I was sitting on the plane from Washington, D.C., this weekend rewatching “House of Gucci” (2021) — a phenomenal film, by the way — and one line struck me. As Patrizia Reggiani (Lady Gaga) gets upset about the rise of counterfeit Gucci bags, she asks the then-chairman of Gucci, Aldo Gucci (Al Pacino) how he can be okay with the tradeoff of free marketing and subsequent profit for quality.

His response is simple: “Quality is for the rich. If a Long Island housewife wants to live with the illusion that she is a Gucci customer, why not let her?”

It rubbed me the wrong way. Fashion isn’t for everyone, but by that I mean for some people it is just clothes, and to others, it is life. Yes, price points vary, but so do prices in virtually any other industry. On the plane, I wrote these thoughts down in my favorite new notebook and finished the movie.

I couldn’t get Aldo’s sentiment out of my head, so I picked up the latest Vogue issue. Highlighting Miuccia Prada and her vast life experience, the cover story discussed how her political involvement, years of miming and general love for exploration constituted the majority of her day to day being — truthfully, fashion only comprised a third of her life.

However, the most important thing she mentioned is how she believes fashion should be useful. The businesswoman claimed that the key to her major collections, ever-growing Prada empire and continued creative genius falls under how the consumer feels. She remarked how clothing should make people feel “confident — that they can perform in life [since] fashion is a representation of one’s vision of the world. Because otherwise, I think fashion is useless.”

It’s interesting that she uses the words “useful” and “useless,” considering she later discusses her love for taking risks. Without a doubt, she has always been a trend setter; from her “ugly chic” Prada collections, inspired purely by her hatred of lace — that made clashing colors, fabrics and textures chic — to her viral Spring-Summer 2022 collection, she is, and has always been, responsible for the creative visionary behind the unstoppable force that is Miu Miu.

But, I believe what we deem as “useful” and what Prada means has different meanings. I believe that her interpretation of useful means something is versatile, more than the sum of its parts and a representation of something greater than face value. To her, something useful doesn’t have to be a tool or one item with one designated responsibility.

I understand what she means, but I still struggle with the idea of how something can be “Prada useful” when a lot of fashion is also novelty. For example, Fendi’s new keychain, as debuted in their Fall 2024 ready to wear collection, was a Chupa Chups leather lollipop holder. It’s about what Aldo Gucci said — a sense of belonging to a group by, ironically, owning something only a few have.

Another article from the March issue discussed the rising prices in fashion. Stylist Amanda Murray said, “The definition of luxury, to me, is exclusivity … it’s why people spend all this money — because they don’t want to walk down the street and see someone else wearing the same thing.”

So, then, where is the solution? What is the future of fashion?

Well, as unsatisfying as this sounds, it is both novelty and business — yet neither.

Prada’s look at fashion is from a background of business — she sees beyond the product — and justifiably so, considering her family business was luxury leather bags, she sees fashion as a creative expression rather than a sole livelihood. As such, the birth of Miu Miu and Prada Sport were extensions and new paths for her to explore her various personalities through clothing.

Murray’s life, however, is fashion: buying, seeing, matching, pairing, styling. The novelty and whimsicality of fashion twists her interpretation and passion for the industry in a more art-centric way.

But, it is a null value, not even on the typically painted fashion spectrum of business and art, because fashion is simply that: fashion. The blend of the two is what fuels the industry and pushes creatives to keep considering new perspectives.

It is what gave Givenchy a breakthrough in luxury competition when recently retired creative director Matthew Williams, the founder of ALYX, launched the “love locks” that adorned the viral shark lock boots. It is what inspires designer Maxime Chercover to create her “modular design heels” where the tip of the shoe is interchangeable to mimic four or five different pairs of shoes.

It is why Giorgio Armani, at age 89, still designs with the same pure heart and love for his brand with simple inspirations such as the one in his statement for his Fall-Winter 2024 collection: “The flowers are a sign of a better season coming and I really liked the contrast — there are no flowers in winter, I created them.”

The beauty of the industry is that it serves everyone because of the fuzzy outline of the extent of its influence. Consumers buy and become, designers create and explore, creatives promote and discover, and in my case, writers digest and learn.

Understanding practicality versus Prada’s definition of useful, your clothes are no longer categorical by nature, design or intended use. Instead, my sweater becomes my armor, warmth, memory, love, a towel and more than I can imagine. I see it for what it is and appreciate it for what it becomes as it develops its own life and its own stories.

Patrizia Gucci’s sentiment of quality is much better suited in what I am trying to get across: Take care of your clothes, and they will take care of you.

Hadyn Phillips is a junior writing about fashion in the 21st century, specifically spotlighting new trends and popular controversy. Her column, “That’s Fashion, Sweetie,” runs every Wednesday.