A s(c)andal story!

 

Imagine being born into a family where your parents, grandparents, and generations before you spent their whole lives building one business and putting in hard work, passion, and everything they had to make it what it is today. And then one day, a luxury brand sitting across the world just takes that legacy without giving any credit. That’s what happened three months back in India. ‘The Prada vs Kolhapuri chappal’ controversy. A craft that’s been carried forward by families of Maharashtra and Karnataka for 12 generations was showcased at Milan Fashion Week. Prada just called them “leather sandals”. No mention of India. And sold for over ₹1 lakh with no recognition at all. This provoked major backlash as it was seen as a form of cultural appropriation. 

In fact, in 2019, Kolhapuri chappals were granted GI status (Geographical Indication), which protects the traditions and cultural knowledge of the artisans.GI status comes under Chapter IV of the Act. Section 21(1)(b) grants users who have authorized GI (Section 17) the exclusive right to use such a sign in relation to goods for which it is granted. As per Rule 56 of the Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Rules, 2002, for registration as an authorised user, a producer has to submit an application to the Registrar in Form GI-3 along with a “Statement of Case”. This may be accompanied by a letter of consent from the GI’s registered proprietors. But in a report by TOI, it mentioned that GI protection doesn’t apply outside India’s borders. Based in Mhalunge, Korakari sells footwear branded as “Kolhapuri Chappals”. The company is registered as an authorised user under the name of “Divyam Leather Crafts”. Earlier, Kolhapuri Chappals faced the “proverbial threat of ‘Chinese imitation’. Not just this Kolhapuri tradition, the Indian Jhola was hyped as “Indian souvenir tote”, dupattas as “Scandinavian scarves”, and lehengas as “maxi skirts”. These are the clear examples of Indian culture and tradition theft. 

In the case of Kolhapuri chappal and Prada controversy, Prada showed  “toe-ring sandals” in their spring collection, which were very identical to Indian Kolhapuri chappals. As the chappals are GI Protected in India, and the mention of Indian artisans was nowhere, a PIL has been filed against the luxury fashion brand, Prada, alleging the violation of intellectual property rights on the introduction of the new sandals by the brand, which were deceptively similar to the famous Kolhapuri chappals and also advertised them as their original products, and gain a huge profit. Just like in this case, they set the price of these chappals at 1.2 lakhs, whereas in India, these chappals are priced at 1000 rupees. Reacting to the increasing accusations of cultural appropriation, Lorenzo Bertelli, Prada's head of corporate social responsibility and son of the company's owners, acknowledged the Indian roots of the design in a letter sent to the chamber of commerce.

"We acknowledge that the sandals are inspired by traditional Indian handcrafted footwear, which carries a rich cultural legacy," wrote Bertelli in the letter, according to news agency Reuters.

“If they keep doing this, our names will disappear while they profit off our legacy.”

Legally, it all happened for the protection of our culture and a lesson through such incidents. But as an Indian, there are a few things that we should keep in mind. Firstly, we Gen Z need to understand that legacy can’t be preserved through just Instagram reels. A ₹500–₹600 handcrafted chappal is being sold under a brand name for ₹1–1.5 lakh, and just because it fits our aesthetic, it doesn’t mean it’s okay to buy it. Secondly, there are a few silver linings. Social media might be a part of that, most pages out there are IT-sellouts. They’re flexing pride, not the outrage. Without recognition, what’s the point of global reach? Third, Prada did later admit that Kolhapuris were their “inspiration.” But what if they'd collaborated from the start? Even the local kurti shop guy does collabs. If Prada had officially worked with Indian artisans, it could’ve been a massive global brand working with rich Indian culture. Sure, we’re happy our work is reaching the world, but if this becomes a pattern, in the name of capitalism, they’ll erase our identity from the story.