Thestandardofreputabilityrequiresthatdressshouldshowwastefulexpenditure；butallwastefulnessisoffensivetonativetaste。Thepsychologicallawhasalreadybeenpointedoutthatallmen——andwomenperhapseveninahigherdegreeabhorfutility，whetherofeffortorofexpenditure——muchasNaturewasoncesaidtoabhoravacuum。Buttheprincipleofconspicuouswasterequiresanobviouslyfutileexpenditure；andtheresultingconspicuousexpensivenessofdressisthereforeintrinsicallyugly。Hencewefindthatinallinnovationsindress，eachaddedoraltereddetailstrivestoavoidcondemnationbyshowingsomeostensiblepurpose，atthesametimethattherequirementofconspicuouswastepreventsthepurposefulnessoftheseinnovationsfrombecominganythingmorethanasomewhattransparentpretense。Eveninitsfreestflights，fashionrarelyifevergetsawayfromasimulationofsomeostensibleuse。Theostensibleusefulnessofthefashionabledetailsofdress，however，isalwayssotransparentamake-believe，andtheirsubstantialfutilitypresentlyforcesitselfsobaldlyuponourattentionastobecomeunbearable，andthenwetakerefugeinanewstyle。Butthenewstylemustconformtotherequirementofreputablewastefulnessandfutility。Itsfutilitypresentlybecomesasodiousasthatofitspredecessor；andtheonlyremedywhichthelawofwasteallowsusistoseekreliefinsomenewconstruction，equallyfutileandequallyuntenable。Hencetheessentialuglinessandtheunceasingchangeoffashionableattire。
Havingsoexplainedthephenomenonofshiftingfashions，thenextthingistomaketheexplanationtallywitheverydayfacts。
Amongtheseeverydayfactsisthewell-knownlikingwhichallmenhaveforthestylesthatareinvogueatanygiventime。Anewstylecomesintovogueandremainsinfavorforaseason，and，atleastsolongasitisanovelty，peopleverygenerallyfindthenewstyleattractive。Theprevailingfashionisfelttobebeautiful。Thisisduepartlytothereliefitaffordsinbeingdifferentfromwhatwentbeforeit，partlytoitsbeingreputable。Asindicatedinthelastchapter，thecanonofreputabilitytosomeextentshapesourtastes，sothatunderitsguidanceanythingwillbeacceptedasbecominguntilitsnoveltywearsoff，oruntilthewarrantofreputabilityistransferredtoanewandnovelstructureservingthesamegeneralpurpose。Thattheallegedbeauty，or“loveliness，“ofthestylesinvogueatanygiventimeistransientandspuriousonlyisattestedbythefactthatnoneofthemanyshiftingfashionswillbearthetestoftime。Whenseenintheperspectiveofhalf-a-dozenyearsormore，thebestofourfashionsstrikeusasgrotesque，ifnotunsightly。Ourtransientattachmenttowhateverhappenstobethelatestrestsonotherthanaestheticgrounds，andlastsonlyuntilourabidingaestheticsensehashadtimetoassertitselfandrejectthislatestindigestiblecontrivance。
Theprocessofdevelopinganaestheticnauseatakesmoreorlesstime；thelengthoftimerequiredinanygivencasebeinginverselyasthedegreeofintrinsicodiousnessofthestyleinquestion。Thistimerelationbetweenodiousnessandinstabilityinfashionsaffordsgroundfortheinferencethatthemorerapidlythestylessucceedanddisplaceoneanother，themoreoffensivetheyaretosoundtaste。Thepresumption，therefore，isthatthefartherthecommunity，especiallythewealthyclassesofthecommunity，developinwealthandmobilityandintherangeoftheirhumancontact，themoreimperativelywillthelawofconspicuouswasteassertitselfinmattersofdress，themorewillthesenseofbeautytendtofallintoabeyanceorbeoverbornebythecanonofpecuniaryreputability，themorerapidlywillfashionsshiftandchange，andthemoregrotesqueandintolerablewillbethevaryingstylesthatsuccessivelycomeintovogue。
Thereremainsatleastonepointinthistheoryofdressyettobediscussed。Mostofwhathasbeensaidappliestomen’sattireaswellastothatofwomen；althoughinmoderntimesitappliesatnearlyallpointswithgreaterforcetothatofwomen。