Like words, fashion is a tricky tool. They are both a form of expression, the first is verbal, and the latter is visual. The similarity _ they can make or break a person.
Fashion can make a person when it's used with tact and wit to send the right message to your audience. It enhances both identity and intent, and as Pulitzer Prize-winning fashion correspondent Robin Givhan once said, "politicians are more concerned about the messages they convey, the way in which they're coming across to their constituency and the way in which they're perceived, than any other group of people I can think of, except perhaps, for entertainers."
Not that we expect our politicians to strut the Parliament House dressed in a Giorgio Armani three-piece suit _ flash brands aren't the dress code for politicians. They're, before they become ministers and all sorts, a representative. As our representative, they need to look like one of us and Thai politicians have been using clothes as a way to show their "being just like people in the country" for ages without being aware of it. I'm talking about that traditional loin cloth they tie around their waist whenever they go out on the election campaign. It's their way of showing they're one of the country folk.
But the art of self-expression is tricky, be it verbal or non-verbal. Even the most hypnotic of all words become empty when they are not materialised. Even worse, they become evidence of the speaker's failure in taking action. Barack Obama should know best.
Fashion, as much as it can enhance your presence, can be a distraction and frivolity once you fail to demonstrate you have much more than just a sense of style. Take dear old Sienna Miller. You can recall dozens of examples of her red-carpet oomph but even our dear movie critic Kong Rithdee shrieked "No, I cannot!" when asked to name three films starring Sienna Miller in only 10 seconds.
Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra is undergoing a similar misfortune that overshadows Miss Miller's acting career. Her flawless dress sense that compliments the statuesque physique, and also the element that had earned her huge admiration from fans and observers, has now become what she's been attacked for. Her detractors have used her strength _ her dress sense _ to make a frivolity out of the premier's recent international appearances. Democrat MP Thepthai Senapong deemed her participation at the World Economic Forum in Davos "a demonstration of fashion, not vision".
I can't say I'm a fan of such snideness, since it won't get the Democrats anywhere beyond the amused giggles of their die-hard fans, but sadly, there's some blatant truth in his words. From Delhi to Davos, the Thai premier has charmed the press with her immaculate wardrobe selections, with the Mail Online India calling her style as a cross between Michelle Obama's penchant for high-street and Carla Bruni's love for elegant classic. What makes her stand out is the fact that she's not even the First Lady, but rather the prime minister.
That is a double-edged sword, after all. First Ladies aren't politicians and the expectations people have of them are different from what we expect from our politicians. First Ladies can dress to kill and nobody's going to kill them if they stand by the side of the president to welcome guests dressed from head to toe in Gucci. There's probably some bunch of uptight and jaded cynics who couldn't care less what Obama and Bruni wear, but want to know what they have done so far as the First Lady. But let's admit it, you remember nothing substantial Jackie Kennedy did that has made her one of the best-known First Ladies but we all know she's a one-of-a-kind style icon.
Female politicians are completely different. It's nice to have a female premier who looks great, but at the end of the day, we all know a country isn't run by a tailored boxy suit, an Hermes scarf and a pair of kitten heels. It's not the hairstyle, but rather what's in the head that makes a capable prime minister. Thepthai's sarcastic remark could just come from the fact that, during the prime minister's visit to India and her participation at the WEF in Davos, the only aspect of her covered by the international media was her appearance, and well, her plan regarding her ousted prime minister brother Thaksin Shinawatra.
Nobody mentioned her speech, nor could she give a clear picture of how she would convince business investors of Thailand's stability as a place for investment. She might have remembered by heart the amount of the loan she planned to acquire in constructing a sustainable flood-prevention plan, but if I'm a foreign investor, what I want to know isn't the hefty digits, but instead how exactly is the plan going to be executed? How is she, as the premier, planning to solve the insurance crisis as the insurance companies refuse to cover flood risk for corporate customers?
If she cannot answer all these questions, it's hard to believe her visit to Davos could be anything beyond a demonstration of her grace and dress sense.