali’s stand against the Vietnam war comes to mind), the most corporate of sports have often been a place where the people in power can impart conservative, pro-war messages under the cover of celebrating the values of sport and nationalism. The National Football League’s attempt to canonize Pat Tillman is one example, but here in Canada we can be just as crass. The players in the 2006 Grey Cup, the championship game for the Canadian Football League, were driven to the stadium in the same armoured personnel carriers Canadian troops use in Afghanistan. And last week, on Hockey Day in Canada, before the Maple Leafs-Canucks game, an extended parade of veterans of the war in Afghanistan was staged before the game, to celebrate their heroism.

Professional sports leagues make the war more palatable to Canadians by connecting it to their favourite entertainment, and by associating it with the values of sport. The Gap and American Eagle make the war more acceptable by lending it their brand’s credibility – by making it cool, stylish, and visible everywhere. This sort of campaign, linked with mainstream media voices insisting that the war is right and just, creates consensus among citizens and consumers, a consensus that supports the war. Selling fatigues in a time of war, or wearing them for that matter, is part of the process of normalizing these conflicts. In a sense, the Gap is on the frontlines of the ongoing debate in Canada about the war in Afghanistan.