Increasingly my preoccupations with ideas of "style" and "fashion" are at once clear and blurred. I am after much thought beginning to understand that being "stylish" and being "Fashionable" are not interchangeable. neither is it a matter of preferring one over the other, it is processual. However having said that the movement is not linear. It could begin by a person being "stylish" and evolving into being "Fashionable" or the other way round.
Being "Fashionable" is a more all encompassing word. Because it entails a certain amount of knowledge, its based on the art of 'sprezzatura'-the Art of disguising Art, it requires a great deal of attention to details in order to create a complete being(or atleast one that you present to the world) and being precotious.

Once this process has been established, the next idea is to support the argument that 'Indians by and large may be stylish in their own unique ways(ref:http://dustyrain.blogspot.com/2008/10/stylish-indian.html ) but are painfully unfashionable.
To the above mentioned point there have been a few disagreements:

1) Most "Fashions" on the ramp are totally unwearable: I had previously given the instance of Galliano, and Warhol as icons of Fashionable because Fashionable entails exhibitionism, the pleasures of the visual etc. I will however give instances by well known designers and Brands who are churning out absolutely 'wearable' and 'fashionable' clothes fall after fall. Take for instance, Lagerfeld, Calvin Klein, Armani, Gucci, Guess, Valentino.
2) Understandably the above mentioned names would not have penetrated India but would surely have penetrated the growing number of people living in most urban cities of India. The statement made was that "Indians are painfully unfashionable" implying that even those that may aford being remotely fashionable are dangerously not.
3) Its been pointed out that many designers and connoiseurs of fashion have very often picked up motifs from India, from our own land of the ethnic. Yes Indeed, the spare kohlapuri's, the paisley motifs, the swastika, the bejwelling, the kaftan, the slimmer fitting Kurtis, the block prints, the duppatta, now the fashionable stole, some weaves aswell etc etc. Yes thats what being fashionable is: the sense of a global fusion, so you match a bandhni Duppata with a Lagerfeld designed short coat and your ready for work! Having said this please take note that the "fashionable" was not just created on that. Most of these are inspired accesories to complete an entire ensemble. So I argue that most Indians cannot put it together and believe me it not always has to do with affordability. As far as the hippie style revival/fashion trend from the east is concerned, that was a whole movement meant to overthrow dictates of Fashion"-it was essentially anti-fashion in nature and along with the long open hair afghans and kaftans-army combat shirts jackets no make up etc were considered fashionable. Some of these styles and fashions continue to remain in vogue even today and borrowing one influence or another from different parts dont really count in making that concerned part Fashionable in any way.

3) While "fashion" may threaten to burn holes in your pocket, I say that not quite so. Infact, whats wrong is really some glitches with fundamentals. For instance Yellow shirts and green trousers, the shade does not matter, but its an absolute no, no given all conditions(Govinda's continue to survive), if one is horizontally expanding its a crime to wear bold horizontal stripes in the light of day, its geometry! You dont attend your wedding in a Tassar dhoti and black old sneakers thinking that you could pass them off as formals somehow, if you have a baby ponch(the indian body type tends to), you avoid wearing synthetic materials that tend to stick and emphasize, if you dont know what kind of a bag to carry to that wedding, your 'little' school bag is not an option, just because 'kantha' work is fashionable you dont spend a fortune on one thats woven like the architecture in NY. There is quite frankly no dearth of people who can afford to be fashionable in India, but the basic sense of mixing and matching is totally missing among most. There are many value for money stores across the world where you have to be a smart shopper(about that later). Take some of the celeb started outlet stores, I have been to some of them and yes they are affordable(5-20$) and very fashionable. Its possible to collect almost an entire wardrobe in very reasonable budgets when one shops from places like H&M, ZARA, Forever21, Strawberry etc.

All I am saying is that one can be fashionable and stylish together without having to spend fortunes, but because its something that does not work all that well with guidebooks and how to's.....its a matter of talent. Its nothing vain glorious, just that, in a way that everyone cannot sing well or paint well similarly not everyone can be fashionable.

Finally Marx as outdated as he may be had mentioned to something as the intellectual Capital production within a superstructure. Essentially referring to the thinking lot of the society and he had said that they maybe produced only out of the surplus. So yes India has a long way to go before we can safely conclude that an Indian is fashionable, not in his/her own way, but in a very global way. And I favour no single way as the universal way....its all about mixing and matching it.