In Peep Show (series 6, episode 4), Mark Corrigan’s voice-over remarks that, other than ‘mare’, ‘pants’, and ‘builder’s tea’, the British middle classes don’t coin much slang. I find this accusation quite poignant, a piece of Peep Show wisdom which validates my exam-term procrastination on Netflix.

Taking the middle-class nature of Cantab culture for granted, I considered whether David Mitchell’s assertion holds true in 2017. After considering idiosyncratic terms like Plodge, Pidge, and the word ‘chat’ (to mean banter… for example, “he’s got shit chat”, or “we had great chat”, or “that’s brilliant chat”), I’ve concluded that he was right – these colloquialisms are pretty limited. However, I also think that ‘wavey garms’ is an interesting recent addition to this tragic assortment of bourgeois jargon, and this column is a great place to dissect the concept...

Wavey garms are great: the concept, the choice of words, and the clothes themselves. The notion of wavey garms frees up fashion choices immensely… it doesn’t match?

It’s too big for you?

It was a fiver from a Mill Road charity shop?

It’s not actually an item of clothing?

It’s nightwear?

It’s your grandma’s?

It’s your dad’s?

Great, you’ve achieved waveyness! Such an inclusive and tolerant genre of fashion entirely liberates your wardrobe, especially for those who wouldn’t otherwise push boundaries. The all-encompassing nature of ‘wavey garms’ allows you to develop your own specific branch of waveyness – whether this involves clashing patterns, layering fabrics, or hunting down the brightest vintage sportswear to complete your 90s raver aesthetic. (I’ve included some of my favourite examples of this exploration. Most come from the queen of wavey garms and Downing fresher, Eli Hayes.)

The more I ponder this artistic freedom, however, the more pessimistic I become about wavey garms. It is slightly discerning that all boundary-breaking fashion choices can be described and boxed up by a single piece of middle-class slang.

If any combination of clothing, no matter how unique, can now be identified under one umbrella term, is it ever possible to rebel through our fashion choices?

Foucault argued that we are all oppressed by the invisible power of discourse, and that those who break societal boundaries lose control and power, once their behaviour becomes ‘normalised’ and summarised through a label. He uses historical examples of homosexuality and insanity, but I would apply this theory to the eccentric clothing of 2017. It is worsened by the heterogeneous nature of wavey garms – any fashion choice which once signified a total rejection of the mainstream, now indicates conspicuous conformity to a trendy Hipster genre.

A truly rebellious individual can’t escape the accusation that they are simply following the trend of wavey garms, and we are progressing towards a culture where it is impossible to wear anything which is perceived as remotely rebellious or shocking. Perhaps this issue will develop to the extent that the edgiest students will start turning up to lectures wearing chinos and a Burberry jacket, as anything else is just too mainstream. Scary stuff.

"The all-encompassing nature of ‘wavey garms’ allows you to develop your own specific branch of waveyness"

To follow another line of interpretation, it goes without saying that our fashion choices are symbolic: we are subtly aware of how our clothing might be interpreted, and can certainly make judgements about others based on their clothing (that, or I’m just ridiculously shallow).

Thus, I think the value of wavey garms might also lie in their association with gap yahs, worldy travels and becoming oh-so cultured and deep. Perhaps the concept of wavey garms is so middle-class because it exists in a sphere where economic wealth isn’t a subject of competition or insecurity.

We don’t feel obliged to wear symbols which prove economic capital, so we use our fashion choices to display cultural capital, demonstrated by our ability to make interesting and diverse fashion choices. This plays into the fact that eccentric clothing can no longer indicate rebellion: what once indicated an individual’s total lack of adherence to mainstream fashion, now carries connotations of privilege.

Social Deconstruction: Cambridge Swaps

To be honest, I don’t think wavey garms are a cultural development which we should really worry about. They’re a vast improvement on previous trends which idolise expensive brands or monotonous combinations of jeans and hoodies. I’m much happier to conform to culottes and grandma blouses, and would hate to be transported back to year 8, where Holister t-shirts prevailed.

Whilst the emancipatory nature of wavy garms may prevent any real rebellion through fashion choices, I’d much rather celebrate the creativity which the genre fosters (don’t get me wrong – my chinos and Burberry are at the ready for when typical wavey garms expand beyond the realm of edginess)